jayboy

I really don't see how allowing the senate to be democratically elected is unconstitutional; unless there is some vested interest that fears an elected senate.

Er, yes there is.

Seems like a pretty fair decision. Making the Senate nothing more than an extension of the lower house would indeed change the system of government. The procedural issues in the debates were also problematic. Not dissolving the coalition parties avoids giving them a reason to bellyache and lets people focus on the genuine unconstutionality of what they attempted to do.

Disagree completely though there's a certain karma given PTP's foolish attempt to steamroller the umbrella amnesty.Verdict underwrites the wholesale politicisation (keeping the Senate 50% appointed is fundamental for the old unelected elites) of the Constitututional Court.Furthermore the contempt for elected politicians was very clear.The Court ludicrously tried to set a precedent for any elected government to make a change to the coup makers driven 2007 constitution.There's absolutely no reason why the 2007 constitution should be sacrosact.Ironic that the excellent 1997 constitution largely driven by Khun Anand was trashed without a thought.No progress at all and Thailand remains stuck in its old rut.

It's plain as day Yingluck is afraid to face Apisit, Jurin, Korn etc, and she has good reason to.

A lamb to the slaughter.

I doubt whether she is afraid though probably very aware of the Democrat leadership's strengths.

What is beyond dobt is that Abhisit, Korn and Jurin are frightened as kittens that if they play this wrong Yingluck will dissolve parliament and appeal to the Thai people.

What a profound comment considering that 6 Democrat MP's resigned to join the anti-government protestors, who's goal is to remove the corrupt Yingluck administration and have a general election. Really you need to research this issue more thoroughly as your read is way off the mark.

Not sure whether it's that profound.This is an internet forum for expatriates with time on their hands - not a parliamentary select committee.Still one wonders whether the Dems are really that keen on facing the Thai electorate.Much of the evidence suggests they would prefer some kind of judicial deus ex machina involving the dissolution of PTP and a back door shady entry into government - just like last time.Still I would give the Dems a sporting chance at a general election.The PTP and Yingluck are definitely less popular.The trouble is the Dems haven't really capitalised on this and Abhisit is to campaigning what the Mayor of Toronto is to skinny jeans..Still who knows?

It's plain as day Yingluck is afraid to face Apisit, Jurin, Korn etc, and she has good reason to.

A lamb to the slaughter.

I doubt whether she is afraid though probably very aware of the Democrat leadership's strengths.

What is beyond dobt is that Abhisit, Korn and Jurin are frightened as kittens that if they play this wrong Yingluck will dissolve parliament and appeal to the Thai people.

all 200 senators would be elected, rather than having 76 elected and 74 appointed as currently.

Are they planning to raise the number of senators from 150 to 200? Or maybe they're planning on getting better reporters.

I believe the extra 50 will be party list senators, so that Thaksin can reward more criminals.

There's a perfectly legitimate debate to be had whether the Senate should be wholly elected or appointed, and there's no "right" answer.Obviously if the Senate appointed members were simply party hacks that doesn't make any sense.It's dishonest to pretend that the present Senate isn't packed with the unelected elites favourites - many unreconstructed reactionaries.So the discussion about Thaksin putting his own people in is somewhat ironical.Personally I'm not too exercised about this (ie an establishment bias in the Senate) and in fact an awkward Senate can form part of the checks and balance on the government with the electoral mandate.After all isn't this what the House of Lords (with a built in conservative bias) did for decades.

Suthep has the support of the South oitside of the deep south, central Bangkok, a few provinces south of BKK and the majority of the elite. He is reviled in most Bangkok suburbs and anywhere north, north east or east of Bangkok excluding possibly Rayong and Mae Hong Song and a couple of other town centers.

Which, of course, is why the Dems have little chance of ever winning a General Election. All their whining about vote-buying, etc. is just a smoke screen to hide the fact that they are simply detested by the vast mass of rural voters.

