ManofReason

i'll take the Americans views over a self proclaimed anti-democract elitist thug any day thank you

Yes, an American view: Lets go and invade a small middle eastern oil producing country and get rid of the dictator that we put into power a few years ago.

As opposed to elitist yellow scum: Lets go and invade bangkok, block election booths, and get rid of a democratically elected PM and replace with a dictator of our own choosing ?

That's a very ignorant statement. Why would they invade Bangkok? Bangkok is their place. The majority of Bangkokians support them. So your analogy abysmally failed.

As for replacing a democratically elected PM. I don't know, the amnesty bill, the rice scheme scam, the computer tablet per child scam, the water management scam etc...etc...The list is getting longer by the day. The easiest way out was to postpone the election till May 2014. The caretaker government refused to negotiate and chose the confrontation and in the process wasted billions of tax payers money on failed election. Everyone knew that beforehand. Yet they stubbornly proceeded.

As far as I'm aware the majority of Bangkokians are currently not located within the boundaries of Lumpini Park.

PDRC is a minority movement.

One need only recall the string of election losses or to witness how they run and hide from current elections to see this fact.

A list of policies you disagree with is put forward as a reason to overthrow the legal government of the day.... abysmal indeed.

You may have forgotten, so let remind you - Suthep is OPPOSED to any elections occurring at any time, ever.

He wants an appointed council - his position is no negotiations and no elections.

The logic of this mini mob beguiles me. "We are the majority but we are scared of elections".

...to meet a "senior person".

If they believe he's off to meet Thaksin, why not say so? Why the ambiguity?

The headline should read:

Charlem leaves for Singapore to meet the most popular and successful politician Thailand has ever seen

Can the mods just close and delete this thread now?

Seriously, this is just a waste of everyone's time.

Sent from my phone ...

I say keep the thread.

Come the next election the Democrats will get crushed (for the seventh time in a row) by PTP's overwhelming popularity.

Why not let the Yellow minority enjoy 5 minutes of popularity (even if it is imaginary)

The 1997 Thai constitution had a fully elected senate - the unelected post-coup government forced upon the citizenry a revised constitution that amongst other things altered the senate to a half elected, half appointed chamber (i.e. diluted democracy).

Forced upon the citizenry? For such a keen advocate of voting, the post coup revised constitution should get some of your blessing, being that the people did get a say in it, unlike the 1997 constitution.

This is no doubt the point where you highlight all the flaws of that referendum. And out of the other side of your mouth, you'll no doubt be defending all of the flaws involved in Thaksin's parties' election successes, and arguing that those flaws had no bearing on the outcome.

Must get hard keeping track of all your double backing and twisting.

Any sort of rational discussion or debate can only occur if both sides acknowledge and accept facts.

It is a fact, a non debatable fact, that the 2007 constitution referendum was neither free nor fair.

Continued refusal to acknowledge and accept facts renders debate and discussion pointless.

"The result of a national referendum held on August 19 on Thailand’s new constitution was far from a resounding vote of confidence in the country’s military leaders. While the constitution was formally passed, the turnout was low and the vote inconclusive, despite aggressive campaigning by the junta and threats to postpone new elections if the referendum were rejected.

Only 57.6 percent of enrolled voters cast a vote, compared with 70 percent in the past two national elections. The vote in favour was just 58 percent, as against 42 percent who voted no. In other words, less than one third of those eligible voted for the new constitution.

The vote was sharply polarised. In the capital Bangkok, the central plains and the southern provinces, where opposition to Thaksin was strong in 2006, the “yes” vote was as high as 88 percent. In the northern rural areas where ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his Thai Rak Thai (TRT) had a strong base of support, the vote went the other way. In the north east, the “no” vote was 62 percent. In the north as a whole, the vote was evenly split.

An editorial in the Japan Times commented: “Critics are right to charge that Thai democracy is being managed. In fact, it is fair to say Sunday’s vote was not so much a referendum on the proposed constitution as a plea for a return to democratic politics.” Had the referendum been rejected the junta would have been able to choose one of the previous 17 constitutions with amendments at its discretion."

All senators should be elected by the people as per the 97 constitution, not 1/2 elected as per the 07 constitution. It works the world over.

It is very clear that you don't believe democracy, you are in fact against it, so what do you believe in?

