Thailand to impose security law for Thaksin protests

[webfact]

UPDATE

Thailand imposes tough security law for Thaksin protests

by Boonradom Chitradon

BANGKOK (AFP) -- Thailand's government Tuesday agreed to impose a tough security law ahead of protests this weekend, vowing to use "all means" to stop violence by backers of ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

The Internal Security Act allows authorities to deploy troops on the streets during mass anti-government rallies in Bangkok by the so-called "Red Shirts" and also to impose curfews and ban gatherings.

Under the law, to be in force between March 11 and 23, the government also banned farm vehicles from the capital in an apparent bid to block the movement of protesters from Thaksin's heartland in the rural north.

"The cabinet has approved the imposition of the Internal Security Act and the prime minister has assigned each ministry certain responsibilities," said Satit Wongnongtaey, a minister attached to premier Abhisit Vejjajiva's office.

Organisers say they expect up to 600,000 Red Shirts to start gathering in Bangkok from Friday for the main day of protests on Sunday against a court ruling last month that confiscated 1.4 billion dollars of Thaksin's fortune.

The government predicts that around 100,000 protesters will gather.

Security officials said at least 30,000 troops and police would be deployed or on standby along with thousands more civilian security volunteers, although final numbers had yet to be determined.

The government has also prepared safe houses for senior figures.

The country remains deeply divided between supporters of the populist Thaksin, who was deposed in a military coup in 2006, and those among the Bangkok-based elites who view him as corrupt.

Satit said the transport ministry would ban improvised farm trucks -- open-sided vehicles that drive on tractor engines -- from entering Bangkok as they could be used to ferry large numbers of protesters from the countryside.

Thaksin, who made his fortune in telecommunications, has been egging on his supporters from self-imposed exile in Dubai, where he is living to avoid a jail term for graft.

Thai Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij on Monday said the government would take all means within the law to prevent violence.

Korn said Abhisit respected the right to peaceful protest but added that the government also fully intended to "use all means within its powers, within the laws of the country, to make sure that the property and safety of its citizens are protected".

On Monday Abhisit briefed Thailand's revered king, who has been hospitalised for the past five months, on the weekend's planned rallies, dubbed "The Red March" by local media.

Any migrant workers attending the rallies would meanwhile be subject to a five-year jail term and fines of up to 100,000 baht (3,100 dollars), Labour Minister Phaitoon Kaeothong said.

Thailand's economy relies on workers from its poorer neighbours Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia, but in recent months the country has become tougher on immigration and has been accused of widespread mistreatment of migrants.

Senior Reds insist they will protest peacefully, but it promises to be the biggest rally since last April, when up to 100,000 Red Shirts derailed a major Asian summit and ensuing riots left two people dead.

The Philippines on Tuesday advised its citizens to avoid travelling to Thailand ahead of the protests.

"Filipinos are advised to postpone all non-essential travel to Thailand, specifically Bangkok," the foreign office said, adding that those in Bangkok had been advised to avoid potential flashpoints and protest spots.

-- ©Copyright AFP 2010-03-08

Published with written approval from AFP.

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[slapout]

I am glad to see so many people approach this and closely related subjects with such open minds. The exchange of information, ideas, and knowledge has brought the world to where it is today (for better or worse) depending on your point of view. The situation in Thailand, as little as I understand it, reminds me of the pissing contest we boys use to have, the advantage seemed to favor the one who controlled the starting time/place, while maintaining enough control not to piss ones-self. Just hope its the deserving ones who get caught with their di.ks hanging out.

[Old Man River]

the pure existence of point 10 in that ISA list makes Thailand to a failed state if the government really need such a law. if they will actually practise point 10 its over.

Then I guess you think that both Singapore and Malaysia are failed states as well. They both have far more severe ISA's have both used them far more then Thailand ever has.

TH

China, Burma and North Korea have such laws too, it doesn't mean Thailand should have to rely on it though.

Unless, of course, if you are actually living in Bangkok and several hundred thousand have threatened to come into your city, where your kids live, and shut it down. Then, you will be happy that Thailand has such laws and relies on them.

[animatic]

the pure existence of point 10 in that ISA list makes Thailand to a failed state if the government really need such a law. if they will actually practise point 10 its over.

