State Of Emergency Announced In Bangkok

[sriracha john]

He sure loves skating on thin ice, and he already fell through once

Seems like Jakrapop isn't the only one with a taste for skating on thin ice

Are you hinting you'd love to see me suspended or banned?

No of course not: it was just a mild tease.Those who conspire to get members who hold differing opinions banned -we all know who they are -are obviously rather sad creatures.

Not nearly as sad as those posters, whoever they are, who attempt to distort reality by excusing forum rule breakers as saying only that they held different viewpoints.

The preoccupation some people have with rules and regulations is admirable, but very much a below decks characteristic where non commissioned ranks must focus on receiving and implementing orders.They don't normally tolerate much diversity of opinion.The officer class thinks a little differently.Obviously rules should normally be followed but occasionally there's a need for what the Royal Navy knows as the "Nelson touch".

Stand easy now (if that's the appropriate term to address someone hunched over their laptop).

Whatever nautical babbling you're attempting doesn't change the fact, as stated, that rather than being removed from the forum for simply holding a different viewpoint, those that refuse to comply with the same rules that all of us are expected to follow are justifiably taken out. Beyond that, if you think someone was removed unjustly, your issue is with admin, not some wild conspiracy theory with individual members.

Edited September 7, 2008 by sriracha john

[WinnieTheKhwai]

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

[....]

(Awzar Thi is the pen name of a member of the Asian Human Rights Commission with over 15 years of experience as an advocate of human rights and the rule of law in Thailand and Burma. His Rule of Lords blog can be read at http://ratchasima.net)

Wow. That's brilliant. Straight and to the point. And rather sad ultimately. I wonder if some of the "people less enamoured with democracy" (hope that term covers them) on this forum can at least agree with this analysis?

[sriracha john]

heres an angle to consider

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=786

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

< snipped >

Was there any reason to double post this 2 days later?

btw, have you ever sorted how who "this guy" is in the interim?

Edited September 7, 2008 by sriracha john

[paulfromphuket]

heres an angle to consider

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=786

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

< snipped >

Was there any reason to double post this 2 days later?

for the benifit of both new members readers and in the hope that some might read it again, as as i said it nails it and i am getting tired of the endless babble of some who have obviously not

[LaoPo]

heres an angle to consider

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=786

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

< snipped >

Was there any reason to double post this 2 days later?

btw, have you ever sorted how who "this guy" is in the interim?

I did.

"Nick Cheesman (pictured above) is Awzar Thi, the pen name of a member of the Asian Human Rights Commission with over 15 years of experience as an advocate of human rights and the rule of law in Thailand and Burma."

From: a blogspot easily to be found if one types 'Awzar Thi' on Google Images.

On this blog he wrote, amongst others, an article: "Are The Thai Police Organized Crime ?", March 27, 2008.

LaoPo

Edited September 7, 2008 by LaoPo

[sriracha john]

heres an angle to consider

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=786

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

< snipped >

Was there any reason to double post this 2 days later?

for the benifit of both new members readers and in the hope that some might read it again, as as i said it nails it and i am getting tired of the endless babble of some who have obviously not

While your motivations might seem valid to yourself, it's not in keeping with the forum's policy of avoiding double posting. Any and all of us may feel strongly about any particular post or blog entry that we may read, but if everyone re-posted their favorite every 2 days, it would unnecessarily clog up the thread. I hope you can see how that works?

[sriracha john]

heres an angle to consider

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=786

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

< snipped >

Was there any reason to double post this 2 days later?

btw, have you ever sorted how who "this guy" is in the interim?

I did.

"Nick Cheesman (pictured above) is Awzar Thi

Thank you for finally providing the elusive answer to that question.

Edited September 7, 2008 by sriracha john

[paulfromphuket]

heres an angle to consider

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=786

This guy nails it

Rule of Lords: Victory of Thailand's coup-makers

< snipped >

Was there any reason to double post this 2 days later?

for the benifit of both new members readers and in the hope that some might read it again, as as i said it nails it and i am getting tired of the endless babble of some who have obviously not

While your motivations might seem valid to yourself, it's not in keeping with the forum's policy of avoiding double posting. Any and all of us may feel strongly about any particular post or blog entry that we may read, but if everyone re-posted their favorite every 2 days, it would unnecessarily clog up the thread. I hope you can see how that works?

originaly i only posted a link so not really a double post but a commentary i feel should be on this forum in whole

[kurtgruen]

I can not believe that people support this.

The PAD's leaders however are neither liberals nor democrats.A gruesome bunch of reactionary businessmen,generals and aristocrats, they demand not fresh elections,which they would lose, but "new politics" -in fact a return to old fashioned authoritarian rule with a mostly appointed parliament and powers for the army to step in when it chooses"

A solution to corruption in Thai politics is needed.......but backing the PAD's agenda is not the answer.....OBVIOUSLY.

Only if you take the top quote as a fact, which I don't.

I see students, Union workers and Union officials, the middle class, the poor and just a lot of average citizens protesting. Plus a lot of academics. Until this corrupt government gets disolved, I am with the PAD and these Protesters on this.

Ok, even if it were the poor downtrodden masses who were protesting and closing airports......you still support the following....

"new politics" -in fact a return to old fashioned authoritarian rule with a mostly appointed parliament and powers for the army to step in when it chooses"

I just can not fathom why anyone would support military oversight and the elimination of democracy.

THIS IS WHAT PAD WANTS, THIS IS THEIR GOAL...SONDHI HAS REPEATEDLY STATED THIS...THIS IS FACT AND YOU SUPPORT THIS?

I apologize for yelling....but PAD is NOT the answer.

