Thailand's Parliament Convenes First Session Since 2006 Coup

[John K]

You are new here, so with respect I suggest you take time to look at the voluminous posts, including links such as this which I've been known to provide before.

Regards

Also to add to this without a link just a short history,

a few months ago the 111 banned were very involved in various parties. The EC announced that that type of involvement would get the party dissolved for involvement with the banned. That cause the banned to scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.

That was countered by the banned by putting up various kin to run as a form of insulation. In that situation the word proxy came into the news and was a topic of forum discussion for several weeks. That is also a situation that can get the party dissolved.

The present day involvement with the PPP and Thaksin is just out and out arrogance, and that is also their Achilles heel.

My reference to wait a little longer a few posts back simply implies they are gathering solid evidence against the PPP that can’t be disputed so no matter how loud the cry “It’s not fair.” With that much solid evidence the crying should fall on mostly deaf ears. I expect the counter on that will be feet dragging until they can buy the court.

[younghusband]

Poll: Most Thais Do Not Want Samak as PM

38.4% does not support Samak.

Highlighted the math for you, (or for the quoted publication; not sure who came up with the header). General comment: It's sometimes hard to see which was in the original news clipping and which was opinions, summaries, headers or smileys and the like added by the poster. I think I prefer JaiDee's way of presenting news clippings verbatim, without spin or ridicule added in.

Well, as only 44.3% want Samak, the other 55.7% obviously do not want Samak, strictly speaking.

I agree the result should have been presented better.

All of this is fair comment but at the same time a bit irrelevant.In all democracies elections tend to throw up large opposition numbers.For example in 1960 JFK only achieved the Presidency by a tiny margin, and Nixon actually had a greater number of total votes.Similar situation with Bush and Gore.Real test is how the winner embraces those who did not actually vote for him, ie avoids the "tyranny of the majority" problem.Oddly enough Samak might be more inclusive than many think.I agree auguries not good but unlike many on this forum will give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

Counter argument is of course when victor needs to carry out necessary radical economic reform which by definition will be divisive -eg Thatcher or Sarkozy.Not relevant in Thailand because no politician has the guts to do what's really needed to propel country in South Korea/China direction.Too many vested interests.

[sriracha john]

Parliament Chairman admits he needs to become more firm in action

He admitted that he apologizes to MPs of the People Power Party for having to cease discussions as he was worried MPs of the Democrat Party would stage a walk out.

The Parliament Chairman said that in the future he would take a more firm stance against such actions but he did not wish to tarnish People Power Party leader Samak Sundaravej’s first day as Prime Minister.

For the Democrats, perhaps they need to bring refrigerators to Parliament for self-preservation during times when Yongyuth feels the urge to be "more firm in action."

[Lilawadee]

You are new here, so with respect I suggest you take time to look at the voluminous posts, including links such as http://www.ect.go.th/english/laws.html which I've been known to provide before.

Nice distraction, but you claimed something about the verdict, but when pressed you follow it up with a link to the constitution of Thailand.. it has nothing to do with this particular court verdict.

This is not in the past, this is a claim you made yesterday, and I was around yesterday to read it.

What's all this hitting on 'you're a newbie' by the way, I usually let it slide when it's just a snide remark because I don't really care, but here you actually use it as an excuse not to back up your claims with facts.. As for member status, look to the left and you will see I'm a 'Senior Member' as per Thaivisa's designation, so don't just put people down because they don't have 10,000 posts.

[jbowman1993]

People keep ranting about blocked sites when they should first learn about international bandwidth and DNS issues that have plagued Thailand`s internet system and annoyed users way back even under Thaksin`s rule and made tens of thousands of internet websites unreachable as time went by, from legit and reputed foreign newspapers, church groups, Japanese wrestling leagues to ginseng grower`s associations and leprechaun hunters. The problem was greatly exaggerated only to criticize the junta which ordered the blockage of much less sites than Thaksin`s cybercop. If you don`t believe it, go and ask the experts in Thaivisa`s own Internet, computers, communication, technology in Thailand Thaivisa itself was often unreachable because of DNS issues, not censored.

