Thai Junta Chief Calls For Emergency Rule In Bangkok

[kmart]

PAD seems less about Thai democracy than the mouthpiece of arch-gobshite Sonthi Limthongkul. If this bloke ever gets into power he will make Thaksin look like Ghandi. He only started this faux "Democratic" shenanigans over a personal business dispute he had with Thaxo anyway. Utter style-over-substance <deleted> of the first order.

[hammered]

PAD seems less about Thai democracy than the mouthpiece of arch-gobshite Sonthi Limthongkul. If this bloke ever gets into power he will make Thaksin look like Ghandi. He only started this faux "Democratic" shenanigans over a personal business dispute he had with Thaxo anyway. Utter style-over-substance <deleted> of the first order.

The one major flaw in your expletive filled expert analysis is that Mr. Sonthi has stated he has no interest in entering politics and prefers to use other ie media or pressure group tactics to further his arguements. Whether one agrees with Mr. Sonthi or not he is quite clear on this.

Also to the best of my knowledge Ghandi did not have thousands of his own citizens killed in an extra-judicial program, so however bad one may want to speculate on Mr. Sonthi being if he became PM (pure fantasy), it is still difficult to compare soemone who headed a regime linked to extra-judicial killings to a man who preached peace even in the face of violence.

[Old Man River]

PAD seems less about Thai democracy than the mouthpiece of arch-gobshite Sonthi Limthongkul. If this bloke ever gets into power he will make Thaksin look like Ghandi. He only started this faux "Democratic" shenanigans over a personal business dispute he had with Thaxo anyway. Utter style-over-substance <deleted> of the first order.

Don't confuse what the PAD ended up being from what Sonthi Lim is. Sonthi Lim is a promoter of the first order, and he is vindictive, and generally not a nice nor trustworthy person. However, eventually the PAD took a life of its own with capable, selfless leaders stepping up. Sonthi Lim became less of a leader and more of a spokeman (befitting his style). Not everyone who supported the PAD thought like Sonthi Lim, although there were a number of brainless idiots that did follow him in his direct attacks on the Singaporean Embassy.

Hence, while he started the PAD, it outgrew him quickly.

[kmart]

PAD seems less about Thai democracy than the mouthpiece of arch-gobshite Sonthi Limthongkul. If this bloke ever gets into power he will make Thaksin look like Ghandi. He only started this faux "Democratic" shenanigans over a personal business dispute he had with Thaxo anyway. Utter style-over-substance <deleted> of the first order.

The one major flaw in your expletive filled expert analysis is that Mr. Sonthi has stated he has no interest in entering politics and prefers to use other ie media or pressure group tactics to further his arguements. Whether one agrees with Mr. Sonthi or not he is quite clear on this.

Also to the best of my knowledge Ghandi did not have thousands of his own citizens killed in an extra-judicial program, so however bad one may want to speculate on Mr. Sonthi being if he became PM (pure fantasy), it is still difficult to compare soemone who headed a regime linked to extra-judicial killings to a man who preached peace even in the face of violence.

Excuse the expletives. But what Mr Sonthi states and actually does are not the same thing. His nationalistic chest-beating anti-foreigner speeches mark him out as a scoundrel or the first order too.

The "Ghandi" remark was supposed to be ironic. I do apologise.

[hammered]

PAD seems less about Thai democracy than the mouthpiece of arch-gobshite Sonthi Limthongkul. If this bloke ever gets into power he will make Thaksin look like Ghandi. He only started this faux "Democratic" shenanigans over a personal business dispute he had with Thaxo anyway. Utter style-over-substance <deleted> of the first order.

The one major flaw in your expletive filled expert analysis is that Mr. Sonthi has stated he has no interest in entering politics and prefers to use other ie media or pressure group tactics to further his arguements. Whether one agrees with Mr. Sonthi or not he is quite clear on this.

Also to the best of my knowledge Ghandi did not have thousands of his own citizens killed in an extra-judicial program, so however bad one may want to speculate on Mr. Sonthi being if he became PM (pure fantasy), it is still difficult to compare soemone who headed a regime linked to extra-judicial killings to a man who preached peace even in the face of violence.

