Thaksin To Set Up Govt In Exile If Coup Staged

[FarangCravings]

Because this goverment was NOT chosen by the people and they continue to refuse to hold elections

What you meant to say is that the current goverment was elected but that the election commission refuses to allow convicted criminals and parties banned for illegal activities stand. Oh, and you are a supporter of the convicted criminal, Thaksin, who has just announced that he is preparing one way or another for civil war.

HE WAS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND in a General election

that is a clear concise fact that cannot be contested or did I miss the general election where the people of a country actually CHOOSE there leader.

Edited January 25, 2010 by FarangCravings

[RegularReader]

Because this goverment was NOT chosen by the people and they continue to refuse to hold elections

What you meant to say is that the current goverment was elected but that the election commission refuses to allow convicted criminals and parties banned for illegal activities stand. Oh, and you are a supporter of the convicted criminal, Thaksin, who has just announced that he is preparing one way or another for civil war.

HE WAS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND in a General election

that is a clear concise fact that cannot be contested or did I miss the general election where the people of a country actually CHOOSE there leader.

PEOPLE IN THAILAND, LIKE AUSTRALIA, UK, CANADA, NZ, JAPAN AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES DO NOT GET TO ELECT THEIR PM!!!!!!

THEY DO GET TO PLACE THEIR VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE A MEMBER OF A PARTY WHO EVENTUALLY BECOME THE GOVERNMENT, OR PART OF IT. IN ALL THESE COUNTRIES THE PM IS ELECTED BY EITHER THE PARLIAMENT OR THE PARTY(S) IN GOVERNMENT - NOT THE ELECTORATE.

Thai people never voted for Thaksin, Samark or Somchai to be their PM, either. They were elected by the parliament.

How many times do people like you need to be told to get your facts right before making such ignorant statements??????

And please take off your CAPS lock.

Edited January 25, 2010 by RegularReader

[Tejas]

I really don't understand this for two reasons:

1) He is a wanted for crimes in Thailand.

Right or wrong?

2) From the perspective of most Thai people, he turned his back on Thailand when he started working for the Cambodian government.

Right or wrong?

If the answers are "right" above, how in the world can he ever enter Thai politics again or run anything from outside of the country.

[hammered]

Some would say it's not fair, because others before him weren't punished in any way. So that's like saying because one specific murdered has never been caught and punished therefore all murderers should not be

I tend to go the other way on this one scorecard where if Thaksin's lot should be punished then so should all the others. To use your murder analogy that's like saying "Well he murdered 10 people but the next guy only murdered one so we''ll let him off." if you go by some posters' stance that the Dem vote buying wasn't as widespread or blatant as Thaksin's lot.

Agree that all should be prosecuted if there is evidence. The nobody has before so nobody should be now arguement means nothing ever changes. It needs to start somewhere. OK so it starts with Thaksin (if we ignore Sanan, Chalor, and a bunch of other bigs who have been done for things but not a PM to date) and then it needs to be extended to others. The flip is if Thaksin manages to disappear the charges against him in a deal or victory rather than completion of court cases that would reinforce the status quo using the arguement of its only me to justify never changing anything, which puts a different complexion on the reds double standard stuff. They are certainly not campaigning to have charges against Thaksin kept and so are campaigning to have charges against all left at status quo. It isnt an arguement of yes do Thaksin and do Sarayid as much as arguement of we all have skeletons so lets agree to disappear them, which is a shame.

[badgerbailey]

For all those that say that the current government has been rightly elected by the people, we all know its been done in a very very dodgy way, if these people are so sure then what is Abhisits problem with holding general elections right now? Because he knows most certainly that he and his party will be out the door. And thats a FACT.

[yoshiwara]

Because this goverment was NOT chosen by the people and they continue to refuse to hold elections

What you meant to say is that the current goverment was elected but that the election commission refuses to allow convicted criminals and parties banned for illegal activities stand. Oh, and you are a supporter of the convicted criminal, Thaksin, who has just announced that he is preparing one way or another for civil war.

HE WAS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND in a General election

that is a clear concise fact that cannot be contested or did I miss the general election where the people of a country actually CHOOSE there leader.

