Don’t waste coup – reform country, Yingluck tells junta

[Baerboxer]

6 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Nice try, how about this - 

 

The elected by a huge majority despite the system being gerrymandered by a previous couple of coups (one military, one judicial) and in spite of this overwhelming popularity she still did the right thing by disbanding parliament and calling for early elections when a minority mob (military + elites + a few southern rubber farmers) took to the streets breaking countless laws causing chaos and death only to be removed as caretaker PM by corrupted courts for nonsense reasons (much like Samak and the cooking show) pot calling the UNELECTED kettle black.

 

Oh please no need to make fairy stories up! Are you a copy writer for a PR team?

 

That huge electoral majority was the largest minority vote. She said for weeks she never ever dissolve parliament, just before her brother instructed her to do just that. The protests against the attempt to push through, without regard for parliamentary procedure and process, including her lying to people it had been withdrawn when the Thaksin favoring version was the only one not withdrawn, were significant. Did you go and see - I did. Her brother's rent a mob and broken countless laws to in order to get the previous government out. 

 

Nonsense reasons - she moved someone out of his job so someone else could take it to create a space to put a family stooge into a key role. Samak was removed because he broke the rules and then lied about it. It seems a Shin family (and crony) trait to lie, break rules, believe the laws don't apply to them and then plead everything is always politically motivated when they get caught. I guess they must be upset that attempts to bribe and intimidate the courts and judges failed.

 

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Oh please no need to make fairy stories up! Are you a copy writer for a PR team?

 

That huge electoral majority was the largest minority vote. She said for weeks she never ever dissolve parliament, just before her brother instructed her to do just that. The protests against the attempt to push through, without regard for parliamentary procedure and process, including her lying to people it had been withdrawn when the Thaksin favoring version was the only one not withdrawn, were significant. Did you go and see - I did. Her brother's rent a mob and broken countless laws to in order to get the previous government out. 

 

Nonsense reasons - she moved someone out of his job so someone else could take it to create a space to put a family stooge into a key role. Samak was removed because he broke the rules and then lied about it. It seems a Shin family (and crony) trait to lie, break rules, believe the laws don't apply to them and then plead everything is always politically motivated when they get caught. I guess they must be upset that attempts to bribe and intimidate the courts and judges failed.

 

Gee, breaking laws, lying, nepotism, human trafficking (oops, that's the military).

 

You list a lot of reasons for an election and a lot of reasons why voters should have chosen a different party, had they been given the chance.  In fact, the correct response the to situation was an election, not a coup.

[Baerboxer]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

What major reforms do you think the Shins should have done?  Has the military done any of these reforms?  Has the military reformed anything?

 

Well, there are enough posts on TVF to inform you of the areas that people think should be reformed - the justice system and all elements therein; the lack of democracy and HR; the inequalities that pervade society; the poor education system; and the massive corruption that pervades all aspects of society,

 

Now you can tell us where the Shins reformed any of these? Yingluck and some nice photo shoots. Remember her standing in front of the no corruption sign? How ironic. She changed, or rather her brother changed ministers so rapidly it's hardly surprising nothing was really reformed.

 

As to day, not a lot. And as many point out on here, highly selective. 

 

But this article is about Yingluck. And she did little other than travel at tax payers expense and be a figure head.

 

 

[Smarter Than You]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Oh please no need to make fairy stories up! Are you a copy writer for a PR team?

 That huge electoral majority was the largest minority vote. She said for weeks she never ever dissolve parliament, just before her brother instructed her to do just that. The protests against the attempt to push through, without regard for parliamentary procedure and process, including her lying to people it had been withdrawn when the Thaksin favoring version was the only one not withdrawn, were significant. Did you go and see - I did. Her brother's rent a mob and broken countless laws to in order to get the previous government out. 

 

Nonsense reasons - she moved someone out of his job so someone else could take it to create a space to put a family stooge into a key role. Samak was removed because he broke the rules and then lied about it. It seems a Shin family (and crony) trait to lie, break rules, believe the laws don't apply to them and then plead everything is always politically motivated when they get caught. I guess they must be upset that attempts to bribe and intimidate the courts and judges failed.

