Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, yes, we are discussing Cannabis in Thailand as well as Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul. Just for some background, I recently made a video regarding the OECD where yeah, I was pretty critical of this Administration and Anutin on the issues associated with OECD especially because I am very curious as to why folks can't see the threat OECD poses to national sovereignty here in Thailand, especially in light of the fact that President Trump over in the United States has a specific Executive Order that just clearly articulates the threat that OECD is. That said, as I have stated in the past, I have a certain affinity for Mr. Anutin. I do think he cares about the national interest, and my hope is that he will see that for what it is, and maybe he's got a trick up his sleeve as he often does in politics, to again put Thailand's interests first; remains to be seen on that. 

On this situation regarding Cannabis, and Mr. Anutin being “under fire” for anything associated with it, I just think that's nonsense. I mean I have got to give credit where credit is due. He saw the potential in Cannabis in Thailand in many ways I think. I think he saw in '22 when he legalized it effectively under Emergency Power and it came online as a new product here in Thailand, I frankly think it probably saved tourism that year, and it probably had a major impact on tourism moving forward from that time, bearing in mind in 2022, we were coming off the worst couple of years we had ever had in tourism and we didn't have too bad of a high season - in 2022 going into 2023 - and we didn't need a bunch of new visas created, and nonsense that allowed a bunch of people to come in that I really couldn't figure out why they were here for long periods of time. No, none of that had to happen. Cannabis alone was enough to draw in the crowds. So to his credit, I just don't see where a lot of criticism can be reasonably leveled at him on the Cannabis topic, but reasonable people can disagree. Let's jump in here. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, that is bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Anutin under fire over Cannabis policy 'failures'. Failures? Again, I just fail to see that. An entire product line, an entire industry now exists in Thailand due to his “failures”. It's just kind of a ridiculous notion. Quoting directly: "People's Party MP Bhuntin Noumjerm yesterday pressed the Government to accept policy responsibility for failures in Cannabis controls, saying that widespread illegal exports show shortcomings in the regulatory framework." So because criminals exist, this guy is on the hook for it; seems a little off. Quoting further: "Speaking during a House Session, the Opposition People's Party MP for Bangkok criticized Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul who as Public Health Minister pushed for the 2022 decriminalization." Wrong word. "Legalization" folks. That's what happened. De-criminalization is a nonsense word, just as much as "governance" and "sustainability" and all these Globalist terms that they throw around. Something is either legal or it is not, there is no "de-criminal". Quoting further: "of Cannabis and reclassification as an economic crop." 

Again, why is he being held accountable for criminal activity of others? And on top of that, when this was legalized, folks under 20 couldn't buy it and pregnant women couldn't but it. Those were the rules. So in terms of law enforcement, things have actually worked out pretty well. 

Quoting further: "He said the country still lacks a comprehensive law to regulate the cultivation, sale, use and advertising of Cannabis" - and whose fault is that? They tried to do it in the early '23 session of Parliament, but it was all thrown out due to a bunch of political machinations of the membership of Parliament at the time. And I think Big Alcohol and Big Pharma were primarily behind a push to effectively eradicate it statutorily in the aftermath of the legalization. Quoting further: "Leaving major gaps in oversight since the plant was decriminalized." Stop using that word; it's not the right term. And I love "major gaps in oversight since the plant was.." What does that mean? You mean people are just free to do business as they need to do business? That's kind of what I want from a Prime Minister in this country. Open up a sector of the economy so people can make some money and then leave them to it. We don't need this constant government oversight. That said, quoting further: "He also questioned whether the Government was able to trace seized Cannabis back to its source?" Is that a legal requirement? Why is everything that is coming from lawmakers now, all about no privacy, all about dystopian totalitarianism? We have got to track and trace everything now. Quoting further: "identify those benefiting from the trade, or establish a central database linking farms, retailers, inventories, transport and export checkpoints?" 

Why should anybody do that right now? It's a legal product. It's on you Parliament to come up with these frameworks. Pass a law; pass an actual law. I'm really tired of MPs talking about this like it is somehow someone else's fault but them. They have the ability to pass a law, pass one. Quoting further: "quote: If the Government doesn't know how much Cannabis is being cultivated, how much is in stock, how much is consumed domestically, and where the surplus goes, then it cannot claim to have the situation under control." So unless we have totalitarianism, the Government can't claim that they are doing their job? What does that even mean?

And when did everybody in Thailand go running for all this government oversight? Where is the hue and cry from the rank-and-file Thais that, "oh my God, we need to have totalitarianism so we know where every leaf and bud of a Cannabis tree has ever been or will ever be? Where is this coming from other than outside foreign influence that wants Thailand to be an unfree country; that it wants to lay us economically low. I mean if there isn't enough evidence for this since 1997, that there very much are powers that be the want to see this, how do you not see it at this point? And beyond even that, all of this is what would be done under a Law. So again Parliament, you want this to be the case, pass a law, mandate it that way - legally - or compel it legally; mandate isn't even the right word under those circumstances. Quoting further: "however, he said lawmakers have a duty to ask, on behalf of the public, why a policy that was originally promoted as being aimed at supporting an economic crop and herbal medicine, has become a burden on Customs Authorities and law enforcement." Well I mean, how much other stuff gets smuggled every year that is perfectly legal? How much alcohol gets smuggled over all of the borders of Thailand? How many times does customs deal with alcohol seizures in a given year? I would love to see those numbers up against Cannabis. That's a big one that just keeps getting omitted, omitted, omitted. They never bring up alcohol. It's always Cannabis's problem.

Look, as the title of this video states, or it implies, I just don't see how Mr. Anutin can be under fire for any of this. If anything, it's the dragging of the feet in Parliament to pass - like adults - an actual law so that we can all deal with this and move on down the road.