PEOPLE IN THAILAND, LIKE AUSTRALIA, UK, CANADA, NZ, JAPAN AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES DO NOT GET TO ELECT THEIR PM!!!!!!

THEY DO GET TO PLACE THEIR VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE A MEMBER OF A PARTY WHO EVENTUALLY BECOME THE GOVERNMENT, OR PART OF IT. IN ALL THESE COUNTRIES THE PM IS ELECTED BY EITHER THE PARLIAMENT OR THE PARTY(S) IN GOVERNMENT - NOT THE ELECTORATE.

Thai people never voted for Thaksin, Samark or Somchai to be their PM, either. They were elected by the parliament.

How many times do people like you need to be told to get your facts right before making such ignorant statements??????

And please take off your CAPS lock.

The reasom why he and the other apologists make such ignorant statements is that they are not interested in, or understand the electoral process, or corruption. In fact there are numerous contributions from similar individuals who argue that Thaksin's corruption is OK because the other side are also corrupt. Not that they care about that particular argument. Any argument will do if it supports Thaksin. For them it is Thaksin Number 1, Thaksin Number 2 and Thaksin Number 3. Nothing else matters. Why? Payday.

[animatic]

Abhist won his Parliamentary chair and is a legitimate Minster of Parliament.

That gives him every right to legally be a Prime Minister.

He needs NO other vote from the people to get that, until his elected term expires.

He was voted in by OTHER legally elected Ministers of Parliament.

They used the typical and legal horse trading for coalition partnerships

and cabinet posts based on their numbers and perceived power.

There is no other criteria that is valid.

[hammered]

Remember there are more than two sides in this and that the Democrat party has never ever been close to the military in its history. At best they coexist or have arrangements of convenience.

Today, even truer than before.

It is sad though that so many people still live under the delusion that Dems plus military equals government. Even many of the analysyts of Thai politics fall into this category not that there are many decent analysts especially those who write in English.

So much of what is going on and why is missed because fallacious assumptions like this are made.

[Netfan]

For all those that say that the current government has been rightly elected by the people, we all know its been done in a very very dodgy way, if these people are so sure then what is Abhisits problem with holding general elections right now? Because he knows most certainly that he and his party will be out the door. And thats a FACT.

What was "dodgy" about about this government coming to power? You are ignoring one FACT - the current government is in power because Thaksin's buddies deserted him in parliament - they jumped ship, right after being courted by Thaksin's sister (that wasn't "dodgy"???). Get over this 'we lost so we want an election now wah waah waaah" crap. You think now is a good time to call an election? You have a rogue army general calling for a "war" against his own army, and the deposed PM financing a movement to bring down the government by any means. And how do you know it is "fact" that Abhisit and his coalition will be out the door? What polls are you citing? Thaksin's supporters had their chance in the last election - when they were in power - and they could not get a majority of MP's elected.

[FarangCravings]

Because this goverment was NOT chosen by the people and they continue to refuse to hold elections

What you meant to say is that the current goverment was elected but that the election commission refuses to allow convicted criminals and parties banned for illegal activities stand. Oh, and you are a supporter of the convicted criminal, Thaksin, who has just announced that he is preparing one way or another for civil war.

HE WAS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND in a General election

that is a clear concise fact that cannot be contested or did I miss the general election where the people of a country actually CHOOSE there leader.

PEOPLE IN THAILAND, LIKE AUSTRALIA, UK, CANADA, NZ, JAPAN AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES DO NOT GET TO ELECT THEIR PM!!!!!!

THEY DO GET TO PLACE THEIR VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE A MEMBER OF A PARTY WHO EVENTUALLY BECOME THE GOVERNMENT, OR PART OF IT. IN ALL THESE COUNTRIES THE PM IS ELECTED BY EITHER THE PARLIAMENT OR THE PARTY(S) IN GOVERNMENT - NOT THE ELECTORATE.

Thai people never voted for Thaksin, Samark or Somchai to be their PM, either. They were elected by the parliament.

How many times do people like you need to be told to get your facts right before making such ignorant statements??????