I see you didn't reply to the question before so I'll ask again, If senators aren't to be elected, how should they be chosen and by whom shall they be chosen by? Suthep? You? Me?

What magical system have you come up with the rest of the world is unaware of?

How are the "chosen" senators going to be held in check? Who do they answer to? Who can be a senator?

I do believe in democracy thank you very much but the democracy i believe in, doesn't begin and end at the ballot box. If you believe in that, what you believe in is something that isn't actually democracy at all.

As for what the solution is regarding the senate, from the start of this discussion, it has been you, not me, claiming to have the magical system that will solve the issue of judicial independence. Although you have in subsequent posts gone on to contradict that claim but admitting that PTP would most likely end up controlling the judiciary and may well make bad and corrupt decisions with regards it, but in your book that's all ok because after four years of a government controlled judiciary, there would be elections and the electorate would no doubt be enraged by judicial injustice and vote them out. Or maybe they wouldn't, maybe the Thai electorate would vote for whoever offers the biggest handout (and no, not because the Thai electorate is stupid, but because a large percentage of the Thai electorate might not have the luxury of voting on ethics what with hungry mouths to feed and bills to pay) and another four years of non-independent, government controlled judiciary would follow.

I don't have the solution, but what i do know is, yours isn't a good one, at least not until there is the sort of accountability and transparency at parliamentary level that exists in a democracy like the one in the US, in which the senate is voted for, but doesn't end up simply as a tool of the government.

And finally, as has already been pointed out, in spite of your claims that the rest of the world is unaware of a system that doesn't involve voting for the senate, the system in the UK, the system on which Thai democracy was modeled, has managed without it for a very long time.

So you are against the current system without knowing what you want to replace it with - how Suthep wishes the country was full of people like you.

Again you repeat that the Thai voters can't be trusted, not because they're stupid but because they're too hungry (first time I've ever heard this silliness). I am actually quite glad you said this though because it actually supports my position. Just think with a few more years of "populist" policies a great many of the poor will move into the middle classes where they'll then have enough money to not be too hungry to be able to vote without adult supervision. The fact is the system has been rigged against the poor for so long resulting in an enormous disparity between living standards within the country that Thailand and its elites are just going to have to accept the political pendulum swinging back a little excessively in the other direction for a while before it settles back somewhere towards the middle and Thailand finally becomes an open and free, first world country. Only once Thailand has reached this point will it be able to have success in reducing the excessive corruption. Note I said reducing as no nation on earth is corruption free. What the Yellow scum are doing, with their constant coups is retarding Thailands growth towards maturity - every time they kneecap democracy they are setting the country back a good 10 years, which is a shame because all they are doing is delaying the inevitable out of their own greed and heartlessness.

As for the UK - The "House of Lords" may technically be the Upper House of the UK parliament, but unlike most countries with Upper and Lower houses it has no voting powers and no powers to pass laws in any way and merely takes on an advisory role to the House of Commons. So, if you would like an unelected house that's fine - as long as they have no power.

No the House of Lords is required to sign off on every single law/Act - they have a veto (this does not remove the bill, but sends it make to the Commons - they can do this indefinitely in most cases, but not cases of bills that were voted on by the public, such as referendums and election manifesto promises - some bills they do have the full right to bin the bill, usually with regard to the Monarchy or the House itself) and they can make amendments. They are NOT and advisory to the Commons, nor were they ever such. They are called the Upper House, because they used to be the house that created the laws and governed the country, under the monarch (who was also a member of the House of Lords) and Commons was for the common people and their chance to raise issue (without veto) - that was changed a long time ago. No idea what you mean by "voting powers". Until recently, under the last Government, the HoL included the Wool-pack, the highest court of the land, but they were the legal advisors to the crown and to both houses - the leader of which was appointed (Lord Chief Justice) - that was changed and they were removed from the HoL (they never took part in the vote in the House anyway - they were a-political as a group) and formed the Supreme Court. They were the only advisory part of the HoL and no longer are. By the way, the HoL is complex in its make up: out of 763 sitting members (there are almost 50 non-sitting members that are barred from sitting for some reason or are ill, infirm or just do not sit): 92 are Peers and claim a seat by birth right (this used to be the majority of the house), 26 are Church of England Bishops (called the Lords Spiritual) and the rest are either Life Peers (made a Peer by the Monarch, QE II, on the advice of Government or House of Lords Appointment Committee).