The government PAD is proposing, that would be something worth forcefully taking down (because it could not be done democratically)

Supporting PAD is like saying..."I don't want to be involved in my future governments decisions" and "Please hold a gun to my head"

That strikes me as quite funny, because by supporting PAD, I am actually quite involved in the governments decisions right now. So is PAD.

PAD does not want to emiminate democracy, but I guess on the internet, you can say anything you want (regardless if it is the truth or not), so fill your boots, as far as I'm concerned. While you are busy brainwashing the feeble minded, I will continue to drum up international Union support for their brothers over here and when I get a chance in between, I'll try to make some intelligent posts.

About your other point....you have been living in a country with no democracy, in which the military can take control at any given time too, so why are you here, if you don't like it? Do you think this is democracy....vote buying, a government protecting and aiding criminals. What about starting a new Party, everytime you get banned. What about attempting to change the Constitution, just so your Party won't get disolved??? You can keep your idea of democracy, I don't want it.

I think that the future, after the PPP gets disolved, will give us at least a chance at real democracy. (I'm not so optimistic as to proclaim that we will have it for sure) Right now, the PAD is democracy in action....Peaceful civil disobedience to bring down a corrupt, illegal government.

I see it as my duty to do whatever I can to help the PAD in their struggle to remove this corrupt government from power, because my wife and I and our daughter live in this country. I have been an active Union member and Social Democrat for most of my life, so if you think that I stand for the elimination of democracy, you are way off base. Maybe it's time for you too examine the issues and parties involved a little closer, instead of just repeating government propaganda?

Yes, I admit, that different interest groups followowing PAD's lead are involved for different reasons. I'm here, because I want to see organized labour thrive in this country and I want to see a corrupt government fall. As a social democrat (borderline socialist), I also want to see real chances and help for the poor of this nation.

It makes me angry, when people claim, that the TRT/PPP are the defenders of the poor. The truth couldn't be further from it. Throwing a few crumbs to keep the poor from rebelling, hinders real change more, than doing nothing at all. You also cannot build an ethical system on corruption. You have to tear it down first and start over.

Of course a lot of the FATCATS don't want to see change. Change scares them. It might affect their standard of living or their personal security. They are quite happy having a handful of slaves running around, doing their work for them.

And then we have some white guys, who come over here, thinking that it is their God-Given right to have servants doing all their work for them, just because they where fortunate enough to be born in a Western Country. They complain, if the cost of living goes up, even so it is still way less than back home. They fear any change, because of course, they like things cheap and people desperate enough to work on their cars for peanuts.

So yes, maybe the real enemy is me...the guy who wants to see the poor empowered, fair wages for good work, an end to child labour, an end to exploitation. and an end to corruption. The question remains...who's enemy?

[kurtgruen]

Whatever nautical babbling you're attempting doesn't change the fact, as stated, that rather than being removed from the forum for simply holding a different viewpoint, those that refuse to comply with the same rules that all of us are expected to follow are justifiably taken out. Beyond that, if you think someone was removed unjustly, your issue is with admin, not some wild conspiracy theory with individual members.

O.K., now I have a question for you...when somebody justifiably gets kicked out for breaking the forum rules and then later just starts another account in another name, lets say TRT or PPP or Phua...., is it o.k. for him to just continue under his new name?

[Guest Reimar]

I can not believe that people support this.

The PAD's leaders however are neither liberals nor democrats.A gruesome bunch of reactionary businessmen,generals and aristocrats, they demand not fresh elections,which they would lose, but "new politics" -in fact a return to old fashioned authoritarian rule with a mostly appointed parliament and powers for the army to step in when it chooses"

A solution to corruption in Thai politics is needed.......but backing the PAD's agenda is not the answer.....OBVIOUSLY.

Only if you take the top quote as a fact, which I don't.

I see students, Union workers and Union officials, the middle class, the poor and just a lot of average citizens protesting. Plus a lot of academics. Until this corrupt government gets disolved, I am with the PAD and these Protesters on this.

Ok, even if it were the poor downtrodden masses who were protesting and closing airports......you still support the following....

"new politics" -in fact a return to old fashioned authoritarian rule with a mostly appointed parliament and powers for the army to step in when it chooses"

I just can not fathom why anyone would support military oversight and the elimination of democracy.

THIS IS WHAT PAD WANTS, THIS IS THEIR GOAL...SONDHI HAS REPEATEDLY STATED THIS...THIS IS FACT AND YOU SUPPORT THIS?

I apologize for yelling....but PAD is NOT the answer.

The government PAD is proposing, that would be something worth forcefully taking down (because it could not be done democratically)

Supporting PAD is like saying..."I don't want to be involved in my future governments decisions" and "Please hold a gun to my head"

That strikes me as quite funny, because by supporting PAD, I am actually quite involved in the governments decisions right now. So is PAD.

PAD does not want to emiminate democracy, but I guess on the internet, you can say anything you want (regardless if it is the truth or not), so fill your boots, as far as I'm concerned. While you are busy brainwashing the feeble minded, I will continue to drum up international Union support for their brothers over here and when I get a chance in between, I'll try to make some intelligent posts.

About your other point....you have been living in a country with no democracy, in which the military can take control at any given time too, so why are you here, if you don't like it? Do you think this is democracy....vote buying, a government protecting and aiding criminals. What about starting a new Party, everytime you get banned. What about attempting to change the Constitution, just so your Party won't get disolved??? You can keep your idea of democracy, I don't want it.

I think that the future, after the PPP gets disolved, will give us at least a chance at real democracy. (I'm not so optimistic as to proclaim that we will have it for sure) Right now, the PAD is democracy in action....Peaceful civil disobedience to bring down a corrupt, illegal government.

