CessyInBkk Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Here is some names and posts.. Samak Sundaravej , PM and the Defence minister Noppadon Pattama, The foreign minister Surapong Suebwonglee, the finance minister - even though he is a medical doctor by training Chalerm Yoobumrung,the interior minister etc, how do you think about this ? :?: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigKus Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Here is some names and posts..Samak Sundaravej , PM and the Defence minister Noppadon Pattama, The foreign minister Surapong Suebwonglee, the finance minister - even though he is a medical doctor by training Chalerm Yoobumrung,the interior minister etc, how do you think about this ? :?: Always sick when hear those names and even more sick when hear they give the answer interviews .. farrrrk ! :evil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie36 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 DEFENDING THE WAR ON DRUGS Chalerm: Hopes to revive policy Veteran politician Chalerm Yubamrung recently joined the People Power Party (PPP) and is seen as its number two. Over the past month, he has expressed his ambition to become Interior Minister and revive the Thaksin Shinawatra government's controversial war on drugs, which led to the deaths of more than 2,500 people in alleged extra-judicial killings by police. Bangkok Post asked him how he plans to revive the policy. Below are excerpts from the interview. Do you intend to use the same heavy-handed approach applied by the Thaksin administration? Drug suppression needs to be handled seriously, the same way the Thaksin administration did. Regarding the extra-judicial killings, people misunderstood that authorities killed innocent people. Will you set time-frames for achievement like the past government? We will work based on what the Thaksin government did, and will continue from there. We will declare a new phase of the war on drugs. Don't you think the implementation of this policy should be conducted in a careful and gradual manner? Illicit drug suppression cannot be handled gradually. It needs time-frames and targets. The Thaksin administration set a target for each province to list local dealers. Do you intend to do the same? It won't be changed. Interview continued here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/27Nov2007_news09.php Hopefully he will tell his sons that it is drug dealers you are supposed to shoot and not policemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie36 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Incidentally the new PM - Samak - is already showing he is a bit of a mug... From his recent interview with CNN... On his role as deputy interior minister during the massacre at Thammasat University in 1976 where 46 left-wing protestors were killed by the military, Mr Samak said he had nothing to do with that. "For me, no deaths, one unlucky guy being burned and burned in Sanam Luang... I have no concern on that business, I have nothing to do, to deal with that at all," he said. One guy huh? Looks like a few more to me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieJR Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 DEFENDING THE WAR ON DRUGSChalerm: Hopes to revive policy Veteran politician Chalerm Yubamrung recently joined the People Power Party (PPP) and is seen as its number two. Over the past month, he has expressed his ambition to become Interior Minister and revive the Thaksin Shinawatra government's controversial war on drugs, which led to the deaths of more than 2,500 people in alleged extra-judicial killings by police. Bangkok Post asked him how he plans to revive the policy. Below are excerpts from the interview. Do you intend to use the same heavy-handed approach applied by the Thaksin administration? Drug suppression needs to be handled seriously, the same way the Thaksin administration did. Regarding the extra-judicial killings, people misunderstood that authorities killed innocent people. Will you set time-frames for achievement like the past government? We will work based on what the Thaksin government did, and will continue from there. We will declare a new phase of the war on drugs. Don't you think the implementation of this policy should be conducted in a careful and gradual manner? Illicit drug suppression cannot be handled gradually. It needs time-frames and targets. The Thaksin administration set a target for each province to list local dealers. Do you intend to do the same? It won't be changed. Interview continued here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/27Nov2007_news09.php Hopefully he will tell his sons that it is drug dealers you are supposed to shoot and not policemen. :shock: Im so glad i kicked my smack habit before i came here.