State Of Emergency Announced In Bangkok

[Thanh-BKK]

Yes.

I second that. It's to make sure to get rid of Samak/PPP BEFORE they can amend the constitution and the laws in a way that their "other issues" can NOT be "dealt with in the courts" anymore. Because THAT is THEIR goal.

Don't you just love to be a powerful politician? You can be the greatest criminal - as you have the power to amend the exisiting laws to become "untouchable".

Thaksin, who should be in jail along with his wife, would be a free man and probably even in a high-ranking government position if Samak would not experience this "little disturbance" from the PAD. Feudalistic or not, at least they're making sure the PPP and Samak can't run the whole country to their personal benefits ONLY, like Thaksin did.

Regards.....

Thanh

[Meerkat]

Unless the corridors of power are filled with more or less honest people, there will be no progress in any other public sphere. Since Thaksin came to power Thai politicians desire for complete control has grown exponentially. Parlamentary control, Senate contorl, media control, judiciary control, academia control - they want it all. Current bunch are just as greedy, though not as successful.

If you want to reform Thai society, you should start from cleaning up the politics.

I know some people are for a complete history and society overhaul but it's simply not possible. If you want to start somewhere - it's the politics, not traffic cops or Customs Dept.

>>>>

According to Economist's own Democratic index that emphasises electoral democracy, Hong Kong is still ahead of Thailand.

ARDA index takes broader criteria than that, like civil rights and media freedom and participation and representation. Freedom House (Econimist index) talks about rules and regulations (like trial by a jury) , rather than actual experience.

Obviously, HK system works for its people. Everybody knows that.

Only up to a point. As I've already said, compared to what it was like before then, Hongkongers are (perhaps ironically) better represented now. But it is certainly not enough for them. Were it that way, you wouldn't see the tens of thousands of people marching for more democracy each and every year since the Handover. 500,000 a few years ago. There was outcry earlier this year when China yet again pushed back the start of more direct elections. Had the British managed to introduce full direct elections at an earlier stage, only for China to then roll them back, they'd need tanks in the street for sure. Britain/Patten knew this, and it was obviously important for this not to happen, thus the limited voting that they chose instead.

The functional constituency system is used to counter the pro-democracy parties which generally get a majority/plurality (no idea on this year's numbers). Democracy is seen as dangerous to Beijing and they're scared of it spreading over the border (and they've got a point. Were it to be introduced there tomorrow, the resulting social chaos would make the break-up of the USSR look like a walk in the park. Just because I don't want to see Thailand's fledgling democracy torn up doesn't mean I'm always blindly for democracy.) The functional constituencies are usually dominated by pro-China business leaders (many run unopposed). Not because they are against democracy per-se, but they don't want to rock China's boat and potentially damage their economy (read wallets). It is the so-called "Let's all just shut up and make money" vote. Go speak to people on the street and even those who confess to voting for the anti-democracy parties for this reason still want more democracy, not less. It's just that China has a huge Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads. Same reason btw why self-censorship is so prevalent there.

And bear in mind too that HK's system doesn't have Legislators selected, as Sondhi would like. Even in the functional constituencies, they are still voted in by the relevant FC members.

Start with the courts and go clearing up politics and the rest from there. This is IMO what was commanded from above a couple of years ago. This is what we are seeing now - even today. It is a good thing. It is progress. It takes time though. Rash attempts at fixing the system like Sondhi's will push the country backwards, not forwards.

[kurtgruen]

until his next court case, whether it's hearing the appeal on his conviction and 2 year prison sentence for defamation case, or his bribery acceptance in the 6.7 Billion Baht Bangkok firetruck case, or his abuse of power case while serving as Bangkok Governor in 2004 to influence biddings on three garbage disposal projects worth 9.5 Billion Baht, or his abuse of power case involving the readmittance of ex-Interior Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung's son Duang Yoobamrung to the Royal Thai Army, or the corruption case involving his 120 Billion Baht hydro-power dam on the Mekong river.

Never mind PAD... he can't hardly keep up with his attorney meetings and court cases.

Well said :-)

[kurtgruen]

Seems like a good excuse to abolish democracy. --- The PM hosts a cooking show. Meanwhile, armed thugs are allowed to take over government property and run rampant in the streets. Is there any hope for this country?

