jayboy

"However, the Prime Minister and her government should not be the ones hosting the general election because they are part of the conflict, said Chavanond."

Democrat Party? What are they on - is he telling them they can't participate in the election because they happen to be the caretaker government?

Incredibly stupid statements and action.

Why compete in an election when the ruling party refuses to accept the verdicts of courts and independent agencies? The Dems have always respected their position of being the opposition. But with the present group of (self exiled) criminals running the country, what would it be worth to be an opposition party?

There are different views about the independence of the courts and independent agencies.But I fail to understand the relevance one way or another with the Democrats refusing to face the Thai public at a general election.

Who wants to play against a team that wins by cheating every time.

At last a clear statement justifying the Democrat boycott (though I think a misguided one).

To make sense of it at least two questions need to be answered:

1.How was the last election not valid and fairly conducted especially since all independent observers were satisfied?

2.What precise reforms need to be put in place to make the next one fair?

I'm not unsympathetic to a national effort across parties to reform the system and tackle corruption, but for clarity's sake there needs to be an understanding on an improved electoral process.

If the response is just the usual claptrap (Thaksin buying farmers votes etc) we can only conclude the Democrat boycott is for the reason they are unelectable.

And in that case the advice should be ditch the incompetent leadership, cut ties with the gangster Suthep, tell the Bangkok middle class that they cannot have the casting vote, develop some policies attractive to the Thai people as a whole.. and then win an election.

How about no vote buying by any one? Buy one vote automatic two years in jail. Sell your vote 5 times the amount for a fine. How about freedom to choose who you vote for? This means no one standing over you to make sure you vote the way the village head man tells you to. How about a secure way to hold the ballots until they are counted?

Now give us your PTP claptrap why we can't do that.

Any sensible measures to minimise or eradicate vote buying and other electoral abuses are obviously to be welcomed.However all the evidence shows that undesirable though vote buying is, outcomes are not affected.Chris Baker and Acharn Pasuk, no suckers for what you describe as "PTP claptrap", describe the suggestion that vote buying undermined the validity of the last election as "dangerous nonsense".

Careful what you wish for, how many democrats have taken to the PDRC stage speaking loosely over 'overthrowing' the govt.

1. Former Democrat MPs involved in the PDRC rallies were careful to resign beforehand.

2. Calling for the overthrow of a government is a democratic right in Thailand. Secession is not.

Not even a good try...

Actually you are wrong.What has often been advocated from the PDRC platform is sedition, the overthrow of an elected government.In most countries those involved would have been facing charges.Having said that I agree that in a robustly democratic country one should err on the side of tolerance.But I'm not sure that loose talk about secession (which would not have taken place if not provoked by seditious movement in Bangkok) is any more illegal than actual sedition.In any case many Muslim Thais from the Southern Provinces have been advocating secession for decades - and nobody (except posturing nincompoops of the NACC/military top brass variety) would think of making this a criminal offence.

Utter piffle.

In most countries a government that has been shown to lie, cheat, break the law, incite people to disobey the law would be thrown out, not even considering the numerous corruption and mismanagement issues.

No one has been convicted of sedition - simply something you have decided applied to those who have a different view to yourself.

Secession and inciting armed rebellion are serious offences in most countries. Treason, which it is, is usually one of the most heavily punished serious crimes. That PTP ministers openly speak at a public gathering encouraging this treason whilst being filmed is much more than the "loose talk" you try and pass it off has. It reveals the extreme contempt and arrogance PTP usually display to all other than themselves, their contempt for the very country, its traditions and laws. They have shown they are prepared to lie and cheat in parliament and have displayed a propensity for violence to enforce their views.

That caretaker government ministers are prepared to publicly advocate armed rebellion is a measure of how far these criminals are prepared to go to keep power.

YL should have immediately censured these traitors and removed them from the caretaker administration. But they were probably following orders just like she has to,

The suggested defense "we only committed treason and encouraged armed rebellion because of seditious actions against us" is nonsense and pathetic. The government should enforce the law - something they do like doing because it doesn't suit their agenda and they don't think it applies to them.

