Thai PM threatens to bar Yingluck from travelling abroad

[Songlaw]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

[whybother]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

Not correct. Whether it is directly facing the electorate or not, the PM is still elected by the representatives of the electorate. This is clearly the case when a party doesn't get a majority of seats, but still applies when they do.

[Songlaw]

With no constitutional basis for either being removed or removing herself from office, she threw herself on her sword with the last avenue available to her; an act that cements her status as a de facto heroine. Remember, you assigned the value to what I wrote. As you no doubt suspect, albeit on a visceral level, once this "situation" rectifies itself, and it eventually will, history will have written a dramatically different narrative than you currently anticipate. What we, the non-Thai interlopers think, will have no bearing on this outcome whatsoever. Societal evolution is a slow and painstaking process that cannot be stopped, only deferred. Rest assured, the people, in the end, will have their day. Khun Yingluck remains the only duly appointed Prime Minister of Thailand as we speak. Ever wonder why that is? Answer: Neither personal opinion, nor military hubris can trump constitutional law.

Are you saying that an elected MP is not allowed to resign?

Were I saying that, it would have been clearly stated. To further clarify, she had the unenviable position of maintaining order as best she could in an environment of maliciously orchestrated chaos. She stands as the only person during this debacle that did not effectively abandon their post or constituency. Why would any conscientious leader effectively hand the fate of their citizenry over to the likes of Suthep, willingly?

You said "With no constitutional basis for either being removed or removing herself from office,"

That would imply that she couldn't resign.

I'll concede that point. But the tone of my narrative should have alluded to the fact that resignation due to coercion would have been seen as an abrogation of responsibility. Don't think for a second that she wasn't scared sh*tless about remaining in her position. She hung in there anyway. That is how her legacy will be recorded as most world historians are not members of the Thai aristocracy and are incensed by events surrounding her removal. Irrespective of her guilt or innocence, or even the seriousness of the charges leveled against her, the world takes an even dimmer view of the mantle of democracy being relegated to cartoon status. Westerners should know this.

[halloween]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

You are actually correct on both accounts. She was appointed by her brother, and then elected by the party that he owns and the politicians he pays to be members of his party. In any other country, the selling of their votes (and souls) to a convicted criminal, and allowing him access to cabinet deliberations, would be tantamount to treason.

Here it is called popularity, and name recognition, which clearly trumps illegality.

[Fat Haggis]

Which countries would it be considered treason to run a country from another?

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavor.

Now before you point the finger at Thaksin for an act of treason have a close look at the part that states overthrowing a government ?

Who fits the bill by definition more? The man who used to be in the chair or the man currently in the chair ?

You simply cannot label one, without labelling the other ?

[Jip99]

"Who pointed the gun at her?" - If Prayut doesn't know, we've all got problems...

No one pointed the gun at her. She is a drama queen seeking attention. No one pointed the gun at her.

What planet are you living on?

Planet Reality......... and you ?

[jayboy]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

You are actually correct on both accounts. She was appointed by her brother, and then elected by the party that he owns and the politicians he pays to be members of his party. In any other country, the selling of their votes (and souls) to a convicted criminal, and allowing him access to cabinet deliberations, would be tantamount to treason.

Here it is called popularity, and name recognition, which clearly trumps illegality.

You missed out the bit about Yingluck

being chosen by the people of Thailand in an election universally recognised as free and fair.

If you wish to talk about puppets look no further than the leader of the Democrat Party, Khun Abhisit.The difference of course between him and Yingluck is that the Thai people have consistently rejected him while Yingluck remains the most popular politician in the country.

Incidentally your comments about legality don't make any sense.Most sane people of course would regard high treason in taking over a country by force as a serious offence.

[Songlaw]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

You are actually correct on both accounts. She was appointed by her brother, and then elected by the party that he owns and the politicians he pays to be members of his party. In any other country, the selling of their votes (and souls) to a convicted criminal, and allowing him access to cabinet deliberations, would be tantamount to treason.

Here it is called popularity, and name recognition, which clearly trumps illegality.

Ah, a TVF regular I see. Bravo. Should have seen that coming. A bit of whimsical faith in the media and justice system, have we?

