In the end, what kind of message is this sending? Communication is discouraged? Be intolerant? We cannot accept money from people who freely express their ideas? Extend the implications of this form of intolerance to other groups, and ask yourself 'would I patronize a restaurant that said 'whites only,' 'liberals only,' 'buddhists only"? Of course not, that would be bigotry. But if it is bigotry you want, go to Pla Dib, it is the first thing on the menu.
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 12:49 am
Your very post on this forum, for example, might disappear. It's everywhere. You might as well see that red banned symbol on here and other media outlets.
Here's my diagnosis of Bangkok people: Whatever Taksin did or did not do or have been accused of doing, that viral information has been spread pretty good throughout Bangkok. Bangkok people are in trauma. It's a group trauma. The state of trauma right now is ANGER. Bangkok people felt abandoned by Taksin. He helped the farmers and Bangkok people don't know why he did that. If Taksin would have gave the same attention to the city people, if Taksin would have spread his wealth among the city people, things would not be as bad. Taksin would have had more City people on his side. But Taksin didn't do that. He kept the money around his family.
See the old form of corruption is you split the money among your peers and this is how you keep your mouth shut.
For example, let say, a German company is willing to pay 100 million baht in "additional fee" to get a certain project.
And there are 3 top ministers involve. These Ministers would form a pack, split the money evenly. Splitting the money evenly assured fairness, and that none will rat out the other.
However, if transparency is shown too much in these government transaction, no one gets the dough. And sometimes it's only the top guy that gets it. Bad, bad, bad. Someone's gonna get it later.
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 7:00 am
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests