Security Tightens At Government House To Block Anti-govt Protesters

[h90]

Regarding the PAD's ideas of "democracy" that I raised earlier, The Nation has now picked up on it, just in case anybody still doubts its veracity.

2Bangkok.com also translates an op-ed piece (scroll down to the 30th June) from Matichon stating, "PAD leader Sonthi Limthongkul recently made a very interesting comment. He said that the PAD not only wanted to oust the government, but also wished to assume its powers." I'd love to find something elsewhere to verify/dismiss this comment; I'll take it with a pinch of salt for now.

thats not much more than a rhetoric sentence. Of course "The People" should take power instead of some corrupt nominees.

But at no means it is meant as: Sondi gets Dictator, Chamlong interior minister etc..

Since years he tells again and again that he don't want to get any power in government or found a party.

Of course there was a lot discussion what form of government is the best one.

but this sentence means nothing.

And even if, it couldn't be worse than the current government.

If this intellectually slovenly garbage is representative of PAD thinking, it can simply be dismissed.I expect there is a more thoughtful position and it would be interesting to hear this at some point.

What I am missing from PAD is a clear picture what they want.

OK kick out the government, but what then???

The next group of PPP nominees? NO

new election new vote buying: NO

So what is their solution if they would be successfully?

[Tony Clifton]

Noppadon leaves for Canada

That pr!ck beat me to it.

[jumnien]

Above all, the PAD (People Against Democracy) want an elite-appointed over-riding authority aver all of the Kingdom. Democracy to them is seen as an insult to their higher forms of control.

[Plus]

More likely Samak is seen as an insult to human decency.

Just think how he makes Thailand look on the international stage, or that amateur Noppadon. They are country's face now but they look like baboons on the lose. Millions of people are ashamed of their behaviour, and some think that if that is the best democracy can deliver, why bother at all.

And while PAD opponents scream about lack of respect for the voice of the masses - look at the result, what is there to respect? Respect needs to be earned, and Samak has blown all the chances he had been given initially.

In a few weeks time Thailand will take over ASEAN chair from Singapore, for 18 months, and it will host a few important regional meetings, but Thailand's FM is a diplomatic embarassment and his signed international agreements turned out to be illegal.

[h90]

Above all, the PAD (People Against Democracy) want an elite-appointed over-riding authority aver all of the Kingdom. Democracy to them is seen as an insult to their higher forms of control.

I guess they would be happy with a democratic government.

[younghusband]

More likely Samak is seen as an insult to human decency.

Just think how he makes Thailand look on the international stage, or that amateur Noppadon. They are country's face now but they look like baboons on the lose. Millions of people are ashamed of their behaviour, and some think that if that is the best democracy can deliver, why bother at all.

And while PAD opponents scream about lack of respect for the voice of the masses - look at the result, what is there to respect? Respect needs to be earned, and Samak has blown all the chances he had been given initially.

In a few weeks time Thailand will take over ASEAN chair from Singapore, for 18 months, and it will host a few important regional meetings, but Thailand's FM is a diplomatic embarassment and his signed international agreements turned out to be illegal.

Insult to human decency is pitching it a bit strong but I agree he does not represent Thailand overseas very well.Actually no PM has done that since Khun Anand (yes, I know unelected!).Not sure about Noppadon, tainted by Thaksin connection but jury still out on capability.Not really convinced the ASEAN chair wil be the big test but let's see how that goes.He is certainly intelligent and his "amateur status" is not necessarily a disadvantage.

As a qualified PAD opponent myself may I query your comment about respect for the masses.I certainly respect the will of the Thai people but have scant respect for this government, two different things.The Thai majority doesn't have to "earn respect" in the way a sitting government certainly does.

Incidentally for those who wondered about PAD leadership objectives there was a useful summary in the Bangkok Post today of PAD's "new Politics" courtesy of Sondhi Limthongkul and sidekick Pibhop, specifically the four conditions under which the military would be allowed to step in:

1).Someone committed lese majeste and no legal action taken

2)Government does nothing

3)State officials become involved in corruption

4)Thai soverignty infringed

Hmm interesting.Having tried hard to provoke a coup and failed, PAD is fast becoming incoherent.In all seriousness I regret this as a in a decent civil society there is a place for protest.Having rubbished your assertion recently there had been no positive impact of the PAD protests I on reconsideration think I was probably wrong.Trouble is the PAD leadership is flawed and the fish rots from the head.I wish Abhisit and co would get a grip.

