Thai bully SG & downgrade relationship
-
Australia may roll out 'Red Carpet' to welcome Thanksin.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Nobody would dare to say that it is Britain's fault but will praise Britain for allowing freedom of speech.
Their news media are always hungry for news.
What if tv stations in Down Under provide ammunitions to Thaksin
to start firing from his hip
Then we shall we how the military clowns in Bangkok react. -
the clowns in bangkok reacted the way as they should, if the news about george yeo having been warned about thaksin's visit then bankok is justified...if china, japan and even uk didn't have any officials meet with thaksin, why does sg need to become a hero.....this is how sg govt works....they always take a legalistic approach...human relationships are never been black and white......imagine one's spouse was out with his or her previous lover, how would you react? even if the reason was private meeting, nothing special...you'll hit the roof...Originally posted by ninefold9:Australia may roll out 'Red Carpet' to welcome Thanksin.
Their news media are always hungry for news.
What if tv stations in Down Under provide ammunitions to Thaksin
to start firing from his hip
Then we shall we how the military clowns in Bangkok react. -
Agreed!!!Originally posted by countdracula:the clowns in bangkok reacted the way as they should, if the news about george yeo having been warned about thaksin's visit then bankok is justified...if china, japan and even uk didn't have any officials meet with thaksin, why does sg need to become a hero.....this is how sg govt works....they always take a legalistic approach...human relationships are never been black and white......imagine one's spouse was out with his or her previous lover, how would you react? even if the reason was private meeting, nothing special...you'll hit the roof...
This stupid FM George Yeo ought to be shooted and sacked for his insensitively towards other country and their ppls!!!! -
many former leaders stayed here,incl some former Thai leader who
leaded failed coup.
with frequent coup happened in Thai,who know when the
current coup leaders will be outsed and have to
take shelter in SG?
Thousands were killed in controversial anti-drug drive -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Yr statement making me really very worrying of the future of Spore!!!!
many former leaders stayed here,incl some former Thai leader who
leaded failed coup.
[b]with frequent coup happened in Thai,who know when the
current coup leaders will be outsed and have to
take shelter in SG?
Thousands were killed in controversial anti-drug drive[/b]
Do u mean that Spore is a place for all these rotten apples? -
sg always have mercy at heart.
so,what is wrong to let the outsed leaders or failed coup
leaders of your neighbours to stay for short period before they take
exile in foreign countries?
2.You want to see them killed?
3.For Thailand, bloodless coup is a tradition. -
Misspelling "money" for "mercy"? If yes, I always agree.Originally posted by lionnoisy:sg always have mercy at heart.
Who is going to kill them? This is Thailand. even Gen Sujinda is well being here. As a matter of fact, we are too kind for these tyrants. None of them has even been put into jail like your oppisition party leader. Where did you get your assumption from (that they will be killed)?Originally posted by lionnoisy:2.You want to see them killed?
The one who kiiled thousand of people in Thailand is this Toxin you DPM just met last week. If Saddam deserves a hang for what he did, this Toxin deserves not one, but two hangs. At least Saddam did everything for his own country, but this Toxin did everything just for his family and his business partner (you know who).
If you know nothing about Thailand, I suggest you to keep shut. -
come lah, we have tons of off-shore banks. black money is flowing through our system. we already are a rotten apple.Originally posted by foomwee88:Yr statement making me really very worrying of the future of Spore!!!!
Do u mean that Spore is a place for all these rotten apples? -
That's right!!! Taksink is being tailed by the Thai govt all the while for his political problems had not been resolved.Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:For those who think face is more important, I tell you what, the whole world will be at war now if every politician think of their bloody face first.
Paiseh I not say everyone is idiot, i am refering to those who think that Singapore has every right to let Thakshit do whatever he wants. If you want to protect your bloody rights, than GUYS, I got the damn rights to say whatever I want because I AM NOT BREAKING THE LAW!!!!!
Thakshit is dumb and got no future whatsoever, singapore should just move on and forget about that Toxin.
