Nickymaster

I have always wondered what the duty of the Police is in Thailand. Why does the army have to deal with internal affairs. Isn't the police the one who should maintain law and order?

Where was the police when the Reds occupied downtown Bangkok?

It's easy to blame the army if they have to do the dirty work left behind by a corrupt Police force.

I have never heard Red lovers criticize the Police for letting them terrorize Bangkok.

I have never heard Red lovers criticize the Police for letting the south go out of control.

I'll admit they're guilty when they have been proved that they are guilty. It's called justice, something you supposedly stand up for as long as it's your kind of justice that is. That is why I specifically added (not slipped in as implied by you as if I was doing something sneaky - it's the way your mind works) "until proven".

When you've got over your lynchmob mentality come back and lecture me on justice and democracy.

Before you get up on your soap box and spout your nonsense about Justice look the word up in a dictionary.

It is exactly like my criminology instructor said when you go to court you can be pretty sure legal is done. But not that justice will be done.

According to your logic even with the thousands of witness having it on tape they are innocent because a court hasn't said they were guilty.

Do you realize a court never said Hitler was Guilty of war crimes. Are you trying to say he was innocent.

No, I'm just waiting for a verdict when they go through judicial procedures. Innocent until proven guilty imho. You have already decreed them guilty. That is the difference (well one of them at least) between you and me.

I was aware that Hitler was never found guilty of war crimes - mind you, it would have been an interesting trial for sure, necessitating a seance at the very least. So apart from the ludicrous nature of your analogy it hardly stands up in court does it - and neither did hitler.....................

Always amusing to read Thaksin's apologists hair-splitting to provide cover for red thuggery. And so much experience doing so.

And shamelessly supporting a guy that is labeled by HRW as a human rights abuser of it's worst kind.

But who can stop a rich, corrupt narcissist with a propaganda machine working at full speed in a country where many have little education. Perfect playing field.

I'll admit they're guilty when they have been proved that they are guilty. It's called justice, something you supposedly stand up for as long as it's your kind of justice that is. That is why I specifically added (not slipped in as implied by you as if I was doing something sneaky - it's the way your mind works) "until proven".

When you've got over your lynchmob mentality come back and lecture me on justice and democracy.

Before you get up on your soap box and spout your nonsense about Justice look the word up in a dictionary.

It is exactly like my criminology instructor said when you go to court you can be pretty sure legal is done. But not that justice will be done.

According to your logic even with the thousands of witness having it on tape they are innocent because a court hasn't said they were guilty.

Do you realize a court never said Hitler was Guilty of war crimes. Are you trying to say he was innocent.

No, I'm just waiting for a verdict when they go through judicial procedures. Innocent until proven guilty imho. You have already decreed them guilty. That is the difference (well one of them at least) between you and me.

I was aware that Hitler was never found guilty of war crimes - mind you, it would have been an interesting trial for sure, necessitating a seance at the very least. So apart from the ludicrous nature of your analogy it hardly stands up in court does it - and neither did hitler.....................

propaganda 101: What you see is not what you see. And if all fails, we can still change the constitution.

Does this mean that our financially supported red shirt apologists might have vanished from this forum?

Let's see!

They never have been financially supported, don't attack them for this, it's against forum rules.

They are lonely ignorants and we have an ear for them to make them happy.

Surely it would be ignorant to just look at one viewpoint, the 'red shirt apologists' on this forum tend to have a balanced view and see both sides, whereas the forum yellows tend to spew bile about anything to do with the reds.

So who is ignorant??

I know there are some Reds here but I didn't know there were yellows too?

I thought it has always been the reds against the machine, or is it the machine against the country?

PPD would call this censorship and not fair. Any other civilized person would agree with the court.

Will the police do what they have to do? It will remain a question mark.

Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung, who oversees the Royal Thai Police, this may be a clue as to how seriously the police will take the courts orders.

A Criminal Court Judiciary that employs Judge/s that allow convicted killers to go free on bail, this may be a clue to how seriously the public views the courts orders......................

Yeaah let's start defaming ALL judges instead. They are all wrong, especially the ones dealing with the Reds and Thaksin.