Excuse the expletives. But what Mr Sonthi states and actually does are not the same thing. His nationalistic chest-beating anti-foreigner speeches mark him out as a scoundrel or the first order too.

The "Ghandi" remark was supposed to be ironic. I do apologise.

No worries we are all entitled to an opinion

Personally I dont agree with much Mr. Sonthi says although there were certainly some good pro-democracy people in the PAD too. It was an alliance with one common thing that held it together but an alliance of divers groups. Mr. Sonthi and those of his ilk were only part of it.

Peace

[drummer]

We don't know what the wishes of those 15 million people were. We know what they have been told to wish, which is not the same.

In tightly knit communities in rural Thailand policy platforms are just icing on the cake.

"You have to vote for Thaksin, and you will feel good too - he cares about people". Presented this way it sells itself and reduces expenses on vote buying. All TRT had to do is grease the canvassing machine.

This is true... It is precisely why the protests happened. It because very very clear that Thakson does NOT care about people. Also, it should be noted that other politicians use the same tack. I've never been North of BKK, but I've been South, and there is extensive, but not totally uncontrolled vote buying there. Its gotta be way way worse in the much much poorer North and Northeast.

[drummer]

The total erradication of the TRT influence will occur with the total erradication of poverty in Thailand. Even if Thaksin had never been born- the stresses in a country as divided economically as Thailand will eventually take on a political dimension- whether that is accomodated through ballots or the polling booth is the big question right now.

That is a very Western way to look at things. Thais generally see the whole context o things, and generally accept their role -good or bad- as being just and right, the way things should be. If you are poor, then its because your spirit is lacking. Thais especially rural Thais, just don't have Western values of egalitarianism. That particular dam will break ONLY when the government starts to abuse them in ways that they think is abuse. It is normal and justified for those with money to maintain their status.

Even Suryuth has said that the greatest threat facing Thailand is not the south, not drugs, not even TRT- it is the gap between the rich and poor.

He is a very smart man. It is true, but not so much in the egalitarian way that you are suggesting. A healthy economy "raises all boats" and will put Thailand onto the world scene economically. If they don't do something about it, they will remain where they are economically, while everyone around them moves up. This makes issues AIDS drugs and the like more problematic for Thailand. (among other reasons) ....just my 2 cents here....

[blaze]

The total erradication of the TRT influence will occur with the total erradication of poverty in Thailand. Even if Thaksin had never been born- the stresses in a country as divided economically as Thailand will eventually take on a political dimension- whether that is accomodated through ballots or the polling booth is the big question right now.

That is a very Western way to look at things. Thais generally see the whole context o things, and generally accept their role -good or bad- as being just and right, the way things should be. If you are poor, then its because your spirit is lacking. Thais especially rural Thais, just don't have Western values of egalitarianism. That particular dam will break ONLY when the government starts to abuse them in ways that they think is abuse. It is normal and justified for those with money to maintain their status.

Even Suryuth has said that the greatest threat facing Thailand is not the south, not drugs, not even TRT- it is the gap between the rich and poor.

He is a very smart man. It is true, but not so much in the egalitarian way that you are suggesting. A healthy economy "raises all boats" and will put Thailand onto the world scene economically. If they don't do something about it, they will remain where they are economically, while everyone around them moves up. This makes issues AIDS drugs and the like more problematic for Thailand. (among other reasons) ....just my 2 cents here....

Are you suggesting that if a political party comes along, promising low interest credit to farmers, increased minimum wage and job protection for the urban poor, free medical for all, 10 years free education- the poor will reject that party- or will have to be paid to vote for it? Because they 'accept their role'?

We hear much about the role of the puuyais. But a puuyai controlling a rich village- albeit rich because of government programs, stands to gain much more than a puuyai controlling an impoverished one.

Any party promising to enrich the poor will get the attention of the puuyais.

Suryuth did not say that the problem facing Thailand is lack of money- he said that it was a problem of the income gap. Gap being the operative word.

The idea that a rising tide raises all boats is true: in countries with strong labor unions and democratic institutions well in place but the tide rises in many countries- and the boats stay mired in the mud. Nigeria comes to mind. Brazil (though thanks to a populist government- that may be changing) Venezuela, Russia of the 90s.... Rising tides do not always lift all boats.

