So Why Is This Allowed To Continue

[Ulysses G.]

The problem is that the protestors have to be innocent of corruption themselves - not just using it against their foes as an excuse for political gain. That is not the case here.

[Neeranam]

My sister-in-law is quite happy - she's getting 1000 baht a day plus free food and entertainment! I was a bit surprised when I found out who was paying.

[LoveDaBlues]

They (PAD) really haven't showered themselves in glory. It's a shame, as I thought some of their issues were worth airing. Now they have negative press, minority national support. Even smaller international sympathy. Not the way to get things done chaps.

Maybe they did have some issues worth airing but they are certainly not the answer to Thailand's problems. According to the CBN website

"The PAD advocate the scrapping of the one-man-one-vote system in Thailand and say only 30 per cent of parliament's members should be directly elected by the people. The remaining 70 per cent should be chosen from various occupations and professions and be appointed".

Hardly the stuff to impress the free world.

George Bush was elected. Twice. Perhaps PAD is on to something......

[merck]

IMO there isb't any one party benefiting more than the any other party, or 'allowing' the situation to happen. It's a stalemate between various powers. There is no deus ex machina solution for this one.

It is by its very nature a stalemate anticipating and positioning for the checkmate.

Have you ever played chess before? A stalement is deemed as a draw. Checkmate, where one player wins, has nothing to do with a stalemate.

[lannarebirth]

IMO there isb't any one party benefiting more than the any other party, or 'allowing' the situation to happen. It's a stalemate between various powers. There is no deus ex machina solution for this one.

It is by its very nature a stalemate anticipating and positioning for the checkmate.

Have you ever played chess before? A stalement is deemed as a draw. Checkmate, where one player wins, has nothing to do with a stalemate.

Mexican Standoff works for me.

[jdinasia]

My sister-in-law is quite happy - she's getting 1000 baht a day plus free food and entertainment! I was a bit surprised when I found out who was paying.

hmmmm you can call me Thomas on this report (doubting thomas)

1000 baht a day when the police are outside the gates with guns???? .... I guess sanity doesn't prevail in some places!

But please Neer ... document this and tell us all who is paying

[Johpa]

As i said, people's opinion on how to protest will vary. I'm with you, it should be legal, but on the question of whether or not there should be protests against corrupt governments, surely we all agree? It seems judging from this thread, i'm wrong in this assumption.

It is difficult to get excited about one misinformed group of protesters gathered by one group of corrupt, nihilistic, racist, elites protesting against an only slighhtly less noxious group of corrupt, self-serving elites. But alas, all we have here is the pot calling the kettle black and we have nothing here that resembles some sort of good guy group protesting against some sort of bad guy group. I go back to the chess metaphor as all these protesters are just pawns who are being manipulated.

[Johpa]

Have you ever played chess before? A stalement is deemed as a draw. Checkmate, where one player wins, has nothing to do with a stalemate.

I have indeed played chess and at one time played often enough to be a decent player, but you need to study the game more, perhaps going a bit further back in history. The stalemate is real, the checkmate will be real, and only thereafter will the stalemate will be resolved. Of course there is always the chance that one player will get frustrated with the stalemate and toss the board into the air causing all the pieces to get mixed up again and thus restarting the same old game. It is just seems so easy to find pawns in Thailand.

[Shah Jahan]

Have you ever played chess before? A stalement is deemed as a draw. Checkmate, where one player wins, has nothing to do with a stalemate.

This is actually more like a 19x19 Go Board. The PAD surrounds and captures. When there are no more moves for either party, then the score is counted and the winner declared.

[Koo82]

The Govt may be weak and indeed corrupt but at least it submits itself to elections and to some notion of democracy, can the same be said of PAD ?

PAD does not want to be leader in politics. Those behind them are desperately want to be in the seats. They just use PAD to achieve their plan.

[sassienie]

The police and military are reluctant to go in and dragging their feet. The word in my area is that they also support the PAD group. So far it’s a stale mate.

[old wanderer]

In a few more days the entire game will change.....Read the new release below.....The current PM and party (along with a few other supporting parties) will be SOL......

I truly wish the court could act even faster, as originally it Dec 15 they were due to close this. As even the PPP admits they are likely to be banned for corruption during the elections.

All the bleeding heart statements of the PM and his party won the election will go out the window then.

The Constitution Court yesterday set a December 2 deadline for its acceptance of closing statements from the three coalition parties, People Power, Chart Thai and Matchima Thipataya, involved in the party-dissolution case.

