Nine Anti-coup Leaders Detained

[ColPyat]

Sorry, Plus, ignoring Social Democrat history and ideology and applying selectively certain Social Democrat qualities to policies not existing within the Democrats doesn't make them any more Social Democrat than my pet dogs. You just desperately attempt to suit realty to your failed argumentation.

It is impossible and fruitless to argue against wishful thinking.

[Plus]

I lifted the WHOLE "social democrat views" from wiki, nothing selective.

How about ANY example of their conservative policies, just for the balance, and let's see how it evens out.

So far it's 8-0.

[ColPyat]

I lifted the WHOLE "social democrat views" from wiki, nothing selective.

How about ANY example of their conservative policies, just for the balance, and let's see how it evens out.

So far it's 8-0.

Just drop it. You lifted a few sentences that suit you, and ignored the rest. I am not gonna bother arguing on such an infantile level (if you feel you play a football game here and just scored "8-0", then be free to feel that way).

You are desperately trying to prove that i may be some extremist leftist, you have been on that quest since months. Everything i post has to fit your preconceived ideas on me, and not even me saying that i am not will sway you.

Stop obsessing with me, please - this will lead only into an argument i am not willing to have.

[Mid]

Some 100 student activists rally in front of Bangkok Remand Prison

August 1, 2007 : Last updated 12:14 pm

Some 100 student activists Wednesday rallied in front of the Bangkok Remand Prison to demand an immediate release of 15 leaders of the White Pigeon Group.

The 15 have been arrested following a clash with police outside the house of Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda.

The student activists from Ramkhamhaeng University gathered in front of the prison at 9:30 am.

They hold banners showing morale support for the detained protesters.

They also shouted in unison, demanding immediate release of the 15 protesters.

The Nation

............. ............... .................. ......................

DAAD protesters rally at Government House to demand release of 15 members

August 1, 2007 : Last updated 11:52 am

About 50 members of the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship rallied in front of the Government House Wednesday to demand immediate release of 9 leaders and 6 other members.

The 15 were arrested following a riot in front of the Sisao Thewes residence of Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda.

The protesters gathered at the Seventh Day Adventist Hospital at 9:30 am and marched to Government House at 11 am.

The Nation

so 9 becomes 15 ?? 30 ?? white pigeon ??

[John K]

Never stand under a pigeon.

[ColPyat]

so 9 becomes 15 ?? 30 ?? white pigeon ??

White Dove, or "Nok Pilab Khao", one of the associated groups under the umbrella organisation UDD. Several of their members were arrested at the night of the Thewet clashes.

[John K]

Colpyat: for me and others if you have a link or could quickly summerize all the sub groups tied to the main group and what they stand for would be nice. I have lost track, but I am not sure it matters if they decided to unite under one banner.

Thanks in advance.

Edited August 1, 2007 by John K

[ColPyat]

Colpyat: for me and others if you have a link or could quickly summerize all the sub groups tied to the main group and what they stand for would be nice. I have lost track, but I am not sure it matters of they decided to unite under one banner.

Thanks in advance.

There are 44 groups (i believe that was the number) under the UDD. They are still separately existing though, have their own separate policies on many other issues. Under the UDD umbrella they campaign under one goal - and that is against the military coup and the new constitution.

The most well known groups are:

The anti 19th September Coup Network (both anti Thaksin and anti coup)

PTV (Pro Thaksin)

Saturday Voice (mostly pro Thaksin, but difficult to define as there are members with many different views on things)

Noc Pilab Khao (white dove, mostly pro Thaksin)

Thais say No (most members anti Thaksin, but the group itself is about the constitution)

There are man other groups whose names i can't remember, or have never really bothered much with, some substantial, and some not so, including man older pro democracy networks.

Edited August 1, 2007 by ColPyat

[John K]

Police to demolish and seize stage of DAAD

About 900 policemen will be deployed to demolish and seize the Sanam Luang stage of the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship early Thursday morning.

The police commandos would be deployed from the 191 Emergency Police Division to Sanam Luang at 5 am, deputy metropolitan police chief Pol Maj Gen Niphon Phumarin said.

He said the policemen would be armed only with shields.

He said the stage would be seized as an evidence against nine DAAD leaders who have been detained pending charges of allegedly instigating unrest.

Niphon said the protesters would not be allowed to set up another stage until after the celebration of Her Majesty the Queen's birthday on August 12.

