NRC votes No against draft charter

[rubl]

You're probably right.

Lol, voice of reason. I just sincerely hope Rubl has more self awareness in real life than on TVF. Such a discourse in how he perceives himself compared to what others see.

Interesting these personal attacks, as if that's the only thing left to kill the voice of reason.

BTW this is not about me, not about you, it's about a new charter for Thailand.

Unlike the UDD I would recommend starting with the 2007 version again and work from there.

Why not start with the 1997 Constitution, one which was widely acclaimed by most persons, rather than one which was written after yet another Coup.

The 2007 charter has various improvements, read about it

"Thailand Law Journal 2009 Spring Issue 1 Volume 12

Deconstructing Thailand's (New) Eighteenth Constitution

Vitit Muntarbhorn"

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

BTW no need to go into the old 'was rewritten'. Most of the text and article are the same. As for 'widely acclaimed', sure, sure.

[cumgranosalum]

this could be good or bad....is it because it isn't "democratic" enough? ....or is it because the Junta wants more time in power?

"The rest of the military officers in the NRC voted against the draft."

Edited September 6, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[cumgranosalum]

unelected Senators with REAL executive and legislative power? Not a good idea!

[rubl]

Prayut also has other options. Like start allover again, ask for cooperation and actually get it, start with the 2007 charter.

Of course in the mean time the Interim charter is still in place. We can't do without a charter, now can we ?

As for time on one's side. What is more important than a charter? People here have been demanding one.

I know this is going to divert attention, but why should groups of people who don't agree or see the coup as illegitimate 'cooperate' with them?

Indeed, indeed, especially since it's so much easier to complain afterwards about the result, say 'if only we could have participated'', 'if only someone asked', 'if only someone hadn't advocated non-obstruction by non-cooperation.

So no answer then?

None you like it would seem.

Are you going to bother and annoy me again with these 'amusing' one liners. Why don't you try to come with some insightful information complete with reasoning as to why. Don't be shy, educate us

[pmugghc]

Is there an another reason that elections are being delayed? Maybe the current government wants the high profile trial of Yingluck over first or could it be the recent bombing in Bangkok has brought back fears of civil war, even though it was maybe relateg to Uyghur terrorists and not red shirts.

Perhaps they are waiting for something else?

[MZurf]

Yes, but still it is kicking the can down the road. People's patience is finite and once they feel they are simply having the p!ss taken out of them...

....................having the p!ss taken out of them... ???

A

And then what Babs ? You keep making these subtle suggestions about something happening without ever revealing what it is. Be careful what you wish for.

Sounds like the PM and his crew are going to be around for a long time ! They won't have to worry about disbanding the reds and their employers, they will have died of old age by the time elections are held !

I shall be less subtle then, Mods permitting.

It dawns on the people that once again the country is being run by a clique of self-serving Generals and their buddies who have no intention of conceding any meaningful power whatsoever to the working class and rise up in anger, like they did in 1973, 1976 and 1992. The army butcher a load of them but end up retreating temporarily after an intervention at the highest level.

Any better an answer?

Well it continues on the continuous red theme that "There Will Be Blood!" The trouble is that most people seem completely indifferent to the current government and the reform process, are getting on with their lives, and quietly approving of the number of formerly exempt corrupt politicians and cronies being brought to book.

BTW the old red tactic of an occasional loud bang or two best have a rethink, lest they be associated with the Erewan mess..

"... are getting on with their lives, and quietly approving of the number of formerly exempt corrupt politicians and cronies being brought to book."

Apparently they are so quiet about it that only halloween can hear them!!

[rubl]

unelected Senators with REAL executive and legislative power? Not a good idea!

Families claiming parliament and Senate seats as their near hereditary right being the local 'ruling' family? Not a good idea even if voted in by their former serfs.

Edited September 6, 2015 by rubl

[MZurf]

This will give them more time to repair the damage caused by the last 4 or 5 governments before they let them have another go at screwing things up again.

