Thailand's ousted Shinawatra clan defies govt with publicity drive

[aussieinthailand]

The problem these people have with anything PTP/Red/Shinz is that anything at all is seen as corrupt and lining their pockets.

I would say for sure that yes there are corrupt politicians and yes they come from all political persuasion's not just the red side.

I have never claimed PTP or the Shinz are whiter than white, neither have I said they have never done anything wrong, "never ever".

But maybe what really get's the haters here is the list of things implemented by Thaksin that has had a MASSIVE positive affect on the country and when their hero's are put to the same test they all go very very QUIET!!!!!

Lets see now Hmmm.

Taksin, 1. national health scheme, (that one really twists their biscuit)

2. Pay down the national debt, while massive investment in infrastructure.

3. Reduction of drugs in the country.

4. A rise in employment rate.

5. Micro loans to villagers to start their own businesses'.

Uncle Too. 1. Lotto prices.

2. Errr, Ummm,,, ??? detaining kids.

3. ever so slightly expensive microphone's.

4. Article 44, I can have you shot if I want.

5. Rubber's not looking to good, not enough water no need for independent review of the park fiasco.

Suthep. 1. The protesters ran into the bullets. (We'll just leave it there huh.)

Mark. 1. Yu'p you can use live rounds on em.

2. No, no, hmmm no'p nothing of any real impact on the nation really.

[halloween]

And the Thai people may not be a stupid as those who believe the Shins are whiter than white, and have never ever done anything wrong, never ever and post such on here.

But then again, some posters on here like to claim Yingluck was Thailand's best ever PM!

not seen any of those posts? whiter than white? and, particularly, never seen a post claiming Yingluck was Thailand's best ever PM do you have a link?

PM Yingluck removed from office - Page 15 - Thailand News ...

I do believe that Yingluck was the best PM Thailand has ever had. Better even than her brother. She had a modern sense of politics, and like ...

www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/724324-pm-yingluck.../page-15

The search facility is quite easy to use, even for the challenged.

well that's a curved ball from you (as per normal) this poster was replying to a post from ME and the inference was that I had claimed it

The obvious should be obvious even for the challenged like yourself

You asked for a link (on an open forum), and I gave you one. A simple TY would have been sufficient.

[LannaGuy]

You asked for a link (on an open forum), and I gave you one. A simple TY would have been sufficient.

a link from ME you censored

[halloween]

You asked for a link (on an open forum), and I gave you one. A simple TY would have been sufficient.

a link from ME you censored

You asked for a link because "never seen a post claiming Yingluck was Thailand's best ever PM.."

Nobody ,including you, limited that request to a post authored by you stating such.

[LannaGuy]

You asked for a link (on an open forum), and I gave you one. A simple TY would have been sufficient.

a link from ME you censored

You asked for a link because "never seen a post claiming Yingluck was Thailand's best ever PM.."

Nobody ,including you, limited that request to a post authored by you stating such.

*facepalm* now back on topic?

[JAG]

More rewrites of history and the facts of the situations.

You are in complete denial aren't you.

When you refuse to believe what actually happened, because it does not fit your narrative,, then accusing those who point that out of rewriting history is an easy, if rather empty, allegation to make!

As you have raised the issue of the 2006 election, you might reflect on why it was held so early when TRT had a large majority, the blatant corruption of the government that brought protesters out in droves, and the illegal electoral practices that caused the election to be cancelled, TRT disbanded and office holders banned.

But, hey, they had a vote, so it must be democracy, right?

Few if any of us who post in support of the democratic process in this country would claim that the 2006 election was a perfect example of the election ideal, or that Thaksin and TRT were perfect examples of perfect governance.

It did however produce a government which which represented the wish of the electorate (51% of the votes cast). The opposition ended up unrepresented because they boycotted it. Rather their own fault.

Thailand ended up with a Junta government, which was not what the electorate wanted.

Much the same thing happened with the last government.

In both cases the people selected who they wanted to form the government, ( Hey, yes, a vote, they are central to democracy). The military and their backers thought otherwise, and staged coups. That is not democracy, even when viewed through a pumpkin mask!

