Thai Govt Likely To Enforce State Of Emergency On Top Of ISA

[Asa]

Another abserdity of Abhisit administration. Government now has already has more men ready to use force on the red shirts, and at extra pay.

[Thai at Heart]

It makes no dam_n difference who is elected if they require the tacit approval of a bloke in camoflage and an M16.

It is really of no importance who is elected if by definition the whole system can be reorganised over and over again by the army. I notice that in Turkey recently (the only other country I can find where the army has become self appointed protecter of the state) that the civilian government arrested several high ranking army personnel for plotting coups. I wouldn't imagine that something similar might happen in the next few years here.

We all sit and debate Ahbist stole the PM ship, and the treatment of Thaksin was fair or unfair, whilst there is a 10 ton gorilla dressed in army uniform in the corner. To have slipped from governments obtaining essentially complete majorities for the first time (some would say a stunning development in Thai political history) to having the Dems team up with a bunch of mafia from Buriram to form a government is ridiculous.

The repeated meddling of the army is the first and foremost political problem in the country. The politicians come and go in and out of power, but to me the main issue is finding a role that the army can perform and be subject to the control of the civilian government. The only constant in the mess of so called Thai democracy is the repeated imposition of the will of the army through the power of the gun.

And people wonder why possibly a portion of the population is pissed off at the political shennanigins that has gone on in the last 5 years in Thailand. Corruption can be tackled through the law, the repeated actions of the army and their apparent favoritism for some parties over others is the fundamental problem.

[animatic]

You know I'm not sure why all these red shirts are screaming foul over the ISA. After all, their beloved father Thaksin was the one who created the ISA law in the first place. Oh, how delicious the irony is...

That is not true. The ISA is the brainchild of the junta.

Again the BS. Drek mit Leber.

The junta REVISED an existing law under Thaksin

and made it stronger.

[hardy1943]

Another abserdity of Abhisit administration. Government now has already has more men ready to use force on the red shirts, and at extra pay.

All of this can be avoided.

Why is the Elite so scared of a true election 1 vote per Thai???

[Gary A]

Another abserdity of Abhisit administration. Government now has already has more men ready to use force on the red shirts, and at extra pay.

All of this can be avoided.

Why is the Elite so scared of a true election 1 vote per Thai???

Obviously you don't understand. They can't permit an election because the wrong people would likely be elected than they would need another coup, not to mention another new constitution. They had a coup and removed Thaksin. An election was held and the minsters elected a new PM, charges were trumped up and he was removed. The ministers elected another PM. He too was not acceptable and again the PM was removed. It wasn't until Newin caved in that a democrat was elected PM.

The red shirts will now disrupt traffic and put Bangkok in a total gridlock. The government will call a state of emergency and try to drive the red shirts off the streets. The violence will then commence. Abhisit must step down to prevent violence. There will be no winners, only losers.

[yoshiwara]

Another abserdity of Abhisit administration. Government now has already has more men ready to use force on the red shirts, and at extra pay.

All of this can be avoided.

Why is the Elite so scared of a true election 1 vote per Thai???

Obviously you don't understand. They can't permit an election because the wrong people would likely be elected than they would need another coup, not to mention another new constitution. They had a coup and removed Thaksin. An election was held and the minsters elected a new PM, charges were trumped up and he was removed. The ministers elected another PM. He too was not acceptable and again the PM was removed. It wasn't until Newin caved in that a democrat was elected PM.

The red shirts will now disrupt traffic and put Bangkok in a total gridlock. The government will call a state of emergency and try to drive the red shirts off the streets. The violence will then commence. Abhisit must step down to prevent violence. There will be no winners, only losers.

Clearly you are getting a little over-excited. Reds still threatening violence? The peacefulness apparently getting turned on and off like a tap. Mind you Bangkok locals remember when the reds attacked them last Songkran. The suspicion that the reds are still looking to go ballistic not incorrect.

