DSI targets Thai Tourism Dept's equipment purchases

[webfact]

DSI targets Tourism Dept's equipment purchases
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) claimed yesterday that it has found irregularities in the Tourism Department's Bt714-million procurements of recreational/exercise equipment.

The DSI now suspects that some high-level officials might have deliberately violated laws and will ask that the National Anti-Corruption Commission take action against them.

The procurements were made through the budget of the Tourism Department, which is under the Ministry of Tourism and Sports.

"The procurements were carried out between 2012 and 2014," DSI deputy chief Pong-In Intarakhao said yesterday, "But there are many irregularities in the procurement process".

He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers.

The investigation by DSI also showed that the standard price for the procurement was inflated.

"The equipment procured was finally overpriced, about four to five times higher than the original price declared by the importing supplier," Pong-in said.

He said evidence suggested that some firms were hired to tender bids, only for price comparisons.

According to Pong-in, the DSI would ask a local revenue office to check the tax payment by the supplier too.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/DSI-targets-Tourism-Depts-equipment-purchases-30264061.html


-- The Nation 2015-07-09

[selftaopath]

Is corruption EVERYWHERE in Land of Scams/ Lack of Sanctions (LOS)?

[PatOngo]

The Tourism Dept, as usual will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[Bluespunk]

"He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers."

Now there's a twist.

What were these specifications?

[Toknarok]

Is anyone surprised at this? Fire engines, microphones, fusal courts, the list goes on and on. I'll bet that not a single item purchased by a Government Department in this Country hasn't been bought at an inflated price.

[rametindallas]

"The procurements were carried out between 2012 and 2014,"

He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers.

"The equipment procured was finally overpriced, about four to five times higher than the original price declared by the importing supplier," Pong-in said.
He said evidence suggested that some firms were hired to tender bids, only for price comparisons.

This looks like corruption to me. This happened when PM Yingluck was taking care of the 'little people'. Wasn't the Yingluck Thaksin administration always going on about being for the people and and how they were corruption fighters? Now we know that smile of hers was because she was playing everyone who believed in her for fools.

Edited July 9, 2015 by rametindallas

[kaorop]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

[Prbkk]

"The procurements were carried out between 2012 and 2014,"

He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers.

"The equipment procured was finally overpriced, about four to five times higher than the original price declared by the importing supplier," Pong-in said.

He said evidence suggested that some firms were hired to tender bids, only for price comparisons.

This looks like corruption to me. This happened when PM Yingluck was taking care of the 'little people'. Wasn't the Yingluck Thaksin administration always going on about being for the people and and how they were corruption fighters? Now we know that smile of hers was because she was playing everyone who believed in her for fools.

Yingluck stop corruption.jpg

But as you very well know, this issue is endemic and is no better or worse regardless of the politics. It will continue to tear away at the fabric of Thai society and ultimately destroy the economy....it's well on the way to doing that now.

If the General is serious, let's see some action about corporate corruption in addition to these civil servants, chickenfeed by comparison with the big boys

[halloween]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

It's like thinking painting began with Da Vinci and Michaelangelo. OTOH they are recognised as great masters.

[rametindallas]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

corruption started and stopped with the taksins

Who said that but you? Go ahead and knock that Straw Man down; it's easy. Here, I'll even knock it down for you. Corruption in Thailand did NOT start and stop with the Shinawatras. There, happy now?

The OP is about a specific corrupt activity that took place during the totally honest, non-corrupt Yingluck Thaksin administration. Since you are clearly an apologist for all things Thaksin, I'm not surprised you want to deflect from the truth using your Straw Man argument. Of course you can't comment on the corruption referred to in the OP as there was only Yingluck's Thaksin's appointed people in charge of that department. My only question is did they send a 'tribute' to Lord Valdemort na Dubai.

.

[rametindallas]

"The procurements were carried out between 2012 and 2014,"

He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers.

"The equipment procured was finally overpriced, about four to five times higher than the original price declared by the importing supplier," Pong-in said.