[Meerkat]

So according to today's Bangkok Post, the PAD is now claiming on the one hand that it is not "pro-coup", but Sondhi has said on the other hand that their "New Politics" would invite military intervention in four circumstances, the second of which would be, "if the government did nothing, just like the Samak Sundaravej administration".

Well which is it guys?

An amusing sketch based upon the PAD's interesting new take on "democracy" in Prachatai.

[Plus]

The Thai majority doesn't have to "earn respect" in the way a sitting government certainly does.

Why? They have no qualms about demanding respect (or those speaking on their behalf), why can't they show they deserved it?

Interesting point about this "new politics" idea is that current system does not give representation to some important groups of people, nor to voters in general. Basically the question is about MPs qualifications for positions they are allowed to hold. Not a bad idea, I think. Why not have the screening process for ministerial positions similar to that of any state enterprise, Bank of Thailand and so on.

Re. Noppadon's amateurish status - why do you stick with that loser, YH? First he was taken for a ride by Cambodians, then his ass was had by Thais, then he blamed previous FM for "misunderstanding" and was promptly told that he knows shit about diplomacy and he can't read, too, and don't even mention his fashion sense.

Is it because of his Oxbridge education, YH?

[younghusband]

The Thai majority doesn't have to "earn respect" in the way a sitting government certainly does.

Why? They have no qualms about demanding respect (or those speaking on their behalf), why can't they show they deserved it?

Interesting point about this "new politics" idea is that current system does not give representation to some important groups of people, nor to voters in general. Basically the question is about MPs qualifications for positions they are allowed to hold. Not a bad idea, I think. Why not have the screening process for ministerial positions similar to that of any state enterprise, Bank of Thailand and so on.

Re. Noppadon's amateurish status - why do you stick with that loser, YH? First he was taken for a ride by Cambodians, then his ass was had by Thais, then he blamed previous FM for "misunderstanding" and was promptly told that he knows shit about diplomacy and he can't read, too, and don't even mention his fashion sense.

Is it because of his Oxbridge education, YH?

I suppose I do have a hard wired bias in favour of representative democracy.In that sense I don't think the Thai majority needs to "earn" respect in the way that politicians do.On the other hand I am all too conscious of the dangers of the tyranny of the majority (or the mob).I am very comfortable with checks and balances being in place, and even with some representatives being nominated on merit rather than elected.I also think representatives should vote on their opinions and not be handcuffed to constituents majority views.But equally they should submit themselves to the peoples verdict at elections.I'm not really favour of educational qualifications as it discriminates against working class movements.Some of the greatest and most competent British ministers (in Attlee's post war government) left school at 14.Let's also be realistic about the value of Thai qualifications.

As to Noppadon I agree he looks a bit of a wanke_r (to use the technical term) but he is bright.In all honesty I don't know that much about him but some of his critics painted him as a cartoon character, and some counterbalance seemed necessary.I suppose I am somewhat biased in favour of the Oxbridge ideal -ie those who can exchange ideas, recognise nuance, show good grace to opponents.Actually the ideal is fading and apart from someone like the late M.R Kukrit is rarely found in Thailand (certainly not in Noppadol!).But there is still lingering in Oxbridge something of that spirit reminding us of its faults and virtues -courageous,arrogant,generous,ornate,pungent,smug and funny.

[hammered]

The Thai majority doesn't have to "earn respect" in the way a sitting government certainly does.

Why? They have no qualms about demanding respect (or those speaking on their behalf), why can't they show they deserved it?

Interesting point about this "new politics" idea is that current system does not give representation to some important groups of people, nor to voters in general. Basically the question is about MPs qualifications for positions they are allowed to hold. Not a bad idea, I think. Why not have the screening process for ministerial positions similar to that of any state enterprise, Bank of Thailand and so on.

