way2muchcoffee

Nowhere in my original statement did I say that the reds should get away with anyhthing. All I did was describe a cycle that is plainly obvious, and put forward elections as a way to confirm Abhisit's position as legitimate and defeat the red argument once and for all.

And yet you support the demonstrations which is perpetuating the cycle of mob rule. Or do you think the redshirts should disband immediately?

I remember a few months ago, the Puea Thai offered the Democrats to create a "power-sharing" deal. They declined. I think that would have been a solution. Not sure if it's still on the table.

The only thing on the table at this point is dissolve house in 15 days or we will commit economic terrorism and bring the business district of Bangkok to a halt, while terrorizing the residents of Bangkok.

Does anyone have a prediction on how this will all end? It is beyond me to figure out. And it looks like a lot at the top of things arent really sure either. Conditions for soemone to make a horrible mistake are there.

I don't think there is an acceptable solution. Here are the possibilities as I see them:

1) The redshirts could halt their demonstrations or at least move them to a legal location and show respect for the law. This would make their 'so-called' democracy protests legitimate. As of now their actions have made them illegitimate. They have resorted to criminal behavior. The redshirts are destroying the democracy that that seem to espouse, and they don't seem to mind if they take down the country along the way. This is ironic because elections are democratic, but demanding them mid-term after their guys were kicked out for anti-democratic vote buying is decidedly undemocratic. I believe that they won't stop, the rhetoric is too strong, they have won several psychological wars in recent days and they have the momentum.

2) The government cannot go in and shut the demonstrations down. The demonstrations would only resume the following day and would be coupled with more bombs and other methods of 'guerrilla warfare' both in Bangkok and in the provinces. A riot would surely ensue and the resulting loss of life and damage to property would be immense and unacceptable.

3) The government cannot dissolve the house and call for elections under these circumstances. The precedent it would set will set Thailand back years. The counter-demonstrations from the PAD will only continue the problems, thus ensuring a cycle of violence and mob rule for the foreseeable future.

4) The government could just wait them out, but who knows how long this could go on. The anarchy and lawlessness in the streets is intolerable to any civilized society. The citizens of Bangkok will likely rise up. You could see bombings of redshirt demonstrations, similar to the bombings of the PAD encampments. This will be disastrous if it happens. I don't have much hope that these demonstrations will just fizzle.

5) The UDD hasn't negotiated in good faith. They have not offered realistic compromise to their demands. For now negotiation seems to be off the table. I have hope that after some time venting their frustrations on the citizens of Bangkok the redshirts may be amenable to further negotiation.

In short, I don't see any positive solutions to this crisis that will be acceptable to the various players.

Which agencies were "set up to convict one side"?

The AEC/ASC was set up by the CNS. Their only task was to investigate corruption in the TRT. It was believed that only an independent investigative body could be trusted with this task.

Levelhead gives us a clear understanding of exactly why these demonstrations are taking place.

A massive and sustained propaganda war of lies, half-truths, hyperbole, and sprinkled with a few facts, has been waged for over a year in nearly every northern/northeastern village. People have been whipped into a frenzy and the truth no longer matters.

What if the PTP cheats again? Should they be dissolved according to the constitution? There is every reason to believe that they will do so, especially fuelled by their current lawlessness and belief that they are above the law. This along with their history strongly suggests that the PTP have no intention of running a clean campaign.

And what about free campaigns? The threats of violence and actual violence the redshirts have inflicted on anyone with an opposing view are unacceptable and there is no reason to expect anything will change in this respect. What kind of an election can be called free and fair if you aren't allowed to campaign in half of the country?

Plenty of problems from your side, but no solutions. Democracy is not a perfect system, but unfortunately there doesn't seem to be another that doesn't involve dictators.

You are saying that Abhist should rule forever, simply because you like him and hold the opposition in low regard. How democratic is that?

Both of those issues are decidedly for 'your side' to address. The inability of you or the redshirt leaders to address or offer solution to two of the most pertinent objections to holding immediate elections speaks volumes.

The demand for house dissolution is ill thought out. It appears that nobody on the redshirt side bothers to think about the consequences or the very real issues that house dissolution will create. They want what they want and they want it now, health of the country and long-term consequences be damned.