Edited January 19, 2016 by JAG

[rubl]

So, the Shinawatras at it again. Obviously and clear for all to see out of the goodness in their hearts. To help the poor suppressed masses in Thailand, like they were helped before and remained poor.

Bread, games, elections. Make the people think they have a say in things. Thanks for voting and now please go home, your betters have things to do. Like frustrating democracy, for your benefit of course.

[bangrak]

"Yinglucks kitchen nightmares" A new show coming soon called "Yinglucks government nightmares"

I can see it now, Yinglucks special roasted rice

mix the rice into that bowl untill full (clearly half empty)

mix in other rotten ingredients to make it look full

and put in oven.......

here is one I made earlier, opens oven removes lid and ......would you believe it - an empty bowl

well I'm sure it's around here somewhere - you can't trust anyone these days

Now if ya swaped Yingluck and rice for Suthep, for land title deeds down Phuket way, then something about palm oil, and lets not forget his own party wanting him out because of he was just to corrupt even for them, and how a bout the bags of cash that just kinda magically disappeared, now that was a neat trick.

No doubt a topic about Suthep could bring quite 'juicy' stuff up about him and his kins. But in this part it is about some Shinawatra family members.

So where the need to 'twist' to ST when it's about TS? Does it make TS look better, I mean less bad?

Only the worn-out Shins' PTP/UDD/reds, etc. trick: 'it's not us, it's ...', or: 'but ... is doing it too'?

When your neighbour does something wrong, does it give you the right to do something wrong too then, maybe? Not a healthy logic...

P.S.: please give me the links between Suthep and disappearing money bags, and Phuket land scams, as I didn't hear about these two yet, thank you.

[ianf]

Few if any of us who post in support of the democratic process in this country would claim that the 2006 election was a perfect example of the election ideal, or that Thaksin and TRT were perfect examples of perfect governance.

It did however produce a government which which represented the wish of the electorate (51% of the votes cast). The opposition ended up unrepresented because they boycotted it. Rather their own fault.

Thailand ended up with a Junta government, which was not what the electorate wanted.

Much the same thing happened with the last government.

In both cases the people selected who they wanted to form the government, ( Hey, yes, a vote, they are central to democracy). The military and their backers thought otherwise, and staged coups. That is not democracy, even when viewed through a pumpkin mask!

Such notables as Mugabe, Hun Sen and Saddam held 'elections'. But in none of those cases did it herald any kind of democracy. Thaksin's elections were far from Democratic, especially the last one with his proxy 'sister' put in power to do his dirty work for him. Hardly democratic. So I don't buy this stuff at all - the current regime is not a democratic regime and neither was the previous two or three. In my opinion I doubt whether we'll ever see democracy in Thailand, whether the ruling government appears by a coup or through Thailand's version of the 'ballot box'.

[bangrak]

Many here seem to forget the nature of the present government and whose governments had a semblance of democracy. I was living in Bangkok during Black May 1992 and still remember all those who died for democracy. It's just a matter of time before violence as bad or not worse happens again. The Thai people want democracy. the Shinawatras gave that although they bought many votes, but that is not different than many other countries.

I follow you when you write some '...governments had a semblance of democracy'. But I can't when you write '...the Shinawatras gave that...' in association with democracy wanted by the Thai people...

The horror of Black May '92 is still fresh in my mind (I've seen quite some censored out info about it too), and no doubt the ones who died (we will never know the number of, scores of people, still, officially considered as 'disappeared') had thought they were coming up for democracy!

But who were the ones behind, the instigators pushing them forward, which were their aims (I've found very little about), was 'democracy' part of it, please tell me what you know?

As for the bloody repression executed by police, army, ...and more, it seems clear which small groups of Thais inspired and cautioned it, but you certainly know too about a certain country, at the time 'very influential' here, and its secret service, which were behind it, and why...

Oh, do you remember, some man very close to Thaksin, who made a PM of (in the mid-2000's), declaring with a square face it were all lies about May '92, there had not even been twenty casualties, accidental ones, from running under trucks and so? What kind of, ...even semblance of, 'democracy' would you expect from that kind of people then...?