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeMarc Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 It's a relaxing, lazy sunday afternoon, and this thread and the implications and realities of this new government is making me feel quite ill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venus Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 how do you think about this ? :?: i dont like them but i will give them a chance as i am left with zero choice. (at least, they come from a democratic process - its one step close to full & decent democracy.) and i wish for the best for my beloved country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CessyInBkk Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 It's a relaxing, lazy sunday afternoon, and this thread and the implications and realities of this new government is making me feel quite ill. reality is always worse than your dream but we have to live with it ..or leave it , do I have choices ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie36 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I'm pretty upset when I saw Samak Sundaravej , Chalerm Yoobumrung in the list. :twisted: What Robbie 36 wrote about Samak and the the massacre 1976 at TU is true. The idea that what I wrote is in dispute is laughable - the whole case is well documented... I am not saying anything that everyone doesnt already know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CessyInBkk Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I am questioning the 48,129,018 Thai who elected this people to be PM and Ministers. And if you guys remember not long ago Samak himself won the election to be Bkk governor with the highest vote in the history ...should I say this cabinet is reflecting Thai democracy ..Welcome "an ugly duckling Cabinet".. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loburt Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Well, actually, it wasn't the "military" that killed those students, although the military certainly must have been involved in planning what happened. The killings were carried out by Police, Border Patrol Police, and several organized right-wing groups including The Red Gaurs, Navaphol, and the Village Scouts. I'm not going to defend Samak, but he is not the only person deserving of blame. Others who played, or are reported to have played a role in either fomenting, organizing or sanctioning the violence include: Chatichai Choonhavan Chamlong Srimuang Pramarn Adireksarn The Chart Thai Party Pol. Gen. Salang Bunnag The Bangkok Post Dao Siam newspaper Army Radio Phra Kittivudho Lt. Col. Utarn Sanitwongs Surely there were others who were also responsible for what happened, but it is unlikely we will ever know the full story behind this day of shame. Some of these people eventually did change their political views, most notably Chamlong Srimuang. Others, including Samak, did not. After troops shot dead pro-democracy demonstrators in Bangkok in May 1992, Samak defending the killings, claiming those protesting against Suchinda were communists. In a poll conducted by The Nation after Black May in which respondents voted for the "the most hated Thais", Samak was the civilian who garnered the most votes, coming in at number 6, after five generals. To be fair, it should be noted that Gen. Surayud Chulanont and his troops were also involved in Black May. He claims, however, that he advised military leaders not to use the army against the people, and he personally never gave any order to shoot. He went on national television after democracy was restored and explained his actions and position in Black May. And the head of the Committee for the Relatives of May 1992, whose son was shot dead by soldiers, said that most relatives of the victims believed him and forgave him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CessyInBkk Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Regard the 6 October 1976 or Hok Tulaa...(may be this is one factor why many Thai voteed this ugly people). A recent review of Thai high school history and culture textbooks showed that 80% do not mention the Hok Tulaa events. Of the few that do mention the massacre most use very neutral language (e.g., their was an "uprising" that was "suppressed" and many students fled to the jungle as a result). One textbook even takes the rightist side suggesting that the students were indeed anti-royalist and infiltrated by Vietnamese revolutionaries. The only textbook which tackles the 1976 massacre in any depth is (not surprisingly) published by Thammasat University, but even that book dodges the issue of the atrocities. As tame as the Thammasat book seems to be, it still has trouble with the Board of Education censors: a group which must give clearance to all the country's schoolbooks, and whose membership and membership criteria is still, to this day, kept secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeMarc Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Men, like these so called 'men', 'grow up' in society. They have families, they go to school, they have parents and they are largely a product (like us all) of their environment. I use the terms 'men' and 'grow up' very loosely here. Because people like these are not grown up at all, neither are they 'men' in any true sense of that word. They are just cowards and little boys who have been allowed (and continue to be allowed) to behave this way. But, to allow this and continue to condone it is, in many ways, to be partly responsible. One cannot entirely blame voters or even point the finger at anyone specifically for having people like this in positions of power to 'lead' a country. And