[kurtgruen]

2 soldiers injured in M79 grenade attack

A M79 grenade was fired into the compound of the First Battalion of the 1st Infantry Regiment Monday afternoon, injuring two soldiers.

The regiment is located in front of the NBT station.

The soldiers were rushed to the Mongkut Klao Hospital.

-- The Nation

Just read this and the first thought that comes to mind, is a repeat of what happened to the PAD, at Government house, where M79 Grenades where shot into the population, killing and injuring resting demonstrators.

Now the blaming game will start again, where everyone blames each other and comes up with their version of what they think that happened.

Sad thing is, two soldiers got injured.

The big guys play there games and the little guys pay the price. It always turns out that way SICK!

[321niti123]

You clearly don't read the news. The red shirted leaders have made it clear they intend to cripple the city of Bangkok INDEFINITELY by blocking major roads. Is that what you call peaceful, disturbing the lives of millions of people, and potentially crippling the entire country? Get real.

QUOTE(from article):"Veera Musikapong, another leader, will address the rally today and deliver an ultimatum for Abhisit to dissolve the House and call a snap election."

And why not? This is not a democratically elected government. I don't support the red shirts - but having said that you must surely have some concerns about how this governemt came to power in the first place.

Further the army acted extra-judicially in their support last April. I.E. Din Daeng.

Actually, Abhisit was democratically elected. Why not a snap election? Is that your idea of democracy that an angry mob can demand an election anytime they fancy? Under threat of basically destroying the economy of the entire country by blocking the capital indefinitely? I won't use the T word, but I want to.

Last year the Election Committee found the PPP party guilty of election fraud. And very conveniently the Democrat party was given a free reign to form a coalition government in their place. This was all by design.

This was wrong. Very wrong. A snap election should have been held in this situation - just like in the west - but it wasn't.

There appeared to be covert collusion between the courts and the opposition.

All I say is let the red shirts have their day. And in the process - let true democracy have a say - whether that be through civil obedience - peaceful and non-violent - or through civil disobedience - or whatever -

By the west you mean the US which has a different government type than us, our government takes the form of a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, like the Great Britain, not a Republic like the US.

This government (contrary to your beliefs -not knowledge- I'm kinda in Theory Of Knowledge mode right now) legally came into power, in a parliamentary state, the party with the majority in the parliament gets to form the government[exactly what happened when PPP was convicted of election fraud-the democrats got the majority therefore they get to form the gov't] while the rest becomes the opposition.

And while we are on this topic the opposition side is supposed be helpful towards the goverment, work together, debate FORMALLY the pros and cons of a law, not try to stop everything the government tries to do just because they didnt get to form the government and they want to be cry babies [and yes i am referring to the puea thai party]

[kraxlhuber]

What a difference twenty-four hours makes. This time yesterday the total number of red shirts in BKK at each of the six meeting points was reported as being woefully low (well less than 10,000 ).

Now with intelligence reporting that there has been a massive increase in numbers over the last twenty-four hours the government - or sources close to it - are reporting that a state of emergency may be declared sometime tomorrow on top of the ISA.

It's still a peaceful demonstration. Up to now there have been absolutely NO reports of violence.

What are the government scared of? Numbers.

why are Farang among the protesters,are they symphatiser or followers,

would'nd be surprised whats at stakes.

Risky isn't,just imagine one of the rednecks got kidnapped!

[kraxlhuber]

One post was deleted. Thailand is not a republic, and if Thaksin returned as the elected leader, he would be Prime Minister.

Please watch what you post.

BANANA REPUBLIC ,ANYBOdy?T. returns to the dictatorship?

[kraxlhuber]

You clearly don't read the news. The red shirted leaders have made it clear they intend to cripple the city of Bangkok INDEFINITELY by blocking major roads. Is that what you call peaceful, disturbing the lives of millions of people, and potentially crippling the entire country? Get real.

