Pad Rallies At British Embassy In Bangkok

[Plus]

they still hold Thailand hostage

It's Thaksin who holds Thailand hostage, not PAD.

Look how this "Thai" government is using state owned TV channel to broadcast Thaksin's live address.

[younghusband]

Does it really make one blind of difference if the PAD protestors are paid or not ?

They still break the law, they still hold Thailand hostage, and the support amongst the Thai population might be at an all time low.

Time to go home, go back to work, and make yourself heard at the next elections...

I see more sympathy for PAD and no less support than I have seen in the past. The recent funerals gave them sme credibility (even though the need for the funerals were sad). Being shot by tear gas with RDX and then guns .. bombs ... grenades ... shows people what the stakes are.

The PAD has been looking to provoke violence for several months, and they have now had some success.The purpose is of course to find a catalyst for a military coup from which point they believe it will be easier to impose their reactionary and quasi-fascist "New Politics".Your statement that recent funerals have given them credibility is I am afraid rather naive.In truth the exploitation by PAD of these tragic deaths for political expediency was an act of gross stupidity.It was interesting that at the recent funerals the PAD mob banged and shook General Anupong's car in their frustration that military intervention has not -so far-happened.

I would question your assumption that PAD has been receiving more support , but frankly I doubt whether you have the faintest idea other than fragmentary anecdotal evidence.

[sjaak327]

they still hold Thailand hostage

It's Thaksin who holds Thailand hostage, not PAD.

Look how this "Thai" government is using state owned TV channel to broadcast Thaksin's live address.

Whilst I'm not going to claim that Thaksin doesn't have any influence, I'm sure a Thaksin address is much easier to avoid then thousands of people blocking Sukhumvit, closing down airports, trying to take siege of parliament, and a few things I have forgottten

[Mobi]

Thaksin back or Tesco out!!

From today's Daily Telegraph:

Thousands protest outside British embassy in Bangkok over Thaksin extradition

Thousands of protesters rallied outside the British embassy in Bangkok on Thursday demanding the extradition of Thaksin Shinawatra, as political tension in the deeply divided city seems in danger of boiling over again.

By Thomas Bell in Bangkok

Last Updated: 1:52AM GMT 31 Oct 2008

People protest outside British embassy in downtown Bangkok earlier this year

Protestors outside British embassy in downtown Bangkok shouted "Send Thaksin back" and sang the Beatles song Get Back.

Mr Thaksin, the former prime minister now seeking asylum in Britain, was last week convicted in absentia of a conflict of interest while in office and sentenced to two years imprisonment.

Outside the British embassy, the crowd chanted in English "Send Thaksin back" and sang the Beatles song Get Back, with the lyrics adapted to refer to Mr Thaksin, clapping along with plastic castanets.

It seemed a light-hearted scene, but at the end of the street the protesters' "security guards" stood by with iron bars and wooden clubs.

"The British people need to understand that they shouldn't protect a criminal," said a 50-year-old graphic designer at the protest who gave his name as Arvudh. "The land of gentlemen will lose its reputation," he claimed, referring to Britain.

The protest organisers went further, implying in a letter to the British ambassador Quinton Quayle that bilateral relations could be damaged if Mr Thaksin receives asylum in Britain.

"Our two countries should not allow an individual to test the strength of our partnership. More importantly, the British Government should not exchange its broader national interests and opportunities to expand its cooperation with Thailand for Thaksin," the group's leaders wrote.

One placard read "Thaksin back or Tesco out".

The protesters, from the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), also demanded that the elected government step down because it is linked to Mr Thaksin.

Earlier, at around 3 am, unknown attackers on a motorcycle hurled a bomb at PAD "security guards" at Government House, which the movement has illegally occupied since late August. Ten people were injured.

The bitter division between Mr Thaksin's supporters and enemies is threatening to drag Thailand into political chaos. Three people have already been killed in violent protests in recent weeks.

Mr Thaksin or his supporters have comfortably won Thailand's last three elections thanks to widespread support from the poor, who benefited from his populist economic policies.