I see it as my duty to do whatever I can to help the PAD in their struggle to remove this corrupt government from power, because my wife and I and our daughter live in this country. I have been an active Union member and Social Democrat for most of my life, so if you think that I stand for the elimination of democracy, you are way off base. Maybe it's time for you too examine the issues and parties involved a little closer, instead of just repeating government propaganda?

Yes, I admit, that different interest groups followowing PAD's lead are involved for different reasons. I'm here, because I want to see organized labour thrive in this country and I want to see a corrupt government fall. As a social democrat (borderline socialist), I also want to see real chances and help for the poor of this nation.

It makes me angry, when people claim, that the TRT/PPP are the defenders of the poor. The truth couldn't be further from it. Throwing a few crumbs to keep the poor from rebelling, hinders real change more, than doing nothing at all. You also cannot build an ethical system on corruption. You have to tear it down first and start over.

Of course a lot of the FATCATS don't want to see change. Change scares them. It might affect their standard of living or their personal security. They are quite happy having a handful of slaves running around, doing their work for them.

And then we have some white guys, who come over here, thinking that it is their God-Given right to have servants doing all their work for them, just because they where fortunate enough to be born in a Western Country. They complain, if the cost of living goes up, even so it is still way less than back home. They fear any change, because of course, they like things cheap and people desperate enough to work on their cars for peanuts.

So yes, maybe the real enemy is me...the guy who wants to see the poor empowered, fair wages for good work, an end to child labour, an end to exploitation. and an end to corruption. The question remains...who's enemy?

An open word, controversial for many, not for me, which I really like. Many really truly words pointing to the right figures.

Keep going that way and best luck.

Cheers.

[ETC]

What comes to my mind is an old saying, "Be carefull what you wish for."

What is going on in Thailand today is nothing new to Society, as a whole, nor is it new to Thailand. Whether in Thailand or some other country in the world, there are those that hold the reigns of power and those wishing to take those reigns away.

Even if country leaders are forced to resign, a new set of problems will always take their place, plus now you become a target for change.

If we are to look at the perceived corruption etc., like a form of cancer...By eliminating the cause of the original cancer you still have the current cancer to deal with, and a new healthy blood cell will eventually fall victim to the lingering cancer. Sorta like closing the barn door after the cows got out.

No votes could have been bought if the people did not allow it to happen. Real change will start at the bottom and work its way up to the countries leaders. Only then can real positive change take place, and have the possibility of long term success. Only when the un-corrupted become the only rule of the land of smiles, can positive solutions prevail.

If we were to assume (right or wrong) that the government, police and Army are corrupt ,as suggested by others, then what chance would a new leader have in bringing about true change. What chance would this person have if no one would implement his orders. It

would be more of "business as usual".

Maybe the PAD PARTY should be replaced with PUP (PEOPLES UNITED PARTY) . A party that would win the hearts and minds of

all the people, PPP and PAD alike. Unless you can do that, your chance of real reform is but a wonderful dream. But then again, it has been said that "Dreams are what make life tolerable."

to avoid any mistakes i am pasting this one in full.I think this guy talks a lot of sence

and if you have doubt as to the sourse google him

Thongchai Winichakul: A simple and straightforward solution

<H5 class=detailsubmit>Thongchai Winichakul

07 September 2008

Article</H5> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } During Sept 1-2, 2008, there were 17 press releases from groups of various kinds of individuals trying to put forth solutions to the current situation. I received two more drafts circulated via email loops, totalling 19.

Of these, 11 want the Prime Minister to resign, 3 call for a House dissolution, 2 for either dissolution or resignation, and 3 have no proposals. These ideas come with different reasonings, of which political enthusiasts could reckon the pros and cons of each solution, according to their own prejudices.

Fortunately, no one has put forward what has probably been on some people's mind, but cannot be said: that is, a coup. There is still some shame, at least.

Fortunately, no one has come up with another option which many may have in mind, but dare not bring it forward. There is some inhibition, at least.

Yet, it is alarming that just a few people have proposed yet another solution which is probably the easiest and the most legitimate way out (Kasian Techapira has proposed it in his article, but has been attacked by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD)'s intellectuals. A handful of academics also recently proposed it at a meeting at Chulalongkorn University before the clash occurred.): i.e.

The PAD leaders should turn themselves in to the police to enter the justice process, while the anti-government rally can still continue in appropriate places.

This solution requires the courage and responsibility of the PAD leaders. They are brave to take action, to resist, so they should be brave to face civil law. Only by doing so is the PAD's protest considered civil disobedience.

If not, what the PAD has done would only amount to outrageous acts of political bullies who, no matter how forceful they are, are just disgusting.

In Thai society where even the king is under the law, who do the PAD leaders think they are, so they can be above the law?

They hate Thaksin, but they cannot do the same as what they have condemned Thaksin to have done.

I would like to see the Army Commander-in-Chief or someone of a similar stature go to the protest site barehanded to ask the protesters to allow their leaders to give themselves up, and let justice take its course.

The PAD leaders should be brave enough to take responsibility for their faults—or who thinks they have no faults?—and should not risk their supporters' lives for themselves.

This kind of courage may turn the PAD leaders into instant heroes.

Some might argue that this is unlikely, because the PAD leaders would not cave in. But, the other options are not likely, either, as the others would not yield. Who do the PAD leaders think they are, to be always pleased by others?

Some might argue that this solution does not radically get rid of the current conflict. But, the other solutions—House dissolution or the PM's resignation—also do not fundamentally solve the problem. We are just trying to avoid confrontation and cool down the political heat. All solutions are meant for immediate results.

Some might argue that the PAD supporters would not yield. But it is up to the PAD leaders to have the courage to explain to their crowd, who are mature and educated.