[tbthailand]

"We have clear rules. If something triggers chaos or unrest we have measures"

Well isn't a coup a trigger for ..chaos and unrest. hmmmmm. He triggered the coup, declared himself almost god

He should arrest himself.... I do not think he got to be chief of the army on IQ potential

Since that trigger has been pulled, where is the chaos and unrest? Haven't the nightly shootings and bombings stopped, the calls for a separate state disappeared, and the protesters and anti-protesters returned to their homes?

wow, an amazing junta ...

did you grow up under a ictatorship and now find Thailand with no self-governance, no human rights protections, no freedom of expression, no political freedom, arbitrary arrests and detentions, military kangaroo courts, revisionist history, and full-on media censorship 'just like home'?

tb, do you mind if I add - no more redshirts murdering innocent people, including children, no more rice farmers taking their own lives...................................

well, you can add what you like as you are also an unabashed junta cheerleader and us tree-hugging democracy lovers respect your right to express yourself. The contrast with the 'NCPO' doesn't need to be explicitly cited again.

I have always been clear about violence. And the violence at Big C as an example that you reference was abhorrent. Not that you mention any of the violence precipitated by Suthep, the PDRC, yellow guards and members of the Navy pretending to be 'protesters'.

If you - you personally - want to decry the violence, then you ought to really be consistent and denounce all the violence.

Just sayin'

[Songlaw]

Hope somehow you find this, Ratcatcher. I apparently went over some arbitrary number of posts to quoted texts, or something to that effect. I didn't want you to think that I did not appreciate your response.

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

"..........the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema."

That sounds quite painful for the PM.

I can understand the horns of a dilemma but enemas are what the PM is applying to the Royal Thai Police. A bit of a flush out I believe.

That was a "play on words," or more accurately, a line from a now forgotten comedian... in other words, intentional. But point taken. It is a bad day in the neighborhood for the RTP. May be justified, it is not for me to say, but allow me to be the harbinger... This portends of an Orwellian magnitude weakening of due process that has already spiraled out of control. What people here see as an overdue sweep by a benign patriarch, is not happening in a vacuum. The net is in reality, quite large and indiscriminate. This is not a "clean up" nor is it a "change of course." Keep your head down, Ratcatcher. I'll do the same. Cheers.

[Baghdad]

I take my hat off to Prayut, keep the good work up Prayut

[pantareiyingluck]

I take my hat off to Prayut, keep the good work up Prayut

Yes, it is all a Great Success. Saw the speech yesterday ? Put a rabbit in your hat. In 1 year time all problems in Thailand are solved! It is a miracle.......

[animatic]

She should have said:

While I'm at the wheel driving the people forward to total bankruptcy, Thank Buddha, suddenly, someone points an imaginary gun at my head and tells me to get lost.

Bar her from everything, she was she is and she will be a liability to this country.

She's not the liability. The psychophant [sic] Thaksin is.

Thaksin is not the sycophant, those are the ones kissing his behind,

and doing what he asks to curry favor in the hopes of profiting.

Thaksin is a megalomaniac, dangling riches in the faces of sycophants,

to make them do things that benefit him,regardless of their risk, or anyone else's...

Including his little sister. She was not a competent PM, but she beautifully

warmed the seat and let the sense of a Shinawatra dynasty come forward another notch.

She apparently has been told, enough time has passed to test the waters, but l it hasn't been.

Edited November 29, 2014 by animatic

[djjamie]

With no constitutional basis for either being removed or removing herself from office, she threw herself on her sword with the last avenue available to her; an act that cements her status as a de facto heroine. Remember, you assigned the value to what I wrote. As you no doubt suspect, albeit on a visceral level, once this "situation" rectifies itself, and it eventually will, history will have written a dramatically different narrative than you currently anticipate. What we, the non-Thai interlopers think, will have no bearing on this outcome whatsoever. Societal evolution is a slow and painstaking process that cannot be stopped, only deferred. Rest assured, the people, in the end, will have their day. Khun Yingluck remains the only duly appointed Prime Minister of Thailand as we speak. Ever wonder why that is? Answer: Neither personal opinion, nor military hubris can trump constitutional law.

Are you saying that an elected MP is not allowed to resign?

Were I saying that, it would have been clearly stated. To further clarify, she had the unenviable position of maintaining order as best she could in an environment of maliciously orchestrated chaos. She stands as the only person during this debacle that did not effectively abandon their post or constituency. Why would any conscientious leader effectively hand the fate of their citizenry over to the likes of Suthep, willingly?