it also appears that out of all the 'men' available for these jobs, none were really much good or worth voting for anyway. A Hobsens choice at best. I'm not here to criticise Thailand or its people in anyway. Afterall, I am a guest living here. What i see here, I see in most other Asian countries. And sure, Western countries have their problems too, so I do not, in anyway, say that either is better or worse. But when I look around at 'men' in general here in Thailand, and how many are allowed to behave, how many boys are still 'mummy's boys' even when they are adults, how secret 'men's clubs and factions are condoned and encouraged, and how many women and mothers continue to dote on their precious little boys - even laughing at how useless and lazy many are at such basic human things - I do often wonder what will become of the future. In most Asian countries, the irony is that they are seen to be paternal and dominated by men in all the positions of power, when in fact, it is the women in these countries who actually do much of the real work - in the home, in business and in politics. I have met so many incredible women of all levels of society, business and politics in my many years living in Asia. But sadly, the truth is, I have met considerably less men who I would hold in such high regard or respect. I could probably count them on just 2 hands. I realise I may be opening up a huge can of worms by saying this, but I believe that when Asian women are able to have more power, more control and more direct roles to play in determining and influencing the future of their countries and businesses, then we will see much more balance and harmony. If I think of all the atrocities that have occured in Asia alone, I cannot think of one which has been the direct result of a woman or women. People here may say that this is impossible or will never happen, but I believe its only a matter of time. There was a time, not so long ago, when American people could not even conceive that a woman would hold (arguably) the most powerful position in the world. Yet now, we see what is possible. More than half the population of Thailand is female. But how much of the power, influence or voice do they really have? When the women of Thailand use their minds, their intellect, their hearts, their insights, their education, their maturity and their positions to start to even up this situation, then we will see much more progress being achieved for more of the right reasons. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loburt Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 You mean like... Jiang Qing? or Imelda Marcos? While I'm all for more equality in society, and more women in government, they can be just as tyrannical, corrupt and pig-headed as men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeMarc Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 You mean like...Jiang Qing? or Imelda Marcos? While I'm all for more equality in society, and more women in government, they can be just as tyrannical, corrupt and pig-headed as men. Yes, two examples. So, I stand corrected on that point. But I am talking about women (plural), in many areas of both business and politics, not just one woman in a token dictatorship role. We have yet to see what women, with some sort of even female support (as apposed to say Imelda who had only males), could do with Thailand. For example, someone will the intelligence, heart and charisma of Myanma's Aung San Suu Kyi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loburt Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I suspect Daw Suu Kyi would not be happy that you say she is from Myanma®. She's also quite a special case in many respects, and so I don't feel comparisons are appropriate with Thailand. Very few countries have had anyone like DASSK, in my opinion. Also, sadly, she's never held power, so there is no way to know how well she would perform if she did, and if our estimation of her might diminish if she did. But there are plenty of strong women in Thailand who, like Suu Kyi, are fighting for what is right in their respective fields. Just a few, off the top of my head, would be: Rosana Tositrakul (candidate for Senator from Bangkok in the upcoming election) Angkhana Neelajaipit Pornthip Rojanasanan Soraida Salwala Supinya Klangnarong Jaruvan Maintaka And there are women who have held high-ranking political positions: Sudarat Keyuraphan, deputy PM in the TRT government and a very powerful member of her party Supatra Masdit. PM's office minister in the last Democrat government Admittedly, though, there haven't been many women Cabinet members. And I can't remember Sudarat doing anything to moderate the harsher instincts of her boss or advance the cause of women. Correct me if I"m wrong. At the moment, the governor of the Bank of Thailand, the President of the Stock Exchange of Thailand, and the head of Siam Commercial Bank are all women. There are definitely gender/societal problems in Thailand, but I don't think the country's political problems have all that much to do with gender. But that's just my two baht. Maybe you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loburt Posted February 15, 2008 Report Share Posted February 15, 2008 