Then I guess you think that both Singapore and Malaysia are failed states as well. They both have far more severe ISA's have both used them far more then Thailand ever has.

TH

China, Burma and North Korea have such laws too, it doesn't mean Thailand should have to rely on it though.

Unless, of course, if you are actually living in Bangkok and several hundred thousand have threatened to come into your city, where your kids live, and shut it down. Then, you will be happy that Thailand has such laws and relies on them.

Exactly!

[boggle]

yes they were elected by the people and the party that wins the most seats is the party that is wanted to govern, so the dems did not win the most seats, the PPP won the most seats even taking aside their coalitions, they won more seats than the dems, the people wante dthe PPP to govern, if they wanted the dems to govern then the dems would have won enough seats to govern without needing the disbandment of the government, lets be honest here, this is the only way they are going to get to govern and that is why they are trying to hang on to it. if they call an election they will be out on their ears again, they will get the yellows to start up again and all hel_l will probably break lose again as the government elected by the people is not the government wanted by the elite and ruling classes.

that said however there should be an elected government in place, and not one that the people did not want in the first place.

In a democracy it is possible for a party with the most votes still not to be able to form a government. The fact that they didn't get more than 50% of the votes just shows that a majority of the people didn't want them.

They then need to form a coalition with minor parties to form government.

If all the smaller parties decide that they actually want to form government with the party that got the second largest number of votes, then that makes it a legitimately formed government.

I dare say that a preferential voting system would go a long way to fixing some of these problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting

[Sunderland]

Anyone know what time the curfew will be? I'm planning to entertain foreign friends the 12th-17th, and it'd be nice to know in what areas and and at what times there would be restrictions. Sorry, if this has already been asked in this long 15-page thread!

It's just been reported on Thai Rumours TV that you have to be inside and tucked in bed by 10pm or Wee Willie Winkie will be checking up on you.

I suggest taking your foreign friends outside Bangkok and its surrounding provinces that are subject to the ISA ruling. You can stay up until the wee hours in Chonburi, Rayong or Prachuab. A quick flight to Phuket or Krabi will probably also result in restriction free entertaining.

[jdinasia]

the pure existence of point 10 in that ISA list makes Thailand to a failed state if the government really need such a law. if they will actually practise point 10 its over.

Then I guess you think that both Singapore and Malaysia are failed states as well. They both have far more severe ISA's have both used them far more then Thailand ever has.

TH

For that matter take a look at the US's Patriot Act and it didn't have to be called up each time it was/is needed.

The failed state argument certainly doen't hold water when you look at laws in other places!

[slimdog]

the pure existence of point 10 in that ISA list makes Thailand to a failed state if the government really need such a law. if they will actually practise point 10 its over.

Then I guess you think that both Singapore and Malaysia are failed states as well. They both have far more severe ISA's have both used them far more then Thailand ever has.

TH

For that matter take a look at the US's Patriot Act and it didn't have to be called up each time it was/is needed.

The failed state argument certainly doen't hold water when you look at laws in other places!

You are aware that "point 10" as highlighted by Mazltov (Internal security Act be 2551; Section 21), is designed purely for individuals who may have breached an ISOC order because of a mistake or ignorance. It isn't allowed to be applied to individuals who intentionally break a law or ISOC order.

[chantorn]

Just distribute yellow t-shirt to the UDD protesters. In that way, they will have to problem arriving at Sanum Luang on Sunday.

[Thai at Heart]

Unless, of course, if you are actually living in Bangkok and several hundred thousand have threatened to come into your city, where your kids live, and shut it down. Then, you will be happy that Thailand has such laws and relies on them.

I would prefer that the law is enacted once something bad happens. Who knows, 1mn farmers may fancy a protest against something next month. Will the ISA be enacted? It is a law that is completely open to abuse.

Challenging legal protest with laws such as this is a very slippery slope and it is a sign of the failings of the civilian government and police that the army is required in this context.

Essentially, the army is kingmaker, which we all knew before but simply because the situation is that the army in Thailand has a role different to elsewhere in the world and TIT, doesn't make it right.

[thaihome]

the pure existence of point 10 in that ISA list makes Thailand to a failed state if the government really need such a law. if they will actually practise point 10 its over.