He said evidence suggested that some firms were hired to tender bids, only for price comparisons.

This looks like corruption to me. This happened when PM Yingluck was taking care of the 'little people'. Wasn't the Yingluck Thaksin administration always going on about being for the people and and how they were corruption fighters? Now we know that smile of hers was because she was playing everyone who believed in her for fools.

Yingluck stop corruption.jpg

But as you very well know, this issue is endemic and is no better or worse regardless of the politics. It will continue to tear away at the fabric of Thai society and ultimately destroy the economy....it's well on the way to doing that now.

If the General is serious, let's see some action about corporate corruption in addition to these civil servants, chickenfeed by comparison with the big boys

I see you don't want to address the OP, either. You'd rather discuss the corruption endemic in the system. I don't blame you as your primary responsibility is to take sides against PM Prayut's reforms and, if not defend, not condemn Thaksin or Yingluck too strongly.

The PM has already put the Civil Service on notice. None of this corruption can happen without the aiding and abetting of the Civil Service. Some high-level Civil Servants have seen, first hand, the power of Article 44 when they were abruptly removed from their lucrative posts. What corporate corruption are your referring to that isn't directly tied to participating in Government corruption?

.

[Kasset Tak]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

The corruption didn't start with Thaksin it just got worse, as a friend working at the amphoe said: Before we payed 10-15% then Thaksin came and we had to pay 30-50%.

BTW. Taksin is regarded as one of Thailand's great kings (1734-1782)!

[Toknarok]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

The corruption didn't start with Thaksin it just got worse, as a friend working at the amphoe said: Before we payed 10-15% then Thaksin came and we had to pay 30-50%.

BTW. Taksin is regarded as one of Thailand's great kings (1734-1782)!

Wrong. Corruption actually fell under Thaksin....https://assassinationthaksin.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/thaksin-corruption-what-transparency-international-says-vs-what-elite-thai-establishment-says/

[halloween]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

The corruption didn't start with Thaksin it just got worse, as a friend working at the amphoe said: Before we payed 10-15% then Thaksin came and we had to pay 30-50%.

BTW. Taksin is regarded as one of Thailand's great kings (1734-1782)!

Wrong. Corruption actually fell under Thaksin....https://assassinationthaksin.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/thaksin-corruption-what-transparency-international-says-vs-what-elite-thai-establishment-says/

Your link says that the"perception" of corruption fell. What it doesn't comment on is the PM's personal corruption which rose to an all time high, with no attempt at concealment because he had bought off the regulators.

[quandow]

True story: A Thai purchasing agent at one of the schools at which I worked was asking if one of us teachers had a calculator she could borrow. We said, "Sure, what for?" She said, "I have to buy 400 plastic chairs. They're in this ad." She then showed us a Makro ad for the chairs priced at 99 baht each. We asked her if this wasn't a simple math probrem [sic] she could do in her head? She replied, "But then I have to add in my own profit."

[FangFerang]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

corruption started and stopped with the taksins

Who said that but you? Go ahead and knock that Straw Man down; it's easy. Here, I'll even knock it down for you. Corruption in Thailand did NOT start and stop with the Shinawatras. There, happy now?

The OP is about a specific corrupt activity that took place during the totally honest, non-corrupt Yingluck Thaksin administration. Since you are clearly an apologist for all things Thaksin, I'm not surprised you want to deflect from the truth using your Straw Man argument. Of course you can't comment on the corruption referred to in the OP as there was only Yingluck's Thaksin's appointed people in charge of that department. My only question is did they send a 'tribute' to Lord Valdemort na Dubai.

.

You are fighting your own fallacy by claiming others are fallacious. Your assumptions were both post hoc ergo propter hoc, and based on an invalid comparison. Further, your implied subtext was also an argument the writer addressed. Then you went into black and white thinking as a response to the criticism. Go back to Logic 101, where I would be happy to fail you.

[Neilly]

DSI targets Tourism Dept's equipment purchases

I wonder how much TAT paid for their Crystal Balls?