Well...he may be allowed to enter sinkapore...but, at this crucial and sensitive moment, why must the ministerl meet him?...can't they just sent some medic with him (and full stop)in case taksink got choked for eating Bak gut teh. -
Something like that.......all by the books!!!Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:I wonder what is the criteria to be a general in the SAF. Get distinctions in your studies? -
[quote]Originally posted by countdracula:
the clowns in bangkok reacted the way as they should, if the news about george yeo having been warned about thaksin's visit then bankok is justified...if china, japan and even uk didn't have any officials meet with thaksin, why does sg need to become a hero.....this is how sg govt works....they always take a legalistic approach...human relationships are never been black and white......imagine one's spouse was out with his or her previous lover, how would you react? even if the reason was private meeting, nothing special...you'll hit the roof...[/quot
Good example!
if people still do not what you meant. Then, I think that guy should jump down form raffles hotel.
+1 -
Sg will always have money at heartOriginally posted by lionnoisy:sg always have mercy at heart.
so,what is wrong to let the outsed leaders or failed coup
leaders of your neighbours to stay for short period before they take
exile in foreign countries?
2.You want to see them killed?
3.For Thailand, bloodless coup is a tradition. If not, why our mini-stars always saying their salaries are lag behind top six or eight earners? -
On what basis does the current Thai Administration have the right to 'strip' Thaksin of his passport and citizenship? He is not a fugitive (at least no charges have been brought against him as yet) and the military coup itself was 'undemocratic' and leaning towards a criminal act against a legitimate govt. The only thing that lends credibility is the blessing of the Thai King.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Singapore's FM gives too much credence to civil liberties, the rule of law and the freedom of expression.
True, Thaksin was legally entitled to visit Singapore as he had a valid Thai passport. Why doesn't Thailand cancel his passport and strip him of his Thai citizenship? That will stop him from traveling around the world. With a valid passport, Singapore is legally required to grant him entry based on international protocols and conventions unless we trump up charges or pronounce him persona non grata. Maybe that was what we should have done.
True, Thaksin was legally entitled to meet his friend Jayakumar on a social visit. As long as no official meeting takes place, no national anthem or guard of honour, there was no legal impediment to stop him playing golf in Singapore or meeting a personal friend. True, it is your civil right to associate with whoever you choose as a friend. But Jayakumar is a DPM and so his national duty should supersede his personal interests. It is not in our national interest for him to have Thaksin as a friend and so he should have dumped Thaksin. Although meeting a friend is legal in Singapore (and Jayakumar knows it well as an ex-professor of law), it is not in our interest to allow such a meeting and in the national interest, some rules of law can and should be bent. LHL should have banned Jayakumar from meeting Thaksin.
True, Thaksin was only exercising his right to freedom of expression by speaking to CNN. True, Singapore cannot stop him if we are to respect such freedom of expression that is enshrined in international protocols and conventions of human rights. But it is not in our national interest to have him speaking against the effective ruler of a neighboring nation. Thaksin will not return to power again, having lost the support of the Thai king. So we should have ignored his right to freedom of expression and muzzled him.
There is no stopping a normal person from entering a country of his choice. But meeting with specific people of power within that country's govt is another matter.
What strikes me as typical of our govt is their attempts to claim the moral high ground by first indicating that 'yes i did inform the Thai administration of Thaksin's impending visit', and then followed by a 'well, its a social call, i can't stop him from meeting 'friends' ', knowing that repercussions would follow.
Whether or not the current Thai administration is legit is irrelevant. It is the defiant act itself that displays our contempt and arrogance towards our neighbours. That does not bode well for future diplomatic relations and enhances Malaysia's gribe that we are a bunch of cold, calculative fish. -
Originally posted by BillyBong:
On what basis does the Thai administration overthrow an elected government? The fact is, they have won and they can do it. If the military junta does not want Thaksin to go around garnering support around the world, they can cancel his passport. What basis? On the basis that they have the power to do so.
