Deal over new chiefs?

[elgordo38]

Deals : Most definitely

Promotion based on experience, suitability and merit etc. : NEVER

What a daisy chain. It would make a good stage play. Love the fruit salad the guy in the picture is adorned with. The following quote says it all. Political observers said Prayut's gesture to allow Prawit to handpick the new police chief could have underlined a behind-the-scenes gentlemen's agreement for the premier's younger brother to take up the top post at the Army.

I wish my brother could have given me a helping hand like this but then he was no gentleman.

[elgordo38]

And I thought that cronyism and nepotism under Thaksin was bad.

The players change but the game remains the same.

[elgordo38]

What is the source of a billion baht in assets?

Its like a marketing scheme the big guy in is the big winner over time as more(salesmen) are brought on board his commissions grow expidentially. Its called pyramid marketing or something. At that level nothing moves without a commission. Charles Ponzi invented the game.

Edited August 15, 2015 by elgordo38

[Baerboxer]

And I thought that cronyism and nepotism under Thaksin was bad.

You thought right, it was.

Difference these police and army guys are all experienced and time served. No idea about the appraisals / annual performance reviews. But they have been doing senior jobs for some time. With suitable candidates to pick from it comes down to some wheeler dealing,

Under Thaksin, he didn't give two fkcus about their qualifications for the job - family first, proven lackey second. They were his main criteria.

[Baerboxer]

If I remember correctly, one of the justifications for the 2006 coup was that Thaksin was appointing loyal generals to the top ranks to consolidate his power. Evidently it's bad for an elected PM to do that, but acceptable for a junta leader.

Really. And there's me thinking Thaksin was kicked out in 2006 because he was illegally occupying the position of caretaker PM, without any authority but his own.

[heybruce]

If I remember correctly, one of the justifications for the 2006 coup was that Thaksin was appointing loyal generals to the top ranks to consolidate his power. Evidently it's bad for an elected PM to do that, but acceptable for a junta leader.

Really. And there's me thinking Thaksin was kicked out in 2006 because he was illegally occupying the position of caretaker PM, without any authority but his own.

Really? Who was supposed to be PM at the time?

[thesetat2013]

If I remember correctly, one of the justifications for the 2006 coup was that Thaksin was appointing loyal generals to the top ranks to consolidate his power. Evidently it's bad for an elected PM to do that, but acceptable for a junta leader.

Really. And there's me thinking Thaksin was kicked out in 2006 because he was illegally occupying the position of caretaker PM, without any authority but his own.

No! That was YL. Thak was kicked out after it was found he was procuring land that was intended for sale to the Gov I think. So he could sell it back for more.

[Walter Travolta]

Why is nobody pointing?

[Srikcir]

.

If I remember correctly, one of the justifications for the 2006 coup was that Thaksin was appointing loyal generals to the top ranks to consolidate his power. Evidently it's bad for an elected PM to do that, but acceptable for a junta leader.

Any indication of rocket promotion in the current situation, or did you forget about that?

No, but indications of suspicious financial dealings by the man likely to become the new Army Chief:

"Preecha earlier declared that he possessed assets worth approximately 79 million baht. This prompted social media users in Thailand to try and trace the sources of Preecha’s wealth. These investigations found that the money in at least one of Preecha’s bank accounts had apparently come directly from the budget of the 3^rd Army, which he used to command. They also found that due to a “math” error in adding up his bank accounts, Preecha’s net worth was closer to 90 million baht than the 79 million baht he originally claimed." http://thediplomat.com/2014/10/thai-junta-beset-by-corruption-scandals/

Not surprisingly, Prayut insisted he was much to busy to investigate this or other suspicious dealings in the army.

Prior to the military coup Prayut's net assets was reduced from 569 million baht to 102 million baht after dividing 467 million baht between his brother Preech and father. He treated the transfer as an EXPENSE against total assets, according to the NACC. Remember Prayut's flag officer's income was US$43,000/year.

In Preech's filings as a member of the NLA to the NACC he reported account assets (as opposed to total assets) of about 42million baht. He somehow overlooked an additional 38 million baht that would have increased his account assets to 80 million baht. He blames the error on bad math and NACC made no further inquiries.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Rimmer
Thai language attachments removed

[heybruce]

If I remember correctly, one of the justifications for the 2006 coup was that Thaksin was appointing loyal generals to the top ranks to consolidate his power. Evidently it's bad for an elected PM to do that, but acceptable for a junta leader.

Really. And there's me thinking Thaksin was kicked out in 2006 because he was illegally occupying the position of caretaker PM, without any authority but his own.

No! That was YL. Thak was kicked out after it was found he was procuring land that was intended for sale to the Gov I think. So he could sell it back for more.

Ok, who was supposed to be PM, and what law did Yingluck violate by holding the position until elections? You have to give her credit for not attempting to prolong the caretaker government status, she tried to hold elections, but anti-democrats objected.

Regarding conflict of interest in lands deals, it's a good thing we have generals in charge now. They never engage in that sort of activity.

Edited August 16, 2015 by heybruce

[mikemac]

................"At the meeting [to elect him], Prawit voiced his support for Jakthip and everyone there nodded," a source at the police board meeting said."...................

Sounds like there were a lot of yes-men there !

I see that annoying catch-cry "anti-democrats" is being bandied around again.

What is this, tag-team ? Another poster who for some reason is not posting anymore used to use that term all the time, incessantly, constantly, as many times as possible in every comment. Almost like they worked for the same "firm".

[heybruce]

................"At the meeting [to elect him], Prawit voiced his support for Jakthip and everyone there nodded," a source at the police board meeting said."...................

Sounds like there were a lot of yes-men there !

I see that annoying catch-cry "anti-democrats" is being bandied around again.

What is this, tag-team ? Another poster who for some reason is not posting anymore used to use that term all the time, incessantly, constantly, as many times as possible in every comment. Almost like they worked for the same "firm".

"Anti-democrats" is a short and accurate way to describe people who oppose elections and elected governments. It also has the advantage of not being banned. There is a one word description to describe the current government, but it is banned, so I use the alternative "Article 44-ship".