Re. Noppadon's amateurish status - why do you stick with that loser, YH? First he was taken for a ride by Cambodians, then his ass was had by Thais, then he blamed previous FM for "misunderstanding" and was promptly told that he knows shit about diplomacy and he can't read, too, and don't even mention his fashion sense.

Is it because of his Oxbridge education, YH?

I suppose I do have a hard wired bias in favour of representative democracy.In that sense I don't think the Thai majority needs to "earn" respect in the way that politicians do.On the other hand I am all too conscious of the dangers of the tyranny of the majority (or the mob).I am very comfortable with checks and balances being in place, and even with some representatives being nominated on merit rather than elected.I also think representatives should vote on their opinions and not be handcuffed to constituents majority views.But equally they should submit themselves to the peoples verdict at elections.I'm not really favour of educational qualifications as it discriminates against working class movements.Some of the greatest and most competent British ministers (in Attlee's post war government) left school at 14.Let's also be realistic about the value of Thai qualifications.

As to Noppadon I agree he looks a bit of a wanke_r (to use the technical term) but he is bright.In all honesty I don't know that much about him but some of his critics painted him as a cartoon character, and some counterbalance seemed necessary.I suppose I am somewhat biased in favour of the Oxbridge ideal -ie those who can exchange ideas, recognise nuance, show good grace to opponents.Actually the ideal is fading and apart from someone like the late M.R Kukrit is rarely found in Thailand (certainly not in Noppadol!).But there is still lingering in Oxbridge something of that spirit reminding us of its faults and virtues -courageous,arrogant,generous,ornate,pungent,smug and funny.

Agree with the first paragraph. I just wonder though sometimes if Thailand wouldnt be better off doing a way with the constituency system and going over totally to PR. That would be straight one man/woman one vote and so as fair as you could get, and also the votes of those of contrarian opinion in regions would have more weight. It would also make it very tough for the local patronage systems to remain so dominant which is probably why absolutely nobody would want it. The downside or maybe upside would be a continuation of coalition governments without 50% of the electorate. I think Thaksin actually achieved that once, so it is possible. Anyway just academic debate but surely abetter idea than 70% appointed and 30% elected. The lower house must be totally elected. The upper house I am more ambivalent on. The UK have the longest lasting democracy and were until recently one of the more tolerant societies and they have had an unelected upper house for aeons albeit with restricted powers.

[Tony Clifton]

PAD speakers are blaring in front of a major police building. Can`t they they didn`t hear the accusations.

They re criticizing how they are intentionally dragging their feet to make investigations last forever and go nowhere, etc.

Big crowd.

[Meerkat]

The only major change that should be made to the eligibility for standing for office is the scrapping of the ridiculous rule that MPs must have a degree. Only around a third of uni-age Thais go to university, and the numbers are skewed heavily in favour of wealthy families. Don't look to articifial measures like the functional constituencies that are found in those bastions of democracy such as HK and Macau to give a better representation of the people, just one simple rule change would give the bulk of the population at least the aspiration to power. If the PAD truly stood for "democracy" of the "people", that's what they'd have been campaigning for, not a government largely selected by the few. Regarding the claims that "New Politics" is based on a Scandinavian model, I've been struggling to find one Scandinavian system where 100% of MPs are not elected.

I also don't agree with the notion of only allowing MPs to hold posts for which they have matching qualifications either. It doesn't seem to have hampered British politics much - Thatcher being a chemist, and Major not even going to university being just two recent examples.

Regarding Noppadom in the Temple issue, I can't agree that he was ridden over by the Cambodians, as much as I think he's far too smarmy for his own good and that IMO he only wanted to get involved in it personally for the glory (that played out well for him didn't it).

They were going to go for nomination this year with or without Thailand's support (and according to today's Post it looks like they'll succeed without). Thailand had the opportunity to get involved at a peripheral level; good for tourism, good for diplomatic relations between two perennially suspicious parties. Thanks to the PAD and the Dems who seemed to have used their talking-points on the issue, Thailand as a whole now looks foolish and will have lost out if Cambodia's bid succeeds. If the bid fails because of the recent nationalistic intervention, then diplomatic relations between the two states will suffer. So the Dems and the PAD have seemingly managed to turn a win-win situation into a lose-lose one. Nice work guys - what do you fancy screwing up next?