The high court ruled to drop the hearing of witnesses and the admission of additional evidence on the grounds that it already had sufficient information to form a verdict.

The abrupt wrap-up of the case is seen as paving the way for a snap election as the outcome of the judicial review will clear uncertainties relating to the fate of the parties.

Court president Chat Chonlaworn said they would be allowed to submit additional arguments in writing as deemed necessary until the deadline but the court would not convene any hearings.

Responding to requests by the defence to summon the three party leaders to give additional testimony on top of their statements given during the investigative stage, Chat said this could be submitted in writing.

PPP deputy leader and party-list MP Karn Thienkaew said it was very likely the PPP would be dissolved as the court was not allowing its 36 executives to make any clarifications. In this case the executives' voting rights must be revoked. Other MPs must move to another party within 30 days, and most of them are moving to the Phue Thai Party.

The next prime minister must come from that party as it will have the most MPs in Parliament, Karn said.

He said he would resign his parliamentary seat to open the way for the next in line on the list to become MP.

A PPP source who asked not to be named said someone very close to former prime minister thaksin Shinawatra would be invited to lead Phue Thai to draw votes from Thaksin's supporters. Among those tipped is General Chaisit Shinawatra, former supreme commander and a cousin of Thaksin.

The source said PPP MPs who were former or current Cabinet members but not PPP executives, including Mingkwan Sangsuwan, Chalerm Yubamrung, Santi Promphat and Somsak Kiartsuranont, might be nominated for prime minister, though this might be interpreted as violating Article 190 of the Constitution, in which case MPs like Chai Chidchob, Apiwan Wiriyachai and Samart Kaewmeechai would have a chance.

Matchima's defence lawyer Chatchai Chookaew said he was surprised at the abrupt decision to fast-track the case.

Chatchai said Matchima leader Anongwan Thepsuthin was expected to personally make the defence summation before the high court.

People Power's defence lawyer Thana Benjathikul said the hearing of witnesses should not have been dropped. Many party executives who had no involvement in the electoral fraud wanted to testify in person to convince the presiding judges of their innocence, he said.

Another PPP source who asked not to be named said the PPP was more likely to be dissolved than the other two parties as the evidence against former deputy leader Yongyuth Tiyapairat for electoral fraud was more damning than in the cases of other party executives.

[Choscura]

this is getting out of hand. I'm going to give my two cents and get out.

the protesters have a right to protest. that is reasonable. they have a right to express their displeasure. this is all well and good.

however, they don't have a right to shut down a country with their protests. this is unacceptable. and this, like it or not, is what the protesters are attempting to do. so far they've stranded thousands of people trying to get in or out of the country.

then there's the simple fact that the prime minister they're protesting against is, according to everything I've seen, a decent guy. he is highly tolerant of childish behaviour (and make no mistake: taking over two airports, blocking off roads, shooting into crowds, and shutting down public means of communication can at best be called childish behaviour), although this may be him waiting for something. he isn't continuing the ridiculous war on drugs thaksin initiated. he isn't reversing everything thaksin did regardless of it being good or bad, he's doing the right thing as best he can, given his situation.

and above and beyond this, Thaksin legitimately did a lot of good things for thailand. has anybody heard of OLPC, the One Laptop Per Child project? it's a swedesh initiative to get laptops to every child in the world, by developing a cost-efficient useful laptop that children can learn essential computer skills on. Or how about the time that Thaksin audited all the foreign 'companies' that were being created and then ignored to allow old money-bags farangs to live with their (generally) prostitute (usually) isarn girlfriends. I don't see this as a loss, although I can understand how it might have upset some people here. these are legitimately good, decent things that thaksin did for thailand, and this is just a small piece of it. yes, he did bad stuff too. yes, he should be held responsible for that. but the thai politics forced the hands of the new PM to get rid of many of these projects that he couldn't figure out how to take credit for, and thailand suffered as a result. it's still suffering now. are any non-thais aware that the standard fee for a poor family to give birth in a hospital has gone from free (thaksin era) to 8000+ baht? and this is a good thing that he's out? no wonder he's still so popular some places. he had an effect that helped the majority of the people and stepped on some toes that eventually decided to kick him in the legs for it. and the fun thing is, there are people here on this board- I know it, and you know who you are- who are selfish enough to say "well, sure, but he stopped me from breaking the rules, so I hate him anyway."

with this in mind, linking the new prime minister and his mild-mannered (apparently) ways to thaksin... I can't really see anything bad. thaksin did the corruption on his own- this new guy wasn't one of the ones paying him, and he wasn't getting paid by thaksin, so I don't see a problem there. I haven't heard of people getting shot by police for having drugs lately, so I'm much more relieved about that now too. a good improvement over the thaksin era.

