Boycott camp rejects results of 'fake' referendum

[JAG]

13 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

Indeed im shouting conspiracy, I just told you that the other charters had similar turnout percentages and that only elections had higher ones and gave a good explanation (money and perceived importance) but you go on hammering about the fingerprints.

 

In an other topic turnout percentages were given for the previous charter and as far as i remember it was not that much different. 

Roblock, because you "told me" something does not automatically invalidate any other views. I gave what I consider a reasoned opinion. Disagree by all means, but "I told you" does not end the debate.

Personally I suspect payment has a marginal effect on both turnout and result.

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, JAG said:

Roblock, because you "told me" something does not automatically invalidate any other views. I gave what I consider a reasoned opinion. Disagree by all means, but "I told you" does not end the debate.

Personally I suspect payment has a marginal effect on both turnout and result.

No it does not but it sound quite silly if the other vote on the charter has the similar vote turnout as this one and you blame fingerprints for the low turnout here. What was it then that made the other turnout so low. In my opinion it just shows that people just don't think referendums about charters are important. Now if there was a big difference between the previous charter turnout and this one I would give it to you that it could be the fingerprint thing. But there is not.

 

Now elections always have higher turnouts because of payment. I personally suspect payment makes people vote (im not going to get into a discussion if it influences it or not) but if they don't vote but get paid they get into trouble (or at least the guy that paid them and promised votes did and in turn he will caution the people). Ad to that the perceived importance of elections versus a referendum and you easily explain the difference. 

 

But hey keep it on the fingerprints its much nicer to blame the government then the people for not voting and loosing. So yes I would scream tinfoil hat.

 

The only thing I do agree with is that the No camp had no real options to campaign, but on the other hand everyone knew the PTP was against it it was in the news quite often. So if their voters still voted yes.. then they just did not listen.

[heybruce]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

No it does not but it sound quite silly if the other vote on the charter has the similar vote turnout as this one and you blame fingerprints for the low turnout here. What was it then that made the other turnout so low. In my opinion it just shows that people just don't think referendums about charters are important. Now if there was a big difference between the previous charter turnout and this one I would give it to you that it could be the fingerprint thing. But there is not.

 

Now elections always have higher turnouts because of payment. I personally suspect payment makes people vote (im not going to get into a discussion if it influences it or not) but if they don't vote but get paid they get into trouble (or at least the guy that paid them and promised votes did and in turn he will caution the people). Ad to that the perceived importance of elections versus a referendum and you easily explain the difference. 

 

But hey keep it on the fingerprints its much nicer to blame the government then the people for not voting and loosing. So yes I would scream tinfoil hat.

 

The only thing I do agree with is that the No camp had no real options to campaign, but on the other hand everyone knew the PTP was against it it was in the news quite often. So if their voters still voted yes.. then they just did not listen.

" Now elections always have higher turnouts because of payment."

 

I assume you are referring to the anecdotal reports of people accepting money for votes, with no indication of who they were being paid to vote for or whether they actually voted the way they were paid to vote. 

 

Have you considered the possibility that the turn-out for constitutional referendums is low because the choices are:

 

A.  Vote for the military constitution.

B.  Vote to allow the military to choose and impose some other constitution.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

I have no such illusions TYVM.  But I can differentiate between what I imagine and hard reality. But it seems that the hard reality, that the Shinawatras are mega-scale criminals is hard to accept to some of us, preferring the "little Johnny did it too" defence. 

"little Johnny" didn't just abuse his office to commit white-collar fraud, though the military does that also.  The military engaged in human trafficking/slavery, gambling, prostitution, extortion, and every other crime that would line the officer's pockets.  And let's not forget treason.  They use the fact that no government dares to challenge the military to commit these crimes with impunity.

 

Some people are incapable of recognizing the lesser of two evils.  I don't know if this is due to a lack of intelligence or lack of a moral compass.

Edited August 11, 2016 by heybruce
clarification

[Alive]

Just amazing that you guys ignore the fact that many voters weren't at their home districts to vote. Two weeks before the referendum( Jul 19,20) many rural working poor people traveled home for Asah Bucha and Khao Pansa and around this time many rural young men become monks. This would be an expensive trip home to play a part in these activities. Now, tomorrow is Mother's Day(Aug12) where all the working women in Bangkok who have kids upcountry want to be there for their kids and other Thais want to go home to see their mothers and grandmothers. Some chose this weekend to spend their money to go home. The referendum was between these two holidays. You know that something like 2% of Thais filed for voting in other provinces. So this would greatly affect the vote if these people would could vote didn't make the trip home. And many didn't. Last weekend Bangkok was as busy as ever when it should have emptied out of rural folks going home for the referendum vote.