Then I guess you think that both Singapore and Malaysia are failed states as well. They both have far more severe ISA's have both used them far more then Thailand ever has.

TH

China, Burma and North Korea have such laws too, it doesn't mean Thailand should have to rely on it though.

China, Burma and North Korea are authoritarian regimes and this is typical strawman that people use. Your point seemed to be that somehow Thailand was unique in its ISA laws and was therefore a "failed state", when in fact virtually every country has them, including provisions for detention.

TH

[animatic]

yes they were elected by the people and the party that wins the most seats is the party that is wanted to govern, so the dems did not win the most seats, the PPP won the most seats even taking aside their coalitions, they won more seats than the dems, the people wante dthe PPP to govern, if they wanted the dems to govern then the dems would have won enough seats to govern without needing the disbandment of the government, lets be honest here, this is the only way they are going to get to govern and that is why they are trying to hang on to it. if they call an election they will be out on their ears again, they will get the yellows to start up again and all hel_l will probably break lose again as the government elected by the people is not the government wanted by the elite and ruling classes.

that said however there should be an elected government in place, and not one that the people did not want in the first place.

In a democracy it is possible for a party with the most votes still not to be able to form a government. The fact that they didn't get more than 50% of the votes just shows that a majority of the people didn't want them.

They then need to form a coalition with minor parties to form government.

If all the smaller parties decide that they actually want to form government with the party that got the second largest number of votes, then that makes it a legitimately formed government.

I dare say that a preferential voting system would go a long way to fixing some of these problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting

There are definite merits to using such a system.

[Thai at Heart]

China, Burma and North Korea are authoritarian regimes and this is typical strawman that people use. Your point seemed to be that somehow Thailand was unique in its ISA laws and was therefore a "failed state", when in fact virtually every country has them, including provisions for detention.

TH

Someone else mentioned that Thailand has become a failed state not me. Enacting such laws quite so regularly doesn't create a warm and fuzzy feeling for the current state of Thailand does it now.

As I answered elsewhere, simply because other countries has ISA laws on the books, how they are used is probably of more importance than the fact that you have them. Enforcing such laws (I can't remember how many times this one has been enacted now) is a very serious issue and I would much prefer for Thailand not to use it with such alacrity. It is a damning indictment of the uselessness of the police force and the legal system that the army is the only port of call to provide security and even they are split apparently. But then, after senior policemen getting fired because of the PAD mess (on the back of evidence from GT 2000 detectors partially) I am not surprised that the police want absolutely nothing to do with helping out the current government, as ridiculous a situation as that should be.

It should not be the army's job to control protests, and reading the law itself it is very draconian. Of course it will be very convenient for the army acting under the ISA that should people get killed, I would imagine there will be absolutely no legal recourse for the victims.

There was an article yesterday that essentially the army is kingmaker. It's support for this law can be extremely selective, and essentially has put the army even more at the centre of Thai politics. I don't tend to rely on army or governmental generosity to not abuse such laws in the developed let alone the developing world.

Whoopee. Army dictatorship by governmental proxy.

[thaihome]

China, Burma and North Korea are authoritarian regimes and this is typical strawman that people use. Your point seemed to be that somehow Thailand was unique in its ISA laws and was therefore a "failed state", when in fact virtually every country has them, including provisions for detention.

TH

Someone else mentioned that Thailand has become a failed state not me. Enacting such laws quite so regularly doesn't create a warm and fuzzy feeling for the current state of Thailand does it now.

As I answered elsewhere, simply because other countries has ISA laws on the books, how they are used is probably of more importance than the fact that you have them. Enforcing such laws (I can't remember how many times this one has been enacted now) is a very serious issue and I would much prefer for Thailand not to use it with such alacrity. It is a damning indictment of the uselessness of the police force and the legal system that the army is the only port of call to provide security and even they are split apparently. But then, after senior policemen getting fired because of the PAD mess (on the back of evidence from GT 2000 detectors partially) I am not surprised that the police want absolutely nothing to do with helping out the current government, as ridiculous a situation as that should be.

It should not be the army's job to control protests, and reading the law itself it is very draconian. Of course it will be very convenient for the army acting under the ISA that should people get killed, I would imagine there will be absolutely no legal recourse for the victims.