Probably the best outcome anyway.

Seems to me that the current government has accomplished more good since they took power, than any other government in the past 20 years.

Yes, the list of achievements is a long one. Let's list them:

1. National lottery reform.

2. Bike lanes (at some point in the future)

3. Uh.....?

[Jon Wetherall]

Yes, but still it is kicking the can down the road. People's patience is finite and once they feel they are simply having the p!ss taken out of them...

....................having the p!ss taken out of them... ???

A

And then what Babs ? You keep making these subtle suggestions about something happening without ever revealing what it is. Be careful what you wish for.

Sounds like the PM and his crew are going to be around for a long time ! They won't have to worry about disbanding the reds and their employers, they will have died of old age by the time elections are held !

I shall be less subtle then, Mods permitting.

It dawns on the people that once again the country is being run by a clique of self-serving Generals and their buddies who have no intention of conceding any meaningful power whatsoever to the working class and rise up in anger, like they did in 1973, 1976 and 1992. The army butcher a load of them but end up retreating temporarily after an intervention at the highest level.

Any better an answer?

Well it continues on the continuous red theme that "There Will Be Blood!" The trouble is that most people seem completely indifferent to the current government and the reform process, are getting on with their lives, and quietly approving of the number of formerly exempt corrupt politicians and cronies being brought to book.

BTW the old red tactic of an occasional loud bang or two best have a rethink, lest they be associated with the Erewan mess..

Maybe. But then it looks like rain. No need to panic, continue walking, carry on as normal, do your business.

Clouds gather but still, no need to panic, continue walking, carry on as normal, do your business.

Now it starts to rain and you're getting wet and it doesn't appear to be stopping. No sunshine in the distance, but sounds of thunder nearby. Now you open the umbrella.

The moral is simple. Until you start getting wet, you don't need put up the umbrella. The only variable is - how wet do you have to get before you decide it isn't going to stop?

Thais may not, as a nation, be very bright, as is clear from the government's own measurements. But they're not completely stupid either.

[MZurf]

This could be the result the PM wanted.

It's the vote I wanted!!

Let democracy take the back seat for longer and make sure that they have got it right this time. They need to shut out incompetent people voted in by ignorant and gullible people. Thaksin rigged it his way and look where that got us, it needs to be changed to avoid serious mistakes from being made again whether it is democratic or not. Of course, if they have an election then that is democracy, so simply make it so that they vote in the right people this time by whatever means necessary.

Prey tell, who are the 'right' people? The democrats?

Not necessarily, simply anyone but the PTP as they are a bunch of dishonest thieves!!

Please, don't be shy while writing inane generalizations - let it all out!

[Eric Loh]

"As for the external factor, he pointed out at the widespread opposition to the draft which, he said, would lead to more conflict if the draft is allowed to go through."

Sounds almost democratic, what's wrong with him. Doesn't he know the NRC has been declared a mouthpiece for a fascist junta, and a few more lovely, endearing terms.

It's a government under military rule; democray doesn't exist. I would expect the NRC to exercise some discretion in making an important decision because of the composition of its members. With 77 from each provinces and 173 from 11 professional fields, they have less direct control by the military. Contrast with the NLA which is a mouthpiece as more than half are from the military.

[heybruce]

This could be the result the PM wanted.

It's the vote I wanted!!

Let democracy take the back seat for longer and make sure that they have got it right this time. They need to shut out incompetent people voted in by ignorant and gullible people. Thaksin rigged it his way and look where that got us, it needs to be changed to avoid serious mistakes from being made again whether it is democratic or not. Of course, if they have an election then that is democracy, so simply make it so that they vote in the right people this time by whatever means necessary.

Prey tell, who are the 'right' people? The democrats?

Not necessarily, simply anyone but the PTP as they are a bunch of dishonest thieves!!