[baboon]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

 

Problem is here that you can't try a case in absentia. That is why he can wait them out.  (please correct me if I am wrong cause this is what I have read and have been told)

I thought that law had changed recently, though I am quite willing to stand corrected.

Even If I am, I still don't think more serious charges will be filed anyway as I imagine he has enough inside knowledge to bring the whole house of cards down with him. What would any of us do if we had nothing left to lose?

[Shawn0000]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

I thought that law had changed recently, though I am quite willing to stand corrected.

Even If I am, I still don't think more serious charges will be filed anyway as I imagine he has enough inside knowledge to bring the whole house of cards down with him. What would any of us do if we had nothing left to lose?

 

I think there is still a 10 year prescription period and a maximum 15 years statute of limitations on financial crimes.

[dageurreotype]

17 hours ago, Winniedapu said:

 

 

OK, who left the door open? Another one escaped. Own up...

 

Winnie

 

No unfortunately what Seajae says is true. I was there in the thick of it in Silom/Sathorn following the events unfolding hourly. Including the fiery incitements to burn down Bangkok (bring your gasoline!) the attacks on Central World, the skytrain, and the looks on the line of upcountry redshirts as the bought and paid for riot inciters/men in black were paraded past them, 'who are they?'

 

Tired of this 'military killed them' nonsensense. Everyone was praying for milksop Abhisit to do something.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

I thought that law had changed recently, though I am quite willing to stand corrected.

Even If I am, I still don't think more serious charges will be filed anyway as I imagine he has enough inside knowledge to bring the whole house of cards down with him. What would any of us do if we had nothing left to lose?

If that law is amended that would be a good thing. 

I am not sure what he would do.. he has shown he is capable of doing a lot. However nothing left to lose.. that is only the case if he gets extradited and sits in jail Before that time he has million / billions.

 

 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, Alive said:

Just amazing that you guys ignore the fact that many voters weren't at their home districts to vote. Two weeks before the referendum( Jul 19,20) many rural working poor people traveled home for Asah Bucha and Khao Pansa and around this time many rural young men become monks. This would be an expensive trip home to play a part in these activities. Now, tomorrow is Mother's Day(Aug12) where all the working women in Bangkok who have kids upcountry want to be there for their kids and other Thais want to go home to see their mothers and grandmothers. Some chose this weekend to spend their money to go home. The referendum was between these two holidays. You know that something like 2% of Thais filed for voting in other provinces. So this would greatly affect the vote if these people would could vote didn't make the trip home. And many didn't. Last weekend Bangkok was as busy as ever when it should have emptied out of rural folks going home for the referendum vote.

 

Just amazing that you think that only NO voters would travel home. Do you think that people from the South don't work in BKK. It goes two ways. 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

" Now elections always have higher turnouts because of payment."

 

I assume you are referring to the anecdotal reports of people accepting money for votes, with no indication of who they were being paid to vote for or whether they actually voted the way they were paid to vote. 

 

Have you considered the possibility that the turn-out for constitutional referendums is low because the choices are:

 

A.  Vote for the military constitution.

B.  Vote to allow the military to choose and impose some other constitution.

 

I know of enough people who got paid to vote first hand. So its not something does not happen. I have on purpose mentioned a few times that I wont be drawn into a discussion if this helps to persuade people to vote for the right people. I said it makes them vote because they got paid.. i did not say they vote the way the paymaster wants them to pay. That is an other discussion. 

[Alive]

I wasn't suggesting it was only no voters.  I'm suggesting that most of the people voting in Esarn were there and didn't have to travel home. Did you see any news reports of a mass exodus last weekend of voters traveling out of Bangkok to the North or South? No, but every major holiday that's what you see. People just didn't go home to vote.

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, Alive said:

I wasn't suggesting it was only no voters.  I'm suggesting that most of the people voting in Esarn were there and didn't have to travel home. Did you see any news reports of a mass exodus last weekend of voters traveling out of Bangkok to the North or South? No, but every major holiday that's what you see. People just didn't go home to vote.

 

They did not care enough about it, and the fact that the same applies for YES voters then it just would not have made a difference. South voted more YES and for sure not all of them went home too. 

