PM defends the use of administrative order against Ms Yingluck as necessary

[scorecard]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

I maybe new to Thailand but I can safely say that all elected and coup governments were crooked, bent and dirty. You want to dispute that?

Being newish---like on the scene nicely to start your perpetual bashing of the PM. noticing again your bashing crooked bent coup governments and not wishing to bash the bent crooked others---AGENDA--example-----like it or lump it-------or you would be more impartial.

Ginjag, you jolted me to finish my post. All governments are bent, crooked and dirty but the legal process to convict is somehow manupulated to suit the establishment political expediency. Military government are by far the most corrupted as they shredded the constitution and ignored the fundamental pillar of the rule of law and human rights. Not forgetting arming themself with Article 44 to stamp his dominance.

Wow, lots of cut and paste but where is your meaningful point?

[scorecard]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

"No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament..."

Are you really sure the people would really want the laws etc., that were being developed / implemented by the last scaly gang of faceless thieves which were deliberately and very obviously aimed at killing any possibility of a government (their scaly unethical gov't.) being thrown out of office by the vote of the people?

Edited October 14, 2015 by scorecard

[h90]

But it is necessary.....

It certainly is if the goal is to maintain the polarisation of society for your own ends.

I and I guess many Thais don't want to pay the compensation for Yingluck. And this is what happens. Money doesn't grow on the tree so the lost money must be recovered with the tax and so everyone pays more tax because of her.

Better she pays than I pay or Mr. Motorbike Taxi pays.

"Pay compensation to Yingluck" ? I think you have the wrong end of the stick here ! Yingluck, almost undoubtedly controlled by her brother, was in the process of completely fleecing this country, and the present government simply want as much of the money back as possible. I see nothing wrong with that

I complete agree....I think I word it wrong: I mean if Yingluck doesn't pay...the taxpayer pays (and I am one of them).

Yes I don't really separate: Yingluck/Thaksin/Pojaman....

[baboon]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

"No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament..."

Are you really sure the people would really want the laws etc., that were being developed / implemented by the last scaly gang of faceless thieves which were deliberately and very obviously aimed at killing any possibility of a government (their scaly unethical gov't.) being thrown out of office by the vote of the people?

Seeing as the public kept voting for them, I would say the answer is 'Yes'...

[metisdead]

Off topic deflection posts have been removed.

[scorecard]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

"No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament..."

Are you really sure the people would really want the laws etc., that were being developed / implemented by the last scaly gang of faceless thieves which were deliberately and very obviously aimed at killing any possibility of a government (their scaly unethical gov't.) being thrown out of office by the vote of the people?

Seeing as the public kept voting for them, I would say the answer is 'Yes'...

Your comment has been refuted / killed hundreds of time, now very boring. Next...

[billd766]

This illegal government has flushed Thailand down the toilet financially and internationally. I can't wait to see this PM's face when the next legally elected government go after him for all of the losses incurred, I hope they reclaim all of these "rewards" being paid to the keystone cops too

What illegal government would that be?

The one that was approved by the highest person in Thailand?

I hope that you (as a non voting person in Thailand) do not believe that you are above the highest person in the country.

It might be your personal opinion but that actually counts for nothing here, nor does mine. The difference between us is that I know my opinion counts for nothing in Thailand and I accept that. You seem to think that if you and others like you keep repeating it then it WILL become true.

It won't.

The current government actually IS legal despite any spin you wish to put on it.

If you don't believe, or don't want to believe it then challenge the government in the courts of Thailand. I wish you the best of luck.

Edited October 14, 2015 by billd766

[gemguy]

OK...Fine with me....as long as the PM is willing to accept the use of administrative order by others, applied on himself .......when his time comes to stand and be held accountable and or to be punished while reminding him how it was himself who made up the rules and regulations and laws and demonstrating how they can be applied to everyone.

Cheers

[baboon]

This illegal government has flushed Thailand down the toilet financially and internationally. I can't wait to see this PM's face when the next legally elected government go after him for all of the losses incurred, I hope they reclaim all of these "rewards" being paid to the keystone cops too

What illegal government would that be?

The one that was approved by the highest person in Thailand?

