Nine Anti-coup Leaders Detained

[Maxi101]

... are there new confrontations tonight, or did I just see a replay of the former happenings..... just confused.

[chuchok]

Surayud government doesn't have time to improve failing system, that's for the next government to work out. Same goes for scholarships and rice subsidies.

But the military government had the time to scrap scholarships, rice subsidies, etc., and of course it had ample time to increase the military budget, which though did not trickle down to combat units, who are presently doing what the military's intended job is. I think that it is a disgrace that there are combat units actually involved in combat which don't even have the budget for Morphine for their injured soldiers.

Yes,this is a government for the people.

[A_Traveller]

From Nation site:-

Criminal Court granted a Bt200,000 bail to member of the National Human Rights Commission, Jaran Dittha-apichai, one of nine anti-coup protest leaders allegedly behind the violent protest on July 22.

Eight other suspects did not file a bail request with the court, saying they wanted to remain in detention.

According to police, the remaining eight suspects will be held at the Bangkok Remand Prison.

Playing to the gallery I suspect.

Regards

Link

[Plus]

New information on 30 baht scheme was interesting but it didn't materialise.

Discussing military budget is beyond the scope of the thread. The fact is that the army now is untouchable, it's everyday workings are not open to the public not so much due to sensorship but because it's politically impossible. Those in the army who were used to stealing can act with impunity now, it's naive to expect for the generals who pulled the coup to act against their own power base - the officers on the ground.

It's a coup trade off.

The South is a special case - the coup apparently hasn't made any impact on how military operates there, and I don't see why should it have - the coup didn't bring any changes to the army itself, it was the coup against civilians.

[jasreeve17]

New information on 30 baht scheme was interesting but it didn't materialise.

Discussing military budget is beyond the scope of the thread. The fact is that the army now is untouchable, it's everyday workings are not open to the public not so much due to sensorship but because it's politically impossible. Those in the army who were used to stealing can act with impunity now, it's naive to expect for the generals who pulled the coup to act against their own power base - the officers on the ground.

It's a coup trade off.

The South is a special case - the coup apparently hasn't made any impact on how military operates there, and I don't see why should it have - the coup didn't bring any changes to the army itself, it was the coup against civilians.

With what? The forced removal of democracy.

Don't both side have to benefit for a trade off to occur...

[SiamSquare123]

PLEASE BRING IN SAMPRANG

[Plus]

New information on 30 baht scheme was interesting but it didn't materialise.

Discussing military budget is beyond the scope of the thread. The fact is that the army now is untouchable, it's everyday workings are not open to the public not so much due to sensorship but because it's politically impossible. Those in the army who were used to stealing can act with impunity now, it's naive to expect for the generals who pulled the coup to act against their own power base - the officers on the ground.

It's a coup trade off.

The South is a special case - the coup apparently hasn't made any impact on how military operates there, and I don't see why should it have - the coup didn't bring any changes to the army itself, it was the coup against civilians.

With what? The forced removal of democracy.

Don't both side have to benefit for a trade off to occur...

"Forced removal of democracy" - you probably meant "plutocracy".

Whatever Thailand had under Thaksin, it had to go one way or another and lots of people thanked the army for doing the dirty job for them. In exchange they have to put up with the army and police being unaccountable for a while, and the generals themselves had to put up with demands for extra funds in exhange for loyalty.

[ColPyat]

PLEASE BRING IN SAMPRANG

Yes, please bring him in, whoever that may be, and send Saprang to the desert.

[ColPyat]

"Forced removal of democracy" - you probably meant "plutocracy".

Whatever Thailand had under Thaksin, it had to go one way or another and lots of people thanked the army for doing the dirty job for them. In exchange they have to put up with the army and police being unaccountable for a while, and the generals themselves had to put up with demands for extra funds in exhange for loyalty.

Yes, our good and virtuous generals would never think of increasing the military budget, decide on an extra salary for themselves for the ardous task of staging a coup, or elevating themselves to positions on boards of government owned companies and their relatives heading strange budgets buying loyalty of prominent members of the public.

No, never would they do that. All the do is 'pueah chat' ...

[John K]

From Nation site:-

Criminal Court granted a Bt200,000 bail to member of the National Human Rights Commission, Jaran Dittha-apichai, one of nine anti-coup protest leaders allegedly behind the violent protest on July 22.

Eight other suspects did not file a bail request with the court, saying they wanted to remain in detention.

According to police, the remaining eight suspects will be held at the Bangkok Remand Prison.

Playing to the gallery I suspect.

Regards

Link

This speaks of their goal to get arrested. However making the statement ‘they want to stay in jail’ kinda blows away the facade that they are being forced to stay against their own will. It appears to be one of those not thought out statements. If they want to stay in jail, I certainly have no objections.

[hammered]

My wife and her family reckon in retrospect the 500 baht scheme was the best and they are poor! Different experiences in different places for 30 baht I think. My mother in law would have died on the 30 baht scheme for want of specific anti-biotics that the government hospital wouldnt give if I hadnt paid for private care elsewhere.

Agreed that a safety net for the poorest is needed, but it is also up to the govenment to lay out how it will be funded in a transparent manner. We shouldnt also forget the coninuing social security scheme which is well organized, provides good coverage, is well funded and is still continuing although how you get the rural people onto a contributary scheme without pricing it out of their reach or detroying the financial stability of it is not easy.

One of the problems of the 30 baht scheme was, like in many other TRT policies, it's implementation. In some areas it was well done, and in others it wasn't. The basic idea of an universal health scheme though is clearly the right direction.