And please take off your CAPS lock.

Errr do all those countries you mention also take over their airports and bring there country to a stand still just so they can take over the country.

Why does the current PM refuse to hold general elections ??? the answer is easy he would lose.

You should take your own advice and cut the caps DH

[Sao Jiang Mai]

Just because you want an electoin does not mean that the legitimate government needs to bend to your will, invest billions of baht to face an election which is more than likely going to be riddled with vote buying, corruption and intimidation, leading to disqualifications, social divisions and with Sae Dang and Thaksin in the wings - civil strife. In what world is that a good idea? The goverment is legitimate FACT. Sigh, it really is frustrating having to go over the same argument over and over. Who, pray tell, would you suggest as leader of the new Thaksin-proxy government? As evident in another thread, there is no one who is acceptable (and not running from the law).

[Thai at Heart]

Stamping feet and wailing at the sky isn't going to compel Abhisit to give the country an election. I would give people more time if they said they wanted an election because they couldn't stand Newin having any control of anything to do with the country.

He is the man with the parliamentary votes, pure and simple. Were he to lose them, I presume this would spark an election. If anything Newin and his bunch are actually more important than the Dems, but that is the inherent problem with coalitions.

Failing that, Abhisit will wait as long as he can before he calls an election. That is the way the rules are, I prefer this type of democracy to a gun.

[RegularReader]

Errr do all those countries you mention also take over their airports and bring there country to a stand still just so they can take over the country.

Why does the current PM refuse to hold general elections ??? the answer is easy he would lose.

You should take your own advice and cut the caps DH

Why are you ignorantly making comments about issues which happened before the current government came to power ?

The airport closing was not done by the Democrats and certainly not by the other members of the coaltion. In fact the others such as BJP were part of the government of the day as were most of the others at the time. So what's your "enlightened" comment mean in the context of this discussion ?

Put your cap on and ride on out of here buddy...

[xminator]

From how I read this, the coup Thaksin refers to here is the one that can occur if the following happens: Coalition government splits over charter amendment (as in news today that is looking more likely then ever). Coalition parties then join ranks with PT to ammend constitution - or worse (from a Democrat viewpoint) rollback to 97. Abhsit minority government have to chose to accept changes or step down. This is where the shadows loose the power they gained in 2006 and the stage is prepared for another coup.

[way2muchcoffee]

From how I read this, the coup Thaksin refers to here is the one that can occur if the following happens: Coalition government splits over charter amendment (as in news today that is looking more likely then ever). Coalition parties then join ranks with PT to ammend constitution - or worse (from a Democrat viewpoint) rollback to 97. Abhsit minority government have to chose to accept changes or step down. This is where the shadows loose the power they gained in 2006 and the stage is prepared for another coup.

That's probably bang on xminator.

[Thai at Heart]

From how I read this, the coup Thaksin refers to here is the one that can occur if the following happens: Coalition government splits over charter amendment (as in news today that is looking more likely then ever). Coalition parties then join ranks with PT to ammend constitution - or worse (from a Democrat viewpoint) rollback to 97. Abhsit minority government have to chose to accept changes or step down. This is where the shadows loose the power they gained in 2006 and the stage is prepared for another coup.

Kingmaker Newin.

What a thought!!

[Insight]

From how I read this, the coup Thaksin refers to here is the one that can occur if the following happens: Coalition government splits over charter amendment (as in news today that is looking more likely then ever). Coalition parties then join ranks with PT to ammend constitution - or worse (from a Democrat viewpoint) rollback to 97. Abhsit minority government have to chose to accept changes or step down. This is where the shadows loose the power they gained in 2006 and the stage is prepared for another coup.

That's probably bang on xminator.

Possibly, but I think a legal route will be taken before a coup.

You don't really have to look far when it comes to BJT.

[scorecard]

Just because you want an electoin does not mean that the legitimate government needs to bend to your will, invest billions of baht to face an election which is more than likely going to be riddled with vote buying, corruption and intimidation, leading to disqualifications, social divisions and with Sae Dang and Thaksin in the wings - civil strife. In what world is that a good idea? The goverment is legitimate FACT. Sigh, it really is frustrating having to go over the same argument over and over. Who, pray tell, would you suggest as leader of the new Thaksin-proxy government? As evident in another thread, there is no one who is acceptable (and not running from the law).