The other solutions would also be unacceptable for people who are against the PAD. I do not see any intellectuals and academics having any qualms about that.

This solution is also a way to uphold democracy, and not damage the credibility of the judiciary. On the contrary, the PAD's defiance of the law harms the judicial power which it has promoted.

If the PAD desires the 'new politics', it would have to be patient and wait until the people give their consent, not push it by force, coercing people into it.

This simple, straightforward and legitimate solution is overlooked due to the partiality that is so awfully prevalent. No one listens anymore.

It is alarming that intellectuals, academics, media, lawyers, and human rights activists have abandoned the principles, and become militants who want victory at all costs and no matter what. They pander to unlawful disobedience. They hate Thaksin to the point of being partial, inconsiderate, discriminatory, mindless, and destructive to anyone standing in the way.

Threats made by people on their side are patriotic acts, aggression is freedom of expression according to the constitution, and carrying weapons is non-violence, all combining to constitute 'some flaws', quite acceptable. But when people on the other side do wrong, that would be utterly intolerable.

Many dare not say or make comments because they do not want to risk being cursed or vilified.

For tens of millions of people watching the PAD and the intellectuals, what does democracy mean to them? They would think that the country is not theirs, but belongs to those Bangkok people who are selfish, self-willed, and childishly irresponsible in the pursuit of their own ends.

They would feel utterly repressed, and would someday burst out, asking if they are only peasants, inferior citizens to the PAD and Bangkok people.

This dismissed solution is a common practice in civilized countries where the rule of law reigns, to prevent protests from escalating to bloodshed. It is among the first options anybody would think of as a common sense.

How is Thailand so uncommon that this simple and forthright solution can be overlooked? Or is Thailand so uniquely civilized that it holds the rule of law as disposable at will?

Or how are the intelligence, integrity and consistency if Thai intellectuals so uncommon that they could not think of a simple solution, using common sense.

I have found that there are many people who admit that they are partial, and see the necessity of their discrimination and arbitrary rule of law, because their cause is too critical.

They thus deliberately overlook this simple solution, because they hope to achieve the victory that is greater than the rule of law.

The political conflict of the past 2-3 years has taken us to the brink of disaster, because of such short-sightedness.

In conclusion, House dissolution or resignation? Or turning themselves in to the authorities, and continuing the rally in other appropriate places?

Please consider it with sobriety. Refrain from the urge to win at the expense of others, and do not let hatred take hold.

Now it is too late for a thorough solution, leaving only a choice between more or less destructive solutions for immediate results.

I am so tired of these press releases. But if anyone comes up with this proposal, I will be very grateful, and give my name in advance.

[Guest Reimar]

Maybe the PAD PARTY should be replaced with PUP (PEOPLES UNITED PARTY) . A party that would win the hearts and minds of

all the people, PPP and PAD alike. Unless you can do that, your chance of real reform is but a wonderful dream. But then again, it has been said that "Dreams are what make life tolerable."

AFAIK there isn't a PAD Party! The PAD isn't a political party and not registered as one.

Cheers.

[Meerkat]

It is the (minority) "power groups" who are threatened by democracy in Thailand. Hence their opposition to it.

And it is the majority poor, who are currently virtually powerless, who stand to gain a fair go through democratic system of government. Hence their support for it.

Exactly, the current bunch of businessmen in charge cannot tolerate PAD because they'd lose their grip on the country. The poor majority must not be allowed representation in parliament as per PAD's new politics proposal. Only candidates appointed and financed by big business are allowed to participate in electoral process.

>>>

Thanks for telling us about Hong Kong, CMsally. Half of their legislature is indeed selected, exactly like PAD proposes, but since their are "our" guys, papers like Economist call it a beacon of democracy in Asia, PAD, who doesn't kow tow to big business, are called fascist reactonaries instead.

Having subscribed to The Economist for much of the last 20 years, and having had a part-time home for work in HK since '94, I'm struggling to think of an edition lauding HK as a beacon of democracy in Asia. Maybe I missed an issue...

The system there is abominable - as the BBC states in its article on the elections today, a Legislator can be voted in from a functional constituency of as few as 144 voters. That Legislator has as much weight as one voted in by a geographical constituency of hundreds of thousands. It's a wonky system that partly only remains in place because the people of HK realise that when it all comes down to it, the guys wielding their little red books have the ultimate say so they don't want to push it too far. Even that hasn't stopped some mass demonstrations towards greater "democracy" (half a million out of a total population of around 6.5m - beat those numbers, Sondhi). They were peaceful marches though; no prizes for guessing what would happen if they took over government offices there.

I'm reminded somewhat of CH Tung's (HK's first leader post-'97) outrage at being designated Chief Executive-select rather than -elect by the press. "But I was elected!" cried he. "Yes, but by a cabal of a few hundred hand-picked-by-Beijing selectors" replied the media...

Having said all that, even that system is better than the one PAD proposes (it's a photo finish though). In HK those members of each industry (actually just a sprinkling of the largest sectors) get to vote; the functional constituency Legislators are "elected". PAD doesn't talk of "election" but "selection" and "appointment". PAD's proposal of "New Politics" doesn't stem from any altruistic notion of better representation, but from a view that the lower classes are buggering up the middle classes' cozy existence by voting the "wrong way". Huge difference. I admit that your personal interpretation of "New Politics" is closer to HK and Macau's less extreme farce than Suriyasai's.

Don't forget too that "New Politics" codifies military involvement in civillian government if such conditions as "the government performs poorly" are met. It is a crock. It was a huge PR disaster for Suriyasai to proclaim it and Sondhi to expand upon it. That some people can still desperately try to spin it into something more palatable is a wonder to behold (and that usually only happens after attempts to say "It was only put forward once!" are somewhat compromised by the PAD...er...continuing to put it forward.) A helpful hint to Sondhi and Co.: next time around don't let on about your absurd anti-democratic ideals (and foreign policy proposals for that matter) until after the revolution.