I agree totally that there should be an election, but i don't agree that a minority who have taken to the streets have any right to demand the date of that election. What's democratic about that? Nothing.

The problem is in the precedent that was set. The yellows got away with it - their street protests and airport blockade triggered change outside the normal democratic process of the ballot box. They opened a Pandora's box of mob-rule that has unfortunately torn apart Thailand's fledgeling democracy. Here we are, some years later, and the country is still unable to function normally. Has all this insanity been worth it, just to get rid of Thaksin who could have been voted out a the ballot box anyway?

Holding an election now, and giving Abhisit a mandate would (if Abhisit indeed got elected) cause the reds and Thaksin a massive loss of face and would justify strict measures to get them off the streets. Either way, the result of any election should be respected as the opinion of the general public and whoever the Thai people choose to be their master, even the devil himself, should not be then kicked out of office. Otherwise, this destructive cycle will of course continue indefinitely.

Why is Abhisit so insecure?

What if the PTP cheats again? Should they be dissolved according to the constitution? There is every reason to believe that they will do so, fuelled by their current lawlessness and belief that they are above the law. This, along with their history, strongly suggests that the PTP have no intention of running a clean campaign.

And what about free campaigns? The threats of violence and actual violence the redshirts have inflicted on anyone with an opposing view are unacceptable, and there is no reason to expect anything will change in this respect. What kind of an election can be called free and fair if you aren't allowed to campaign in half of the country?

[in my village in Surin, there is 0% supporting the redshirt protest. There used to be 60% THAI RAK THAI/PHEU THAI supporters.

Interesting. I've just come back from spending a week in a village in Surin. Based on informal conversations with many folks in the village, listening to their banter etc I would put the distribution there at about:

Pro-Red: 70%

Pro-Government: 10%

Undecided: 20%

To be expected. The heartlands of TRT aren't likely to change their views any time soon.

It was also very interesting that they all know that my wife and I are pro-government. They made no attempt to push their beliefs or criticize ours. In fact, they generally preferred to steer any political conversation to safer topics to avoid any potential confrontation or hard feelings. It was something like - yes we have our beliefs and you have yours. You all are here for a holiday so let's just enjoy each other's company while you are here - friends, family, fun. I was rather impressed by this attitude.

[in my village in Surin, there is 0% supporting the redshirt protest. There used to be 60% THAI RAK THAI/PHEU THAI supporters.

Interesting. I've just come back from spending a week in a village in Surin. Based on informal conversations with many folks in the village, listening to their banter etc I would put the distribution there at about:

Pro-Red: 70%

Pro-Government: 10%

Undecided: 20%

The Revenge of The Reds.....................

As the elderly elites age they will come to rely more and more upon their caregivers that have historically come from the North.

Will these northerners leave the shrivelled elites to sit in their feces? So many scenarios. The lesson is that one should be kind to all as we never know when we may need the kindness returned.

yes it is an issue for the Elderly elite only, the issaners at 70 or more have to grow their rice, are fishing or are making baskets with bamboos...No pension funds, only solidarity between family members.

Is that your experience? My experience from my wife's village, mostly farmers, is that the retirement age is between 45 and 50 due to the physically demanding nature of farm work.

After this age they may do the occasional odd job in the village. If they have enough smarts and money they may open a village shop, or set up a small business to make baskets or charcoal. But mostly they sit around all day, walk the cows, pick some herbs for dinner, with the menfolk occasionally catching fish or frogs.

The money they live on after about 50 primarily comes from their children or grandchildren. After 60 they get a 500 bt monthly stipend from the government and this is supplemented by their children or grandchildren.

yes it s what I witness in Northern Issan, the village is empty and everybody is working in the fields, men and women, at very advanced age. (Father in law and wife as well as their friends....)

But what do they do in the other 6-8 months of the year? Rice farming is not steady work. At least half of the year there is nothing to do with their crops. Perhaps conditions are different in Southern Isaan. My wife's village is in Surin.

Please note, I am not making judgments or saying they are lazy. I am simply stating that there is very little for them to do once they have reached the age of about 50 as their bodies are bent and broken from farming. At 50 they look like they are 70. Also, before the age of 50 there is very little to do for much of the year if they are a farming family.