[Jimlove]

Can only hope the Supreme Leader have had enough of scandals in MOTS and have to fire Mrs. Popcorn - not that its gonna change anything, I just dont like her ... but he will not since she is the wife of one of his good friends ... Ah the nepotism ....

[Si Thea01]

Why wouldn't they buy at inflated prices, they have to go touring as well, and you wouldn't expect them to pay for those world wide trips out of their own pockets. Happens everywhere that governments seek tenders and when you see the prices they are at least four to five times higher than what you and I could buy the same product for.

I know it's about Thailand but here's a comparison from OZ. An ex prime minister's office was recently refurbished at a cost in excess of $500,00.00. What sort of new home could one buy for that amount, and including the land and all the furniture. They're all into it, corrupt bastards who don't give a toss about the taxpayers, and live in a word that many on this planet cannot afford.

[Fat Haggis]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

It's like thinking painting began with Da Vinci and Michaelangelo. OTOH they are recognised as great masters.

Why would a Ninja turtle be considered a master? I always thought Splinter was the master?

[h90]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

I recall a friend who built schools and he was so upset....

5% was usual, when Thaksin came it went up to 10% than 15% and than more. He stopped building schools for government because he said 5% he can take from his profit but 15 he would have to cut on building quality which he wont do.

Thaksin didn't start corruption but he increased it from a small "thank you" to a full scale huge corruption.

[Baerboxer]

"He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers."

Now there's a twist.

What were these specifications?

An old trick in public procurement tendering. You write the specifications of the goods and/or services to favor one supplier, or suppliers from a particular country, area, or domestic ones.

Usually, that means the bung went in prior to the tender specs being written.

[Baerboxer]

"The procurements were carried out between 2012 and 2014,"

He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers.

"The equipment procured was finally overpriced, about four to five times higher than the original price declared by the importing supplier," Pong-in said.

He said evidence suggested that some firms were hired to tender bids, only for price comparisons.

This looks like corruption to me. This happened when PM Yingluck was taking care of the 'little people'. Wasn't the Yingluck Thaksin administration always going on about being for the people and and how they were corruption fighters? Now we know that smile of hers was because she was playing everyone who believed in her for fools.

Yingluck stop corruption.jpg

Be fair. She stopped corruption. Her brother said so on CNN. They never ever did anything wrong. There was no corruption in his cousin illegally issuing him with a new passport or hand delivering it; no corruption in cheating parliamentary process; no corruption in the self financing rice scheme; and no corruption in any of the PTP policies, budget accounting or departments. That's why they could cut the NACC budget significantly at a stroke.

Yingluck must have been successful. Her FB page says so. Just like she made massive inroads on addressing the trafficking problems.

Thailand - where politicians can get away with the biggest whoppers that their foreign counterparts can only dream of.

[halloween]

"He said the DSI had found that specifications had been laid down in a way that looked set to block out domestic manufacturers."

Now there's a twist.

What were these specifications?

An old trick in public procurement tendering. You write the specifications of the goods and/or services to favor one supplier, or suppliers from a particular country, area, or domestic ones.

Usually, that means the bung went in prior to the tender specs being written.

An old trick Thaksin learned while still employed in the BIB. It's a huge pity that he wasn't prosecuted and jailed for that corrupt contract fiddle, might have saved the country a lot of drama.

Edited July 10, 2015 by halloween

[phoenixdoglover]

As usual, the conversation quickly devolves. One contributor actually derides another for pointing out that systemic corruption in Thailand has been endemic for a long time.

I understand it is far easier to attribute corruption to one set of leaders. We have the wonderful coincidence; it happened while they were in charge. It was the evil ones, after all!

Yet the same people who invoke the "evil ones" also admit the systemic nature of corruption in Thailand. They just don't want to talk about it. Solving systemic corruption is much more difficult than assigning blame to a few people, who can be condemned with a few keystrokes. Battling systemic corruption, even from the keyboard, is just more difficult.