Wonderful job of maintaining order.

On the 25th of February senators implored yingluck to show some leadership in solving the maliciously orchestrated violence and this statement was triggered because yingluck thought it prudent to inspect fruit in Saraburi after 2 deadly terrorist attacks by red shirts in 2 days. At that point in time there were 19 people dead and 717 injured all at the hands of red shirts (and yes this is before the popcorn gunman) and not a single suspect arrested. Not one. A wonderful job of maintaining order...

Why on earth yingluck decided to look at fruit when the city and country was in turmoil reflects her true role in this country and it aint as the leader and one cannot abandon a role when the role she played was doing nothing except running the other way.

Prayut has been more than fair with her letting her visit her accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive brother and if she abuses the privilege then so be it.

Soon she will have no choice as I doubt jail allows oversees trips to visit criminals. She will have enough criminals to last a lifetime in jail.

[casualbiker]

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "

And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

[jayboy]

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "

And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

He did say something clumsily to that effect but I don't see how that impinges on the points I made.Yingluck would not have course been elected if she had not been Thaksin's sister.Thais voted for her because they perceived in doing so that the policies of her brother would be implemented.Is this so surprising?

[55Jay]

With no constitutional basis for either being removed or removing herself from office, she threw herself on her sword with the last avenue available to her; an act that cements her status as a de facto heroine. Remember, you assigned the value to what I wrote. As you no doubt suspect, albeit on a visceral level, once this "situation" rectifies itself, and it eventually will, history will have written a dramatically different narrative than you currently anticipate. What we, the non-Thai interlopers think, will have no bearing on this outcome whatsoever. Societal evolution is a slow and painstaking process that cannot be stopped, only deferred. Rest assured, the people, in the end, will have their day. Khun Yingluck remains the only duly appointed Prime Minister of Thailand as we speak. Ever wonder why that is? Answer: Neither personal opinion, nor military hubris can trump constitutional law.

Are you saying that an elected MP is not allowed to resign?

Were I saying that, it would have been clearly stated. To further clarify, she had the unenviable position of maintaining order as best she could in an environment of maliciously orchestrated chaos. She stands as the only person during this debacle that did not effectively abandon their post or constituency. Why would any conscientious leader effectively hand the fate of their citizenry over to the likes of Suthep, willingly?

Wonderful job of maintaining order.

On the 25th of February senators implored yingluck to show some leadership in solving the maliciously orchestrated violence and this statement was triggered because yingluck thought it prudent to inspect fruit in Saraburi after 2 deadly terrorist attacks by red shirts in 2 days. At that point in time there were 19 people dead and 717 injured all at the hands of red shirts (and yes this is before the popcorn gunman) and not a single suspect arrested. Not one. A wonderful job of maintaining order...

Why on earth yingluck decided to look at fruit when the city and country was in turmoil reflects her true role in this country and it aint as the leader and one cannot abandon a role when the role she played was doing nothing except running the other way.

Prayut has been more than fair with her letting her visit her accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive brother and if she abuses the privilege then so be it.

Soon she will have no choice as I doubt jail allows oversees trips to visit criminals. She will have enough criminals to last a lifetime in jail.

And so....what do we do next?

Will this period of military induced calm produce a mutually acceptable candidate who will lead us all onward and upward?

What do we have to look forward to in 2016?

I'm not asking you be a fortune teller, only for our thoughts on what this current situation is aiming for and where you think it will end up.

[scorecard]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "
And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

He did say something clumsily to that effect but I don't see how that impinges on the points I made.Yingluck would not have course been elected if she had not been Thaksin's sister.Thais voted for her because they perceived in doing so that the policies of her brother would be implemented.Is this so surprising?

There's a lot more to the story which you conveniently omit. Nice try --- failed!

[djjamie]

Are you saying that an elected MP is not allowed to resign?

Were I saying that, it would have been clearly stated. To further clarify, she had the unenviable position of maintaining order as best she could in an environment of maliciously orchestrated chaos. She stands as the only person during this debacle that did not effectively abandon their post or constituency. Why would any conscientious leader effectively hand the fate of their citizenry over to the likes of Suthep, willingly?

Wonderful job of maintaining order.