The young men will usually go off to do itinerant construction work, mostly in Bangkok or the surrounding areas. If they are lucky they might find something a little closer to home.

Well it looks like things are set to go off today. The roads surrounding the protest area have been blocked by the military and police. Troops apparently awaiting to order to converge. UDD is ordering the protesters to fight the police and military, with Sae Daeng's boys tooling up. UDD threatening to invade Abhisit's private residence. This doesn't look good.

Policy corruption is theft.

Down and dirty contract corruption is theft.

The Revenge of The Reds.....................

As the elderly elites age they will come to rely more and more upon their caregivers that have historically come from the North.

Will these northerners leave the shrivelled elites to sit in their feces? So many scenarios. The lesson is that one should be kind to all as we never know when we may need the kindness returned.

yes it is an issue for the Elderly elite only, the issaners at 70 or more have to grow their rice, are fishing or are making baskets with bamboos...No pension funds, only solidarity between family members.

Is that your experience? My experience from my wife's village, mostly farmers, is that the retirement age is between 45 and 50 due to the physically demanding nature of farm work.

After this age they may do the occasional odd job in the village. If they have enough smarts and money they may open a village shop, or set up a small business to make baskets or charcoal. But mostly they sit around all day, walk the cows, pick some herbs for dinner, with the menfolk occasionally catching fish or frogs.

The money they live on after about 50 primarily comes from their children or grandchildren. After 60 they get a 500 bt monthly stipend from the government and this is supplemented by their children or grandchildren.

The government knew since inception that they have the authority to deal with the red but decided to throw the hot potato to court. However, it was ricochets back to the government - court washed their hands...brilliant!

Alternately, Abhisit wanted to add legitimacy to any efforts he might make to remove the illegal protesters. He won on two points:

1) Court confirmed that they are illegally protesting in violation of constitutional law

2) Court confirmed that he has the power to remove them at his discretion.

The court stopped short of ordering the removal of the protesters as under the ISA the government already has the authority to make that decision and it would therefore be inappropriate for the court to interfere.

Yes, the paper trail is there and obviously end of the day such large donations often go towards vote buying.

However, the issue is here that the bank accounts clearly show the money trail the "excuse" trying to be made is to try to say the accounts are not linked and therefore there is no case.

EG I give 200 baht to Jack, who gives it to Jill and who gives it to Fred, pre-ageeed.

Actually I have given Fred 200 baht.

I can say I never gave him 200 baht and I do not know who Jill is.

Pretty simple way of looking at the case here. Its blatently obvious what happened, but people are trying to muddy the waters and come up with a flimsy reason why the elite sponsered Democrats should again avoid dissolution.

A similar case may be Thaksin and the land buying by his wife.

He had nothing to do with the deal, his wife and the seller were found guilty of nothing, but Thaksin was the only one found guilty based on "association" even though he had no direct influence of knowledge of the deal.

Again, in the Takky case he is found guilty - no excuses.

In the Democrats case everyone is expecting them to be found not guilty based on a flimsy excuse, one which could not be used by anyone in TRT/PPP as the courts would throw it out.

Sadly it all boils down presently to what is nearly a, coup appointed EC, coup appointed Assets Examination Committee and coup appointed top judiciary.

They all appear to be anti TRT, PPP, PTP, Thaksin etc... and pro-elite, Democrats etc..... to such an extent that "double standards" are now becoming the new standard.

Which is why the people are now in red shirts demanding an end to the double standards and to get democracy back.

1) You make blatant and unsupportable accusations that the money was used for vote buying. There is no proof of this, so in fact it is you who is muddying waters here.

2) In order to convict and dissolve the Democrat Party there would need to be iron-clad proof of the 'pre-agreed' part. There is no such proof.

3) There is no comparison between either the Democrat donations case or the PPP dissolution case or in the Thaksin Ratchadapisek land case. It is useless to compare them because they have nothing to do with each other. the crimes are not the same. The evidence is not the same. Again you poorly attempt to muddy waters now for a later double standards argument.

4) You then say that if similar arguments were presented by PPP then they would have been thrown out of court. Again, these cases are not at all the same, much as you might wish them to be.