Could I suggest that instead of blindly following this little tinpot would-be dictator ("The Butcher of Bangkok" as he is known as up here!), the Dems could sit down and come up with policies that appeal to the entire population, not just their BKK chums. Getting rid of their English Public School elites might be a good start.

In a blind poll, the Democrat policies came off quite well in the north east.

It's not the policies that are the issue.

Well it's partly the policies.But it's also the toxic leadership and the unimpressive record of the last Democrat administration.

I assume you are referring to Thaksin since Abhisit, though his alleged crimes are much more serious, has not been convicted yet.

Can you remind us which of Abhisits crimes are worse than mass extra-judicial killings, dividing a nation for power and greed, policy corruption and theft on a never before seen scale? As far as I'm aware Abhisit's "crimes" consist of his taking a holiday in the Maldives during Yingluck's great flood, and having some wrong date on his national service paperwork some 25 years ago(although nobody disputes that he actually did the national service).

You missed out mass murder charges.

Occasionally now his critics will raise the drugs war as a means of attacking Thaksin secure in the knowledge there will never be an investigation in to it.The vast majority of his critics were silent when the crimes were being carried out.

No one is too keen on becoming another victim.

I rarely see Jayboy's posts (the ignore option is excellent) but he constantly uses the "the war on drugs was widely popular" argument for human rights abuses. Well, at the time of the removal of Thaksin from his extra constitutional position as on again off again PM ... nobody said or did anything either, That coup was widely popular" Months and months later when the offers of cash started flowing it became unpopular in the NE.

I'm assuming you have not thought very carefully about this (my polite and charitable interpretation of your foolish post).If you read my references to the drugs war I have gone out of my way to state it was Thaksin's worst abuse.Its popularity is irrelevant and in any case it cannot absolve him of responsibility and the matter should be dealt with in a court of law.

Whether the coup was popular is debatable even ignoring your lies about "cash flowing".It was certainly broadly welcome in middle class Bangkok.But it doesn't actually matter because it was a criminal act whatever its degree of initial popularity.As we know it didn't take long for the coup makers and the miserable incompetent government of Surayud to become unpopular.Subsequent elections more accurately measured the views of the Thai people.

I have to assume that the vast majority of posts on ThaiVisa forums are made by individuals whose home countries respect and follow democratic principles and yet, when commentating on Thai politics they appear to be completely blind to the results of the 2011 elections when Pheu Thai took 265 seats and the Democrat party 159

This was despite Abhisit trying to 'buy votes' from poorer Thais by promising to increase the minimum wage to a level that employers felt would be unsustainable.

Pheu Thai didn't become the ruling party because of military or 'other' interventions they did so because a healthy majority of ordinary Thai people wanted them to be in office. That's what democracy is all about and I can never understand how Abhisit of all people cannot accept this. He spent his formative years living in the 'cradle of democracy' the UK and was educated at Oxford University where no debate would have countenanced the denial of democratic rights.

Perhaps it's his devotion to Newcastle United football club that has in some way distorted his view of life. The constant disappointment of his team's failures are now mirrored in his political life.it's a modern day tragedy

For many years growing up in England I could never see the Conservative government being ousted from power but I didn't take to the streets to insist on a change of govermnment but used the BALLOT BOX with the result we had a change of government and that's how it should be in Thailand

Thaksin is just an unwelcome distraction to this democratic process

Does the British government take orders from a convicted criminal facing several other charges?

Do they try to pass a law to absolve all corruption cases over the last 7 years as well as rioting offences?

I assume you are referring to Thaksin since Abhisit, though his alleged crimes are much more serious, has not been convicted yet.

We know that Thaksin's convictions would not stand in an independent court of law since they were pressed with political motivation (similar case in the Ukraine).We know that for sure from Wikileaks though it was always obvious the old elites were out to nail him come what may.

Doesn't mean of course he isn't guilty of all or some of the charges.But it would be absurd to suggest they are unusual in Thailand or that someone like Suthep (oh the irony) is much different.