I agree the system was rigged against the poor and always has been - but it still is too - and the present Government has made no attempt to change that fact either. Indeed, with propaganda, lies and false promises, and the rhetoric, with the enforcement of biased information and stopping other parties with opposing views even the ability to canvass in their strong hold areas, it is the very opposite of trying to get out of that particular rut. The Reds are not the answer to the poor - they are using the poor. The Yellows likewise are not the answer, as they just ignore the poor. There is no answer whilst corruption rules the roost and politicians and their families rape the country to the tune of trillions of baht every year - making themselves fortunes to the people's detriment.

An elected Senate (like an elected House of Lords) has a problem - the members are politically affiliated en-masse. This takes away the very point of having a second house - and makes it just a bigger first house. There are only two ways to lessen that effect: Appoint the members, a maximum percentage allowed per sitting government (so the house can not simply be replaced) from non-political positions (experts/academics/business/laymen/clerics/etc); or disallow affiliation between Senatorial political parties and Primary political parties (of course they may well be similar outlooks, but arms in both houses should never be allowed). In both cases, siblings and immediate family members should not be on the list of appointees - or on the Senatorial party lists - of sitting members of the primary house.

The latter was pretty much how the bill for Senatorial Reform was written, it was PTP that tacked on to allow siblings and family members of sitting members of parliament, it was the reason the bill was suddenly an anathema.

I note the quote in your signature - “A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool”. With that in mind, I respond to thee....

1. “the HoL has a veto” and “they are NOT an advisory to the Commons, nor were they ever such”

“...the power of the House of Lords was such that any bill passed in the House of Commons could be defeated and therefore rejected in the House of Lords. This meant that on occasions the Commons had to adjust a bill so that it was acceptable to the Lords and would therefore be passed. However, with society rapidly changing at the start of the Twentieth Century, it was only a matter of time before a clash occurred between both Houses.This clash came in 1909. The Lords refused to pass the budget prepared by David Lloyd George, Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer. This so-called ‘People’s Budget’ had been touted as a mainstay of what was to become the Welfare State. There were many in the Liberal Party – who had won an overwhelming victory in the 1906 General Election – who saw the Lords as peers who simply abused their power and privilege. Over the next two years a campaign was started to reduce the power of the Lords. This culminated with the 1911 Parliament Act. The Lords still had the right to scrutinize bills passed by the Commons but they could no longer kill off a bill. The Lords could only reject a bill three times within one year. After this it became law. The 1949 Parliament Act ended the right of the Lords to stop any ‘money bills’.

If, after reading the above, you plan on continuing your line of argument I suggest that you first pay a visit to the official UK government website, absorb some facts and then take a moment to rethink your position before letting your fingers hit the keyboard.

1. “I agree the system was rigged against the poor and always has been - but it still is too”.

The 1997 Thai constitution had a fully elected senate - the unelected post-coup government forced upon the citizenry a revised constitution that amongst other things altered the senate to a half elected, half appointed chamber (i.e. diluted democracy). Yinglucks’ elected government (2011, 53% of the vote) did in fact attempt to change the rigged system, they began the (legal) process of amending the constitution, aiming to return the nations’ upper house to a democratic footing but they were illegally prevented from doing so by the (Yellow) Thai enemies of democracy.

1. “...propaganda, lies and false promises and rhetoric.....out of that particular rut”.

The Reds have the support of 15-16 million voters and the Democrats about 11-12 million. What you’ve done here is parrot a list of unproven allegations and slander by the “majority hating” Yellow movement in an irrational attempt to deny the will of the people in elections. A free and fair election held in present day Thailand would be easily won by the Reds - even the Democrat leadership (Abhisit, Korn et al.) acknowledge this fact - so should you as anything else is but to live in denial.

1. “The Reds are not the answer to the poor...”.

That may very well be your belief or opinion, but what right do you have to force it on the poor. They can decide for themselves who best serves their interests and they in fact do so by repeatedly voting into power Red governments. Until the Democrats modernize and put together a decent set of policies that helps improve the standard of living of the poor the fact is that the Reds will continue to be the choice of the poor.