I see. So now anyone who disagrees with the leaders of the redshirt movement must be a racist. Nice to see the bar set so high here on TV.

I am flattered to see that a moderator has weighed in, full bias and all and provided a response which wasn't even relevant to my initial position. I respond to the points as follows;

1. How many Issan farmers pay taxes?

Most of them. How so you ask? The Thai government introduced a series of indirect taxes in 1992 starting with the VAT. Although farm products are mostly exempt, the goods and services of many items associated with farming are not. Thailand never ever relied upon personal income taxes. It is a country where only about 20% of the population pays some form of income tax. If you believe that Thailand relies on that 20%, then you are greatly mistaken. the 3% SBT and 7% VAT are important revenue sources as are the other series of fees. The Issan farmer is alot like the Bangkok elites because that farmer pays the same rate of tax on his or her purchases. Unfortunately, such a system is hardly progressive and acts to put a larger share of the tax burden on the poor.

You are making 2 mistakes here:

1) You assume that the shop-owners keep accurate books and that they declare all incomes. As we all know, most street vendors (even if they reach the tax income bracket), mom and pop shops, normal stores etc greatly under-represent their incomes. If you don't believe me, just take a day and go over their books. I have seen some.

2) You say that a tax-system that is not progressing in scale is unfair to the poor when it comes to the VAT. Not at all, fair is that people pay an equal share added in tax on their purchase. The richer, doing more purchases, already pay several times more in actual tax baht than the poor. You want the one buying an imported steak instead of a cheap local chicken breast to be further penalized by adding twice the amount of VAT on their purchase?

Tawp, you are the one that has it wrong. Maybe your libertarian sensitivities have taken over?

1. It doesn't matter if the mom amd pop stores under declare their income. They are taxed when they purchase their stock. That's how VAT works. The supplier charges them. True the suppliers can sometimes fiddle with their books, but who are the suppliers for all of these vendors? It all is in the hands of a few distributors who act as a semi monopoly. Who are the major trading houses in Thailand and who benefits from all of this? The same oligarchy.

2. You do not understand how a VAT/GST system works. Perhaps this is because you are an American and have never seen it in action. In an affluent nation it can and does work. However, in an impoverished nation, it has more costs than benefits. here's why;

The VAT classified as a regressive tax. Regressive taxes tend to benefit the wealthy and punish the poor. Why? Someone making 1 million baht a year may only spend 15% of their income, so only 15% is taxed. The guy that operates a noodle stand may only make 100,000 baht a year and spends it all supporting his family. As such this person is taxed on 100% of his income. You may counter and say well if this person doesn't spend he won't have to pay VAT, but what if he has no choice living a subsistence life?

Western countries like Canada address this negative aspect of the tax by providing automatic refunds paid on a quarterly basis to those below a set income. Thailand does not do this. I happen to be a big advocate of the VAT because it cuts into the "black" market for goods and services. The mechanic may make a deal to fix your car, but he still has to pay VAT on the parts that he will use for the repairs so the only thing he is giving up is his labour income. The government still manages to get more than it would under a basic sales tax system. However, VAT works best in countries where there is affluence.

Please also keep in mind that specific sectors and industries are VAT exempt. These special trade zones are not controlled by the poor, but once again by the same group of families that own most things in Thailand.

Good explanations GK.

Reds pushing way into EC Building right now according to Tulsathit tweets.

A few minutes later....

Reds at EC halted by leaders - Wait 15 more minutes

Nice try, but Thaksin is their LEADER, not someone just "associated" with them. BTW, their other leaders are also criminals based on their violent rhetoric in the last few days, so they aren't any great shakes either.

No he's not. He's in a figurehead position. The leadership is being carried out by the 3 leaders at the head of the rally.

Give it a rest. Thaksin has been pushed to the side and it is the tail that wags that dog.

That's a bit like saying the middle managers are in charge of a company and the CEO is marginalized, powerless, and only a figurehead.

Also Article 70 might be appropriate.

Section 70: Every person shall have the duty to defend the country and obey the law.