Do you consider a bunch of suspiciously wealthy generals who get angry when asked where their money came from to be trustworthy?

[rubl]

"As for the external factor, he pointed out at the widespread opposition to the draft which, he said, would lead to more conflict if the draft is allowed to go through."

Sounds almost democratic, what's wrong with him. Doesn't he know the NRC has been declared a mouthpiece for a fascist junta, and a few more lovely, endearing terms.

It's a government under military rule; democray doesn't exist. I would expect the NRC to exercise some discretion in making an important decision because of the composition of its members. With 77 from each provinces and 173 from 11 professional fields, they have less direct control by the military. Contrast with the NLA which is a mouthpiece as more than half are from the military.

Oh come on Eric, don't you know the NRC has been condemned by TVF's finest as being a junta mouthpiece ?

Anyway, the NRC voted against with PM Prayut being in favour. How's that for democracy?

[rubl]

Nice article explaining all about the constitutions and Thailand. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34149522

I think this part explains the mentality of some of the junta and their supporters:

"It is "a quest for a system in which benevolent and morally upstanding elites are able to exercise very substantive control and jurisdiction over what's going on in the society", renowned Thai scholar Duncan McCargo recently told the US Brookings Institute.

"As though it was always clear who the good guys were and the bad guys were, and as though people who were not elected politicians, people who were bureaucrats, people who were military officials, people who were close to the monarchy, people who were judges, would in some way be inherently morally superior to anybody who had been elected.""

I never bought the idea that only elected officials were corrupt and that military officers, civil servants, and other self-proclaimed "quality people" were honest and trustworthy.

I also never bought the idea that elected politicians and the nouveau-rich were all honest and trustworthy.

BTW Professor Duncan McCargo

"I may be best known for my agenda-setting contributions to current debates on the politics of Thailand, but my work is centrally concerned with the nature of power."

http://www.polis.leeds.ac.uk/people/staff/mccargo/

[473geo]

"As for the external factor, he pointed out at the widespread opposition to the draft which, he said, would lead to more conflict if the draft is allowed to go through."

Sounds almost democratic, what's wrong with him. Doesn't he know the NRC has been declared a mouthpiece for a fascist junta, and a few more lovely, endearing terms.

It's a government under military rule; democray doesn't exist. I would expect the NRC to exercise some discretion in making an important decision because of the composition of its members. With 77 from each provinces and 173 from 11 professional fields, they have less direct control by the military. Contrast with the NLA which is a mouthpiece as more than half are from the military.

Oh come on Eric, don't you know the NRC has been condemned by TVF's finest as being a junta mouthpiece ?

Anyway, the NRC voted against with PM Prayut being in favour. How's that for democracy?

Perhaps when the ex monk and his mass of support came out strongly in favour of the charter........... NRC were prompted to take another look

[jayboy]

Prayut is not out of options to still pass the draft 2015 constitution within the next 30 days. No NRC or referendum approval required.

In no order of importance:

- use the NLA to get a majority vote of approval as was done with the 1997 Constitution.

- invoke Article 44 to legalize it.

- resubmit draft to NRC with some band-aid revisions if majority approval can be guaranteed

- extend the Interim Charter indefinitely

Time is not on Prayut's side to redo the NRC and CDC process over another 6 months.

Prayut also has other options. Like start allover again, ask for cooperation and actually get it, start with the 2007 charter.

Of course in the mean time the Interim charter is still in place. We can't do without a charter, now can we ?

As for time on one's side. What is more important than a charter? People here have been demanding one.

I know this is going to divert attention, but why should groups of people who don't agree or see the coup as illegitimate 'cooperate' with them?

Indeed, indeed, especially since it's so much easier to complain afterwards about the result, say 'if only we could have participated'', 'if only someone asked', 'if only someone hadn't advocated non-obstruction by non-cooperation.

It works both ways.I understand the point you are trying to make but you can't put lipstick on a pig.