The one that overthrew by means of a coup the democratically elected government and which was approved by the highest person in Thailand.

Don't even try that one. General Suchinda did and the lese majeste charge against Sulak Sivarkasa was thrown out of court. By the way, invoking the name of His Majesty is a particularly dirty and underhanded way of attempting to stifle discourse, given forum rules. Shame on you for doing that.

Edited October 14, 2015 by baboon

[gemguy]

I think that this is all very sad. The previous PM made a big mistake whilst in Government because she did not really understand what was going on. In retrospect, perhaps she should never have been in that position. However, she had advisors and a cabinet who are equally culpable. She may have lost the country billions of baht, but she did not as I understand, pocket the money! Many other Governments around the world, including UK, make bad decisions which cost the tax payer billions. However, this does not make them corrupt and if the populous don't like what they have done they are voted out at the next election.

However, this unelected buffoon did not let the public decide by an election, but seized power, gave himself ultimate authority and now wants to completely destroy the previously elected Prime Minister by making her personally liable for a bad political decision! He talks about reconciliation but then flies in the face of any reasonable dialogue by doing this. If he truly wanted to reconcile the country, he would accept that Ms Yingluck and her legitimate, elected Government, made an error of judgement, leave it at that, and move on.

If the previous PM had included this in the budget, as a subsidy, attended meetings, produced audited accounts. told the truth about G2G deals and done her best to try and stamp out the corruption which seemingly riddled this project, she would be o k.

But is was set up as a self financing scheme. It was open to corruption and seemingly had little in the way of financial or operational management controls. She was warned by international credible organizations, by some concerned internal people. Her response was to ignore them, threaten, intimidate and transfer internal people who raised concerns, not produce any actual accounts and never to attend the scheme's meetings of which she was the self appointed chair.

Negligent - and seemingly deciding to be negligent.

Was the scheme nothing more than a vote catching populist election ploy that was then used to allow various cronies to exploit and enrich themselves illegally?

What progress is being made on the other connected cases like those who concocted fictitious export deals, those whose warehoused had big holes in the inventory etc etc.

There is a difference, a very big difference, between being incompetent and choosing to lie and deliberately turn a blind eye. Claiming to know nothing when not actually turning up to chair meetings suggests the latter.

No doubt she was simply following orders, but that is no defense or excuse.

Good points....but ..are you and the others who seem to be so supportive of the new government order and their extraordinary efforts to vilify Yinluck and or the former government, as the worst ever, going to be as critical and harsh on the current military government when they are exposed of corruption and grand malfeasance and massive profiteering and all the same political shenanigans and political skullduggery as everyone who has ever been in political power here in Thailand.

When the current governments political boondoggles are revealed and or the critical question is asked: Where did the money go??? while important answers are demanded of this current government administration but deliberately and callously ignored are you then going to be as scathing in your opinion and be as zealous in your accusations and criticisms as you currently are concerning the last government administration.

The significant difference between this current, self appointed military rule government is the fact that they can and will silence the nation, if necessary, at the point of a gun.

If you are comfortable with that fact, while in effect defend that aspect of a military rule government then that is your prerogative.....however most people are not comfortable with the current political situation under military rule while the country is in dire need of a political party that can oppose the status quo....by way of political means rather than military enforcement perpetrated upon the nation in the form of another military coup ...number 17 and counting.

Seriously ...the military should form a military based political party and run for election and obtain their political power by way of the peoples vote if the way they run the country is so much better while they are so highly regarded by so many???...supposedly for their political acumen.... then more than likely the citizens at large would actually vote for them while confident a military based political organization is agreed to be a better form of government and far better for the country.

Just a thought anyhow.

Cheers

Edited October 14, 2015 by gemguy

[williamgeorgeallen]

Draconian laws are not popular

But it is necessary.....

It certainly is if the goal is to maintain the polarisation of society for your own ends.

I and I guess many Thais don't want to pay the compensation for Yingluck. And this is what happens. Money doesn't grow on the tree so the lost money must be recovered with the tax and so everyone pays more tax because of her.