I'd rather be the hammer ,then the nail.

[mazeltov]

You know I'm not sure why all these red shirts are screaming foul over the ISA. After all, their beloved father Thaksin was the one who created the ISA law in the first place. Oh, how delicious the irony is...

That is not true. The ISA is the brainchild of the junta.

My apologies, I meant the State of Emergency decree. The one that allows soldiers to actively intervene in dispersing protesters. This was the one that Thaksin enacted way back in 2006 to deal with the PAD.

Thai civic groups urge MPs, Senators to reject executive decree

Civic groups yesterday submitted a petition against the executive decree on public administration in emergency situations to the parliament president. Representatives from Thai Labour Solidarity, the State Enterprise Labour Relations Confederation, the Students Federation of Thailand and the Confederation for Democracy

were led by Weng Tochirakarn

to file the petition. The alliance called on MPs and senators to shoot down the controversial decree, to be debated in parliament...

Bangkok - August 23, 2005

you mean that one?

don't assume all anti-coup activists are pro-thaksin.

[lannarebirth]

You know I'm not sure why all these red shirts are screaming foul over the ISA. After all, their beloved father Thaksin was the one who created the ISA law in the first place. Oh, how delicious the irony is...

That is not true. The ISA is the brainchild of the junta.

My apologies, I meant the State of Emergency decree. The one that allows soldiers to actively intervene in dispersing protesters. This was the one that Thaksin enacted way back in 2006 to deal with the PAD.

Thai civic groups urge MPs, Senators to reject executive decree

Civic groups yesterday submitted a petition against the executive decree on public administration in emergency situations to the parliament president. Representatives from Thai Labour Solidarity, the State Enterprise Labour Relations Confederation, the Students Federation of Thailand and the Confederation for Democracy

were led by Weng Tochirakarn

to file the petition. The alliance called on MPs and senators to shoot down the controversial decree, to be debated in parliament...

Bangkok - August 23, 2005

you mean that one?

don't assume all anti-coup activists are pro-thaksin.

I've got a soft spot for true believers and I always had Weng pegged as such and not a Thaksin shill. That makes his intransigence on a 15 day dissolution in the face of a reasonable offer for early elections all the more baffling to me.

Edited March 29, 2010 by lannarebirth

[Publicus]

He's crossed the Rubicon for one reason or another, one can only speculate. True believers are often more subject and susceptible to flip flops than the casual affiliate of a cause or purpose. If I can passionately believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat, I just as easly can believe in in the dictatorship of national socializm (need I state Nazi?).

But more from a practical and pragmatic standpoint, not to mention selfish, it's also been said that every man has his price. (What's my price to switch to support Thaksin? A thousand virgins .)

Seriously, the guy has crossed the Rubicon, that's about it. So, yes, the remaining and outstanding question is why. Perhaps see the reason stated above, i.e., every man has his price.

Edited March 29, 2010 by Publicus

[mazeltov]

I've got a soft spot for true believers and I always had Weng pegged as such and not a Thaksin shill. That makes his intransigence on a 15 day dissolution in the face of a reasonable offer for early elections all the more baffling to me.

he is not a politican, but a true citizen. he challenges the power-hungry system. not bad. such activists are always a little bit odd. 'true believer' is the false word for charachters like him. 'true believers are group thinkers, authoritarian. he don't follow prophets.

from his point of view Abhisit lost any credit during the 2006/07 Junta days, guess Weng was patient long time enough. there is no compromise, no deal with the military. he is resolute - 'There is no way of living a false life correctly.' (Adorno).

1976, 1992, shaped his life. from there comes his stance against the coup and soldiers in the city.

