Poll delay proposal slammed

[heybruce]

The Thaksin controlled Yingluck government was even more afraid it would seem

you continue your trolling ways... I've never seen such a dedicated dutch fascist.

Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination...

wadda dweeb you are...

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

It is a very forgettable statement. Politicians often fail to keep campaign promises, although in the case of the PTP they were vilified for trying to keep their campaign promise to make the Senate fully elected. The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

[heybruce]

The Thaksin controlled Yingluck government was even more afraid it would seem

you continue your trolling ways... I've never seen such a dedicated dutch fascist.

Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination...

wadda dweeb you are...

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

It is a very forgettable statement. Politicians often fail to keep campaign promises, although in the case of the PTP they were vilified for trying to keep their campaign promise to make the Senate fully elected. The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats.

Another who twists things out of context.

There was no problem with making the senate fully elected in fact the first reading of the bill was passed in the house with the agreement of the Democrats.

The trouble arose when changes were made in the committee stage to make it possible for family of sitting MP's to become senators and to abolish the 6 year term.

It was these amendments that were unpalatable and facing opposition PT got all sneaky and passed the bill at 4 in the morning after the opposition had gone home.

But you know all that you are just ignoring it in a feeble attempt to defend the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

[rubl]

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

It is a very forgettable statement. Politicians often fail to keep campaign promises, although in the case of the PTP they were vilified for trying to keep their campaign promise to make the Senate fully elected. The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

[Robby nz]

It is a very forgettable statement. Politicians often fail to keep campaign promises, although in the case of the PTP they were vilified for trying to keep their campaign promise to make the Senate fully elected. The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats.

Another who twists things out of context.

There was no problem with making the senate fully elected in fact the first reading of the bill was passed in the house with the agreement of the Democrats.

The trouble arose when changes were made in the committee stage to make it possible for family of sitting MP's to become senators and to abolish the 6 year term.

It was these amendments that were unpalatable and facing opposition PT got all sneaky and passed the bill at 4 in the morning after the opposition had gone home.

But you know all that you are just ignoring it in a feeble attempt to defend the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/662768-argument-rages-on-over-thai-senate-changes/

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

Although you may like to argue that in the year of the Sonthi military Govt corruption was worse, but then that could be because it was detected in that year much the same as corruption is coming to light now.

You may also note that General Sonthi teamed up with PT as part of their coalition Govt, make of that what you will.

To wait until a new election to vote against a corrupt Govt may be to late as legislation will have already have been passed to change laws which are detrimental to the country.

A prefect example of this is the legislation that PT had on the table, first the senate changes as discussed. Then changes to section 190 of the constitution which would have given them the power to make international deals without scrutiny of parliament: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/opposition-slams-amendment-article-190

Then there was the rice pledging scheme which would have continued for another 2 years with farther huge loss to the country.

Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains.

Then there was the 2.2 trillion which would have been obtained out of budget with no checks and balances as to where it went.

There is also the 350 billion that was supposed to be for flood protection work, nobody seems to know if that was obtained and disappeared or was still to be got.

We also had a situation where there had been grenade attacks on judges and checks and balances organisations, courts had been ignored, the police refused to do their job and their own people had been put in key positions.

These are all indications of a govt out of control and only working for their own good.

When the people of the country see that politicians are doing things for their own benefit and not for the country I would say they not only have a right but a duty to step in, for waiting for an election may be to late, indeed there is no guarantee that an election would ever come.

[rubl]

Another who twists things out of context.

There was no problem with making the senate fully elected in fact the first reading of the bill was passed in the house with the agreement of the Democrats.

The trouble arose when changes were made in the committee stage to make it possible for family of sitting MP's to become senators and to abolish the 6 year term.

It was these amendments that were unpalatable and facing opposition PT got all sneaky and passed the bill at 4 in the morning after the opposition had gone home.

But you know all that you are just ignoring it in a feeble attempt to defend the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

Interesting question. Some have it even anti-democrats are allowed an existence in a real democracy. Some even defend criminal fugitives who rule a country through an elected clone.