There was an article yesterday that essentially the army is kingmaker. It's support for this law can be extremely selective, and essentially has put the army even more at the centre of Thai politics. I don't tend to rely on army or governmental generosity to not abuse such laws in the developed let alone the developing world.

Whoopee. Army dictatorship by governmental proxy.

Perhaps a read about how many people Malaysia has detained under the ISA would give you some perspective.

I do agree that it is a shame that the police cannot be trusted to control such demostrations, but certainly their attack on the PAD in Oct 2008 shows why that is true. Compare that to how the Army controlled the Songkran riots last year.

TH

[anotherpeter]

I dare say that a preferential voting system would go a long way to fixing some of these problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting

There are definite merits to using such a system.

IMO, a preferential system would be too confusing for most people in Thailand. They are only just getting used to voting in the first place. In countries like Australia where preferential voting is used, there is a lot of advertising before the elections on how to vote correctly, and there are still thousands of votes that are deemed invalid because the ballot has been filled out incorrectly.

[mazeltov]

the pure existence of point 10 in that ISA list makes Thailand to a failed state if the government really need such a law. if they will actually practise point 10 its over.

Then I guess you think that both Singapore and Malaysia are failed states as well. They both have far more severe ISA's have both used them far more then Thailand ever has.

TH

For that matter take a look at the US's Patriot Act and it didn't have to be called up each time it was/is needed.

The failed state argument certainly doen't hold water when you look at laws in other places!

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Public Statement

AI Index: ASA 39/010/2007 (Public)

News Service No: 155

10 August 2007

Thailand's Internal Security Bill -- sweeping powers for the military with little accountability

Amnesty International is concerned that the "Draft Act on the Maintenance of National Security in the Kingdom" (Draft Act), currently under review by Thailand's Council of State (the government's legal advisory body), would, if passed into law, violate international human rights standards and further jeopardise human rights in Thailand.

The Draft Act vests sweeping and ill-defined powers in the military, in particular the Commander-in-Chief, including powers to take command of state agencies, to carry out long-term detention, and to suppress groups and individuals perceived by him as posing a threat to national security. The Draft Act will also ensure impunity from prosecution for human rights violations perpetrated under its provisions.

Amnesty International acknowledges the challenges, including security challenges, facing Thailand, and the duty that the Thai authorities have to ensure the safety of the population. However, the organization is calling upon the authorities to face these challenges while protecting and respecting the human rights of all. In this context, a recent statement by the Defence Minister Boonrawd Somtas that the clashes between anti-coup protesters and the police on 22 July 2007 in Bangkok provided justification for the Draft Act is a cause for concern.1

The Draft Act proposes the creation of several bodies. The powers of these bodies are concentrated in the hands of one man -- the Director of a revived Internal Security Operation Command (ISOC) -- who is the "Royal Army Commander-in-Chief" (Article 9).

The following powers are among those which the Army Commander-in-Chief, in his capacity as the Director of ISOC, would be able to exercise:

Take command of "state agencies" -- which, undefined and unlimited, may in effect mean the full civil service apparatus [Article 24];

Impose restrictions on freedom of movement, assembly and information [Articles 25(2), 25(3) and 25(6)];

Order "the use of military force" in accordance with Martial law [Article 25(8)];

Arrest and detain a person, on the basis of a court warrant, for seven days initially, with extensions of up to 30 days in total [Article 26(1)];

"Suppress" groups, individual and organizations perceived by him as posing a threat to national security [Article 26(2)];

Compel any person to issue statements; appear in person or hand in "any documents or evidence" [Article 26(3)];

Search individuals, vehicles and buildings [Articles 26(4)] -- while this section states that such searches must be carried out according to the Criminal Procedure Code, under the terms of which court authorisation is usually necessary, there is no clear statement in this Act that a court warrant is required;

Enter and search homes [Article 26(5)] -- the terms of this section are contradictory and appear to suggest that such searches generally do not require a court warrant;

Seize or freeze assets, document or other evidence [Article 26(6)]

Order the "training at a special location" of suspects, in lieu of pressing charges against them, for up to six months (Article 31). Such training apparently requires the "consent" of the suspect, but with the threat of criminal procedures as alternative, the voluntariness of consent to such "training" is doubtful. In the absence of freely given consent, such training is therefore likely to amount to arbitrary detention.