Better she pays than I pay or Mr. Motorbike Taxi pays.

you are right it does not grow on trees it is printed up from nothing. not really relavent i know.

[MW72]

Agree, IMHO what is also urgently needed is urgent education of the good people of Thailand to understand how democracy really works and why it's the best alternative.

To my mind two items come up quickly.

- The people need a much better, more accurate understanding of the features of a valuable democracy, the processes that make it work and what needs to be protected to ensure real democracy is not destroyed or damaged. This must include making the people understand that they are part of the process and they have a lot of responsibility to protect democracy.

Why? Just one example, from my discussions with many Thai folks there is a major falsehood. There is the solid belief that the reason why all farang who come to Thailand have 'unlimited' money is because their government / their leader at home is rich beyond believe and the leader / the government continuously hands out large amounts of money to all citizens. Therefore Thailand needs the same, we need a leader who is super rich and hands out big money to everyone every month. The belief is that this is democracy.

- There should be election laws which require all parties to regular publish a detailed manifesto, which (by law - aligned to the constitution) must be aimed with specific details at building and maintaining a civil society where there is equal opportunity for all, there is an appropriate level of sharing the wealth, the law is respected and the law is applied equally to all citizens. And more.

The manifesto must be specific, at appropriate times (e.g. at the start of election campaigns), new / adjusted policies must be 'costed' by an outside committee and the results published in numerous newspapers, on TV spots, etc. And all parties required to take part in TV debates which are moderated by respected people, and the public invited and encouraged to send in questions / phone in with questions, etc., and the questioner has the right to nominate who on the panel for each party represented must answer the question. Etc.

Up until few years ago Thailand had the richest head of state in the world. Only Vlad Putin returning as the Russian prez has changed that stat. I am sure most Thais would be as surprised as I was to find out this little fact.

I am in no way commenting in a negative or positive way on this fact. Just stating a fact. Long live the King and all that.

[JAG]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty.

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

[Jonathon]

Good man. The Thaksins need to be kept out of politics.

[AGareth2]

How much is the military annual budget?

How much has been syphoned off over the years on one scheme or another?

[scorecard]

I like this statement he made

The prime minister said Tuesday that his government would duty-bound to seek compensation for the loss and it was necessary to use the administrative order because the civil case will expire in two years.

How can an illegal government be duty bound?

His government? Stealing a car doesn't make it yours. Stealing a watch doesn't make it yours. How does stealing a government make it his and since stealing a government is against all laws everywhere, by what justification does he feel duty bound to to steal even more from the rightful victim who had her government stolen?

Having a slow day?

[joebrown]

I think that this is all very sad. The previous PM made a big mistake whilst in Government because she did not really understand what was going on. In retrospect, perhaps she should never have been in that position. However, she had advisors and a cabinet who are equally culpable. She may have lost the country billions of baht, but she did not as I understand, pocket the money! Many other Governments around the world, including UK, make bad decisions which cost the tax payer billions. However, this does not make them corrupt and if the populous don't like what they have done they are voted out at the next election.

However, this unelected buffoon did not let the public decide by an election, but seized power, gave himself ultimate authority and now wants to completely destroy the previously elected Prime Minister by making her personally liable for a bad political decision! He talks about reconciliation but then flies in the face of any reasonable dialogue by doing this. If he truly wanted to reconcile the country, he would accept that Ms Yingluck and her legitimate, elected Government, made an error of judgement, leave it at that, and move on.

If the previous PM had included this in the budget, as a subsidy, attended meetings, produced audited accounts. told the truth about G2G deals and done her best to try and stamp out the corruption which seemingly riddled this project, she would be o k.

But is was set up as a self financing scheme. It was open to corruption and seemingly had little in the way of financial or operational management controls. She was warned by international credible organizations, by some concerned internal people. Her response was to ignore them, threaten, intimidate and transfer internal people who raised concerns, not produce any actual accounts and never to attend the scheme's meetings of which she was the self appointed chair.

Negligent - and seemingly deciding to be negligent.

Was the scheme nothing more than a vote catching populist election ploy that was then used to allow various cronies to exploit and enrich themselves illegally?