Yeah.

Just that these "armed thugs" were neither armed nor thugs until the REAL armed thugs from the DAAD showed up. Then they (PAD) at least armed themselves, they're still not thugs yet - THAT is a government position.

Thanh

That's right. Armed (Pro-Government) thugs attacked protesters, who up to that point where gathered for a peaceful demonstration. Peaceful Civil Disobedience.

[kurtgruen]

Anyways, just wanted to say that it's been interesting posting and reading in this forum during the past couple of weeks. I'm sorry to say, that I don't have that much time anymore, at the moment, as I have a business to look after.

I will stop in when I can though, to try to straighten some of you Samak/Thaksin style government lovers out a little ;-)

Cheers

[h90]

from the nation:

If Samak convicted, PPP will elect him PM again: Kuthep

People Power Party spokesman Kuthep Saikrajan said Monday that if Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej is disqualified by the Constitution Court on Tuesday, his party would elect him as the prime minister again.

The court is scheduled to read its verdict in a case against Samak who was accused of violating the charter by hosting a TV programme for a private firm.

Kuthep said PPP MPs would vote to elect Samak as the prime minister again because they saw that Samak was he most suitable person for the post.

The Nation

[sriracha john]

They said the same 17 days ago as well, except it was a different mouthpiece then...

again, the precedent was set with Chaiya's reincarnation...

One of the problems with electing a criminal rioting gang leader like Jatuporn as an MP...

"There's nothing wrong with breaking rules"...

It's the same, same as Chaiya's return to the Samak Cabinet after he was thrown off of it by the courts...

PPP plan to vote Samak back in as PM

PPP MPs say they will re-elect Samak Sundaravej as PM if the Constitution Court disqualifies him from the position over his hosting of cooking shows on commercial television. The constitution prohibits a prime minister from holding any position in a partnership, company or an organisation involved in business with a view to sharing profits or income, or being an employee of any other person. If he is found guilty by the court, he will be stripped of the prime ministership. But PPP MP Jatuporn Promphan said yesterday the party will simply use its numbers in the House to vote him back into the position. Samak is accused of violating the constitution by hosting the cooking programs. Samak is scheduled to defend himself before the court on Sept 8. Jatuporn said party MPs would vote to reinstate Samak as head of the government if he is disqualified.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.net/220808_News/22Aug2008_news10.php

Edited September 8, 2008 by sriracha john

[ubonjoe]

Three options to end political deadlock : Senate speaker

By The Nation

There are three plausible options to end the ongoing political deadlock: the PM resignation, House dissolution, and an end to the anti-government rally, Senate Speaker Prasopsuk Boondet said Monday.

His comment came after a mediating meeting on MOnday at the Parliament which resulted in the nomination of Finance Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, who is also the ruling People Power Party secretary general, as the government negotiator.

The meeting concluded that both the government and the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) must soften their stance and reach at some form of compromise in order to end the political deadlock.

The PAD was not involved in the today talk yet but attempt is being made to get them on the table.

The meeting which involved Prasopsuk and others including opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and House speaker Chai Chidchob also led to the formation of an eight-person working committee.

Prasopsuk also met Army commanderinchief General Anupong Paochinda after the meeting to inform him of the progress. Anupong then reiterate to the senate speaker that the military will not use force to quell the PAD protesters and that there will be no coup d' etat. The army chief then told Prasopsuk that he believes that the current intiative by the parliament is the best method to solve the problem.

If Samak resigns, then a government acceptable to all sides could be established, said Prasopsuk, elaborating on the first option. The second option, involving the dissolution of the house, will automatically lead to a snap election. With option three, the PAD should end its protracted protest and its leaders submit itself to judicial review.

Surapong was also asked to personally talk to the prime minister in order to reduce tension and confrontation. The meeting concluded that both sides have become too "aggressive" and both sides must compromise.

The meeting was followed by a meeting amongst leaders of all major parties. Mun Patanothai, deputy premier and minister of Communication Technology and leader of Puea Pandin Party said they will meet again after Surapong have met with Samak.