Let us hypothesise there was a military coup in the UK or Holland, and the generals involved (or their henchmen) tried to force through a constitution.Do you think it possible that principled Dutch or British democrats might refuse to have anything to do with the process - on the grounds that its origin was suffused in illegitimacy and illegality?

[lildragon]

It's the vote I wanted!!

Let democracy take the back seat for longer and make sure that they have got it right this time. They need to shut out incompetent people voted in by ignorant and gullible people. Thaksin rigged it his way and look where that got us, it needs to be changed to avoid serious mistakes from being made again whether it is democratic or not. Of course, if they have an election then that is democracy, so simply make it so that they vote in the right people this time by whatever means necessary.

Prey tell, who are the 'right' people? The democrats?

Not necessarily, simply anyone but the PTP as they are a bunch of dishonest thieves!!

Do you consider a bunch of suspiciously wealthy generals who get angry when asked where their money came from to be trustworthy?

So, in relation to the topic which generals in the NRC are 'suspiciously' wealthy and which of them got angry when asked where their money came from?

Prayuth did or have you forgotten that.

Rubl we all know you have a serious hard on for the PTP but do you seriously think that the Thai armies swollen upper ranks are all cleaner than clean and whiter than white then you truly are deluded.

[rubl]

"As for the external factor, he pointed out at the widespread opposition to the draft which, he said, would lead to more conflict if the draft is allowed to go through."

Sounds almost democratic, what's wrong with him. Doesn't he know the NRC has been declared a mouthpiece for a fascist junta, and a few more lovely, endearing terms.

It's a government under military rule; democray doesn't exist. I would expect the NRC to exercise some discretion in making an important decision because of the composition of its members. With 77 from each provinces and 173 from 11 professional fields, they have less direct control by the military. Contrast with the NLA which is a mouthpiece as more than half are from the military.

Oh come on Eric, don't you know the NRC has been condemned by TVF's finest as being a junta mouthpiece ?

Anyway, the NRC voted against with PM Prayut being in favour. How's that for democracy?

Perhaps when the ex monk and his mass of support came out strongly in favour of the charter........... NRC were prompted to take another look

So NRC as mouthpiece of the junta which would like the draft to be accepted more scared by a few protesters?

Anyway, perhaps some other reasons. Who knows maybe even content may have been a concern.

[Jon Wetherall]

"As for the external factor, he pointed out at the widespread opposition to the draft which, he said, would lead to more conflict if the draft is allowed to go through."

Sounds almost democratic, what's wrong with him. Doesn't he know the NRC has been declared a mouthpiece for a fascist junta, and a few more lovely, endearing terms.

It's a government under military rule; democray doesn't exist. I would expect the NRC to exercise some discretion in making an important decision because of the composition of its members. With 77 from each provinces and 173 from 11 professional fields, they have less direct control by the military. Contrast with the NLA which is a mouthpiece as more than half are from the military.

Oh come on Eric, don't you know the NRC has been condemned by TVF's finest as being a junta mouthpiece ?

Anyway, the NRC voted against with PM Prayut being in favour. How's that for democracy?

Perhaps when the ex monk and his mass of support came out strongly in favour of the charter........... NRC were prompted to take another look

Was that the great mass of the people. estimated at 300,000 people but counted by Suthep as 3.2 million people? That one?

[kareona]

So now what? Despite publicly stating he was for the Charter I wouldn't be surprised if this is what the PM really wanted, a furtherance of the status quo with him at the helm.

If we could know the percentage of military nrc members who voted no, it would be a relatively reliable way to test this assumption.

All, or nearly all, of the military NRC members voted no. Most of the academics, NGO and others voted yes. This is the result Prayut wanted although he said in public he supported the draft constitution. We, the Thai people, are being hoodwinked. Let's have the People's Constitution (1997) back and an election!

[rubl]

Prayut also has other options. Like start allover again, ask for cooperation and actually get it, start with the 2007 charter.