 

 

[sjaak327]

On ‎8‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 4:56 AM, sweatalot said:

Seems they are still on their master's payroll 

 

Hmm, which paymaster one wonders, Abhisit ? Thaksin ? This referendum was flawed before it even began, as it offered no choice, either vote yes and you get the military in control, vote no, and they introduce a new one without a referendum, no doubt pretty much the same charter and they would still be in control.

 

The period leading up to the referendum, there was no open debate, people were not allowed to advocate people to vote either way, or to even explain why. Except of course for the government.

 

Isn't it telling that the south overwhelmingly voted yes, despite the fact that the democrats opposed the charter and the south has been a stronghold of that party for decades.

 

Either the result has been manipulated (no observers were allowed of course) or the fact that ballots have been fingerprinted has something to do with it ? The last fact alone is enough grounds to throw out the referendum of course.

 

As to the boycott camp, one has to wonder why they didn't vote in the first place, maybe because of the lack of choice, but showing up might have changed the result, and might have put more pressure on the Junta to leave and reinstate the 1997 constitution, one that wasn't drafted by a coup and was a democratic charter.

[Alive]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

 

I know of enough people who got paid to vote first hand. So its not something does not happen. I have on purpose mentioned a few times that I wont be drawn into a discussion if this helps to persuade people to vote for the right people. I said it makes them vote because they got paid.. i did not say they vote the way the paymaster wants them to pay. That is an other discussion. 

 

I can add to that that in my village up in the Northeast, the last election all three parties offered money to voters. The party that offered the most won the vote. It doesn't mean everyone takes money but there appears to be people offering it and the Democrat party candidate was one of those people.  Just a note. I'm totally against corruption but I've learned that it is the Democrat party and other parties candidates too. They are all corrupt. There's wasn't any money spent during the election so I don't think that kind of corruption is there. There is "corruption" in the way the referendum was brought to the public. There was a total lack of information and analysis which people should be able to listen to and make decisions from. I will not that if someone in the city who lives in a rural area got funds to go home for the election, they would probably be more likely to make that 7-10 hour trip. The regime needs to make it easy for the rural people to vote in the next election. Maybe they should let anyone from any part of the nation vote without registration on election day. If all the rural people in Bangkok and vicinity could vote with a simple ID and no pre-registration, that would be fair. As it is now, this regime and past governments seem to use voter disenfranchisement strategies to shut out the rural voters. Rural people have always worked in the BKK area and yet nothing really has been done to make it easy for them to vote. They are forced every election to make a choice about keeping their money or spending it for another election.  Their work empowers Bangkok but Bangkok and the Thai government doesn't do what it should to make them equal in terms of ease of voting. Things need to change but Thai people especially the rural people don't complain enough.

[Eric Loh]

51 minutes ago, dageurreotype said:

 

No unfortunately what Seajae says is true. I was there in the thick of it in Silom/Sathorn following the events unfolding hourly. Including the fiery incitements to burn down Bangkok (bring your gasoline!) the attacks on Central World, the skytrain, and the looks on the line of upcountry redshirts as the bought and paid for riot inciters/men in black were paraded past them, 'who are they?'

 

Tired of this 'military killed them' nonsensense. Everyone was praying for milksop Abhisit to do something.

 

So you was in the thick of action and probably dodged the live bullets from the soldiers and the snipers. I saw huge military presence and you only see red and black shirts. Amazing. 

[robblok]

Just now, Eric Loh said:

 

So you was in the thick of action and probably dodged the live bullets from the soldiers and the snipers. I saw huge military presence and you only see red and black shirts. Amazing. 

You were wearing red glasses, he did not. 

 

We all disagree on all the news and how things look and interpret things different. So if we foreigners think like this. Just imagine how polarized the Thais are. 

This will only be solved if the corruption in the government is solved. Then its no longer profitable to be a politician so they don't go all the way to get in government or to topple a government (reds and yellow both toppled a government) 

[scorecard]

9 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

 

So you was in the thick of action and probably dodged the live bullets from the soldiers and the snipers. I saw huge military presence and you only see red and black shirts. Amazing. 

 

He didn't say he ONLY saw red and black shorts.

 

What a convenient twist EL!