BTW, did you know that there is a difference between having an opinion about someone (or group) and defaming someone?

PPD would call this censorship and not fair. Any other civilized person would agree with the court.

Will the police do what they have to do? It will remain a question mark.

If one police officer is charged with murder, it would mean that there were extra-judicial killings during Thaksins war on drugs.

Therefore, these 5 policemen will eventually be cleared. Thaksin will try everything possible to avoid policemen being charged.

If there were "proven" extrajudicial killings, Thaksin could be charged for crimes against humanity. He knows that.

So don't expect any official to be punished. Not now, not the last 8 years and not in the future.

Wait and see.

Most probably you are looking at a murderer who should have received the death sentence.

In the US system of jurisprudence, politicians and judges are beyond the reach of libel and defamation laws. As public officials, they are regarded as fair game and the slander gets pretty vicious. Even where slander and libel laws can be applied, a person must show damages. No harm, no foul.

Let's face it, libel and defamation laws in Thailand and many other countries are used to stifle dissent and political discourse. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Very true, particularly paragraph 2. Exactly why I referred to Ahbist as a sissy for resorting to Defamation. One should not be in politics if they cannot handle public scrutiny.

So very true..............

Thaksin sues Privy Councillor for defamation - Nationmultimedia.com

Thaksin wins appellate review to sue Kaewsun - The Nation

Thaksin sues anti-graft panel for 50b baht - Teen Forums, Teen Help ...

Thaksin sues for one billion baht

Thai ousted premier Thaksin sues deputy prime minister for ...

Thaksin sues Thai graft busters for US$1.5b

BURMA DEMOCRACY & DEVELOPMENT: Thaksin sues deputy PM

Thaksin sues Gen Pichitr for defamation : National News Bureau of ...

Thaksin sues Suthep for defamation

Thaksin sues Swiss banks - <URL Automatically Removed> - The Thailand Forum

Thaksin sues a media tycoon for 12 million dollars

Thailand's PM Thaksin sues critic for black magic remark - China Post

Ex-Thai PM sues UAE lawyer for Dh441m - Emirates 24/7

Thaksin's wife sues Thai anti-graft body - USATODAY.com

Thaksin sues Thai antigraft body over frozen $2.1-B asset | GMA ...

Thaksin Sues Newspaper for Misleading Report - Xinhua News - vLex

and theres 1,180,000 more........

.

Too funny. A reflection if childlike mentality that keeps everything in turmoil. Since Thaksin did years ago when in Thailand, and that worked so well and made everyone so happy, it must be okay to do it now. Comparable to the "mom he hit me first" argument that children make when mom bust them for acting bad. Children are generally taught just because he did it first does not make it right.

Think you are cornered but good try.

No one as the Thais to go to Pattani.

If Thais do not go about busybody the Musllim, who they be killed?

Just like the Brit in Northern Ireland, or American in Iraq, of USSR in Afgan.

Isn't Pattani a part of Thailand?

I hope they go on grilling Yingluck for 2 days over and over again on the alleged sexual at the four season duck restaurant. Until the confession of an unmarried mother come out, hopefully with supporting video clip.

I hope they put up some porn video in the Parliament large screen too, just like the last time (alleged by MP from mark's party).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m3Z3AfonfI

Why do you hope that they put porn on? There is no other way for you to get your porn?

surely at some point in the near future something needs to happen to end this circus, Thailand is getting well out of control and going down the toilet fast, in the past I've often thought that Thai adults are much like children as they progress through life - as I read the news here every day I get constant confirmation, pity it's so serious - it would make a great sitcom

And the sad thing is that it will only get worse. All because of one narcissist.

RT@robertamsterdam: Rumors I no longer work for the Red Shirts are completely false. I remain as committed as ever to making sure my clients receive justice.

RT@robertamsterdam: I should also confirm I remain retained by Dr Thaksin with my main efforts focused on bringing the 2010 Thai regime to account at the ICC.

Thaksin supporters can sleep tight now. He still has a fancy mouthpiece.