so when you look at all this- democratically elected guy, just doing his job, letting people live their lives, putting things back in order, generally- what exactly are they protesting? and how, again, HOW, does it advocate a democracy by the very act of tearing it down and stopping it from functioning?

this is stupid and childish, and I've very little sympathy for the protesters right now. all- not most, but all- the people I've talked to- every single person- has been frustrated with the protesters. most consider them idiots. some say that yes, the government is corrupt and needs to be shook up, but even the people that say this say that what the protesters are doing is wrong.

so why the hel_l *is* this being allowed to continue? I've tried to look as objectively as I can at all the information available to me, and I can't for the life of me figure out any of the answers to the three big questions- what exactly are they protesting, what do they want to accomplish (beyond the PM stepping down- who do they want instead, and a related question- why didn't they vote for him when the elections were held?), and why exactly is it being allowed to continue?

[mostcurious]

On my last visit to Thailand I noticed a distinct lack of Army Personnel at Bangkok Inernational Airport a stark contrast to when I visited in April whis year. Could it be that the army are on the side of the PAD supporters ?

[sabaijai]

On my last visit to Thailand I noticed a distinct lack of Army Personnel at Bangkok Inernational Airport a stark contrast to when I visited in April whis year. Could it be that the army are on the side of the PAD supporters ?

[Mosha]

As Old Wanderer hints at. I think the police are waiting until Dec 2nd. The courts dissolve the guilty parties, therefore a new election will be called. The Police say to PAD "OK you've proved your point, now please leave." The police can then hopefully claim to have resolved the situation peacefully. PAD have got what they want, no one loses face. Well apart from the whole country in the eyes of the world.

Edited November 28, 2008 by Mosha

[plachon]

My sister-in-law is quite happy - she's getting 1000 baht a day plus free food and entertainment! I was a bit surprised when I found out who was paying.

Could you be a bit more explicit please Neeranam? What is your sister-in-law doing exactly and who is paying her? You've stumped me.

[plachon]

On my last visit to Thailand I noticed a distinct lack of Army Personnel at Bangkok Inernational Airport a stark contrast to when I visited in April whis year. Could it be that the army are on the side of the PAD supporters ?

It's nice to see light bulbs going on and mostcurious links being made, eh?

[plachon]

this is getting out of hand. I'm going to give my two cents and get out.

the protesters have a right to protest. that is reasonable. they have a right to express their displeasure. this is all well and good.

however, they don't have a right to shut down a country with their protests. this is unacceptable. and this, like it or not, is what the protesters are attempting to do. so far they've stranded thousands of people trying to get in or out of the country.

then there's the simple fact that the prime minister they're protesting against is, according to everything I've seen, a decent guy. he is highly tolerant of childish behaviour (and make no mistake: taking over two airports, blocking off roads, shooting into crowds, and shutting down public means of communication can at best be called childish behaviour), although this may be him waiting for something. he isn't continuing the ridiculous war on drugs thaksin initiated. he isn't reversing everything thaksin did regardless of it being good or bad, he's doing the right thing as best he can, given his situation.

and above and beyond this, Thaksin legitimately did a lot of good things for thailand. has anybody heard of OLPC, the One Laptop Per Child project? it's a swedesh initiative to get laptops to every child in the world, by developing a cost-efficient useful laptop that children can learn essential computer skills on. Or how about the time that Thaksin audited all the foreign 'companies' that were being created and then ignored to allow old money-bags farangs to live with their (generally) prostitute (usually) isarn girlfriends. I don't see this as a loss, although I can understand how it might have upset some people here. these are legitimately good, decent things that thaksin did for thailand, and this is just a small piece of it. yes, he did bad stuff too. yes, he should be held responsible for that. but the thai politics forced the hands of the new PM to get rid of many of these projects that he couldn't figure out how to take credit for, and thailand suffered as a result. it's still suffering now. are any non-thais aware that the standard fee for a poor family to give birth in a hospital has gone from free (thaksin era) to 8000+ baht? and this is a good thing that he's out? no wonder he's still so popular some places. he had an effect that helped the majority of the people and stepped on some toes that eventually decided to kick him in the legs for it. and the fun thing is, there are people here on this board- I know it, and you know who you are- who are selfish enough to say "well, sure, but he stopped me from breaking the rules, so I hate him anyway."