Perhaps the reason vote buying was so rampant in the southern provinces you refer to- is that the dominant party there was promising very little that would interest let alone benefit the poor.

[hammered]

The total erradication of the TRT influence will occur with the total erradication of poverty in Thailand. Even if Thaksin had never been born- the stresses in a country as divided economically as Thailand will eventually take on a political dimension- whether that is accomodated through ballots or the polling booth is the big question right now.

That is a very Western way to look at things. Thais generally see the whole context o things, and generally accept their role -good or bad- as being just and right, the way things should be. If you are poor, then its because your spirit is lacking. Thais especially rural Thais, just don't have Western values of egalitarianism. That particular dam will break ONLY when the government starts to abuse them in ways that they think is abuse. It is normal and justified for those with money to maintain their status.

Even Suryuth has said that the greatest threat facing Thailand is not the south, not drugs, not even TRT- it is the gap between the rich and poor.

He is a very smart man. It is true, but not so much in the egalitarian way that you are suggesting. A healthy economy "raises all boats" and will put Thailand onto the world scene economically. If they don't do something about it, they will remain where they are economically, while everyone around them moves up. This makes issues AIDS drugs and the like more problematic for Thailand. (among other reasons) ....just my 2 cents here....

Are you suggesting that if a political party comes along, promising low interest credit to farmers, increased minimum wage and job protection for the urban poor, free medical for all, 10 years free education- the poor will reject that party- or will have to be paid to vote for it? Because they 'accept their role'?

We hear much about the role of the puuyais. But a puuyai controlling a rich village- albeit rich because of government programs, stands to gain much more than a puuyai controlling an impoverished one.

Any party promising to enrich the poor will get the attention of the puuyais.

Suryuth did not say that the problem facing Thailand is lack of money- he said that it was a problem of the income gap. Gap being the operative word.

The idea that a rising tide raises all boats is true: in countries with strong labor unions and democratic institutions well in place but the tide rises in many countries- and the boats stay mired in the mud. Nigeria comes to mind. Brazil (though thanks to a populist government- that may be changing) Venezuela, Russia of the 90s.... Rising tides do not always lift all boats.

Perhaps the reason vote buying was so rampant in the southern provinces you refer to- is that the dominant party there was promising very little that would interest let alone benefit the poor.

There is an issue of what the people get to hear. In the villages sources of information tend to be TV news if watched but more importantly and often missed by western observers is the importance of the message spread by the village headman either by tannoy or by talking to people. The electorate will not necessarily know the policies of all parties. For example, under TRT government if you questioned villagers in the northern region about the democrat policies they would tell you incorrectly that dem polices were to just undo everything TRT had done, which was the message spread by TRT cadres. They did not know anything about free education for their kids to 18 or elected provincial governors and that the Dems had stated they would not repeal laws giving 30 baht health care etc. The villagers while also fully informed of the 30 baht, cows for all etc policies were certainly also not fully informed on the ultra-free market FTA and privavtisation polices of TRT which were going to impinge on their lives so negatively. It was not then and probably remains not an even playing field where all citizens are equally informed. The control of information was and probably still remains far more critical than any stated policies. TRT managed quite nicely by controlling information on what they were going to do to only the positive, informing people incorrectly about everyone elses polices to the point where it was very dangerous to oppose TRT publically in many areas, which of course limited the flow of information even more. It was populism along the lines of that succesfully employed by certain leaders in Europe in the thirties. In fact I even get confused to "who beat the mafia", and used it as a slogan. Was it Mussolini or Thaksin?

By the way vote buying was rampant in the North and North East. Poor areas of Bangkok also saw it. In fact in the 2005 election it is estimated far more vote buying was done than in any previous election. There is no need to state which party was handing out the most money.

I totally agree a rising tide can benefit all but only as long as distribution of wealth is looked at.

[Plus]

Are you suggesting that if a political party comes along, promising low interest credit to farmers, increased minimum wage and job protection for the urban poor, free medical for all, 10 years free education- the poor will reject that party- or will have to be paid to vote for it?

Parties like that don't "come along", they don't pass the qualifying round - getting major sponsors and penetrating power structures. Without this backing you are nothing in Thai politics.