Thus, we don't seek to understand how corrupt procurements are conducted, regardless of the players' political affiliation.

In part, I blame the investigative officials (in this case at DSI) and the media, for being so lazy. The DSI conducts a partial investigation, and makes a half-assed announcement, failing to identify the corrupt acts with precision. And they're not ready to prosecute, so the official announcement just gives the perpetrators time to cover their tracks. The DSI says in effect, "Oh we looked into this and we found some bad stuff, so we'll turn it over to NACC; they can finish the investigation. After all we're only the "DSI". This beggars the questions: What if there was no NACC? Are there no laws against corruption? Are there no prosecutors?

The media compounds the problem by actually accepting this incomplete work, and failing to demonstrate the slightest curiosity to follow up. Official pronouncements are sufficient... Just take notes, arrange them in an illogical order that fails to tell a story, and publish the little mess. No independent investigation. No contacting anyone else for a statement.

And so it goes. Systemic corruption is accepted. While individual instances of corruption are investigated with a strange mixture of enthusiasm (we are the first to make an announcement!) and incompetence (we haven't completed our job; so sorry).

So you see friends, it doesn't matter if corruption went up under the Shins (from 5% to 10%. They are sooooo evil). What matters is that corruption has been flourishing regardless of whether the leaders are a little corrupt or a lot corrupt.

But the General is The Best Leader in a Long Time. He only has a dodgy past and unexplained wealth. He is doing crackdowns. Corruption will be rooted out!

No, it won't.

The General is just a player. Thaksin is just a player.

The play rolls on.

The Police are complicit. The media is complicit.

Edited July 10, 2015 by phoenixdoglover

[robblok]

As usual, the conversation quickly devolves. One contributor actually derides another for pointing out that systemic corruption in Thailand has been endemic for a long time.

I understand it is far easier to attribute corruption to one set of leaders. We have the wonderful coincidence; it happened while they were in charge. It was the evil ones, after all!

Yet the same people who invoke the "evil ones" also admit the systemic nature of corruption in Thailand. They just don't want to talk about it. Solving systemic corruption is much more difficult than assigning blame to a few people, who can be condemned with a few keystrokes. Battling systemic corruption, even from the keyboard, is just more difficult.

Thus, we don't seek to understand how corrupt procurements are conducted, regardless of the players' political affiliation.

In part, I blame the investigative officials (in this case at DSI) and the media, for being so lazy. The DSI conducts a partial investigation, and makes a half-assed announcement, failing to identify the corrupt acts with precision. And they're not ready to prosecute, so the official announcement just gives the perpetrators time to cover their tracks. The DSI says in effect, "Oh we looked into this and we found some bad stuff, so we'll turn it over to NACC; they can finish the investigation. After all we're only the "DSI". This beggars the questions: What if there was no NACC? Are there no laws against corruption? Are there no prosecutors?

The media compounds the problem by actually accepting this incomplete work, and failing to demonstrate the slightest curiosity to follow up. Official pronouncements are sufficient... Just take notes, arrange them in an illogical order that fails to tell a story, and publish the little mess. No independent investigation. No contacting anyone else for a statement.

And so it goes. Systemic corruption is accepted. While individual instances of corruption are investigated with a strange mixture of enthusiasm (we are the first to make an announcement!) and incompetence (we haven't completed our job; so sorry).

So you see friends, it doesn't matter if corruption went up under the Shins (from 5% to 10%. They are sooooo evil). What matters is that corruption has been flourishing regardless of whether the leaders are a little corrupt or a lot corrupt.

But the General is The Best Leader in a Long Time. He only has a dodgy past and unexplained wealth. He is doing crackdowns. Corruption will be rooted out!

No, it won't.

The General is just a player. Thaksin is just a player.

The play rolls on.

The Police are complicit. The media is complicit.

As i recall you were quite vocal against the general's removal of officials suspected of corruption (during the investigation). You said that did not happen in the US and when I gave you a link where the US suspended police men while investigating wrong doings you stayed silent never admitting you were wrong.