Careful there. Obeying the law would inconvenience a great many foreigners. They delight in stating that they love Thailand because of the lawlessness. Do you want some of those great bars that pimp out locals to have to shut down? Noodle shop owners to close because they don't have work permits? Foreign "developers" to actually build according to fire & safety code? What of the time share touts?

What's that you say? You meant only that this would apply for the Thais? ahhhh gotchya.I understand now. One law for Bwana and another for the workers.

Someone might also interpret your recommendation interpret to mean that it's time to remove some of the entrenched leadership and institutions along with meddlesome opinionated foreigners This might prove a tad inconvenient for many foreign guests in Thailand.

Chapter IV

Duties of Thai People

Section 70: Every person shall have the duty to defend the country and obey the law.

Interesting comments. I really don't see your point. It might appear that you are recommending a country without laws. Do you have to reach so far? The post was in response to the UDD using the constitution to defend their actions when in fact their actions are illegal under both this Article and the one they claim excuses them. Also, did you notice that this article is in the chapter for Duties of Thai People?

By the way, in case you missed it, article 63 is the one the UDD believes protect their actions. Article 62 seems relevant.

Part 11

Liberty to Assemble and Association

Section 62: A person shall enjoy the liberty to assemble peacefully and without arms.

Restriction on such liberty under paragraph one shall not be imposed except by virtue

of the law specifically enacted for the case of public assembling and for securing public

convenience in the use of public places or for maintaining peace and order during the

time when the country is in a state of war or when a state of emergency or martial law is

declared.

Section 63: A person shall enjoy the liberty to unite and form an association, a union,

league, cooperative, farmers group, private organization or any other groups.

State officials and employees, like other citizens, have the right to join groups, unless

it has no impact on the administration of the country and consistency in the provision of

public services.

Restriction on rights and liberties under paragraph one and paragraph two is

prohibited except by virtue of the law specifically enacted for protecting the common

interest of the public, maintaining public order or good morals or preventing economic

monopoly.Duties of the Thai People

Also Article 70 might be appropriate.

Section 70: Every person shall have the duty to defend the country and obey the law.

ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE UDD:

1. The area around the Rachaprasong

intersection is public space, not government/ official space.

Article 63 of the Constitution states that the public have the right

to assemble.

2. Constitutional law is the highest

form of law in the country, and gives people the right to assemble.

Therefore, according to this constitutional right, any notification

by the government to try to prohibit this assembly is invalid and

cannot be enforced.

3.

Any arrest or control of the

population who are exercising their right to peaceful protest, free

from weapons, is illegal according to the law of the land.

4.

Demands by the public for the

government to dissolve parliament are demands made in accordance

with the law and the principles of democracy. Therefore, government

officials do not have the authority to quell or disperse the

protester's assembly.

Perhaps they should have read Section 62.

Section 62: A person shall enjoy the liberty to assemble peacefully and without arms.

Restriction on such liberty under paragraph one shall not be imposed except by virtue

of the law specifically enacted for the case of public assembling and for securing public

convenience in the use of public places or for maintaining peace and order during the

time when the country is in a state of war or when a state of emergency or martial law is

declared.

Folks be careful. There may be some agent provocateurs on board who would relentlessly bait people into slipping up and getting themselves suspended or banned. I urge all to exercise caution.

I think in order to clear up who has the right to update on the situation in Bangkok, and who are just noise and posting from afar and causing trouble lets have a photo verfication session.

Get hold of the Bangkok Post and the Nation, today's prints.

Walk to a well known Bangkok landmark, Emporium, MBK, Sky Train etc.. and take a photo of both of the papers together with the landmark in the background.

Then put your user name as a watermark on the picture, and then post it on here.

Then readers will know WHO IS IN BANGKOK, and who are pretending to be in Bangkok.

Good idea ? I think so.

What for? Patent nonsense. I'm in Bangkok but I'm certainly not going to do as you suggest. And for others who are not in Bangkok, are they not allowed to have opinions? I really don't follow the argument here.

Just curious, bubba, since you have been here a long time, what is this issue about the demonstrators being paid? A lot of others in these forums have ranted about them being paid. Wouldn't you think that if money is their motivation, the PM would be smart enough to just pay them to go home and expose their lack of allegiance?

In what world would a government pay protesters to leave and illegal demonstration? Certainly not this one.