I bet you can find a dozen of parties with populist platforms on EC list, and no one ever heard of them.

[blaze]

Are you suggesting that if a political party comes along, promising low interest credit to farmers, increased minimum wage and job protection for the urban poor, free medical for all, 10 years free education- the poor will reject that party- or will have to be paid to vote for it?

Parties like that don't "come along", they don't pass the qualifying round - getting major sponsors and penetrating power structures. Without this backing you are nothing in Thai politics.

I bet you can find a dozen of parties with populist platforms on EC list, and no one ever heard of them.

Which does not answer the question.

(And in fact such a party did recently 'come along' -the TRT).

[frikkiedeboer]

Let us not forget that PTV is the TRT. I trust that you can see past the facade of what is going on here. I for one would have to agree that putting emergency rule back into place is the right thing to do. You need to ask yourself who would be arrogant enough to do this self serving thing and you will find the only answer is the TRT. I would also say it fits what I am calling Thaksin's plan "B".

Punishing TRT members, well that's one for the books. Again all meant to make the appearance it is not the TRT, and if you think about Thaksin and his opposites, it fits exactly his style and what he would say.

Slow? The issue about the constitution is for what I can see still more or less on track based on the initial time frame, and I certainly would be annoyed at someone who would be bitching and complaining about something that was still not done. Although I do agree putting the underlying infrastructure back together seems to be a impotent attempt at this point, we must not forget it is a two step process, undo what Thaksin did then rebuild. As far as I can see undoing has never been done before because noone has ever taken thing to this level. I have been watching demolition next to the Asok BTS station for a while now, obviously clearing the way for a new building, this is no different.

Remember the "under currents" talked about early on and mostly centered in Thaksin country, you are now seeing that was not a false statement. This has much bigger ramifications than the appearance of infringement of freedom, and only will serve to further divide the country. Emergency rule is the correct call.

you seem to forget that thaksin was put into power by the ballot, as is the case in all democracies. his critics were allowed to protest and gathered support (relatively) freely in the runup to his demise. the trt is a registered political party (last i saw) and if they wish to protest ,then it is their democratic right....

whether you agree with trt policies or not,-they should have a right to be heard. i am not necessarily a supporter of the trt, nor even a supporter of democratic rule-(i am a south african and have seen "democracy" bring about the demise of many african countries,including my own) i am simply saying that everybody should have the right to voice an opinion, and the right to hear that of others

[John K]

Let us not forget that PTV is the TRT. I trust that you can see past the facade of what is going on here. I for one would have to agree that putting emergency rule back into place is the right thing to do. You need to ask yourself who would be arrogant enough to do this self serving thing and you will find the only answer is the TRT. I would also say it fits what I am calling Thaksin's plan "B".

Punishing TRT members, well that's one for the books. Again all meant to make the appearance it is not the TRT, and if you think about Thaksin and his opposites, it fits exactly his style and what he would say.

Slow? The issue about the constitution is for what I can see still more or less on track based on the initial time frame, and I certainly would be annoyed at someone who would be bitching and complaining about something that was still not done. Although I do agree putting the underlying infrastructure back together seems to be a impotent attempt at this point, we must not forget it is a two step process, undo what Thaksin did then rebuild. As far as I can see undoing has never been done before because noone has ever taken thing to this level. I have been watching demolition next to the Asok BTS station for a while now, obviously clearing the way for a new building, this is no different.

Remember the "under currents" talked about early on and mostly centered in Thaksin country, you are now seeing that was not a false statement. This has much bigger ramifications than the appearance of infringement of freedom, and only will serve to further divide the country. Emergency rule is the correct call.

you seem to forget that thaksin was put into power by the ballot, as is the case in all democracies. his critics were allowed to protest and gathered support (relatively) freely in the runup to his demise. the trt is a registered political party (last i saw) and if they wish to protest ,then it is their democratic right....

whether you agree with trt policies or not,-they should have a right to be heard. i am not necessarily a supporter of the trt, nor even a supporter of democratic rule-(i am a south african and have seen "democracy" bring about the demise of many african countries,including my own) i am simply saying that everybody should have the right to voice an opinion, and the right to hear that of others

Yes but read on past that post to the replies about vote buying. Rich people buying their way into office is not a new thing. In this case it was a business investment to get even richer by systematically removing obstructions such as laws. That resulted in democracy being gutted and that is why a new constitution is being drafted so that does not happen again. The people that are complaining are the ones that will get hit, hence they have things to hide.