Now when YL is in the spotlight you do all you can to deflect the blame from her and again try to shift blame.

Your agenda is obvious.

I can only say the general is doing a great job at least he is doing something. I can't recall much fights against corruption by YL.. besides the fact that she wanted a blanket amnesty including 26.000 corruption cases (and it would have made sure the doggy G2G trades would not be punished).

I am not saying the general is perfect but at least things are done (and a lot more should be done) but its a lot better as not doing anything and even helping corruption like YL.

[phoenixdoglover]

As usual, the conversation quickly devolves. One contributor actually derides another for pointing out that systemic corruption in Thailand has been endemic for a long time.

I understand it is far easier to attribute corruption to one set of leaders. We have the wonderful coincidence; it happened while they were in charge. It was the evil ones, after all!

Yet the same people who invoke the "evil ones" also admit the systemic nature of corruption in Thailand. They just don't want to talk about it. Solving systemic corruption is much more difficult than assigning blame to a few people, who can be condemned with a few keystrokes. Battling systemic corruption, even from the keyboard, is just more difficult.

Thus, we don't seek to understand how corrupt procurements are conducted, regardless of the players' political affiliation.

In part, I blame the investigative officials (in this case at DSI) and the media, for being so lazy. The DSI conducts a partial investigation, and makes a half-assed announcement, failing to identify the corrupt acts with precision. And they're not ready to prosecute, so the official announcement just gives the perpetrators time to cover their tracks. The DSI says in effect, "Oh we looked into this and we found some bad stuff, so we'll turn it over to NACC; they can finish the investigation. After all we're only the "DSI". This beggars the questions: What if there was no NACC? Are there no laws against corruption? Are there no prosecutors?

The media compounds the problem by actually accepting this incomplete work, and failing to demonstrate the slightest curiosity to follow up. Official pronouncements are sufficient... Just take notes, arrange them in an illogical order that fails to tell a story, and publish the little mess. No independent investigation. No contacting anyone else for a statement.

And so it goes. Systemic corruption is accepted. While individual instances of corruption are investigated with a strange mixture of enthusiasm (we are the first to make an announcement!) and incompetence (we haven't completed our job; so sorry).

So you see friends, it doesn't matter if corruption went up under the Shins (from 5% to 10%. They are sooooo evil). What matters is that corruption has been flourishing regardless of whether the leaders are a little corrupt or a lot corrupt.

But the General is The Best Leader in a Long Time. He only has a dodgy past and unexplained wealth. He is doing crackdowns. Corruption will be rooted out!

No, it won't.

The General is just a player. Thaksin is just a player.

The play rolls on.

The Police are complicit. The media is complicit.

As i recall you were quite vocal against the general's removal of officials suspected of corruption (during the investigation). You said that did not happen in the US and when I gave you a link where the US suspended police men while investigating wrong doings you stayed silent never admitting you were wrong.

Now when YL is in the spotlight you do all you can to deflect the blame from her and again try to shift blame.

Your agenda is obvious.

I can only say the general is doing a great job at least he is doing something. I can't recall much fights against corruption by YL.. besides the fact that she wanted a blanket amnesty including 26.000 corruption cases (and it would have made sure the doggy G2G trades would not be punished).

I am not saying the general is perfect but at least things are done (and a lot more should be done) but its a lot better as not doing anything and even helping corruption like YL.

Can you name one systemic change that has been accomplished in the past 14 months that will survive beyond the General's tenure?

What does the General have other than Article 44?

Do you understand what a systemic change would look like?

My agenda IS clear. I am wholly opposed to corruption. I have absolutely no problem with corrupt officials being suspended based on an investigation that is conducted in a proper manner. I have significant doubts that the current government is any more interested in addressing the root causes of corruption in Thailand than any past government. I consider the current government to be illegitimate, and no number of "good deeds" will change that.

I have absolutely no interest in debating the relative levels of corruption in the past governments versus this one. I consider that argument to be foolish. I am much more interested in the future of Thailand, and whether any changes are taking place that would have a lasting effect on corruption. I don't see it.