[heybruce]

Another who twists things out of context.

There was no problem with making the senate fully elected in fact the first reading of the bill was passed in the house with the agreement of the Democrats.

The trouble arose when changes were made in the committee stage to make it possible for family of sitting MP's to become senators and to abolish the 6 year term.

It was these amendments that were unpalatable and facing opposition PT got all sneaky and passed the bill at 4 in the morning after the opposition had gone home.

But you know all that you are just ignoring it in a feeble attempt to defend the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

Interesting question. Some have it even anti-democrats are allowed an existence in a real democracy. Some even defend criminal fugitives who rule a country through an elected clone.

Yes, but anti-democrats are not allowed to topple democracies, unless they have the support of the military.

Once again you obsess over the legal relationship between PM Yingluck and her brother, the one promised during the 2011 campaign which the voters condoned.

[heybruce]

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

[heybruce]

It is a very forgettable statement. Politicians often fail to keep campaign promises, although in the case of the PTP they were vilified for trying to keep their campaign promise to make the Senate fully elected. The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats.

Another who twists things out of context.

There was no problem with making the senate fully elected in fact the first reading of the bill was passed in the house with the agreement of the Democrats.

The trouble arose when changes were made in the committee stage to make it possible for family of sitting MP's to become senators and to abolish the 6 year term.

It was these amendments that were unpalatable and facing opposition PT got all sneaky and passed the bill at 4 in the morning after the opposition had gone home.

But you know all that you are just ignoring it in a feeble attempt to defend the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/662768-argument-rages-on-over-thai-senate-changes/

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

Although you may like to argue that in the year of the Sonthi military Govt corruption was worse, but then that could be because it was detected in that year much the same as corruption is coming to light now.

You may also note that General Sonthi teamed up with PT as part of their coalition Govt, make of that what you will.

To wait until a new election to vote against a corrupt Govt may be to late as legislation will have already have been passed to change laws which are detrimental to the country.

A prefect example of this is the legislation that PT had on the table, first the senate changes as discussed. Then changes to section 190 of the constitution which would have given them the power to make international deals without scrutiny of parliament: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/opposition-slams-amendment-article-190

Then there was the rice pledging scheme which would have continued for another 2 years with farther huge loss to the country.

Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains.

Then there was the 2.2 trillion which would have been obtained out of budget with no checks and balances as to where it went.

There is also the 350 billion that was supposed to be for flood protection work, nobody seems to know if that was obtained and disappeared or was still to be got.

We also had a situation where there had been grenade attacks on judges and checks and balances organisations, courts had been ignored, the police refused to do their job and their own people had been put in key positions.

These are all indications of a govt out of control and only working for their own good.

When the people of the country see that politicians are doing things for their own benefit and not for the country I would say they not only have a right but a duty to step in, for waiting for an election may be to late, indeed there is no guarantee that an election would ever come.

I see, Thailand's history began in 2001 with Thaksin, is that it?

Transparency International changed their scoring system in 2012, making comparisons difficult. Your newspaper reference confuses the issue by using a scale other than the one on the TI website http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results, without explaining the scale. However a comparison of the 2010 score of 3.5 http://www.transparency.org/cpi2010/results, the 2004 score of 3.6 under Thaksin http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, and the pre-Thaksin 1995 score of 2.79 http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, seems to indicate that corruption was worse in Thailand before Thaksin.

As far as the rest, do you want a comparison of amnesty proposals and the checks and balances in place between the Yingluck government and the junta?

[candide]

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

It is a bit more complex than what the curve shows, as it shows the ranking among countries, not the index. In fact the ranking is worse because corruption perception has decreased in other countries, not because corruption perceptionj has increased in Thailand

If we look at the index itself, it was 3.5 in 2010, 3.4 in 2011, 3.7 in 2012, 3.5 in 2013, and 3.8 in 2014. So it does not show much variation over time. In fact it has remained more or less stable during the last decade, with a maximum of 3.8 and a minimum of 3.4, since 2004.