 

1. The election results of 2011: 

                                    PTP                     Democrats

Last election	Did not contest	164 seats, 30.30%
Seats before	189	173
Seats won	265	159
Seat change	76	14
Popular vote	15,744,190	11,433,762
Percentage	48.41%	35.15%

 

2. She said for weeks she never ever dissolve parliament, just before her brother instructed her to do just that. So she did dissolve parliament

3. Nonsense reasons - she moved someone out of his job so someone else could take it. Exactly, nonsense!

 

[Fulwell53]

The equivalent of having hitler giving advice on how to organise a bar mitzvah.

The woman needs driving out of the country and living in exile with her seedy corrupt sibling

Edited May 22, 2017 by Fulwell53

[Saladin]

I would like to see a balance sheet of what have been the pluses and minuses of three years of military dictatorship. It is apparent that there is much more public order but what else?

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Gee, breaking laws, lying, nepotism, human trafficking (oops, that's the military).

 

You list a lot of reasons for an election and a lot of reasons why voters should have chosen a different party, had they been given the chance.  In fact, the correct response the to situation was an election, not a coup.

 

Indeed. But neither the Shins nor those opposing them would have accepted an election result peacefully; nor abide by any rules but their own. 

 

Is it really acceptable to have a non elected criminal whose a fugitive from justice, actually paying a salary to MP's who form the government and largest minority in parliament? And for those MP's and the partly leader, who happens to be his sister, trying to force an amnesty whitewash through for him without even bothering to follow parliamentary procedure? 

 

Seriously, do really think that should be allowed?

[Baerboxer]

8 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

1. The election results of 2011: 

                                    PTP                     Democrats

Last election	Did not contest	164 seats, 30.30%
Seats before	189	173
Seats won	265	159
Seat change	76	14
Popular vote	15,744,190	11,433,762
Percentage	48.41%	35.15%

 

2. She said for weeks she never ever dissolve parliament, just before her brother instructed her to do just that. So she did dissolve parliament

3. Nonsense reasons - she moved someone out of his job so someone else could take it. Exactly, nonsense!

 

The constituency votes were:

 

No.1 Pheu Thai	12,211,604	% = 44.3
No.10 Democrat	8,907,140   % =	32.3

 

Source: same wikipedia you used. So a majority of the electorate didn't vote PTP. The largest minority did.

 

Yep, she dissolved parliament. Just has her brother did before her.

 

If you think it's acceptable for politicians to ignore the rules for nepotism then that's up to you. Understandable that a Shin fan would.

[pentap]

She's brave and attractive. 555

[Eric Loh]

The amount of blatant corruption, nepotism, cronyism and the damage to the economy in this junta government really made the Yingluck's government looks good. The junta promised reforms and nothing fulfilled and Yingluck was not the only one that criticize. Ahbisit, Chavalit, industrial leaders, academics and ordinary people on the street said the same thing. Gosh even ex-PDRC supporters are saying the same thing. 

[champers]

4 hours ago, owl sees all said:

At the last election her party gained over 70% of the vote. She, through her government, had an obligation to try to redistribute Thailand's huge wealth.

 

The 5 cornerstones of Thailand are;

 

Monachy

Military

Religion

Courts

Parliament 

 

She found out, as did her brother, that democracy, through parliament, was by far the weakest.

A house with 5 corners?

[Smarter Than You]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

The constituency votes were:

 

No.1 Pheu Thai	12,211,604	% = 44.3
No.10 Democrat	8,907,140   % =	32.3

 

Source: same wikipedia you used. So a majority of the electorate didn't vote PTP. The largest minority did.

 

Yep, she dissolved parliament. Just has her brother did before her.

 

If you think it's acceptable for politicians to ignore the rules for nepotism then that's up to you. Understandable that a Shin fan would.

In both popular vote and constituency vote, PTP beat the Democrats by about 4,000,000 votes.

 

A thorough thumping if ever there was one!

 

What I don't understand is what point you're trying to make? Yingluck only won by 4 million so she is illegitimate but Prayuth who bypassed elections altogether and used his tanks is legitimate?

Updated: When transfers are acceptable

Back in May 2014, then Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra was dismissed by a verdict of the Constitutional Court. Her “crime” was to transfer one official, or as the New York Times stated it, “having impure motives when she transferred a bureaucrat three years ago.” Reasonable commentators referred to this verdict as biased, politicized and ridiculous.