I always thought that the DNS problems (which I agree are widespread in Thailand) would only result in not being able to view a given page, whilst trying to access a censored site would instead get you a message from one of the relevant government agencies stating that you were being denied said access.

etc etc etc yadda yadda yadda

I think all of us need a hobby. This back and forth tit for tat does NOTHING to improve the quality of the country we call home. Go buy some rice for some orphans, or help your neighbor get his cow out of the mud. Much more helpful in the short and long run. I'm off to do just this. Bye!

Edited January 29, 2008 by jbowman1993

[sriracha john]

nevermind... not worth the minimal effort expended

Edited January 29, 2008 by sriracha john

[Jai Dee]

OK folks... enough of the petty bickering please.

[Maxi101]

You are new here, so with respect I suggest you take time to look at the voluminous posts, including links such as this which I've been known to provide before.

Regards

Also to add to this without a link just a short history,

a few months ago the 111 banned were very involved in various parties. The EC announced that that type of involvement would get the party dissolved for involvement with the banned. That cause the banned to scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.

That was countered by the banned by putting up various kin to run as a form of insulation. In that situation the word proxy came into the news and was a topic of forum discussion for several weeks. That is also a situation that can get the party dissolved.

The present day involvement with the PPP and Thaksin is just out and out arrogance, and that is also their Achilles heel.

My reference to wait a little longer a few posts back simply implies they are gathering solid evidence against the PPP that can't be disputed so no matter how loud the cry "It's not fair." With that much solid evidence the crying should fall on mostly deaf ears. I expect the counter on that will be feet dragging until they can buy the court.

I back that, it's the same behaivour, like Mr. T dealt with higher persons when he was in office

I see no change at all.

maxi

[Lilawadee]

The change is indeed not in the government, which is by and large the same clique it was when they were called TRT.

The change is in the constitution, and in the weakening of elected government in general.

Honestly, nobody high up has any issue with people FAR more despicable even than Thaksin, as long as they don't challenge their power, they don't really care. This is why I think John K is going to be in for a long wait if he trusts Thai courts / EC / etc to do anything more to oppose PPP. This is not about corruption or justice, it never was and for the foreseeable future, never will be.

[A_Traveller]

I noted above links such as I care little if an individual is unwilling to expend effort in understanding and reviewing data that is accessible, however, the decision was based as I stated upon constitutional, and organic law. The link provided yesterday was not some diversion, but provides access to English translations of the relevant acts, which an interesed individual might care to review.

Regards

PS

LINK to Summary Judgement 1

LINK to Summary Judgement 2

[Old Man River]

Also to add to this without a link just a short history,

a few months ago the 111 banned were very involved in various parties. The EC announced that that type of involvement would get the party dissolved for involvement with the banned. That cause the banned to scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.

That was countered by the banned by putting up various kin to run as a form of insulation. In that situation the word proxy came into the news and was a topic of forum discussion for several weeks. That is also a situation that can get the party dissolved.

The present day involvement with the PPP and Thaksin is just out and out arrogance, and that is also their Achilles heel.

My reference to wait a little longer a few posts back simply implies they are gathering solid evidence against the PPP that can’t be disputed so no matter how loud the cry “It’s not fair.” With that much solid evidence the crying should fall on mostly deaf ears. I expect the counter on that will be feet dragging until they can buy the court.

John, I know you believe the EC will finally act, but I just can't see it. People are ready to move on and see where this government takes us. Any move by the EC at this late stage would work against them as they certainly have had enough time to act. My guess is that they are asking for proof of irregularities now so that they can report back that there wasn't enough proof in an attempt to discourage anyone from filing on the commissioners individually for perceived malfeasance. If I am wrong, then color me shocked.

[John K]

Also to add to this without a link just a short history,

a few months ago the 111 banned were very involved in various parties. The EC announced that that type of involvement would get the party dissolved for involvement with the banned. That cause the banned to scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.