So your conclusion is wrong, the figures don't show that Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Edited April 26, 2015 by candide

[tbthailand]

The Thaksin controlled Yingluck government was even more afraid it would seem

you continue your trolling ways... I've never seen such a dedicated dutch fascist.

Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination...

wadda dweeb you are...

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

the forgotten part wasn't forgotten, it was dismissed as the irrelevant prattle that it is.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

it is truly amazing how you cannot stop yourself from trolling....

here on a thread about a delayed election, in response to a comment about one side being rather afraid of elections, you end up blathering on about Thaksin skyping ...

Seriously, have you got all your marbles?

[rubl]

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/662768-argument-rages-on-over-thai-senate-changes/

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

Although you may like to argue that in the year of the Sonthi military Govt corruption was worse, but then that could be because it was detected in that year much the same as corruption is coming to light now.

You may also note that General Sonthi teamed up with PT as part of their coalition Govt, make of that what you will.

To wait until a new election to vote against a corrupt Govt may be to late as legislation will have already have been passed to change laws which are detrimental to the country.

A prefect example of this is the legislation that PT had on the table, first the senate changes as discussed. Then changes to section 190 of the constitution which would have given them the power to make international deals without scrutiny of parliament: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/opposition-slams-amendment-article-190

Then there was the rice pledging scheme which would have continued for another 2 years with farther huge loss to the country.

Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains.

Then there was the 2.2 trillion which would have been obtained out of budget with no checks and balances as to where it went.

There is also the 350 billion that was supposed to be for flood protection work, nobody seems to know if that was obtained and disappeared or was still to be got.

We also had a situation where there had been grenade attacks on judges and checks and balances organisations, courts had been ignored, the police refused to do their job and their own people had been put in key positions.

These are all indications of a govt out of control and only working for their own good.

When the people of the country see that politicians are doing things for their own benefit and not for the country I would say they not only have a right but a duty to step in, for waiting for an election may be to late, indeed there is no guarantee that an election would ever come.

I see, Thailand's history began in 2001 with Thaksin, is that it?

Transparency International changed their scoring system in 2012, making comparisons difficult. Your newspaper reference confuses the issue by using a scale other than the one on the TI website http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results, without explaining the scale. However a comparison of the 2010 score of 3.5 http://www.transparency.org/cpi2010/results, the 2004 score of 3.6 under Thaksin http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, and the pre-Thaksin 1995 score of 2.79 http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, seems to indicate that corruption was worse in Thailand before Thaksin.

As far as the rest, do you want a comparison of amnesty proposals and the checks and balances in place between the Yingluck government and the junta?

Well, Thailands history begon a wee bit longer ago than just with Thaksin. Mind you, a few years ago the UDD celebrated an even in 1932 (I think) when the military brought the first glimpses of democracy to this country.

BTW a comparision between a democratically elected government and a junta doesn't make too much sense, even if it gives you the possibility to stress the form of democracy the Yingluck government represented, the one with a criminal fugitive being the strong man behind the strings with others dancing.

[rubl]

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

Does your country also allow criminal fugitive to run your country from afar? Does your country allow such figures to own political parties, skype-in into cabinet meetings to give orders? Allow criminal fugitives to recall his party and government underlings to him to pass a few more orders?

It's interesting that a month ago some here pointed out that the Founding Father of Singapore had endorsed Thaksin as a strong leader and a few agreed with that. Possibly because they don't come from real democracies.

So, poll delayed, mentality of Thai and farang alike still not correct. An election now wouldn't solve any problems.

[rubl]

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

the forgotten part wasn't forgotten, it was dismissed as the irrelevant prattle that it is.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

it is truly amazing how you cannot stop yourself from trolling....

here on a thread about a delayed election, in response to a comment about one side being rather afraid of elections, you end up blathering on about Thaksin skyping ...

Seriously, have you got all your marbles?

Well, your

"Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination... "

was about Thaksin. Following you go into denial.

