Army chief blasts redshirt leaders over charter draft referendum

[Baerboxer]

Try and grow up it you want to discuss with the adults.

ANU - who rates them or cares about them outside hypocritical Australia. Australia and intellectual engagement - there's an oxymoron. I remember one of their "academics" telling everyone what a wonderful group of power to the people socialists the Shins are. What a plonker - so much of an expert her only framework for contextualization was Western political constructs.

People are entitled to their view, as is the gentleman who wrote the article. He may be genuinely concerned about the new charter and some of the contents. Many will be. But that doesn't mean the Shin kleptocracy nepotistic alternative is acceptable either.

But, as you normally love to demonstrate your keen objective understanding by concurring with the Shin PR claptrap regardless of any facts; we can only assume you are somewhat gullible and easily led.

yawn, blah blah blah....

One, the "Shin Klepto-whatever" could have been voted out of office by the Thai people. That is a choice for the Thai people to make, not the generals.

Two, ANU and their web site has guest contributors from all flavors of the political spectrum. For you to dismiss the entire site out of hand as biased is nonsense.

Three, the author of this article is from Chula which is not known as a bastion of democratic intellectualism... again, ANU gives time to many views.

Fourth, you have a lot of nerve accusing another poster of following "PR claptrap" given your staunch support of the clowns currently running the country...

Just woke up?

The Shins could have been voted out. But their illegal attempts at forcing a whitewash for their paymaster, use of violence, constant threats and intimidation to judges, open defiance of the law, and calls for a separate state suggest otherwise. If they'd won an election it would have been business as usual, ignore laws when it suits, get the boss back a freeman at all costs. If they lost, it would have been a series of made up challenges and shennanigans to try and cling on to office and get the result changed. They don't play by any rules but their own and left themselves wide open for a coup - which was eagerly waiting for an excuse.

Australia is only a serious player academically, politically, and economically in the minds of Australians. Quite frankly, I doubt the current government give a fig about not being able to go there so long as the Aussie politicos and businessmen come here, as they do. No one really cares what institutions down under think.

Doesn't matter where the author is from, he's entitled to his view. Being against aspects in the proposed charter doesn't make him pro Shin.

Who says I staunchly support the current government? That's the usual retort of those who praise the Shins.

So, what is your view on the junta?

I've made that clear on several posts on various threads.

[Eric Loh]

Try and grow up it you want to discuss with the adults.

ANU - who rates them or cares about them outside hypocritical Australia. Australia and intellectual engagement - there's an oxymoron. I remember one of their "academics" telling everyone what a wonderful group of power to the people socialists the Shins are. What a plonker - so much of an expert her only framework for contextualization was Western political constructs.

People are entitled to their view, as is the gentleman who wrote the article. He may be genuinely concerned about the new charter and some of the contents. Many will be. But that doesn't mean the Shin kleptocracy nepotistic alternative is acceptable either.

But, as you normally love to demonstrate your keen objective understanding by concurring with the Shin PR claptrap regardless of any facts; we can only assume you are somewhat gullible and easily led.

yawn, blah blah blah....

One, the "Shin Klepto-whatever" could have been voted out of office by the Thai people. That is a choice for the Thai people to make, not the generals.

Two, ANU and their web site has guest contributors from all flavors of the political spectrum. For you to dismiss the entire site out of hand as biased is nonsense.

Three, the author of this article is from Chula which is not known as a bastion of democratic intellectualism... again, ANU gives time to many views.

Fourth, you have a lot of nerve accusing another poster of following "PR claptrap" given your staunch support of the clowns currently running the country...

Just woke up?

The Shins could have been voted out. But their illegal attempts at forcing a whitewash for their paymaster, use of violence, constant threats and intimidation to judges, open defiance of the law, and calls for a separate state suggest otherwise. If they'd won an election it would have been business as usual, ignore laws when it suits, get the boss back a freeman at all costs. If they lost, it would have been a series of made up challenges and shennanigans to try and cling on to office and get the result changed. They don't play by any rules but their own and left themselves wide open for a coup - which was eagerly waiting for an excuse.

Australia is only a serious player academically, politically, and economically in the minds of Australians. Quite frankly, I doubt the current government give a fig about not being able to go there so long as the Aussie politicos and businessmen come here, as they do. No one really cares what institutions down under think.