1. “An elected senate (like an elected HoL) has a problem”.

There has been and continues to be reforms being undertaken in the UK to in fact change the HoL into an elected chamber. In a series of votes as to what the new make up of the HoL should be, ranging from 0% elected to 100% elected the strongest support in the House of Commons (337 for - 224 against) was for the HoL to be fully elected. It is inevitable that the unelected nature of the HoL’s days are numbered. It is generally agreed the world over that a bicameral system with both chambers being fully elected is the most democratic form of government mankind has come up with - anything less is a denial of a peoples right to sovereignty over their own nation.

DJJamie,just out of interest, where are you getting the figure of 80% of the population want Yingluck to resign from?

If that were the case, that would have refelected in the recent Polls would it not?

I think I can answer that for you. The 80% is

All votes cast for parties other than PTP + all no votes + all spoiled ballots + all eligible voters that did not vote.

They delusional premise is that 100% of eligible voters who did not vote for PTP are actually die hard Suthep supporters.

Beyond belief that anyone could make the 80% claim and keep a straight face.

Thailand appears to be stuck in an endless cycle of violence and chaos. It can only get worse. It's festering.

Thanks to Suthep !

So you think Suthep threw the grenade?

Probably not, the windows at the Dusit Thani don't open.

I'm guessing this is the same NIDA that is responsible for what is widely considered grossly unreliable and one eyed polling? And I've searched the article to find their mandate to make such statements. Maybe I missed it.

Nothing new here, move on ....

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

But absolutely correct assessment of this government all the same.

Biased, corrupt and a danger to the kingdom of Thailand from one end to the other.

Everywhere you turn now... death throes of all the acronym groups of the right wing lunatic fringe.

Someone should do these groups a favour and euthanise the lot.

The fact that this is only a " Memorandum of Understanding " - which is a form of gentleman's agreement - in itself acknowledges that the administration no longer has the power to conduct legal negotiations. In fact, as of today, they do not have the power to discuss anything, as the date for a parliamentary sitting was yesterday, and the caretaker status of the administration has been stripped as per the constitution. Two former members of the Supreme Court are already of that opinion, and the Constitutional Court will undoubtedly rule on it this month.

Now all the faux sympathy shown earlier by the Yellows for the farmers when they thought the late payments would entice the rural folk to join mob in the street is exposed for the fraud it was. The government secures a deal to sell 1 million tonnes of rice and the Yellows are devastated. They would rather the farmers be forced to continue to suffer for as long as possible in the hope that they are eventually broken and it becomes that little bit more likely that the mob can finally steal power. All the anti-democrats know is how to sabotage at all costs. They are actively hoping this deal collapses - selfish fools.

Now all the faux sympathy shown earlier by the Yellows for the farmers when they thought the late payments would entice the rural folk to join mob in the street is exposed for the fraud it was. The government secures a deal to sell 1 million tonnes of rice and the Yellows are devastated. They would rather the farmers be forced to continue to suffer for as long as possible in the hope that they are eventually broken and it becomes that little bit more likely that the mob can finally steal power. All the anti-democrats know is how to sabotage at all costs. They are actively hoping this deal collapses - selfish fools.

If March 4th is the firm and definitive drop dead date of the interim government, then why didn't Suthep go home and wait after he screwed up the election. All Suthep had to do after Feb 3rd was to go home and circle the March 4th date in red on one of his several calendars (to include 2006) then come back today to appoint his feudal council.

So now all of a sudden Suthep's voices here know with a clear certainty that the legal case against the government is a sure thing, that the interim government had been zombies all along.

Certain posters will claim they have been constitutionally certain for weeks if not longer. If so, then why didn't the few constitutional expert prognosticators call on Suthep to stop his insurrection which resulted in deaths, limbs lost, great harm to the society and the economy? And how can these TVF constitutional experts be so certain how the CC will rule in this dispute?

So very, completely, absolutely certain.

Suthep's Insurrection? Anti-government protests caused by an undemocratic blanket amnesty bill pushing government; protests which met violence and started to retaliate? 'Insurrection'?

It would look to some that the caretaker government is very busy to prosecute political opponents. The UN doesn't like that.

As for a possible ruling, we'll see. Mind you a government with majority party Pheu Thai openly led and commanded by a criminal fugitive seems to ask for a negative advise on it's legal status. Only in democracies of course.