That was countered by the banned by putting up various kin to run as a form of insulation. In that situation the word proxy came into the news and was a topic of forum discussion for several weeks. That is also a situation that can get the party dissolved.

The present day involvement with the PPP and Thaksin is just out and out arrogance, and that is also their Achilles heel.

My reference to wait a little longer a few posts back simply implies they are gathering solid evidence against the PPP that can’t be disputed so no matter how loud the cry “It’s not fair.” With that much solid evidence the crying should fall on mostly deaf ears. I expect the counter on that will be feet dragging until they can buy the court.

John, I know you believe the EC will finally act, but I just can't see it. People are ready to move on and see where this government takes us. Any move by the EC at this late stage would work against them as they certainly have had enough time to act. My guess is that they are asking for proof of irregularities now so that they can report back that there wasn't enough proof in an attempt to discourage anyone from filing on the commissioners individually for perceived malfeasance. If I am wrong, then color me shocked.

I know you point and I can see that too that the EC is a bit shy to step up to the plate. However I still must place my trust in the high courts as they have been performing in a stellar way that I am sure any honest Thai can be proud of.

I have also noted that the courts are careful in taking cases. This is not new as we have all experienced filling out a various Thai form for one thing or another, then having it sent back for edits as we missed something. In this case it is very good as it avoids a technical overturning of a ruling.

I guess I am just trying to look at why things happen. The last case that was thrown out was for technical reason, only the EC could file that type of case. So that means it can be filed again properly and then the courts will deal with it.

[Lilawadee]

noted above links such as I care little if an individual is unwilling to expend effort in understanding and reviewing data that is accessible, however, the decision was based as I stated upon constitutional, and organic law. The link provided yesterday was not some diversion, but provides access to English translations of the relevant acts, which an interesed individual might care to review.

Regards

PS

LINK to Summary Judgement 1

LINK to Summary Judgement 2

LOL, I posted those very same links in my reply to John K yesterday in post #325.

They just talk about suspending 'electoral rights'. Now under a military government that surely could be extended to mean anything, but I think in the real world and under a PPP government, it just means they can't run for elected office.

Until they get around to overturning the whole verdict, which was of course ludicrous as it was based on rules enacted by that same military AFTER the coup, not at the time TRT people tried to get other parties to contest the elections to break the "Democrat" boycott.

[Ricardo]

Real test is how the winner embraces those who did not actually vote for him,

Spot On, YH ! I am reminded of Thaksin's comment, in the old days, that areas which failed to vote TRT need not hold their breaths, waiting for any government-money to come their way.

ie avoids the "tyranny of the majority" problem.Oddly enough Samak might be more inclusive than many think.I agree auguries not good but unlike many on this forum will give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

Agreed, we will have to wait only a short time, to see. He won the election for PM, & claims to expect to serve a full term, though many of us on TV will be looking for signs of his strings being pulled from elsewhere. He might just turn out, to be his own man after all, just imagine the surprise and consternation in Hong Kong if he does ! In which case we can look forward to interesting, not to say entertaining, times !

Counter argument is of course when victor needs to carry out necessary radical economic reform which by definition will be divisive -eg Thatcher or Sarkozy.Not relevant in Thailand because no politician has the guts to do what's really needed to propel country in South Korea/China direction.Too many vested interests.

Problem being that normal people tend to get hurt, during radical reform, I remember the millions who suffered under Thatcher, while she did the needful & broke the power of the unions, and wouldn't want to see people trampled that way here in Thailand. Then again, this is a problem of elites not being willing to share or encourage 'trickle-down', rather than union-leaders playing Marxist-politics and political-leaders who really believe that 'If it's not hurting - It's not working'.

[A_Traveller]

^^ But you didn't read or understand the reference, please take time to review the Organic Act on Political Parties B.E. 2541 {1998} initially Sections 8, 21, 23, 77, 86, 89 will provide key guidance. It's on the diversion link.