Yet if the Constitutional Court declared her single act improper then, what should it say now about what the Bangkok Post says: is a set of transfers impacting “73 positions at the Metropolitan Police Bureau … and 130 positions at the Central Investigation Bureau…”? We ask because that Post says these transfers “involve many officers from the old power clique of the Yingluck administration.”

We know that the Constitutional Court will say nothing. Because this court is politically biased towards anti-democrats and royalists, it is more likely to cheer the police transfers.

Double standards define Thailand’s judiciary and there is no justice.

The new officers brought in are mostly close to General Prawit Wongsuwan and worked for the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime.

[canuckamuck]

The best reform would be to make it illegal for the military to become involved with national politics.

[wakeupplease]

6 hours ago, steven100 said:

Yingluck trying to tell Khun Prayuth how to run the country ....

Someone needs too, try the 5 years olds at the local primary school

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, Smarter Than You said:

In both popular vote and constituency vote, PTP beat the Democrats by about 4,000,000 votes.

 

A thorough thumping if ever there was one!

 

What I don't understand is what point you're trying to make? Yingluck only won by 4 million so she is illegitimate but Prayuth who bypassed elections altogether and used his tanks is legitimate?

Updated: When transfers are acceptable

Back in May 2014, then Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra was dismissed by a verdict of the Constitutional Court. Her “crime” was to transfer one official, or as the New York Times stated it, “having impure motives when she transferred a bureaucrat three years ago.” Reasonable commentators referred to this verdict as biased, politicized and ridiculous.

Yet if the Constitutional Court declared her single act improper then, what should it say now about what the Bangkok Post says: is a set of transfers impacting “73 positions at the Metropolitan Police Bureau … and 130 positions at the Central Investigation Bureau…”? We ask because that Post says these transfers “involve many officers from the old power clique of the Yingluck administration.”

We know that the Constitutional Court will say nothing. Because this court is politically biased towards anti-democrats and royalists, it is more likely to cheer the police transfers.

Double standards define Thailand’s judiciary and there is no justice.

The new officers brought in are mostly close to General Prawit Wongsuwan and worked for the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime.

 

The point is Yingluck never had a majority. She won by a large margin for sure but didn't achieve over 50% of the votes.

 

The NYT - hardly the world's most unbiased news outlet. Reasonable commentators, now who might they be: any who agree with that view? The usual "unquoted sources"?

 

She moved someone out on purpose, ignoring the rules that prevent that happening. Just like her party and its members broke parliamentary rules. Arrogance, stupidity, a belief they can do what they like and either bluster, bribe or intimidate their way out? You chose.

 

The justice system, including the police is in dire need of reform. But any one in charge seeks to cram it with cronies. That others have done it and continue to do it is not justification for anyone.

[Baerboxer]

17 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The amount of blatant corruption, nepotism, cronyism and the damage to the economy in this junta government really made the Yingluck's government looks good. The junta promised reforms and nothing fulfilled and Yingluck was not the only one that criticize. Ahbisit, Chavalit, industrial leaders, academics and ordinary people on the street said the same thing. Gosh even ex-PDRC supporters are saying the same thing. 

 

Come on, making the Yingluck, or should it be Thaksin, government look good. 555! That's stretching it too far.

[Baerboxer]

24 minutes ago, pentap said:

She's brave and attractive. 555

 and very very rich, with an even richer big brother.

 

Amazing how you can still look young and attractive when your're a billionaire.

[saminoz]

Far from "wasting" the coup, I believe that the silly little General, his clueless accomplices and the rest of the cabal are truly making hay while their sun shines!

 

I doubt that any of them are having sleepless nights worrying about not achieveing enough.

[ujayujay]

Oh yes... she's a big Example for political improvement

[YetAnother]

my fav yingluk story is the one where she answered 'that was just campaign speech' to the query as to why she wasnt fulfilling her promises; once you get elected , it is just steal,steal,steal ; nepotism isnt bad as 'everyone does it (!!)'; corruption is standard practice, nothing bad; serving the public ? PLEASE.....

[phycokiller]

are we not allowed to say that the reason for the coup was to make sure the succession went peacefully and without a hitch and that so far it has been a complete success

[TonyBB]

They say that if you put 100 monkeys in a room with typewriters and wait long enough, eventually you'll get Shakespeare.  I have a similar theory: If you wait long enough, every now and then the truth will come out of a politician's mouth.