Why has now the present government with its unprecedented powers not improved its implementation, but has done completely away with it? If it would have been for monetary considerations, then they would have hardly afforded the military such a huge budget raise (which though didn't really trickle down to the parts of the military doing what is the real job of the military - the combat units on the ground, who are miserably underfunded).

Every pro people policy of TRT has been done away with in a similar fashion, such as rice subsidies, such as the scholarships. They were all necessary policies that have been mostly badly implemented.

The social security scheme is only for employees under contract. That means in reality for people with at least mor 6 qualifications necessary to get one of the jobs that give you such a contract. Vast sectors of the labour force still work without contract, has no chance to get one, and as you pointed out, none of the small scale farmers have access to it.

The only thing the military does is sending out spies, control the media, and blames Thaksin for things he even hasn't done.

Back to the topic - yes, many of the UDD leaders are flawed. But who else is protesting against the military?

The established political parties are doing nothing than sucking up to the military, nobody else steps in and tries to stop the many draconian actions of the military. People here debate the flaws of the protesters, but what about the flaws of the military?

What about the proposed ISOC laws? What about the scrapping of all pro people policies? What about the continued presence of military in news rooms? What about the undue pressure on all sectors of accepting the new constitution?

One issue that has not been addressed and certainly is a flaw of the UDD is the alienation of a lot of pro-democracy people by their (UDD) closeness to the previous regime. An arguement could be made that they themselves have undermined any anti-coup movement by suppressing support with their links to the previous lot. To put it simply the involvement of people who at least are suspected by many of being directly funded by the T-man has made this anti-coup movement seem dirty.

I wonder if those inside the movement ever debate this. To have totally distanced themselves from the previous flawed regime would have been a good tactic for a pro-democracy group that really wanted change imho. At the moment they end up looking like a disparate group of allies with a common interest in an anti-junta platform which does not necessarily translate into a pro-democracy platform, something on which the individual allies seem very split with a majority seemingly wanting the Thaksin regime back and a minority wanting a return to the status quo without Mr. T. Then there are the funding questions, which of course will likely never be proved but which does anyone really doubt exist to some extent? Maybe it can be argued that they are the only people fighting the Junta, but to my mind an anti-junta and anti-T movement would have had more support and actually started a discussion that is needed. However, we are where we are and the anti-coup movement made their choices and alliances long ago and they are set now. A missed opportunity. Sadly what we have now is just a battle for who is going to manipulate democracy to their advantage. Wasnt even Banharn quoted as saying he wouldnt mind a return to the 97 consty because he passed it but more tellingly the new one makes it easy and cheap for the people to bring charges against corrupt parties? We certainly havent moved forward much. As for anyone considering what is best for the people, I think we can forget that for the foreseeable.

[ColPyat]

One issue that has not been addressed and certainly is a flaw of the UDD is the alienation of a lot of pro-democracy people by their (UDD) closeness to the previous regime. An arguement could be made that they themselves have undermined any anti-coup movement by suppressing support with their links to the previous lot. To put it simply the involvement of people who at least are suspected by many of being directly funded by the T-man has made this anti-coup movement seem dirty.

I wonder if those inside the movement ever debate this. To have totally distanced themselves from the previous flawed regime would have been a good tactic for a pro-democracy group that really wanted change imho. At the moment they end up looking like a disparate group of allies with a common interest in an anti-junta platform which does not necessarily translate into a pro-democracy platform, something on which the individual allies seem very split with a majority seemingly wanting the Thaksin regime back and a minority wanting a return to the status quo without Mr. T. Then there are the funding questions, which of course will likely never be proved but which does anyone really doubt exist to some extent? Maybe it can be argued that they are the only people fighting the Junta, but to my mind an anti-junta and anti-T movement would have had more support and actually started a discussion that is needed. However, we are where we are and the anti-coup movement made their choices and alliances long ago and they are set now. A missed opportunity. Sadly what we have now is just a battle for who is going to manipulate democracy to their advantage. Wasnt even Banharn quoted as saying he wouldnt mind a return to the 97 consty because he passed it but more tellingly the new one makes it easy and cheap for the people to bring charges against corrupt parties? We certainly havent moved forward much. As for anyone considering what is best for the people, I think we can forget that for the foreseeable.

Just after the military coup there were single organisations demonstrating against the coup. The two earliest organisations were the 19th September network, which was both very anti Thaksin and anti coup, and the pro Thaksin Saturday voice.

The 19th September network is what you would consider as a clean pro democracy group. The problem though is that they have attracted on average a few hundred protesters, and at most about 2000. The fault there lies with the traditional pro democracy activists who have previously allied themselves with the far more than PTV flawed PAD powers Sonthi Limthonkul, a corrupt business man with extreme nationalist rethorics, and sectarian nationalist Chamlong Srimuang (lets not forget - these two were far more powerful parts of Thaksin's support base than the PTV leaders), and have for some strange reason not broken with their erstwhile nemesis now ally - the military and the old power elites. Personally, i have huge difficulties to understand how these once pro democracy activists are now embedded with the military, and find no fault whatsoever with some of their more than dubious tactics and proposed laws. I can understand somewhat that they have allied themselves with the PAD to fight against Thaksin. But supporting a military coup as a solution to the political crises, and giving continued support even to the most anti democratic actions is beyond me. How can they???

Nobody is hindering them from doing their own protests against the military, independent of pro Thaksin factions, and distancing themselves from the UDD. Why don't they? As it is now - the only people resisting the military takeover presently have no choice other than attending UDD protests, because the traditional pro democracy activists prefer to side now with the military.