Pracharaj Party leader Snoh Thienthong said the meeting took place under a good environment by all parties and expect to see a breakthrough soon.

However, Suwit Khunkitti, another senior politician, said the PM should consider resigning or dissolve the house to show his spirit especially if Samak cannot end the current crisis. Suwit cited Japan and Canada as examples.

Surapong meanwhile said he's not worried about the task given to him and played down the suggestion of dissolution of the house as just another suggestion. He added that the ruling coalition was still solidly together.

[ubonjoe]

If Samak convicted, PPP will elect him PM again: Kuthep

People Power Party spokesman Kuthep Saikrajan said Monday that if Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej is disqualified by the Constitution Court on Tuesday, his party would elect him

as the prime minister again.

The court is scheduled to read its verdict in a case against Samak who was accused of violating the charter by hosting a TV programme for a private firm.

Kuthep said PPP MPs would vote to elect Samak as the prime minister again because they saw that Samak was he most suitable person for the post.

The Nation

[cmsally]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

It is a battle against Samak and Thaksin and nothing else.

In this case you are inferring that should the PPP be still running the country as an elected government, without these 2 people in a position of power, then the PAD would disband and go home. Don't you think there is just a slight possibility that the PAD would decry the next leader to be a puppet of the 2 former leaders?

You are predicting that without these 2 on the scene the protests would end in total tomorrow. Can you honestly say that you believe that?

[Nampeung]

What the PAD really want... an interview (scroll down)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JI09Ae01.html

[h90]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

It is a battle against Samak and Thaksin and nothing else.

In this case you are inferring that should the PPP be still running the country as an elected government, without these 2 people in a position of power, then the PAD would disband and go home. Don't you think there is just a slight possibility that the PAD would decry the next leader to be a puppet of the 2 former leaders?

You are predicting that without these 2 on the scene the protests would end in total tomorrow. Can you honestly say that you believe that?

Of course the PPP is no party it is a vehicle for Thaksin. And the PPP is anyhow on the way to get dissolved due to their election fraud. So you can hardly argue that they are democratic elected, it is just a bunch of criminals. Or do you know the ideology of this "party", are the socialists, communists, liberal, fascists or what?

[cmsally]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

It is a battle against Samak and Thaksin and nothing else.

In this case you are inferring that should the PPP be still running the country as an elected government, without these 2 people in a position of power, then the PAD would disband and go home. Don't you think there is just a slight possibility that the PAD would decry the next leader to be a puppet of the 2 former leaders?

You are predicting that without these 2 on the scene the protests would end in total tomorrow. Can you honestly say that you believe that?

Of course the PPP is no party it is a vehicle for Thaksin. And the PPP is anyhow on the way to get dissolved due to their election fraud. So you can hardly argue that they are democratic elected, it is just a bunch of criminals. Or do you know the ideology of this "party", are the socialists, communists, liberal, fascists or what?

So in other words if the PPP regroup under a different name and without Samak as the leader there will still be protests from the PAD. Right or wrong?

[blaze]

Yes.

I second that. It's to make sure to get rid of Samak/PPP BEFORE they can amend the constitution and the laws in a way that their "other issues" can NOT be "dealt with in the courts" anymore. Because THAT is THEIR goal.

Don't you just love to be a powerful politician? You can be the greatest criminal - as you have the power to amend the exisiting laws to become "untouchable".

Thaksin, who should be in jail along with his wife, would be a free man and probably even in a high-ranking government position if Samak would not experience this "little disturbance" from the PAD. Feudalistic or not, at least they're making sure the PPP and Samak can't run the whole country to their personal benefits ONLY, like Thaksin did.

Regards.....

Thanh

They get rid of Samak- get rid of the PPP- they are still faced with the problems which the "new politics' aims to correct. (The best way to fix the problems in democracy, Sondhi et al appear to believe, is to simply replace democracy with a non-democratic system- and then- call that new system ' true democracy' ).

Flush with two major victories in two years, it's hard to believe that the leadership will not rally the troops for one final battle- this one to dismantle the current system by which 'the people' determine who governs them.