Dr. Weng in interview

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/580

[TheOldWolf]

I've got a soft spot for true believers and I always had Weng pegged as such and not a Thaksin shill. That makes his intransigence on a 15 day dissolution in the face of a reasonable offer for early elections all the more baffling to me.

he is not a politican, but a true citizen. he challenges the power-hungry system. not bad. such activists are always a little bit odd. 'true believer' is the false word for charachters like him. 'true believers are group thinkers, authoritarian. he don't follow prophets.

from his point of view Abhisit lost any credit during the 2006/07 Junta days, guess Weng was patient long time enough. there is no compromise, no deal with the military. he is resolute - 'There is no way of living a false life correctly.' (Adorno).

1976, 1992, shaped his life. from there comes his stance against the coup and soldiers in the city.

Dr. Weng in interview

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/580

So Dr Wengt has formed "People's Committee for Reforming the 2007 Constitution", but it is all about getting 1997 constitution back, thats not reforming!

PM offers talk about making a new constitution, where all thais can take part, but it seems that reforming is not what People's Committee for Reforming the 2007 Constitution want.

Dr Weng is red from top to toe. He has got a new friend giving him money to change the constitution the way his master wants.

[lannarebirth]

I've got a soft spot for true believers and I always had Weng pegged as such and not a Thaksin shill. That makes his intransigence on a 15 day dissolution in the face of a reasonable offer for early elections all the more baffling to me.

he is not a politican, but a true citizen. he challenges the power-hungry system. not bad. such activists are always a little bit odd. 'true believer' is the false word for charachters like him. 'true believers are group thinkers, authoritarian. he don't follow prophets.

from his point of view Abhisit lost any credit during the 2006/07 Junta days, guess Weng was patient long time enough. there is no compromise, no deal with the military. he is resolute - 'There is no way of living a false life correctly.' (Adorno).

1976, 1992, shaped his life. from there comes his stance against the coup and soldiers in the city.

Dr. Weng in interview

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/580

Think, fixated on ideology.

[webfact]

UPDATE

ISA Extended for Another 7 Days

Today's Cabinet meeting has extended the implementation of the Internal Security Act for another seven days until April 6, 2010.

-- Tan Network 2010-03-30

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[moresomekl]

<br />

Ten thousand, one hundred thousand or even one million dose not make a majority in a population of over 60 million.

<br /><br /><br />How many of the 60 million chose to vote Abhisit into power?<br />

<br />A majority of the MPs that the 60 million voted for got together and chose to vote Abhisit into power. That is how a democracy works.<br /><br />(actually, not 60 million, less eligible voters, and less that actually voted ... so probably about 30 million voted)<br /><br />EDIT: It's the same in Aus and UK elections, voters don't actually vote for Kevin Rudd or Gordon Brown. They vote for their local MPs. The elected MPs then vote for the leader who becomes PM.<br />

<br /><br /><br /<br /><br />More like close to 39 millions eligible voters <br /><br />I dont understand your reasoning .<br />If a court throws 10% of MPs belonging to a majority in jail or impeach them , then the majority may becomes the minority , a new PM is elected , and yes you are right all MPs that vote for that PM were elected representatives . But that you find this to be democratic is hardly convincing . It means that in Thailand , courts can decide the parliament instead of the thai ppl . I cant think of another country including UK where this could happen without protests

<br />Yes Somchai could have dissolved the parliament but that is not an excuse for Abhasit not doing it . With this kind of argument you can justify coups and other abuses .<br />One can be excused to think that Abhisit did not call for election because he was fraid to loose them <br />Also according to my infos the PPP had the absolute majority (>240Mps) in the last democratic popular election in Thailand in Dec 2007 , so not forced to form a coalition . I think they had about 250+ . <br />But this discussion is purely academic , past is past , its just that Abhisit could had avoided the troubles .<br /> <br />Please do not conclude that i am in favor of 15 days elections , what is done is done ,things have changed I do think that a 9 months time frame is reasonable and for the good of the thai ppl . I also think that Abhisit is doing a good job , and if he is forced to resign before the 9 months there is a fair chance it would be because of his own side , rather then because of the reds . I hope not ! I also would wish that he did something with more immediate results for the isaan folks , north and south , those are good ppl in their immense majority , you know . <br />As for the system of parlementary democracy that you defend , look at the results , since WWII , 17 COUPS , one 2 or 3 PM only that could last a full term , general corruption of which Thaksin was an extreme case . Its a DISASTER no excuse . UK is UK its not Thailand . I feel its greatly time to change the charter