Of course in the mean time the Interim charter is still in place. We can't do without a charter, now can we ?

As for time on one's side. What is more important than a charter? People here have been demanding one.

I know this is going to divert attention, but why should groups of people who don't agree or see the coup as illegitimate 'cooperate' with them?

Indeed, indeed, especially since it's so much easier to complain afterwards about the result, say 'if only we could have participated'', 'if only someone asked', 'if only someone hadn't advocated non-obstruction by non-cooperation.

It works both ways.I understand the point you are trying to make but you can't put lipstick on a pig.

Let us hypothesise there was a military coup in the UK or Holland, and the generals involved (or their henchmen) tried to force through a constitution.Do you think it possible that principled Dutch or British democrats might refuse to have anything to do with the process - on the grounds that its origin was suffused in illegitimacy and illegality?

Your starting point should be at least somewhat believable, so let us not hypothise too much. Of course, if you think a military coup in the UK is not entirely unbelievable, who am I to say different.

As for lipstick on a pig, go ahead. Myself I'd like to talk a bit more about the NRC having rejected the draft charter crafted by the CDC. As I mentioned a few times already having started with the 2007 charter made much more sense. It was more-or-less known what deficiencies, what possible improvements could be applied. Pity really, a year lost.

Also, and again sorry to repeat, I still think an overwhelming participation by grassroots could have helped to get an improved charter. The NCPO would have looked silly if they had tried to prevent such overwhelming input.

[rubl]

So now what? Despite publicly stating he was for the Charter I wouldn't be surprised if this is what the PM really wanted, a furtherance of the status quo with him at the helm.

If we could know the percentage of military nrc members who voted no, it would be a relatively reliable way to test this assumption.

All, or nearly all, of the military NRC members voted no. Most of the academics, NGO and others voted yes. This is the result Prayut wanted although he said in public he supported the draft constitution. We, the Thai people, are being hoodwinked. Let's have the People's Constitution (1997) back and an election!

A silent coup perhaps?

BTW 'we, the Thai people' or should that possibly be 'you as Thai person' ?

[rubl]

[

So, in relation to the topic which generals in the NRC are 'suspiciously' wealthy and which of them got angry when asked where their money came from?

Prayuth did or have you forgotten that.

Rubl we all know you have a serious hard on for the PTP but do you seriously think that the Thai armies swollen upper ranks are all cleaner than clean and whiter than white then you truly are deluded.

Pray tell me what was suspicious, what was provided in information and how silent even distractors have become as nothing untoward has been found?

Apart from a math error in younger brother's asset declaration which showed 10 million too much (and probably earned his accountant team an attitude adjustment session).

Now as to wealth, didn't all NLA members and all Cabinet members submit asset declarations, just as if they were elected MP, Senators and such? Did you hear the opposition? They're not completely muzzled, enough true and dirty details could filter through.

As for the hard-on for PTP, you are mistaken, not even for their Thai pretty figurehead.

[jayboy]

Prayut also has other options. Like start allover again, ask for cooperation and actually get it, start with the 2007 charter.

Of course in the mean time the Interim charter is still in place. We can't do without a charter, now can we ?

As for time on one's side. What is more important than a charter? People here have been demanding one.

I know this is going to divert attention, but why should groups of people who don't agree or see the coup as illegitimate 'cooperate' with them?

Indeed, indeed, especially since it's so much easier to complain afterwards about the result, say 'if only we could have participated'', 'if only someone asked', 'if only someone hadn't advocated non-obstruction by non-cooperation.

It works both ways.I understand the point you are trying to make but you can't put lipstick on a pig.

Let us hypothesise there was a military coup in the UK or Holland, and the generals involved (or their henchmen) tried to force through a constitution.Do you think it possible that principled Dutch or British democrats might refuse to have anything to do with the process - on the grounds that its origin was suffused in illegitimacy and illegality?