Good points. Now let me guess who the thaksin apologists would be happy with as their line-up:

- Chalerm or Chavalit as PM

- Noppadon as Foreign Minister

- Jatuporn as Interior Minister

- Sae Daeng as Minister of Defence

- Sudarat as Minister of Health

- Chalerms no 1 son as Justice Minister

- Chalerms no 2 son as ........ Minister

- Chalerms no 3 son as Tourist Minister (he lived there for a while

- Hun Sen as for Finance and Economy

- Thaksins son as .........Minister

Enough?

International credibility rating - up 2 u!

Scary isn't it, very very scary.

Edited January 26, 2010 by scorecard

[termad]

Why would the military stage another coup when they already have a proxy govt in place? The mind boggles.

I think that what he's saying is that if there's an election in the near future and Phue Thai are elected with a working majority, as is very, very likely then the chances are the military will stage a coup which will be opposed.

[rixalex]

Why does the current PM refuse to hold general elections ??? the answer is easy he would lose.

If all of your unsubstaniated assumptions / wishes happen to be true about Abhisit having little support, wouldn't that make him rather stupid to call an election now then? I mean, why exactly would he? To be a gent perhaps - to voluntarily stand down and pass the reins over to someone like Mr Chalerm? I'm sure the reds would be elated, but do you think that is Abhisit's main priority?

[termad]

Because this goverment was NOT chosen by the people and they continue to refuse to hold elections

What you meant to say is that the current goverment was elected but that the election commission refuses to allow convicted criminals and parties banned for illegal activities stand. Oh, and you are a supporter of the convicted criminal, Thaksin, who has just announced that he is preparing one way or another for civil war.

HE WAS NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND in a General election

that is a clear concise fact that cannot be contested or did I miss the general election where the people of a country actually CHOOSE there leader.

PEOPLE IN THAILAND, LIKE AUSTRALIA, UK, CANADA, NZ, JAPAN AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES DO NOT GET TO ELECT THEIR PM!!!!!!

THEY DO GET TO PLACE THEIR VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE A MEMBER OF A PARTY WHO EVENTUALLY BECOME THE GOVERNMENT, OR PART OF IT. IN ALL THESE COUNTRIES THE PM IS ELECTED BY EITHER THE PARLIAMENT OR THE PARTY(S) IN GOVERNMENT - NOT THE ELECTORATE.

Thai people never voted for Thaksin, Samark or Somchai to be their PM, either. They were elected by the parliament.

How many times do people like you need to be told to get your facts right before making such ignorant statements??????

And please take off your CAPS lock.

Your comments are specious and you should sit back and read what you have written.

I think everybody on this site is aware that in UK and many other countries you vote for a Political Party not for a Prime Minister that is how a Constitutional Monarchy works. However, the people voted for Thai Rak Thai, Peoples Power Party and Phue Thai and the elected MPs for those parties and the people who voted for them all wanted/want Thaksin back as Prime Minister.

Nobody voted for the Bhumjaithai Party in the last election as it did not exist. After the last election Newin Chitbob and his Friends of Newin (some forty MPs) were approached by The Democrat Party and the Military waving large sums of cash and all forty were in fact bought. They (except for Newin who is a banned politician) then deserted the Phue Thai Party and formed a new party Bhumjaithai after which they set up a Coalition Government with Abhisit as Prime Minister. Nobody voted for Abhisit as acceptance of him as Prime Minister was part of the deal.

If you want to refer to the UK Parliamentary System you must be aware that in UK, or the other countries that you refer to, the forty MPs who form the Bhumjaithai

would be morally and honour bound to go back the electors who elected them as Phue Thai MPs and after explaining themselves stand for re-election. As it stands even by Thai standards their actions and the actions of Abhisit by entering into a coalition with them are reprehensible. I'm told by Thai friends that those forty MPs rarely visit their constituencies and when or if they do they are surrounded by a large group of armed bodyguards and they also say that the chances of them being elected (not re-elected) as Bhumjaithai MPs are zero.