And there are posters here who take everything Economist (or WSJ) says as a god given gospel on democracy.

Possibly, though unlikely IMO. I tend to think that posters here - even those I'm politically opposed to - as being intelligent enough to disagree with something they read even if it's in a publication with which they usually agree, and vice versa. YMMV.

Tell you what though; had I such a narrow mind that I wasn't able to take in more than one media outlet's opinion at a time, I'd happily take The Economist (or even the WSJ which I'm no fan of) over The Nation or [shudder] Manager/ASTV/TOC/NBT [/shudder] any day.

"New Politics" hasn't been almost universally derided in the press because of some conspiracy theory against Sondhi; it's been derided because the only thing it's worthy of is derision.

[Guest Reimar]

Friends, keep on topic and stop flaming each other.maybe the action isn't a friendly warning anymore! I'll send two PM's to tow members in question.

Cheers.

[catmac]

The preoccupation some people have with rules and regulations is admirable, but very much a below decks characteristic where non commissioned ranks must focus on receiving and implementing orders.They don't normally tolerate much diversity of opinion.The officer class thinks a little differently.Obviously rules should normally be followed but occasionally there's a need for what the Royal Navy knows as the "Nelson touch".

Stand easy now (if that's the appropriate term to address someone hunched over their laptop).

Or, as my old Headmaster told us on the day we left school for the big real world, "rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools"!

[kurtgruen]

What comes to my mind is an old saying, "Be carefull what you wish for."

What is going on in Thailand today is nothing new to Society, as a whole, nor is it new to Thailand. Whether in Thailand or some other country in the world, there are those that hold the reigns of power and those wishing to take those reigns away.

Even if country leaders are forced to resign, a new set of problems will always take their place, plus now you become a target for change.

If we are to look at the perceived corruption etc., like a form of cancer...By eliminating the cause of the original cancer you still have the current cancer to deal with, and a new healthy blood cell will eventually fall victim to the lingering cancer. Sorta like closing the barn door after the cows got out.

No votes could have been bought if the people did not allow it to happen. Real change will start at the bottom and work its way up to the countries leaders. Only then can real positive change take place, and have the possibility of long term success. Only when the un-corrupted become the only rule of the land of smiles, can positive solutions prevail.

If we were to assume (right or wrong) that the government, police and Army are corrupt ,as suggested by others, then what chance would a new leader have in bringing about true change. What chance would this person have if no one would implement his orders. It

would be more of "business as usual".

Maybe the PAD PARTY should be replaced with PUP (PEOPLES UNITED PARTY) . A party that would win the hearts and minds of

all the people, PPP and PAD alike. Unless you can do that, your chance of real reform is but a wonderful dream. But then again, it has been said that "Dreams are what make life tolerable."

to avoid any mistakes i am pasting this one in full.I think this guy talks a lot of sence

and if you have doubt as to the sourse google him

Thongchai Winichakul: A simple and straightforward solution

<H5 class=detailsubmit>Thongchai Winichakul

07 September 2008

Article</H5> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } During Sept 1-2, 2008, there were 17 press releases from groups of various kinds of individuals trying to put forth solutions to the current situation. I received two more drafts circulated via email loops, totalling 19.

Of these, 11 want the Prime Minister to resign, 3 call for a House dissolution, 2 for either dissolution or resignation, and 3 have no proposals. These ideas come with different reasonings, of which political enthusiasts could reckon the pros and cons of each solution, according to their own prejudices.

Fortunately, no one has put forward what has probably been on some people's mind, but cannot be said: that is, a coup. There is still some shame, at least.

Fortunately, no one has come up with another option which many may have in mind, but dare not bring it forward. There is some inhibition, at least.

Yet, it is alarming that just a few people have proposed yet another solution which is probably the easiest and the most legitimate way out (Kasian Techapira has proposed it in his article, but has been attacked by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD)'s intellectuals. A handful of academics also recently proposed it at a meeting at Chulalongkorn University before the clash occurred.): i.e.

The PAD leaders should turn themselves in to the police to enter the justice process, while the anti-government rally can still continue in appropriate places.

This solution requires the courage and responsibility of the PAD leaders. They are brave to take action, to resist, so they should be brave to face civil law. Only by doing so is the PAD's protest considered civil disobedience.

If not, what the PAD has done would only amount to outrageous acts of political bullies who, no matter how forceful they are, are just disgusting.

In Thai society where even the king is under the law, who do the PAD leaders think they are, so they can be above the law?

They hate Thaksin, but they cannot do the same as what they have condemned Thaksin to have done.

I would like to see the Army Commander-in-Chief or someone of a similar stature go to the protest site barehanded to ask the protesters to allow their leaders to give themselves up, and let justice take its course.

The PAD leaders should be brave enough to take responsibility for their faults—or who thinks they have no faults?—and should not risk their supporters' lives for themselves.

This kind of courage may turn the PAD leaders into instant heroes.

Some might argue that this is unlikely, because the PAD leaders would not cave in. But, the other options are not likely, either, as the others would not yield. Who do the PAD leaders think they are, to be always pleased by others?

Some might argue that this solution does not radically get rid of the current conflict. But, the other solutions—House dissolution or the PM's resignation—also do not fundamentally solve the problem. We are just trying to avoid confrontation and cool down the political heat. All solutions are meant for immediate results.

Some might argue that the PAD supporters would not yield. But it is up to the PAD leaders to have the courage to explain to their crowd, who are mature and educated.

The other solutions would also be unacceptable for people who are against the PAD. I do not see any intellectuals and academics having any qualms about that.