But many in the Bangkok middle class were upset by Mr Thaksin's perceived corruption, while the elite in the royal palace and army perceived a threat to their traditional dominance in Mr Thaksin's electoral success. He was toppled by a military coup in 2006, only for his supporters to win elections at the end of last year.

To prevent the same thing from happening again, the PAD now wants to reduce the influence of the poor voters by having a parliament mostly appointed by the traditional elite.

Although they rarely draw crowds of more than a few thousand, the movement has powerful backers and has received public support from Queen Sirikit, the wife of Thailand's revered king.

Government supporters have formed a rival group called the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship (DAAD). On Saturday they will hold a rally in a stadium, to be addressed by Mr Thaksin by telephone. Some people fear the event could spark further violence.

Earlier this week PAD "security guards" kidnapped a group of terrified DAAD members and paraded them in front of PAD supporters who reportedly bayed for their blood.

A British embassy spokesman declined to comment on the state of Thai-British relations or on individual cases. "Extradition requests are decided in strict accordance with the law," he said.

[Jai Dee]

Senator suggests House dissolution

A senator believes lower House's dissolution would be the best solution for the country’s current political problem.

Gen Gen Lertrat Ratanavanich (เลิศรัตน์ รัตนวานิช), a senator, expressed his belief today (Octboer 31) that the House of Representatives’ dissolution would be the best solution to the country’s ongoing political problem. He also said that if Prime Minister Mr. Somchai Wongsawat chose to reshuffle the cabinet under existing six parties, it would not solve the problem.

The senator also urged all protesting groups to control the situation and prevent potential violent incidents from occuring because some group wanted to stir violence in the nation following eruption of untowards incidents during the past couple of days.

Regarding former premier Pol Lt Col Thaksin Shinawatra’s scheduled phone-in to the "Today’s Truth" mobile political talk show on November 1, Gen Lertrat suggested the phone-in should not be aired through the statee media for the sake of the government's legitimacy.

Source: National News Bureau of Thailand - 31 October 2008

[h90]

Does it really make one blind of difference if the PAD protestors are paid or not ?

They still break the law, they still hold Thailand hostage, and the support amongst the Thai population might be at an all time low.

Time to go home, go back to work, and make yourself heard at the next elections...

I see more sympathy for PAD and no less support than I have seen in the past. The recent funerals gave them sme credibility (even though the need for the funerals were sad). Being shot by tear gas with RDX and then guns .. bombs ... grenades ... shows people what the stakes are.

The PAD has been looking to provoke violence for several months, and they have now had some success.The purpose is of course to find a catalyst for a military coup from which point they believe it will be easier to impose their reactionary and quasi-fascist "New Politics".Your statement that recent funerals have given them credibility is I am afraid rather naive.In truth the exploitation by PAD of these tragic deaths for political expediency was an act of gross stupidity.It was interesting that at the recent funerals the PAD mob banged and shook General Anupong's car in their frustration that military intervention has not -so far-happened.

I would question your assumption that PAD has been receiving more support , but frankly I doubt whether you have the faintest idea other than fragmentary anecdotal evidence.

And again the new politics which we discussed many times has nothing to do with fascist.

[younghusband]

And again the new politics which we discussed many times has nothing to do with fascist.

I would have thought even someone like you would have realised by now it's not sufficient simply to deny.I say someone like you because you even argue the TRT coalition has no legitimacy putting their victory completely down to vote buying.The more intelligent PAD supporters don't take this fatuous line but sensibly concentrate on politicians' corruption and - in their view - the inappropriateness of the Western democratic model.If you wish in this instance to make a case, you need to define fascism and then argue why PAD doesn't fit into this definition.I don't agree with Giles Ungpakorn about everything by any means but his comments below on PAD's fascistic tendencies is on the money.

"Since late evening on the 6th October 2008, the ultra right-wing fascist mob which calls itself the “Peoples Alliance for Democracy” (PAD) laid plans to lay siege to the Thai parliament. They came prepared with iron bars and crash helmets. Their plan, as always, was to create chaos in the hope that the military would stage a coup or that the ruling party would once again be dissolved by the courts. Their claim is that the present government lead, by the Peoples Power Party or PPP (ex-Premier Thaksin’s Thai Rak Thai in another name), is “illegitimate”. The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections, proving that they are popular with the poor, who make up the majority of the population. This support from the poor is not surprising, since the party was the first elite party in 30 years to offer a universal health care scheme and public funds to develop the rural economy."