You are very muddled in your analysis but you actually inadvertently make my key point for me.Suthep is on record as calling on the army to overthrow the democratically elected government, ie armed rebellion.He has (to date) failed and we will see whether charges of sedition will be pursued in the future - though I suspect they won't.The whole PDRC strategy is to provoke violence.

As to charges against the government (as with those against Suthep) these should be pursued in the courts.However it is reasonable that the courts and related independent agencies should demonstrate they are non partisan.This is an uncertain area in Thail;and

Google the author and make your own minds up whether she is entitled to preach to anybody about a moral compass.

Careful what you wish for, how many democrats have taken to the PDRC stage speaking loosely over 'overthrowing' the govt.

1. Former Democrat MPs involved in the PDRC rallies were careful to resign beforehand.

2. Calling for the overthrow of a government is a democratic right in Thailand. Secession is not.

Not even a good try...

Actually you are wrong.What has often been advocated from the PDRC platform is sedition, the overthrow of an elected government.In most countries those involved would have been facing charges.Having said that I agree that in a robustly democratic country one should err on the side of tolerance.But I'm not sure that loose talk about secession (which would not have taken place if not provoked by seditious movement in Bangkok) is any more illegal than actual sedition.In any case many Muslim Thais from the Southern Provinces have been advocating secession for decades - and nobody (except posturing nincompoops of the NACC/military top brass variety) would think of making this a criminal offence.

When there are accusations of a government being involved in illegal acts obviously they should be investigated and if found guilty by non-politicised courts they should be punished.

Unfortunately all governments in every country tend to spin events.Some may call it cheating and lying, but the only real test is legal or illegal.Populist policies are not illegal.

But the real answer to your question is the blindingly obvious one.In every democracy there is the chance to "throw the bums out" in a general election where the people have their say.But this is the option that I'm suspecting you have problems with.

The clue is in the "In every democracy". Here we're talking about Thailand where 'respect my vote' stops the moment the vote is counted.

The tyranny of the majority always needs to be addressed by the strengthening of genuine checks and balances, not just the packing of the courts with compliant judges and reliance on the brute force of miltary intervention.Equally it could be argued the tyranny of the minority is even worse even when dressed up as the Committee of Public Safety or whatever label the Suthep mobsters have in mind.

Your "Committee of Public Safety or whatever label" shows your bias, my dear boy.

What an odd comment.Whenever someone expresses a point of view that is by your definition "bias". As to Suthep's proposed caretaker government by a small self appointed "good" people, that has attracted broad criticism across party lines.If you are a fan just say so rather than accusing others of "bias".

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Can't avoid some cynicism here.Sukhumbhand is not popular with the Democrat leadership or rank and file.He was nearly ditched as mayoral candidate and even then allowed a mediocre PTP candidate to grab a large slice of the Bangkok electorate in the election.Thus no real regret by Dems at EC decision despite the crocodile tears.And the big bonus is that the EC (excuse me while I snigger) is presented to the world as somehow non partisan - thus anticipating the outrage when it joins the packed Constititional Court in removing or castrating a democratically elected government.I'm not one for conspiracy theories but still...hope I'm wrong.

Interesting theories.

Do you have a view on how a democratically elected government that acts illegally, cheats and lies should be removed?

Are you suggesting that legal actions are the wrong way? In which case how do you propose to remove them?

When there are accusations of a government being involved in illegal acts obviously they should be investigated and if found guilty by non-politicised courts they should be punished.

Unfortunately all governments in every country tend to spin events.Some may call it cheating and lying, but the only real test is legal or illegal.Populist policies are not illegal.

But the real answer to your question is the blindingly obvious one.In every democracy there is the chance to "throw the bums out" in a general election where the people have their say.But this is the option that I'm suspecting you have problems with.

The clue is in the "In every democracy". Here we're talking about Thailand where 'respect my vote' stops the moment the vote is counted.