[JAG]

Few if any of us who post in support of the democratic process in this country would claim that the 2006 election was a perfect example of the election ideal, or that Thaksin and TRT were perfect examples of perfect governance.

It did however produce a government which which represented the wish of the electorate (51% of the votes cast). The opposition ended up unrepresented because they boycotted it. Rather their own fault.

Thailand ended up with a Junta government, which was not what the electorate wanted.

Much the same thing happened with the last government.

In both cases the people selected who they wanted to form the government, ( Hey, yes, a vote, they are central to democracy). The military and their backers thought otherwise, and staged coups. That is not democracy, even when viewed through a pumpkin mask!

Such notables as Mugabe, Hun Sen and Saddam held 'elections'. But in none of those cases did it herald any kind of democracy. Thaksin's elections were far from Democratic, especially the last one with his proxy 'sister' put in power to do his dirty work for him. Hardly democratic. So I don't buy this stuff at all - the current regime is not a democratic regime and neither was the previous two or three. In my opinion I doubt whether we'll ever see democracy in Thailand, whether the ruling government appears by a coup or through Thailand's version of the 'ballot box'.

Comparing Thailand's elections with those held by Saddam and Mugabe (I know little about Hun Sen) exposes the weakness of your arguments better than I could. The Thai election which resulted in Yingluck's Government gave the Thai electorate a free choice. They chose Pheu Thai, and before you bleat on about Thaksin and puppets, everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate for Prime Minister, and they were well aware of Thaksins place in this arrangement. They chose her and Pheu Thai, not Abhisit and/ or the junta.

You and many others don't like (putting it mildly) Pheu Thai and the Shinawatra political machine. Fine, that is a perfectly valid viewpoint. But sooner or later you are going to have to accept that the Thai electorate seem to like them. They keep electing them. That is a simple fact, which no amount of banging on about Mugabe or Saddam will change.

[rubl]

Few if any of us who post in support of the democratic process in this country would claim that the 2006 election was a perfect example of the election ideal, or that Thaksin and TRT were perfect examples of perfect governance.

It did however produce a government which which represented the wish of the electorate (51% of the votes cast). The opposition ended up unrepresented because they boycotted it. Rather their own fault.

Thailand ended up with a Junta government, which was not what the electorate wanted.

Much the same thing happened with the last government.

In both cases the people selected who they wanted to form the government, ( Hey, yes, a vote, they are central to democracy). The military and their backers thought otherwise, and staged coups. That is not democracy, even when viewed through a pumpkin mask!

Such notables as Mugabe, Hun Sen and Saddam held 'elections'. But in none of those cases did it herald any kind of democracy. Thaksin's elections were far from Democratic, especially the last one with his proxy 'sister' put in power to do his dirty work for him. Hardly democratic. So I don't buy this stuff at all - the current regime is not a democratic regime and neither was the previous two or three. In my opinion I doubt whether we'll ever see democracy in Thailand, whether the ruling government appears by a coup or through Thailand's version of the 'ballot box'.

Comparing Thailand's elections with those held by Saddam and Mugabe (I know little about Hun Sen) exposes the weakness of your arguments better than I could. The Thai election which resulted in Yingluck's Government gave the Thai electorate a free choice. They chose Pheu Thai, and before you bleat on about Thaksin and puppets, everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate for Prime Minister, and they were well aware of Thaksins place in this arrangement. They chose her and Pheu Thai, not Abhisit and/ or the junta.

You and many others don't like (putting it mildly) Pheu Thai and the Shinawatra political machine. Fine, that is a perfectly valid viewpoint. But sooner or later you are going to have to accept that the Thai electorate seem to like them. They keep electing them. That is a simple fact, which no amount of banging on about Mugabe or Saddam will change.

... and then there are people who have no problem with a democracy where people just vote for the highest bidder and afterwards go home as told. No thought on future, no thought on how much those voted for rob the country of it's resources while 'providing' free bread and games for their impoverished fellow countrymen.

Education, education, education. That's what's needed to make Thailand a democracy as we know it in the West.

[ianf]

Few if any of us who post in support of the democratic process in this country would claim that the 2006 election was a perfect example of the election ideal, or that Thaksin and TRT were perfect examples of perfect governance.