Doesn't matter where the author is from, he's entitled to his view. Being against aspects in the proposed charter doesn't make him pro Shin.

Who says I staunchly support the current government? That's the usual retort of those who praise the Shins.

They don't play by any rules but their own and left themselves wide open for a coup - which was eagerly waiting for an excuse....

Think you just got up from your afternoon nap. The amnesty has been binned and the previous government has already dissolved Parliment plus the fact that the PM has been dismissed and had stepped down by order from the constitutional court. They didn't clinged to power. What excuse and why the coup is necessary if not to have the excuse to rid their political enemies.

You are lying Eric, The Amnesty Bill, the version craftily amended, against procedure, to favor Thaksin was never binned. Yingluck lied, not for the first or last time, when she said all the versions of the bill had been binned. Several versions had, but strangely, not the one that favored her brother and caused all the protests. They knew that would be returned to the lower house and they could then vote it into law without it having to go to the upper house again.

All well reported on at the time, Eric, including on ThaiVisa.

Appreciate your love of the Shins is undying, but do try and avoid repeating lies they've already been caught out on.

The amnesty bill need 2 houses for approval. It didn't got through and even if the bill is still there, no way it could get pass upper house again and possible the highly idiosyncratic constitution court. There is not a snowflake in hell that this amnesty will continue with internal and external pressures and you know that but continue to procrastinate. No comment on rest of my posting?

[waitforusalso]

Try and grow up it you want to discuss with the adults.

ANU - who rates them or cares about them outside hypocritical Australia. Australia and intellectual engagement - there's an oxymoron. I remember one of their "academics" telling everyone what a wonderful group of power to the people socialists the Shins are. What a plonker - so much of an expert her only framework for contextualization was Western political constructs.

People are entitled to their view, as is the gentleman who wrote the article. He may be genuinely concerned about the new charter and some of the contents. Many will be. But that doesn't mean the Shin kleptocracy nepotistic alternative is acceptable either.

But, as you normally love to demonstrate your keen objective understanding by concurring with the Shin PR claptrap regardless of any facts; we can only assume you are somewhat gullible and easily led.

yawn, blah blah blah....

One, the "Shin Klepto-whatever" could have been voted out of office by the Thai people. That is a choice for the Thai people to make, not the generals.

Two, ANU and their web site has guest contributors from all flavors of the political spectrum. For you to dismiss the entire site out of hand as biased is nonsense.

Three, the author of this article is from Chula which is not known as a bastion of democratic intellectualism... again, ANU gives time to many views.

Fourth, you have a lot of nerve accusing another poster of following "PR claptrap" given your staunch support of the clowns currently running the country...

Just woke up?

The Shins could have been voted out. But their illegal attempts at forcing a whitewash for their paymaster, use of violence, constant threats and intimidation to judges, open defiance of the law, and calls for a separate state suggest otherwise. If they'd won an election it would have been business as usual, ignore laws when it suits, get the boss back a freeman at all costs. If they lost, it would have been a series of made up challenges and shennanigans to try and cling on to office and get the result changed. They don't play by any rules but their own and left themselves wide open for a coup - which was eagerly waiting for an excuse.

Australia is only a serious player academically, politically, and economically in the minds of Australians. Quite frankly, I doubt the current government give a fig about not being able to go there so long as the Aussie politicos and businessmen come here, as they do. No one really cares what institutions down under think.

Doesn't matter where the author is from, he's entitled to his view. Being against aspects in the proposed charter doesn't make him pro Shin.

Who says I staunchly support the current government? That's the usual retort of those who praise the Shins.

" If they lost, it would have been a series of made up challenges and shennanigans to try and cling on to office and get the result changed."

They have never lost an election, so your statement is bogus & unfounded. (like most things you say)

"Australia is only a serious player academically, politically, and economically in the minds of Australians."

Wow! Now slagging off an entire country. Very arrogant. I hope some Australians take you to task for this nonsense.

Please let me know what educational institution is in favour of your General friend & his fascist regime.

[tbthailand]

"he only explanation I can think of is that you are somehow finacially involved" and "and have something to lose if this government is successful in cutting the corrupt money supply to certain people"

defamation against a fellow poster

For the record I do not financially benefit in any way from pointing out a few of the many things wrong with this military government. I am retired from a military that defends a democratic government, it doesn't stage coups.