Regards

Edited January 29, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Plus]

Samak being inclusive?

I don't think so. He is nice to people he likes, but he never makes amends with his enemies, and he creates plenty.

He hasn't done anything to be hated for yet, btw, and probably won't do anything worth hating for anyway as he is simply incapable of doing anything at all. Too old.

Unless he started pushing Thaksin back, he'll have a relatively easy ride, personally.

Real fights will be with his corruption prone cabinet while Samak will be ignored, he is not going to be involved in or let anywhere near any decision making.

Eventually he will be noticed only when he farts during Cabinet meetings (that's a nasty one, on his first day, I apologize).

[John K]

I imagine it will be fun for some journalists just to keep Samak all fired up everyday seeing just how high they can make his blood pressure go before he blows a unit.

Edited January 29, 2008 by John K

[Thai at Heart]

The change is indeed not in the government, which is by and large the same clique it was when they were called TRT.

The change is in the constitution, and in the weakening of elected government in general.

Honestly, nobody high up has any issue with people FAR more despicable even than Thaksin, as long as they don't challenge their power, they don't really care. This is why I think John K is going to be in for a long wait if he trusts Thai courts / EC / etc to do anything more to oppose PPP. This is not about corruption or justice, it never was and for the foreseeable future, never will be.

Which would seem to explain the main reason behind the coup in the first place.

[Plus]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

[Pierrot]

As a strong suporter of Mr Thaksin, I want here to thanks The Nation for its help. I can't remember one day in the past year where Thaksin name didn't appear in the front page. They really made sure we didn't forget the man. And their Thaksin bashing trademark was so obvious that it became soon ridiculous.

At the same time, can anybody tell me what is the platform of the "democrat", what they stand for? Beside being against Thaksin of course? Me neither.

There is two projects that summarize why I welcome the return of Mr Thaksin :the new airport and the Hopeless project leading to Don Muang. Thaksin get things done, and that's more than enough for me.

Unfortunately, too many people that supported the PPP were, like yourself, clueless about what the other parties were saying. Certainly, the PPP knew this and now make comments (concerning capital controls) such as: ''We did say in our campaign platform we want to scrap this policy but now we are in the government. We have to be careful about what we say or do,'' Dr Surapong said.

In other words, tell them what they want to hear and then once elected we can do differently. Since they didn't think things out it is no wonder that Samak refused to debate the issues.

Yes, many of us can tell you what the Democrats policies were as they were the first to issue them and put it on their website. At least those that cared to know the issues, instead of blindly electing a group who readily admits they now need to think things out. To give you an example, for capital controls, the PPP said abolish them (but are now reneging) , the Demo's said abolish them and the Chart Thai said they wanted to review them. For the Rural Economy, the PPP said give, give, give (deficit spending), while the Demo's said increase farmer's incomes by increases in productivity and the Chart Thai said focus on debt and land problems for farmers. There are certainly more, and I am sure if you are really interested you can find them.

Thank you for answering my question ... and making my point.

"I am sure if you are really interested you can find them (Democrats policies)". I don't really care about american election but I know what every candidate stand for. Because that's what election are about, to let people know what you stand for. But "democrats" were not interested in campaigning, they failed miserably the couple of last time they tried.

Then you talked about "capital control", the "Rural Economy" (with capital letter ???). Definitely you're a "democrat" (other countries spell it "technocrat"). Real people care about local economy, healthcare, education ...Thaksin answer these questions, "democrats" don't even understand them.

But the worst is "democrats" think they are smarters than everybody else, and they loudly let it know. Then they expect that people they overtly despised will vote them in office.

"democrats" should now do the honorable thing : political suicide. If they still remember what honour means.

[Thai at Heart]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

They have rejigged the formula of the senate that will ever allow a Presidential style system. Nothing lasts forever, unless you work to make it happen.

[Thai at Heart]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

They have rejigged the formula of the senate that will ever allow a Presidential style system. Nothing lasts forever, unless you work to make it happen.