Certainly they will not initially have the numbers they currently have- (I expect most of the rank and file gave up critical and analytical thinking about ten days ago and are now motivated by pure self righteous hatred- like the audience at a Victorian melodrama hissing the villain- or at a public hanging= and now that the villains have been run out of town on, will go home)- but for how long... sooner or later, under the current system the poor majority will elect another government which threatens that status quo- and it will all start again- I think Sondhi understands that and that's why for him- it is not just PAD vs Thaksin/Samak- it is PAD vs the political system.

Edited September 8, 2008 by blaze

[Thai at Heart]

What the PAD really want... an interview (scroll down)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JI09Ae01.html

As I mentioned the first time I pulled a link from Mr. Crispin I asked for it to be removed if it was a spoof. So if we assume it is an honest article.

Well it begs a few very obvious questions?

1. Who gets to decide the 70%? Why not 30:70? Why not 90/10? How about 0:100?

2. Why is he bothering to mention his negotiating stance on this website, when he still refuses to countenance any negotiation at the moment?

3. Does he finally realise he can't win outright?

If this was a negotiation, I would wait until the next article arises and see if this middle? (slightly modified massively anti-democratic)ground moves even further.

4. Why is his opinion any more valid than all the academics who got their degrees from overseas? Or the poor, ill-educated farmer for that matter? Since when did bankrupting a media business provide insight into the why's and wherefores of writing constitutions?

5. Would someone please explain to me why it is the voting system that needs to change as opposed to the legal system?

6. Why can't Thailand have a pure democracy?

Edited September 8, 2008 by Thai at Heart

[h90]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

It is a battle against Samak and Thaksin and nothing else.

In this case you are inferring that should the PPP be still running the country as an elected government, without these 2 people in a position of power, then the PAD would disband and go home. Don't you think there is just a slight possibility that the PAD would decry the next leader to be a puppet of the 2 former leaders?

You are predicting that without these 2 on the scene the protests would end in total tomorrow. Can you honestly say that you believe that?

Of course the PPP is no party it is a vehicle for Thaksin. And the PPP is anyhow on the way to get dissolved due to their election fraud. So you can hardly argue that they are democratic elected, it is just a bunch of criminals. Or do you know the ideology of this "party", are the socialists, communists, liberal, fascists or what?

So in other words if the PPP regroup under a different name and without Samak as the leader there will still be protests from the PAD. Right or wrong?

there will be the same criminals so I am sure they will protest again as soon as they do something that harms Thailand.

If they regroup with different, good people....than not.....but that is not probable.

[Plus]

As I've already said, compared to what it was like before then, Hongkongers are (perhaps ironically) better represented now. But it is certainly not enough for them. Were it that way, you wouldn't see the tens of thousands of people marching for more democracy each and every year since the Handover.

Sure they want the universal suffrage, but, as far as I understand, it's linked to having more independence from Beijing rather than having better government.

Regarding their campaign for universal suffrage there's this quote on Wiki:

" Despite this, the pro-democratic camp insisted on promoting their agenda, which seemed to backfire when the campaign lost its original momentum. This was not helped by various sex and financial scandals of a few pro-democracy candidates. There were some allegations by the pro-democracy camp of Mainland Chinese influence behind this."

And, according to the same article, in the last elections pro-democracy camp actually gained seats among non-elected MPs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_leg..._election,_2004

Please look at the bottom line - they had half elected parliament for nearly twenty years, and it served them rather well.

>>>>

That Namphueng's link to Sondhi's interview should be made a sticky.

There's a huge gap between what Sondhi says himself and what is attributed to him by various posters.

For example:

"ATol: Should the military have a role in appointing the people who are appointed to a "new politics" parliament?

Sondhi: No. "

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JI09Ae01.html

[Plus]

1. Who gets to decide the 70%?

One thing is sure - not Sondhi. The proposal calls for academics and the civil society to decide on the best formula.

2. Why is he bothering to mention his negotiating stance on this website, when he still refuses to countenance any negotiation at the moment?

I see only confirmation of his well known stance:

"So our stance is very firm: Samak and this government need to go first before we will sit down and negotiate with anybody."

4. Why is his opinion any more valid than all the academics who got their degrees from overseas?

Maybe because they " invented a bloody constitution which does not work for Thailand." I mean, it really doesn't work, does it?