The Nation

[Mid]

[Plus]

Just drop it. You lifted a few sentences that suit you, and ignored the rest.

I repeat - I most certainly have not!!!

I am not gonna bother arguing on such an infantile level (if you feel you play a football game here and just scored "8-0", then be free to feel that way).

You are desperately trying to prove that i may be some extremist leftist, you have been on that quest since months. Everything i post has to fit your preconceived ideas on me, and not even me saying that i am not will sway you.

Stop obsessing with me, please - this will lead only into an argument i am not willing to have.

In case you missed, that was about Democrat party being social democratic in nature, not about your persona. 0 is the number of counter arguments you presented so far.

[ColPyat]

Just drop it.

I am not debating on this childish level.

[John K]

Colypat;

I don’t see it as childish, however I see in this case Plus has provided arguments that you find difficult to counter. The proper thing is to admit when you are wrong as I do when confronted with the facts. There in nothing wrong that admitting your information was flawed. It is part of life in Thailand to get bad information from time to time. You have seen me post 60-20-20 on more than one occasion, now you know what it means. Admitting you are wrong does not put you down, it actually has the opposite effect and shows you are open minded.

[ColPyat]

Colypat;

I don’t see it as childish, however I see in this case Plus has provided arguments that you find difficult to counter. The proper thing is to admit when you are wrong as I do when confronted with the facts. There in nothing wrong that admitting your information was flawed. It is part of life in Thailand to get bad information from time to time. You have seen me post 60-20-20 on more than one occasion, now you know what it means. Admitting you are wrong does not put you down, it actually has the opposite effect and shows you are open minded.

Rubbish.

It's about political theory, and not information. The Democrat's can not be called "Social Democratic" in any way, even if a few copied qualities of modern social democrats might be applicable. Most though of by Plus listed qualities are applied more by wishful thinking that by by fact due to the complete lack of Social Democrat typical policies of the Democratic Party (read up on social democratic political theory, based on a strong ideology of equality of all humans). The history, ideology and base of Social Democracy is simply not existing under the Democrats, has never done so, while though the ideology and history of a conservative party is existing in the Democrats, in certain rudiments. Read any serious book or study on Thai politics, such as 'rituals of national loyalty' - and you will see my assessment confirmed.

It is simply childish and laughable to selectively choose a few sentences out of a complex political theory with a long history not shared in any way by the Democrats, suit them to a hypothesis that has nothing to do with reality, completely misunderstand the political theory and call that an argument. This is being argumentative, but that about it, and i refuse to debate on such an infantile and intellectually not very stimulating level.

[TAWP]

So Thaksin and his cronies wiretapped Prem and possible others - perhaps people even _inside_ the royal family? That if anything is an increadible breach and could have a much bigger aftereffect then anything this thread has talked about sofar.

Why is a breach to wiretap Prem? Given that he is fingered by even many pro-coup quarters of being behind the coup, i think there is a clear reason for doing that. Don't forget - Prem is a citizen, and not a member of the royal family.

Anyhow, the taped recording in question most likely is not from a wiretap, but was recorded by one of the people in the phone conversation. At least that was how it was explained to me.

Are you saying the wiretaps are investigated by police because they are legal? The mere problem with them being checked into would suggest they wheren't legal and hence a breach.

[ColPyat]

Are you saying the wiretaps are investigated by police because they are legal? The mere problem with them being checked into would suggest they wheren't legal and hence a breach.

What i am saying is, that the particular "wiretap" the case is about was not a wiretap, but a phone call that was recorded by one of the two participants. It is nothing but a political stalling game. The one who will be falling in the end is the low ranked police officer who was forced to make the case by his superiors when Jakrapop Penkar will make the complaint against this case.

And given the subsequent military coup, i would say, if the law pre-coup is applied, there is by logic and common sense a definite reason for wire tapping people suspected of making plans for a military coup. As you should know - according to the then valid '97 constitution - coups were illegal.

[Plus]

It's about political theory, and not information. The Democrat's can not be called "Social Democratic" in any way, even if a few copied qualities of modern social democrats might be applicable. Most though of by Plus listed qualities are applied more by wishful thinking that by by fact due to the complete lack of Social Democrat typical policies of the Democratic party.

So they are not social democrats because they don't have social democrat policies? But if you flip back to my post with typical social democrat policies you'll see that Democrat Party supports and incorporates almost all of them.