Check tomorrow's 'Letter to Editor' column in the Nation. There will be a letter addressing this issue from Kip Keino.

Letter is there today, as predicted.

Simply put, No. Did you see any violence happening as a result? If that was the intended result it seems to have been a resounding failure.

According to your logic, if I toss a grenade at a motorcade, and the grenade doesn't go off, then it's a 'failure' and mai pen rai, no legal repercussions.

No it's not, that's a ridiculous suggestion. A few red shirts burning paper coffins is not

going to incite anyone to do anything than shout slogans.

Why do you people always have to up the hyperbole, heckling is against democracy,

we have "evil people doing evil things" alleged throwing stones becomes throwing rocks

until we get to the "man' himself, abhisit, who insists they were out to harm him. Wuss.

Democracy thai style:

Democrat MP Rangsima

(who incidentally wants breathalyzer tests in parliament)

plays hide and seek with the speakers chair - nice

Democracy British Style - No wusses here when campaigning

Isn't that the movie where the DEMS tried to stop Somsak when he abruptly ended a session on deliberation of the whitewash bill (when it was the DEMS turn to speak out), and called for an urgent vote (because it was an urgent bill)?

PPD would then say: Bad DEMS!

has our man in Dubai not been paying his bills I wonder

they certainly havent parted ways on moral grounds

They haven't parted way : " ... Amsterdam said, adding that Thaksin remains a client of the firm."

Most probably, due to the current situation, the lobbying services are no longer needed.

Good to note too that the former prime minister, was convicted in absentia on a conflict-of-interest charge. It's a legal blog so there a bit more precise in their wording that our Sondhi's boys. The only thing Thaksin has ever been convicted for is a controversial land deal To be even more precise, for a land deal his wife did when he was in office.

the land deal was not controversial, it was corrupt and forbidden by law. All the million other cases against can't proceed without him.

Not exactly the truth. It's not that there wasn't a will to destroy Thaksin by any means possible, even the more futile, it's just that the courts couldn't find anything else that this very minor land deal.

Question to the mods : is it ok to cite wikileaks (with links) here ?

There are dozens of cases against Thaksin. You don't know that? You really thought it was only the land case?

Yesterday, Noppadon says:

The government will never withdraw the reconciliation bills

Noppadon speaks the truth...which lasted one day.

Today, the government spokesman says:

The government is shelving the reconciliation bills

I suppose it is a waste of time explaining to you the difference between withdrawing and shelving bills but I'll try.

To withdraw a bill is to retract it i.e not to support its passage through parliament, to stop it in other words.

To shelve a bill is literally to put it to one side until the moment is right to re - present the bill.

In other words your interpretation is wrong, not that you'll admit of course and will no doubt spin this part of the thread into the universe and beyond. I've said my piece and I've explained that what Noppodon said on two seperate occasions leads to the same meaning.

So they are withdrawn from the current agenda right?

Well if the op had not cut the copy and paste short you would see that Thaksin is still a client so there has been no parting of the ways

I know you like to disregard the forum rules, but the OP was posted in compliance with them.

Additionally, if one reads the article, they will discover that some services with Thaksin continue while there has been a parting of the ways for other services.

.

So contrary to opinion it appears that Thaksin does have a visa for the United States, though the Amsterdam Office did not have any involvement with this matter. Well thats cleared that matter up at least.

Thaksin already said many times to his Reds (during rallies) that he could travel the whole world except Thailand. He, and the Reds, didn't understand that. Do you?

Well if the op had not cut the copy and paste short you would see that Thaksin is still a client so there has been no parting of the ways

It is you who can't read. Don't blame someone else.

"MP's must have their privilege to question and interrogate any institution - it's in their JD and they should be allowed to question Courts (as in every other country INCLUDING yours)"

Well I am from Thailand but in the other country I hail from, we use the Westminster system of parliamentary privilege, which allows an MP protection against civil and criminal liability in the course of their duties as a legislator, typically during parliamentary proceedings only, and still not a free for all to engage in any verbal tirade they wish, but rather a restricted freedom of speech without much consequence, while working as a member of parliament, and usually requiring that they are in session or at least in the house.