5. Would someone please explain to me why it is the voting system that needs to change as opposed to the legal system?

No legal system can cope with this amount of offences. There's a fatal design flaw in Thai politics - there shouldn't be so many transgressions in a properly working system.

[Thai at Heart]

1. Who gets to decide the 70%?

One thing is sure - not Sondhi. The proposal calls for academics and the civil society to decide on the best formula.

2. Why is he bothering to mention his negotiating stance on this website, when he still refuses to countenance any negotiation at the moment?

I see only confirmation of his well known stance:

"So our stance is very firm: Samak and this government need to go first before we will sit down and negotiate with anybody."

4. Why is his opinion any more valid than all the academics who got their degrees from overseas?

Maybe because they " invented a bloody constitution which does not work for Thailand." I mean, it really doesn't work, does it?

5. Would someone please explain to me why it is the voting system that needs to change as opposed to the legal system?

No legal system can cope with this amount of offences. There's a fatal design flaw in Thai politics - there shouldn't be so many transgressions in a properly working system.

And 6?

[LaoPo]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

I couldn't have said it better.

The obsessed tunnel vision some posters have against members of the present and former governments, or entire government at all, is almost sickening. The day-in-day-out posts they write have nothing to do anymore with the reality and future of Thailand.

These same people will ALWAYS find a new target to bash upon to filter their own narrow minded views.

It's the same as if some obsessed Thai people would write and object against (members of) governments in the countries they live in, abroad.

Having an opinion is nothing wrong with but to make it a personal battle is something one has to think about twice. Trying to be objective is not their strongest point; on the contrary, they can't even listen or try to accept views from others which differ from theirs.

The complete Thai system and society is so deeply rotten that the people behind the Thai velvet curtains are now even trying to to overthrow the democratically elected and formed coalition government because the PM showed up in a cooking show and the same afore mentioned posters go along with that...

The ENTIRE world will look and almost laugh themselves to death if the Thai government is overthrown because of a cooking PM..........

It's just sick; speaking about losing face for Thailand....

LaoPo

[way2muchcoffee]

What the PAD really want... an interview (scroll down)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JI09Ae01.html

As I mentioned the first time I pulled a link from Mr. Crispin I asked for it to be removed if it was a spoof. So if we assume it is an honest article.

Well it begs a few very obvious questions?

1. Who gets to decide the 70%? Why not 30:70? Why not 90/10? How about 0:100?

To be determined after vigorous and public debate I would imagine.

2. Why is he bothering to mention his negotiating stance on this website, when he still refuses to countenance any negotiation at the moment?

That is disingenuous. They have only set the resignation of Samak as a condition for negotiation.

3. Does he finally realise he can't win outright?

If this was a negotiation, I would wait until the next article arises and see if this middle? (slightly modified massively anti-democratic)ground moves even further.

Eh?

4. Why is his opinion any more valid than all the academics who got their degrees from overseas? Or the poor, ill-educated farmer for that matter? Since when did bankrupting a media business provide insight into the why's and wherefores of writing constitutions?

You mean SOME of the academics, certainly not all. Why are the opinions of those academics he chooses not to listen to more correct than the opinions of the academics he does listen to?

5. Would someone please explain to me why it is the voting system that needs to change as opposed to the legal system?

As the present government is primarily concerned with changing the legal system to favor cheating in the voting system, I don't think the two are separate issues.

6. Why can't Thailand have a pure democracy?

Indeed. Why can't any country have a pure democracy? Evidently the wealthy and powerful always get in the way.

Edited September 8, 2008 by way2muchcoffee

[JoeInSurin]

Seems like a good excuse to abolish democracy. --- The PM hosts a cooking show. Meanwhile, armed thugs are allowed to take over government property and run rampant in the streets. Is there any hope for this country?

Yeah.

Just that these "armed thugs" were neither armed nor thugs until the REAL armed thugs from the DAAD showed up. Then they (PAD) at least armed themselves, they're still not thugs yet - THAT is a government position.

Thanh

The PAD armed thugs took over the NBT station with semi-automatic weapons, clubs, golf clubs ect. and many had drugs on them. This happened before the illegal take over of the Government House and before the DAAD ralley. You don't have any idea what you are talking about.