On the 25th of February senators implored yingluck to show some leadership in solving the maliciously orchestrated violence and this statement was triggered because yingluck thought it prudent to inspect fruit in Saraburi after 2 deadly terrorist attacks by red shirts in 2 days. At that point in time there were 19 people dead and 717 injured all at the hands of red shirts (and yes this is before the popcorn gunman) and not a single suspect arrested. Not one. A wonderful job of maintaining order...

Why on earth yingluck decided to look at fruit when the city and country was in turmoil reflects her true role in this country and it aint as the leader and one cannot abandon a role when the role she played was doing nothing except running the other way.

Prayut has been more than fair with her letting her visit her accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive brother and if she abuses the privilege then so be it.

Soon she will have no choice as I doubt jail allows oversees trips to visit criminals. She will have enough criminals to last a lifetime in jail.

And so....what do we do next?

Will this period of military induced calm produce a mutually acceptable candidate who will lead us all onward and upward?

What do we have to look forward to in 2016?

I'm not asking you be a fortune teller, only for our thoughts on what this current situation is aiming for and where you think it will end up.

what do we do next?

Nothing. We are falangs. Thai's however need to engage the reform process and offer constructive input to allow Thailand to regain a sorely missed democracy where the majority were only respected when it suited the governments agenda. That lack of respect for the majority can be seen daily on this forum when the majorities wished are denounced or excuses made why it is not the majority if it does not suit a certain agenda. When it does suit the agenda……..Silence..

Will this period of military induced calm produce a mutually acceptable candidate who will lead us all onward and upward?

Through education of the masses I think it will. The way not to do it is by propagating the ethos of red shirt indoctrination schools or isolations of communities by declaring them "red villages". All that does is divide society and negatively gears a drive for a stable and fair society.

A truly honest understanding of democracy and the ramifications of how ones vote will impact Thailand will allow society to find a mutually acceptable candidate. Of course there will be a 7% vocal minority that disagree, but they have already been left in the past and are, but a minor (potential violent) annoyance now.

Don't forget that over 85% of voters have no idea what a senators job entails and this is reflected in the voting in of criminals from CM and Udon Thani. This alone shows that education is a tool to achieve true and fair democracy.

What do we have to look forward to in 2016?

No idea. I do know that through reform though that democracy and checks and balances will hopefully be adhered to. In other words the majority will be respected no matter what they chose. I look forward to a majority rule and minority rights government. You an be assured that you will not be hearing politicians threatening to behead themselves which reminds me of terrorist activity. You will not hear deputy PM's threatening voters in Phuket that they will get what they want when they vote for a particular political party. You will not hear deputy PM's stating that protestors are garbage. You will not hear of governments being dragged to court to ensure Thai's are given their democratic right to transparent government projects like the water scheme. You will not hear of PM's spending most of their time overseas while the country desperately needs leadership and guidance. You will not hear that all the above is acceptable because the government respected one principle of democracy. We will however see democracy practiced post elections instead of it being ignored.

Because my base is Thailand and my 2 beautiful children grow up here I personally look forward to a stable and just society were the government do now let terrorism be enacted with impunity. Unlike most retired members that populate this forum I do have a family here. I have a young family. I do cherish stability and peace and that is what I look forward to in 2016 and beyond.

And unless one prefers terrorism and death to stability and peace then I cannot see how anyone can disagree. Of course some will say the PDRC perpetrated terrorist attacks too. I don't care who perpetrated them. A grenade from a PDRC protestor or a grenade from a red shirt protestor has the same potential to kill my children. The general stopped that and for that I am eternally thankful.

I see a bright future.

Edited November 29, 2014 by djjamie

[JAG]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Unless the head of the army decides to dismiss the government and appoint himself!

[JAG]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

You are actually correct on both accounts. She was appointed by her brother, and then elected by the party that he owns and the politicians he pays to be members of his party. In any other country, the selling of their votes (and souls) to a convicted criminal, and allowing him access to cabinet deliberations, would be tantamount to treason.

Here it is called popularity, and name recognition, which clearly trumps illegality.

You missed out the bit about Yingluck

being chosen by the people of Thailand in an election universally recognised as free and fair.

If you wish to talk about puppets look no further than the leader of the Democrat Party, Khun Abhisit.The difference of course between him and Yingluck is that the Thai people have consistently rejected him while Yingluck remains the most popular politician in the country.