We have now a very unique situation in Thailand. The main support of the protests are now by social sectors that have traditionally been unpolitical (and yes - it is real support, regardless of accusations of moneys paid to protesters). If one looks beyond Thaksin and TRT, but just at the motivation - then this is a somewhat positive sign. Farmers, laborers, and lower middle class people are now fighting for what they see as their democratic right. Does it matter that they choose a flawed character such as Thaksin really was/is as their chosen hero? I don't think so. They have chosen Thaksin under their democratic right of casting their vote, and that was taken away from them by the coup. In some ways this is a protest about a democratic principle, and not just about Thaksin. And if you observe the development of the protest movement, Thaksin does play a decreasing role in the protests, and even in the speeches, and people start asking themselves far more fundamental questions about the Thai system in general.

For many here the picture of unwashed mobs of the "uneducated" may be a frightening idea. But personally, looking beyond Thaksin and the present protests, i do welcome these unwashed mobs taking an interest in politics. There will never be a democracy anywhere without those sectors of society taking an interest in politics and their right.

And lets not forget one thing - the '97 constitution outlawed military coups, and provided for people the right to resist. And even if it is a uncomfortable situation for some here - these unwashed mobs are Thai people as well. And that they are undereducated, underpaid, and unwashed is the result of decades of mismanaging the country by the people behind this military coup and their snotty supporters.

Edited July 28, 2007 by ColPyat

[hammered]

One issue that has not been addressed and certainly is a flaw of the UDD is the alienation of a lot of pro-democracy people by their (UDD) closeness to the previous regime. An arguement could be made that they themselves have undermined any anti-coup movement by suppressing support with their links to the previous lot. To put it simply the involvement of people who at least are suspected by many of being directly funded by the T-man has made this anti-coup movement seem dirty.

I wonder if those inside the movement ever debate this. To have totally distanced themselves from the previous flawed regime would have been a good tactic for a pro-democracy group that really wanted change imho. At the moment they end up looking like a disparate group of allies with a common interest in an anti-junta platform which does not necessarily translate into a pro-democracy platform, something on which the individual allies seem very split with a majority seemingly wanting the Thaksin regime back and a minority wanting a return to the status quo without Mr. T. Then there are the funding questions, which of course will likely never be proved but which does anyone really doubt exist to some extent? Maybe it can be argued that they are the only people fighting the Junta, but to my mind an anti-junta and anti-T movement would have had more support and actually started a discussion that is needed. However, we are where we are and the anti-coup movement made their choices and alliances long ago and they are set now. A missed opportunity. Sadly what we have now is just a battle for who is going to manipulate democracy to their advantage. Wasnt even Banharn quoted as saying he wouldnt mind a return to the 97 consty because he passed it but more tellingly the new one makes it easy and cheap for the people to bring charges against corrupt parties? We certainly havent moved forward much. As for anyone considering what is best for the people, I think we can forget that for the foreseeable.

Just after the military coup there were single organisations demonstrating against the coup. The two earliest organisations were the 19th September network, which was both very anti Thaksin and anti coup, and the pro Thaksin Saturday voice.

The 19th September network is what you would consider as a clean pro democracy group. The problem though is that they have attracted on average a few hundred protesters, and at most about 2000. The fault there lies with the traditional pro democracy activists who have previously allied themselves with the far more than PTV flawed PAD powers Sonthi Limthonkul, a corrupt business man with extreme nationalist rethorics, and sectarian nationalist Chamlong Srimuang (lets not forget - these two were far more powerful parts of Thaksin's support base than the PTV leaders), and have for some strange reason not broken with their erstwhile nemesis now ally - the military and the old power elites. Personally, i have huge difficulties to understand how these once pro democracy activists are now embedded with the military, and find no fault whatsoever with some of their more than dubious tactics and proposed laws. I can understand somewhat that they have allied themselves with the PAD to fight against Thaksin. But supporting a military coup as a solution to the political crises, and giving continued support even to the most anti democratic actions is beyond me. How can they???

Nobody is hindering them from doing their own protests against the military, independent of pro Thaksin factions, and distancing themselves from the UDD. Why don't they? As it is now - the only people resisting the military takeover presently have no choice other than attending UDD protests, because the traditional pro democracy activists prefer to side now with the military.

We have now a very unique situation in Thailand. The main support of the protests are now by social sectors that have traditionally been unpolitical (and yes - it is real support, regardless of accusations of moneys paid to protesters). If one looks beyond Thaksin and TRT, but just at the motivation - then this is a somewhat positive sign. Farmers, laborers, and lower middle class people are now fighting for what they see as their democratic right. Does it matter that they choose a flawed character such as Thaksin really was/is as their chosen hero? I don't think so. They have chosen Thaksin under their democratic right of casting their vote, and that was taken away from them by the coup. In some ways this is a protest about a democratic principle, and not just about Thaksin. And if you observe the development of the protest movement, Thaksin does play a decreasing role in the protests, and even in the speeches, and people start asking themselves far more fundamental questions about the Thai system in general.

For many here the picture of unwashed mobs of the "uneducated" may be a frightening idea. But personally, looking beyond Thaksin and the present protests, i do welcome these unwashed mobs taking an interest in politics. There will never be a democracy anywhere without those sectors of society taking an interest in politics and their right.

And lets not forget one thing - the '97 constitution outlawed military coups, and provided for people the right to resist. And even if it is a uncomfortable situation for some here - these unwashed mobs are Thai people as well. And that they are undereducated, underpaid, and unwashed is the result of decades of mismanaging the country by the people behind this military coup and their snotty supporters.

On the subject of the positions of pro-democracy people it is not easy to pigeon hole. Andrew Walker of New Mandala had an interesting look at it on June 21st 2007 - everything from pro-T and pro-coup, apparently a lot of the electorate to anti-T anti-coup.