Unless otherwise stated, none of the above provisions requires court authorisation for the powers to be exercised.

The Draft Act contains no objective criteria and no procedures to declare a state of emergency or establish that the use of these powers is necessary or justified. The only requirement is the subjective determination by the Army Commander-in-Chief that "there appears to be" or "there is an instance" of "an act which is a threat to the national security in the Kingdom" (Articles 24, 25). Such acts are very broadly and vaguely defined, including not only acts of violence but also "trans-border crime," "propaganda" and "incitement" (Article 2). The powers given to the Army Commander-in-Chief can be used anywhere in Thailand at any time.

While Article 4 provides that there should be "checks and balances" on the exercise of power under this Act, there are no clear proposals beyond this generic provision to institute effective safeguards to ensure that the Army Commander-in-Chief's sweeping powers can be countervailed. The limited scrutiny by the courts further compounds the risk that powers will be arbitrarily exercised and abused.

Moreover, Amnesty International is seriously concerned that the Draft Act exempts all government officials who have committed crimes while acting in accordance with the act from any criminal or civil liability, or even disciplinary action, if they had exercised "functions honestly, in a non-discriminatory manner and within reason" (Article 37). Amnesty International opposes granting impunity for any human rights violation.

The organization is further concerned that with the enactment of this draft law, several key human rights would be in jeopardy of being violated with impunity. These rights are enshrined in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and provided, among others, in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Thailand is a state party. They include:

Freedom of movement

Freedom of assembly

Freedom from arbitrary detention

The right to fair trial procedures

The right to privacy

Amnesty International's research has shown that where legislation gives the military or other authorities special powers in contravention of international human rights standards, they facilitate other human rights violations beyond those that such legislation leads to in the first instance. These further violations have often included violations of the right to life and freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

As Amnesty International has reported in the past, Thailand has for decades enacted wide-ranging and vaguely worded Emergency Decrees and Martial Law, granting the military sweeping powers, particularly in the south. These have resulted in human rights violations, and have not brought peace or security. The Draft Act, if passed, would further entrench the legacy of impunity which has characterised recent Thai history. For example, investigations into the deaths of almost 200 people, caused by the security forces' ill-treatment and excessive use of lethal force, during the violent suppression of attacks by armed groups on government facilities in three southern provinces on 28 April 2004, and during the Tak Bai demonstrations on 25 October 2004, have not resulted in those responsible being brought to justice. In addition, the enforced disappearances of more than 20 people since the escalation of violence in the south in 2004 remain unsolved.

To ensure respect for human rights, the Thai government must investigate, prosecute and hold accountable those suspected of crime, including of violent crime, using normal civilian laws and criminal procedures in civilian courts, rather than resorting to human rights violations in fighting threats to national security.

The Draft Act, as currently formulated, is in breach of international human rights law and standards, and accordingly, it should not be passed by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA). Amnesty International therefore calls upon the Thai authorities to either withdraw the Draft Act or else reform it extensively, to ensure full compliance with international human rights law and standards.

Background

Following cabinet approval on 19 June 2007, the Draft Act was forwarded to the Council of State for review before it goes to the NLA for debate. The military-led Council for National Security established after the 19 September 2006 coup has exercised key decision-making powers over government appointments, including the NLA, which is serving as the interim legislature pending a referendum set for 19 August 2007 and elections envisaged to take place by the end of the year, as well as in the constitution drafting process.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=...2007〈=e

Edited March 10, 2010 by mazeltov

[jdinasia]

Yes Mazeltov --- I understand you are quoting the most extremely liberal organization in the world. The issue isn't what the extreme left thinks but what is reasonable. The ICJ report was far more informative. To remark upon AI's report without showing it in context to the argument that your "failed state" argument doesn't hold water is plain silly. Look at what they have written about similar legislation all over the world and THEN make the comparison.

Note --- the legislation being discussed in the AI paper is NOT the current legislation. The draft bill was changed significantly as reported by the ICJ.

[mazeltov]

I don't tend to rely on army or governmental generosity to not abuse such laws in the developed let alone the developing world.

Whoopee. Army dictatorship by governmental proxy.

Exactly!