This solution is also a way to uphold democracy, and not damage the credibility of the judiciary. On the contrary, the PAD's defiance of the law harms the judicial power which it has promoted.

If the PAD desires the 'new politics', it would have to be patient and wait until the people give their consent, not push it by force, coercing people into it.

This simple, straightforward and legitimate solution is overlooked due to the partiality that is so awfully prevalent. No one listens anymore.

It is alarming that intellectuals, academics, media, lawyers, and human rights activists have abandoned the principles, and become militants who want victory at all costs and no matter what. They pander to unlawful disobedience. They hate Thaksin to the point of being partial, inconsiderate, discriminatory, mindless, and destructive to anyone standing in the way.

Threats made by people on their side are patriotic acts, aggression is freedom of expression according to the constitution, and carrying weapons is non-violence, all combining to constitute 'some flaws', quite acceptable. But when people on the other side do wrong, that would be utterly intolerable.

Many dare not say or make comments because they do not want to risk being cursed or vilified.

For tens of millions of people watching the PAD and the intellectuals, what does democracy mean to them? They would think that the country is not theirs, but belongs to those Bangkok people who are selfish, self-willed, and childishly irresponsible in the pursuit of their own ends.

They would feel utterly repressed, and would someday burst out, asking if they are only peasants, inferior citizens to the PAD and Bangkok people.

This dismissed solution is a common practice in civilized countries where the rule of law reigns, to prevent protests from escalating to bloodshed. It is among the first options anybody would think of as a common sense.

How is Thailand so uncommon that this simple and forthright solution can be overlooked? Or is Thailand so uniquely civilized that it holds the rule of law as disposable at will?

Or how are the intelligence, integrity and consistency if Thai intellectuals so uncommon that they could not think of a simple solution, using common sense.

I have found that there are many people who admit that they are partial, and see the necessity of their discrimination and arbitrary rule of law, because their cause is too critical.

They thus deliberately overlook this simple solution, because they hope to achieve the victory that is greater than the rule of law.

The political conflict of the past 2-3 years has taken us to the brink of disaster, because of such short-sightedness.

In conclusion, House dissolution or resignation? Or turning themselves in to the authorities, and continuing the rally in other appropriate places?

Please consider it with sobriety. Refrain from the urge to win at the expense of others, and do not let hatred take hold.

Now it is too late for a thorough solution, leaving only a choice between more or less destructive solutions for immediate results.

I am so tired of these press releases. But if anyone comes up with this proposal, I will be very grateful, and give my name in advance.

How many more times do we have to look at this article in this forum? I'm getting tired of having to pick it apart, which is easy to do, but time consuming. To make it short, when you have a winning hand you don't fold.

What required courage by the PAD leaders was to stand up and continue to stand up against this corrupt government. They have been doing this with risk to their lives, so have the other protesters. Jails are for crooks like Thaksin, not for people who want to bring them to justice.

This article aims to castrate the PAD movement and is nothing but propaganda.

The leaders of the PAD will face justice after all this is over. Maybe they will be convicted, maybe they will be found innocent, maybe HMK will pardon them. There are a few scenarios that can happen.

Personally, I hope, that after they bring down this corrupt government, that they will all get medals, for their efforts and courage on behalf of Thailand and it's citizens.

[kurtgruen]

if you dont want see it stop quoting it, easy but each time you do some else reads it and thats a good thig

You are right about the "stop quoting it part". Guess I was too tired to shorten it. Time to go to bed, I guess (before the wife wakes up and gives me that "What on Earth are you still doing on the computer look ;-)

[Moonrakers]

if you dont want see it stop quoting it, easy but each time you do some else reads it and thats a good thig

You are right about the "stop quoting it part". Guess I was too tired to shorten it. Time to go to bed, I guess (before the wife wakes up and gives me that "What on Earth are you still doing on the computer look ;-)

I've just had that very look.

[kurtgruen]

Two tourists from New Zealand visit the Government House on Sunday to witness the protests. They bought t-shirts as souvernir from a roadside stall.//Man Noipitak

From the Nation, I thought it was funny and a good way to end my night ;-)

[kurtgruen]

if you dont want see it stop quoting it, easy but each time you do some else reads it and thats a good thig

You are right about the "stop quoting it part". Guess I was too tired to shorten it. Time to go to bed, I guess (before the wife wakes up and gives me that "What on Earth are you still doing on the computer look ;-)

I've just had that very look.

Yeah, everytime, I might think that I am the boss, all it takes is that look for me to know different lol

[paulfromphuket]

The preoccupation some people have with rules and regulations is admirable, but very much a below decks characteristic where non commissioned ranks must focus on receiving and implementing orders.They don't normally tolerate much diversity of opinion.The officer class thinks a little differently.Obviously rules should normally be followed but occasionally there's a need for what the Royal Navy knows as the "Nelson touch".

Stand easy now (if that's the appropriate term to address someone hunched over their laptop).

Or, as my old Headmaster told us on the day we left school for the big real world, "rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools"!

can not agree with that, you must follow the rules or anarchy will rule! what a fantastic race in the F1 in belgium go hamo go

[Thai at Heart]

I can't help feeling, that PAD's issue is "Who" has their grip on business?

They are not fighting for the common man, the middle class, the unions. The have taken a very dangerous step of demonising the poorest part of society as the reason for the ill's Thailand is seeing today.

This is a very dangerous power game to prevent this current upstart, new money group getting far big for it's boots.

[kurtgruen]

By ROB GILLIES, Associated Press Writer

2 hours, 22 minutes ago

TORONTO - Canada's prime minister dissolved Parliament on Sunday and called an early election next month in hopes of strengthening his Conservative minority government's hold on power.