The tyranny of the majority always needs to be addressed by the strengthening of genuine checks and balances, not just the packing of the courts with compliant judges and reliance on the brute force of miltary intervention.Equally it could be argued the tyranny of the minority is even worse even when dressed up as the Committee of Public Safety or whatever label the Suthep mobsters have in mind.

Can't avoid some cynicism here.Sukhumbhand is not popular with the Democrat leadership or rank and file.He was nearly ditched as mayoral candidate and even then allowed a mediocre PTP candidate to grab a large slice of the Bangkok electorate in the election.Thus no real regret by Dems at EC decision despite the crocodile tears.And the big bonus is that the EC (excuse me while I snigger) is presented to the world as somehow non partisan - thus anticipating the outrage when it joins the packed Constititional Court in removing or castrating a democratically elected government.I'm not one for conspiracy theories but still...hope I'm wrong.

Interesting theories.

Do you have a view on how a democratically elected government that acts illegally, cheats and lies should be removed?

Are you suggesting that legal actions are the wrong way? In which case how do you propose to remove them?

When there are accusations of a government being involved in illegal acts obviously they should be investigated and if found guilty by non-politicised courts they should be punished.

Unfortunately all governments in every country tend to spin events.Some may call it cheating and lying, but the only real test is legal or illegal.Populist policies are not illegal.

But the real answer to your question is the blindingly obvious one.In every democracy there is the chance to "throw the bums out" in a general election where the people have their say.But this is the option that I'm suspecting you have problems with.

Can't avoid some cynicism here.Sukhumbhand is not popular with the Democrat leadership or rank and file.He was nearly ditched as mayoral candidate and even then allowed a mediocre PTP candidate to grab a large slice of the Bangkok electorate in the election.Thus no real regret by Dems at EC decision despite the crocodile tears.And the big bonus is that the EC (excuse me while I snigger) is presented to the world as somehow non partisan - thus anticipating the outrage when it joins the packed Constititional Court in removing or castrating a democratically elected government.I'm not one for conspiracy theories but still...hope I'm wrong.

Truth hurts.My comments are accurate as I suspect you well know.Having said that there is nothing amiss with the opposition taking the government on with regard to the best method of funding,and to be fair Khun Korn has done some excellent work here.The Constitutional Court ruling is not interested in this and is mainly designed to frustrate democracy; the infrastructure programme is beyond its comprehension.

I'm not sure why you introduce the subject of fascists.Why are they relevant to this subject? But the overall attack on democracy by the CC is beyond dispute.

However the damage has been done and this ruling is a major set back for the very necessary improvement of infrastructure

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

...But the overall attack on democracy by the CC is beyond dispute...

Why? Because you say so? Get a grip.

You could argue with the phraseology I use.But what you cannot do is suggest that key parts of the judicial system have not been enlisted to complete the process of ending a democratically elected government especially given the limits now placed on street mobs and military coups.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

PTP have not followed the law or parliamentary rules when it suited them. They have been caught and the courts have ruled against them.

You cannot suggest that every ruling against PTP is part of some judicial conspiracy to help remove them. All hogwash designed to hide the facts i,e, they didn't follow the law and cheated through parliament.

Not every ruling of course but the overall pattern is very clear.

For you and others that might need a refresher course in the basics Time Magazine has a useful article - including the issue of politicised courts.

http://world.time.com/2013/11/28/thailands-democrat-party-is-hilariously-misnamed/

you seem to overlook that the Democrat party led coalition government under Abhisit was already working on high-speed train ideas, only to see all scrapped by the new government.

Furthermore you seem to overlook that part of the infrastructure budget seemed to include activities and therefor money normally found in the yearly National Budget. Like the rice scam, just trying to avoid parliamentary scrutiny.