It did however produce a government which which represented the wish of the electorate (51% of the votes cast). The opposition ended up unrepresented because they boycotted it. Rather their own fault.

Thailand ended up with a Junta government, which was not what the electorate wanted.

Much the same thing happened with the last government.

In both cases the people selected who they wanted to form the government, ( Hey, yes, a vote, they are central to democracy). The military and their backers thought otherwise, and staged coups. That is not democracy, even when viewed through a pumpkin mask!

Such notables as Mugabe, Hun Sen and Saddam held 'elections'. But in none of those cases did it herald any kind of democracy. Thaksin's elections were far from Democratic, especially the last one with his proxy 'sister' put in power to do his dirty work for him. Hardly democratic. So I don't buy this stuff at all - the current regime is not a democratic regime and neither was the previous two or three. In my opinion I doubt whether we'll ever see democracy in Thailand, whether the ruling government appears by a coup or through Thailand's version of the 'ballot box'.

Comparing Thailand's elections with those held by Saddam and Mugabe (I know little about Hun Sen) exposes the weakness of your arguments better than I could. The Thai election which resulted in Yingluck's Government gave the Thai electorate a free choice. They chose Pheu Thai, and before you bleat on about Thaksin and puppets, everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate for Prime Minister, and they were well aware of Thaksins place in this arrangement. They chose her and Pheu Thai, not Abhisit and/ or the junta.

You and many others don't like (putting it mildly) Pheu Thai and the Shinawatra political machine. Fine, that is a perfectly valid viewpoint. But sooner or later you are going to have to accept that the Thai electorate seem to like them. They keep electing them. That is a simple fact, which no amount of banging on about Mugabe or Saddam will change.

Not strictly as you describe but if you wish to live with this strange point of view, that is your choice.

[waitforusalso]

So, the Shinawatras at it again. Obviously and clear for all to see out of the goodness in their hearts. To help the poor suppressed masses in Thailand, like they were helped before and remained poor.

Income in the northeast, the poorest part of the country, rose by 46% from 2001 to 2006.

Nationwide poverty fell from 21.3% to 11.3%.

Thailand's Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, fell from .525 in 2000 to .499 in 2004 (it had risen from 1996 to 2000).

Wikipedia.

Don't worry about facts, just keep bleating the yellow BS mantra, as you do ad naseam!

[JAG]

So, the Shinawatras at it again. Obviously and clear for all to see out of the goodness in their hearts. To help the poor suppressed masses in Thailand, like they were helped before and remained poor.

Income in the northeast, the poorest part of the country, rose by 46% from 2001 to 2006.

Nationwide poverty fell from 21.3% to 11.3%.

Thailand's Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, fell from .525 in 2000 to .499 in 2004 (it had risen from 1996 to 2000).

Wikipedia.

Don't worry about facts, just keep bleating the yellow BS mantra, as you do ad naseam!

..and if you can't win the argument change the subject!

[casualbiker]

The problem these people have with anything PTP/Red/Shinz is that anything at all is seen as corrupt and lining their pockets.

I would say for sure that yes there are corrupt politicians and yes they come from all political persuasion's not just the red side.

I have never claimed PTP or the Shinz are whiter than white, neither have I said they have never done anything wrong, "never ever".

But maybe what really get's the haters here is the list of things implemented by Thaksin that has had a MASSIVE positive affect on the country and when their hero's are put to the same test they all go very very QUIET!!!!!

Lets see now Hmmm.

Taksin, 1. national health scheme, (that one really twists their biscuit)

2. Pay down the national debt, while massive investment in infrastructure.

3. Reduction of drugs in the country.

4. A rise in employment rate.

5. Micro loans to villagers to start their own businesses'.

Uncle Too. 1. Lotto prices.

2. Errr, Ummm,,, ??? detaining kids.

3. ever so slightly expensive microphone's.

4. Article 44, I can have you shot if I want.

5. Rubber's not looking to good, not enough water no need for independent review of the park fiasco.

Suthep. 1. The protesters ran into the bullets. (We'll just leave it there huh.)

Mark. 1. Yu'p you can use live rounds on em.