You say that The Prime Minister is elected by the political party that the people voted for but Bhumjaithai Party has never stood for election and is not wanted by the people so how can you say that Abhisit is the elected Prime Minister?

[termad]

And how do you know it is "fact" that Abhisit and his coalition will be out the door? What polls are you citing? Thaksin's supporters had their chance in the last election - when they were in power - and they could not get a majority of MP's elected.

Wrong! Thaksin's supporters did get the majority of MPs elected.

Edited January 26, 2010 by termad

[Thai at Heart]

I too find it a case of bending the truth when holding up "UK, Japan,etc" as democracies with a similar system to Thailand, the poster neglects to countenance that Thailand has also become the poster boy for military coups and electoral fraud. Honour bound? Does anyone even understand the concept in Thailand?

It is similar to comparing types of snakes, some make great pets, others eat your children. On the outside, Thai politics looks all so organised and grown up, in reality Thai politicians are eons away from understanding the concept of public service and devotion to their country.

So whilst the situation is that Abhisit is sitting in his seat on top of some dubious but legally binding votes, we can all sit here and cogitate about the rights and wrongs of it, but you can bet that he, Anupong and Newin are well aware about who owes who. Abhisit couldn't give the country an election when he wants anyway. I am amazed they even let him dress himself.

There is a point of view that should say , in his situation, he should quit because he wants a clear mandate of the people. Forget it, it will NEVER NEVER NEVER be allowed to happen.

[rixalex]

if there's an election in the near future and Phue Thai are elected with a working majority, as is very, very likely

Anyone who claims to know how the Thai population would vote at the next election is very, very likely to be speaking unsubstaniated nonsense based simply on their own personal preferences - otherwise known as wishful thinking.

[xminator]

From how I read this, the coup Thaksin refers to here is the one that can occur if the following happens: Coalition government splits over charter amendment (as in news today that is looking more likely then ever). Coalition parties then join ranks with PT to ammend constitution - or worse (from a Democrat viewpoint) rollback to 97. Abhsit minority government have to chose to accept changes or step down. This is where the shadows loose the power they gained in 2006 and the stage is prepared for another coup.

That's probably bang on xminator.

Possibly, but I think a legal route will be taken before a coup.

You don't really have to look far when it comes to BJT.

Of course there will be all sorts of red tape, smoke and mirrors, and maybe there is noone ready to take the risk of a coup either. Its just one possible way to a environment where the power base that currently seem solid enough disapears and what Thaksin is talking about make sense. Well at least sort of makes sense...

[xminator]

Wrong! Thaksin's supporters did get the majority of MPs elected.

Didnt PPP need support from other parties to establish a government? Anyone have the current split of party MPs in the parliament after all the by-elections?

[termad]

Thing is whatever your point of view on Taksin he was the last democratically elected PM, on at least 2 times.

/.../ and the only way to restore the democracy is to have an election.

Uh, what? Samak et al wasn't democratically elected? Wow, are we reaching consensus that election fraud is bad?

the going rate for voting for thaksin's parties up here in issan was 300 baht per vote. so it's hard to say that winning an election by vote buying is real democracy.

All Thai political parties have been in the habit of vote buying in the past but now with so much Court involvement I doubt it will be a factor in the next Election. I am in any case very dubious if it is in fact possible to actually buy votes i.e. If I give little farmer Nok Baht 200 to vote for me how do I know that he will do so? I can hardly stand and look over his shoulder when he plants his cross on the ballot paper. I know for a fact many people in Bangkok (Democrats) were given Baht 200 so they must be cheaper that Issan voters. But I doubt that that made any difference to the election result.

You say that Samak et al weren't democraticaly elected but to prove that statement you would need to show evidence that the majority of the majority of people who elected them had been bought and I doubt that you could do that or in fact that it is true.

There is only one instance where everybody is sure that massive vote buying took place and that was when the Elite/Military and the Democrat Party bought Newin Chitbob and forty Phue Thai party MPs. How many millions of votes did those forty MPs represent and how many millions of baht were they bought for? Or do you think that they were bought for Baht 200 each?