As for the rest, the usual denigrating remarks. BTW although you had the 'unelected elites' you missed out mentioning 'fascists'

Truth hurts.My comments are accurate as I suspect you well know.Having said that there is nothing amiss with the opposition taking the government on with regard to the best method of funding,and to be fair Khun Korn has done some excellent work here.The Constitutional Court ruling is not interested in this and is mainly designed to frustrate democracy; the infrastructure programme is beyond its comprehension.

I'm not sure why you introduce the subject of fascists.Why are they relevant to this subject? But the overall attack on democracy by the CC is beyond dispute.

However the damage has been done and this ruling is a major set back for the very necessary improvement of infrastructure

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

...But the overall attack on democracy by the CC is beyond dispute...

Why? Because you say so? Get a grip.

You could argue with the phraseology I use.But what you cannot do is suggest that key parts of the judicial system have not been enlisted to complete the process of ending a democratically elected government especially given the limits now placed on street mobs and military coups.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

nice to see all you guys liking thailand being held back, this loan was to improve infrastructure within the country and just like any other country, they would have to borrow to enable the development...i guess bar stool judgement wins approval here

Personally I feel sorry for all those poor commuters in ChiangMai who really needed this high-speed link to Bangkok, according to a Pheu Thai minister that was.

Furthermore I wonder what we'll do with all those Thai traditional lunch boxes which were selected for use in the high-speed trains. Maybe a special TAT organised event to sell them to foreigners departing Suvannabhum? I'm afraid Ms. Yingluck may be in tears again, she was so happy with those lunch boxes.

You and many others on this thread seem to have overlooked the fact that the infrastructure package including the high speed train link is fully supported by the Democrat leadership.It is the method of financing they object to (so say they say) though their administration also used off budget funding methods.

Of course the Constitutional Court decision is actually very little to do with high speed trains, and much more about political goals of the old orded.Long predicted and part of the campaign of sedition against the government.Judicial activism is now the main tool of the unelected elites with the likely eclipse of Suthep's mobsters and the unwillingness of the army to play ball (so far anyway).

you seem to overlook that the Democrat party led coalition government under Abhisit was already working on high-speed train ideas, only to see all scrapped by the new government.

Furthermore you seem to overlook that part of the infrastructure budget seemed to include activities and therefor money normally found in the yearly National Budget. Like the rice scam, just trying to avoid parliamentary scrutiny.

As for the rest, the usual denigrating remarks. BTW although you had the 'unelected elites' you missed out mentioning 'fascists'

Truth hurts.My comments are accurate as I suspect you well know.Having said that there is nothing amiss with the opposition taking the government on with regard to the best method of funding,and to be fair Khun Korn has done some excellent work here.The Constitutional Court ruling is not interested in this and is mainly designed to frustrate democracy; the infrastructure programme is beyond its comprehension.

I'm not sure why you introduce the subject of fascists.Why are they relevant to this subject? But the overall attack on democracy by the CC is beyond dispute.

However the damage has been done and this ruling is a major set back for the very necessary improvement of infrastructure

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

nice to see all you guys liking thailand being held back, this loan was to improve infrastructure within the country and just like any other country, they would have to borrow to enable the development...i guess bar stool judgement wins approval here

Personally I feel sorry for all those poor commuters in ChiangMai who really needed this high-speed link to Bangkok, according to a Pheu Thai minister that was.

Furthermore I wonder what we'll do with all those Thai traditional lunch boxes which were selected for use in the high-speed trains. Maybe a special TAT organised event to sell them to foreigners departing Suvannabhum? I'm afraid Ms. Yingluck may be in tears again, she was so happy with those lunch boxes.

You and many others on this thread seem to have overlooked the fact that the infrastructure package including the high speed train link is fully supported by the Democrat leadership.It is the method of financing they object to (so say they say) though their administration also used off budget funding methods.

Of course the Constitutional Court decision is actually very little to do with high speed trains, and much more about political goals of the old orded.Long predicted and part of the campaign of sedition against the government.Judicial activism is now the main tool of the unelected elites with the likely eclipse of Suthep's mobsters and the unwillingness of the army to play ball (so far anyway).