Edited October 31, 2008 by younghusband

[TAWP]

"The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections"

Since this socialist is more than happy to use false 'facts' to spice his posts, it's rather clear what his angle is.

[hammered]

And again the new politics which we discussed many times has nothing to do with fascist.

I would have thought even someone like you would have realised by now it's not sufficient simply to deny.I say someone like you because you even argue the TRT coalition has no legitimacy putting their victory completely down to vote buying.The more intelligent PAD supporters don't take this fatuous line but sensibly concentrate on politicians' corruption and - in their view - the inappropriateness of the Western democratic model.If you wish in this instance to make a case, you need to define fascism and then argue why PAD doesn't fit into this definition.I don't agree with Giles Ungpakorn about everything by any means but his comments below on PAD's fascistic tendencies is on the money.

"Since late evening on the 6th October 2008, the ultra right-wing fascist mob which calls itself the “Peoples Alliance for Democracy” (PAD) laid plans to lay siege to the Thai parliament. They came prepared with iron bars and crash helmets. Their plan, as always, was to create chaos in the hope that the military would stage a coup or that the ruling party would once again be dissolved by the courts. Their claim is that the present government lead, by the Peoples Power Party or PPP (ex-Premier Thaksin’s Thai Rak Thai in another name), is “illegitimate”. The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections, proving that they are popular with the poor, who make up the majority of the population. This support from the poor is not surprising, since the party was the first elite party in 30 years to offer a universal health care scheme and public funds to develop the rural economy."

So that Giles does not get misunderstood I think it fair to point out that huis piece in its entirety which I think was on Asia Sentinel (I cant be bothered to provide the link again, sorry) did advocate people froming a third side based around a people's movement. he was critical of both of the other sides and his analysis is pretty much Marxist seeing the development from Feudalism through capitalism with the elite always trying to retain control (note he describes TRT as an elite party).

It does now seem that we are moving into the arena of more deaths and violence. This will probably force an intervetnion of some kind at some time, but who will that favour and disadvantage?

[younghusband]

"The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections"

Since this socialist is more than happy to use false 'facts' to spice his posts, it's rather clear what his angle is.

Whatever you think of his politics Acharn Giles has a record of integrity.You simply demean yourself by making these cheap comments.

Equally importantly research your own facts.What Giles said about PPP/TRT election success is nothing more than the truth.

[sriracha john]

As Jack Nicholson, in character, would say... "You can't handle the truth."

PPP, did NOT by any stretch of imagination, win a "large majority in election"

[jdinasia]

"The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections"

Since this socialist is more than happy to use false 'facts' to spice his posts, it's rather clear what his angle is.

Whatever you think of his politics Acharn Giles has a record of integrity.You simply demean yourself by making these cheap comments.

Equally importantly research your own facts.What Giles said about PPP/TRT election success is nothing more than the truth.

ummmm help me out here, since when is less than 50% a 'majority'?

U

[sabaijai]

"The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections"

Since this socialist is more than happy to use false 'facts' to spice his posts, it's rather clear what his angle is.

Whatever you think of his politics Acharn Giles has a record of integrity.You simply demean yourself by making these cheap comments.

Equally importantly research your own facts.What Giles said about PPP/TRT election success is nothing more than the truth.

ummmm help me out here, since when is less than 50% a 'majority'?

U

Exactly. 'Giles' can be a little out of touch at times. Here he obviously never bothered to look at the actual figures, which show the Democrats having garnered more of the popular vote than any other party.

[h90]

And again the new politics which we discussed many times has nothing to do with fascist.

I would have thought even someone like you would have realised by now it's not sufficient simply to deny.I say someone like you because you even argue the TRT coalition has no legitimacy putting their victory completely down to vote buying.The more intelligent PAD supporters don't take this fatuous line but sensibly concentrate on politicians' corruption and - in their view - the inappropriateness of the Western democratic model.If you wish in this instance to make a case, you need to define fascism and then argue why PAD doesn't fit into this definition.I don't agree with Giles Ungpakorn about everything by any means but his comments below on PAD's fascistic tendencies is on the money.