However, while we argue over the democracy credentials, and even who they are or who they represent of a fairly small group of people we are probably missing something else: For many many people Fatigue with demonstrations. Fatigue with political conflict. Fatigue with division. People are tired of it all. I would, admittedly with no evidence, make a guess that the majority of people would like to see an end to it all. If you are in this position the known quantity of an election that is currently being offered is the only tangtible way out being presented by anyone at the moment. everything else leaves uncertainty. This probably will help with the passage of the charter and then an electoral outcome. Therein lies a problem for the UDD leadership. What is the alternative? How can this be mapped out? Who will oversee it? There are a lot of uncertainties in these. It is easy to oppose and criticise (UDD, DAAD, PTV, and PAD), but what precise alternative with a plan and time frame is being offered? How many people look at the UDD and simply say: "what do you want?".

[jasreeve17]

New information on 30 baht scheme was interesting but it didn't materialise.

Discussing military budget is beyond the scope of the thread. The fact is that the army now is untouchable, it's everyday workings are not open to the public not so much due to sensorship but because it's politically impossible. Those in the army who were used to stealing can act with impunity now, it's naive to expect for the generals who pulled the coup to act against their own power base - the officers on the ground.

It's a coup trade off.

The South is a special case - the coup apparently hasn't made any impact on how military operates there, and I don't see why should it have - the coup didn't bring any changes to the army itself, it was the coup against civilians.

With what? The forced removal of democracy.

Don't both side have to benefit for a trade off to occur...

"Forced removal of democracy" - you probably meant "plutocracy".

Whatever Thailand had under Thaksin, it had to go one way or another and lots of people thanked the army for doing the dirty job for them. In exchange they have to put up with the army and police being unaccountable for a while, and the generals themselves had to put up with demands for extra funds in exhange for loyalty.

I think that you know it's a bit more than that, linked to a subject we shall not mention. It was a forced removal of democracy for the sake of the "old boys"... pure and simple.

Thaksin being good or bad is neither here nor there, he was a democratically elected leader.

I remember when I used to complain about Mr T non stop, and all the Thais I know told me that I shouldn't because:-

1) He was the only leader that ever did anything, ANYTHING at all for the people.

2) They were happy to start down the imperfect road to democracy without the "oldboys" taking 100% of everything for themselves.

3) The alternative, the democrats, never kept a single promise or pledge in their entire time in power,and nobody expects them to change.

I said that Mr T must go, but I was wrong because I didn't understand the reality of the last forty years. Now that it's repeating itself for the benefit of the same group, it becomes clear and obvious.

Democracy evolves through democratic process.

With respect to this protesting group; they seem to be on a hiding to nothing, mainly because most Thais can't motivate themselves to act. I get the anti-coup feeling everywhere, from all around. Thais don't like and don't want the army.

It might come down to elections by the end of the year. If they don't materialize then these demonstrations might quickly grow much larger. But, I reckon that the elections will happen and the results will be just as the army like. A big step backwards from Thaksin days. Hard as that is to believe.

Edited July 28, 2007 by jasreeve17

[ColPyat]

On the subject of the positions of pro-democracy people it is not easy to pigeon hole. Andrew Walker of New Mandala had an interesting look at it on June 21st 2007 - everything from pro-T and pro-coup, apparently a lot of the electorate to anti-T anti-coup.

However, while we argue over the democracy credentials, and even who they are or who they represent of a fairly small group of people we are probably missing something else: For many many people Fatigue with demonstrations. Fatigue with political conflict. Fatigue with division. People are tired of it all. I would, admittedly with no evidence, make a guess that the majority of people would like to see an end to it all. If you are in this position the known quantity of an election that is currently being offered is the only tangtible way out being presented by anyone at the moment. everything else leaves uncertainty. This probably will help with the passage of the charter and then an electoral outcome. Therein lies a problem for the UDD leadership. What is the alternative? How can this be mapped out? Who will oversee it? There are a lot of uncertainties in these. It is easy to oppose and criticise (UDD, DAAD, PTV, and PAD), but what precise alternative with a plan and time frame is being offered? How many people look at the UDD and simply say: "what do you want?".

It is difficult, or almost impossible, to judge the extend of support the present protests have. We all have our personal speculations, but realistically, how can we judge the support with a media that is highly censored, countless military street blocks that turn protesters back, even such actions as upcountry bus stations blocked off when larger groups of protesters wanted to join the Sanam Luang demonstrations.

What i can see with the UDD leaders - it is more than just either a fight for Thaksin's return, or just a protest against the military, depending on political views of the individual groups of that alliance, but goes further into initiation of questioning a Thai system that has been in power for a very long time, and will stay in power for a considerably longer time.

They have managed to publically attack Prem, which never happened before. Regardless of the pro Prem propaganda, and present almost comically government organized pro Prem demonstrations - this has initiated a debate in society that will last for a lot longer.

Presently huge changes are happening in Thai society, Thaksin, the coup, the different protest may have been catalysts for those - but in the end - these changes were waiting to happen anyhow. Sadly - part of those changes are social upheavals, uncertainty and insecurity. But in the end, things have to change, change is inevitable.

[hammered]

On the subject of the positions of pro-democracy people it is not easy to pigeon hole. Andrew Walker of New Mandala had an interesting look at it on June 21st 2007 - everything from pro-T and pro-coup, apparently a lot of the electorate to anti-T anti-coup.