Simon Jenkins of The Guardian gets it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/12/ukraine-crisis-west-do-nothing-russia

What laws are these exactly? If there are indeed such laws, there are equally no doubt laws on sedition prohibiting the unlawful overthrow of an elected government.As always in Thailand some brief consideration of mote and beam is always advisable before spraying insults around.

If this elected government had behaved itself and not deemed serving one individual as being more important than serving the nation then none of this would have happened.

Do you seriously think that they have done a good job??? it is has been a total disaster from beginning to end (not too far off now, thank god)!!!!!!!!

It's not a question about your view of the current government.In any event millions of Thais take a different view.The government is ready to seek a further mandate from the Thai people but this is not what its opponents want

The real question is whether it is only the supporters of the government, as suggested in your earlier post, that take a cavalier attitude towards the law.I pointed out that this is not the case and would comment further that actual sedition is a graver offence than some loose talk about secession.

The Dem's are all for elections. The difference being that they want to fix the electoral system first as it is clearly flawed (as this government has shown). Populist policies are in nobody's interest, especially when they fail so spectacularly as they ALL have (not just the rice scam). Without these, PTP wouldn't be in government and the country wouldn't be in such a mess, surely you agree with this.

Can you advise how exactly the Democrats wish to reform the electoral system bearing in mind all observers comfirmed the last election was fair and properly conducted.As far as I am aware there have been no specific proposals on the electoral process.Clearly there are measures to be taken which would reduce vote buying and similar abuses.However all the evidence demonstrates these are marginal.

Populist policies are a different subject altogether and in any event are pursued to some extent in all democracies.If the Thai people do not want governments to pursue populist policies that benefit the majority, they are at liberty to vote them out of office.

Corruption in the implementation of populist policies is another separate matter, and obviously needs to be investigated and offenders punished.

By conflating several factors the reform process becomes unintelligible.In all honesty I suspect for some that is the purpose.Even though this means gibberish, it is easier to advocate than saying "we don't like elections because we can't win them."

you can discuss, in private, anything you like. But there are laws prohibiting advocating secession in public, as in putting up banners. Of course, this is another law the PTP supporters have decided doesn't apply to them. Surprise!

What laws are these exactly? If there are indeed such laws, there are equally no doubt laws on sedition prohibiting the unlawful overthrow of an elected government.As always in Thailand some brief consideration of mote and beam is always advisable before spraying insults around.

If this elected government had behaved itself and not deemed serving one individual as being more important than serving the nation then none of this would have happened.

Do you seriously think that they have done a good job??? it is has been a total disaster from beginning to end (not too far off now, thank god)!!!!!!!!

It's not a question about your view of the current government.In any event millions of Thais take a different view.The government is ready to seek a further mandate from the Thai people but this is not what its opponents want

The real question is whether it is only the supporters of the government, as suggested in your earlier post, that take a cavalier attitude towards the law.I pointed out that this is not the case and would comment further that actual sedition is a graver offence than some loose talk about secession.

I think that this article is far more pretentious than the actions of the Army and is typical of the myopic red ideology.

If no one in authority takes a hard stance against suggestions of secession then we will end up with similar problems that we already have in the South.

Yinglucks caretaker government should have been the first to condemn such rhetoric, however ,she was more worried about sensitizing her loyal lemmings and losing their support.

Keep up son! she already condemned it, not that there's anything wrong with discussing secession.

you can discuss, in private, anything you like. But there are laws prohibiting advocating secession in public, as in putting up banners. Of course, this is another law the PTP supporters have decided doesn't apply to them. Surprise!

What laws are these exactly? If there are indeed such laws, there are equally no doubt laws on sedition prohibiting the unlawful overthrow of an elected government.As always in Thailand some brief consideration of mote and beam is always advisable before spraying insults around.