[LaoPo]

What the PAD really want... an interview (scroll down)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JI09Ae01.html

Asia Times (owned by Sondhi Limthongkul...Mr. PAD) went bankrupt in 1997 but an online edition, run by some of Asia Times former staff, continues to operate Asia Times Online.

I highly doubt if the present Asia Times Online is 100% objective and/or has no (behind the scenes) ties/connections with Sondhi anymore...

Remember, Sondhi was infamous for hiding companies, entities and assets overseas...the same as his former close friend and ally, Mr. T. did.

It's a bluddy mess, the whole system and ALL people involved.

LaoPo

[JoeInSurin]

Has any of you actually ever experienced how this sort of situation goes in Europe?

Here we have a somewhat peaceful sit-in at the government house (essentially public property, so why shouldn't "the public" be there??) and it only got violent when "the other site" marched up, intoxicated, under police escort, weapons in hand.

In Europe, you'd have one group against the other, BOTH against the police and all of them against every piece of property they can get their hands on - broken windows, looted shops, cars up in flames. Ok it won't last two weeks but which version do you prefer??

Best regards.....

Thanh

The Government house is public property , so why shouldn't they be there? You have got to be joking. As a US citizen do I have the right to go sleep in the White House with George Bush? Can I go break down the door of the US Capital and live in it? Can I break down the door to Fort Knox and sit on the money because I am a citizen? There is no excuse for what the PAD has done. They have every right to protest as they were doing before but have now gone way over the line in breaking the law.

[cmsally]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

It is a battle against Samak and Thaksin and nothing else.

In this case you are inferring that should the PPP be still running the country as an elected government, without these 2 people in a position of power, then the PAD would disband and go home. Don't you think there is just a slight possibility that the PAD would decry the next leader to be a puppet of the 2 former leaders?

You are predicting that without these 2 on the scene the protests would end in total tomorrow. Can you honestly say that you believe that?

Of course the PPP is no party it is a vehicle for Thaksin. And the PPP is anyhow on the way to get dissolved due to their election fraud. So you can hardly argue that they are democratic elected, it is just a bunch of criminals. Or do you know the ideology of this "party", are the socialists, communists, liberal, fascists or what?

So in other words if the PPP regroup under a different name and without Samak as the leader there will still be protests from the PAD. Right or wrong?

there will be the same criminals so I am sure they will protest again as soon as they do something that harms Thailand.

If they regroup with different, good people....than not.....but that is not probable.

So in other words what you said before:

It is a battle against Samak and Thaksin and nothing else.

is not correct , it covers a much wider range of factors and these factors can be interpreted to PAD'S advantage along the way.

This is what most people are arguing about. The constraints of the PAD's demands are far to fluid to gauge what their real objectives and demands are.

I think you will have to agree on that as you have pretty much proved that by yourself!

[way2muchcoffee]

The Government house is public property , so why shouldn't they be there? You have got to be joking. As a US citizen do I have the right to go sleep in the White House with George Bush? Can I go break down the door of the US Capital and live in it? Can I break down the door to Fort Knox and sit on the money because I am a citizen? There is no excuse for what the PAD has done. They have every right to protest as they were doing before but have now gone way over the line in breaking the law.

Sit-ins are illegal, nevertheless, they are a part of the arsenal of nearly every protest group.

Other illegal things protest groups do: disrupt conferences, block railroad tracks, chain themselves to trucks/tractors, boycott buses, labor strikes (not so illegal anymore, but certainly in the past), disrupt services, block roads, disrupt fishing vessels, spike trees, remove road signs, defy law enforcement officers, etc. etc. etc.

The 'disobedience' part of 'civil disobedience' means breaking the law, almost by definition.

Edited September 8, 2008 by way2muchcoffee

[Koo82]

The ENTIRE world will look and almost laugh themselves to death if the Thai government is overthrown because of a cooking PM..........

Let's wait until 2pm tomorrow. I'll laugh my head off first. Only in Thailand. What a great reason to pull a Prime Minister

[LaoPo]

The ENTIRE world will look and almost laugh themselves to death if the Thai government is overthrown because of a cooking PM..........