The history, ideology and base of Social Democracy is simply not existing under the Democrats, has never done so, while though the ideology and history of a conservative party is existing in the Democrats, in certain rudiments.

They developed their policies mostly by copying the West, not by developing them from the ground up. Does it disqualify them from being Social Democratic? I don't think so. The whole concept of democracy in Thailand is copied from the West, ages ahead of it's natural development in Thai society. Get used to it.

During Thaksin's time Democrat party shed a lot of ballast, lots of "undesirables" have left, the party is leaner and meaner now. Samak, once leading Democrat has certainly no place in the party anymore. It's unreasonable to call them "conservative" based on actions of a previous generation that is not even welcome anymore.

[hammered]

It's about political theory, and not information. The Democrat's can not be called "Social Democratic" in any way, even if a few copied qualities of modern social democrats might be applicable. Most though of by Plus listed qualities are applied more by wishful thinking that by by fact due to the complete lack of Social Democrat typical policies of the Democratic party.

So they are not social democrats because they don't have social democrat policies? But if you flip back to my post with typical social democrat policies you'll see that Democrat Party supports and incorporates almost all of them.

The history, ideology and base of Social Democracy is simply not existing under the Democrats, has never done so, while though the ideology and history of a conservative party is existing in the Democrats, in certain rudiments.

They developed their policies mostly by copying the West, not by developing them from the ground up. Does it disqualify them from being Social Democratic? I don't think so. The whole concept of democracy in Thailand is copied from the West, ages ahead of it's natural development in Thai society. Get used to it.

During Thaksin's time Democrat party shed a lot of ballast, lots of "undesirables" have left, the party is leaner and meaner now. Samak, once leading Democrat has certainly no place in the party anymore. It's unreasonable to call them "conservative" based on actions of a previous generation that is not even welcome anymore.

Wonder which party the undesiriables joined in the great suck? Few remember or choose to rememeber before the great suck the Democrats had more northern MPs than other party. These guys and gals mostly got sucked right in. Including the most hideous Dem of them all. The great suck was an intereting time for anyone with an interest in money politcs and the buying of MPs and clans.

[ColPyat]

It's about political theory, and not information. The Democrat's can not be called "Social Democratic" in any way, even if a few copied qualities of modern social democrats might be applicable. Most though of by Plus listed qualities are applied more by wishful thinking that by by fact due to the complete lack of Social Democrat typical policies of the Democratic party.

So they are not social democrats because they don't have social democrat policies? But if you flip back to my post with typical social democrat policies you'll see that Democrat Party supports and incorporates almost all of them.

The history, ideology and base of Social Democracy is simply not existing under the Democrats, has never done so, while though the ideology and history of a conservative party is existing in the Democrats, in certain rudiments.

They developed their policies mostly by copying the West, not by developing them from the ground up. Does it disqualify them from being Social Democratic? I don't think so. The whole concept of democracy in Thailand is copied from the West, ages ahead of it's natural development in Thai society. Get used to it.

During Thaksin's time Democrat party shed a lot of ballast, lots of "undesirables" have left, the party is leaner and meaner now. Samak, once leading Democrat has certainly no place in the party anymore. It's unreasonable to call them "conservative" based on actions of a previous generation that is not even welcome anymore.

Every European conservative party has adopted certain social democrat policies. Adopting some of their policies still does not make them a social democratic party - they remain conservative. The same way most social democratic parties have shed some of their very left policies for several reason - because they are not practical, or because many of their goals have been accomplished. And some what is now attributed to the 'third way', or 'new labor' is still highly disputed under social democrats.

In Thailand though, still caught in an equivalent of Dickensian times in the UK, none of what Social Democrats the world over have fought for has been accomplished. So, out of necessity - a Social Democratic Party in Thailand would need to put main emphasis on labor right issues, work closely with Unions, etc. The Democrats in Thailand though don't. They mostly work with big business and middle class - they are a typical conservative party, and a regional power without any ideology but Thai typical part of the patron client system.

And if you find the time in your busy schedule, read books, or the Wikipedia article on the Democrats (modern Democrats are described there as "center-left and liberal", which is not Social Democratic), you will find not one single reference to the Democrats being social democratic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(Thailand)

It is written there as well, that the Democrats are outspoken against military involvement in politics, where i guess the center -left idea comes from. But as the Democrats now are about the opposite from outspoken against military involvement in politics - i guess you can replace that 'left' of the center with a clear 'right'.