However, while we argue over the democracy credentials, and even who they are or who they represent of a fairly small group of people we are probably missing something else: For many many people Fatigue with demonstrations. Fatigue with political conflict. Fatigue with division. People are tired of it all. I would, admittedly with no evidence, make a guess that the majority of people would like to see an end to it all. If you are in this position the known quantity of an election that is currently being offered is the only tangtible way out being presented by anyone at the moment. everything else leaves uncertainty. This probably will help with the passage of the charter and then an electoral outcome. Therein lies a problem for the UDD leadership. What is the alternative? How can this be mapped out? Who will oversee it? There are a lot of uncertainties in these. It is easy to oppose and criticise (UDD, DAAD, PTV, and PAD), but what precise alternative with a plan and time frame is being offered? How many people look at the UDD and simply say: "what do you want?".

It is difficult, or almost impossible, to judge the extend of support the present protests have. We all have our personal speculations, but realistically, how can we judge the support with a media that is highly censored, countless military street blocks that turn protesters back, even such actions as upcountry bus stations blocked off when larger groups of protesters wanted to join the Sanam Luang demonstrations.

What i can see with the UDD leaders - it is more than just either a fight for Thaksin's return, or just a protest against the military, depending on political views of the individual groups of that alliance, but goes further into initiation of questioning a Thai system that has been in power for a very long time, and will stay in power for a considerably longer time.

They have managed to publically attack Prem, which never happened before. Regardless of the pro Prem propaganda, and present almost comically government organized pro Prem demonstrations - this has initiated a debate in society that will last for a lot longer.

Presently huge changes are happening in Thai society, Thaksin, the coup, the different protest may have been catalysts for those - but in the end - these changes were waiting to happen anyhow. Sadly - part of those changes are social upheavals, uncertainty and insecurity. But in the end, things have to change, change is inevitable.

I wasnt trying to estimate support or lack of it for anyone. My point was that I guess most people are just tired or even sick of all the turmoil. I am not disputing social changes are occuring on many fronts. I am just trying to raise a practical point. For most people, and I will make the assumption that most people favour stability over instability, I would guess elections in or around December are a known quantity and seen as a way out of the present morass (nothwistnading social changes that will occur over time). Maybe there are better ways out but what are they? What roadmap for want of a better word are the UDD proposing to get out of the immediate mire? Do they have a plan?

Here I am actually not trying to debate the rights and wrongs or who supports who for what reason but to purely look at the practical steps of returning to a form of elected government. I guess I am also assuming that people do not want revolution and that the UDD are not proposing that.

[jasreeve17]

Hammered, Col Pyat and Plus - have you considered a night together at the pub? You could have some lively and interesting political conversations.

[esbobes]

My wife and her family reckon in retrospect the 500 baht scheme was the best and they are poor! Different experiences in different places for 30 baht I think. My mother in law would have died on the 30 baht scheme for want of specific anti-biotics that the government hospital wouldnt give if I hadnt paid for private care elsewhere.

Agreed that a safety net for the poorest is needed, but it is also up to the govenment to lay out how it will be funded in a transparent manner. We shouldnt also forget the coninuing social security scheme which is well organized, provides good coverage, is well funded and is still continuing although how you get the rural people onto a contributary scheme without pricing it out of their reach or detroying the financial stability of it is not easy.

One of the problems of the 30 baht scheme was, like in many other TRT policies, it's implementation. In some areas it was well done, and in others it wasn't. The basic idea of an universal health scheme though is clearly the right direction.

Why has now the present government with its unprecedented powers not improved its implementation, but has done completely away with it? If it would have been for monetary considerations, then they would have hardly afforded the military such a huge budget raise (which though didn't really trickle down to the parts of the military doing what is the real job of the military - the combat units on the ground, who are miserably underfunded).

Every pro people policy of TRT has been done away with in a similar fashion, such as rice subsidies, such as the scholarships. They were all necessary policies that have been mostly badly implemented.

The social security scheme is only for employees under contract. That means in reality for people with at least mor 6 qualifications necessary to get one of the jobs that give you such a contract. Vast sectors of the labour force still work without contract, has no chance to get one, and as you pointed out, none of the small scale farmers have access to it.

The only thing the military does is sending out spies, control the media, and blames Thaksin for things he even hasn't done.

Back to the topic - yes, many of the UDD leaders are flawed. But who else is protesting against the military?

The established political parties are doing nothing than sucking up to the military, nobody else steps in and tries to stop the many draconian actions of the military. People here debate the flaws of the protesters, but what about the flaws of the military?

What about the proposed ISOC laws? What about the scrapping of all pro people policies? What about the continued presence of military in news rooms? What about the undue pressure on all sectors of accepting the new constitution?

Stop knoking Thailand medical program for the poor. The United States doesn't even have that.

USA can learn a lot about helping the poor.

[ColPyat]

I wasnt trying to estimate support or lack of it for anyone. My point was that I guess most people are just tired or even sick of all the turmoil. I am not disputing social changes are occuring on many fronts. I am just trying to raise a practical point. For most people, and I will make the assumption that most people favour stability over instability, I would guess elections in or around December are a known quantity and seen as a way out of the present morass (nothwistnading social changes that will occur over time). Maybe there are better ways out but what are they? What roadmap for want of a better word are the UDD proposing to get out of the immediate mire? Do they have a plan?

Here I am actually not trying to debate the rights and wrongs or who supports who for what reason but to purely look at the practical steps of returning to a form of elected government. I guess I am also assuming that people do not want revolution and that the UDD are not proposing that.

My view is that most people are far too caught up in whatever present mire we have, since the beginnings of the PAD protests. At that time i have spoken to several PAD leaders, asking them the question what their outlook on the future might be, and that was answered mostly with complete silence. The only person at that time who has given me an answer, and that was that he himself felt very uncomfortable about the future implications, was Dr. Weng, while he was still allied to the PAD.