[scorecard]

29 minutes ago, Alive said:

 

I can add to that that in my village up in the Northeast, the last election all three parties offered money to voters. The party that offered the most won the vote. It doesn't mean everyone takes money but there appears to be people offering it and the Democrat party candidate was one of those people.  Just a note. I'm totally against corruption but I've learned that it is the Democrat party and other parties candidates too. They are all corrupt. There's wasn't any money spent during the election so I don't think that kind of corruption is there. There is "corruption" in the way the referendum was brought to the public. There was a total lack of information and analysis which people should be able to listen to and make decisions from. I will not that if someone in the city who lives in a rural area got funds to go home for the election, they would probably be more likely to make that 7-10 hour trip. The regime needs to make it easy for the rural people to vote in the next election. Maybe they should let anyone from any part of the nation vote without registration on election day. If all the rural people in Bangkok and vicinity could vote with a simple ID and no pre-registration, that would be fair. As it is now, this regime and past governments seem to use voter disenfranchisement strategies to shut out the rural voters. Rural people have always worked in the BKK area and yet nothing really has been done to make it easy for them to vote. They are forced every election to make a choice about keeping their money or spending it for another election.  Their work empowers Bangkok but Bangkok and the Thai government doesn't do what it should to make them equal in terms of ease of voting. Things need to change but Thai people especially the rural people don't complain enough.

 

You seem to be located everywhere.

[halloween]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

"little Johnny" didn't just abuse his office to commit white-collar fraud, though the military does that also.  The military engaged in human trafficking/slavery, gambling, prostitution, extortion, and every other crime that would line the officer's pockets.  And let's not forget treason.  They use the fact that no government dares to challenge the military to commit these crimes with impunity.

 

Some people are incapable of recognizing the lesser of two evils.  I don't know if this is due to a lack of intelligence or lack of a moral compass.

Get off your high horse. Trying to reduce Thaksin's crimes to white collar fraud is a bit sycophantic don't you think? You might like to take a look at the charges pending against him.

Yes, individual military officers are no doubt in all sorts of crimes. But should the country's leader be allowed to blatantly commit criminal acts and pervert the piss-poor democratic system the country is stuck with, because he throws a few pennies to his supporters. Calling removal of Thaksin or his puppets treason is a very long bow to pull - you might want to think who is this country's enemy.

I don't know where your moral compass points, but my stomach turns at the sight of that smug mongrel who has spent his working life robbing the Thai people pulling the strings and appointing other criminals to high office.  Can you point to any military officer committing worse crimes than Chalerm and sons?

[sjaak327]

Yet you have no problem when the military does the same, there are a few differences of course, the military has been robbing the country blind for a whole lot longer and they never received a mandate for doing so. They have killed many Thai citizens who had the audacity to get in their way.

 

Removing a government with elections pending (they managed to do this twice in 8 years !) is the very definition of treason, unless you don't respect the will of the Thai electorate. Talking about the country's enemy, let me give you a hint, Thai citizens aren't. not the students, not the red shirts and not the folks down south, all of which have been killed by the Thai military, such outstanding soldiers, experts at killing fellow countrymen. I bet your stomage doesn't turn on that right ?

[halloween]

3 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Yet you have no problem when the military does the same, there are a few differences of course, the military has been robbing the country blind for a whole lot longer and they never received a mandate for doing so. They have killed many Thai citizens who had the audacity to get in their way.

 

Removing a government with elections pending (they managed to do this twice in 8 years !) is the very definition of treason, unless you don't respect the will of the Thai electorate. Talking about the country's enemy, let me give you a hint, Thai citizens aren't. not the students, not the red shirts and not the folks down south, all of which have been killed by the Thai military, such outstanding soldiers, experts at killing fellow countrymen. I bet your stomage doesn't turn on that right ?

In your own person dictionary, maybe. Others know the real meaning of the word. You also forgot the key word "resigned" or if you like "caretaker".

Grouping people together to extend your time line is a bit simplistic, but yes the history of Thailands military is not wonderful. OTOH if you want to arm yourself and start indiscriminately firing explosive rounds around the capital in support of a criminal who has just had his wealth trimmed, don't expect any sympathy from me. As much as you might like to gloss over the actions of the red shirts, the forming of private and mercenary militia to destabilise the country is not the act of a friend.  Their continued use of intimidation and violence of those who oppose criminal regimes speaks for itself.

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

You were wearing red glasses, he did not. 

 

We all disagree on all the news and how things look and interpret things different. So if we foreigners think like this. Just imagine how polarized the Thais are. 

