way2muchcoffee

PM Abhisit faces a serious problem: He can't do very much. If he takes even stronger actions at this stage of the political crisis he will have alienated the very people he needs to help keep the peace. What do you think the reaction will be if a police general gets busted? These generals tend to have family and friends in the military and the government.

It's easy to piss on Abhisit for his response, but he's in the same position as the PMs that came before him, including Mr. Thaksin.

The police and military have an elected government by the short hairs. Factor in who Mr. Abhisit's daddy is and you can see the fine line he has to walk. Yes, it would be wonderful if the PM could do more, but the circumstances are such that he cannot.

I fear that Thailand is at a point in its development that in order for there to be a real change, there will unfortunately have to be a complete upset of the way things are done. In other words, Thailand must pass through a stage where it gets worse before it gets better.

I agree. Nice and measured comment. I hope things don't have to get 'too bad' but I suspect the pain must be severe for any real change to come from it.

No matter what it is illegal to pass inside of a car which is occupying the left lane. Keep attempting to justify it and you will get the same responses. Passing a vihicle that is in the left lane by passing on the left of the car is the violation.

I disagree. As outlined before it really doesn't matter what unenforced laws are on the books. What matters are the laws that are enforces and the typical practice. I don't speak for anywhere outside of BKK, but in BKK every motorcycle I have ever seen or been on does not hesitate to drive between a car and the curb. The police never ticket this activity. Therefore it is not illegal - for all intensive purposes. And so any driver who has been in Thailand for more than a couple of weeks would know not to open the door to get out without first checking for motorcycles.

I don't know for sure of the legality or illegality of passing on the left between car and curb or of threading cars up the middle. What I can say is that over 90% of motorcycles do it. Tuk tuks will try it. No police officer will ever ticket a motorcycle driver for it. It is simply the rules of the road - common law.

Motorcycles drive on the left at all times. Due to this basic circumstance it is the responsibility of the person in the taxi or personal vehicle to look before opening the door. If they don't look it is an antisocial act of pure recklessness and negligence. In such a case they will be held responsible for any damage they cause if the police are summoned.

Western notions of road rules, law, and common sense do not enter into this situation in any way.

"Thaksin faces criminal case if guilty of Feb. 26th"

But this would be unseemly in the modern context.....So what to do that would generate similar results.

Do I need to go further......I dont think so.

In the modern context I suspect the best course is to shine a spotlight on corrupt practices and prosecute accordingly. Which is exactly what is being done.

Hmm. On several main streets near where I live in BKK (Sathorn/Narthiwas) there is a motorcycle lane on the far left. It is designed for motorcycles and bicycles to pass cars on the left. This is the leftmost lane (but only about 1 m wide) so naturally cars and taxis continually drive in it and cut off the motorcyles. I drive in BKK, but I also take a motorcycle taxis daily. Most of the accidents I see are the fault of the car drivers and their disregard for the motorcycles.

You either believe in free speech or dont.

That's not really true Hammered. Shades of gray most certainly exist. Please don't stoop to disingenuous one-liners that smack of a PR gimmick. You are smarter and better than that.

The thai prime minister has a british passport, also about 50,000 thai bar girls

What? The Thai PM has 50,000 Thai bar girls? He's my new hero!

So according to your statement PAD never occupied government facilities, airports, hindered children to go to school, destroyed puplic and governement facilities, intimitated courts.

What about you doing your homework and don't wait until your meal is served?

By the way I'm pink, see the wink?

Maybe I'm confused. Where did hammered indicate that PAD didn't occupy government facilities or airports, hinder children going to school, and damaging government facilities?

You also failed to answer even one of his simple questions, instead choosing to dissemble. Here's another chance. I'll remind you of the questions:

Please give evidence of the PAD:

1) Stealing sensitive security data.

2) Kidnapping citizens of this country.

3) Intimidating courts.

4) Calling on children to join their fun.

5) Please also give a reference to the court case in which Thaksin "was cleared from these engraving violations (extra judicial killing).

Surely this must be a joke.

What about the head of Chonbury police that just got shafted for being on the take, what about the Sophon Cable TV using COPY DVD movies etc etc, yes you are right what a joke.

The Chonburi police officer is not a member of the NACC. Actually the fact that he got caught and this was made public suggests that the anti-corruption units in Thailand are doing their job. Sophon Cable? What does this have to do with anything?

Sure, Thaksin made money while in office, and it's something every single Thai politician does. The problem is that some people got jealous because he made so much more than they did. Don't for a second think that other politicians ousted Thaksin for the good of the Thai people. No, they did it for their own benefit.

Please outline exactly how Abhisit has become personally enriched by abusing his authority a PM. Also please do the same for Korn. If you are going to make such sweeping statements please be prepared to defend them.

Now, back to 'Democracy'. Thaksin allowed people to vote and even called early elections. On the other hand, Abhisit is a puppet that was brought to power through a military coup - and he refuses to hold elections, even though public opinions show that Thai people clearly want them.