2. No, no, hmmm no'p nothing of any real impact on the nation really.

you missed the 2007 interim government extending compulsory education three years from P6 (10 years old) to M3 (15 years old). Abhisits government keeping this amendment and also giving an allowance to allow poorer family's to purchase the required uniform (allowance scrapped by Yingluck government). Abhisits government keeping the health care scheme and scrapping the 30 co-payment as it was actually costing more to take the 30b (Yinglucks government tried bringing the co-payment back, unsuccessfully)

Thaksin did indeed bring about great change (mostly for the better) in his first term. Unfortunately they got to used to the trough!

[casualbiker]

So, the Shinawatras at it again. Obviously and clear for all to see out of the goodness in their hearts. To help the poor suppressed masses in Thailand, like they were helped before and remained poor.

Income in the northeast, the poorest part of the country, rose by 46% from 2001 to 2006.

Nationwide poverty fell from 21.3% to 11.3%.

Thailand's Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, fell from .525 in 2000 to .499 in 2004 (it had risen from 1996 to 2000).

Wikipedia.

Don't worry about facts, just keep bleating the yellow BS mantra, as you do ad naseam!

And what about later years when the shins were in power? Thaksin's first term was a good one, most all who have been following things will admit that.. But then!!!!

[bangrak]

So, the Shinawatras at it again. Obviously and clear for all to see out of the goodness in their hearts. To help the poor suppressed masses in Thailand, like they were helped before and remained poor.

Income in the northeast, the poorest part of the country, rose by 46% from 2001 to 2006.

Nationwide poverty fell from 21.3% to 11.3%.

Thailand's Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, fell from .525 in 2000 to .499 in 2004 (it had risen from 1996 to 2000).

Wikipedia.

Don't worry about facts, just keep bleating the yellow BS mantra, as you do ad naseam!

Do you mean 'income per capita'?

In my home N-EU country, I was living in the second richest community in the land, but I could have taken you to whole streets of small, shabby, houses with no insulation, no central heating, no hot water, no comfort at all, where the wallets were empty on the 10th of the month rather than the 20th...

When so, as I allow myself to presume, you're just using, or should I say abusing, figures and statistics!

Maybe (...?) making a 'Thaksinist' out of you, but for sure not a 'socialist'!

Did 'Thaksin power' bring more money to the N-E? No doubt about that.

But to whom, hmm?

Did that money reach the poor layers of Issan society? The poorest, the small farmers, f.i.?

Come on! The only effect on them is all they need to grow a bit of rice to feed their family (faaar too small to be granted access to Thaksin's rice scams) has become, a lot, more expensive, like seeds, fertilisers and pesticides, not to forget the rent for the land!

Making them more deeply indebted than ever before they heard the name Thaksin for the first time in their life, ...and of course, like the whole brainwashed village, still willing to give off their ID-card for that banknote they need, ...to vote in their name for 'the right people' (don't mention how the reds around would outcast them when they would refuse to...)!

Is the actual team in power doing well? No, clearly. Were the Dems doing a good job? Not in my book! Were any or all of the Thaksin emanations any better? I beg to differ! IMO in depth worse than military and Dems cumulated.

The Shins and their Thaksin have 'a line', a plan, yes, indeed, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with 'democracy' or the wellbeing of the small people, outside of what will be strictly needed to install and consolidate their power, to rule(...!) over Thailand, as their fiefdom, for generations!

Didn't you see that in, or do you just don't want to see it?

Edited January 19, 2016 by bangrak

[rubl]

So, the Shinawatras at it again. Obviously and clear for all to see out of the goodness in their hearts. To help the poor suppressed masses in Thailand, like they were helped before and remained poor.

Income in the northeast, the poorest part of the country, rose by 46% from 2001 to 2006.

Nationwide poverty fell from 21.3% to 11.3%.

Thailand's Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, fell from .525 in 2000 to .499 in 2004 (it had risen from 1996 to 2000).

Wikipedia.

Don't worry about facts, just keep bleating the yellow BS mantra, as you do ad naseam!

Now nearly three months ago Pheu Thai stated to have paid 870 billion Baht directly to 1.4 million rice farming families. How many are no longer poor?