On the contrary, the current situation has many red flags for increased corruption. For example:

- the media has been suppressed, which reduces the likelihood of corruption being investigated and reported

- individual expression has been suppressed; reducing the likelihood of "whistle blowing"

- very large infrastructure deals are being made without competitive bidding

- Article 44 is being invoked to bypass legal and administrative processes, thus reducing the number of checks and balances

- All of the government institutions (such as the NLA) that would normally oppose a corrupt PM have been appointed by the PM

In my view, these conditions increase the probability of corruption and decrease the probability such corruption will be uncovered or reported.

[kaorop]

As always someone /\ thinks corruption started and stopped with the taksins, truly ridiculous.

corruption started and stopped with the taksins

Who said that but you? Go ahead and knock that Straw Man down; it's easy. Here, I'll even knock it down for you. Corruption in Thailand did NOT start and stop with the Shinawatras. There, happy now?

The OP is about a specific corrupt activity that took place during the totally honest, non-corrupt Yingluck Thaksin administration. Since you are clearly an apologist for all things Thaksin, I'm not surprised you want to deflect from the truth using your Straw Man argument. Of course you can't comment on the corruption referred to in the OP as there was only Yingluck's Thaksin's appointed people in charge of that department. My only question is did they send a 'tribute' to Lord Valdemort na Dubai.

.

Touchy?

I've seen enough of your post to know you take pop shots every time there is an opportunity.

And It means nothing, nada, zero, zip, you of course are unable to see that, particularly with the "clearly a taksin apologist" line which is just laughable

Of course, could easily prove your worthless claim (but wont and cant) with my previous posts.

Try to make relevant and for the FUTURE posts, or be look upon and commented upon as, well, lets leave that to every ones imagination.

[robblok]

As usual, the conversation quickly devolves. One contributor actually derides another for pointing out that systemic corruption in Thailand has been endemic for a long time.

I understand it is far easier to attribute corruption to one set of leaders. We have the wonderful coincidence; it happened while they were in charge. It was the evil ones, after all!

Yet the same people who invoke the "evil ones" also admit the systemic nature of corruption in Thailand. They just don't want to talk about it. Solving systemic corruption is much more difficult than assigning blame to a few people, who can be condemned with a few keystrokes. Battling systemic corruption, even from the keyboard, is just more difficult.

Thus, we don't seek to understand how corrupt procurements are conducted, regardless of the players' political affiliation.

In part, I blame the investigative officials (in this case at DSI) and the media, for being so lazy. The DSI conducts a partial investigation, and makes a half-assed announcement, failing to identify the corrupt acts with precision. And they're not ready to prosecute, so the official announcement just gives the perpetrators time to cover their tracks. The DSI says in effect, "Oh we looked into this and we found some bad stuff, so we'll turn it over to NACC; they can finish the investigation. After all we're only the "DSI". This beggars the questions: What if there was no NACC? Are there no laws against corruption? Are there no prosecutors?

The media compounds the problem by actually accepting this incomplete work, and failing to demonstrate the slightest curiosity to follow up. Official pronouncements are sufficient... Just take notes, arrange them in an illogical order that fails to tell a story, and publish the little mess. No independent investigation. No contacting anyone else for a statement.

And so it goes. Systemic corruption is accepted. While individual instances of corruption are investigated with a strange mixture of enthusiasm (we are the first to make an announcement!) and incompetence (we haven't completed our job; so sorry).

So you see friends, it doesn't matter if corruption went up under the Shins (from 5% to 10%. They are sooooo evil). What matters is that corruption has been flourishing regardless of whether the leaders are a little corrupt or a lot corrupt.

But the General is The Best Leader in a Long Time. He only has a dodgy past and unexplained wealth. He is doing crackdowns. Corruption will be rooted out!

No, it won't.

The General is just a player. Thaksin is just a player.

The play rolls on.

The Police are complicit. The media is complicit.