If I paid your boss to fire you after you have been a faithful employee for several years, is that democratic?

[Jai Dee]

Poll: Divisiveness causes political problem in Thailand

Divisiveness is the major cause of political problems in Thailand, according to Bangkok's respected Suan Dusit poll.

The leading poll -- conducted April 15-22 among 4,297 persons nationwide -- found that 70 per cent of the respondents agreed that Thailand's political problems stemmed from people disagreeing, causing factions to appear among the people.

Nearly one in four persons -- 24 per cent -- agreed that the problems resulted from a lack of unity and that competing factions should overlook disadvantages they might experience, giving up some of their privileges for the sake of the country.

As for the consequences of Thailand's national political problem, nearly 50 per cent of the respondents said that the current chaos and divisiveness in Thai society are a major result, some 24 per cent said people lived in despair and fear that severe violence could erupt, and 21 per cent said the problem depressed the national economy and also caused more unemployment.

Nearly half -- 47 per cent -- of respondents said politicians must end their conflicts and negotiate reasonably, with good intentions, while 28 per cent urged that the Council for National Security and the government it installed should clarify their roles and show unity in running the country.

Source: TNA - 22 April 2007

[Ricardo]

Let us not forget that PTV is the TRT. I trust that you can see past the facade of what is going on here. I for one would have to agree that putting emergency rule back into place is the right thing to do. You need to ask yourself who would be arrogant enough to do this self serving thing and you will find the only answer is the TRT. I would also say it fits what I am calling Thaksin's plan "B".

Punishing TRT members, well that's one for the books. Again all meant to make the appearance it is not the TRT, and if you think about Thaksin and his opposites, it fits exactly his style and what he would say.

Slow? The issue about the constitution is for what I can see still more or less on track based on the initial time frame, and I certainly would be annoyed at someone who would be bitching and complaining about something that was still not done. Although I do agree putting the underlying infrastructure back together seems to be a impotent attempt at this point, we must not forget it is a two step process, undo what Thaksin did then rebuild. As far as I can see undoing has never been done before because noone has ever taken thing to this level. I have been watching demolition next to the Asok BTS station for a while now, obviously clearing the way for a new building, this is no different.

Remember the "under currents" talked about early on and mostly centered in Thaksin country, you are now seeing that was not a false statement. This has much bigger ramifications than the appearance of infringement of freedom, and only will serve to further divide the country. Emergency rule is the correct call.

you seem to forget that thaksin was put into power by the ballot,

Yes, originally, five years ago, when many voters velieved that Thaksin would be immune to corruption, since he had already made his money.

as is the case in all democracies. his critics were allowed to protest and gathered support (relatively) freely in the runup to his demise.

Sorry but this is very far from true, IMHO. Were you here 9-15 months ago ? Do you remember the men in black shirts ?

the trt is a registered political party (last i saw) and if they wish to protest ,then it is their democratic right....

Unless they are dissolved, for rigging the last election, bribing fake candidates & joke parties to stand, to give the false impression that it was a free and fair election.

whether you agree with trt policies or not,-they should have a right to be heard. i am not necessarily a supporter of the trt, nor even a supporter of democratic rule-(i am a south african and have seen "democracy" bring about the demise of many african countries,including my own) i am simply saying that everybody should have the right to voice an opinion, and the right to hear that of others

So Departed Leader's habit of firing-off billion-baht lawsuits at everybody who disagreed with him was merely an unusual way of supporting their right to be heard ?

I agree with your views on freedom-of-speach, and free-media to report what is said, but don't think they existed, towards the later stages of the previous government, as you seem to believe.

[hammered]

Poll: Divisiveness causes political problem in Thailand

Divisiveness is the major cause of political problems in Thailand, according to Bangkok's respected Suan Dusit poll.