I believe reacting to only a present problem without looking at a bigger picture was the fundamental mistake of the military coup.

Of course everybody wants stability, on all sides of the political fronts. The question here, and where people differ, is stability under which conditions. You and others may see a quick approval of the constitution as the best way to stability, and other see that as an intolerable condition, especially with the ISOC laws. And TRT diehards will see any dissolution of TRT already as intolerable.

Stability is very difficult now to reach, and even successful elections as proposed by the military will only lead to a pseudo stability that won't last long. The ultimate outcome of the elections will be a weak coalition government with the usual suspects, and increased power of the military and bureaucracy. And that will lead to a very same situation not long down the line.

Forget stability. Change is going to come inevitably, and that will be a very uncomfortable experience for everybody.

I am not intimate to the roadmap of the UDD (neither would i want to be as i am not an activist), but i believe that other than several fundamental principles i have already outlined, they will, like everybody here, have to wait and see. This is a high stakes game played out on many levels, many of them hidden from the public with strategies and counter-strategies galore.

[hammered]

Hammered, Col Pyat and Plus - have you considered a night together at the pub? You could have some lively and interesting political conversations.

LOL.

[ColPyat]

Hammered, Col Pyat and Plus - have you considered a night together at the pub? You could have some lively and interesting political conversations.

LOL.

I guess after i have drowned Plus in a pint of beer, Hammered and me end up agreeing with each other.

[hammered]

I wasnt trying to estimate support or lack of it for anyone. My point was that I guess most people are just tired or even sick of all the turmoil. I am not disputing social changes are occuring on many fronts. I am just trying to raise a practical point. For most people, and I will make the assumption that most people favour stability over instability, I would guess elections in or around December are a known quantity and seen as a way out of the present morass (nothwistnading social changes that will occur over time). Maybe there are better ways out but what are they? What roadmap for want of a better word are the UDD proposing to get out of the immediate mire? Do they have a plan?

Here I am actually not trying to debate the rights and wrongs or who supports who for what reason but to purely look at the practical steps of returning to a form of elected government. I guess I am also assuming that people do not want revolution and that the UDD are not proposing that.

My view is that most people are far too caught up in whatever present mire we have, since the beginnings of the PAD protests. At that time i have spoken to several PAD leaders, asking them the question what their outlook on the future might be, and that was answered mostly with complete silence. The only person at that time who has given me an answer, and that was that he himself felt very uncomfortable about the future implications, was Dr. Weng, while he was still allied to the PAD.

I believe reacting to only a present problem without looking at a bigger picture was the fundamental mistake of the military coup.

Of course everybody wants stability, on all sides of the political fronts. The question here, and where people differ, is stability under which conditions. You and others may see a quick approval of the constitution as the best way to stability, and other see that as an intolerable condition, especially with the ISOC laws. And TRT diehards will see any dissolution of TRT already as intolerable.

Stability is very difficult now to reach, and even successful elections as proposed by the military will only lead to a pseudo stability that won't last long. The ultimate outcome of the elections will be a weak coalition government with the usual suspects, and increased power of the military and bureaucracy. And that will lead to a very same situation not long down the line.

Forget stability. Change is going to come inevitably, and that will be a very uncomfortable experience for everybody.

I am not intimate to the roadmap of the UDD (neither would i want to be as i am not an activist), but i believe that other than several fundamental principles i have already outlined, they will, like everybody here, have to wait and see. This is a high stakes game played out on many levels, many of them hidden from the public with strategies and counter-strategies galore.

I'm not sure I would personally say that was the best way, but I would say that from where we are now it is something that needs trying. If we dont go through the charter vote and then to elections the only option seems to be leaving the military directly in power, which I dont think many want. It is about what choices there are. After the charter vote we will have a voted in constitution or one selected by the military. After this we will have elections. Then we will have an elected government operating under a form of partial democracy again. Not perfect but maybe better than the alternative as the other options seem to be continued direct military rule either through the current group or some counter or successor coup. There dont really seem to be many options to try in terms of where the politcal process takes us in the short term. That is not to downgrade the effect of contiued politcal struggles, which exist not only in Thailand but also in other societies. What we are talking about is what framework they will occur within, which we seem to agree on. The battle is set for the charter. If the authorities get a big win no doubt we will hear them employ the TRT tactic of going on about "X million votes" ad infinitum. If they lose they will be forced to pick the 97 constitution I am fairly sure. Well at least we will know the answer on that one in a few weeks.

In short OK the UDD, others before them, and even many others who stay relatively quiet may have initiated or jumped on a debate on what do you want after the soldiers, but that debate will be a long, arduous and unpredictable one and is about societal and economic changes that cannot be controlled. In the meantime something has to replace the direct soldier administration while this debate and the change that drives it continues even if what succeeds it proves to be a temporary power structure. People have work to do, investment to think of, money to make, and there is international stuff too as Thailand cannot exist in isolation. A simplification as this all involves other power groups and factors and a potentially huge banana skin that could appear at any time but maybe a simplification that I think explains the point I am trying to make that right now a political system of some sort needs to be reestablished. Right now we have nothing but a military appointed and controlled government that has the clock ticking on its limited existance.

[ColPyat]

Right now we have nothing but a military appointed and controlled government that has the clock ticking on its limited existance.

It is a difficult situation.

Many people though would argue that the proposed constitution, especially with the ISOC laws, will make it far more difficult to get the military out at a later time as they will have entrenched themselves with a set of very dubious security laws in the power structure.

People do expect that the military might choose the '97 constitution if this one is not voted for. But this is still a big question mark, especially because theoretically the military would have the power to make amendments by their choosing, or use any of the previous constitutions.