On what basis does the current Thai Administration have the right to 'strip' Thaksin of his passport and citizenship? He is not a fugitive (at least no charges have been brought against him as yet) and the military coup itself was 'undemocratic' and leaning towards a criminal act against a legitimate govt. The only thing that lends credibility is the blessing of the Thai King.Originally posted by BillyBong:
Yeah? Pray tell on what basis can a government stop Thaksin from meeting his friend without infringing his right to free association?
There is no stopping a normal person from entering a country of his choice. But meeting with specific people of power within that country's govt is another matter.
As I said, Singapore should have stopped that meeting on the grounds that it is not in our national interests. Of course we will infringe his human rights, but we must not be afraid to do that if it is in the national interests.
At least I am prepared to call a spade a spade...unlike the hypocrites who champion civil liberties when they can take a swipe at the government but are strangely silent when the government did the very thing they advocate.
Civil liberties are not sacrosanct. If it is not in the national interests as with Thaksin, Singapore should not extend the 'normal courtesies' given to an ex-leader.Whether or not the current Thai administration is legit is irrelevant. It is the defiant act itself that displays our contempt and arrogance towards our neighbours. That does not bode well for future diplomatic relations and enhances Malaysia's gribe that we are a bunch of cold, calculative fish.
Defiant act? I thought you people who always talk about human rights and civil liberties would welcome any action that protects someone's right to free association and freedom of expression? If the government had not allowed Thaksin to meet Jayakumar and speak to the press, would you not also condemn the government for curbing freedom of expression and ignoring human rights?
I agree with you that the government should not have allowed the meeting but for a different reason. I believe national interests must come before civil liberties and so the government was wrong. As for you, the government is always wrong. -
small amd big eyes on SG!!Originally posted by tripwire:you guys read the newspaper today?
apparently... our DPM was not the first ASEAN officials that has met thaksin since his ouster!!
that honor goes to INDONESIA coordinating minister aburizal bakrie in bali indoneisa....
and thats not all... he even met former US assistant secretary of state stephen rademaker, who is currently working as lobbyist!
in hongkong... right under the nose of PRC leaders! -
According to the saying "a rotten apple will spoil the whole bucket of apples"Originally posted by nismoS132:come lah, we have tons of off-shore banks. black money is flowing through our system. we already are a rotten apple.
Since Spore is place for all these rotten apples,wat is Singapore ,then???? -
Maybe Bush will invade Thailand, just like Iraq.
-
On what basis does the Thai administration overthrow an elected government? The fact is, they have won and they can do it. If the military junta does not want Thaksin to go around garnering support around the world, they can cancel his passport. What basis? On the basis that they have the power to do so.
This is exactly the kind of pompous atttitude that makes you want to claim moral high ground, the same kind that gives you myopia.
In all my posts, i have stated that the military coup is 'undemocratic' and therefore illegal; they have always been refered to as the 'current administration' and not the Thai govt.
Cancelling Thaksin's passport is ILLEGAL and itself a criminal act, since he has committed no crime; unlike your presumptious self, there are those who will act in what they believe to be national interests in wresting control from a preceived 'corrupt' govt, but will not perform further actions that belly those of the common criminal.
Can our own SAF, in the event of perceived corruption within our own govt, perform the same 'coup', endorsed by the president of the republic and act on behalf of the people? Clearly, they could be mobilised on the blessing of the MIW, as our esteemed Minister Mentor previously claimed, in the event of an unlikely victory by the alternatives.
I'll call a spade a spade, but i'll also call a shovel when its a shovel. Unlike those who blindly and rigidly subscribe to the same misguided principles and propaganda, there are those who give credit when it's due, and criticize when its deserved. -
The role of a monarch is largely ceremonial; however King Bhumibol has stepped in only in times of national crisis.
For those who mentioned that Thaksin has played a bigger role for creating what Thailand is today, I urge you to think again. The King of Thailand has little direct power under the constitution but is a symbol of national identity and unity.
King Bhumibol — who has been on the throne since 1946 — commands enormous popular respect and moral authority, which he has used on occasion to resolve political crises that have threatened national stability.