Incidentally your comments about legality don't make any sense.Most sane people of course would regard high treason in taking over a country by force as a serious offence.

Umm, not in this case, haven't they granted themselves an amnesty?

[casualbiker]

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "

And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

He did say something clumsily to that effect but I don't see how that impinges on the points I made.Yingluck would not have course been elected if she had not been Thaksin's sister.Thais voted for her because they perceived in doing so that the policies of her brother would be implemented.Is this so surprising?

Just a quick question what Thais voted for Yingluck. She didn't ACTUALLY contest the election as a candidate, did she?

[55Jay]

Wonderful job of maintaining order.

On the 25th of February senators implored yingluck to show some leadership in solving the maliciously orchestrated violence and this statement was triggered because yingluck thought it prudent to inspect fruit in Saraburi after 2 deadly terrorist attacks by red shirts in 2 days. At that point in time there were 19 people dead and 717 injured all at the hands of red shirts (and yes this is before the popcorn gunman) and not a single suspect arrested. Not one. A wonderful job of maintaining order...

Why on earth yingluck decided to look at fruit when the city and country was in turmoil reflects her true role in this country and it aint as the leader and one cannot abandon a role when the role she played was doing nothing except running the other way.

Prayut has been more than fair with her letting her visit her accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive brother and if she abuses the privilege then so be it.

Soon she will have no choice as I doubt jail allows oversees trips to visit criminals. She will have enough criminals to last a lifetime in jail.

And so....what do we do next?

Will this period of military induced calm produce a mutually acceptable candidate who will lead us all onward and upward?

What do we have to look forward to in 2016?

I'm not asking you be a fortune teller, only for our thoughts on what this current situation is aiming for and where you think it will end up.

what do we do next?

Nothing. We are falangs. Thai's however need to engage the reform process and offer constructive input to allow Thailand to regain a sorely missed democracy where the majority were only respected when it suited the governments agenda. That lack of respect for the majority can be seen daily on this forum when the majorities wished are denounced or excuses made why it is not the majority if it does not suit a certain agenda. When it does suit the agenda……..Silence..

Will this period of military induced calm produce a mutually acceptable candidate who will lead us all onward and upward?

Through education of the masses I think it will. The way not to do it is by propagating the ethos of red shirt indoctrination schools or isolations of communities by declaring them "red villages". All that does is divide society and negatively gears a drive for a stable and fair society.

A truly honest understanding of democracy and the ramifications of how ones vote will impact Thailand will allow society to find a mutually acceptable candidate. Of course there will be a 7% vocal minority that disagree, but they have already been left in the past and are, but a minor (potential violent) annoyance now.

Don't forget that over 85% of voters have no idea what a senators job entails and this is reflected in the voting in of criminals from CM and Udon Thani. This alone shows that education is a tool to achieve true and fair democracy.

What do we have to look forward to in 2016?

No idea. I do know that through reform though that democracy and checks and balances will hopefully be adhered to. In other words the majority will be respected no matter what they chose. I look forward to a majority rule and minority rights government. You an be assured that you will not be hearing politicians threatening to behead themselves which reminds me of terrorist activity. You will not hear deputy PM's threatening voters in Phuket that they will get what they want when they vote for a particular political party. You will not hear deputy PM's stating that protestors are garbage. You will not hear of governments being dragged to court to ensure Thai's are given their democratic right to transparent government projects like the water scheme. You will not hear of PM's spending most of their time overseas while the country desperately needs leadership and guidance. You will not hear that all the above is acceptable because the government respected one principle of democracy. We will however see democracy practiced post elections instead of it being ignored.

Because my base is Thailand and my 2 beautiful children grow up here I personally look forward to a stable and just society were the government do now let terrorism be enacted with impunity. Unlike most retired members that populate this forum I do have a family here. I have a young family. I do cherish stability and peace and that is what I look forward to in 2016 and beyond.

And unless one prefers terrorism and death to stability and peace then I cannot see how anyone can disagree. Of course some will say the PDRC perpetrated terrorist attacks too. I don't care who perpetrated them. A grenade from a PDRC protestor or a grenade from a red shirt protestor has the same potential to kill my children. The general stopped that and for that I am eternally thankful.

I see a bright future.

That's true. We are Farangs. It's a screwed up country in a lot of ways that are similar and different to my own.

I don't feel that's a good reason to introduce more humans into the mix, but everyone has their own take on things I reckon.