Who is trying to pass a law absolving all corruption cases over the last 7 years ? - first I've heard of it.Rioting offences are different and could sensibly be covered in an amnesty notwithstanding the grotesque difference in treatment between redshirts and the yellow shirt thugs and their quasi fascist leadership.Plenty of examples overseas = S.Africa, N.Ireland etc

The umbrella amnesty proposal was a classic piece of Thaksin stupidity - handing the opposition a hand up from the low place it had fallen.Can the Dems capitalise on this and erode the PTP so that an election win in less than two years is possible? Could do it with intelligent leadership but the performance over the last few days doesn't give much grounds for hope.In their hearts the Dems don't really believe they can win over the Thai people at an election so hope for a coup (the stupid bone headed ones) or a judicial intervention (the less stupid ones).Still even if they manage to diitch Yingluck or ban the PTP, ther's still that pesky problem of winning an election thereafter.Frankly it might be easier all round for the DEms to abandon plotting and licking the army's posterior to concentrate on decent policies and bonding again with the country.Believe it or not that's what I would prefer.

You couldn't make it up.The usual suspects always spoil their case by going over the top.For example this suggestion that Thaksin's populist policies were in fact initiated by the Democrats only they didn't quite get time to put any of them in place.Also a first for me was the zany idea that Thaksin was responsible for the Asian Crisis.If this level of insanity is to be the usual suspectrs mantra why not go the whole hog and make him responsible for cholera,global warming, junk food,James Blunt and alchopops.It's the same deranged mindset that queries the Thaksinite parties electoral success because it was all down to "vote buying" or that an absolute majority of Thais didn't vote that way.

In this case, ONE poster has suggested ONE Thaksin policy was suggested before Thaksin was in power.

IIRC, this policy was suggested a few years before Thaksin was in power, but it was found to be unaffordable at the time, so wasn't implemented. It seems that they were correct at that time given that it costs more to collect the fee than the fee itself.

And you seem to be suggesting the same thing - viz it was a Democrat policy that after careful investigation was not implemented.Main line usual suspect material I'm afraid.

He seems to be getting the publicity. He's firing up the crowds. He's pressing a few buttons. And few give a dam_n about his history. Add the group-frenzy mentality to the fiery rhetoric and there could be the makings of something we are reluctant to predict. I don't like this at all. We may not like this character, but if he strikes a chord ... well, I hate to think. Whether we like it or not, Suthep is prepared to push things as far as he can. It's heady stuff, despite our cynicism about him personally. Suthep is clearly trying to manoeuvre this situation into a new level. and that's what worries me.

sorry anything to get rid of the Thaksin clan will be welcome to me and if others are to nice to play dirty well then it needs someone like him even with his obvious dark side to stop Thailand descending slowly into a one party state. Also if it comes to it I hope the army will again stop the megalomaniac

turning Thailand into his own north Korea. Pol pot was also elected. I doubt sheep will ever agree but its only way if people here are happy to sell their votes and so naive as to believe Thaksin will do them any good. Ive lived here through many coups and bad governments but this lot is worst of any ive seen.

No argument from me. I'm only concerned about another round of violence - I just don't want to see any more deaths, especially if the alternatives have not been exhausted (although I have no idea what they might be). I saw friends and colleagues turned into cripples and alcoholics after both 1992 and 2010. Please, no more.

That is a good reason to get behind this movement it is a peaceful one and I doubt very much the Army would move in on them. If nothing else they might move in on the Police if they started using weapons against all the unarmed protestors. This is not like the last one where the protestors came armed with guns and rocket launchers and in fact used them to fire on defenders of Thailand who had not shot at them.