What progress is being made on the other connected cases like those who concocted fictitious export deals, those whose warehoused had big holes in the inventory etc etc.

There is a difference, a very big difference, between being incompetent and choosing to lie and deliberately turn a blind eye. Claiming to know nothing when not actually turning up to chair meetings suggests the latter.

No doubt she was simply following orders, but that is no defense or excuse.

Good points....but ..are you and the others who seem to be so supportive of the new government order and their extraordinary efforts to vilify Yinluck and or the former government, as the worst ever, going to be as critical and harsh on the current military government when they are exposed of corruption and grand malfeasance and massive profiteering and all the same political shenanigans and political skullduggery as everyone who has ever been in political power here in Thailand.

When the current governments political boondoggles are revealed and or the critical question is asked: Where did the money go??? while important answers are demanded of this current government administration but deliberately and callously ignored are you then going to be as scathing in your opinion and be as zealous in your accusations and criticisms as you currently are concerning the last government administration.

The significant difference between this current, self appointed military rule government is the fact that they can and will silence the nation, if necessary, at the point of a gun.

If you are comfortable with that fact, while in effect defend that aspect of a military rule government then that is your prerogative.....however most people are not comfortable with the current political situation under military rule while the country is in dire need of a political party that can oppose the status quo....by way of political means rather than military enforcement perpetrated upon the nation in the form of another military coup ...number 17 and counting.

Seriously ...the military should form a military based political party and run for election and obtain their political power by way of the peoples vote if the way they run the country is so much better while they are so highly regarded by so many???...supposedly for their political acumen.... then more than likely the citizens at large would actually vote for them while confident a military based political organization is agreed to be a better form of government and far better for the country.

Just a thought anyhow.

Cheers

This post gets my vote (I admit it's only a TVF vote) of the day, because in most civilised countries the military isn't so closely, and so often involved in politics. I remember the unelected current PM stating that when he was a military leader he warned Yingluk about the problems with the rice subsidy scheme. Such involvement and comments on political activities should be limited to elected politicians, not soldiers.

I agree that if these military leaders think so highly of their political skills, and want ongoing political power, they should form a party and promote their 'manifesto' in a fair and independently observed general election.

[scorecard]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty.

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

"Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty..."

Well there's a first - you don't deny there were serious (serious - your word) faults in the previous government.

IMHO one (just one) of those serious faults was that the previous government (unethical blatant in your face schemers with no morals) had made quite some progress towards creating a scenario whereby they could never be removed from power.

So you point about '...had offered itself for reelection...' holds no water.

It would be interesting to look at a specific list of what you consider to be the serious faults of the previous government.

Edited October 15, 2015 by scorecard

[billd766]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty.

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

I am not sure where you come from but the previous PTP government was NOT forced from office at all. The PM, Yingluck Shinawatra actually dissolved parliament on 9th December 2013 and became the caretaker PM with limited powers and none at all to take out loans that the incoming government would have to repay.

No matter what spin you attempt to put on it, you are wrong.

[JAG]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty.

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

I am not sure where you come from but the previous PTP government was NOT forced from office at all. The PM, Yingluck Shinawatra actually dissolved parliament on 9th December 2013 and became the caretaker PM with limited powers and none at all to take out loans that the incoming government would have to repay.

No matter what spin you attempt to put on it, you are wrong.

They called an election, which was prevented from happening by a mob run by a leading opposition politician, and whose activities were, shall we be generous, regarded benignly by the judiciary and the military, (some might say they colluded). The military then used the resulting stalemate to justify a coup, and installed a junta government which for 18 months has persistently strengthened it's grip on power.

If that is not being forced from power - then how would you describe defeat of Germany in 1945 - a minor setback for National Socialism?

In claiming that the Yingluck Government was not forced from power you are simply denying an evident ( if inconvenient for your narrative) truth.

[Si Thea01]

How much is the military annual budget?

How much has been syphoned off over the years on one scheme or another?

What makes you think anyone on here would know? There might have been, then there may not have been but wait,that's right, this is TV Factual, so lets wait for the knowledgeable ones to come forward with their guestimates. Better still if you're so worried ask someone in charge. Love to hear the response.