PS you seem to have come with a new definition of 'trolling': any writing you don't agree with. Next you add a few descriptives as if to annoy and provoke (dweeb, possibly lacking marbles). You seem to feel very insecure. If I could a would give you a hug to make you feel better.

[rubl]

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

It is a bit more complex than what the curve shows, as it shows the ranking among countries, not the index. In fact the ranking is worse because corruption perception has decreased in other countries, not because corruption perceptionj has increased in Thailand

If we look at the index itself, it was 3.5 in 2010, 3.4 in 2011, 3.7 in 2012, 3.5 in 2013, and 3.8 in 2014. So it does not show much variation over time. In fact it has remained more or less stable during the last decade, with a maximum of 3.8 and a minimum of 3.4, since 2004.

So your conclusion is wrong, the figures don't show that Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

I agree that the figures as such don't mean too much. Thailand is still a basket case.

Of course, Ms. Yingluck had her government take special care of corruption and staged shows to tell every one, pity it doesn't show.

[baboon]

^^

Billy No-mates, chuntering on and on to himself about irrelevant points on off topic subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested...

Edited April 26, 2015 by baboon

[rubl]

^^

Billy No-mates, chuntering on and on to himself about irrelevant points on off topic subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested...

Did you get fed up just talking to a mirror?

PS even on topic subjects are wasted on people who are not interested.

[baboon]

^^

Billy No-mates, chuntering on and on to himself about irrelevant points on off topic subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested...

Did you get fed up just talking to a mirror?

PS even on topic subjects are wasted on people who are not interested.

So that gives you Carte Blanche to blether on about any old off-topic flapdoodle you fancy, does it?

[Robby nz]

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/662768-argument-rages-on-over-thai-senate-changes/

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

Although you may like to argue that in the year of the Sonthi military Govt corruption was worse, but then that could be because it was detected in that year much the same as corruption is coming to light now.

You may also note that General Sonthi teamed up with PT as part of their coalition Govt, make of that what you will.

To wait until a new election to vote against a corrupt Govt may be to late as legislation will have already have been passed to change laws which are detrimental to the country.

A prefect example of this is the legislation that PT had on the table, first the senate changes as discussed. Then changes to section 190 of the constitution which would have given them the power to make international deals without scrutiny of parliament: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/opposition-slams-amendment-article-190

Then there was the rice pledging scheme which would have continued for another 2 years with farther huge loss to the country.

Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains.

Then there was the 2.2 trillion which would have been obtained out of budget with no checks and balances as to where it went.

There is also the 350 billion that was supposed to be for flood protection work, nobody seems to know if that was obtained and disappeared or was still to be got.

We also had a situation where there had been grenade attacks on judges and checks and balances organisations, courts had been ignored, the police refused to do their job and their own people had been put in key positions.

These are all indications of a govt out of control and only working for their own good.

When the people of the country see that politicians are doing things for their own benefit and not for the country I would say they not only have a right but a duty to step in, for waiting for an election may be to late, indeed there is no guarantee that an election would ever come.

I see, Thailand's history began in 2001 with Thaksin, is that it?

Transparency International changed their scoring system in 2012, making comparisons difficult. Your newspaper reference confuses the issue by using a scale other than the one on the TI website http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results, without explaining the scale. However a comparison of the 2010 score of 3.5 http://www.transparency.org/cpi2010/results, the 2004 score of 3.6 under Thaksin http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, and the pre-Thaksin 1995 score of 2.79 http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, seems to indicate that corruption was worse in Thailand before Thaksin.

As far as the rest, do you want a comparison of amnesty proposals and the checks and balances in place between the Yingluck government and the junta?

Another extremely poor effort at deflection.

That the graph I posted only starts at 2001 does not change the fact that the PT Govt took corruption to unprecedented highs in their short term in office. You may claim it was worse before Thaksins time but that does not change the fact.

You are apparently trying to draw some parallel between what the present Govt is doing and the amnesty bill PT had before the house, another deflection.

No coup is a good thing but at least the present lot is uncovering the billions of Baht in corruption which would have been pardoned under the PT bill.