Yes it will affect the FM's status at home, and possibly cost him his job, but the real culprits for stuffing up the matter will still be protesting on the streets and censuring in parliament, stirring up nationalistic/monarchist fervour on false premises as and when it suits them best. Sondhi & co I can understand, but I'm immensely disappointed with Abhisit, someone who I had thought was above the general standard of Thai politicians until now.

[Plus]

YH and Hammered, I agree so far, but then there's the government, and as it stands now the only qualification to manage billions of baht is being someone's brother or a husband. That Chaya fellow demanded that Health Minister position was transferred to his brother if he were to resign, as if it was his family heriloom, so Samak had to keep him until court's decision (due this week). Isn't it ridiculous?

I mean, Ministers are not representatives, they are basically top level managers, and criteria for their selection must be at least as strict as in any business. Final decision might rest with the PM or whoever else, but proposed candidates must pass vigorous selection process. I think it's only reasonable.

Lower House is a trickier situation - people must have their representation, but why can't it be more than that? Why not have some professional representatives, too, like lawyers or economists.

Actually it's rethinking the basics - why do we need Lower House at all? What do those MPs do? It seems their main role is to help with local elections every four years. Fine, but why keep them in Bangkok in between the elections? Why can't they work in their provinces and let professionals do legislative work in the capital? When it comes to voting, each party would have a number of votes and simply declare their stand and put that number into yes or no column.

Just testing the ground here, btw. System we have now obviously doesn't work as intended, so why not propose some changes?

[slimdog]

The only major change that should be made to the eligibility for standing for office is the scrapping of the ridiculous rule that MPs must have a degree.

Only members of the cabinet need a degree. The requirement that all MP's need to be graduates was never included in the 2007 Constitution

[Meerkat]

The only major change that should be made to the eligibility for standing for office is the scrapping of the ridiculous rule that MPs must have a degree.

Only members of the cabinet need a degree. The requirement that all MP's need to be graduates was never included in the 2007 Constitution

Ah - didn't (obviously) know that - thanks for the heads-up. It's a vital step in the right direction.

Does that go for the Senate as well (indeed was that requirement ever there for Senators pre '07)?

[slimdog]

Does that go for the Senate as well (indeed was that requirement ever there for Senators pre '07)?

Both the 1997 and 2007 Constitutions stipulate that a candidate for the Senate must have not less than a Bachelor's degree or it's equivalent. In the 2007 Constitution this applies to both selected and elected senators

[h90]

The Thai majority doesn't have to "earn respect" in the way a sitting government certainly does.

Why? They have no qualms about demanding respect (or those speaking on their behalf), why can't they show they deserved it?

Interesting point about this "new politics" idea is that current system does not give representation to some important groups of people, nor to voters in general. Basically the question is about MPs qualifications for positions they are allowed to hold. Not a bad idea, I think. Why not have the screening process for ministerial positions similar to that of any state enterprise, Bank of Thailand and so on.

Re. Noppadon's amateurish status - why do you stick with that loser, YH? First he was taken for a ride by Cambodians, then his ass was had by Thais, then he blamed previous FM for "misunderstanding" and was promptly told that he knows shit about diplomacy and he can't read, too, and don't even mention his fashion sense.

Is it because of his Oxbridge education, YH?

I suppose I do have a hard wired bias in favour of representative democracy.In that sense I don't think the Thai majority needs to "earn" respect in the way that politicians do.On the other hand I am all too conscious of the dangers of the tyranny of the majority (or the mob).I am very comfortable with checks and balances being in place, and even with some representatives being nominated on merit rather than elected.I also think representatives should vote on their opinions and not be handcuffed to constituents majority views.But equally they should submit themselves to the peoples verdict at elections.I'm not really favour of educational qualifications as it discriminates against working class movements.Some of the greatest and most competent British ministers (in Attlee's post war government) left school at 14.Let's also be realistic about the value of Thai qualifications.