May I ask, why are you bringing this aspect into the debate, has nothing to do with the pinup girl's problems? Oh I know, you just want to make the other side look bad through suggestion because you have nothing of substance to add. So lets throw mud and hope some sticks. Give it a break and stick with the subject, use facts not innuendos.

[mikemac]

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

I am not sure where you come from but the previous PTP government was NOT forced from office at all. The PM, Yingluck Shinawatra actually dissolved parliament on 9th December 2013 and became the caretaker PM with limited powers and none at all to take out loans that the incoming government would have to repay.

No matter what spin you attempt to put on it, you are wrong.

They called an election, which was prevented from happening by a mob run by a leading opposition politician, and whose activities were, shall we be generous, regarded benignly by the judiciary and the military, (some might say they colluded). The military then used the resulting stalemate to justify a coup, and installed a junta government which for 18 months has persistently strengthened it's grip on power.

If that is not being forced from power - then how would you describe defeat of Germany in 1945 - a minor setback for National Socialism?

In claiming that the Yingluck Government was not forced from power you are simply denying an evident ( if inconvenient for your narrative) truth.

..........................Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption...........................

I thought she was being charged with negligence, not corruption.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-former-thai-pm-in-court-on-negligence-charges-2015-5?IR=T

If it were possible to charge Thai politicians with corruption the courts would be tied up for years. And I think the main reason she was even charged with negligence was because of the amount of money involved (and of course because she is a Shinawatra and everyone has it in for that family)

............................"which was prevented from happening by a mob run by a leading opposition politician".............................

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-25116427

"Suthep Thaugsuban, a former Thai deputy prime minister, resigned from the opposition Democrat Party to lead protests aimed at dislodging Thailand's government."

......................."and whose activities were, shall we be generous, regarded benignly by the judiciary and the military, (some might say they colluded).".....................

Not going near that one, waste of time even discussing that subject.

It seems to me the main arguing point the majority of the Junta-bashing posters use is how "crooked bent and dirty" the current regime is.

Most of the Shin-bashing posters like myself don't deny that, so you really are arguing with yourself. We don't defend the actions of the Junta, although some posters have this crazy idea in their heads that we do.

Personally I would love to see free and fair elections (wow ! never had them before) held tomorrow, just as long as the Military, the Shins and their terrorist wing, and the Democrats had no part in those elections whatsoever.

I think it is comical to read some of the attacks on the current regime, when the previous governments were just as guilty.

[scorecard]

This illegal government has flushed Thailand down the toilet financially and internationally. I can't wait to see this PM's face when the next legally elected government go after him for all of the losses incurred, I hope they reclaim all of these "rewards" being paid to the keystone cops too

What illegal government would that be?

The one that was approved by the highest person in Thailand?

The one that overthrew by means of a coup the democratically elected government and which was approved by the highest person in Thailand.

Don't even try that one. General Suchinda did and the lese majeste charge against Sulak Sivarkasa was thrown out of court. By the way, invoking the name of His Majesty is a particularly dirty and underhanded way of attempting to stifle discourse, given forum rules. Shame on you for doing that.

Easy retort.

Nobody would expect that because a government was approved it cannot, at a later time, be criticized, or very heavily criticized, or subject to a peoples power movement to force it out of power, etc.

Now we wait for the diversion to avoid seeing the point.

[Cook my sock]

Still wearing his Dr Evil outfit..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[billd766]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty.

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

I am not sure where you come from but the previous PTP government was NOT forced from office at all. The PM, Yingluck Shinawatra actually dissolved parliament on 9th December 2013 and became the caretaker PM with limited powers and none at all to take out loans that the incoming government would have to repay.

No matter what spin you attempt to put on it, you are wrong.

They called an election, which was prevented from happening by a mob run by a leading opposition politician, and whose activities were, shall we be generous, regarded benignly by the judiciary and the military, (some might say they colluded). The military then used the resulting stalemate to justify a coup, and installed a junta government which for 18 months has persistently strengthened it's grip on power.

If that is not being forced from power - then how would you describe defeat of Germany in 1945 - a minor setback for National Socialism?