Censorship row By Anucha Charoenpo - Bangkok Post Former Bangkok senator Chirmsak Pinthong yesterday accused Prime Minister's Office Minister Jakrapob Penkair of pulling the strings behind the closure of a radio show he presented. Mr Jakrapob denied the allegations and challenged Mr Chirmsak to back up his claims with evidence. One day after the Chirmsak's Viewpoints programme (Mum Mong Khong Chirmsak) was shut down from FM 105, Mr Chirmsak said he was informed of the forced closure from an executive of Fatima Broadcasting International Co shortly after a phone call to the radio station from Mr Jakrapob. The executive quoted Mr Jakrapob as saying that he would not allow the Public Relations Department, which owns the station, to extend the contract with Fatima radio because some programmes had inappropriate content, according to Mr Chirmsak. The show was axed after airing evidence to counter claims by Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej that only one demonstrator died during the Oct 6, 1976 uprising. Mr Samak made the comment during a recent CNN interview. Official figures concluded that 46 people died in the student uprising. The executive then sought advice from Mr Chirmsak on how to alleviate the damage because he realised that Mr Jakrapob was targetting his programme, the former senator said. "For the benefit of the (radio) company, I told him (the executive) that I'm ready to go and allowed him to remove my programme," the former Thammasat University lecturer who was appointed to the Airports of Thailand board following the 2006 coup said. Mr Chirmsak said he was worried that the media might operate a system of self censorship to prevent the risk of losing their businesses. However, Mr Jakrapob, who has been handed the role of overseeing the media under the new government, challenged the former senator to prove claims he had influenced the axing of Mr Chirmsak's show. Mr Pramoj and Fatima executives were due to hold a press conference to clarify the issue yesterday but it was cancelled. The Thai Broadcast Journalists Association will call a meeting today to discuss the closure of Mr Chirmsak' s programme to determine whether there was any political interference. Chirmsak stops hosting radio talk following threat Former Bangkok senator Chirmsak Pinthong Wednesday gave up hosting in his daily radio talk show after he criticised Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej for allegedly covering up the Thammasat University massacre of October 6, 1976. PM's Office Minister Jakrapob Penkair, who supervises the Public Relations Department, telephoned production house Fatima Co to give notice that he might not extend its airtime contract, a company source said. The explanation given was that the show's content had to be adjusted to match the new programming schedule, the source said. The company asked Chirmsak about Jakrapob's reason. He understood the situation by withdrawing as a radio host, the source said. "Chirmsak's Views" was broadcast from 89pm on FM105, which is under the PRD. The Nation Jakrapob denies ordering withdrawal of Chirmsak's radio talk show PM's office minister Jakrapob Penkair Thursday denied he was behind the withdrawal of Chirmsak Pinthong from a radio talk show. Jakrapob said neither he nor anyone in the Cabinet ordered the production house Fatima to remove Chirmsak from the host programme. He said it was not government policy. "I can't leave this. I want to know who is behind the scene. I will tell the Public Relations Department chief to call the company [Fatima] to hold a press briefing to explain the case in order to prevent other matters that might be happen in the future," he said. He said there are 'invisible hands' who want to slander the government. The Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJack Posted February 15, 2008 Report Share Posted February 15, 2008 Censorship rowJakrapob denies ordering withdrawal of Chirmsak's radio talk show and he might even be telling the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loburt Posted February 15, 2008 Report Share Posted February 15, 2008 Censorship rowJakrapob denies ordering withdrawal of Chirmsak's radio talk show and he might even be telling the truth Right...and Samak might also be telling the truth about what happened at Thammasat. I've got some swamp land in Florida you might be interested in .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatty Posted February 15, 2008 Report Share Posted February 15, 2008 Censorship rowJakrapob denies ordering withdrawal of Chirmsak's radio talk show and he might even be telling the truth Laugh my ass off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce551 Posted February 15, 2008 Report Share Posted February 15, 2008 Little faith in new government, forum told ACHARA ASHAYAGACHAT Academics and activists who met at a forum in Bangkok yesterday said the presence of the ''same old faces'' in the Samak Sundaravej government offered little hope it will be any different from a succession of past corrupt governments. Many of the cabinet members are considered to be either tainted by corruption scandals, linked to the banned 111 politicians from the dissolved Thai Rak Thai party, or from deeply entrenched political