Thaksin dissolved parliament because his party was about to be dissolved for massive election fraud. Thaksin engaged in massive human rights violations with the anti-drug campaign. Thaksin utilized the libel laws of Thailand to silence media that wasn't friendly to his cause. Thaksin even publicly announced that democracy was not the aim of his government. Is this the man you are praising as the poster-boy for democracy? Really?

The Abhisit government is the elected government of a parliamentary system. It would be entirely irresponsible for him to call elections at this time because the present opposition party will not allow free and fair elections (this includes freedom to campaign).

What a disgracefull mess abisits military coups

PM-Abhisit has led or instigated or encouraged in any way multiple-coups by the military ?

You will never get any answer from CLOD. He is a serial propagandist with no interest in discussion.

Stooping to the level of personal insult in a debate huh? Illuminating.

1. Thaksin was elected. Twice. Then he dissolved parliament and won no further elections. Since then, there has been one military appointed government. This was followed by a general election, and then two parliamentary elections leading to 3 elected PMs

You're not quote right there- Thaksin dissolved parliament and called for a snap election, which was approved of by the King. He then went on to win the snap election, but the victory was later nullified by the Constitutional Court, who upheld the PAD's disagreement with polling booth positioning. Yet another vote was to be held in October 2006, but the army got in first.

Yes. I don't count a nullified election as valid and so didn't include it.

Either: You see what drinking too much coffee does?

Or: I am grossly wrong about this - if so then someone please put me to rights.

Question 1: Who was democratically elected?

I say . . . I think . . . I'm SURE I remember this correctly . . . the answer is THAKSIN.

Question 2: Who ASSUMED control WITHOUT going to the people?

Answer . . . this present government!

Have I just woken from a strange dream or is the above correct?

In plain, simple language, please enlighten me . . .

Stooping to the level of personal insult in a debate huh? Illuminating.

1. Thaksin was elected. Twice. Then he dissolved parliament and won no further elections. Since then, there has been one military appointed government. This was followed by a general election, and then two parliamentary elections leading to 3 elected PMs

2. Thaksin assumed caretaker PM control after dissolving parliament. The military assumed control via a coup. Then there was a general election. PPP formed a coalition government with Samak at the helm. Samak was disqualified but allowed to return. Thaksin didn't want that so Somchai (Thaksin's brother) took his place. The PPP was disbanded for electoral fraud. The coalition partners worked it out that it was in their interests to form a government with the Democrats with Abhisit as the PM. And here we are.

The PAD are led by nationalistic, religious fundamentalist nut cases (the Santi Asoke cult)....

What exactly makes them nut cases? The fact that they don't drink alcohol, gamble, or eat meat?

They are a purist organization attempting to live by the precepts of Buddha as they interpret them.

The fact is that the RED SHIRTS are the dominant force to restore Electoral Representational Democracy to Thailand.

That is an opinion and certainly not a fact. If this is true then why would they wish to bring down an elected government? If this is true then why would they have found it necessary to engage in massive election fraud?

Reference to this is AVOIDED by the Domestic Media. It is NOT something this government wish to publicise.

Perhaps because it's not true?

The media/government refer to the movement as "Anti-Govt" because they can/will NEVER admit the non-electoral basis of the present Govt.

Given that their aims are to destroy the present elected government it is only natural that they are referred to as anti-government.

Therefore this article is a ploy, trying to dramatize a non-existent rift within the Red Shirt Democracy Movement.

Actually that's not what Thaksin thinks given is recent call for unity amongst his supporters.

johncitizen.

Thank you for taking the time to address some of the questions. Opposing views are always welcome, indeed necessary for a healthy forum or discussion. The point isn't to agree, but to offer our unique interpretation of events so that others may be better informed to make their own conclusions.

I'm referring to the Constitutional Court of Thailand, which is the "highest court" in the land. The Court was dissolved following the coup, and wiki reports that the new court was junta appointmed, but I can't find anything in English about the current composition of the court or how they are elected.

If you do, please let me know. I am genuinely curious about this. I spent a couple of hours trying to research it on the internet and came up empty handed.

And you know that yes or no questions like that are absolute bull- firstly, because you get to frame the questions to your benefit, and secondly because it disregards equal culpability by the other side.

Yes, I know. Guess that dog won't hunt. LOL

So how about addressing those questions one by one in whatever way you fancy? As long as you do answer and don't dissemble, I would like to know your thoughts.

As I've said, Thaksin is guilty of a trend of dodginess in Thai politics that neither began nor ended with him- the problem is he is the only one that is on the receiving end of such "justice."

No. He is not the only one on the receiving end of such justice. PM's have been jailed in the past. Politicians of all stripes have been investigated, and some charged and convicted.

JohnCitizen:

A simple yes or no please:

1) Did Thaksin engage in corruption during his time in office?