Who is the writer of this article trying to kid ? This is an outrageous opinion article, and it flies very squarely in the face of the facts. Chalerm will be laminating this article and framing it. The writer of this article should look at the tape of the UDD rally on February 23. On that stage stands Thida, Jutuporn, Nattawut, former minister of agriculture, and Charupong, former interior minister. All endorsed the UDD platform that called for armed readiness, denigrated the independent agencies, and promoted secession. Everyone has seen it. Not only that, but we're had rallies, banners, the calls of red shirt radio, interviews with the press, addresses from Chiang Mai, and every one of these people stands by what they say. Not only that, but Ko Tee has now openly defied Prayuth and the banners are going up. Why does this writer publish this anonymously ? The Nation has some excellent writers, and most articles are under the banner of a writer or even two. This is so outside the mainstream of editorials it ought to have been signed. This article is a disgrace and a disservice to the informed.

It is the established form for editorial pieces - representing the newspaper's views rather than a particular contributor - to be unsigned.The Nation follows the same practice as the New York Times, The (London) Times, the FT etc.

As to its content your objections are of little substance.Most observers of whatever political view would regard the main points to be perfectly sensible.The PM has already made it clear secessionist objectives cannot and never will be on the agrenda.If there are some in the redshirt camp who wish to talk about this, that is no crime and indeed discussion cannot be banned in a free society.None of this has anything to do with the army which should keep its nose out of political debate.

The important point however is the one made also in the Nation I think - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.Without the sedition of Suthep and his Southern rentacrowd thugs compounded by the complicity of the Democrats and the myopic Sino Thai middle class, the current secessionist chatter would not have arisen in the first place.These fools (and in some cases criminals) sowed the wind and may well reap the whirlwind, but so far the Lanna Republic concept is just idle chatter,

What was happening over at the RBSC during the Thai alliance with Japan and occupation by Japan during WWII?

A fascinating subject.See William Warren's "Celebrating 100 Years" I'm sure the Club would show a copy to anyone with an interest.There's a photo in it of SS with fellow committee members!

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The RBSC as you mention TAH is a bizarre place, with a lot of people living in a cocoon. Nice spot though.

The irony of it is, of course that Thailand wasn't colonised apparenlty, but the Thai's went off on their own and copied an old colonial sytled sports club. And the type of discussion hasn't apparently moved on much from that era either.

The Thais didn't go off on their own to set up RBSC a Russian expat petitioned the King with the support of some nobles for a grant of land for the purpose of training horses and this was granted. The club was run as a colonial club largely by the British until about 1960 when the British lost their dominance, as the colonial trading companies declined in Asia, and it was taken over by Thais. The bylaw limiting one nationality to not more than half of the general committee was put in place to reduce British dominance. Now it applies to Thais but was reduced to not more than one third a few years ago. The only difference between RBSC and other colonial style clubs in the region was that natives were allowed in as members but this was originally restricted to the royal family and nobility. They fitted right in because they had been to Eton, Harrow, Oxford, Cambridge and Sandhurst and were generally better British educated than the expats who were often sent out to the Far East by trading companies straight from public school. They happily joined the rugger, soccer and cricket teams, as you may see from the old photographs at the club. Naturally, the Chinese were only welcome as club servants and expats regarded employing them as a necessary evil because it was virtually impossible to find Thai butlers, cooks etc that could speak any English.

An interesting digression on a lost world.I became a member of the RBSC about 15 years ago and until today I believed, that Sehgal was on the new members interviewing committee - but I think it may perhaps have been a relative.Whichever Sehgal he was I recall he was very slightly aggressive but a nice enough guy.Arkady touches on the delightfully English class distinction between the Thai aristocracy and the (mostly) minor public school boys at Borneo,Anglo-Thai etc.There were of course a few exceptions like the late Dacre Raikes, a genuine though untypical toff.The more blokey Brits tended to gravitate to the British Club, not as depressingly plebeian as it is now.The top rank Brits tended to belong to both clubs, although RBSC was the one with cachet.Anyway the action towards Sehgal seems petty and spiteful and I hope he is in the event able to stay - though he exercised extremely poor judgement (not that someone like that would ever understand why).