And the founding of the Democrats was as a conservative monarchist party. That makes it rather clear that this party never has been, and never will be Social Democratic, however much you want to stretch the truth to suit your "argument". They just are not social democratic, get it?

I hope we can lay that idiotic arguing at rest now, or do you want to redefine "Social democracy" now to suit this irrelevant internet forum debate?

Edited August 2, 2007 by ColPyat

[ColPyat]

And back to topic:

http://www.bangkokpost.net/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=120606

----------------------------------------------------------

Police target core UDD leaders for arrest

(BangkokPost.com) – Acting National Police chief Seripisuth Temiyavej has reiterated that the police are preparing to issue more arrest warrants for core leaders of the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) following a meeting to discuss the issue on Thursday morning.

....

“We plan to issue arrest warrants for anyone suspected of being a core UDD leader,” he warned, “but we would be willing to let them off the hook if there is no proof of their involvement in the anti-government group.”

------------------------------------------------------------

Wow, being leader of an "Anti-Government Group" is now enough reason for an arrest warrant. Truly democratic...

[tijnebijn]

Hmmmmmm interesting theories . So if I understand it right the name Democrats is just misleading , I understand the point .

It seems like there is not a 'left' party in Thailand available to choose from , at least not an established one .

Isn't that what Thailand just needs , balanced politics instead of nationalistic driven politics only ?

I wonder how it has came this far , isn't this not more interesting to discuss further about ?

I would find it quite interesting to read anyway .

[ColPyat]

Hmmmmmm interesting theories . So if I understand it right the name Democrats is just misleading , I understand the point .

It seems like there is not a 'left' party in Thailand available to choose from , at least not an established one .

Isn't that what Thailand just needs , balanced politics instead of nationalistic driven politics only ?

I wonder how it has came this far , isn't this not more interesting to discuss further about ?

I would find it quite interesting to read anyway .

The name of the Democrats is not really misleading, they definitely are democratic, as conservative and liberal parties are part of the democratic spectrum. They just are not Social Democratic.

But yes, you are absolutely right - there are no balanced politics in Thailand. In the few open years between '73 and '76 there were several leftist parties, but they were all made illegal after the Thammasat massacre and subsequent coup. Until today, this is still a very sensitive topic, and only really debated fully in Universities and outside Thailand, an academic publications. TRT attracted many former communists, or leftist students who fled into the jungle in those days, and so have many other parties. But a pure leftist party is not possible in Thailand at the moment.

The only real left parties (i am aware of one Trotzkyist party, and one Party with both Leninist and Maoist influences), mostly remnants of the CPT, are not official parties as they refuse to swear allegiance to the monarchy, which is a prerequisite for any official political party of Thailand. A social democrat party though would be possible, in theory. The problem here though is the funding, and that such a party would have no chance to get funding from within Thailand, and that would make it almost impossible to properly campaign here. Remember, only a few years ago, during the last government, i believe, the last anti communist laws were shafted.

That's why most leftists in Thailand who try to work within the system join established parties. And others turned towards NGOs to follow their ideals, and work outside the parliamentary system but in legality.

[tijnebijn]

Interesting read , makes much sense and that the root problems all lay in the past of Thai history .

The only thing which I do not understand is why the population itself , especially the lowest income group

do not feel a cry to establish such a party . I mean social democratic in my understanding cares about all and not

the rich influential groups only . I know it is goes back a very long time in history why the rich are adored, its cultural .

But isn't this just the problem , you saw how quick TRT came into power through its populist way of working that lured the rural communities ! Maybe the word 'left' associated with the communists too much which is wrong , a mix of parties may create social security and healthcare . Anyway there is much work to be done in this country . And I appreciate the thoughts of you Tv members which enlighten me to get the picture , which is complicated in the world named Thailand today .

[ColPyat]

The only thing which I do not understand is why the population itself , especially the lowest income group

do not feel a cry to establish such a party .

That lies in very recent (and ongoing) Thai history. You should read "Rituals of National Loyalty" by Katherine E. Bowie, and anthropological study on the Village Scout movement (and beyond). That answers your question in detail.

Roughly - the answer of the Thai state to rising communism and general dissent to the status quo has been, and still is, state sponsored nationalist mass movements and organisations, and military coups. The establishment will not allow any government that is threatening their hold on power.

And the lowest income group has far too many worries about daily income, and their educational standard is extremely low. If there is no public debate on leftist parties, it is not very difficult to devilize anything that is even slightly leftist. But things slowly do change there.