I am also appalled at the number of posters who should know better who supported the coup and continue to defend the junta. I sometimes wonder if some of them are paid trolls, but the quality of their posts is generally so bad it seems unlikely.

The only issue with what you say is that the last government, whilst elected through the existing election mechanism, was not acting in a democratic way.

Lying to the opposition that a vote would be held the next day, and then holding it when the opposition left is hardly democratic. But they didn't want a public debate. Many more examples.

Why did they act in such a way, when they had a majority and with coalition partners, a very big one?

Too lazy, things to hide in the detail, not wanting discussion and accountability, or simply arrogant? Who knows but they left themselves wide open for a coup which duly happened.

Politicians and the elite hiso wealthy and their clans wouldn't get away with such behavior in real democracies. But that's the rub, things are different here and until there are some very fundamental changes in society nothing will change much.

well, I see you already have a lot to answer, but here is one...

Lying to the opposition that a vote would be held the next day, and then holding it when the opposition left is hardly democratic. But they didn't want a public debate. Many more examples.

since you are sure it happened that way (it did not, the Dems walked out), then please just pop up a link for us.... Heck I'll even take one from Landdestroyer if you can find it...

I'll be interested to see your links and to read some of your other replies ... like your view of the junta, ... if you are not a closet-junta-hugger, that is... Or is junta-hugger-in-denial a better term?

[heybruce]

So, do you & your buddies really think this is a good constitution that should be passed in a referendum? Really?

This draft (& the last one) is shameful. It is simply rubber stamping the army's ongoing control over parliament. It restricts freedoms & stifles democracy to the point it is hardly worth having a lower house.

Here is an accurate assessment of the draft turd

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2016/02/05/liberties-and-rights-lost-under-thailands-2016-constitution/

You people really make me sick backing this foul administration!

Gee wiz, something that stops the red shirts, and their non elected non democratic leaders keeping a control on information - and they don't like it. What a surprise.

Normally, opposition candidates and spokes people, canvassers or anyone even daring to question the Shin party are dealt with - warned off, intimidated, assaulted or even murdered. The gang protects its turf. Bit different when it's the military.

New Mandala - accurate and unbiased, your having a laugh, Why not ask Yingluck, number 1 cousin, Chalerm or any of the former cabinet to comment?

They don't like anything that takes power away from them or the opportunity to get back in charge of the trough. Period.

The posters on here who love to pretend the Shins are remotely interesting in democracy and justice for the poor rather than proven liars who brag at how much they've increased their fortune whilst in government, and break the laws they don't like, are the ones who make any reasonable person want to puke.

In other words--"But, but, but...Thaksin!"

No comment on the OP, right?

Try and read all the posts on a thread. Perhaps a friend can help.

I was replying to a previous post.

I have commented on the OP. Hope you enjoy reading those.

I read all the posts--seajae did a "But, but, but....redshirts!", waitforusalso replied with a referenced post on the draft constitution, and you replied with "But, but, but...Shins!".

Still no comment on the OP, and nothing pertinent to seajae's or waitforusalso's posts.

[heybruce]

Reds in a panic because their decades of corruption income stream is coming to an end - if only the people could see it for what it is, maybe they do lol

It takes willful ignorance in the extreme for people to believe this corrupt military will eliminate corruption. http://government.defenceindex.org/countries/thailand/

However there are clearly posters who exercise such an extreme.

Ok you believe this "corrupt military" will not eliminate corruption.

Please tell me Who will? The reds?

Well Yingluck did claim there was no corruption in "her" government.

And she said on FB, her chosen way of informing the masses, that "her" government had made significant in-roads into the elimination of Human Trafficking.

And her brother said on CNN that he, and his charming sister, had never ever done anything wrong, never ever.

So yes, looks like they could eliminate corruption. Along with eliminating all checks and balances, ngo's, transparency, accountability and the need for any financial accounting.

Paradise.

Still with "But, but, but...Shins!"

The majority of the anti-junta posters here, myself included, are not fans of the Shinawatra's, we are fans of letting the Thai people choose their leaders. I was pointing out that it's absurd to expect a corrupt military to eliminate corruption. Does that bring a level of complexity to the situation that is beyond you?