The leading poll -- conducted April 15-22 among 4,297 persons nationwide -- found that 70 per cent of the respondents agreed that Thailand's political problems stemmed from people disagreeing, causing factions to appear among the people.

Nearly one in four persons -- 24 per cent -- agreed that the problems resulted from a lack of unity and that competing factions should overlook disadvantages they might experience, giving up some of their privileges for the sake of the country.

As for the consequences of Thailand's national political problem, nearly 50 per cent of the respondents said that the current chaos and divisiveness in Thai society are a major result, some 24 per cent said people lived in despair and fear that severe violence could erupt, and 21 per cent said the problem depressed the national economy and also caused more unemployment.

Nearly half -- 47 per cent -- of respondents said politicians must end their conflicts and negotiate reasonably, with good intentions, while 28 per cent urged that the Council for National Security and the government it installed should clarify their roles and show unity in running the country.

Source: TNA - 22 April 2007

Well with more and more groups jumping on the state religion bandwagon it doesnt look like the people wil get what they want with unity. A fight over state religion will cause even bigger divisions in society. Although over 90 % of Thais are Buddhist, there are going to be at least a large minority and possibly even a majority, who oppose a state religion. This will set mostly traditional against secular with a few traditional following the Buddha's teaching implying no politics and opposing it. It will cause divides between young and old. It will further divide town and country. It will divide families. I can only wonder if those proposing it know this and that is their aim. The governments best way ahead with this may be to organise a referendum in tandem with the constitution on this. The governmetn run the risk of letting their opponents further split society if they do nothing.

[jumnien]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

[hammered]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

The junta has stated they want to heal divisions in society. Their opponents would rather they didnt achieve their objectives, so causing rifts in society becomes an aim. An acrimonious debate on a state religion will definitely cause divisions and potentially violent ones. The current gov get caught in the middle. They cannot take sides easily. The gov opponents succeed in making the gov look like it cannot achieve its stated goals. Quite simple really. Unfortunately it has nothing to do with the interests of the people, but that should not surprise us.

[sriracha john]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

Kinda ironic then that military is opposed to the inclusion of Buddhism as the national religion and the TRT is in favor of it.

[Jai Dee]

ISOC Director-General urges officials to monitor situations in all areas

The Director-General of Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC) has reminded its officials to monitor situations in all areas, especially along Thailand’s border.

The ISOC Director-General Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratkrin (สนธิ บุญยรัตกลิน) this morning presides over an ISOC meeting. The conclusion of security measures and officials’ performance will be reported to Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont during the Cabinet meeting tomorrow.

Gen. Sonthi has urged officials to monitor situations, including possible rallies throughout the country.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 23 April 2007

[jumnien]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

Kinda ironic then that military is opposed to the inclusion of Buddhism as the national religion and the TRT is in favor of it.

I don't see the irony. The military is opposed to the inclusion of Buddhism as the national religion. So, it won't be included in the military's new constitution. Any opposition will be slaughtered as has happened in the past. It's really not that complicated.

[sriracha john]

Ironic doesn't necessarily mean it's complicated.

I think the military is opposed to it because it's a bad idea; which actually makes sense that the TRT would be in favor of it as they are so fond of bad ideas.

Edited April 23, 2007 by sriracha john

[blaze]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

Kinda ironic then that military is opposed to the inclusion of Buddhism as the national religion and the TRT is in favor of it.

Perhaps the military understands the gravity of the situation in the south better than many of us- they see that this conflict is going nowhere fast- and they understand from being on the ground the marginalization that southern Moslems feel.

It is in their best interests- since it is they who will be stuck with this problem for years to come- that the less done to further marginalize and antagonize the southern Moslems, the better.

Perhaps.

What are the reasons that Sonthi et al have given for opposing a state religion?

[hammered]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

Kinda ironic then that military is opposed to the inclusion of Buddhism as the national religion and the TRT is in favor of it.

Perhaps the military understands the gravity of the situation in the south better than many of us- they see that this conflict is going nowhere fast- and they understand from being on the ground the marginalization that southern Moslems feel.

It is in their best interests- since it is they who will be stuck with this problem for years to come- that the less done to further marginalize and antagonize the southern Moslems, the better.

Perhaps.

What are the reasons that Sonthi et al have given for opposing a state religion?