Personally I wonder what would happen if Suthep let's himself be arrested. He would become a political prisoner, a 'Nelson Mandela' who some others only shook hands with. If the government would triumphantly display him he'd be a martyr, if they hid him the same.

Of course I have no doubt Ms. Yingluck would state something like that he was kept in safety for his own sake.

Those are intellectually stimulating hypotheticals which I'll pass on at this time, thx.

Intellectually stimulating.

How about bizarre, deluded and incomprehensible.

Wise move on the pass.

I too would leave it alone.

_{What a load of cobblers that is!!!}

_{The only thing that has changed pipkins is your avatar - why do you think that people cottoned on to who you really are (were).}

_{Could it be the drivel factors matching each other perfectly???}

Point me in the right direction and I would be more than happy to use Pipkins avatar.

Yes, it was tilted in favour of one group - the responsible group that ensures that unjust and corruption enhancing bills and laws are not passed into law. A simpler way to put it would be to describe it as a Thaksin oriented parties checks and balances system!!!!

Why do you think that he wanted to alter it so badly to suit his personal agenda? It couldn't be to do with the 2 trillion baht corruption fund or his 'get me back into Thailand' at any cost amnesty bill, could it by any chance???

Thank god Suthep came on the scene to rescue the Thai people!!!

The responsible group - that can't win an election.

A simpler way to put it would be to describe it as an anti democratic denial of the peoples right to choose their own government.

You don't have to search to hard to find several quotes from old mate Abhisit in support of the exact amendments mentioned here - Thailand should have a fully elected senate - anything else is a denial of democracy.

Thank god Suthep came on the scene to hasten the endgame by leading the last futile effort of the Yellow crims to overthrow the rule of law. The PDRC embarrassment will most likely be the final nail in this decade long right wing insurrection. The Thai people will very shortly be free to decide their own destiny with a government of their choice implementing to policies they so desperately want.

"a huge number of people will take to the streets to object"

I don't think so...

Chalerm is right about this. Many people WILL take to the streets to protest if this gov is removed. All of them will be REDS from the north.

They do not agree with the constitution and want the PTP to rule the land with their simplistic understanding of democract.

Plus there is the fact that the ruling gov (including Chalerm) do not want to lose their postion of power.

Chalerms statement about forming a new party is dubious to say the least. He fails to mention that any new party needs approval before they can participate legally in politics. Also there are the cases against these PTP leaders and current leaders that should have all of them banned from politics.

As seen in another post these leaders are already trying to get their family members into the senate. I dont think the PTP foresaw the Senate as a threat to them so did not infiltrate that gov position.

They do not agree with the constitution? You clearly have no idea as to what has been going on in Thailand for the last decade. The Yellows are the only ones that have ever operated outside of the constitution with their military and judicial coups as well as their illegal street mobs. The Reds in the streets in 2010 were actually there to defend and uphold the constitution against the elite upsurpers who had stolen power from the people. The Reds have fought and died before to defend the constitution and Charlem is just stating the obvious fact that the Reds will again do what must be done to defend the rule of law in the land they love. The Yellows would be much better served if they learnt to accept election results because the consequences of them not will be devastating.

You are a funny man! In the past few months who has been trying to go around the constitution by any means possible? Who has ignored the constutution? You can not use the past to justify what the leaders of this country are and have been doing. Whats worse is that they are making the word democracy a joke. The PTP have been devious, subversive, intimidating and lyers. Suthep is just as bad but he has done more because he has challenged thr constitution instead of being sneaky trying to change it or ignore it like the PTP have done.

What you fail to see is that the REDS are following the PTP blindly. When hitler ruled the masses loved him. That does not make that he was a good leader for the people. Just because a majority doesnt see the bad that someone is doing does not mean their chosen leader is not a bad one. It only means the followers are being led based on what they are told wether it be truth or lies. Sometimes it takes a single person to shine the light on yhe blinded and misguided matter what it takes to do it

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

In the past few months it has been Suthep and his rabble that has completely ignored the constitution. This is beyond obvious to anyone not suffering from serious intellectual deficiencies. Nobody here is making democracy a joke, the situation is that one side simply refuses to accept democracy because they never win elections. Yingluck did the right thing by the constitution and the nation by calling a snap election - returning power to the people to decide who should govern the land - no deviousness, subversiveness, intimidation or lying here - just an honest government acting honestly. The rest of your post appears to be an incoherent babble that seems to be trying to, like Suthep, deny democracy in favour of some form of elite dictatorship.