"Since late evening on the 6th October 2008, the ultra right-wing fascist mob which calls itself the “Peoples Alliance for Democracy” (PAD) laid plans to lay siege to the Thai parliament. They came prepared with iron bars and crash helmets. Their plan, as always, was to create chaos in the hope that the military would stage a coup or that the ruling party would once again be dissolved by the courts. Their claim is that the present government lead, by the Peoples Power Party or PPP (ex-Premier Thaksin’s Thai Rak Thai in another name), is “illegitimate”. The party and the previous TRT party have consistently won large majorities in elections, proving that they are popular with the poor, who make up the majority of the population. This support from the poor is not surprising, since the party was the first elite party in 30 years to offer a universal health care scheme and public funds to develop the rural economy."

Take Google and search for the PAD leaders background. You'll find many things, from very left to right. The PAD is an alliance to remove that illegal government.

Everything fascist movement only exists in your dreams.

But you can call the government that way if you want (even also not correct)

[younghusband]

Now pay attention chaps.It sometimes happens in many countries that a winning party doesn't achieve an absolute majority or even a majority of the popular vote.But under the various electoral systems there are rules which steer a way through this, usually through a party joining up with others.I agree Giles should have said something like TRT/PPP commanding a majority, but most people would understand what he was trying to say.The fact is that Thaksin's party and its successor has been astonishingly successful in electoral terms and seems likely to continue that way.If you want to split hairs by all means do so.I expect next week in the U.S there will be those (your spiritual equivalents desperate to deny a winner's legitimacy) doing convoluted calculations justifying why their candidate was robbed.But rules are rules.

[jdinasia]

hmmmmm

so now in your mind less than 50% DOES equal a majority, YH?

Leading a coalition government because you could not get 50% does not constitute your party having a majority. Not to mention calling PAD a list of names vwhich only has the intent to sway people that don't know anything about them is tacky at best.

[johnwills]

I am wide awake and I still fail to see even the pro-gov't side making claims that PAD supporters are paid. Random claims not withstanding

Why do you not believe some people are being paid to demonstrate?? They paid people from my wife's village to go on one of these demonstrations, the funny thing is, these were the same people that would have taken money to vote for PPP in the last election. Poor people cannot always afford ethical behaviour.

[younghusband]

hmmmmm

so now in your mind less than 50% DOES equal a majority, YH?

Leading a coalition government because you could not get 50% does not constitute your party having a majority. Not to mention calling PAD a list of names vwhich only has the intent to sway people that don't know anything about them is tacky at best.

I'm not sure how I can make myself much clearer on the "majority" issue.Most of my Thai friends sympathetic to PAD who think I am off beam on my political views have never actually questioned the electoral legitimacy of Thaksin, Samak or Somchai under the current rules.Some members of this forum do and I think that's just plain silly.I respect the intellectual integrity of people like Plus who argue the case for changing the rules, but under the existing rules the current bunch (ok fairly unsavoury I concede) hold office legitimately.

As for PAD I have more sympathy with the original ideals than you might think.But the PAD leadership is a disgusting and reactionary cabal, and the test of Thai politics now is whether politicians (whose heart is with the PAD rank and file) have the courage to articulate this truth.

Come on Korn don't disappoint us.

[sriracha john]

I'd also throw TRT into the "Won a Large Majority in Elections Trash Bin of BS"...

When an election was annulled, particularly when it's done so for fraud, then nobody won the election....

Edited October 31, 2008 by sriracha john

[johnwills]

What I find quite surprising is that any westerner would side with any political party in Thailand, there are no "lesser of two evils" over here, both PAD and PPP are corrupt. It is none of our business and we can never change anything here, better just to sit back and enjoy the ride, where ever it leads.

Quite so, much of a muchness. Thailand doesn't yet have the full benefit of western style democracy. Look at the US where the choice is stark, one candidate is promoting the Iraq war and the other the Afghanistan war. Oil or Opium, extend to Syria or Pakistan, decisions, decisions, which group of grubby godless heathens to bomb into the rubble and grant them the joy of liberation.