with this in mind, linking the new prime minister and his mild-mannered (apparently) ways to thaksin... I can't really see anything bad. thaksin did the corruption on his own- this new guy wasn't one of the ones paying him, and he wasn't getting paid by thaksin, so I don't see a problem there. I haven't heard of people getting shot by police for having drugs lately, so I'm much more relieved about that now too. a good improvement over the thaksin era.

so when you look at all this- democratically elected guy, just doing his job, letting people live their lives, putting things back in order, generally- what exactly are they protesting? and how, again, HOW, does it advocate a democracy by the very act of tearing it down and stopping it from functioning?

this is stupid and childish, and I've very little sympathy for the protesters right now. all- not most, but all- the people I've talked to- every single person- has been frustrated with the protesters. most consider them idiots. some say that yes, the government is corrupt and needs to be shook up, but even the people that say this say that what the protesters are doing is wrong.

so why the hel_l *is* this being allowed to continue? I've tried to look as objectively as I can at all the information available to me, and I can't for the life of me figure out any of the answers to the three big questions- what exactly are they protesting, what do they want to accomplish (beyond the PM stepping down- who do they want instead, and a related question- why didn't they vote for him when the elections were held?), and why exactly is it being allowed to continue?

I don't have the energy to go through point by point your naive and simplistic post, which suggests you very rarely open a newspaper beyond the sports pages or read the news section of Thaivisa, but please, oh please, explain this particular Toxin-credited project:

"Or how about the time that Thaksin audited all the foreign 'companies' that were being created and then ignored to allow old money-bags farangs to live with their (generally) prostitute (usually) isarn girlfriends."

I'm sure all the "old money-bags farangs" and even young, non-loaded farangs with Isaan girlfriends are dying for an answer.

Just as well I'm skint and married, or I may have been up-in-arms about your stereotyping skills.

[rixalex]

The problem is that the protestors have to be innocent of corruption themselves - not just using it against their foes as an excuse for political gain. That is not the case here.

First you said that "yes they can protest legally". Now you've changed your mind and said "no they can't protest because you think they are corrupt".

OK, flip floping aside, can you be more specific in your corruption claim? Who are these people? Have they been convicted? If they have, i 100% agree with you that they should be put away. If they haven't, well then you are just dealing in speculation and your opinion.

For the people they are protesting against, it's not a matter of speculation. We have a government that is under the control and direction of a fugitive who is on the run. Until recently we had Samak, a convicted criminal as PM. Please tell me which decent nation-loving citizens wouldn't stand up and protest against such a situation occuring in their country?

[Ulysses G.]

No flip flopping. Actually we were not talking about anyone specifically. You asked me if citizens should protest corruption and I responded that if they did, they should protest legally.

I was not referring to the PAD who are a front for other parties who have bought votes and done everything wrong that Thaksin has been accused of – even if I can’t “prove" it - but hired a bunch of folks for 500 baht a day to break the law without having to worry about any repercussions.

Thaksin is the big bogeyman that they use to justifying breaking every law, but he did not do anything worse than most Prime Ministers before him. In fact, he made Thailand a better place in many respects before being removed from power illegally and a majority of citizens want him back and keep voting for politicians who are aligned with him.

I think that Thaksin is helping the current government. I think that he supports them, but I doubt if he tells them exactly what to do. Can you prove that the current government is being controlled by Thaksin? I don't think so.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Ulysses G.

[anotheruser]

I am beginning to think the longer it goes on the better. Things can't remain the same as they have been and the longer this goes on the less the chances are of ever going back.

[anotheruser]

My sister-in-law is quite happy - she's getting 1000 baht a day plus free food and entertainment! I was a bit surprised when I found out who was paying.

What does some farang wiring your sister in law money to in Thailand have anything to do with this?

[OlRedEyes]

I think the question is 'why wasn't it nipped in the bud.' Just like children, unless you stop them from misbehaving early on, their behavior will only get worse.

By misbehaving, i take it you mean protesting against a corrupt government? Nothing childish about that, that i can see. I guess though if you're a supporter of said corrupt government, i can understand you thinking that way.

Has there ever been a Thai government that wasn't corrupt?

I don't remember the PAD protesting against the corrupt governments that were run by their sponsors.

Exactly. This is not about corruption at all. Never was. Corruption here is part of the national makeup. It's natural and accepted.

Thaksin, as bad as he is, tried to move Thailand in a direction that the elite don't want at all. Giving the people a plastic democracy, the face of democracy, is fine. The real thing will not be tolerated. This is a fight about who this country belongs to, who owns it. His corruption could be accepted, his power play not.