Surely this honest Gov you are talking about isnt the PTP party? Weekly they make contradictory statements to cover their lies. Daily promises made to the farmers were lies. You can qoute fault at Suthep but those same lies were said prior to Suthep. If YL did the right thing by the constitution then why did she sign on an illegal amnesty bill that was devious and subversive when they tried to passit in the middle of the night ? What about the people in the Norths claim about intimidation using threats if they didnt vote for PTP members. Are you really so blind that you cant see any of this? Forget Suthep is there for just a minute. Forget what the PTP is telling you. Look at what has been said and done recently without biased blinders on. Then maybe you can sort out the truth and lies.

Some people say the Northerners are stupid like buffalos. I disagree! I think they are just ignorant becausr they are constantly being fed the PTPs version of the truth. If a person told you a lie every day, given time you will accept that lie as truth. Especially when nobody is refuting that it is really a lie. In time you will defend that lie because you believe it as a truth. This is what has happened in the north. Secluded from all except what they hear on PTP radio and tv. If you thought the last part if my comment was babble then it was meant for you. Take off your blinderS.

I dont support suthep and he is just as bad as the PTp. Only difference is that he is not in control of this country. The PTPare and they have emptied this countries money and ABused their positions for personal gain.

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The amnesty bill wasn't illegal, it was unwise but but not illegal. The proposed constitutional amendment to make the senate a fully elected chamber was also quite legal and was in fact an amendment Abhisit himself supported back in 2007 - before he sold his soul.

As for the rest - drivel trying to deny the popularity of the PTP government. Voters are too dumb / ignorant / uneducated or are intimidated / bought / brainwashed. If rural voters are truly as pathetic as the Yellow mob claim, then surely it would be the easiest of things for the Democrats - the party of the intelligent, educated good people to win them over. Yet the Dems keep on boycotting elections. The fact is, Thai voters continuously make informed decisions to elect Red governments and a small minority continuously try to deny them the right to do so.

Messing around with the party logo. Gonna have a lot of hurt feelings there.

Wanna bet a STR leader's house gets attacked tomorrow? Only question is it a gun attack, a grenade or both?

I would fully support the police stationing officers at every STR members house(not just the leaders - every members) to prevent such an atrocity occurring.

I'm quite sure the police budget will be able to absorb the costs of the 5 or 6 officers it would require to do this.

I'm sure they'll do their job valiantly protecting the protestors from attacks as they have the last few months.

Actually, the most likely outcome would probably be the police catching the PDRC clowns bombing their own houses with dud grenades.

"a huge number of people will take to the streets to object"

I don't think so...

Chalerm is right about this. Many people WILL take to the streets to protest if this gov is removed. All of them will be REDS from the north.

They do not agree with the constitution and want the PTP to rule the land with their simplistic understanding of democract.

Plus there is the fact that the ruling gov (including Chalerm) do not want to lose their postion of power.

Chalerms statement about forming a new party is dubious to say the least. He fails to mention that any new party needs approval before they can participate legally in politics. Also there are the cases against these PTP leaders and current leaders that should have all of them banned from politics.

As seen in another post these leaders are already trying to get their family members into the senate. I dont think the PTP foresaw the Senate as a threat to them so did not infiltrate that gov position.

They do not agree with the constitution? You clearly have no idea as to what has been going on in Thailand for the last decade. The Yellows are the only ones that have ever operated outside of the constitution with their military and judicial coups as well as their illegal street mobs. The Reds in the streets in 2010 were actually there to defend and uphold the constitution against the elite upsurpers who had stolen power from the people. The Reds have fought and died before to defend the constitution and Charlem is just stating the obvious fact that the Reds will again do what must be done to defend the rule of law in the land they love. The Yellows would be much better served if they learnt to accept election results because the consequences of them not will be devastating.