I agree your view this protest is most likely to be peaceful.But you have got the reasoning the wrong way round.People like the crazier type of quasi fascist (Pitak movement etc), though obviously wouldn't admit it now, could envisage nothing better than a blood stained incident.Equally the government is concerned that such an incident might occur, and will do everything to prevent it.The reason of course is that shedding blood on the streets of Bangkok is either catastrophic or very counter productive for the perpetrators.That's a rather obvious lesson of history.But having said that I don't think we are anywhere near that point even with the dubious Suthep at the helm.However whatever his faults he isn't a fool and knows that violence can have very unpredictable results.His aim is the obliteration of Thaksin and his influence.Hence I'm surmising his strategy is to keep a febrile atmosphere going to give background to a judicial intervention.Whether it will work is for discussion.

Sure the have expensive overheads, so do private schools in the UK, probably a lot more.

Just looked at the schools web page, first reaction, good, their enrollment fee is approx 50% of other inter schools,Tuition fees are also lower. Then I looked for information on the staff, this they do supply, unlike some inter schools. However their teacher seem to be mostly Philippine nationals,

Are they competent and well trained teachers, I don't know, thou I suspect they have been employed because they are cheaper then those from the UK/Australia/NZ.

By way of reference pricing, my nephew has just begun at a public school in the UK as a dayboy.Fees are Pnds 7200 per term (say Bt 360,000).By that standard Bangkok schools seem reasonably priced.

Just looked up Queen Ethelburga's in York, I think they came 15th overall in the UK educational league table.( How do the international schools compere).For a day pupil at grade 3 the fee is £2,440 per term, approx 125,000 baht, so not much different from the fees at a good international school here in Thailand,in fact lower than at some. One thing that stands out is that they do not impose an admission fee, as do all Thai international schools.

It's a reasonable school (though not one of the hiso variety) but not typical of decent UK independent schools in terms of day fees ( though its boarding fees are).In brief UK day fees are over twice the cost of elite Bangkok schools.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Sure the have expensive overheads, so do private schools in the UK, probably a lot more.

Just looked at the schools web page, first reaction, good, their enrollment fee is approx 50% of other inter schools,Tuition fees are also lower. Then I looked for information on the staff, this they do supply, unlike some inter schools. However their teacher seem to be mostly Philippine nationals,

Are they competent and well trained teachers, I don't know, thou I suspect they have been employed because they are cheaper then those from the UK/Australia/NZ.

By way of reference pricing, my nephew has just begun at a public school in the UK as a dayboy.Fees are Pnds 7200 per term (say Bt 360,000).By that standard Bangkok schools seem reasonably priced.

Doesn't really work does it? If you wish to engage in invective (albeit lame because just copied) like this you need to provide an example or you just look foolish.Here's a pointer.Chuwit is an entertaining politician (that's an opinion).Chuwit has been involved in immoral businesses (that too is an opinion because morality is subjective).Chuwit has owned massage parlours in Bangkok (that's a fact).Got it now? Off you go.

So how does "only a small number of people joined the protest." become an "incontestable fact"? In your opinion, that is.

To be quite honest I was thinking of Suthep's call for a strike/go slow and its poor response rather than, as I should have given the context (my mistake), the earlier protests against the blanket amnesty.I accept Khunken's contention that these were 'large enough' to do the job to bury the blanket amnesty - an objective I support.

You come down with the last shower? Yeah of course he has disconnected. I like Chuvit and the way he stands against corruption etc, but it really is hypocritical and a fox guarding the hen house scenario.

One could say the same about Suthep though he, unlike the zany Chuwit, is of course not in any way likeable.

And returning to the thread subject matter Mr Green Tea was speaking no more than the truth.

As one who prattles on about facts here's a good example of distortion. Mr Green Tea was giving his opinion and it was not the truth. Given the numbers that came on to the streets and the varied groups that saw through the amnesty bill and the government & Senate's reaction to them, it was significant enough to - at least temporarily - squash it.

Numbers in street protests are variable depending who is pronouncing on them and to call them small or large or whatever is nothing but opinion. However, like Ezzra, I won't be drinking green tea because of Suthep but because it is little more than sugared water.

Fair enough.I accept your point.Still there's no harm in many of us thinking harder about what are facts (or as near as can be defined as facts) and what are opinions.

