On 9/20/2016 at 6:23 PM, z42 said:

Absolutely incredible. This guy seemingly has less morals than the other one.

Such a shame that he has carte blanche to do anything and will remain untouchable for a long, long time to come.

 

The current junta has very little credibility to begin with. But when stuff like this is allowed to go on unabated it just makes an even bigger mockery of the message they want to project (even though most with even an ounce of intelligence can see through it anyway).

 

Pathetic ?

This is just what happens every time there's a coup. Then they'll go back to civilian government for a while in hopes the public will forget, and the public will forget, and then they'll have another coup to protect the public from the corruption of the civilian politicians. This is how things have worked ever since Phibulsongkhram kicked Pridi out.

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

I think you're being facetious, but I'm not sure.  However, if you paid your brother with taxpayer's money, then you are guilty of nepotism.

It does not have to be taxpayers money to be nepotism  just "using your power or influence to favour relatives or friends , especially by giving them jobs "[that is a quote ]but i am sure the taxman thinks i still have some with his name on it, and yes  i was having a laugh 555   ps brothers son...and he was not that good..

Here's the new boss. Same as the old boss. 

Off topic deflection posts and replies have been removed. 

7 hours ago, jayboy said:

Of course it would be nice if the forum hardliners publicly recognised they had shown poor judgement - but human beings are frail vain creatures and it takes intellect, self confidence and character to admit error.

But who knows? We may be surprised.

 

I made the mistake, back in April, of admitting that I, like many others, was relieved when the farce that was the Yingluck "government" came to an end, and wildly optimistic in the very early days after Prayuth took over, and how that optimism soon faded, along with Thailand's democracy, economy, freedoms, and international reputation - I was pounced upon as a "Pollyanna" that had lost "any future credibility in my politically-inclined jewels of wisdom on this forum."

 

Note that my optimism lasted mere days, I can't imagine how hard it would be to 'come out' after cheering for them for over 2.5 years!

On 9/20/2016 at 7:14 PM, jamesbrock said:

 

This overt nepotism, and the story of Preecha's wife getting treatment usually reserved for those way above her station, clearly shows what they think of themselves.

 

If there is any doubt:

 

A gentleman wouldn't sit like that!  Remember that old saying " You can put an orangutan in a tuxedo and let it be chauffeur driven around  in a Rolls Royce, but it's still an orangutan"  Well, maybe you haven't heard that one before....but it's true!

1 hour ago, Happy Grumpy said:

Here's the new boss. Same as the old boss. 

except he won't be - will he .....

An entertaining story for an (very brave) investigating journalist would be too find out what families got all the road repair contracts during the last couple of years.

Edited September 21, 20169 yr by HiSoLowSoNoSo

On 9/20/2016 at 4:19 PM, ChrisY1 said:

These people simply have no morals......a fine example of a failed society........I would be surprised if Prayuth even makes a mention of this......it's simply business as usual!

 

I guess The Thais have no words for "Decency" and "Morals" !?!?! whoever gets in power will be corrupt and a Despot....!!!

19 hours ago, starky said:

Not another but but but Thaksin response. Thaksin hasnt been in power for a long time. Arguably he was pulling Yingluks strings but she is no longer in power either. You cant keep pointing to the Thaksins as an excuse for the continual and ongoing failings of this junta. Especially when this current govt. holds themselves above reproach and the whole basis of thier coup was to fight corruption and to stop all the things that the Thaksins were guilty of. I know you are saying they are all as bad as each other but continually dragging Thaksin back into the arguement serves no purpose. Im sorry the old kindergarten but they did it too excuse doesnt hold any water. In fact it just makes them look even more ridiculous (If thats even possible). I do agree with your statement that Thailand will never have a corruption free govt.

 

Thaksin, in various political guises has been in power for most of this century. Either directly or by proxy puppets. Anyone who thinks it arguable he was pulling Yingluck's strings is naive at best. She did as instructed and he even reshuffled her cabinet for her.

The fact he was in control for most of this century makes it reasonable to use him as a comparison and serves that purpose. Even though he and those who support want to just brush it all under the nearest carpet.

 

What is more relevant is what, anything or nothing, is being done by the current government to tackle the corruption that riddles and pervades everything. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Thaksin, in various political guises has been in power for most of this century. Either directly or by proxy puppets. Anyone who thinks it arguable he was pulling Yingluck's strings is naive at best. She did as instructed and he even reshuffled her cabinet for her.

The fact he was in control for most of this century makes it reasonable to use him as a comparison and serves that purpose. Even though he and those who support want to just brush it all under the nearest carpet.

 

What is more relevant is what, anything or nothing, is being done by the current government to tackle the corruption that riddles and pervades everything. 

 

 

I agree to compare with Thaksin, as you advocate.

Thaksin got 2 years for conflict of interest. This is also an obvious (even more than Thaksin's wife case) conflict of interest. How much will members of the Chan family get?

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Thaksin, in various political guises has been in power for most of this century. Either directly or by proxy puppets. Anyone who thinks it arguable he was pulling Yingluck's strings is naive at best. She did as instructed and he even reshuffled her cabinet for her.

The fact he was in control for most of this century makes it reasonable to use him as a comparison and serves that purpose. Even though he and those who support want to just brush it all under the nearest carpet.

 

What is more relevant is what, anything or nothing, is being done by the current government to tackle the corruption that riddles and pervades everything. 

 

 

Missed the point entirely. Many of us on here have had to listen to the fan club sucking up and toadying on about how great and good the junta will be. How everything is going to change and thank the lord we got rid of the shins with their corruption, nepotism and cronyism.  Now that it has been proven that this mob is just as bad or potentially worse the tune has changed to  its ok because it's no worse than anything the ptp or Thaksin ever did. Only problem being this mob has blanket immunity for everything and anything they ever do with no way to ever remove them from power. At least the shins could have been voted out if the Thai people didn't want them there. How does this mob get removed? Only one way and it involves much more bloodshed than the red shirts were ever responsible for.

15 hours ago, jayboy said:

Of course it would be nice if the forum hardliners publicly recognised they had shown poor judgement - but human beings are frail vain creatures and it takes intellect, self confidence and character to admit error.

 

 

Why would it be nice? What's that, about vanity?

 

The only poor judgement that needs to be recognized is that which is in current use.

6 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

Thaksin, in various political guises has been in power for most of this century.

1916-2016?

Thaksin became prime minister in 2001, followed by two military coups and Democtrat government. A bit of an exaggeration maybe to say Thaksin has been in power for almost a century?

But bless your passion. It is only bounded by your faith and not by any facts.