This will only be solved if the corruption in the government is solved. Then its no longer profitable to be a politician so they don't go all the way to get in government or to topple a government (reds and yellow both toppled a government) 

" This will only be solved if the corruption in the government is solved. Then its no longer profitable to be a politician"

 

But there's still good corruption money to be made in the military, especially when the military runs the country.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

Get off your high horse. Trying to reduce Thaksin's crimes to white collar fraud is a bit sycophantic don't you think? You might like to take a look at the charges pending against him.

Yes, individual military officers are no doubt in all sorts of crimes. But should the country's leader be allowed to blatantly commit criminal acts and pervert the piss-poor democratic system the country is stuck with, because he throws a few pennies to his supporters. Calling removal of Thaksin or his puppets treason is a very long bow to pull - you might want to think who is this country's enemy.

I don't know where your moral compass points, but my stomach turns at the sight of that smug mongrel who has spent his working life robbing the Thai people pulling the strings and appointing other criminals to high office.  Can you point to any military officer committing worse crimes than Chalerm and sons?

" Yes, individual military officers are no doubt in all sorts of crimes."

 

"individually"?  The entire military is corrupt.  I know you will ignore this reference again, but for the benefit or others:

 

"While there are wide-ranging examples of Thai military units or individuals involved or complicit on organised crime, there is no concrete evidence to suggest that the government or the military see this connection as a serious problem or working actively to alleviate it. There is extensive evidence of the military's involvement in criminal networks associated with narcotics, prostitution, human trafficking, and illegal casinos. Military and paramilitary officers have been involved individually, at senior and lower ranking levels. Evidence suggests that security officials are illegally paid "protection" money to ensure that illegal mafia operations are allowed to continue. Tackling this issue is difficult given that those responsible for enforcing the law may also be implicated in illicit activities."  http://government.defenceindex.org/downloads/docs/thailand.pdf

 

"But should the country's leader be allowed to blatantly commit criminal acts and pervert the piss-poor democratic system the country is stuck with, because he throws a few pennies to his supporters."

 

Once again, some people are incapable of choosing the lesser of two evils.  They are the ones who prefer corrupt military rule, seized at gunpoint, over corrupt democratic rule that came to power by elections and can be changed with an election.

 

"Can you point to any military officer committing worse crimes than Chalerm and sons?"

 

LtGen Manas perhaps?  http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/thai-general-among-72-indicted-over-human-trafficking

 

Of course Manas is an exception, collateral damage from when the RTP demonstrated that it can push back if the military threatens it.  Usually the military is above the law.

[heybruce]

23 minutes ago, halloween said:

In your own person dictionary, maybe. Others know the real meaning of the word. You also forgot the key word "resigned" or if you like "caretaker".

Grouping people together to extend your time line is a bit simplistic, but yes the history of Thailands military is not wonderful. OTOH if you want to arm yourself and start indiscriminately firing explosive rounds around the capital in support of a criminal who has just had his wealth trimmed, don't expect any sympathy from me. As much as you might like to gloss over the actions of the red shirts, the forming of private and mercenary militia to destabilise the country is not the act of a friend.  Their continued use of intimidation and violence of those who oppose criminal regimes speaks for itself.

 

" In your own person dictionary, maybe. Others know the real meaning of the word."

 

I am a retired military officer, I can assure you that removing an elected government by a military coup is definitely treason.  The detail about "caretaker" government is irrelevant, the caretaker government was the elected PTP government.

[halloween]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

" Yes, individual military officers are no doubt in all sorts of crimes."

 

"individually"?  The entire military is corrupt.  I know you will ignore this reference again, but for the benefit or others:

 

"While there are wide-ranging examples of Thai military units or individuals involved or complicit on organised crime, there is no concrete evidence to suggest that the government or the military see this connection as a serious problem or working actively to alleviate it. There is extensive evidence of the military's involvement in criminal networks associated with narcotics, prostitution, human trafficking, and illegal casinos. Military and paramilitary officers have been involved individually, at senior and lower ranking levels. Evidence suggests that security officials are illegally paid "protection" money to ensure that illegal mafia operations are allowed to continue. Tackling this issue is difficult given that those responsible for enforcing the law may also be implicated in illicit activities."  http://government.defenceindex.org/downloads/docs/thailand.pdf

 

"But should the country's leader be allowed to blatantly commit criminal acts and pervert the piss-poor democratic system the country is stuck with, because he throws a few pennies to his supporters."