[JAG]

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "

And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

He did say something clumsily to that effect but I don't see how that impinges on the points I made.Yingluck would not have course been elected if she had not been Thaksin's sister.Thais voted for her because they perceived in doing so that the policies of her brother would be implemented.Is this so surprising?

Just a quick question what Thais voted for Yingluck. She didn't ACTUALLY contest the election as a candidate, did she?

Just about every person who went to the polls at the 2011 election did so in the knowledge that a victory for Pheu Thai would result in Yingluck Shinawatra being selected as Prime Minister. ( by the same token they were well aware that a Pheu Thai government would take steps to allow Thaksin to return).

Pheu Thai won, convincingly, therefore it follows that Yingluck was the candidate for Prime Minister selected by the electorate, in line with the Thai constitution.

However distasteful this may be for some here,it remains a fact, as does the fact that the opportunity of the Thai people to pass a judgement on Yingluck and her government, again in line with the constitution, was denied by blocking the election.

So yes, she was elected as Prime Minister. Not a claim that can be made for the present incumbent.

Edited November 29, 2014 by JAG

[djjamie]

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "

And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

He did say something clumsily to that effect but I don't see how that impinges on the points I made.Yingluck would not have course been elected if she had not been Thaksin's sister.Thais voted for her because they perceived in doing so that the policies of her brother would be implemented.Is this so surprising?

Just a quick question what Thais voted for Yingluck. She didn't ACTUALLY contest the election as a candidate, did she?

Just about every person who went to the polls at the 2011 election did so in the knowledge that a victory for Pheu Thai would result in Yingluck Shinawatra being selected as Prime Minister. ( by the same token they were well aware that a Pheu Thai government would take steps to allow Thaksin to return).

Pheu Thai won, convincingly, therefore it follows that Yingluck was the candidate for Prime Minister selected by the electorate, in line with the Thai constitution.

However distasteful this may be for some here,it remains a fact, as does the fact that the opportunity of the Thai people to pass a judgement on Yingluck and her government, again in line with the constitution, was denied by blocking the election.

So yes, she was elected as Prime Minister. Not a claim that can be made for the present incumbent.

So yes, she was elected as Prime Minister. Not a claim that can be made for the present incumbent.

So you would prefer an elected criminal than a popular non criminal? Seriously?

Mugabe was an elected PM and had been for 33 years. He decimated Africa’s strongest economy and had human rights abuses. But thats ok right because he was elected?

Chavez was the elected PM for 15 years. He consolidated power through constitutional change and intimidating opponents. But thats ok right because he was elected?

Al Basher was the elected PM for 24 years. He was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. But thats ok right because he was elected?

They all had gullible followers that said they were elected so every thing else is not an issue. Tell that to the poor innocent protestors that died at the hand of supporters of their government. (red shirt terrorists come to mind)

thaksin was the elected PM for years and he intimidated opponents, consolidate power through constitution change and had crimes against humanity and terrorism.

These elected majorities are not a badge of success, but of failure.

PTP was an elected majority that share traits with the above. I have to set an example to my children lest they judge me later in life.

I dare you to describe the PTP using the other 14 principles of democracy apart from elections. No one has yet and I am confident no one will in the future.

So when the current PM was not voted in it inconsequential to the argument because democracy and dictatorships are tools that in the right hands are harsh or tolerable. Democracy like military rule is a tool. Used in the right hands it is a blessing. Used in the wrong hands it is evil. Thaksin showed that democracy can be evil when held in his hands through his ability to bypass democracy when trying to push through a free trade agreement with the UDS while Prayut has showed that the Junta can be beneficial to society. through his ability to stamp out corruption.

So yes, the PTP was elected, but it certainly does not make them the right choice.

That is why reform is needed.

[The stuttering parrot]

Jamie your still banging on about Yingluck being a criminal.

Your posts are getting longer and more repetitive yet you still refuse to list the criminal convictions recorded against Yingluck.

It shouldn't be that hard for you they must be recorded somewhere.

As for your pro junta rhetoric I really can't understand how you can even remotely support a regime that not only to the country by force but constantly denied that they wouldn't and this bloke would never be PM.

You wouldn't cop it in your own country being denied the vote and living under martial law and all that entails.