There are people who are saying that the UDD should concentrate more on the referendum, and less on Prem. But the UDD says that one of the main struggles is the beginning of a whole system change, of which Prem and his extra-constitutional powers is a symbol. Their argumentation is that any constitution is worth nothing as long as somebody like Prem can circumvent it.

[sriracha john]

Can we start a new thread on these off-topic posts please?

Thank you.

Actually I find some of these slightly off topic posts fascinating, for example the recent exchange between Plus and Colpyat.I think it's a tribute to moderators good sense to let a thread run on a bit if the subject matter is interesting.Suggest you leave this to the moderators to decide.

I realize you're a newbie at this forum "stuff", so I can understand you mistakenly replying to this post. If you don't mind, I'll take a minute to explain things to you.

The dialog between those involved in the off-topic discussion was indeed good and certainly worthwhile, in fact, worthy of it's own thread. It was wasn't slightly off-topic, it wasn't connected at all to the thread title, which is not to detract from it, but to properly manage any thread, the scope of each needs to be controlled. That's something posters with more experience than yourself realized and it's a tribute to them that since the first quoted post, it has, indeed and thankfully returned to the thread title.

The initial post was directed at those involved in the discussion, the colonel and Plus and hammered and not to the mods or those uninvolved such as yourself. My request was politely written and in a respectful manner, which was in tribute and in response to the noteworthy level of the off-topic discussion. If it was off-topic and not worthwhile, I would have taken the appropriate response and simply PM'd a mod to request deletion or modification of the posts. That's why it was an appeal in the open forum to those involved... which, sorry, didn't include you.

I hope this has been instructional for you and beneficial to all posters on all threads.

===============================================

now then,

on-topic continues....... with the UDD in jail, the UDD, version 2.0 hits the internet.... except it's very similiar to version 1.0 in its TRT-ishness... both in its membership and its hollow sound-bites....

New UDD leaders emerge

The United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) yesterday announced nine new leaders who will keep the anti-coup rallies going while their predecessors are behind bars. They said they are pursuing two agendas _ to oust the Council for National Security and to free their nine jailed leaders. They vowed to keep the anti-coup protests going, and shrugged off orders for the demonstrators to stay put at Sanam Luang. The new line-up is headed by Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University lecturer Maethapan Photitheeraroj. Chinawat Habunpad, a Caravan of the Poor leader, said the UDD will continue to expose the undemocratic situation in Thailand to the UN and the rest of the world. UDD leader Surachai Danwattananusorn said the group would launch a paper to argue its standpoint. The five other new leaders are ex-senator Prateep Ungsongtham-Hata, PTV leader Kokaew Pikulthong, Saturday Voice Against Dictatorship member Suchart Nakbangsai, Friends of 1997 Charter Group member Sansern Sri-unruen, and activist Somyos Phrueksakasemsuk.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/28Jul2007_news04.php

==================

white dove has been replaced by caravan of the poor.... it's like a cucumber being replaced by a pickle... it's the same thing...

Meanwhile, their predecessors are getting aquainted with jail-life.

[sriracha john]

A direct hit on UDD...

UDDerly rudderless in mindless violence

UDD mai chorb... they had to go and change their name from DAAD (as in dodo) and pick a fight with the police - not because the latter were refusing to reform, but because they were impeding the UDD's march on Si Sao Theves, the residence of Pa Prem, our lovable (as the name implies) elderly statesman who is president of the Privy Council. Obviously, UDD leader Mr Musikapong is not content creating a stink with his fiercely unmusical rhetoric at Sanam Luang, where posters nailed to tamarind trees by black-hearted pigeons claiming to be white doves "Demand the Arrest of the Three Tyrants" picturing Gen Sonthi, Gen Surayud and Gen Prem. And so the Black Pearl of Phatthalung and his co-pirates have been growing more vocal by the day. Right from the start of the protests, the print and broadcast media have been calling the protesters "the Mob" - and they lived up to that name last Sunday. The Black Pearl and his sidekick Full Moon (who was Mr Thaksin's government spokesman) now say they plan to file lese majeste charges against the president of the Privy Council, claiming that he had a hand in the Sept 19 coup. The very idea of Pa Prem committing lese majeste would be laughable were it not so serious. Who in his right mind would think up such a thing as to impugn Pa Prem's integrity? This is a man who has proven his loyalty to the Crown beyond the shadow of any nebulous doubt, and for decades already.

COMMENTARY by Thirasant Mann, Bangkok Post

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/28Jul2007_news98.php

===================================

Interesting 1981 reference in the full article.

[ColPyat]

COMMENTARY by Thirasant Mann, Bangkok Post

It is a sad state of affairs of the media that an article with such insulting and infantile language, extrapolations and rather creative juggling with reality is allowed to be published in Thailand's biggest English speaking newspaper.

The sub-editor could have at least checked his facts, for example it was not "Sutthisarn" police station in which the leaders of the UDD were held first, but "Samsen" police station, before they were brought to Bangkok Remand Prison. There are more than a few other mistakes, which i won't take the time to correct.

Edited July 28, 2007 by ColPyat

[younghusband]

Can we start a new thread on these off-topic posts please?

Thank you.

Actually I find some of these slightly off topic posts fascinating, for example the recent exchange between Plus and Colpyat.I think it's a tribute to moderators good sense to let a thread run on a bit if the subject matter is interesting.Suggest you leave this to the moderators to decide.

I realize you're a newbie at this forum "stuff", so I can understand you mistakenly replying to this post. If you don't mind, I'll take a minute to explain things to you.