families that have exerted influence over Thai politics for decades. Siripan Noksuan, an associate professor of political science at Chulalongkorn University, revealed the results of her study on the expectations for this government from interviews with 4,000 people. She said people expected the government to solve economic woes, increase the quality of life and enact good laws. The study shows the respondents want an honest and corruption free government, she said. ''Their desires are still unrealistic because Thailand has never had such clean leadership and government, and Thai society has yet to come up with an effective tool to monitor their politicians to meet their expectations,'' Ms Siripan said at a seminar yesterday organised by Thailand Democracy Watch. Thai society also seemed to allow a small group of people to continually run the country, the academic said. She said the same family names crop up in almost every cabinet and that a new breed of politicians will find it very difficult to break into that inner circle. Pakorn Preeyakorn from the National Institute of Development Administration said the Samak government was a source of considerable concern. Ministers, especially those in charge of economic problems as well as a number of old faces such as Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej and Interior Minister Chalerm Yubamrung, will be in the spotlight of critics, he said. Veera Somkwamkid, leader of the People's Network Against Corruption, said fighting corruption was not a priority of the government, which was more focussed on continuing the populist policies of the Thaksin administration. There are decent smart people who work within the Thai government, unfortunately the politicians at top make it difficult for government to operate effectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie36 Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Samak seems to be getting very upset about the scandal of the October 1976 Thammasat massacre. Actually there is little or no evidence that he was involved - although he was interior minister at the time. People are just naturally upset that he denied anything happened at all. To be honest I think all politicians should retire at 70. At that age most arent capable of driving a car let alone running a country. (Look at Afook for God's sake - he is clearly not all there and he is only 64.) His memory might be going but he appears to still be quite a good cook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeMarc Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 There was a great line I remember in the UK show "Yes, Minister", when he finally became PM. Back in his office, he asked his trusted aid "So, now that I am Prime Minister, what should be my most important job?" "Your only job Sir...is to keep your job." was the answer. Populist policies, whatever the country, by their very nature, will achieve little other than keeping the top people in power and the majority of voters happy. In this case is seems, mainly the people of Isaan (no disrespect intended). Change is always the harder road to take for both the people and government alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loburt Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Samak seems to be getting very upset about the scandal of the October 1976 Thammasat massacre. Actually there is little or no evidence that he was involved - although he was interior minister at the time. People are just naturally upset that he denied anything happened at all. Samak was kicked out as Interior Minister on October 5, a day before the massacre. According to one banned book, he and the Chart Thai Party then organized a rally of Village Scouts later that day at the Royal Plaza. The Village Scouts participated in the Thammasat massacre less than 24 hours later. How do you define "involved"? There is no hard evidence linking anyone to the planning of the massacre. Does making speeches filled with rhetoric that incites hatred against the students that were eventually massacred qualify as being involved? Was Samak actually there? He denies it. Nonetheless, many years ago the Foreign Correspondents Club showed some films of that day. At one point, the camera panned along the crowd of vigilantes on the road outside the university. When a certain figure briefly appeared walking in front of the crowd and smiling, several people in the audience at the FCCT that night shouted out "Samak!" I wasn't sure if it was him or not. But it sure looked like him. If he really was completely uninvolved, then why does he need to lie about how many people died? Why should we believe he was uninvolved when he is clearly lying about other aspects of what happened? At the very least, Samak was like someone who cheers on a bunch of guys committing a gang rape, but doesn't actually penetrate the victim himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_love_som_tam Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 At the very least, Samak was like someone who cheers on a bunch of guys committing a gang rape, but doesn't actually penetrate the victim himself. In most societies he would still be guilty of rape :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now