From the military perspective you have probably got that right.

[sriracha john]

The military is in charge, it's the military who calls the shots. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it. Might is right!

Kinda ironic then that military is opposed to the inclusion of Buddhism as the national religion and the TRT is in favor of it.

Perhaps the military understands the gravity of the situation in the south better than many of us- they see that this conflict is going nowhere fast- and they understand from being on the ground the marginalization that southern Moslems feel.

It is in their best interests- since it is they who will be stuck with this problem for years to come- that the less done to further marginalize and antagonize the southern Moslems, the better.

Perhaps.

What are the reasons that Sonthi et al have given for opposing a state religion?

As I recall, he stated that he simply felt it unnecessary. That it was already the de facto national religion and that by constitutionally declaring it, it unnecessarily alienated the non-Buddhists.

If I'm not mistaken, it's somewhere on one of these splintered threads.

*Edit.

Upon further searching, it was actually the Constitution Drafting Committee Chairman Prasong talking in that manner.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=1265734

and

http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/tops...s.php?id=118157

Edited April 23, 2007 by sriracha john

[Jai Dee]

As I recall, he stated that he simply felt it unnecessary. That it was the de facto national religion, but that by constitutionally declaring it, it unnecessarily alienated the non-Buddhists.

If I'm not mistaken, it's somewhere on one of these splintered threads.

Try the Constitution thread.

[sriracha john]

As I recall, he stated that he simply felt it unnecessary. That it was the de facto national religion, but that by constitutionally declaring it, it unnecessarily alienated the non-Buddhists.

If I'm not mistaken, it's somewhere on one of these splintered threads.

Try the Constitution thread.

LOL@wading thru 225 posts....

anyway... as per above edit, I found it in another thread....

Edited April 23, 2007 by sriracha john

[Plus]

Are you suggesting that if a political party comes along, promising low interest credit to farmers, increased minimum wage and job protection for the urban poor, free medical for all, 10 years free education- the poor will reject that party- or will have to be paid to vote for it?

Parties like that don't "come along", they don't pass the qualifying round - getting major sponsors and penetrating power structures. Without this backing you are nothing in Thai politics.

Which does not answer the question.

(And in fact such a party did recently 'come along' -the TRT).

I thought the question was about an improbable event.

I don't think the establishment would allow another TRT - big capitalists marketing themselves as friends of the poor.

If, however, such a populist, and here we mean socialist, party does come along it will be ignored unless it plays by the rules - pay for votes, or rather pay to canvassers and lets its sponsors in on the money. By going through that process it will have to drop all its socialism and start talking money.

Actually what I meant to say is that socialist parties won't get off the ground in Thailand any time soon.

[blaze]

Are you suggesting that if a political party comes along, promising low interest credit to farmers, increased minimum wage and job protection for the urban poor, free medical for all, 10 years free education- the poor will reject that party- or will have to be paid to vote for it?

Parties like that don't "come along", they don't pass the qualifying round - getting major sponsors and penetrating power structures. Without this backing you are nothing in Thai politics.

Which does not answer the question.

(And in fact such a party did recently 'come along' -the TRT).

I thought the question was about an improbable event.

I don't think the establishment would allow another TRT - big capitalists marketing themselves as friends of the poor.

If, however, such a populist, and here we mean socialist, party does come along it will be ignored unless it plays by the rules - pay for votes, or rather pay to canvassers and lets its sponsors in on the money. By going through that process it will have to drop all its socialism and start talking money.

Actually what I meant to say is that socialist parties won't get off the ground in Thailand any time soon.

Yes, I suppose so- at the first sign of progressive politics the military will simply shut the whole thing down again- the memory of those flowers on their gun barrels, just too enticing. So for the foreseeable future- I have to agree with you.

[John K]

Ironic doesn't necessarily mean it's complicated.

I think the military is opposed to it because it's a bad idea; which actually makes sense that the TRT would be in favor of it as they are so fond of bad ideas.

I think you hit on it here. The notorious idea to divide and conquer as smaller pieces are easer to digest. It is no illusion that the TRT if continuing to do Thaksin’s work to weaken any opposition. This could be very serious if you know who passes on before there is closure.