2) Did Thaksin engage in criminal behavior during his time as PM?

3) Did Thaksin abuse his authority in order to further enrich himself?

4) Did Thaksin initiate an anti-drug campaign that resulted in thousands of extrajudicial deaths?

5) Did the party that Thaksin represented engage in massive electoral fraud during his time in office?

6) Did Thaksin use his money and power to silence voices of his opposition and the media during his time in office?

7) Did Thaksin misrepresent his assets when assuming a role in government?

8) In the last year or two has Thaksin made any public calls for revolution?

9) If they were to assume control of government, would the PTP whitewash Thaksin of any criminal activity he may have engaged in?

10) Have red shirt organizations used violence to prevent opposition politicians from speaking in Northern/Northeastern cities?

11) Have red shirt leaders threatened violence to judges, politicians, or any other citizens?

12) If elections were held next month, would every politician of every party be able to freely campaign everywhere in Thailand without fear of violence or personal harm?

One last thing. My impression was that the King of Thailand appoints judges to the Supreme Court of Thailand. Do you have any references or evidence for your claim that the current judges on the Supreme Court were appointed by the military? I am not saying you are incorrect, but I have not read any credible source of information that either refutes or supports your claim.

Thaksin was as corrupt as any past leader of Thailand has been (although thanks to Victors Justice, he is the one with the heat on him), and was equally as ambitious as he was naive. Yet he is also the only PM to have EVER made it to the end of his first term, and win not one but two general elections AND a snap election. Call it what you like, but it was certainly an important step in Thai political history (if only a baby step.)

Yes, enfranchising rural voters was a very good step for Thai politics. Unfortunately for Thailand Thaksin was extremely corrupt, destroyed the checks and balances that are the pillars of any functional democracy, engaged in human rights violations on an unprecedented scale, and engaged in massive vote fraud. None of this is acceptable. No matter how much positive work he did, he must be held accountable for his criminal actions.

Now, for an instant there the PAD held the moral highground and was doing a good job in holding the TRT to account for (some of) their wrongdoings, but instead of working within the democratic system and settling for hard-hitting opposition and building a legitimate support base for the next election, they handed power back to the military-aristocracy and set Thai democracy back a good decade or two.

Yes, the PAD held the moral high ground. They lost it with the airport takeover. I don't understand the point you are making when you say the PAD handed power to the military-aristocracy. The PAD didn't have the power to hand over. The military had the power it always has in Thailand, no matter what government is in control.

And so for most of the Reds Thaksin represents a missed opportunity at what could have been, (not necessarily to do with the man himself or even his policies, but simply the fact that he was their man, and they put him in there.) He is the closest they have ever come to having real democracy for themselves.

Unfortunately when the pillars of democracy are systematically weakened or destroyed, what remains can no longer be called a democracy.

I don't believe that Thaksin has a place at the head of the Redshirt movement, no matter what comes to pass in the coming months- nor do I believe that the Reds intend to have him as such. Because the Red movement has become more than a disenfranchised TRT support base- it is truly a grassroots movement seeking democracy and the restoration of the Peoples Constitution of 1997.

If the red shirts are not beholden to Thaksin, and they are truly after democracy, then they should show it. I would like to hear calls from them for the imprisonment of Thaksin for his criminal behavior. Until they can completely sever the ties to Thaksin they will never be a legitimate democracy movement.

Therein lies the problem. They will not do this. Perhaps some time in the future, but as of now the primary aim of the red shirts and PTP is to secure Thaksin his money, exonerate him of his criminal acts, and perhaps reinstall him to a position as head of government. This is unacceptable to a great many Thai people. This position thoroughly undermines the claims of the PTP and red shirts as a democracy movement. When they come to this realization and act on it they may find themselves in a position of moral authority.

I never understand what they need to save for? I met and married my wife for about 300 baht and that was the cost of the two friends as witnesses meal afterwards at the side of the road.

So ... a hopeless romantic then?

Yes thaksin was corrupt, but name me one thai politician who isnt filling his bank account from the public coffers.

I can name two: Abhisit and Korn

I don't get it. Why would you expect a full refund? Many shops worldwide have an exchange-only policy. Warranties on items are replacement or repair only. I'm rather confused by the stance of the OP. Am I missing something?

Pay nothing. Its 2010 already, not the dark ages. Time for the village to get with the times...

Very Western perspective. 2010 in the USA looks very very different than 2010 in Surin. Yes you might see a few modern trappings like automobiles, televisions, refrigerators, or mobile phones, but everything else is very different. Your position fails to account for reality.

It's good the visit went off without a major incident.

Precisely. I think that is the point here.

Sounds like a decent idea to me. The kids they are talking about are enrolled at technical colleges and engage in violent campus rivalries. For this group, many of whom are just ordinary kids from middle income families, prison visits just might have a positive effect. Or not.