The dialog between those involved in the off-topic discussion was indeed good and certainly worthwhile, in fact, worthy of it's own thread. It was wasn't slightly off-topic, it wasn't connected at all to the thread title, which is not to detract from it, but to properly manage any thread, the scope of each needs to be controlled. That's something posters with more experience than yourself realized and it's a tribute to them that since the first quoted post, it has, indeed and thankfully returned to the thread title.

The initial post was directed at those involved in the discussion, the colonel and Plus and hammered and not to the mods or those uninvolved such as yourself. My request was politely written and in a respectful manner, which was in tribute and in response to the noteworthy level of the off-topic discussion. If it was off-topic and not worthwhile, I would have taken the appropriate response and simply PM'd a mod to request deletion or modification of the posts. That's why it was an appeal in the open forum to those involved... which, sorry, didn't include you.

I hope this has been instructional for you and beneficial to all posters on all threads.

I think I should briefly respond and will not react to your patronising tone "newbie at this forum stuff" etc.I did not for one moment suggest you were being discourteous, merely that it's best to leave this kind of action to moderators who as I say do an excellent job in deciding how long to let a thread run.A month or so ago I expressed concern that political discussion on this forum was being dumbed down.I have to say I have been very pleasantly surprised by the high standard recently and I would have to identify Plus,Hammered, Colpyat and one or two others.I realise a lot of this is outside your comfort zone but I'm sure there will be lots of opportunities for your stock in trade of amusing anecdotes and zany pictures of Thaksin and his family.

[Plus]

It takes entirely unconvincing jumble of words to produce an argument that UDD is not doing Thaksin's bidding and that it somehow has a popular support among the "unpolitical" classes. There's nothing to consider as the evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.

I understand that Colpyat finds it incredible that former pro democracy activists who joined PAD now support the military junta. After all his opinion is unique and unusual, as he admits himself that his ideological borthers, the true anti-coup protesters, could attract only 2000 supporters at most.

The number of supporters doesn't make an idea right or wrong but I feel confident being in majority, relying on people whose opinions I respect rather than on nutty communists characters who run around Sanam Luang crying for democracy and end up directing rampaging mobs paid by Thaksin, people like Dr. Weng Tojurakarn or Giles Ungpakorn.

That is a sad situation with many leftists, and Thai leftists, too - they do not represent the majority, in Thailand's case ther lower classes, they only want to command them to do their bidding and build a "better" future directed by lefitsts themselves. Anyone disagreeing is called a right-wing fascist or worse. All communist regimes are brutal in dealing with dissent, Thai socialists are no different.

The fact that their ideology is not taking roots in Thailand is comforting. I dread to see the day when the "masses" take over the country and start purging the "elite", anywhere in the world. Russians were the first to experience this and China and Cambodia had similar purges not long time ago.

As for a pint with Colpyat - the man has not a shred of decency, not a shred of intregrity or honesty left in him, only blind faith in his brand of socialism.

I don't drink with people like that.

[blaze]

As for a pint with Colpyat - the man has not a shred of decency, not a shred of intregrity or honesty left in him, only blind faith in his brand of socialism.

I think most posters, including some of Colpyat's stongest detractors- would not agree with you. At all. In a forum that attracts, among others, people with nothing but a kind of patronizing disdain for the majority of Thais, to accuse the Colonel of lack of decency is quite a stretch.

[hammered]

It takes entirely unconvincing jumble of words to produce an argument that UDD is not doing Thaksin's bidding and that it somehow has a popular support among the "unpolitical" classes. There's nothing to consider as the evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.

I understand that Colpyat finds it incredible that former pro democracy activists who joined PAD now support the military junta. After all his opinion is unique and unusual, as he admits himself that his ideological borthers, the true anti-coup protesters, could attract only 2000 supporters at most.

The number of supporters doesn't make an idea right or wrong but I feel confident being in majority, relying on people whose opinions I respect rather than on nutty communists characters who run around Sanam Luang crying for democracy and end up directing rampaging mobs paid by Thaksin, people like Dr. Weng Tojurakarn or Giles Ungpakorn.

That is a sad situation with many leftists, and Thai leftists, too - they do not represent the majority, in Thailand's case ther lower classes, they only want to command them to do their bidding and build a "better" future directed by lefitsts themselves. Anyone disagreeing is called a right-wing fascist or worse. All communist regimes are brutal in dealing with dissent, Thai socialists are no different.

The fact that their ideology is not taking roots in Thailand is comforting. I dread to see the day when the "masses" take over the country and start purging the "elite", anywhere in the world. Russians were the first to experience this and China and Cambodia had similar purges not long time ago.

As for a pint with Colpyat - the man has not a shred of decency, not a shred of intregrity or honesty left in him, only blind faith in his brand of socialism.

I don't drink with people like that.

I am not sure that anyone on any side actually represents the lower classes to be honest. They may at best have some paternalistic notion of what is best for the lower classes. I severely doubt that in any democratic country the masses will take over completely. They usually have a a fairly major but often manipulated say at the regular snapshots of public opinion that we term elections but it would be rare indeed to think any party of left, center or right in democracies will be a party of the masses in actuality although they may to varying degrees have built in policies to ameliorate the position of the majority. This is probably where Thailand is heading although it may not be easy and will take time.

By the way, and I stand to be corrected but I always thought Colpyat was more of a social democrat than a socialist.

As someone who over time has had lengthy debates and disagreements with Colpyat I could not say I see him as someone lacking a shred of decency. He has different opinions on somethigns to me. Come on Plus you have written some decent stuff, and argue your corner. There is no need to go down there. imho

Peace

Edited July 28, 2007 by hammered