Hi kids ... before we get off track here .... the PAD is not a political party. They have no aspirations that I know of to become one.

Shows my interest level in Thai politics.

yet your willingness to comment on Thai politics! (You'll fit in well with the Thaksinistas!)

Sorry, I'm no fan of Mr T, he should not be allowed to hide in my country, my initial post was just to show surprise that any westerner would take sides over here, but interpret it as you like.

[younghusband]

I'd also throw TRT into the "Won a Large Majority in Elections Trash Bin of BS"...

When an election was annulled, particularly when it's done so for fraud, then nobody won the election....

In the politest possible way, given your known views, who exactly are you trying to say? Are you arguing that the current government has no legitimacy and that the swearing in ceremony was a fraudulent event?

[Mobi]

Now pay attention chaps.It sometimes happens in many countries that a winning party doesn't achieve an absolute majority or even a majority of the popular vote.But under the various electoral systems there are rules which steer a way through this, usually through a party joining up with others.I agree Giles should have said something like TRT/PPP commanding a majority, but most people would understand what he was trying to say.The fact is that Thaksin's party and its successor has been astonishingly successful in electoral terms and seems likely to continue that way.If you want to split hairs by all means do so.I expect next week in the U.S there will be those (your spiritual equivalents desperate to deny a winner's legitimacy) doing convoluted calculations justifying why their candidate was robbed.But rules are rules.

Here's some extracts of what Democrat MP Korn had to say in a recent Bangkok Post article

"....the government retains the ultimate advantage of being incumbents - with a freshly approved record high national budget with which to pork-barrel their way to popularity......

Having said that, win or lose, it is likely to be close. Most people are unaware of the fact that in the party votes, out of a total of about 30 million votes cast in the last general election, we lost to the PPP by a mere 100,000 or so votes......

This represented a huge swing from 2005, when I first ran for office, when the spread was a full 12 million votes. Of course, the problem was that in the first-past-the-post system of constituency voting, we were trumped roundly, with the PPP winning roughly 70 more constituencies than us, and mostly in the Northeast and the North.

I remember giving an interview with this newspaper some time after the 2005 poll and responding to the question posed at the time, as to how many votes we felt we would need to be in a position to form a government. My answer was 12 million - we had at that time just won 7 million votes. Coincidentally, that was precisely the number of votes we attained in December 2007, but it proved insufficient. In truth, we would only need to win one or two million more votes this time around in order to pip the PPP to the finish line......

This means the need to win another 30 seats in total, most of which would have to be constituency seats. This is certainly within the realm of the possible and we have already completed our assessment as to where these winnable seats might be......."

The full article is HERE

[sriracha john]

Now pay attention chaps.It sometimes happens in many countries that a winning party doesn't achieve an absolute majority or even a majority of the popular vote.But under the various electoral systems there are rules which steer a way through this, usually through a party joining up with others.I agree Giles should have said something like TRT/PPP commanding a majority, but most people would understand what he was trying to say.The fact is that Thaksin's party and its successor has been astonishingly successful in electoral terms and seems likely to continue that way.If you want to split hairs by all means do so.I expect next week in the U.S there will be those (your spiritual equivalents desperate to deny a winner's legitimacy) doing convoluted calculations justifying why their candidate was robbed.But rules are rules.

From a forceful, unequivocal "Giles speaks the truth" statement regarding "large majority in elections"... to... "oh ok...well, if you want split hairs, then yes, I'm wrong"....

only thing missing is a colpyat-ish "Well, if you're going to be pedantic, then yes, you're right" whenever caught out on the losing end of a non-pedantic issue... (which was often)

hmmmmm

so now in your mind less than 50% DOES equal a majority, YH?

Leading a coalition government because you could not get 50% does not constitute your party having a majority. Not to mention calling PAD a list of names vwhich only has the intent to sway people that don't know anything about them is tacky at best.