Correction "Never" allow it to happen

[Plus]

You meant "never allow"?

That section of the Constitution will be the first to go, probably before the next elections.

I don't think potential for presidential republic is very high in Thailand, you don't need a coup to prevent that, let alone guarantee that it won't ever happen. Any coup offers only short term solutions.

[Pierrot]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

Respectfully disagree, the junta hasn't gained MUCH because I still believe until proved wrong that western powers didn't allow them to stay longer. But they still managed to negotiate future spending for the army that will allow them to gain substantial commission. Also a couple of position in the board of some of the most important companies. It isn't much but far from negligible.

[Thai at Heart]

You meant "never allow"?

That section of the Constitution will be the first to go, probably before the next elections.

I don't think potential for presidential republic is very high in Thailand, you don't need a coup to prevent that, let alone guarantee that it won't ever happen. Any coup offers only short term solutions.

Not in my lifetime as some may think. There is a very big fish to catch if anything never changes.

[Plus]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

Respectfully disagree, the junta hasn't gained MUCH because I still believe until proved wrong that western powers didn't allow them to stay longer. But they still managed to negotiate future spending for the army that will allow them to gain substantial commission. Also a couple of position in the board of some of the most important companies. It isn't much but far from negligible.

Stage a coup to get a job???

And the parlament can cut military budget at will, 300 bil over ten years is only on paper so far.

That's not a kind of payback for staging the coup. Certainly not for the "high up" parties allegedly involved.

Junta's ulterior motives hasn't materisalised, I think because there weren't any to begin with.

>>>>

Thai at heart - there's nothing to catch at all. Presidential system is not a substitute for monarchy, presidents come and go, every five years.

The money is not in politics, and neither is the real power. The real power comes from people, from getting millions of people to back you up and having very few enemies.

Thaksin, hated by half the country, never had a shot at it, and never will.

[Thai at Heart]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

Respectfully disagree, the junta hasn't gained MUCH because I still believe until proved wrong that western powers didn't allow them to stay longer. But they still managed to negotiate future spending for the army that will allow them to gain substantial commission. Also a couple of position in the board of some of the most important companies. It isn't much but far from negligible.

Stage a coup to get a job???

And the parlament can cut military budget at will, 300 bil over ten years is only on paper so far.

That's not a kind of payback for staging the coup. Certainly not for the "high up" parties allegedly involved.

Junta's ulterior motives hasn't materisalised, I think because there weren't any to begin with.

>>>>

Thai at heart - there's nothing to catch at all. Presidential system is not a substitute for monarchy, presidents come and go, every five years.

The money is not in politics, and neither is the real power. The real power comes from people, from getting millions of people to back you up and having very few enemies.

Thaksin, hated by half the country, never had a shot at it, and never will.

Of course it doesn't match with constitutional monarchy!

Do you think these people are playing this game for the next 3 months, or the next 30 months (finite possibly), or the next 30 years. There is an enormous power struggle going on, and two men are playing for keeps.

Two men are absolutely loved by the same 51% of society. Hmmm, now there is a bunfight for popularity and as we have seen money on the table (not in the military pocket) wins.

[Pierrot]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

Respectfully disagree, the junta hasn't gained MUCH because I still believe until proved wrong that western powers didn't allow them to stay longer. But they still managed to negotiate future spending for the army that will allow them to gain substantial commission. Also a couple of position in the board of some of the most important companies. It isn't much but far from negligible.

Stage a coup to get a job???

And the parlament can cut military budget at will, 300 bil over ten years is only on paper so far.

That's not a kind of payback for staging the coup. Certainly not for the "high up" parties allegedly involved.

Junta's ulterior motives hasn't materisalised, I think because there weren't any to begin with.

>>>>

Thai at heart - there's nothing to catch at all. Presidential system is not a substitute for monarchy, presidents come and go, every five years.