[JAG]

The mental derangement of those who loathe Yingluk Shinawat never take a moment to realize that maybe all the brains in the Shinawat family did not go only to the son. Maybe daughters can be just as capable. It's an extraordinary insult to women to assume the boy got all the brains. but, that, natch, escaped the loathers.

One of the most uninformed observations of the haters is that Yingluck had no tested executive capability.They argue she only worked in a Shin company as a sinecure.There are a couple of ponts to be made.Firstly it is entire natural in line with Sino Thai business habits for a person to work in a family company.Secondly (and this observation is based on many years of experience) the less capable and energetic of the family members are sidelined or marginalised.The fact that Yingluck held a position of some responsibility says volumes.The reality is that in terms of executive experience and capability she had rather more than her political rivals.This is not to say Abhisit was not her superior in many other ways, and that her emergence as PM wasn't something of a fluke.Still capability and charm aren't to be despised in a politician.

Wasn't it Thaksin himself that said something like "I could get a lamp post elected PM "

And previously. "she(Yingluck) is my clone"

He did say something clumsily to that effect but I don't see how that impinges on the points I made.Yingluck would not have course been elected if she had not been Thaksin's sister.Thais voted for her because they perceived in doing so that the policies of her brother would be implemented.Is this so surprising?

Just a quick question what Thais voted for Yingluck. She didn't ACTUALLY contest the election as a candidate, did she?

Just about every person who went to the polls at the 2011 election did so in the knowledge that a victory for Pheu Thai would result in Yingluck Shinawatra being selected as Prime Minister. ( by the same token they were well aware that a Pheu Thai government would take steps to allow Thaksin to return).

Pheu Thai won, convincingly, therefore it follows that Yingluck was the candidate for Prime Minister selected by the electorate, in line with the Thai constitution.

However distasteful this may be for some here,it remains a fact, as does the fact that the opportunity of the Thai people to pass a judgement on Yingluck and her government, again in line with the constitution, was denied by blocking the election.

So yes, she was elected as Prime Minister. Not a claim that can be made for the present incumbent.

So yes, she was elected as Prime Minister. Not a claim that can be made for the present incumbent.

So you would prefer an elected criminal than a popular non criminal? Seriously?

Mugabe was an elected PM and had been for 33 years. He decimated Africa’s strongest economy and had human rights abuses. But thats ok right because he was elected?

Chavez was the elected PM for 15 years. He consolidated power through constitutional change and intimidating opponents. But thats ok right because he was elected?

Al Basher was the elected PM for 24 years. He was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. But thats ok right because he was elected?

They all had gullible followers that said they were elected so every thing else is not an issue. Tell that to the poor innocent protestors that died at the hand of supporters of their government. (red shirt terrorists come to mind)

thaksin was the elected PM for years and he intimidated opponents, consolidate power through constitution change and had crimes against humanity and terrorism.

These elected majorities are not a badge of success, but of failure.

PTP was an elected majority that share traits with the above. I have to set an example to my children lest they judge me later in life.

I dare you to describe the PTP using the other 14 principles of democracy apart from elections. No one has yet and I am confident no one will in the future.

So when the current PM was not voted in it inconsequential to the argument because democracy and dictatorships are tools that in the right hands are harsh or tolerable. Democracy like military rule is a tool. Used in the right hands it is a blessing. Used in the wrong hands it is evil. Thaksin showed that democracy can be evil when held in his hands through his ability to bypass democracy when trying to push through a free trademarks agreement with the UDS while Prayut has showed that the Junta can be beneficial to society. through his ability to stamp out corruption.

So yes, the PTP was elected, but it certainly does not make them the right choice.

That is why reform is needed.

Yingluck was not a criminal when she was elected. She is not a criminal at the moment. Before she can be said to be a criminal she has to indicted and convicted by a court. That has not happened yet, and it is by no means certain that this will happen. If she is then the provenance of such a court, under a Junta government is shall we say open to some dispute.

You state that democracy is a tool of government, comparing it with military rule. It's far more than that, it is a means of government. If you deny it, as the coup has, or you attempt to qualify it, as may be the result of the "reforms" , then it ceases to be democracy.