[mazeltov]

Note --- the legislation being discussed in the AI paper is NOT the current legislation. The draft bill was changed significantly as reported by the ICJ.

i quoted it for an additional reason.

Note --- what points are quoted in the first entry of this thread and which points the AI papers is about.

when will these far right authoritarians learn that they are not in the center and that there is a difference between "extremely liberal" and "extreme left"?

and i don't think that concerns about human right issues aren't exactly a very extreme political position. if you start to deny them, or coming up with arguments to justify that human rights should not be granted to everybody you are moving into an extreme corner.

[the_webninja]

President George W. Bush wrote most of that stuff right into a Constitutional Amendment here in the US, PERMANENTLY! And no matter how many people jumped up and down and screamed about it, it still stayed in there, and when the people elected Obama thinking he would repeal it all, it is STILL on the Books as of today.

I realized Thailand was falling under the Influence of American Laws when I left from Florida to go to Pattaya, and saw them implementing the exact same Laws in Pattaya they had just passed in Florida only a year before, almost to the Letter.

Many of these Laws are suspected to be the Work of the Bilderberg Group and the Banking Cartels who took over and did the same things in England before they even knew what happened and created the Euro before anyone could say "What?".

Now they have plans to Implement the Amero in the US under the North American Union Plans which will join together Canada, US, and Mexico in the same way they did Europe, and effectively destroy the Constitutions (AND FREEDOMS) of those countries.

Often times these Groups will do things like a Magic Trick, they draw your attention to some "Bad Guys" or "Terrorists" (Many times they paid off to create the diversion in the first place) then they implement these new "Security measures" to "Fight the Bad Guys"

when in Reality they are Assuming Control of the People in every country in the world for the purpose of Enslaving the People so They can get Richer, and we get Poorer. They Implement these Security Laws without any Checks and Balances because once people finally realize what has happened, there will be World Wide Rebellion. But by then it will be too late. They will already have the Legal justification to Imprison anyone who opposes them. They Brain wash the Police and military by using these new Laws they Created, and they just tell them "Go Enforce the Law" and they blindly accept these orders without realizing they are just puppets for the Banking Cartels who most likely already BOUGHT Thailand.

True the Red Shirts DID in fact Embarrass the Thai Government when they threw a big Riot and Disrupted the World Asian summit in Pattaya a while back, and it IS True that one of their Leaders is being Prosecuted right now, so they DO have to be on Guard. So I DO see a need for such Martial Law regarding the Red Shirts.

I just hope they don't use the Red Shirts to implement the Bilderberg Group's master plans in Thailand.

Cause I was planning to Run away from the US to go Live on a little Island in Thailand to get away from all the BS in the US.

If the Bilderberg Group takes over Asia before I can get out of the US, then that pretty much screws up that plan doesn't it?

Guess I have to buy a Boat.

[jdinasia]

Note --- the legislation being discussed in the AI paper is NOT the current legislation. The draft bill was changed significantly as reported by the ICJ.

i quoted it for an additional reason.

Note --- what points are quoted in the first entry of this thread and which points the AI papers is about.

when will these far right authoritarians learn that they are not in the center and that there is a difference between "extremely liberal" and "extreme left"?

and i don't think that concerns about human right issues aren't exactly a very extreme political position. if you start to deny them, or coming up with arguments to justify that human rights should not be granted to everybody you are moving into an extreme corner.

lol

Hmmmm the most aggregious human rights violations in Thailand's recent history all happened in Thaksin's regime. The fact that the acts discussed here are used in other countries (significant countries) pretty much shows that crying about them being used judiciously is just silly.

[johncitizen]

Yes Mazeltov --- I understand you are quoting the most extremely liberal organization in the world. The issue isn't what the extreme left thinks but what is reasonable. The ICJ report was far more informative. To remark upon AI's report without showing it in context to the argument that your "failed state" argument doesn't hold water is plain silly. Look at what they have written about similar legislation all over the world and THEN make the comparison.

Note --- the legislation being discussed in the AI paper is NOT the current legislation. The draft bill was changed significantly as reported by the ICJ.

I notice you didn't mind them when they were decrying Thaksin's human rights violations.

But now that the "haves have", Amnesty is suddenly just another bunch of bleeding hearts...