How many still poor rice farming families would vote for a Shinawatra party because they're bound to get a little bit for voting for them? Someone will pay the bill and it's neither the poor nor the Shinawatras. Self-entitlement, self-reliance? Not if the Shinawatras can prevent it, they need an ignorant population which will thank them for a pittance.

Education, education, education. That's what we need, not some Amply Rich elite who don't even want to show any responsibility or accountability. The timing of this 'publicity drive' seems to coincide with Ms. Yingluck's first day in court for her 'negligence' charge. Obviously democracy died the day she was asked to show the responsibility and accountability she talked about so much. Thaksin her original (she's only a clone after all) is not a hair better. Reconciliation is asked from others only, reconciliation Thaksin style "when I come back and people see I'm not out for revenge all will love me".

A publicity offence not aimed at helping people or Thailand. Not at all. Just an publicity offence to help Shinawatras escape justice.

[seedy]

one off topic post removed

[aussieinthailand]

The problem these people have with anything PTP/Red/Shinz is that anything at all is seen as corrupt and lining their pockets.

I would say for sure that yes there are corrupt politicians and yes they come from all political persuasion's not just the red side.

I have never claimed PTP or the Shinz are whiter than white, neither have I said they have never done anything wrong, "never ever".

But maybe what really get's the haters here is the list of things implemented by Thaksin that has had a MASSIVE positive affect on the country and when their hero's are put to the same test they all go very very QUIET!!!!!

Lets see now Hmmm.

Taksin, 1. national health scheme, (that one really twists their biscuit)

2. Pay down the national debt, while massive investment in infrastructure.

3. Reduction of drugs in the country.

4. A rise in employment rate.

5. Micro loans to villagers to start their own businesses'.

Uncle Too. 1. Lotto prices.

2. Errr, Ummm,,, ??? detaining kids.

3. ever so slightly expensive microphone's.

4. Article 44, I can have you shot if I want.

5. Rubber's not looking to good, not enough water no need for independent review of the park fiasco.

Suthep. 1. The protesters ran into the bullets. (We'll just leave it there huh.)

Mark. 1. Yu'p you can use live rounds on em.

2. No, no, hmmm no'p nothing of any real impact on the nation really.

you missed the 2007 interim government extending compulsory education three years from P6 (10 years old) to M3 (15 years old). Abhisits government keeping this amendment and also giving an allowance to allow poorer family's to purchase the required uniform (allowance scrapped by Yingluck government). Abhisits government keeping the health care scheme and scrapping the 30 co-payment as it was actually costing more to take the 30b (Yinglucks government tried bringing the co-payment back, unsuccessfully)

Thaksin did indeed bring about great change (mostly for the better) in his first term. Unfortunately they got to used to the trough!

Ok cool, Good to see you can acknowledge the few listed policies (which all to often are ignored) by others who have a dislike for PTP/Shinz and refuse to acknowledge the things that were accomplished.

My point was the many policies implemented by Thaksin were far reaching and had massive positive affect on the country as a whole.

Although extending the compulsory education is quite a good policy and YES your right has had a major positive affect on the country.

Now as far as Mark keeping the health scheme isn't a thing to crow about as scrapping it would have been a massive disaster which Mark fully knows.

[halloween]

you missed the 2007 interim government extending compulsory education three years from P6 (10 years old) to M3 (15 years old). Abhisits government keeping this amendment and also giving an allowance to allow poorer family's to purchase the required uniform (allowance scrapped by Yingluck government). Abhisits government keeping the health care scheme and scrapping the 30 co-payment as it was actually costing more to take the 30b (Yinglucks government tried bringing the co-payment back, unsuccessfully)

Thaksin did indeed bring about great change (mostly for the better) in his first term. Unfortunately they got to used to the trough!

Ok cool, Good to see you can acknowledge the few listed policies (which all to often are ignored) by others who have a dislike for PTP/Shinz and refuse to acknowledge the things that were accomplished.

My point was the many policies implemented by Thaksin were far reaching and had massive positive affect on the country as a whole.

Although extending the compulsory education is quite a good policy and YES your right has had a major positive affect on the country.