[justnbangkok]

I want to see this grown man to cry when the verdict comes and he loses a lot of money

when I saw a speach of Khun Thaksin yesterday he looked already like near crying and breaking into tears.

All he wants is BACK TO THE MONEY and every day counts. Atm other people filling their pockets. Doesnt matter, at least he did something

in Thailand for what many Thais liked him.....what Abhisit did since he came to power ????????????????? RIGHT, NOTHING!!!!!!!

Thaksin did nothing either. It was Abhisit who bought legally more fire and rescue equipment for the poor provinces as well as spend more than a 1 billion baht on job training and education for the poor provinces as well while Thaksin lined his pockets from subway construction and bts delays while Abhisit has them opening up on schedule while under Thaksin they were delayed. Thaksin publicly denied that 9/11 attacks ever happened and not one Thai baht or condolence was made from his government to the U.S. Under Thaksin, thai education went from one of the best in se asia to dead last. Thaksin used martial law to murder over 10,000 "drug dealers" while he had business interests with North Korean, Burmese drug mafia. he wanted to control the market himselves.

[RegularReader]

if there's an election in the near future and Phue Thai are elected with a working majority, as is very, very likely

Anyone who claims to know how the Thai population would vote at the next election is very, very likely to be speaking unsubstaniated nonsense based simply on their own personal preferences - otherwise known as wishful thinking.

Well said Rialex.

To the posters who picked up on my ignorance of the British system, I presume they are from there, or at least have a more thorough knowledge of the workings of government there, than I do?

I accept the premise, a significant number voted the way they did, because they wanted Thaksin back.

There is also a point in saying, changing sides in the manner the BJT did, is unethical - it would be considered the same in my home country, as well. But, when this whole rag bag of politics, is so full of low ethical standards by all sides, doing the "right thing", gets little attention - by all sides, either. It's somewhat like playing a football game and seeing what you can get away with, behind the referee's back. If he doesn't see it, it must be okay...or an "honest mistake" ?

Edited January 26, 2010 by RegularReader

[termad]

if there's an election in the near future and Phue Thai are elected with a working majority, as is very, very likely

Anyone who claims to know how the Thai population would vote at the next election is very, very likely to be speaking unsubstaniated nonsense based simply on their own personal preferences - otherwise known as wishful thinking.

Well said Rialex.

To the posters who picked up on my ignorance of the British system, I presume they are from there, or at least have a more thorough knowledge of the workings of government there, than I do?

I accept the premise, a significant number voted the way they did, because they wanted Thaksin back.

There is also a point in saying, changing sides in the manner the BJT did, is unethical - it would be considered the same in my home country, as well. But, when this whole rag bag of politics, is so full of low ethical standards by all sides, doing the "right thing", gets little attention - by all sides, either. It's somewhat like playing a football game and seeing what you can get away with, behind the referee's back. If he doesn't see it, it must be okay...or an "honest mistake" ?

The unsubstanciated nonsense that you refer to is in fact demographic fact i.e. 30% of the Thai population live in Issan and the vast majority of people in Issan would vote for Phue Thai. Also a very large percentage of the Thai population live in the North and again the vast majority of them would vote for Phue Thai. If you add these percentages together with the percentage of Phue Thai supporters in other parts of Thailand Phue Thai will win the next election. This is why Abhisit can't call an election because he knows he would lose. If you doubt that look back at the results of the last elections.

It is a nice piece of understatement to call the actions of Bhumjaithai unethical but whatever you call them the majority of voters in Thailand believe that they have been robbed of their votes three times and the longer Abhisit stays in power the more their resentment will grow. His coalition government is looking shaky

and I think that he will have to call an election soon - as an example look at what is happening with Constitution amendment. Abhisit does not want to change the Constitution but he is being told by Bhumjaithai that he has to.

There are now two bad scenarios laying ahead. a) Abhisit doesn't call an election and resentment boils over into a violent uprising Abhisit calls an election and loses and the Military stages a coup and again there is a violent uprising which would be supported by international oppinion.