He also mentioned he will not get actively involved in politics unless it comes to a point whereby the people of Thailand are deeply divided. There is a right time for every action and he chooses his next move carefully. LetÂ’s respect this man ok?
Although Bhumibol is a constitutional monarch, he has several times made decisive interventions in Thai politics, including the political crisis of 2005-2006. Bhumibol has been widely credited with facilitating Thailand's transition to democracy in the 1990s, although in earlier periods of his reign he supported military regimes. Most recently, he did not oppose the September 2006 coup which overthrew the elected government of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
Bhumibol uses his great wealth to fund numerous development projects, particularly in rural areas. He is immensely popular in Thailand, and is revered as a semi-divine figure by many Thais. Critics, mostly outside Thailand, attribute this status to the suppression of criticism of the monarchy.
During the 1970's, Bhumibol was a key figure in the Village Scouts and Red Gaur. In October 1973 after massive protests and the deaths of a large number of pro-democracy demonstrators led by students, Bhumibol asserted himself politically for the first time by opening the gates of the Chitralada Palace to fleeing students, and holding audiences with their leaders.
In 1992, Bhumibol played a key role in Thailand's transition to a democratic system. A coup on February 23, 1991 put Thailand back under military dictatorship. After a general election, held in 1992, the majority parties invited General Suchinda Kraprayoon, a leader of the coup group, to be the Prime Minister. This caused much dissent, and the conflict escalated to demonstrations and then to a large number of deaths when the military was brought in to control the protesters. The situation became increasingly critical as neither side would back down and the violence escalated.
Bhumibol summoned Suchinda and the leader of the pro-democracy movement, Major General Chamlong Srimuang, to a televised audience. At the height of the crisis, the sight of both men appearing together on their knees (in accordance with royal protocol) made a strong impression on the nation, and led to Suchinda's resignation soon afterwards. It was one of the few public occasions where Bhumibol directly intervened in a political conflict. A general election was held shortly afterward leading to a civilian government. -
Why SG DPM meet Thaksin:
Was Thaksin a good friend after all?.
-----
Prof Jayakumar is no spring chicken to diplomacy. He was Singapore's ambassador to the playground of diplomats, the United Nations, and its Foreign Minister at a time when the country's relations with Malaysia were at their testiest.
.
So, why did he agree to the meeting?
.
Two possibilities: One, sovereignty.
.
Being an impossibly small nation surrounded by big players, Singapore has not compromised, at least publicly, on its sovereignty.
.
It was a stand espoused by Singapore's first Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and its first Foreign Minister S Rajaratnam way back, after the separation with Malaysia in 1965. Legally or diplomatically, the Republic never gave in to pressure.
.
Whether it was pressure from Indonesia not to hang its marines who bombed MacDonald House on Orchard Road during the Indonesian Confrontation, or the outpouring of anger and protests in Malaysia and Indonesia against the official visit of Israeli President Chaim Herzog in 1986 — Singapore stuck to its guns.
.
In the latter case, this was so even though it was accepted that inviting the President was not the best thing to do because of the sensitivities of Singapore's Muslim neighbours.
.
Two, the signals from Bangkok were, at best, not clear; at worst not read well.
.
It is becoming clearer by the day that Thai politics is in a state of flux. A country flip-flopping within 24 hours of announcing major changes to its economic management (read: capital controls); talking about self-sufficiency economics (read: economic barriers); and not making a fuss when it was first told of the proposed Jayakumar-Thaksin meeting (read: hazy power structure) — means that relations have to be handled with care.
.
That is because every shade of opinion can become contradictory, every tea leaf discoloured.
.
What finally broke the camel's back, as veteran diplomat Kishore Mahbubani said in an interview with this paper, was Mr Thaksin breaking his silence and criticising the military government in interviews with high-profile news organisations such as CNN and the AWSJ.
.
Was Singapore outfoxed by Mr Thaksin, as Mr Mahbubani had suggested?
.
More than that, did Singapore read a good friend wrongly?
