Anti-graft body investigating my witnesses, Yingluck tells to court

[Smarter Than You]

46 minutes ago, seajae said:

maybe if she wasnt associated with so many corrupt people it wouldnt happen, like they say, when you lay with fleas.......

Are they really corrupt or is it just a tactic in the Juntas war on democracy?

[stephen tracy]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

How about the level of corruption involved up to and including ministers, and the sheer amount of money wasted?

 

BTW the "little Johnny did it too" defence doesn't work.

The "little Johnny did it too" is not a defence as such, but it is relevant because charging anyone in Thailand with corruption is a joke.  Corruption is one of the foundations of Thai society.  It's only trumpeted as being wrong by whoever happens to be in power at the time.  And at the present time it happens to be the deranged little man-child with the dyed hair obsessed with twerks, who has amassed a staggering amount of money on a soldier's paycheck.... it's all just farcical.  To get in to some sort of position of authority in Thailand corruption is a prerequisite. 

[halloween]

8 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

The "little Johnny did it too" is not a defence as such, but it is relevant because charging anyone in Thailand with corruption is a joke.  Corruption is one of the foundations of Thai society.  It's only trumpeted as being wrong by whoever happens to be in power at the time.  And at the present time it happens to be the deranged little man-child with the dyed hair obsessed with twerks, who has amassed a staggering amount of money on a soldier's paycheck.... it's all just farcical.  To get in to some sort of position of authority in Thailand corruption is a prerequisite. 

If regimes only prosecute their opponents, at least someone goes to jail. IMHO a better situation than crime without consequences.

 

BTW he speaks highly of you too.

[stephen tracy]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

If regimes only prosecute their opponents, at least someone goes to jail. IMHO a better situation than crime without consequences.

 

BTW he speaks highly of you too.

What a ridiculous notion.  So one party is on the take while prosecuting another party for being on the take?  That's a "better situation"?  You sound as deranged as Prayuth. 

[bangrak]

3 hours ago, seajae said:

maybe if she wasnt associated with so many corrupt people it wouldnt happen, like they say, when you lay with fleas.......

'When you lay with a dog, you catch its fleas'?

[JCauto]

18 hours ago, robblok said:

Now would they would only have to worry if they are corrupt would they not. If they are corrupt are they good witnesses ? 

 

Your explanation is good too.. but again.. if they are not corrupt nothing will turn up will there so no worries. 

 

The issue to me would be "were these people under investigation prior to being named as witnesses to Yingluck?" If the answer is "no", then we have a real issue here. Who would volunteer to be a witness when there is a clear link to being identified as a witness and being investigated for corruption? It's a deliberate tactic in that case of witness intimidation. And this is regardless as to whether there is any corruption or not.

[Artisi]

20 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Pick better witnesses. 

At least honest ones. 

[Artisi]

36 minutes ago, JCauto said:

 

The issue to me would be "were these people under investigation prior to being named as witnesses to Yingluck?" If the answer is "no", then we have a real issue here. Who would volunteer to be a witness when there is a clear link to being identified as a witness and being investigated for corruption? It's a deliberate tactic in that case of witness intimidation. And this is regardless as to whether there is any corruption or not.

Tough titties, if standing as a witness for the likes of YL, expect to be looked at. 

Edited June 17, 2017 by Artisi

[yardrunner]

20 hours ago, than said:

 

It seems that your "witnesses" are as corrupt as you

or the prosecutors 

[YetAnother]

21 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

YINGLUCK Shinawatra has claimed that witnesses testifying in her defence in a high-profile criminal case have been subject to a serious of corruption probes.

cmon guys; a little editing please; 'series' not 'serious'

[robblok]

How to keep a check on those in power then??
Tough riddle this one, not sure if we can crack it.
The rest of the world uses elections, do you think they might be on to something there?
Maybe Thailand should give it a go eh?
Couldn't be worse than an unending cycle of coups could it?
 