Edited November 29, 2008 by OlRedEyes

[rixalex]

No flip flopping. Actually we were not talking about anyone specifically. You asked me if citizens should protest corruption and I responded that if they did, they should protest legally.

I was not referring to the PAD who are a front for other parties who have bought votes and done everything wrong that Thaksin has been accused of – even if I can't "prove" it - but hired a bunch of folks for 500 baht a day to break the law without having to worry about any repercussions.

Thaksin is the big bogeyman that they use to justifying breaking every law, but he did not do anything worse than most Prime Ministers before him. In fact, he made Thailand a better place in many respects before being removed from power illegally and a majority of citizens want him back and keep voting for politicians who are aligned with him.

I think that Thaksin is helping the current government. I think that he supports them, but I doubt if he tells them exactly what to do. Can you prove that the current government is being controlled by Thaksin? I don't think so.

You continue to speak in vague general terms, to avoid having to substaniate that which you obviously can not. You say that the PAD are a front for other parties. OK, so which parties? Democrats perhaps? You really believe that? I think you'd certainly be right to say that the Democrats haven't been strongly opposed to the PAD (some might say not opposed at all), and it is possible that the outcome of the PAD protests could benefit the Democrats, but it's another great leap to say that the PAD is a front for them. I'm not doubting that there are people in the background who are giving the PAD power, but i don't for one minute think it's the Democrats or any of the other forgetable political parties.

You go on to say that these political parties which you omit to name, have done everything wrong that Thaksin has. How can that possibly be? None of the other parties have ever formed a government? How on earth could they have done what he has? I'm not saying they haven't done wrong, nor am i saying that they would be any less corrupt than Thaksin given the oppurtunity, but that's not the point. We are dealing in facts (or at least we should be). And the fact is that Thaksin has been convicted of a crime. Like any other convicted criminal he has to do his time. Same goes for any Democrat or any member of the PAD. Why is it you think that Thaksin is above the law?

Rather than point the finger at others who you think have been as corrupt or worse, and use that as an excuse for Thaksin, why not point the finger at them all? They should all be brought to account, even those you think have done some good.

As for Thaksin's degree of control over the PPP is concerned - well you are right, nobody really knows exactly how far it stretches. We can only draw conclusions from the facts we do know. If your conclusion is that he doesn't have much control, all i can say is that you might want to review the facts.

[Los78]

I seriously dont understand why police have not already done their job. Drive in their with a trucks arrest them and clean the airport up. The longer they wait the more damage they are causing to the facilities and not to mention the whole economy. The one thing I can think of is the army is holding everything back as they are ready to pounce when the first police move in.

[Ulysses G.]

You continue to speak in vague general terms, to avoid having to substaniate that which you obviously can not. You say that the PAD are a front for other parties. OK, so which parties? Democrats perhaps? You really believe that?

How long have you been here? One has to be vague sometimes in order to say within the law. However, I don't understand why you are so sure that the Democrats are not involved with PAD. Do you think the same about the Army?

Edited November 29, 2008 by Ulysses G.

[myauq]

For many of the grass roots PAD supporters this is about the future of the country. It is extremely complex and made even more so as many aspects of the issues cannot be openly discussed.

To call them children is the height of western arrogance and has racist overtones going back to colonial era.

TH.

Their lack of education and critical awareness makes them naive and easily manipulated by both sides. Shame really.

so true. the other element in this is that there is no freedom of press, further knocking out the 'critical' checks and balances that is so important in the proper functioning of democratic societies.

[rixalex]

You continue to speak in vague general terms, to avoid having to substaniate that which you obviously can not. You say that the PAD are a front for other parties. OK, so which parties? Democrats perhaps? You really believe that?

How long have you been here? One has to be vague sometimes in order to say within the law. However, I don't understand why you are so sure that the Democrats are not involved with PAD. Do you think the same about the Army?

10 years if you want to know. Yes, i understand there are times when one has to be vague, but you were being vague about parties who have bought votes. This is obviously refering to political parties (who else buys votes?), so i see no need for vagueness, other than for lack of substance to the claim.

Your claim re the Democrats wasn't that they were involved, but that the PAD was a front for them. There's a big distinction between being involved and being a front - are you aware what that is? As for the army, it would be my guess that there are supporters within it - i think there's no doubt about that, but the PAD a front for the army? Just more speculative nonsense.

[Ulysses G.]

OK, only Thaksin buys votes and PAD is not controlled by the Army and the Democrats and other important institutions.

You win!