[jdinasia]

Yes Mazeltov --- I understand you are quoting the most extremely liberal organization in the world. The issue isn't what the extreme left thinks but what is reasonable. The ICJ report was far more informative. To remark upon AI's report without showing it in context to the argument that your "failed state" argument doesn't hold water is plain silly. Look at what they have written about similar legislation all over the world and THEN make the comparison.

Note --- the legislation being discussed in the AI paper is NOT the current legislation. The draft bill was changed significantly as reported by the ICJ.

I notice you didn't mind them when they were decrying Thaksin's human rights violations.

But now that the "haves have", Amnesty is suddenly just another bunch of bleeding hearts...

You will find that I have not resorted to quoting AI as a reputable source ever. Then again I have ALWAYS thought they were a bunch of extremists that were more interested in an ideal utopia than a working society. But tell me about Thaksin's human rights violations and why you are working with a group that even recently has stated thier goal is bringing him back and even giving him his money back?

[ThailandLovr]

<snip> Most horrifying was talking to foreigners who admired George W. Bush <snip>

You lose credibility when you make stupid statements like this. Many people hate Bush but many love him.

Live with it.

[Jingthing]

<snip> Most horrifying was talking to foreigners who admired George W. Bush <snip>

You lose credibility when you make stupid statements like this. Many people hate Bush but many love him.

Live with it.

You took my comment completely out of context. Nobody even knows the issue that was discussed there (which was how it is perfectly OK for foreigners to have political OPINIONS) reading your post. Cheers.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Jingthing

[johncitizen]

Then again I have ALWAYS thought they were a bunch of extremists that were more interested in an ideal utopia than a working society.

And it is thanks to people like you that this ideal world will never be achieved. You are a walking, talking, self-fulfilling prophecy.

[granuaile]

<snip> Most horrifying was talking to foreigners who admired George W. Bush <snip>

You lose credibility when you make stupid statements like this. Many people hate Bush but many love him.

Live with it.

Wow, I guess some must have, but then I've met very few who loved him.... Actually I've never met anyone who admitted it. Personally, well never mind....

[neverdie]

<snip> Most horrifying was talking to foreigners who admired George W. Bush <snip>

You lose credibility when you make stupid statements like this. Many people hate Bush but many love him.

Live with it.

Wow, I guess some must have, but then I've met very few who loved him.... Actually I've never met anyone who admitted it. Personally, well never mind....

I liked george w (jnr), he use to make me laugh, it was easily seen that he was a JACKASS and never failed to attract a few laughs. I can still never understand how the man actually managed to make Presidents of the USA, but thats another story. The man was a first class fool, so it just shows you doenst it. Has anyone else noticed the similarities between him and his replacement.

Anyway, thankfully neither of those idiots gentleman are running the show in Thailand whilst they try to deal with the issues at hand.

[jdinasia]

Then again I have ALWAYS thought they were a bunch of extremists that were more interested in an ideal utopia than a working society.

And it is thanks to people like you that this ideal world will never be achieved. You are a walking, talking, self-fulfilling prophecy.

Right ---

I would MUCH rather have a world that works than to strive for some insane ideal of utopia. I do like how you cut the meat out of what I said and stuck with what you (erroneously) thought would score points

Give me a world where convicted criminals serve their time and not run away. Give me a world where disgraced generals aren't allowed to run around free with grenades and threatening the judges of a country! Give me a world where a group of people CONSISTANTLY caught in electoral fraud are not held up as heroes and instead are thought of as the traitors to the ideals of democracy that they really are! Give me a world where a criminal that is running from his sentence doesn't dare compare himself to a man that actually stayed and served his sentence when he was convicted.

Many people would say I was wanting a utopia, but all I want is a working society

[ThailandLovr]

I liked george w (jnr), he use to make me laugh, it was easily seen that he was a JACKASS and never failed to attract a few laughs. I can still never understand how the man actually managed to make Presidents of the USA, but thats another story. The man was a first class fool, so it just shows you doenst it. Has anyone else noticed the similarities between him and his replacement.

Anyway, thankfully neither of those idiots gentleman are running the show in Thailand whilst they try to deal with the issues at hand.

...and many people love Obama while many hate him. Agreed Mr. Neverdie, it has been quite some time since the last really good U.S. president.