That is a lie... a good judiciary is what keeps check on those on power. Just voting is nothing. Unless your one of those that feels that getting voted out is punishment enough for corruption. I certainly don't feel it is but many on the red side of the discussion do think so.

[robblok]

"If they are not corrupt nothing will turn up".
Your faith in the Thai police and judicial system is entirely unwarranted.
 
BTW - How about the Red Bull kid,  he is clearly guilty, should he be worried about imminent imprisonment or is the system a joke?

The system is a joke that is why they don't have to worry. Money talks mate and those friends of YL got enough money to either buy people off or get real good lawyers. Unless of course the corruption is too easy to prove. But if they leave the country they are as untouchable as red bull and Thaksin who is also on the run and even convicted.

[stephen tracy]

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

That is a lie... a good judiciary is what keeps check on those on power. Just voting is nothing. Unless your one of those that feels that getting voted out is punishment enough for corruption. I certainly don't feel it is but many on the red side of the discussion do think so.

Because one is critical of the junta - like myself - does not make one a fan of the reds/Shinawats... the TV junta justifiers seem to have difficulty understanding that.  The fact they always feel the need to come out swinging in defence of the junta regardless of what they do/say.  I know you don't always do that, and have expressed criticism in the past but with many it's an instant reaction. 

[JCauto]

31 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Tough titties, if standing as a witness for the likes of YL, expect to be looked at. 

 

Right, so let's abandon all pretense of there being any kind of impartial justice in Thailand, after all, who needs that anyway? So long as the side I'm on wins, I'm okay with that? Of course, I'm sure you won't be on here whining when it is your sides' turn at the dock.

 

Remember, one of the many rationalizations for the coup was that justice was being corrupted, that Thaksin was using the courts to unfairly prosecute his opponents, attack the free press, etc. Pot? Meet kettle.

[stephen tracy]

3 minutes ago, JCauto said:

 

Right, so let's abandon all pretense of there being any kind of impartial justice in Thailand, after all, who needs that anyway? So long as the side I'm on wins, I'm okay with that? Of course, I'm sure you won't be on here whining when it is your sides' turn at the dock.

 

Remember, one of the many rationalizations for the coup was that justice was being corrupted, that Thaksin was using the courts to unfairly prosecute his opponents, attack the free press, etc. Pot? Meet kettle.

Sadly, the current lot in power will never have to face a court cause they have decreed that they can not be held accountable for anything that they do... also they have lots of guns, armoured cars and a submarine.

Edited June 17, 2017 by stephen tracy

[JCauto]

9 minutes ago, robblok said:

The system is a joke that is why they don't have to worry. Money talks mate and those friends of YL got enough money to either buy people off or get real good lawyers. Unless of course the corruption is too easy to prove. But if they leave the country they are as untouchable as red bull and Thaksin who is also on the run and even convicted.

Okay, we agree the system is a joke and the rich, connected, and corrupt have no fear of it and can just go on the lam whenever they like. But why is it you're only identifying "friends of YL" as the issue? Do you think the current mob are clean? Do you think the previous one that Thaksin replaced was? Do you think the one that will replace this one eventually will be?

I think you'd likely agree with me that the answer is that justice is blind here except for one colour, green. If you've got money, you're in the clear unless someone else with similar money and power decides to have a go at you. But does that really remedy the situation? This is my point here. When you go after YL, you should have more than enough evidence if she was so corrupt that you have no reason to intimidate her witnesses. All that shows is that the courts are biased and the prosecution likely malicious or predetermined in its outcome. This does not in any way advance the cause of justice in Thailand, it just sows the seeds for the revenge prosecution whenever the other side gets back in power.

[YetAnother]

Thai logic :

why is she telling this to the court ?

what does the court care about this ?

this is a separate matter from her immediate

case

[yardrunner]

52 minutes ago, robblok said:

That is a lie... a good judiciary is what keeps check on those on power. Just voting is nothing. Unless your one of those that feels that getting voted out is punishment enough for corruption. I certainly don't feel it is but many on the red side of the discussion do think so.

and a good judiciary is what is needed

[robblok]

Because one is critical of the junta - like myself - does not make one a fan of the reds/Shinawats... the TV junta justifiers seem to have difficulty understanding that.  The fact they always feel the need to come out swinging in defence of the junta regardless of what they do/say.  I know you don't always do that, and have expressed criticism in the past but with many it's an instant reaction. 