You are a funny man! In the past few months who has been trying to go around the constitution by any means possible? Who has ignored the constutution? You can not use the past to justify what the leaders of this country are and have been doing. Whats worse is that they are making the word democracy a joke. The PTP have been devious, subversive, intimidating and lyers. Suthep is just as bad but he has done more because he has challenged thr constitution instead of being sneaky trying to change it or ignore it like the PTP have done.

What you fail to see is that the REDS are following the PTP blindly. When hitler ruled the masses loved him. That does not make that he was a good leader for the people. Just because a majority doesnt see the bad that someone is doing does not mean their chosen leader is not a bad one. It only means the followers are being led based on what they are told wether it be truth or lies. Sometimes it takes a single person to shine the light on yhe blinded and misguided matter what it takes to do it

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

In the past few months it has been Suthep and his rabble that has completely ignored the constitution. This is beyond obvious to anyone not suffering from serious intellectual deficiencies. Nobody here is making democracy a joke, the situation is that one side simply refuses to accept democracy because they never win elections. Yingluck did the right thing by the constitution and the nation by calling a snap election - returning power to the people to decide who should govern the land - no deviousness, subversiveness, intimidation or lying here - just an honest government acting honestly. The rest of your post appears to be an incoherent babble that seems to be trying to, like Suthep, deny democracy in favour of some form of elite dictatorship.

This is a far cry from the student lead revolution in 92 , bye bye Junta and it seems that only a small minority of students are involved, the PTP can thank their lucky stars that this is the case, long timers will remember the strong student cause of that era, they persisted and one, although much older ,some are still active with Suthep in this protest, but most remain silent , I wounder why?

They're probably inactive because they don't want the embarrassment of being associated with this overwhelming failure of Sutheps', or maybe it's because they are now law abiding citizens who no longer want to associate with the Yellow crims.

"a huge number of people will take to the streets to object"

I don't think so...

Chalerm is right about this. Many people WILL take to the streets to protest if this gov is removed. All of them will be REDS from the north.

They do not agree with the constitution and want the PTP to rule the land with their simplistic understanding of democract.

Plus there is the fact that the ruling gov (including Chalerm) do not want to lose their postion of power.

Chalerms statement about forming a new party is dubious to say the least. He fails to mention that any new party needs approval before they can participate legally in politics. Also there are the cases against these PTP leaders and current leaders that should have all of them banned from politics.

As seen in another post these leaders are already trying to get their family members into the senate. I dont think the PTP foresaw the Senate as a threat to them so did not infiltrate that gov position.

They do not agree with the constitution? You clearly have no idea as to what has been going on in Thailand for the last decade. The Yellows are the only ones that have ever operated outside of the constitution with their military and judicial coups as well as their illegal street mobs. The Reds in the streets in 2010 were actually there to defend and uphold the constitution against the elite upsurpers who had stolen power from the people. The Reds have fought and died before to defend the constitution and Charlem is just stating the obvious fact that the Reds will again do what must be done to defend the rule of law in the land they love. The Yellows would be much better served if they learnt to accept election results because the consequences of them not will be devastating.

But wasn't Chalerm gonna clean it all up, and arrest all the leaders, within 3 days ?

Now I remember that statement was a month ago.

You may have misheard Charlem. He was going to round up all 3 of the protestors.

Fortunately for him he doesn't actually have to do anything as the Shutdown Bangkok circus self imploded leaving behind nothing more than a couple of homeless bums in the park.

p.s. we must be just about due for Suthep to announce another final, last ever, never to be repeated ultimate victory march. It has been at least a day or two since the last announcement.

Messing around with the party logo. Gonna have a lot of hurt feelings there.

Wanna bet a STR leader's house gets attacked tomorrow? Only question is it a gun attack, a grenade or both?

I would fully support the police stationing officers at every STR members house(not just the leaders - every members) to prevent such an atrocity occurring.

I'm quite sure the police budget will be able to absorb the costs of the 5 or 6 officers it would require to do this.

More intimidation used on thr PRDC. While the idiot government wants to file charges on people who blow their whistles, they don't seem to be doing much to catch the real armed criminals.

Second grenade in less than a week thrown into the residence of a prominent PDRC personalty that fails to actually detonate.

Either the Reds are as dumb as Chitpas thinks they are or..... they're both just staged events trying to keep a dying protest movement in the news.

I think we all know which is the most likely story here.