As i recall you were quite vocal against the general's removal of officials suspected of corruption (during the investigation). You said that did not happen in the US and when I gave you a link where the US suspended police men while investigating wrong doings you stayed silent never admitting you were wrong.

Now when YL is in the spotlight you do all you can to deflect the blame from her and again try to shift blame.

Your agenda is obvious.

I can only say the general is doing a great job at least he is doing something. I can't recall much fights against corruption by YL.. besides the fact that she wanted a blanket amnesty including 26.000 corruption cases (and it would have made sure the doggy G2G trades would not be punished).

I am not saying the general is perfect but at least things are done (and a lot more should be done) but its a lot better as not doing anything and even helping corruption like YL.

Can you name one systemic change that has been accomplished in the past 14 months that will survive beyond the General's tenure?

What does the General have other than Article 44?

Do you understand what a systemic change would look like?

My agenda IS clear. I am wholly opposed to corruption. I have absolutely no problem with corrupt officials being suspended based on an investigation that is conducted in a proper manner. I have significant doubts that the current government is any more interested in addressing the root causes of corruption in Thailand than any past government. I consider the current government to be illegitimate, and no number of "good deeds" will change that.

I have absolutely no interest in debating the relative levels of corruption in the past governments versus this one. I consider that argument to be foolish. I am much more interested in the future of Thailand, and whether any changes are taking place that would have a lasting effect on corruption. I don't see it.

On the contrary, the current situation has many red flags for increased corruption. For example:

- the media has been suppressed, which reduces the likelihood of corruption being investigated and reported

- individual expression has been suppressed; reducing the likelihood of "whistle blowing"

- very large infrastructure deals are being made without competitive bidding

- Article 44 is being invoked to bypass legal and administrative processes, thus reducing the number of checks and balances

- All of the government institutions (such as the NLA) that would normally oppose a corrupt PM have been appointed by the PM

In my view, these conditions increase the probability of corruption and decrease the probability such corruption will be uncovered or reported.

You are blaming the general that measures he has instigated against corruption could be changed back by the next government. That is new one. Blaming someone for something he has no control over.

I showed you links that in the USA they also suspend people pending investigation while in that topic you claimed this was not the case and that it was totally wrong for the junta to put people on non active during an investigation. You never accepted that you were wrong after proven wrong. You still don't.

I want a systemic change as badly as you do and had hoped the junta would do so.. so far I see a lot of corruption cases being handled far more as done by YL but your right.. there is no systemic change but I that is an almost impossible task.

Of course you don't want to compare the previous (your darling) government because letting 26.000 corruption cases slide and making sure her ministers could not be charged for the fake G2G deals is worse then anything in recent history. I mean not going after corruption is one thing.. but telling the judges to let all corrupt people go is far worse (that is what the amnesty was about if not she would have made provisions about not including corruption cases) So in fact ANY government would be better as the previous one.

You are right about the freedom of press that much I give you but have you ever seen the press really going after corruption cases and doing follow up. I haven't (and I think we both agree that is needed)

[phoenixdoglover]

Dear Robblok,

You are so off base with your insinuations regarding my supposed support for the previous government. Oddly, in all of my comments on here, you will never find it.

My support is for democratically elected governments, for better or worse. I don't care about the reds vs yellows, or the Shins. I care about the institutions of government and whether they function well.

So we agree the General in 14 months has instituted NO SYSTEMIC REFORMS.

And we agree the Press in Thailand has shown no appetite for pursuing corruption through investigative journalism.

Do we have the same vision of a future Thailand, in which corruption is not flourishing or hidden and sapping the strength of the country? How does Thailand get there without systemic reforms of the police, judiciary, government administration and press?

Personally, I think the current government will continue with some crackdowns; the cynical part of me thinks this is primarily for show. But I suppose a little bit is better than nothing.

Or is it? What if the crackdowns, all highly publicized, are a smokescreen for more significant acts of malfeasance involving very large sums of money?

Nah, nobody in Thailand could be so corrupt, could they?