In claiming that the Yingluck Government was not forced from power you are simply denying an evident ( if inconvenient for your narrative) truth.

What on earth has Germany being defeated in 1945 got to do with the subject at hand?

Do you accept that Yingluck dissolved parliament, yes or no?

Was she forced by the military to do so, yes or no?

Where am I denying an evident truth?

Suthep had resigned from the Democratic party so he was NO longer a leading opposition politician.

I do wish you would stick to the facts and not try to twist them in your favour.

Why did Yingluck ignore the election commissions recommendation not to hold an election at that time,

She didn't even need to dissolve parliament as the election was not due for a while.

[billd766]

This illegal government has flushed Thailand down the toilet financially and internationally. I can't wait to see this PM's face when the next legally elected government go after him for all of the losses incurred, I hope they reclaim all of these "rewards" being paid to the keystone cops too

What illegal government would that be?

The one that was approved by the highest person in Thailand?

The one that overthrew by means of a coup the democratically elected government and which was approved by the highest person in Thailand.

Don't even try that one. General Suchinda did and the lese majeste charge against Sulak Sivarkasa was thrown out of court. By the way, invoking the name of His Majesty is a particularly dirty and underhanded way of attempting to stifle discourse, given forum rules. Shame on you for doing that.

I never mentioned any persons name. You did.

There was NO democratically elected government running the country at the time that the military took over, not even a caretaker government.

Yingluck was no longer the caretaker PM, the caretaker government was being dissolved.

Would you therefore agree that to be legitimate the PM has to appear before the highest person in the land to be confirmed in the position?

In 2006 after Thaksin had resigned, he took back the position of PM after 7 weeks but was never formally endorsed as the PM. Does that mean he was legally the PM or not?

Why should I be ashamed? If you have a problem with my post then report it to the moderators.

I will accept and respect their decision and opinion but I don't have to accept or respect yours.

[LannaGuy]

What on earth has Germany being defeated in 1945 got to do with the subject at hand?

Do you accept that Yingluck dissolved parliament, yes or no?

Was she forced by the military to do so, yes or no?

Where am I denying an evident truth?

Suthep had resigned from the Democratic party so he was NO longer a leading opposition politician.

I do wish you would stick to the facts and not try to twist them in your favour.

Why did Yingluck ignore the election commissions recommendation not to hold an election at that time,

She didn't even need to dissolve parliament as the election was not due for a while.

You always seek to justify the lack of freedoms here and are a Military Junta apologist.

Apichatpong Weerasethakul, winner of the prestigious Cannes Film Festival Palme d'Or prize in 2010 who resists the Thai censor and a THAI citizen unlike you or I recognizes and speaks out against the bully tactics and censorship whilst you a FARANG defend them.

Yingluck was forced out and it is a self-evident truth if you are at all familiar with what happened. No smoke and mirrors about "the Court did it" can hide these truths from brave Thais like Apichatpong Weerasethaku. Your analysis is not worthy of most second grade Thai school kids - go LEARN then come back to us.

[Thai at Heart]

Thinking about it, this application of the law could mean that any boss of a civil service department could be held accountable for not stopping any corruption in their ministry..... This would put every minister in the clink.

[JAG]

Whether members like it or not, PM Prayut is applying the law & there was an enquiry that found fmr PM Yingluck guilty of negligence & malfeasance in control of the Rice Pledging Scheme, now she's being brought to justice. All you naysayers, would you be happy if she simply walks free, does a runner, same as Bro & leaves all the poor rice farmers down the drain further?

No the majority want a government elected by the people to apply laws made in parliament, rather than a self appointed junta leader who is pursuing his backers aims to finish a political movement which threatens their perpetual hold on power and the access it gives them to the country's wealth.

JAG, you are aware how crooked, bent and dirty the last government was, aren't you ?

Because to read your posts one would think you were a newcomer to Thailand who knew nothing about them.

Mikemac, I don't deny that there were serious faults in the previous government. However at the time that it was forced from office it had offered itself for reelection, under the rules of the constitution. Preventing that process in order to engineer a coup to install a military Junta is at least as crooked bent and dirty.