Edited March 31, 2010 by moresomekl

[anotherpeter]

<br />

Ten thousand, one hundred thousand or even one million dose not make a majority in a population of over 60 million.

How many of the 60 million chose to vote Abhisit into power?

A majority of the MPs that the 60 million voted for got together and chose to vote Abhisit into power. That is how a democracy works. (actually, not 60 million, less eligible voters, and less that actually voted ... so probably about 30 million voted)

EDIT: It's the same in Aus and UK elections, voters don't actually vote for Kevin Rudd or Gordon Brown. They vote for their local MPs. The elected MPs then vote for the leader who becomes PM.

More like close to 39 millions eligible voters

I dont understand your reasoning .

If a court throws 10% of MPs belonging to a majority in jail or impeach them , then the majority may becomes the minority , a new PM is elected , and yes you are right all MPs that vote for that PM were elected representatives . But that you find this to be democratic is hardly convincing .

Yes Somchai could have dissolved the parliament but that is not an excuse for Abhasit not doing it . With this kind of argument you can justify coups and other abuses .

One can be excused to think that Abhisit did not call for election because he was fraid to loose them

Also according to my infos the PPP had the absolute majority (>240Mps) in the last democratic popular election in Thailand in Dec 2007 , so not forced to form a coalition . I think they had about 250+ .

But this discussion is purely academic , past is past , its just that Abhisit could had avoided the troubles .

Please do not conclude that i am in favor of 15 days elections , what is done is done ,things have changed I do think that a 9 months time frame is reasonable and for the good of the thai ppl . I also think that Abhisit is doing a good job , and if he is forced to resign before the 9 months there is a fair chance it would be because of his own side , rather then because of the reds . I hope not ! I also would wish that he did something with more immediate results for the isaan folks , north and south , those are good ppl in their immense majority , you know .

As for the system of parlementary democracy that you defend , look at the results , since WWII , 17 COUPS , one 2 or 3 PM only that could last a full term , general corruption of which Thaksin was an extreme case . Its a DISASTER no excuse . UK is UK its not Thailand . I feel its greatly time to change the charter

1) By-elections - the electorate of the banned MPs had by-elections. So those people are still represented.

2) Somchai could have dissolved parliament, but he didn't have to, so he chose not to. Abhisit can dissolve parliament, but he doesn't have to and he has chosen not to.

3) People can conclude what they like about the result of elections. a) Just because a government may lose an election if it was held when they had little support, doesn't mean they have to hold one then. They have to hold an election when it is scheduled (ie every 4 years) or when they don't have the support of the majority of MPs. Given that they have majority support of the MPs now, why wouldn't they have that support after an election.

4) Abhisit could avoid these problems by handing over power to Thaksin. But that doesn't solve the problem. That just moves it somewhere else. Governments shouldn't have to call elections just because there are people out there demanding it. Abhisit is trying to solve these problems by compromising. The red leaders (ie Thaksin) doesn't want to compromise because they need to stop Thaksin from losing all his money.

5) Abhisit is already doing things for the people of the North/North East. The reds are just trying to hide it, because it doesn't do their cause any good.

6) As you said, the past is the past. I don't know all the reasons why there were the previous 16 coups. I do know why there was the last coup. Democracy works. Corruption doesn't.

7) The government is trying to have the constitution changed, with input from the PTP. The PTP have rejected that. Abhisit wants to change the constitution and have the people discuss it and approve it through a referendum. But the red leaders have rejected that.