 

 

 

 

 

Wrong. I noted a fact as well..... Events occurring right now are an ongoing proof of that...   :-)

 

 

So you are unable to distinguish between a fact and an opinion.I will keep that in mind when reading your posts.

 

 

Good idea. I always keep in mind the difference between fact and fiction when I read yours.  

 

 

Doesn't really work does it? If you wish to engage in invective (albeit lame because just copied) like this you need to provide an example or you just look foolish.Here's a pointer.Chuwit is an entertaining politician (that's an opinion).Chuwit has been involved in immoral businesses (that too is an opinion because morality is subjective).Chuwit has owned massage parlours in Bangkok (that's a fact).Got it now? Off you go

 

Still posting in the superior mindset of the insecure. Maybe that's not your intention, but it does make you look so patronizing, pretentious and unable to accept anything as your own opinion as fact.

 

You find Chuwit entertaining - your opinion. Chuwit's involvement in the massage business has been well documented - do your own research. Your judgment on the immorality of this business is down to your own personal values. 

 

Your views, based on your values, allow others to judge the contents of your posts in the context of your values.

 

You appear to like to give other posters instructions - keep on with the delusion that you're in someway important. 

Not only are you unable to understand what is subjective and what is not, you also seem unable to grasp a simple point.I was not having a debate about Chuwit.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Wrong. I noted a fact as well..... Events occurring right now are an ongoing proof of that... :-)

So you are unable to distinguish between a fact and an opinion.I will keep that in mind when reading your posts.

Good idea. I always keep in mind the difference between fact and fiction when I read yours.

Doesn't really work does it? If you wish to engage in invective (albeit lame because just copied) like this you need to provide an example or you just look foolish.Here's a pointer.Chuwit is an entertaining politician (that's an opinion).Chuwit has been involved in immoral businesses (that too is an opinion because morality is subjective).Chuwit has owned massage parlours in Bangkok (that's a fact).Got it now? Off you go.

Regarding Mr. Green Tea, instead of sucking up to the government by making disparaging remarks about the attendance at the rally, he should learn to keep his mouth shut..... I was in a taxi once, and the driver asked me in Thai if I like Thaksin. I told him that Thaksin was the worst thing that ever happened to Thailand. He stopped the cab, and told me to get out. Lesson? Opinions are not appreciated in Thailand.

Your comparison is invalid.He was noting an incontestable fact.You were expressing a personal and subjective opinion.

Wrong. I noted a fact as well..... Events occurring right now are an ongoing proof of that... :-)

So you are unable to distinguish between a fact and an opinion.I will keep that in mind when reading your posts.

Regarding Mr. Green Tea, instead of sucking up to the government by making disparaging remarks about the attendance at the rally, he should learn to keep his mouth shut..... I was in a taxi once, and the driver asked me in Thai if I like Thaksin. I told him that Thaksin was the worst thing that ever happened to Thailand. He stopped the cab, and told me to get out. Lesson? Opinions are not appreciated in Thailand.

Your comparison is invalid.He was noting an incontestable fact.You were expressing a personal and subjective opinion.

You come down with the last shower? Yeah of course he has disconnected. I like Chuvit and the way he stands against corruption etc, but it really is hypocritical and a fox guarding the hen house scenario.

One could say the same about Suthep though he, unlike the zany Chuwit, is of course not in any way likeable.

And returning to the thread subject matter Mr Green Tea was speaking no more than the truth.

 

Well  unlike the Red Shirt  rioters, there are no bribes being paid to the anti amnesty protesters, they came out because they believe in the cause but a great many of them have like jobs and stuff, you know what they are ? People need money and need jobs to survive in this world and since there is no rich fugitive criminal on the run paying them to protest, normal life must go on.....Do you get me ?

Translation: The strike looks like being an embarrassing failure.The ghastly Suthep has egg on his face.The Democrats, having been provided an unanticipated bonus through Thaksin's idiotic Amnesty, seem destined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app