This includes the top cop with his billions salted away and the fake G2G rice deals, do you really believe the corrupt should be allowed to keep what they have scammed from the country and the people ?

I purposely didn't mention the politicians absolving themselves from all crime but I will now. Do you think that is a good way to reconcile the people or just to give crooked politicians a way to avoid answering to the law ?

Honest people don't need amnesty, and don't start on about political prisoners, if there is such a thing then their cases can be dealt with individually on a case by case basis, no need for a blanket amnesty that covers all politicians.

And don't have another go at comparing the amnesty that coup makers always give themselves, that is another subject altogether.

[rubl]

^^

Billy No-mates, chuntering on and on to himself about irrelevant points on off topic subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested...

Did you get fed up just talking to a mirror?

PS even on topic subjects are wasted on people who are not interested.

So that gives you Carte Blanche to blether on about any old off-topic flapdoodle you fancy, does it?

I was giving a reply to member candide. I agreed with him. Of course if you think he wrote some old off-topic flapdoodle feel free to tell him. If possible in a proper response. You might have noticed that at the bottom of a post on the right side there are buttons like MultiQuote and Quote. Just press the "Quote". Apart from making it easier to see what you are referring to than with just "^^" it's also more polite, more nettiquette.

[tbthailand]

the forgotten part wasn't forgotten, it was dismissed as the irrelevant prattle that it is.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

it is truly amazing how you cannot stop yourself from trolling....

here on a thread about a delayed election, in response to a comment about one side being rather afraid of elections, you end up blathering on about Thaksin skyping ...

Seriously, have you got all your marbles?

Well, your

"Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination... "

was about Thaksin. Following you go into denial.

PS you seem to have come with a new definition of 'trolling': any writing you don't agree with. Next you add a few descriptives as if to annoy and provoke (dweeb, possibly lacking marbles). You seem to feel very insecure. If I could a would give you a hug to make you feel better.

I don't knowingly hug fascists.

trolling, ... no, not anything I disagree with... there is plenty of that around this forum, but it's not trolling.

however, your inane, off-topic, obtuse posting is definitely trolling

ciao

[rubl]

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

it is truly amazing how you cannot stop yourself from trolling....

here on a thread about a delayed election, in response to a comment about one side being rather afraid of elections, you end up blathering on about Thaksin skyping ...

Seriously, have you got all your marbles?

Well, your

"Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination... "

was about Thaksin. Following you go into denial.

PS you seem to have come with a new definition of 'trolling': any writing you don't agree with. Next you add a few descriptives as if to annoy and provoke (dweeb, possibly lacking marbles). You seem to feel very insecure. If I could a would give you a hug to make you feel better.

I don't knowingly hug fascists.

trolling, ... no, not anything I disagree with... there is plenty of that around this forum, but it's not trolling.

however, your inane, off-topic, obtuse posting is definitely trolling

ciao

A continuation of name calling and the usual 'troll' accusation. You really don't like opinions which go against your own, now do you and facts may really disturb you.

Ah well, you can still look in the mirror and get your image to agree with you.

Have a good night's sleep,

uncle rubl

[heybruce]

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

Does your country also allow criminal fugitive to run your country from afar? Does your country allow such figures to own political parties, skype-in into cabinet meetings to give orders? Allow criminal fugitives to recall his party and government underlings to him to pass a few more orders?

It's interesting that a month ago some here pointed out that the Founding Father of Singapore had endorsed Thaksin as a strong leader and a few agreed with that. Possibly because they don't come from real democracies.

So, poll delayed, mentality of Thai and farang alike still not correct. An election now wouldn't solve any problems.

In your previous post you state that it is unreasonable to compare the unchecked power of a military junta that grants itself amnesty to the checks and balances in an elected government that attempted to use the legislative process to grant amnesty to people no longer in government.

Here you ask for a comparison in governments between a country where the military doesn't stage coups or get involved in politics, and a country where the military stages coups and routinely plays politics. You're not big on logical consistency, are you?