As to Noppadon I agree he looks a bit of a wanke_r (to use the technical term) but he is bright.In all honesty I don't know that much about him but some of his critics painted him as a cartoon character, and some counterbalance seemed necessary.I suppose I am somewhat biased in favour of the Oxbridge ideal -ie those who can exchange ideas, recognise nuance, show good grace to opponents.Actually the ideal is fading and apart from someone like the late M.R Kukrit is rarely found in Thailand (certainly not in Noppadol!).But there is still lingering in Oxbridge something of that spirit reminding us of its faults and virtues -courageous,arrogant,generous,ornate,pungent,smug and funny.

Agree with the first paragraph. I just wonder though sometimes if Thailand wouldnt be better off doing a way with the constituency system and going over totally to PR. That would be straight one man/woman one vote and so as fair as you could get, and also the votes of those of contrarian opinion in regions would have more weight. It would also make it very tough for the local patronage systems to remain so dominant which is probably why absolutely nobody would want it. The downside or maybe upside would be a continuation of coalition governments without 50% of the electorate. I think Thaksin actually achieved that once, so it is possible. Anyway just academic debate but surely abetter idea than 70% appointed and 30% elected. The lower house must be totally elected. The upper house I am more ambivalent on. The UK have the longest lasting democracy and were until recently one of the more tolerant societies and they have had an unelected upper house for aeons albeit with restricted powers.

I complete agree. For the lower house they discussed a system in which every group can send their man. One from the farmers, one from the labour union, one from the academics one from the factory owner. It is also democratic as these people get elected. But I don't see much reason why it should be less corrupt.

[plachon]

The Thai majority doesn't have to "earn respect" in the way a sitting government certainly does.

Why? They have no qualms about demanding respect (or those speaking on their behalf), why can't they show they deserved it?

Interesting point about this "new politics" idea is that current system does not give representation to some important groups of people, nor to voters in general. Basically the question is about MPs qualifications for positions they are allowed to hold. Not a bad idea, I think. Why not have the screening process for ministerial positions similar to that of any state enterprise, Bank of Thailand and so on.

Re. Noppadon's amateurish status - why do you stick with that loser, YH? First he was taken for a ride by Cambodians, then his ass was had by Thais, then he blamed previous FM for "misunderstanding" and was promptly told that he knows shit about diplomacy and he can't read, too, and don't even mention his fashion sense.

Is it because of his Oxbridge education, YH?

I suppose I do have a hard wired bias in favour of representative democracy.In that sense I don't think the Thai majority needs to "earn" respect in the way that politicians do.On the other hand I am all too conscious of the dangers of the tyranny of the majority (or the mob).I am very comfortable with checks and balances being in place, and even with some representatives being nominated on merit rather than elected.I also think representatives should vote on their opinions and not be handcuffed to constituents majority views.But equally they should submit themselves to the peoples verdict at elections.I'm not really favour of educational qualifications as it discriminates against working class movements.Some of the greatest and most competent British ministers (in Attlee's post war government) left school at 14.Let's also be realistic about the value of Thai qualifications.

As to Noppadon I agree he looks a bit of a wanke_r (to use the technical term) but he is bright.In all honesty I don't know that much about him but some of his critics painted him as a cartoon character, and some counterbalance seemed necessary.I suppose I am somewhat biased in favour of the Oxbridge ideal -ie those who can exchange ideas, recognise nuance, show good grace to opponents.Actually the ideal is fading and apart from someone like the late M.R Kukrit is rarely found in Thailand (certainly not in Noppadol!).But there is still lingering in Oxbridge something of that spirit reminding us of its faults and virtues -courageous,arrogant,generous,ornate,pungent,smug and funny.

You really do have a sneaking admiration for Noppadope, apparently on the strength of his Oxbridge qualifications alone? Only "looks" a bit of a wanke_r, eh? But apparently the university one goes to can make those appearances deceptive. Seems to me the FM is a 42 carrot plonker in the rich, upper class <deleted> sense of the word. Now let's analyse the faults and virtues you put propose as being indicative of his Oxbridge "spirit":

Courageous - if you call being an obsequious toad, with your nose half way up your boss's ass the whole time, guess he qualifies. Where's the courage in being a paid proxy for a lying, cheating, murdering ex-dictator?

Arrogant - I can see how you associate with that fault easily YH, but doesn't go down well with many ordinary folk.