 

Once again, some people are incapable of choosing the lesser of two evils.  They are the ones who prefer corrupt military rule, seized at gunpoint, over corrupt democratic rule that came to power by elections and can be changed with an election.

 

"Can you point to any military officer committing worse crimes than Chalerm and sons?"

 

LtGen Manas perhaps?  http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/thai-general-among-72-indicted-over-human-trafficking

 

Of course Manas is an exception, collateral damage from when the RTP demonstrated that it can push back if the military threatens it.  Usually the military is above the law.

Again you misjudge my thoughts. I do not prefer corrupt military rule, but applaud their efforts to remove and prosecute criminals, and hopefully to effect change in the Thai democratic system to prevent corrupt government being allowed to flourish. Reform of the system is far more than just badly needed, it is essential for a proper democracy to flourish. It will not happen any other way.

 

LtGen mana was indeed a criminal, but nobody unilaterally appointed HIM as DPM.

[Rancid]

Mind you at least they got the answer they wanted to the referendum. Better than the EU that holds referendums, then completely ignores the results they don't like. At least Thailand tries to look democratic rather than just dismissing the concept out of hand. Also hows that Brexit been progressing, or did the UK learn a thing or two from the EU?

[candide]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

Its impossible to track all voters back, however if you got fraud (a lot of ballots with the same print) its easy to track back to the person responsible (or at least involved) Because then you only have to track one or a few prints. You don't have to track millions (that is impossible).

 

Just accept your side lost because they just did not want to vote NO or were to lazy to go and vote. I am not perfectly happy with this new constitution either it has good parts (the removal of the statute of limitation on corruption cases and tougher penalties) and bad parts (the appointed senators).

 

 

Again, why is it forbidden to have any identification of the voter on the ballot in any democratic country? 

And even if you are right that in practical term it's nearly impossible to do (not sure, if you target a specific voting point, it may be only a few hundred ballots to check), with a military regime in place, military and police everywhere, etc.... it is very likely to cause fear among voters (in particular the ones who are not well educated and informed)

Now are you trying to explain us that this referendum process was free and fair? Human rights organisations and organisations who control elections don't think it was free and fair,  neither the EC and other countries, no serious media state it was a free and fair process (choose the one you like most: AFP, Reuters, BBC, Le Monde, El Pays, The Economist....etc).

 

And now we have a bunch of unchained contributors excited by the referendum results trying to explain that the referendum was free and fair, and that's only because we don't like the result that we state that the referendum was rigged.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

Again you misjudge my thoughts. I do not prefer corrupt military rule, but applaud their efforts to remove and prosecute criminals, and hopefully to effect change in the Thai democratic system to prevent corrupt government being allowed to flourish. Reform of the system is far more than just badly needed, it is essential for a proper democracy to flourish. It will not happen any other way.

 

LtGen mana was indeed a criminal, but nobody unilaterally appointed HIM as DPM.

You expect a corrupt military to clean up government in Thailand?

 

I assume that in the 1920's you would have expected Al Capone to clean up bootlegging in old Chicago, or in the 1990's you'd expect Pablo Escobar to stop the cocaine trade in Columbia.  Maybe you can ask ISIS to end terrorism in the MidEast.

 

Your last line is excellent.  Who unilaterally appointed Prayut as PM?  Oh, I remember, Prayut!

[halloween]

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You expect a corrupt military to clean up government in Thailand?

 

I assume that in the 1920's you would have expected Al Capone to clean up bootlegging in old Chicago, or in the 1990's you'd expect Pablo Escobar to stop the cocaine trade in Columbia.  Maybe you can ask ISIS to end terrorism in the MidEast.

 

Your last line is excellent.  Who unilaterally appointed Prayut as PM?  Oh, I remember, Prayut!

I have much more expectation of a military government, corrupt or not, to clean up the democratic system which doesn't effect them, than any elected government. Thaksinist governments have been in power for most of the last 15 years - what have they done to reduce corruption? Yingluk's STOP corruption was a joke even to her, before she reduced the funding of the anti-corruption bodies. Then she appointed Chalerm to look into corruption in the rice scam.  Nothing found.

Why don't you stop whining about the temporary military government and take a look at what you are advocating instead? Do you think allowing a corrupt billionaire to buy office and openly bribe MPs is acceptable or not?

BTW why doesn't your list of criminal organisations include PTP reducing corruption - it's equally as ridiculous.