P N Balji
Editorial Director
[email protected]
— News Comment by P N Balji
[email protected]
2.even Thai FM admitted The meeting with DPM Jayakuma was purely social and private----15 Jan 07
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=116023(Thai)Foreign Minister Nitya Pibulsonggram played down the Singapore report. Mr Thaksin was in Singapore on a private visit, he said.
According to diplomats, Mr Thaksin had asked to meet Mr Jayakumar, who is an old friend.
The meeting was purely social and private, said Mr Nitya. (Thai)The foreign ministry had no comment. -
Yeah right... you have no bloody idea how much Americans hate the war in Iraq. They hate Mr Bushy!Originally posted by norm:Maybe Bush will invade Thailand, just like Iraq. -
Look. If you go to any democracy, a mature one, the rule of law, the constitution is absolute. Human relationships to hell. Sure, there are exceptions to the rule, but note so that the rule of law is well respected and mob rule is heavily frowned upon. How about this, you commit a crime, and then you cry fowl that the police are being too legalistic. Stupid argument right?
There was absolutely nothing on the basis of rule of law that would deny the right of the DPM to meet Thaksin. It was used as a mere excuse for the Thais to beat the Nationalistic drum. The Thais can be very very nationalistic at times, and back in WWII, they actually heavily supported the Japanese, despite the attempts to pretend that issue never happened. They even invaded some neighbouring country.. forgot which one. Royalty back then did not have the respect they had now. Hell, the king abdicated because of the clashes with the Junta back then.
What really ticked the Thais off was the use of CNN and ANN to fire shots at the Thai Junta. The Thai Junta are fast realising that there is virtually nothing to pin Thaksin on, and they know people are getting restless.
Typical military types to think they can write the law as they so wished. Why do you think the SAF is so screwed? -
So all that said, Thai govt really ought to put it's own house in order before they go about shooting from the hip. In the long run I wonder if the haphazard way they are running their internal and diplomatic politics will only end up hurting themselves.
Who suffers? Certainly not the ones in power, it is the people. The thai people (especially those who have posted here) need to question who is the bigger bogeyman and threat: is it some southern island state that at best has the most ridiculus reasons to be a threat to their nation or is it rather their very own government who currently at best is sending out mixed messages to the world, approaching every delicate issue with a sledgehammer, and filp flopping in their policies? While attempting to "expose" the apparent "acts" that Singapore is carrying out against them, are they really pulling the wool over the eyes of the populace to the real issues? -
Legal? A coup is not legal but that's not our business. It is not in the interest of the Thai government to have Thaksin trying to garner political support all over the world. If they do not want him to do that, they should cancel his passport. What is one more 'illegal' act? Hanged for a penny, hanged for a pound. National interests come before individual rights.Originally posted by BillyBong:Cancelling Thaksin's passport is ILLEGAL and itself a criminal act, since he has committed no crime; unlike your presumptious self, there are those who will act in what they believe to be national interests in wresting control from a preceived 'corrupt' govt, but will not perform further actions that belly those of the common criminal.
You tell me...Are you trying to infringe the Sedition Act?Originally posted by BillyBong:Can our own SAF, in the event of perceived corruption within our own govt, perform the same 'coup', endorsed by the president of the republic and act on behalf of the people? Clearly, they could be mobilised on the blessing of the MIW, as our esteemed Minister Mentor previously claimed, in the event of an unlikely victory by the alternatives.
If you argue that everything should be done legally, then you must support the Singapore government for respecting Thaksin's LEGAL rights to free association and freedom of expression. I don't see you supporting Thaksin's meeting with Jayakumar and speaking to CNN? Stinks of hypocrisy to high heavens! -
so, what are you fighting. Thaksin hs right to go the any country and to see any body in the world privately. what's wrong if he want to go to see his friend. it doesnt matter whoever is he.. business or poliltical man.
this thai gengster is not mojority representative. so, why SG wory about this junta clown. they will get kick and go soon.
they just want to fight with SG becos they want to ruin shin coprp and temasek in stock market and any other reason but not becos of Thaksin go to political man in SG.