I'll give you the obvious comparison; the country where the military doesn't stage coups has the better government and better future prospects.

[heybruce]

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/662768-argument-rages-on-over-thai-senate-changes/

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

Although you may like to argue that in the year of the Sonthi military Govt corruption was worse, but then that could be because it was detected in that year much the same as corruption is coming to light now.

You may also note that General Sonthi teamed up with PT as part of their coalition Govt, make of that what you will.

To wait until a new election to vote against a corrupt Govt may be to late as legislation will have already have been passed to change laws which are detrimental to the country.

A prefect example of this is the legislation that PT had on the table, first the senate changes as discussed. Then changes to section 190 of the constitution which would have given them the power to make international deals without scrutiny of parliament: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/opposition-slams-amendment-article-190

Then there was the rice pledging scheme which would have continued for another 2 years with farther huge loss to the country.

Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains.

Then there was the 2.2 trillion which would have been obtained out of budget with no checks and balances as to where it went.

There is also the 350 billion that was supposed to be for flood protection work, nobody seems to know if that was obtained and disappeared or was still to be got.

We also had a situation where there had been grenade attacks on judges and checks and balances organisations, courts had been ignored, the police refused to do their job and their own people had been put in key positions.

These are all indications of a govt out of control and only working for their own good.

When the people of the country see that politicians are doing things for their own benefit and not for the country I would say they not only have a right but a duty to step in, for waiting for an election may be to late, indeed there is no guarantee that an election would ever come.

I see, Thailand's history began in 2001 with Thaksin, is that it?

Transparency International changed their scoring system in 2012, making comparisons difficult. Your newspaper reference confuses the issue by using a scale other than the one on the TI website http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results, without explaining the scale. However a comparison of the 2010 score of 3.5 http://www.transparency.org/cpi2010/results, the 2004 score of 3.6 under Thaksin http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, and the pre-Thaksin 1995 score of 2.79 http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, seems to indicate that corruption was worse in Thailand before Thaksin.

As far as the rest, do you want a comparison of amnesty proposals and the checks and balances in place between the Yingluck government and the junta?

Another extremely poor effort at deflection.

That the graph I posted only starts at 2001 does not change the fact that the PT Govt took corruption to unprecedented highs in their short term in office. You may claim it was worse before Thaksins time but that does not change the fact.

You are apparently trying to draw some parallel between what the present Govt is doing and the amnesty bill PT had before the house, another deflection.

No coup is a good thing but at least the present lot is uncovering the billions of Baht in corruption which would have been pardoned under the PT bill.

This includes the top cop with his billions salted away and the fake G2G rice deals, do you really believe the corrupt should be allowed to keep what they have scammed from the country and the people ?

I purposely didn't mention the politicians absolving themselves from all crime but I will now. Do you think that is a good way to reconcile the people or just to give crooked politicians a way to avoid answering to the law ?

Honest people don't need amnesty, and don't start on about political prisoners, if there is such a thing then their cases can be dealt with individually on a case by case basis, no need for a blanket amnesty that covers all politicians.

And don't have another go at comparing the amnesty that coup makers always give themselves, that is another subject altogether.

"That the graph I posted only starts at 2001 does not change the fact that the PT Govt took corruption to unprecedented highs in their short term in office. You may claim it was worse before Thaksins time but that does not change the fact."

You have repeatedly referred to the Yingluck government as "the most corrupt administration in the history of this country." Now you seem to be retreating from that statement. Also, as indicated, it is Transparency International that "claimed" corruption was worse in 1995, and probably would have data to show much more corruption in previous years if their corruption perception index went back further.

"No coup is a good thing but at least the present lot is uncovering the billions of Baht in corruption which would have been pardoned under the PT bill."

Of course we can only imagine the amount of corruption that would be uncovered if there were a comprehensive, independent audit of the military. We can only imagine because the military will never allow such a thing.

Earlier you posted:

"Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains."

then you stated:

"I purposely didn't mention the politicians absolving themselves from all crime but I will now. Do you think that is a good way to reconcile the people or just to give crooked politicians a way to avoid answering to the law ?"

and concluded with:

"And don't have another go at comparing the amnesty that coup makers always give themselves, that is another subject altogether."