Generous - oh yes, in the old pastry box school of generosity and generous of spirit to the boss it seems

Ornate - 'nother word for a poof ain't it?

Pungent - you got that one correct. He stinks higher than a split barrel of 3 month old pla rah. That's Gentleman's Relish for you, sir.

Smug - smarmy, weasly, in the tosser mould of smugness. Smirks like a chimp. Bit like Bush and his Yale qualification, per chance?

Funny - if you say so. Another of Toxin's clowns, but with brown nose rather than red. Also big clodhopper shoes, likely to put his foot in it if put in a position of public responsibility, rather than working behind the scenes to feather one's own and boss's clans nest. Meanwhile, I'm not sure if man in the street would share your opinion as to the giggle-factor of this joker.

If that's what going to Oxford or Cambridge teaches you (which I don't for a minute believe), then the rest of us proles can thank our lucky stars we never had the money or connections to get in to these bastions of smugness.

Edited July 7, 2008 by plachon

[h90]

Two interesting things:

The nation:

Civil Court orders PAD to remove stage

The Civil Court Monday clarified its injunction, saying the Peoples' Alliance for Democracy has to remove its stage that is blocking traffic.

The court did not directly order the PAD to demolish its stage but the court said the PAD would have to open all traffic lanes from 5 am to 6 pm from Mondays to Fridays.

Since the PAD's stage is occupying three traffic lanes, it will have to be demolished.

The court gave the clarification after parents and teachers of the Rajvinit Secondary School told the court that the PAD failed to compile with the court's injunction, asking it to stop blocking the roads near Government House.

The PAD has been blocking Rama V and Phitsanulok in its marathon demonstration against the government.

The Nation

end of quote

bangkok post:

Supreme commander doubts anyone planning coup

Supreme Commander Boonsang Niempradit on Monday dismissed People's Alliance for Democracy rumours about a possible military coup d'etat, saying there is no signal or indication of any military movement.

The PAD alleged that former classmates of ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra plan to stage a coup.

Gen Boonsang said he had heard those rumours, but there is no evidence to substantiate either the events or the persons alleged to be involved in the alleged plot.

Gen Boonsang was quoted by the Thai News Agency as saying that he himself saw no signal or indication of possible efforts to conduct a coup. He believed that there would be none.

He said, "some people want a coup while others don't." He suggested people who "think it is an option to use to resolve the country's ongoing political turmoil should think more carefully."

"I can remind (everyone) that a coup cannot solve the problems at their root cause. The military is not fond of staging coups. We have patience and tolerance. We have always sided with the people when they feel unhappy or desperate," Boonsang said.

He said in a democratic society, the military must be patient because it has a duty to serve the people.

end of quote

What does this mean:

"We have always sided with the people when they feel unhappy or desperate," Boonsang said.

He said in a democratic society, the military must be patient because it has a duty to serve the people."

Is it just blabla or does he want to tell something important?

They side with the people (and not the government). That I might read out of the first sentence.

But that "He said in a democratic society, the military must be patient because it has a duty to serve the people."

what does it mean?

[hammered]

Two interesting things:

The nation:

Civil Court orders PAD to remove stage

The Civil Court Monday clarified its injunction, saying the Peoples' Alliance for Democracy has to remove its stage that is blocking traffic.

The court did not directly order the PAD to demolish its stage but the court said the PAD would have to open all traffic lanes from 5 am to 6 pm from Mondays to Fridays.

Since the PAD's stage is occupying three traffic lanes, it will have to be demolished.

The court gave the clarification after parents and teachers of the Rajvinit Secondary School told the court that the PAD failed to compile with the court's injunction, asking it to stop blocking the roads near Government House.

The PAD has been blocking Rama V and Phitsanulok in its marathon demonstration against the government.

The Nation

end of quote

bangkok post:

Supreme commander doubts anyone planning coup

Supreme Commander Boonsang Niempradit on Monday dismissed People's Alliance for Democracy rumours about a possible military coup d'etat, saying there is no signal or indication of any military movement.

The PAD alleged that former classmates of ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra plan to stage a coup.

Gen Boonsang said he had heard those rumours, but there is no evidence to substantiate either the events or the persons alleged to be involved in the alleged plot.