The money is not in politics, and neither is the real power. The real power comes from people, from getting millions of people to back you up and having very few enemies.

Thaksin, hated by half the country, never had a shot at it, and never will.

Please read my post. I was not saying that the coup was justified by money (not directly) but that the junta didn't gained much from the coup because they weren't given enough time for that.

The coup was about the end of an era. Nothing to do about monarchy, England or Spain have a well loved Queen / King but are still a vibrant democracy. It's the end of an outdated system based on the power of a minority that didn't work (I didn't do it on purpose but I really like this one, didn't work ... very good, apply to both the system and the minority ). As you said "The real power comes from people, from getting millions of people to back you up", but for the part of "having very few enemies", I'm not so sure.

[sriracha john]

POLITICAL PARTY DISSOLUTIONS, COURT CASES

EC decision on Matchima this week

Will set precedent for Chart Thai, PPP cases

The EC will decide this week whether to propose the dissolution of the Matchima Thipataya party to the Constitution Court following the disqualification of the Party's Deputy Leader in the general election. Election commissioner Sodsri Sattayatham said yesterday the EC's advisory team had concluded that the red-carding of Deputy Leader Sunthorn Wilawan for electoral fraud could be grounds for the party's dissolution. Article 103 of the law governing the installation of representatives and senators specifies that if an executive member of a party misbehaves the entire party can be dissolved, she said. The EC's advisory team assists the commission on issues relating to the affairs of political parties. It looked into the disqualification of the Matchima Thipataya Deputy Leader for vote buying in Prachinburi. Mrs Sodsri said the five election commissioners would not form a sub-committee to consider the Matchima Thipataya case, but would consider the issue itself right away. If the EC supports the finding of the advisory team, it could proceed with the case by asking the Constitution Court to dissolve the Matchima Thipataya Party. If the court dissolves the party, it would be widely regarded as a precedent for the dissolution of Chart Thai and even the People Power party (PPP), which are in a similar situation. Chart Thai Party Deputy Secretary-General Monthian Songpracha and his sister Nanthana, the winning candidates in Chai Nat province, were red-carded by the EC. House Speaker Yongyuth Tiyapairat is under investigation by the EC for alleged vote buying. At the time he was PPP Deputy Leader. If found guilty, he could be red-carded by the Supreme Court. Mrs Sodsri said if the commission's inquiry ruled against the Chart Thai executive member, the commissioners would not consult the advisory team, because it was similar to the Matchima Thipataya case, and would make a judgement right away. On Monday the Chart Thai Party submitted a letter to the EC asking that the regulator apply principles of political science, rather than legal principles, in considering whether the party should be dissolved.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.net/News/30Jan2008_news11.php

Edited January 29, 2008 by sriracha john

[Ricardo]

I think it's a groundless theory.

Nor the coupmakers nor any particular party high up there had anything to gain from the coup, and, in the end, they haven't gained anything at all.

The main reason was the inevitable confrontation between the government and anti-Thaksin movement, the confrontation that could have been very bloody indeed. That needed to be avoided at any cost, in coup makers view.

Ok, there was no immediate violence yet, but there was no "democratic" solution in sight either.

Respectfully disagree, the junta hasn't gained MUCH because I still believe until proved wrong that western powers didn't allow them to stay longer. But they still managed to negotiate future spending for the army that will allow them to gain substantial commission. Also a couple of position in the board of some of the most important companies. It isn't much but far from negligible.

Well it's a free world, you can believe anything, but personally I don't see any signs of 'western powers' having forced an end to the junta. It has more to do with honourable military men, loyal to the Head of State if not any politician, who claimed they took power to defend what remained of Thai democracy, and then handed it back on-schedule after elections as promised, which suggests that was indeed their aim.

I also never subscribed to the suggestion that there was a Moslem or Al-qaeda plot, to take control of the country, although the idea was floated, based I imagine on the religion of the coup-leader. Paranoid if you ask me !

Do you have any particular western powers in mind, who were behind the end, to the military caretaker-government ?