Now as far as Mark keeping the health scheme isn't a thing to crow about as scrapping it would have been a massive disaster which Mark fully knows.

You accuse others of ignoring his good policies, while you refuse to admit that Thaksin was a self-serving corrupt criminal. How much more could have been achieved in a time of global boom if he had paid his taxes, stopped his corrupt practices, and acted in the interest of his country rather than himself?

[LannaGuy]

you missed the 2007 interim government extending compulsory education three years from P6 (10 years old) to M3 (15 years old). Abhisits government keeping this amendment and also giving an allowance to allow poorer family's to purchase the required uniform (allowance scrapped by Yingluck government). Abhisits government keeping the health care scheme and scrapping the 30 co-payment as it was actually costing more to take the 30b (Yinglucks government tried bringing the co-payment back, unsuccessfully)

Thaksin did indeed bring about great change (mostly for the better) in his first term. Unfortunately they got to used to the trough!

Ok cool, Good to see you can acknowledge the few listed policies (which all to often are ignored) by others who have a dislike for PTP/Shinz and refuse to acknowledge the things that were accomplished.

My point was the many policies implemented by Thaksin were far reaching and had massive positive affect on the country as a whole.

Although extending the compulsory education is quite a good policy and YES your right has had a major positive affect on the country.

Now as far as Mark keeping the health scheme isn't a thing to crow about as scrapping it would have been a massive disaster which Mark fully knows.

You accuse others of ignoring his good policies, while you refuse to admit that Thaksin was a self-serving corrupt criminal. How much more could have been achieved in a time of global boom if he had paid his taxes, stopped his corrupt practices, and acted in the interest of his country rather than himself?

so funny... Thaksin was just "lucky" and the Junta "unlucky" with the economy looor?

[jackie charles]

She was P.M. of a government Elected by THE PEOPLE.

[casualbiker]

She was P.M. of a government Elected by THE PEOPLE.

Some of the people BUT not the majority of the the people. 52% of the people voted for someone else!

[JAG]

She was P.M. of a government Elected by THE PEOPLE.

Some of the people BUT not the majority of the the people. 52% of the people voted for someone else!

Ah, so that justifies replacing her government with a military coup and junta !

[casualbiker]

She was P.M. of a government Elected by THE PEOPLE.

Some of the people BUT not the majority of the the people. 52% of the people voted for someone else!

Ah, so that justifies replacing her government with a military coup and junta !

I certainly didn't say or imply that. I merely stated the facts.

[slapout]

I always liked the description ''she was pm of a government purchased by members of said government from the people of Thailand, with funds stolen from those thai people by members of same said government''.

That seems to be fairly accurate on most accounts on the entire shin and shin influenced governments

that Thailand has been exposed to.

[rubl]

She was P.M. of a government Elected by THE PEOPLE.

Some of the people BUT not the majority of the the people. 52% of the people voted for someone else!

Ah, so that justifies replacing her government with a military coup and junta !

After all the shenanigans the brother/sister duo Shinawatra were leading the country through with their blanket amnesty bill covering even Ms. Yingluck's two years in office, with House dissolution, no RPPS bill payments, trying for a quick 'vote for us, you dumb people and get money' and even a minister suggesting the military declare Martial Law so the Shinawatras could have their election, with all that there's wasn't much government left and some may still end up in jail.

It would seem this publicity offence is trying to distract from Ms. Yingluck's court case. The case which gives Ms. Yingluck the opportunity to justify her RPPS, explain why those 500++ billion Baht losses don't mean she was negligent, etc., etc.

Probably our beloved criminal fugitive is also getting impatient. Gone since September 2006 (or July 2008) he needs to do something to stay in the 'picture'. People might start to forget him. He needs to remind them that he handed out freebies, he needs to remind them he is too rich to need to be corrupt.

[rubl]

She was P.M. of a government Elected by THE PEOPLE.

She was PM of a government selected and run by her brother and bought with the election promises.

She was removed from office in a case of 'conflict of interest' ('promoting' a person to make a position vacant for a relative). She's in court to explain why losing 500++ billion Baht isn't negligence. In a way she's ending up like Silvio Berlusconi.