ADVERTISEMENT

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's party needs to win an additional 28 seats to have a majority in Parliament. Although he has played down that possibility, polls in recent days indicate his right wing party has a chance to do so.

The Oct. 14 election will be Canada's third ballot in four years.

Now there is one right wing crook, who disolved Parliament. Why can't Samak follow his example and do this the easy way? ;-)

[ETC]

Maybe the PAD PARTY should be replaced with PUP (PEOPLES UNITED PARTY) . A party that would win the hearts and minds of

all the people, PPP and PAD alike. Unless you can do that, your chance of real reform is but a wonderful dream. But then again, it has been said that "Dreams are what make life tolerable."

AFAIK there isn't a PAD Party! The PAD isn't a political party and not registered as one.

Cheers.

Thank you correcting me Reimer...My wife Boonchuay corrected me after I posted my article too.

[Meerkat]

It is the (minority) "power groups" who are threatened by democracy in Thailand. Hence their opposition to it.

And it is the majority poor, who are currently virtually powerless, who stand to gain a fair go through democratic system of government. Hence their support for it.

Exactly, the current bunch of businessmen in charge cannot tolerate PAD because they'd lose their grip on the country. The poor majority must not be allowed representation in parliament as per PAD's new politics proposal. Only candidates appointed and financed by big business are allowed to participate in electoral process.

>>>

Thanks for telling us about Hong Kong, CMsally. Half of their legislature is indeed selected, exactly like PAD proposes, but since their are "our" guys, papers like Economist call it a beacon of democracy in Asia, PAD, who doesn't kow tow to big business, are called fascist reactonaries instead.

Having subscribed to The Economist for much of the last 20 years, and having had a part-time home for work in HK since '94, I'm struggling to think of an edition lauding HK as a beacon of democracy in Asia. Maybe I missed an issue...

The system there is abominable - as the BBC states in its article on the elections today, a Legislator can be voted in from a constituency of as few as 144 voters. That Legislator has as much weight as one voted in by a geographical constituency of hundreds of thousands. It's a wonky system that only remains in place because the people of HK realise that when it all comes down to it, the guys wielding their little red books have the ultimate say so they don't want to push it too far. Even that hasn't stopped some mass demonstrations (half a million out of a total population of around 6.5m - beat those numbers, Sondhi) towards greater "democracy". They were peaceful marches though; no prizes for guessing what would happen if they took over government offices there.

I'm reminded somewhat of CH Tung's (HK's first leader post-'97) outrage at being designated "Chief Executive-select" rather than "-elect" by the press. "But I was elected!" cried he. "Yes, but by a cabal of a few hundred hand-picked by Beijing selectors" replied the media...

Having said all that, even that system is better than the one PAD proposes (it's a photo finish though). In HK those members of each industry (actually just a sprinkling of the largest sectors) get to vote; the functional constituency Legislators are "elected". PAD doesn't talk of "election" but "selection". PAD's proposal of "New Politics" doesn't stem from any altruistic notion of better representation, but from a view that the lower classes are buggering up the middle classes' cozy existence by voting the "wrong way". Huge difference. I admit that your personal interpretation of "New Politics" is closer to HK and Macau's less extreme farce than Suriyasai's.

Don't forget too that "New Politics" codifies military involvement in civil government if such conditions as "the government performs poorly" are met. It is a crock. It was a huge PR disaster for Suriyasai to proclaim it and Sondhi to expand upon it. That some people can still desperately try to spin it into something more palatable is a wonder to behold (and that usually only happens after attempts to say "It was only put forward once!" are somewhat compromised by the PAD insisting on continuing to put it forward.) A helpful hint to Sondhi and Co. : next time around don't let on about your absurd anti-democratic ideals until after the revolution.

And there are posters here who take everything Economist (or WSJ) says as a god given gospel on democracy.

Possibly (though unlikely IMO. I tend to think that posters here - even those I'm politically opposed to - as being intelligent enough to disagree with something they read even if it's in a publication with which they usually agree, and vice versa. YMMV.)

Tell you what though; had I such a narrow mind that I wasn't able to take in more than one media outlet's opinion at a time, I'd happily take The Economist

[kurtgruen]

/quote]

look guys and girls its was worth reading but stop quoting it unless we need a reminder about clairty

About what? lol

Anyways, Phi Nong,

I'm tired and off to bed. See you all tomorrow

Good night.

P.S. I keep getting PM's, but haven't figured out how to answer them, without being taken away from the forum and having to click my way all the way back afterwards. So my replies will have to wait until tomorrow..... and yes, Permanent_Disorder, I will check out the Union Forum tomorrow, when I get a chance and answer your questions about Thai Unions, or find you someone more knowledgeable, who can answer them for you.

Cheers

[paulfromphuket]

good nite all.

BANGKOK - Despite the relative calm following PAD intrusions into several government offices, the world media continue to claim that the country has collapsed into anarchy and chaos. As ordinary Thais go to their daily jobs and lives<SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Tahoma">, The New York Times writes<SPAN style="COLOR: #333333"> that the “government has been shut down and social order revoked by an organized army of over a million protestors.” Even though only three schools near the Government House have suspended classes, CNN has placed all Thailand-related stories under a flaming banner reading “Civil War in

[paulfromphuket]

good nite all.

BANGKOK - Despite the relative calm following PAD intrusions into several government offices, the world media continue to claim that the country has collapsed into anarchy and chaos. As ordinary Thais go to their daily jobs and lives<SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Tahoma">, The New York Times writes<SPAN style="COLOR: #333333"> that the "government has been shut down and social order revoked by an organized army of over a million protestors." Even though only three schools near the Government House have suspended classes, CNN has placed all Thailand-related stories under a flaming banner reading "Civil War in

shame that post not work it was very funny

link was http://www.notthenation.com/pages/news/getnews.php?id=575

enjoy

[pumpuiman]

I can not believe that people support this.