I have given full criticism in 2 topics of the junta (maybe 3.. the NLA not appearing one... twerking..and some other) your doing the same as you accuse me off. So im not that bothered.

[stephen tracy]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

I have given full criticism in 2 topics of the junta (maybe 3.. the NLA not appearing one... twerking..and some other) your doing the same as you accuse me off. So im not that bothered.

I don't defend the Shinawats, you do often defend the junta, except when it's obviously indefensible, like the twerking

[robblok]

Okay, we agree the system is a joke and the rich, connected, and corrupt have no fear of it and can just go on the lam whenever they like. But why is it you're only identifying "friends of YL" as the issue? Do you think the current mob are clean? Do you think the previous one that Thaksin replaced was? Do you think the one that will replace this one eventually will be?

I think you'd likely agree with me that the answer is that justice is blind here except for one colour, green. If you've got money, you're in the clear unless someone else with similar money and power decides to have a go at you. But does that really remedy the situation? This is my point here. When you go after YL, you should have more than enough evidence if she was so corrupt that you have no reason to intimidate her witnesses. All that shows is that the courts are biased and the prosecution likely malicious or predetermined in its outcome. This does not in any way advance the cause of justice in Thailand, it just sows the seeds for the revenge prosecution whenever the other side gets back in power.

Im talking about friends of YL because that is what the topic is about. I don't think the other side is clean. I commented on how bad it was about the PM his brother and nephew in the past. So no both sides are corrupt and need to be punished if they are.

And your right whoever is in power goes after the other. Its far from perfect. But better this as that they all get away.

[JCauto]

59 minutes ago, robblok said:

Im talking about friends of YL because that is what the topic is about. I don't think the other side is clean. I commented on how bad it was about the PM his brother and nephew in the past. So no both sides are corrupt and need to be punished if they are.

And your right whoever is in power goes after the other. Its far from perfect. But better this as that they all get away.

Doesn't do a thing to move the country forward, and your solution of a magical judiciary somehow rising above it all to police it is a fantasy. Why not ask the question "why have the yellows not managed to win an election for 16 years and why can't they accept majority rule?"  This is why democracy, however flawed, is better than all the other systems. You at the very least have to appeal to the most people to win. If you can't do that, you need to change your policies or make your case to the contrary to win support. When corruption is an accepted thing that will happen regardless, it's obvious that a government selected by the majority (and, it is noteworthy, by the poorer part of the population) should be allowed to be in power. The endless cycle of coups abrogating elected power retards any political progress, however distasteful that it may appear when implemented by not particularly democratic and grossly corrupt person like Thaksin. 

The current government had a chance to do what they said, rise above partisan politics, demonstrate that there could be government with clean hands (as has actually happened once, the Anand Panyarachun government installed after the fall of Suchinda), prove that the judiciary would treat the rich exactly the same as the poor, and reach out to and engage with the disaffected majority. Instead, it's business as usual, with the Elite taking control and governing for their people just as they accused all the others of doing. How you see this as progress is beyond me.

Edited June 17, 2017 by JCauto

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed. 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

I don't defend the Shinawats, you do often defend the junta, except when it's obviously indefensible, like the twerking

Not true.. I have been harsh on the topics about the brother of the PM, now again when they wanted to change the law about turning up. But you can be blind and not see that that is up to you. Been harsh about the subs too, i base if I defend them or not dependent on the topic. 

[stephen tracy]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Not true.. I have been harsh on the topics about the brother of the PM, now again when they wanted to change the law about turning up. But you can be blind and not see that that is up to you. Been harsh about the subs too, i base if I defend them or not dependent on the topic. 