I'm not sure how I can make myself much clearer on the "majority" issue.Most of my Thai friends sympathetic to PAD who think I am off beam on my political views have never actually questioned the electoral legitimacy of Thaksin, Samak or Somchai under the current rules.Some members of this forum do and I think that's just plain silly.I respect the intellectual integrity of people like Plus who argue the case for changing the rules, but under the existing rules the current bunch (ok fairly unsavoury I concede) hold office legitimately.

well, at least you're now self-lowering it yourself from "large majority" to "majority".... to being the leading party in a coalition....

yep... just purely pedantic on the part of more than a couple of posters...

I'd also throw TRT into the "Won a Large Majority in Elections Trash Bin of BS"...

When an election was annulled, particularly when it's done so for fraud, then nobody won the election....

In the politest possible way, given your known views, who exactly are you trying to say? Are you arguing that the current government has no legitimacy and that the swearing in ceremony was a fraudulent event?

Just saying what I posted... that when phrases like "TRT won a large majority in elections" are thrown around... it's BS when one considers that one of their "wins" was pitched out like yesterday's fish because it reeked of fraud.

as for the current government, it is a PPP-led coalition... not a "large majority winner".... to which all TAWP did was throw the BS flag at and then you responded... which prompted all the other responses...

Edited October 31, 2008 by sriracha john

[h90]

I'd also throw TRT into the "Won a Large Majority in Elections Trash Bin of BS"...

When an election was annulled, particularly when it's done so for fraud, then nobody won the election....

In the politest possible way, given your known views, who exactly are you trying to say? Are you arguing that the current government has no legitimacy and that the swearing in ceremony was a fraudulent event?

Yes it was as the EC has the opinion that the PPP should be dissolved.

[younghusband]

as for the current government, it is a PPP-led coalition... not a "large majority winner".... to which all TAWP did was throw the BS flag at and then you responded... which prompted all the other responses....

The governments of Thaksin, Samak and Somchai commanded large majorities.I agree Giles should have said this or something similar, but it's not really the main point.Do you agree the current government is legitimate (having formed a coalition representing most Thais) or was the signing in ceremony a dishonest fraud?

Will you give a straight answer or not?

[sjaak327]

All this disucssion about majority is funny. Whatever you say, the current PPP government (together with other coalition parties) has a clear majority. Simply because combined the hold the most seats, and that's how democracy works in most countries.

Before TRT had this majority by itself (2005 elections), that I guess is what that quoted writer meant.

And of course the current government is still legitimate. regardless of the opinion of the EC, until that has been handled in a court of law, it should be business as usual.

[sriracha john]

as for the current government, it is a PPP-led coalition... not a "large majority winner".... to which all TAWP did was throw the BS flag at and then you responded... which prompted all the other responses....

The governments of Thaksin, Samak and Somchai commanded large majorities.I agree Giles should have said this or something similar, but it's not really the main point.Do you agree the current government is legitimate (having formed a coalition representing most Thais) or was the signing in ceremony a dishonest fraud?

Will you give a straight answer or not?

Sure... I just wish your statements were straight from the beginning and didn't require a dozen posts by several posters to actually get at what you're saying, which is quite different from the beginning.

I haven't any idea where all this "dishonest fraud" at the "signing-in ceremony" is coming from as no one has mentioned it, except yourself.

As to whether this government is legitimate, we'll know soon enough after the Constitution Court decides if it is or not.

Edited October 31, 2008 by sriracha john

[TAWP]

YH>> I was merely pointing out that he is using word that implies facts that isn't based on reality. He talks about 'large majority' to obfuscate and confuse the people that isn't fully sure on the numbers. It's a common technique (see: build up to the Iraq War) but it doesn't make it any more true.

As an intellectual his integrity should be based on his arguments. You want to base it on something else?

[AlKing]

"THAKSIN BACK or TESCO OUT!!!" I bet you 100 Baht that the poster is sponsered by CARREFOUR. Nice one Monsieur. Je nais se qua.

[h90]

All this disucssion about majority is funny. Whatever you say, the current PPP government (together with other coalition parties) has a clear majority. Simply because combined the hold the most seats, and that's how democracy works in most countries.

Before TRT had this majority by itself (2005 elections), that I guess is what that quoted writer meant.

And of course the current government is still legitimate. regardless of the opinion of the EC, until that has been handled in a court of law, it should be business as usual.

Which countries do you know, in which the three largest coalition partners get dissolved due to vote buying?