However, that has nothing to do with this case, which as anyone can see, is party political grandstanding idiocy of the highest order by the two MPs in question, and there is no question in the countries I hail from that the person in making an accusation outside the house (in this case as a representative of the Puea Thai party, not directly as an MP, using the 2 'hats' theory) is fully liable for any defamatory statement or libel.

At no point were they choosing to "question and interrogate" the courts, rather they were delivering a personal attack making incorrect statements which they claimed were facts, for personal and party political gain.

It would truly be odd if MPs were the only people in the world to enjoy some sort of odd civil liberty to defame another person at any time, when one of whom isn't even directly elected and is merely a list MP jobsworth.

I look forward to the reference in the Constitution, perhaps the most relevant legal document as to the jobs of MPs, as to where it specifically states that this is part of their job. I would personally have thought Section 45 and section 130 are the two key pieces, here is section 130 which specifically addresses this situation, paraphrased:

"At a sitting of the House of Representatives ....words expressed in giving statements of fact or opinions or in casting the vote by any member are absolutely privileged. No charge or action in any manner whatsoever shall be brought against such member.

The privilege under paragraph one does not extend to a member who expresses words at a sitting which is broadcast through radio or television if such words appear out of the precinct of the National Assembly and the expression of such words constitutes a criminal offence or a wrongful act against any other person, who is not a Minister or member of that House."

I would have thought this is crystal clear, but then again, my legal training is not as extensive as some members of the house, a few who even have PhDs in Law. Even if some of them didn't attend too many classes. Alledgedly.

Certainly, given the lack of progress in most areas, I would have thought PT MPs would be a little more focused on delivering any sort of progress to their supporters rather than wasting their time with another PR opportunity...but then again that's me, always looking for the glass to be half full, preferably of a nice lager.

They are delivering money to their supporters. That is a sign of progress to them (supporters).

2 unrelated things (a man trampled to death by an annoyed elephant) and the PM at the same place, but somehow not involved in the incident reported...and some of you can simply not focus on the main story and have to make comments about the PM! Amazing!

The main story wouldn't be the main story without the PM.

A pink Bentley is a typical car for a guy who thinks he could get away with murder. Why would Chalerm have the same car as Paris Hilton? Ohh no.. wait, he might also have the same dress as Paris Hilton.

I wouldn't put Chalerm in charge of my toilet paper supply. The 391 million would be barely enough to put armor on his Bentley ....

Seriously, is that somebody's car who is in the Government? Or am I not getting the joke.

Hope some of that 391 million is used to buy some armour for the Honda Waves the troops have to patrol on.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Thaivisa Connect App

No thats reserved for the APC's they use in Bangkok to keep the shopping centres open. From Yala to Prada.

If you have nothing to say..

These laws have been in place since 1956.

Perhaps if Parliament wasn't busy with reconciliation bills to exonerate the Dubai Dude, then they might have had time to set to work on revamping those laws they feel unjust.

As for censorship, the ever greater curtailment of the internet with Chalerm in charge is a fair indicator of how the current government views censorship. "it's ok as long as we're in charge of it"

.

The laws may well have been in existence since 1956. However the constitutional court has only been in existence since 1997, the adversarial non independant version of it since 2007. This is only the 2nd time I am aware of it being involved in "pressing charges" against ordinary citizens (the first being against Jatuporn) so it's a bit of a new situation for everybody.

Not sure this is what the writers of "The Peoples Charter" envisioned when they set up the first Constitutional Court to concentrate entirely on constitutional matters.....................

It is a new situation for Thailand... I suspect that as the courts become more political that there will be more anti-court demonstrations, and more retaliatory acts by the courts.

As for censorship, whether it is Thaksin's gov't, the military junta, Abhisit's gov't, the current gov't, or the CC, it's still people in power putting a muzzle on citizens.

The courts don't become more political, they want to survive as one of the three columns of democracy. The anti-court demonstrations - it's your hidden desire, I suppose, seeing the fact that you inverse cause and effect.

Inverting cause and effect. Spot on.