The PAD's leaders however are neither liberals nor democrats.A gruesome bunch of reactionary businessmen,generals and aristocrats, they demand not fresh elections,which they would lose, but "new politics" -in fact a return to old fashioned authoritarian rule with a mostly appointed parliament and powers for the army to step in when it chooses"

A solution to corruption in Thai politics is needed.......but backing the PAD's agenda is not the answer.....OBVIOUSLY.

Only if you take the top quote as a fact, which I don't.

I see students, Union workers and Union officials, the middle class, the poor and just a lot of average citizens protesting. Plus a lot of academics. Until this corrupt government gets disolved, I am with the PAD and these Protesters on this.

Ok, even if it were the poor downtrodden masses who were protesting and closing airports......you still support the following....

"new politics" -in fact a return to old fashioned authoritarian rule with a mostly appointed parliament and powers for the army to step in when it chooses"

I just can not fathom why anyone would support military oversight and the elimination of democracy.

THIS IS WHAT PAD WANTS, THIS IS THEIR GOAL...SONDHI HAS REPEATEDLY STATED THIS...THIS IS FACT AND YOU SUPPORT THIS?

I apologize for yelling....but PAD is NOT the answer.

The government PAD is proposing, that would be something worth forcefully taking down (because it could not be done democratically)

Supporting PAD is like saying..."I don't want to be involved in my future governments decisions" and "Please hold a gun to my head"

That strikes me as quite funny, because by supporting PAD, I am actually quite involved in the governments decisions right now. So is PAD.

PAD does not want to emiminate democracy, but I guess on the internet, you can say anything you want (regardless if it is the truth or not), so fill your boots, as far as I'm concerned. While you are busy brainwashing the feeble minded, I will continue to drum up international Union support for their brothers over here and when I get a chance in between, I'll try to make some intelligent posts.

About your other point....you have been living in a country with no democracy, in which the military can take control at any given time too, so why are you here, if you don't like it? Do you think this is democracy....vote buying, a government protecting and aiding criminals. What about starting a new Party, everytime you get banned. What about attempting to change the Constitution, just so your Party won't get disolved??? You can keep your idea of democracy, I don't want it.

I think that the future, after the PPP gets disolved, will give us at least a chance at real democracy. (I'm not so optimistic as to proclaim that we will have it for sure) Right now, the PAD is democracy in action....Peaceful civil disobedience to bring down a corrupt, illegal government.

I see it as my duty to do whatever I can to help the PAD in their struggle to remove this corrupt government from power, because my wife and I and our daughter live in this country. I have been an active Union member and Social Democrat for most of my life, so if you think that I stand for the elimination of democracy, you are way off base. Maybe it's time for you too examine the issues and parties involved a little closer, instead of just repeating government propaganda?

Yes, I admit, that different interest groups followowing PAD's lead are involved for different reasons. I'm here, because I want to see organized labour thrive in this country and I want to see a corrupt government fall. As a social democrat (borderline socialist), I also want to see real chances and help for the poor of this nation.

It makes me angry, when people claim, that the TRT/PPP are the defenders of the poor. The truth couldn't be further from it. Throwing a few crumbs to keep the poor from rebelling, hinders real change more, than doing nothing at all. You also cannot build an ethical system on corruption. You have to tear it down first and start over.

Of course a lot of the FATCATS don't want to see change. Change scares them. It might affect their standard of living or their personal security. They are quite happy having a handful of slaves running around, doing their work for them.

And then we have some white guys, who come over here, thinking that it is their God-Given right to have servants doing all their work for them, just because they where fortunate enough to be born in a Western Country. They complain, if the cost of living goes up, even so it is still way less than back home. They fear any change, because of course, they like things cheap and people desperate enough to work on their cars for peanuts.

So yes, maybe the real enemy is me...the guy who wants to see the poor empowered, fair wages for good work, an end to child labour, an end to exploitation. and an end to corruption. The question remains...who's enemy?

But you still support "new politics". This is clearly not democratic and includes military oversight.

Is this what your using as a selling point to the unions your trying to organize? Military oversight and unfair representation would not fly with either of the two unions I am an active member of.

I want to see the poor empowered, fair wages for good work, an end to child labor, an end to exploitation and an end to corruption just as much as you, but will not give up a democracy to do it.

Perhaps some have considered the PAD as a quick fix, letting their anger and frustration with Thaksin/Samak/TRT/PPP cloud their judgment. Sure, it would be nice to fix it all in one fell swoop but PAD does not fix it. Their plan leaves traces of cancer after the growth has been removed.

The majority needs to vote. Thats how we do it at all the union meetings I've been to. Every contract vote has been ratified by a majority vote...in twenty five years of being involved in unions my vote has always been counted.

The PAD's "new politics" don't allow all the votes to be counted.

Plain and simple.

The PAD allows for military oversight. Would you allow management to step in and change the contract if they felt it wasn't to their liking?

It's a marvelous uprising. Everybody in yellow singing songs in the pouring rain...Marvelous.... The speeches about freedom and the end of corruption....The movie stars appearing on the stage...the free food....I can understand how some may be excited by the show. A union organizers dream of solidarity.

"NEW POLITICS" IS THEIR GOAL. "NEW POLITICS" REMOVES THE POWER FROM THE PEOPLE. "NEW POLITICS" IS NOT DEMOCRATIC.

The system is broken, but PAD's answer is sadly not the right one. It's too bad their not proposing something that could promote a fair democracy in Thailand. If they were...I'd help organize.