First you bring up the amnesty bill, then you claim you didn't, they you state that the amnesty the coup leaders granted themselves is not open to discussion. If you don't want to bring amnesty into the discussion you shouldn't bring amnesty into the discussion. Once you introduce a subject it is open to discussion.

On that thought, after commenting on the abuse of checks and balances of the Yingluck administration, you avoided a comparison to the complete absence of checks on the junta. You clearly enjoy criticizing the previous government, but want to avoid comparisons with the current junta.

[rubl]

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

Does your country also allow criminal fugitive to run your country from afar? Does your country allow such figures to own political parties, skype-in into cabinet meetings to give orders? Allow criminal fugitives to recall his party and government underlings to him to pass a few more orders?

It's interesting that a month ago some here pointed out that the Founding Father of Singapore had endorsed Thaksin as a strong leader and a few agreed with that. Possibly because they don't come from real democracies.

So, poll delayed, mentality of Thai and farang alike still not correct. An election now wouldn't solve any problems.

In your previous post you state that it is unreasonable to compare the unchecked power of a military junta that grants itself amnesty to the checks and balances in an elected government that attempted to use the legislative process to grant amnesty to people no longer in government.

Here you ask for a comparison in governments between a country where the military doesn't stage coups or get involved in politics, and a country where the military stages coups and routinely plays politics. You're not big on logical consistency, are you?

I'll give you the obvious comparison; the country where the military doesn't stage coups has the better government and better future prospects.

You asked for it with your "I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. " and "Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election.".

So, polls delayed, consistently. Reforms first, to prevent coups and criminal fugitive involvement.

[rubl]

Interesting that some still complain about the junta and the junta appointed NLA is not democratic with all which goes with democracies. Almost as if some are prepared to accept the junta if they 'democratise' a wee bit. Imagine to have poll to elect members of the junta. Now that would be democratic.

Edited April 27, 2015 by rubl

[baboon]

Interesting that some still complain about the junta and the junta appointed NLA is not democratic with all which goes with democracies. Almost as if some are prepared to accept the junta if they 'democratise' a wee bit. Imagine to have poll to elect members of the junta. Now that would be democratic.

Imagine, imagine. What if, what if... Imagine if Iceland was a landlocked country in South America... So bloody what, some would say...

Edited April 27, 2015 by baboon

[heybruce]

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

Does your country also allow criminal fugitive to run your country from afar? Does your country allow such figures to own political parties, skype-in into cabinet meetings to give orders? Allow criminal fugitives to recall his party and government underlings to him to pass a few more orders?

It's interesting that a month ago some here pointed out that the Founding Father of Singapore had endorsed Thaksin as a strong leader and a few agreed with that. Possibly because they don't come from real democracies.

So, poll delayed, mentality of Thai and farang alike still not correct. An election now wouldn't solve any problems.

In your previous post you state that it is unreasonable to compare the unchecked power of a military junta that grants itself amnesty to the checks and balances in an elected government that attempted to use the legislative process to grant amnesty to people no longer in government.

Here you ask for a comparison in governments between a country where the military doesn't stage coups or get involved in politics, and a country where the military stages coups and routinely plays politics. You're not big on logical consistency, are you?

I'll give you the obvious comparison; the country where the military doesn't stage coups has the better government and better future prospects.

You asked for it with your "I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. " and "Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election.".

So, polls delayed, consistently. Reforms first, to prevent coups and criminal fugitive involvement.

I'm not sure what your point is. Your repeatedly compare Thailand's elected governments to other democracies and find it lacking, but insist that it's not fair to compare Thailand's elected government to most recent junta that deposed it.

I'll make it simple for you; In my country the people elect their leaders and the military stays out of politics. In Thailand the military runs the country or is in the background threatening a coup. Thailand will not have real democracy until the military is out of politics, and it's not going to get real democracy from the military. The draft charter makes that clear.