[saminoz]

24 minutes ago, TonyBB said:

They say that if you put 100 monkeys in a room with typewriters and wait long enough, eventually you'll get Shakespeare.  I have a similar theory: If you wait long enough, every now and then the truth will come out of a politician's mouth.

This holds true for Thailand but, instead of coming up with Shakespeare, the 100 monkeys under the NCPO managed to produce a constitution that no-one could read!

Edited May 22, 2017 by saminoz
embellishment

[JAG]

Her first car policy has put lots of cars on the road without the much needed infrastructure and has put many in debt......not a great move, there were so many other policies she could have done instead of populist ones !

She's talking out of her..... again

Says the fellow with a new car as his avatar...

 

[JAG]

 
Totally agree Jim, But she wasn't removed by any coup. She dissolved parliament and became the caretaker PM. She was then removed by a court for an illegal abuse of power before the coup. The Shins PR team and sadly lazy journalists must think being removed by a coup sounds better as it represents her a a victim rather than a wrong doer.
 
The only things that was massively increasing under the Shins was, surprise surprise, their family fortune. 
 
If anybody thinks Thailand would have been better off under a Thaksin owned PTP once they got their hands on that 2.2 trillion baht loan they're living in cuckoo land.

How about applying the same forensic reasoning to the reason why the election was prevented then...

[billd766]

6 hours ago, champers said:

The people of Thailand could have voted her out. That's democracy.

 

Actually they couldn't as she was NEVER and elected MP with a party seat. She became the PM because the PTP was entitled to party list seats and she was #1 on the list for a party seat.

 

The fact that her bother, Thaksin Shinawatra, owned the PTP is merely co-incidental and had little to do with it. (Sarcasm mode on full power).

 

I could ask why when she was the PM and in power what she did to reform politics and power in Thailand but I would be wasting my breath.

Edited May 22, 2017 by billd766
Added extra text

[JAG]

 
Indeed. But neither the Shins nor those opposing them would have accepted an election result peacefully; nor abide by any rules but their own. 
 
Is it really acceptable to have a non elected criminal whose a fugitive from justice, actually paying a salary to MP's who form the government and largest minority in parliament? And for those MP's and the partly leader, who happens to be his sister, trying to force an amnesty whitewash through for him without even bothering to follow parliamentary procedure? 
 
Seriously, do really think that should be allowed?

Your first paragraph - which I assume would form the basis of the answer ( which you and several others avoid like the plague) to the question why was the election prevented - is a pretty far fetched surmisal. Is there any evidence to support it?

[billd766]

4 hours ago, brucec64 said:

All of her comments are valid. There was a considerable economic cost from the coup (far outweighing rice scheme costs) and no meaningful reform. The economy is a mess, and bombings in the South and Bangkok show that peace and reconciliation have not been achieved.

Apart from submarines and beach chairs, what have they really accomplished?

Sent from my SM-J710F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

A lot out in rural Thailand. Roads have been rebuilt and upgraded, the electricity supply improved, more water storage, more boreholes to supply water to thousands of villages nationwide, they are trying to reform local politics to make the Puu Yai Ban more accountable and only have a 4 year term instead of to the age of 60 they are forcing the mobile phone companies plus TOT and TOT to extend 4G coverage and fibre optics to as many small villages as possible.

 

Having looked once again at my list I believe you are right, they have achieved nothing. Either that or they have achieved a hell of a lot more than you realise.

 

But of course you would have little knowledge of that living in the city and hating the Junta as you do.

Edited May 22, 2017 by billd766
Added extra text

[billd766]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

Yingluck was not removed by the coup, the elected party was removed by the coup, and democratic government along with it.

 

There was NO elected party removed by the coup. There was only a caretaker government which was removed by the courts.

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

An elected government that responded with far greater restraint to protests than its predecessor, protests that had little impact on the vast majority of the country, a government that was wisely letting protests die of apathy and attempting to hold elections, and was toppled by a military and elite desperate to prevent elections.

 

The elected government as you call it was dissolved by Yingluck Shinawatra (who was the elected PM) 6 months previously after a disastrous attempt at trying to ram an amnesty bill through (not the one voted on earlier in the evening) and lying to the parliamentary opposition that there would be no further business that night.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, champers said:

A house with 5 corners?

 

How about the Pentagon with 5 corners? Off topic I know.