I don't see how it's possible to defend any entity that imposes attitude adjustment on its own people, not to mention the very dangerous law we can not name.  Disgusting.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, JCauto said:

Doesn't do a thing to move the country forward, and your solution of a magical judiciary somehow rising above it all to police it is a fantasy. Why not ask the question "why have the yellows not managed to win an election for 16 years and why can't they accept majority rule?"  This is why democracy, however flawed, is better than all the other systems. You at the very least have to appeal to the most people to win. If you can't do that, you need to change your policies or make your case to the contrary to win support. When corruption is an accepted thing that will happen regardless, it's obvious that a government selected by the majority (and, it is noteworthy, by the poorer part of the population) should be allowed to be in power. The endless cycle of coups abrogating elected power retards any political progress, however distasteful that it may appear when implemented by not particularly democratic and grossly corrupt person like Thaksin. 

The current government had a chance to do what they said, rise above partisan politics, demonstrate that there could be government with clean hands (as has actually happened once, the Anand Panyarachun government installed after the fall of Suchinda), prove that the judiciary would treat the rich exactly the same as the poor, and reach out to and engage with the disaffected majority. Instead, it's business as usual, with the Elite taking control and governing for their people just as they accused all the others of doing. How you see this as progress is beyond me.

So during YL her rule the judiciary was better.. believe the whole red bull saga began under her watch. So its just crazy to think they are any better. YL is elite too.. just an other elite. 

 

Just voting does not work without a good judiciary and good punishment. Now when the junta came in the bad stuff the PTP did (corruption ect) got punished. Had the junta not been there they PTP would still have had protection and cases would not have progressed. Do I like it that it takes a coup to punish them. I would have preferred it if that was not needed for justice. Too bad its not. As long as a party is in power they do all they can to get their men in the right positions and then control it all. They then make sure that crimes and stuff they commit does not get prosecuted (or stall and use their friends to make sure evidence does not get found ect).

 

Now the junta did the same thing (look at the PM his brother and nephew) But at least the PTP got their crimes punished... later when junta has no protection its their turn to get punished. It would be far better if this did not happen and that sitting governments did not have the power to stall and pervert justice. However this is how it goes in Thailand.  

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

I don't see how it's possible to defend any entity that imposes attitude adjustment on its own people, not to mention the very dangerous law we can not name.  Disgusting.

As I said.. depends on the topic, just because they do some things you don't like does not mean all they do is wrong. Even the Shins had their good things. 

[stephen tracy]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

So during YL her rule the judiciary was better.. believe the whole red bull saga began under her watch. So its just crazy to think they are any better. YL is elite too.. just an other elite. 

 

Just voting does not work without a good judiciary and good punishment. Now when the junta came in the bad stuff the PTP did (corruption ect) got punished. Had the junta not been there they PTP would still have had protection and cases would not have progressed. Do I like it that it takes a coup to punish them. I would have preferred it if that was not needed for justice. Too bad its not. As long as a party is in power they do all they can to get their men in the right positions and then control it all. They then make sure that crimes and stuff they commit does not get prosecuted (or stall and use their friends to make sure evidence does not get found ect).

 

Now the junta did the same thing (look at the PM his brother and nephew) But at least the PTP got their crimes punished... later when junta has no protection its their turn to get punished. It would be far better if this did not happen and that sitting governments did not have the power to stall and pervert justice. However this is how it goes in Thailand.  

The junta has already stated that they are not accountable.  And even if some future political party tries to reverse that, there'll simply be another coup. 

[stephen tracy]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

As I said.. depends on the topic, just because they do some things you don't like does not mean all they do is wrong. Even the Shins had their good things. 

Denying people the right to freedom of expression punishable by breathtaking jail sentences means you're unfit to rule.  End of story. 

[robblok]

Just now, stephen tracy said:

The junta has already stated that they are not accountable.  And even if some future political party tries to reverse that, there'll simply be another coup. 

Maybe yes maybe no.. will see. I still hope they will go after them. If there is proof of corruption there won't be a coup.