Gen Boonsang was quoted by the Thai News Agency as saying that he himself saw no signal or indication of possible efforts to conduct a coup. He believed that there would be none.

He said, "some people want a coup while others don't." He suggested people who "think it is an option to use to resolve the country's ongoing political turmoil should think more carefully."

"I can remind (everyone) that a coup cannot solve the problems at their root cause. The military is not fond of staging coups. We have patience and tolerance. We have always sided with the people when they feel unhappy or desperate," Boonsang said.

He said in a democratic society, the military must be patient because it has a duty to serve the people.

end of quote

What does this mean:

"We have always sided with the people when they feel unhappy or desperate," Boonsang said.

He said in a democratic society, the military must be patient because it has a duty to serve the people."

Is it just blabla or does he want to tell something important?

They side with the people (and not the government). That I might read out of the first sentence.

But that "He said in a democratic society, the military must be patient because it has a duty to serve the people."

what does it mean?

More interstingly imho the courts continue to find against the PAD at the same time as the anti-Thaksin cases come up. Those courts certainly arent in the PAD camp and we see it on an almost daily basis as we head into the cases against the Thaksinistas.

One analyst a while speculated that the military would like to see the PAD and the Thaksinistas both smashed. Hey why a coup when the courts may just give them exactly what they want, which is probably why there are also rumours of a pro-Thaksin coup. Some of the class ten have more power again now although with Gen. Prayuth in charge of the first army it is hard to see how they could launch a coup, and the military reshuffle may well not be influencable by their politcal side.

[Tony Clifton]

Respecting the court's injunction, PAD just started to move crowd and stage only to be interrupted by news of Thaksinistas already atempting to hurt some, violence and intimidation always on their mind as the first options over a valuable argument.

[sriracha john]

Noppadon leaves for Canada

That pr!ck beat me to it.

This one's just for you, Tony...

Thais living in Canada hold a protest outside the Unesco building in Quebec comdemning Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama over the Preah Vihear Temple dispute.

The Nation

Now all he needs is to have some Thai throw water in his face like they did for Thaksin in London...

p.s. you may wanna the check the Canadian papers, they might even have a better photo...

[Tony Clifton]

PAD has moved back to Makhawan bridge.

[Nampeung]

Thanks for the update Tony, any news on their next steps?

[Nampeung]

Looks like we are all getting bored with this topic. Any news on the ground

[younghusband]

You really do have a sneaking admiration for Noppadope, apparently on the strength of his Oxbridge qualifications alone? Only "looks" a bit of a wanke_r, eh? But apparently the university one goes to can make those appearances deceptive. Seems to me the FM is a 42 carrot plonker in the rich, upper class <deleted> sense of the word. Now let's analyse the faults and virtues you put propose as being indicative of his Oxbridge "spirit":

Courageous - if you call being an obsequious toad, with your nose half way up your boss's ass the whole time, guess he qualifies. Where's the courage in being a paid proxy for a lying, cheating, murdering ex-dictator?

Arrogant - I can see how you associate with that fault easily YH, but doesn't go down well with many ordinary folk.

Generous - oh yes, in the old pastry box school of generosity and generous of spirit to the boss it seems

Ornate - 'nother word for a poof ain't it?

Pungent - you got that one correct. He stinks higher than a split barrel of 3 month old pla rah. That's Gentleman's Relish for you, sir.

Smug - smarmy, weasly, in the tosser mould of smugness. Smirks like a chimp. Bit like Bush and his Yale qualification, per chance?

Funny - if you say so. Another of Toxin's clowns, but with brown nose rather than red. Also big clodhopper shoes, likely to put his foot in it if put in a position of public responsibility, rather than working behind the scenes to feather one's own and boss's clans nest. Meanwhile, I'm not sure if man in the street would share your opinion as to the giggle-factor of this joker.

If that's what going to Oxford or Cambridge teaches you (which I don't for a minute believe), then the rest of us proles can thank our lucky stars we never had the money or connections to get in to these bastions of smugness.

I know it's a little difficult for birdbrains to concentrate but if you re-read my post you might twig that I specifically excluded Noppadol from sharing what I consider to be the traditional Oxbridge virtues.He also comes not from a privileged background but a lower middle class Chinese family with very little money.Otherwise I can't be bothered to comment on your ignorant rant.