Moreover, if Yingluck is to punished for alleged corruption, it should be through a criminal prosecution, and depending on the verdict a punishment imposed by the court, not by administrative orders enforced by civil court action.

I am not sure where you come from but the previous PTP government was NOT forced from office at all. The PM, Yingluck Shinawatra actually dissolved parliament on 9th December 2013 and became the caretaker PM with limited powers and none at all to take out loans that the incoming government would have to repay.

No matter what spin you attempt to put on it, you are wrong.

They called an election, which was prevented from happening by a mob run by a leading opposition politician, and whose activities were, shall we be generous, regarded benignly by the judiciary and the military, (some might say they colluded). The military then used the resulting stalemate to justify a coup, and installed a junta government which for 18 months has persistently strengthened it's grip on power.

If that is not being forced from power - then how would you describe defeat of Germany in 1945 - a minor setback for National Socialism?

In claiming that the Yingluck Government was not forced from power you are simply denying an evident ( if inconvenient for your narrative) truth.

What on earth has Germany being defeated in 1945 got to do with the subject at hand?

Do you accept that Yingluck dissolved parliament, yes or no?

Was she forced by the military to do so, yes or no?

Where am I denying an evident truth?

Suthep had resigned from the Democratic party so he was NO longer a leading opposition politician.

I do wish you would stick to the facts and not try to twist them in your favour.

Why did Yingluck ignore the election commissions recommendation not to hold an election at that time,

She didn't even need to dissolve parliament as the election was not due for a while.

1, My reference to Germany was a political metaphor, and as such was not meant or intended to be taken literally. I'm sorry if it went over your head.

2, Yes Yingluck dissolved parliament. We don't know if she was under any pressure from the army (and we probably will never know) so I cannot give you one of your beloved yes or no answers.

3, The self evident truth is that the previous government was forced from office: a lengthy process with many phases, many players, civil, judicial and military. The process ultimately depended on creating the conditions for a coup. The prevention of the election was essential for that.

4, Suthep's resignation from the Democratic Party hardly removes his standing as a leading opposition politician. He demanded that the government resign and be replaced by a council appointed by him - pretty political I would suggest.

5, The election commissions recommendation not to hold an election was just that, a recommendation. It carried no force. I don't know why she chose to go ahead, perhaps she thought she would win it. Others certainly did, that's why it was prevented. It would have been impossible to justify the coup if she had "gone to the country" and won!

6, I am not twisting facts. You're interpretation of what happened, and the thinking behind the various actions, differs from mine, and numerous other people's. You're zeal for removing the Shinawatra family and Pheu-Thai from the Thai political scene does not make you the arbiter of "the facts". Nor incidentally is Wikipedia a reliable " journal of record", reflecting as it does (and as you inferred in a recent post) the views of its most recent editor.

In contrast a wide variety of independent international media have published articles supporting the proposition that the Yingluck Government was forced from office. Are they also twisting the facts?

[mikemac]

What on earth has Germany being defeated in 1945 got to do with the subject at hand?

Do you accept that Yingluck dissolved parliament, yes or no?

Was she forced by the military to do so, yes or no?

Where am I denying an evident truth?

Suthep had resigned from the Democratic party so he was NO longer a leading opposition politician.

I do wish you would stick to the facts and not try to twist them in your favour.

Why did Yingluck ignore the election commissions recommendation not to hold an election at that time,

She didn't even need to dissolve parliament as the election was not due for a while.

You always seek to justify the lack of freedoms here and are a Military Junta apologist.

Apichatpong Weerasethakul, winner of the prestigious Cannes Film Festival Palme d'Or prize in 2010 who resists the Thai censor and a THAI citizen unlike you or I recognizes and speaks out against the bully tactics and censorship whilst you a FARANG defend them.

Yingluck was forced out and it is a self-evident truth if you are at all familiar with what happened. No smoke and mirrors about "the Court did it" can hide these truths from brave Thais like Apichatpong Weerasethaku. Your analysis is not worthy of most second grade Thai school kids - go LEARN then come back to us.

......................."Your analysis is not worthy of most second grade Thai school kids"..............................

As opposed to you, LG. Your analyses are worthy of most second grade Thai school kids.