[heybruce]

"he only explanation I can think of is that you are somehow finacially involved" and "and have something to lose if this government is successful in cutting the corrupt money supply to certain people"

defamation against a fellow poster

For the record I do not financially benefit in any way from pointing out a few of the many things wrong with this military government. I am retired from a military that defends a democratic government, it doesn't stage coups.

I am also appalled at the number of posters who should know better who supported the coup and continue to defend the junta. I sometimes wonder if some of them are paid trolls, but the quality of their posts is generally so bad it seems unlikely.

The only issue with what you say is that the last government, whilst elected through the existing election mechanism, was not acting in a democratic way.

Lying to the opposition that a vote would be held the next day, and then holding it when the opposition left is hardly democratic. But they didn't want a public debate. Many more examples.

Why did they act in such a way, when they had a majority and with coalition partners, a very big one?

Too lazy, things to hide in the detail, not wanting discussion and accountability, or simply arrogant? Who knows but they left themselves wide open for a coup which duly happened.

Politicians and the elite hiso wealthy and their clans wouldn't get away with such behavior in real democracies. But that's the rub, things are different here and until there are some very fundamental changes in society nothing will change much.

The PTP government was elected, in an internationally monitored election deemed to represent the will of the voters. They were attempting to hold another election even though they were at a low point in popularity and would have suffered. None of the problems you mentioned, or rather alluded to, were of a magnitude such that they could not have been dealt with by the courts or elections. There was no need for a coup. Got it?

Edited February 9, 2016 by heybruce

[heybruce]

A lot of the posters are hammering on about what has NOT been done about corruption under Prayuth. But in actual fact we have seen a massive civil service shakeup, regulations passed with clear timelines on how long various tasks in reviewing applications etc. should take (strict timelines I may add) removal or shifting of department heads etc. all to sever former cash flows for the civil servants concerned. In fact in many departments the civil servants are not happy with the changes (I wonder why not?).

But like everything in Thailand, they only seem to be doing something against those at the bottom of the pecking order. When will they start doing something about those with real power?

Perhaps you could provide links that explain in greater detail all these anti-corruption changes. Is transparency in government spending, including the military, part of these changes? How about regular asset declarations by all people in government, including the military, in a position to influence spending? What conflict of interest laws and regulations have been implemented? Is the press free to perform its role as an outside government watchdog?

I am not defending the junta. Just pointing out that there have in fact been changes. I do not support the coup or the present government. I think that they are making a hash of things, including their argument that they are working on making Thailand a corruption free country. However, the things that they have done in regard to the civil service are things that no elected government would dare do or even want to do (Licensing Facilitation Act 2558, which more accurately should be translated as the Facilitation of Approval Review Act). The ministers involved would be at the trough with their civil servant brethren.

As I said a lot more needs to be done, especially in regard to those in real power. As to the issues you raised, you know that transparency is never going to happen, at least in our lifetimes, and they are never going to introduce laws that directly impact themselves. So, no, I don't think we are ever going to see asset declarations for all and sundry and they are going to keep strict control over the press and attempt to control social media. These latter two, however, are likely to backfire in the long term and further turn the general public against them.

Until Joe public (the Thai public and not armchair warriors) stands up en masse, we are not going to see the changes Thailand needs for a better future, which will be a future many of the elite do not want to see as they will have to start working within the system and become accountable. A system where nepotism, patronage and name dropping is no longer tolerated, where criminals no matter their social status are punished, where land is not only taken away from no name national forest trespassers but also those with famous family names and connections.

Perhaps, and only perhaps, we are seeing some movement in this respect, with the CP insider trading case and the direct impact it has had on that company as a result. But I will not hold my breath waiting as I do not have a death wish.

"Until Joe public (the Thai public and not armchair warriors) stands up en masse, we are not going to see the changes Thailand needs for a better future..."

I agree. However if the Thai public rises up under a military government determined to hold power it will be a bloodbath. That's why I'm not a fan of military rule. It they rise up in a democracy the politicians will have to appease them.

A lot of people feign outrage that the voters don't make eliminating corruption their top priority during the times between military rule. Too bad. The Thai voters can decide for themselves what their top priorities are for elected government. Besides, until democracy is well entrenched a democratic government dare not upset the military with things like transparency and thorough, independent audits, it would prompt another coup.