Let's wait until 2pm tomorrow. I'll laugh my head off first. Only in Thailand. What a great reason to pull a Prime Minister

Indeed.

The greatest lunatic show on Earth...only in Thailand.

Can you imagine the hundreds of Champagne Bottles popping tomorrow evening at many dinner parties in the 5* Hotels where the "behind the curtains BKK Boys & Girls" enjoy their meals, cheering:

WE DID IT....WE TOPPLED THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THE PM WAS COOKING ON TELEVISION

I can't wait to see the headlines in the West. How deep has Thailand sunken....

The Titanic drama is a bath tub toy piece in comparison what happens here.

LaoPo

[koosdeboer]

It seems to me a lot of people here are missing the point about the current conflict. This is not a battle against Thaksin, Samak, the PPP or the TRT.

It is a battle where by a minority want to overturn a democratic system in favour of a grossly socially inequitable feudalistic form of government.

Thailand is a corrupt country relative to western democracies. It is a developing democracy moving from a feudal system through an absolute Monarchy to a democratic Monarchy. There will be winners and losers in such a change. However, the power-brokers of today wish to turn back the clock to a more archaic form of government which is generally not accepted in western countries which have already undergone this political evolutionary process in past centuries.

The sins of Samak or Thaksin are not an issue here. They can be dealt with by the courts. What really is at stake here is Thailands future as a developing democracy and its future in developing from a basically third world country into a modern economic world partner.

Its far too easy (and emotive I would add) to focus on the politically "hot" topics of the day and to not see the bigger picture.

I couldn't have said it better.

The obsessed tunnel vision some posters have against members of the present and former governments, or entire government at all, is almost sickening. The day-in-day-out posts they write have nothing to do anymore with the reality and future of Thailand.

These same people will ALWAYS find a new target to bash upon to filter their own narrow minded views.

It's the same as if some obsessed Thai people would write and object against (members of) governments in the countries they live in, abroad.

Having an opinion is nothing wrong with but to make it a personal battle is something one has to think about twice. Trying to be objective is not their strongest point; on the contrary, they can't even listen or try to accept views from others which differ from theirs.

The complete Thai system and society is so deeply rotten that the people behind the Thai velvet curtains are now even trying to to overthrow the democratically elected and formed coalition government because the PM showed up in a cooking show and the same afore mentioned posters go along with that...

The ENTIRE world will look and almost laugh themselves to death if the Thai government is overthrown because of a cooking PM..........

It's just sick; speaking about losing face for Thailand....

LaoPo

Lao Po

You are sick. It's a joke to have a cook as prime minister. You are the one who is narrow minded. If Taksin, Samak and friends were not so corrupt there would not be a PAD at all.

Why are you bashing at Sondhi? I'm not a fan of him but I'm certainly not a fan of this Taksin and Samak basterds who only think about themself and their ego's.

Even if they are elected "democrationaly" they still have to serve the Thai people and not themself and their cronies and family.

Wake up. It's not only the people in governmenthouse but there are millions who are silent but supporting of Pad even though they don't agree with everything. There are so many people even in Chiangmai who hate Samak and Taksin but don't dare to raise their voice because that's dangerous because of this government supporters who now go after everybody in yellow supported by the fine boys of the PPP. Sick. sick

[koosdeboer]

The ENTIRE world will look and almost laugh themselves to death if the Thai government is overthrown because of a cooking PM..........

Let's wait until 2pm tomorrow. I'll laugh my head off first. Only in Thailand. What a great reason to pull a Prime Minister

Indeed.

The greatest lunatic show on Earth...only in Thailand.

Can you imagine the hundreds of Champagne Bottles popping tomorrow evening at many dinner parties in the 5* Hotels where the "behind the curtains BKK Boys & Girls" enjoy their meals, cheering:

WE DID IT....WE TOPPLED THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THE PM WAS COOKING ON TELEVISION

I can't wait to see the headlines in the West. How deep has Thailand sunken....

The Titanic drama is a bath tub toy piece in comparison what happens here.

LaoPo

Thats the only thing Samak is good in, cooking and eating like a pig. He is a laughing stock as prime minister