Your starting point should be at least somewhat believable, so let us not hypothise too much. Of course, if you think a military coup in the UK is not entirely unbelievable, who am I to say different.

As for lipstick on a pig, go ahead. Myself I'd like to talk a bit more about the NRC having rejected the draft charter crafted by the CDC. As I mentioned a few times already having started with the 2007 charter made much more sense. It was more-or-less known what deficiencies, what possible improvements could be applied. Pity really, a year lost.

Also, and again sorry to repeat, I still think an overwhelming participation by grassroots could have helped to get an improved charter. The NCPO would have looked silly if they had tried to prevent such overwhelming input.

You have missed the point or perhaps preferred not to acknowledge it.A constitution sponsored by a military government which illegally grabbed power can reasonably be seen as lacking any legitimacy.

I don't say it's wrong to work with the Junta, simply that there's a very good case not to work with it.In Western Europe ( the hypothetical case is very relevant) decent democrats wouldn't have any truck with it.I accept that in Thailand given the context it's more iffy hence my non dogmatic position.

I have no idea why you opt for the 2007 charter another military sponsored effort.Remarkably and to the chagrin of the generals it was only endorsed by the Thai public by a modest margin despite the government propaganda campaign,interference with the no campaign and the threat it would be implemented anyway.A weary public by a small margin said yes just to get the creeps out of the picture.Privately the Generals felt bitch slapped and they were right to sense that.

All reasonable people would of course use Khun Anand's excellent 1997 constitution as the starting point.

[heybruce]

There is an interesting article related to this subject in the August 22 Economist http://www.economist.com/printedition/2015-08-22, but if I gave more information this post would be deleted.

Interesting part is the fact (indeed fact) both sides have their own elite, even that 'fighter for the people' Thaksin.

Good point. If only there were some way to let the people choose which group of elites they wanted in charge, and maybe allow them to choose again every few years in case the majority of people change their minds. I wonder how that could be done.

[zaphod reborn]

Prayut also has other options. Like start allover again, ask for cooperation and actually get it, start with the 2007 charter.

Of course in the mean time the Interim charter is still in place. We can't do without a charter, now can we ?

As for time on one's side. What is more important than a charter? People here have been demanding one.

I know this is going to divert attention, but why should groups of people who don't agree or see the coup as illegitimate 'cooperate' with them?

Indeed, indeed, especially since it's so much easier to complain afterwards about the result, say 'if only we could have participated'', 'if only someone asked', 'if only someone hadn't advocated non-obstruction by non-cooperation.

It works both ways.I understand the point you are trying to make but you can't put lipstick on a pig.

Let us hypothesise there was a military coup in the UK or Holland, and the generals involved (or their henchmen) tried to force through a constitution.Do you think it possible that principled Dutch or British democrats might refuse to have anything to do with the process - on the grounds that its origin was suffused in illegitimacy and illegality?

Your starting point should be at least somewhat believable, so let us not hypothise too much. Of course, if you think a military coup in the UK is not entirely unbelievable, who am I to say different.

As for lipstick on a pig, go ahead. Myself I'd like to talk a bit more about the NRC having rejected the draft charter crafted by the CDC. As I mentioned a few times already having started with the 2007 charter made much more sense. It was more-or-less known what deficiencies, what possible improvements could be applied. Pity really, a year lost.

Also, and again sorry to repeat, I still think an overwhelming participation by grassroots could have helped to get an improved charter. The NCPO would have looked silly if they had tried to prevent such overwhelming input.

All reasonable people would of course use Khun Anand's excellent 1997 constitution as the starting point.

How can any Constitution, whether the 1997 version or the 2007 version, which allowed elected governments to be taken down by mobs in the streets 3 times in the last 8 years be considered "excellent"?

I know the answer, because this is Ted and Bill's excellent adventure, right? What a farce!