You bang on about "principles of democracy " as if they were enshrined in some sort of political ten commandments. You dare me and others to quote them, yet I am not aware of you ever listing or quoting them. I would suggest that one of the first principles of a democrat is the ability to accept the result of an election, and if it is not palatable to overturn it through the ballot box rather than enthusiastically support a military coup. I would suggest that your support for the coup, enthusiasm for the junta government and utter contempt for the settled and repeated decisions of the Thai electorate, when linked to your proclamations about democracy qualify you as a hypocrite.

As for children, many of us on this forum have families and children in this country, and we all will have ambitions as to the society in which they will grow up and live. You do not have the monopoly on what is right and wrong, to proclaim that you do is simple arrogance.,

[15Peter20]

Jamie your still banging on about Yingluck being a criminal.

Your posts are getting longer and more repetitive yet you still refuse to list the criminal convictions recorded against Yingluck.

It shouldn't be that hard for you they must be recorded somewhere.

As for your pro junta rhetoric I really can't understand how you can even remotely support a regime that not only to the country by force but constantly denied that they wouldn't and this bloke would never be PM.

You wouldn't cop it in your own country being denied the vote and living under martial law and all that entails.

He's married to the mob, mate.

[LazarusRising]

So yes, she was elected as Prime Minister. Not a claim that can be made for the present incumbent.

So you would prefer an elected criminal than a popular non criminal? Seriously?

Mugabe was an elected PM and had been for 33 years. He decimated Africa’s strongest economy and had human rights abuses. But thats ok right because he was elected?

Chavez was the elected PM for 15 years. He consolidated power through constitutional change and intimidating opponents. But thats ok right because he was elected?

Al Basher was the elected PM for 24 years. He was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. But thats ok right because he was elected?

They all had gullible followers that said they were elected so every thing else is not an issue. Tell that to the poor innocent protestors that died at the hand of supporters of their government. (red shirt terrorists come to mind)

thaksin was the elected PM for years and he intimidated opponents, consolidate power through constitution change and had crimes against humanity and terrorism.

These elected majorities are not a badge of success, but of failure.

PTP was an elected majority that share traits with the above. I have to set an example to my children lest they judge me later in life.

I dare you to describe the PTP using the other 14 principles of democracy apart from elections. No one has yet and I am confident no one will in the future.

So when the current PM was not voted in it inconsequential to the argument because democracy and dictatorships are tools that in the right hands are harsh or tolerable. Democracy like military rule is a tool. Used in the right hands it is a blessing. Used in the wrong hands it is evil. Thaksin showed that democracy can be evil when held in his hands through his ability to bypass democracy when trying to push through a free trade agreement with the UDS while Prayut has showed that the Junta can be beneficial to society. through his ability to stamp out corruption.

So yes, the PTP was elected, but it certainly does not make them the right choice.

That is why reform is needed.

The list of history's unelected demagogues and the damage pain and misery that they have wrought is of many magnitudes greater than that of those who started out as elected leaders. For every Mugabe, Chavez or Albasher there is hundreds thousands of brutal unelected dictators such as Gamel Abdul Nasser, David Dacko, Francois Tombalbaye, Milton Obote, Houari Boubediene, Mussa Traore, Jerry Rawlings, Idi Amin, Thomas Sankara, Daniel Ortega, Gustavo Pinilla, Augusto Pinochet, Raphael Trujillo, Mao Zedong, General Suharto, Than Shwe, Joseph Stalin and so it goes on and on and on.Democracy is not perfect but its the best system mankind has invented and regular elections are the best disinfectant for corruption. That Thailand currently has neither is all anyone needs to know when forecasting the effectiveness of the current reform and anti-corruption process.

[Songlaw]

Prime ministers are appointed, not elected. Her party's overwhelming election and subsequent endorsement is tantamount to facing the electorate. If a presidential system were implemented tomorrow, next week or next year, she would win election by a landslide; a fact that even the most inept cannot deny. Yet somehow this escaped our hero and is the easily foreseeable reason why the current "prime minister" finds himself sitting squarely on the "horns of an enema." He has no legally available means to neutralize her, nor can he let her go. While absurd, it does hold a certain comedic value. Way-2-Go, Comandante .

In Thailand, Prime Ministers are elected in parliament by a majority of elected MPs.

Understood. That is tantamount to an appointment by her party. Semantics. It is not directly facing an electorate.

Not correct. Whether it is directly facing the electorate or not, the PM is still elected by the representatives of the electorate. This is clearly the case when a party doesn't get a majority of seats, but still applies when they do.

It is correct.