"THE CALL for secession by pro-government groups and red shirts in the north has become a new subject of a dispute, with legal action being sought for the seditious act by the military and the anti-government movement using it to strengthen its attacks against the caretaker government"

Permit me to say this about that.

This thing reeks of double standards and coup-monger support by the military. Are they saying all that stuff that has been spewed from the Coup-monger stage by you know who, is all sacrosanct? There was NOTHING there with which to pillorize these people about attacks on the current form of Govt. and Democracy?...But somehow that is OK?

And why this mis-characterization about "pro-Govt. groups" when talking about "Pro-Democracy" entities?

And what about this mis-characterization of the coup-mongers as being "anti-Govt.".....They would be on the streets even if the PTP and Ms. Y. were the most effective Govt. and Prime Minister in the history of the world..... Simply because they are not in power.

This is clearly demonstrated in the final words of this quote, using fabricated issues as cover for "it to strengthen its attacks against the caretaker government", or more aptly characterized, as attacks against an elected Govt..

I have asked many times how you and your red mates think a coup could possibly benefit Suthep and have not go an answer just the usual coup-monger BS,

The only ones who could possibly benefit from a coup are Thaksin, Yingluck and PT.

They could then scream to the world that a legitimate elected democratic government was overthrown by the military.......again.

As we see the reds are prepared to raise an army to fight any coup a move which would probably degenerate into a civil war, as per the south.

Thaksin cares northing how much death and destruction he causes, as we saw in 2010, if he can not be in power he will do anything to harm those who are.

Don't be absurd.It was part of Suthep's strategy that the military intervened so that his proposed council of "good people" could take the place of an elected government.Even his supporters don't deny that.

No mate you are the absurd one, Do you really think that that if the army took over they would give Suthep any place in any administration, no way the military would do it themselves.

I can show you several of his so called supporters who would deny, but of course you never have any proof although you ask others for links.

I have explained how a coup would benefit PT you have just come out with the usual anti Suthep crap.[/

quote]

Sorry you should continue your discussion with someone else.Even supporters of the PDRC protest will understand why.It's not an equal match.

But just a comment which even you might grasp.There has never been a possibility that Suthep would have a central role when this phase has been played out.This would be endorsed by his supporters,his opponents and by Suthep himself.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

"THE CALL for secession by pro-government groups and red shirts in the north has become a new subject of a dispute, with legal action being sought for the seditious act by the military and the anti-government movement using it to strengthen its attacks against the caretaker government"

Permit me to say this about that.

This thing reeks of double standards and coup-monger support by the military. Are they saying all that stuff that has been spewed from the Coup-monger stage by you know who, is all sacrosanct? There was NOTHING there with which to pillorize these people about attacks on the current form of Govt. and Democracy?...But somehow that is OK?

And why this mis-characterization about "pro-Govt. groups" when talking about "Pro-Democracy" entities?

And what about this mis-characterization of the coup-mongers as being "anti-Govt.".....They would be on the streets even if the PTP and Ms. Y. were the most effective Govt. and Prime Minister in the history of the world..... Simply because they are not in power.

This is clearly demonstrated in the final words of this quote, using fabricated issues as cover for "it to strengthen its attacks against the caretaker government", or more aptly characterized, as attacks against an elected Govt..

I have asked many times how you and your red mates think a coup could possibly benefit Suthep and have not go an answer just the usual coup-monger BS,

The only ones who could possibly benefit from a coup are Thaksin, Yingluck and PT.

They could then scream to the world that a legitimate elected democratic government was overthrown by the military.......again.

As we see the reds are prepared to raise an army to fight any coup a move which would probably degenerate into a civil war, as per the south.

Thaksin cares northing how much death and destruction he causes, as we saw in 2010, if he can not be in power he will do anything to harm those who are.

Don't be absurd.It was part of Suthep's strategy that the military intervened so that his proposed council of "good people" could take the place of an elected government.Even his supporters don't deny that.