[Thai at Heart]

Shows what an utterly horrible legal document it wad

[Thai at Heart]

Prayut also has other options. Like start allover again, ask for cooperation and actually get it, start with the 2007 charter.

Of course in the mean time the Interim charter is still in place. We can't do without a charter, now can we ?

As for time on one's side. What is more important than a charter? People here have been demanding one.

I know this is going to divert attention, but why should groups of people who don't agree or see the coup as illegitimate 'cooperate' with them?

Indeed, indeed, especially since it's so much easier to complain afterwards about the result, say 'if only we could have participated'', 'if only someone asked', 'if only someone hadn't advocated non-obstruction by non-cooperation.

It works both ways.I understand the point you are trying to make but you can't put lipstick on a pig.

Let us hypothesise there was a military coup in the UK or Holland, and the generals involved (or their henchmen) tried to force through a constitution.Do you think it possible that principled Dutch or British democrats might refuse to have anything to do with the process - on the grounds that its origin was suffused in illegitimacy and illegality?

Your starting point should be at least somewhat believable, so let us not hypothise too much. Of course, if you think a military coup in the UK is not entirely unbelievable, who am I to say different.

As for lipstick on a pig, go ahead. Myself I'd like to talk a bit more about the NRC having rejected the draft charter crafted by the CDC. As I mentioned a few times already having started with the 2007 charter made much more sense. It was more-or-less known what deficiencies, what possible improvements could be applied. Pity really, a year lost.

Also, and again sorry to repeat, I still think an overwhelming participation by grassroots could have helped to get an improved charter. The NCPO would have looked silly if they had tried to prevent such overwhelming input.

All reasonable people would of course use Khun Anand's excellent 1997 constitution as the starting point.

How can any Constitution, whether the 1997 version or the 2007 version, which allowed elected governments to be taken down by mobs in the streets 3 times in the last 8 years be considered "excellent"?

I know the answer, because this is Ted and Bill's excellent adventure, right? What a farce!

With selective judgements from courts and useless policing, it doesn't matter what constitution they have.

[Praematura]

Thais are getting real tired of the circus ruining the economy and the junta has nothing tangible to show for seizing power. I think the pm is realizing it's not easy to run the country with all its diverse problems. If he keeps power and this country continues at virtually no gdp growth, people having higher debt loads and investors avoiding this mess I think the actual Thais with real power will pull the plug on him. Also he puts off elections it's conceivable sanctions by the west are on the horizon like the USA has done specifically targeting Russian kleptocrats.

[Just1Voice]

[

So, in relation to the topic which generals in the NRC are 'suspiciously' wealthy and which of them got angry when asked where their money came from?

Prayuth did or have you forgotten that.

Rubl we all know you have a serious hard on for the PTP but do you seriously think that the Thai armies swollen upper ranks are all cleaner than clean and whiter than white then you truly are deluded.

Pray tell me what was suspicious, what was provided in information and how silent even distractors have become as nothing untoward has been found?

Apart from a math error in younger brother's asset declaration which showed 10 million too much (and probably earned his accountant team an attitude adjustment session).

Now as to wealth, didn't all NLA members and all Cabinet members submit asset declarations, just as if they were elected MP, Senators and such? Did you hear the opposition? They're not completely muzzled, enough true and dirty details could filter through.

As for the hard-on for PTP, you are mistaken, not even for their Thai pretty figurehead.

"Now as to wealth, didn't all NLA members and all Cabinet members submit asset declarations," - No, they did not! General P himself publicly stated that his finances, and those of the NRC were NOT to be examined. Why not? If he's so clean and pure, then he has nothing to hide. He even got pissed off at a reporter who dared to ask him about a 600 million baht land deal that had recently transpired. If you want to be a Junta supporter/puppet, that's your choice. Try try getting your facts straight first. And I've also noticed that you deliberately, and pointedly, avoid the subject when facts regarding the legitimacy of the government are put squarely in front of you.