TRT has been in some ways pro-people, at least from the view of those lower classes (and yes, we know, before somebody comes and shoots me down, TRT was in essence not exactly a pro-people party, but it was the first party with proper pro-people policies on the agenda and policies they not just talked about).

So, in some way, you could argue that TRT was for those people a party similar to this. And see what happened when TRT became too popular under a certain class of people - a military coup which has taken apart all pro people policies of the previous government.

So, read between the lines.

Edited August 2, 2007 by ColPyat

[tijnebijn]

I will go out and look for the books you recommended , will be an interesting read . Although I think I got the hint

it might go somewhere we are not allowed to talk about . Anyway I thought you stayed in the North didn't you ?

At which book centre in Chiangmai I can find these books ? Would be helpful , thanks !

[ColPyat]

I will go out and look for the books you recommended , will be an interesting read . Although I think I got the hint

it might go somewhere we are not allowed to talk about . Anyway I thought you stayed in the North didn't you ?

At which book centre in Chiangmai I can find these books ? Would be helpful , thanks !

I stay in Bangkok, but my wife is from the North, and we own a farm there. Not much idea on Chiang Mai though. I got most of my books from amazon. Two very good reads have recently been published locally, in depth studies on the dahan praan - "The Boys in Black" and a study on the "Or Sor", another paramilitary organisation, both published by White Lotus, and can be ordered by any Asia Books or bookazine store.

[tijnebijn]

I will have a look in some stores if not visit amazon .

To stay a bit on topic , sorry if I missed the point about the new constitution , the thing is why they are such in need to

make a new one . What is the thing why these anti coup leaders got into protest ?

Are they reading through the lines and know it will be hurt the country more then it will do good .

Or is it because like the junta says they want to undercurrent for other reasons . I do not know what to believe no more .

I have got my thoughts though , clearly is that these leaders in detention are not that sure of there case for nothing either .

All I can see it is a big mess , and for instance my wife and family members and friends do not know what to think or

to vote for , even when reading the yellow book they gave out .

[ColPyat]

I will have a look in some stores if not visit amazon .

To stay a bit on topic , sorry if I missed the point about the new constitution , the thing is why they are such in need to

make a new one . What is the thing why these anti coup leaders got into protest ?

Are they reading through the lines and know it will be hurt the country more then it will do good .

Or is it because like the junta says they want to undercurrent for other reasons . I do not know what to believe no more .

I have got my thoughts though , clearly is that these leaders in detention are not that sure of there case for nothing either .

All I can see it is a big mess , and for instance my wife and family members and friends do not know what to think or

to vote for , even when reading the yellow book they gave out .

They are in need to get legitimacy and a pardon. So far their only legitimacy is the barrel of the gun, and the decreasing support of a small sector of Thai society that originally supported the coup (regardless of claims otherwise). They have realized though that it's not the old days anymore, and they have to be in the background while holding power, have to give at least a pretense of democracy to the people.

There are lots of smokes and mirrors, and the new constitution is one of that. They have introduced some very questionable articles, such as the ISOC debate, or the semi appointed senate, and the need a referendum to appear legitimized. Nevertheless, the pressure applied into accepting the constitution is not exactly of democratic spirit - such as outlawing campaigning for not accepting the constitution, such as the use of Puyai Bans and Or Bor Dor's and the countless militias and volunteer organisations.

And even if it is not accepted, they can choose any previous constitution, as they said, it will be the '97 constitution with "certain changes"...

There are many reasons for the different protest leaders to demonstrate against the military coup, ranging from pro Thaksin groups over to democracy activists and remnants of the CPT even. They collaborate on the issues of the coup and the constitutions, keep though their separate identities and agendas.

It is a very confusing time, and things now are in a constant flux. It's a good time to learn though, now.

I am sure that most Thais even are completely overwhelmed with present social and political developments, and the few avenues of open debate and information are closed to the majority of Thais, unfortunately. Public debate is unfortunately dominated by blatant propaganda and increasing extremism.

Edited August 2, 2007 by ColPyat

[A_Traveller]

Detention has been confirmed, Court rejected appeal under section 90 of the Criminal Case Procedural Code {not penal code}.

Regards

[John K]

Detention has been confirmed, Court rejected appeal under section 90 of the Criminal Case Procedural Code {not penal code}.

Regards

I think they are starting to feel that knot in their gut just about now.