[ando]

"PAD plans campaign to oust judges

The People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) plans to gather 20,000 voters' signatures to kick-start impeachment proceedings against two Civil Court judges for ordering the alliance to stop blocking Rama V and Phitsanulok roads during school hours. Maj-Gen Chamlong Srimuang said all five PAD leaders agreed with the move. At least 20,000 signatures would be submitted to the Senate to support the impeachment bid. "

http://www.bangkokpost.com/090708_News/09Jul2008_news06.php

Looks like PAD is really off the rails this time.

[hammered]

"PAD plans campaign to oust judges

The People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) plans to gather 20,000 voters' signatures to kick-start impeachment proceedings against two Civil Court judges for ordering the alliance to stop blocking Rama V and Phitsanulok roads during school hours. Maj-Gen Chamlong Srimuang said all five PAD leaders agreed with the move. At least 20,000 signatures would be submitted to the Senate to support the impeachment bid. "

http://www.bangkokpost.com/090708_News/09Jul2008_news06.php

Looks like PAD is really off the rails this time.

The PAD being in conflict with the courts is a very useful meme to have going and being reported on every form of media at the same time as the courts find against the Thaksinistas if you happen to be of the anti-Thaksin persuasion. The courts must be or be seen to be strictly neutral and right now both the Thaksinistas and the public face of opposition to them are having a bad month in court.

[plachon]

You really do have a sneaking admiration for Noppadope, apparently on the strength of his Oxbridge qualifications alone? Only "looks" a bit of a wanke_r, eh? But apparently the university one goes to can make those appearances deceptive. Seems to me the FM is a 42 carrot plonker in the rich, upper class <deleted> sense of the word. Now let's analyse the faults and virtues you put propose as being indicative of his Oxbridge "spirit":

Courageous - if you call being an obsequious toad, with your nose half way up your boss's ass the whole time, guess he qualifies. Where's the courage in being a paid proxy for a lying, cheating, murdering ex-dictator?

Arrogant - I can see how you associate with that fault easily YH, but doesn't go down well with many ordinary folk.

Generous - oh yes, in the old pastry box school of generosity and generous of spirit to the boss it seems

Ornate - 'nother word for a poof ain't it?

Pungent - you got that one correct. He stinks higher than a split barrel of 3 month old pla rah. That's Gentleman's Relish for you, sir.

Smug - smarmy, weasly, in the tosser mould of smugness. Smirks like a chimp. Bit like Bush and his Yale qualification, per chance?

Funny - if you say so. Another of Toxin's clowns, but with brown nose rather than red. Also big clodhopper shoes, likely to put his foot in it if put in a position of public responsibility, rather than working behind the scenes to feather one's own and boss's clans nest. Meanwhile, I'm not sure if man in the street would share your opinion as to the giggle-factor of this joker.

If that's what going to Oxford or Cambridge teaches you (which I don't for a minute believe), then the rest of us proles can thank our lucky stars we never had the money or connections to get in to these bastions of smugness.

I know it's a little difficult for birdbrains to concentrate but if you re-read my post you might twig that I specifically excluded Noppadol from sharing what I consider to be the traditional Oxbridge virtues.He also comes not from a privileged background but a lower middle class Chinese family with very little money.Otherwise I can't be bothered to comment on your ignorant rant.

Do I detect that stuff upper lip quavering a bit, what? No room for a bit of humour in adversity old fellow? The unwashed, anti-globalisation PAD demons getting to you? Could the corporate takeover plan be set back a tad? And my birdbrain does so distinctly recall a certain board member telling everyone to lighten up not so many moon's ago. Guess a little humility was never considered a traditional Oxbridge virtue was it?

And what exactly did you mean by "ornate" by the way? Us second class university graduates need the guidance of your superior intelligence on that "quality".

[A_Traveller]

^ I guess the use of ornate is as in Milton 'ornate rhetoric taught out of the rule of Plato' or more directly engaging in discussion with the use of elaborate, or florid, language which may be a mask to hide a lack of complex reasoned argument underpinning the statement.

The choice is yours.

Regards