Abhisit Is The Legitimate Thai Prime Minister

[moresomekl]

They are not putting forward any other alternatives. All they talk about is Thaksin.

There is a big assumption that if the reds were in government, they would change the laws to get Thaksin off and get his money back, and he would come back and take over. It is only an assumption, but it something the red leaders have been pushing.

Sure, most of the protestors want more help from the government, but they want to bring Thaksin back to do that.

Sorry bout the quote thing , not so sure how to do .

Yes perhaps .... But its unlikely Thaksin himself can be PM again .

[bendejo]

He was born in Kenya, and is a Muslim and a communist and a socialist.

Oh, wait, I think I mean someone else....

Yes ... That was Obama ... A good example of how much some people believe what they are told without evidence.

Yeah. I'm wondering if Glenn Beck will be running Tea Bagger rallies in the US with his face on the jumbotron. I'm waiting for Taksin to be signed up by Fox News, or at least Forbes magazine (like his buddy Lee Kwan Yew).

[thaihome]

Sorry bout the quote thing , not so sure how to do .

Yes perhaps .... But its unlikely Thaksin himself can be PM again .

You press the reply button and then type in the box that appears below all the other writing.

TH

[anotherpeter]

They are not putting forward any other alternatives. All they talk about is Thaksin.

There is a big assumption that if the reds were in government, they would change the laws to get Thaksin off and get his money back, and he would come back and take over. It is only an assumption, but it something the red leaders have been pushing.

Sure, most of the protestors want more help from the government, but they want to bring Thaksin back to do that.

Sorry bout the quote thing , not so sure how to do .

Yes perhaps .... But its unlikely Thaksin himself can be PM again .

(when you press reply, there is "quote" and "/quote" in square brackets. Don't delete them, or if you do, delete them in pairs.)

But that is what they are saying they want. And if they change the laws in the right way, that's what they will get.

That's why a lot of people are against them. Not because they are poor farmers.

[anotherpeter]

How about the earthquake in Haiti?

Thaksin is in Haiti now ?

He was last seen with Elvis in Montenegro.

[Moonrakers]

How about the earthquake in Haiti?

Thaksin is in Haiti now ?

He was last seen with Elvis in Montenegro.

Elvis started the Haiti earthquake with Thaksin?

Well I never.

[featography]

He was born in Kenya, and is a Muslim and a communist and a socialist.

Oh, wait, I think I mean someone else....

Yes, but another poster hopes he will come over and teach Abisit about Democracy

[anotherpeter]

Some extra information from another thread (thanks TH):

<snip>

You probably should read the thread on Abhisit for the facts, but a quick run down may help you understand.

Thaksin was a caretaker PM, in the 2006 election he could not form a government because there was not a majority of legally elected TRT MP's. A coup did indeed remove him from office.

The court disbanded the lead political party (PPP) in a coalition that controlled Parliament. All but 29 of the MP's from that party moved to another party (PTP). 2 parties that were members of the old coalition chose to align with the Democrats to form a new government. In a subsequent by election held to replace the 29 MP's of the disbanded parties, the Democrats and their new coalition partners won 20 seats.

TH

[brd]

France is certainly not representative of a democratie if only compared to Great Britain that certainly is one and in France where is the liberte, egalite et fraternite they have on each stamp post !

The problem is, with a direct general election, like we got here in France, the chain of event would be way much simpler :

- General direct election of prime minister : A red leader ( T or else) is elected with a large majority.

- Stability for the next 5 years. End of the story.

This is Democracy and This scares a couple of Big Dudes in BKK apparently.

[anotherpeter]

More good information from another thread:

<snip>

Can you demonstrate that the coup leaders or the government that the coup placed in power for a year changed the make-up of the court OR changed the organic laws in Thailand? Of course not since it didn't happen.

Since then Thaksin has been found guilty and owes the Thai people 2 years in jail (and is NOT eligible for an appeal since that time period has passed.) He has had his ill-gotten cash taken by the courts opening him to 10 or more new charges. He has unanswered charges waiting for him to show up in court again.

He acknowledged the legitimacy of both courts that then made rulings against him. He promised to abide by their results. He ran away from justice.

You don't get to have it both ways.

<snip>

[anotherpeter]

And ...

Actually, the judiciary could hear the case under the 1997 constitution and assuming that the judiciary has independence (which is nothing to do with democracy and coup and everything to do with clear lines of separation) then the result would be exactly the same.

The reason why Thaksin is pushing for a complete and total pardon is under either constitution he will be found guilty on this case and others; the evidence is overwhelming; there are ample people who know about the various schemes (it is almost open knowledge now and was back then, many hands means many informants willing to sell eachother out) and so this is why he needs, not a trial under a neutral court under the constitution of his choice, but a pardon. A neutral trial he will lose. Maybe not all of them, but some.

Out of interest, most of the senior red shirts and TRT officials will off the record admit the guilt, but skirt the issue that 'well they all do it, at least he did some good'. That's the legalise murder/drugs/prostitution can't beat em join em argument and irrelevant. I think if you actually believe he is innocent, you would be in a minority of people familiar with the case and the law.

As for the future election.....not sure, but I'm willing to see any poll. If you could please provide the article I'd be curious to see the figures. Newin will get a number of seats but probably not a huge list vote; Peua Thai and Dems will be about even on the party/list votes (same as the house stands now) or Dems slightly higher based on the byelection where Peua thai had dropped considerably against both PJT and Dems; Chart Thai were widely considered the big failure last time and are likely to do worse not better due to Banharn not personally being involved.

I am hoping against hope that in the next 6 months a true rural party appears, which represents the farmer's interests and shows up with a real agenda for change. Not this constitution irrelevance (which is a non partisan issue anyhow) but a proper manifesto.

I can't really see it happening though, because rural people have their own system. BJT is probably the closest thing in appearance but not reality.

So instead....either Bhumjaithai and the other smaller parties will buy the factions up or PT will buy some back although I am unsure they have the budget anymore. The vote will be held and the winner will likely walk in with some rather unsavoury upcountry MPs the same as has happened in every election held in Thailand to date (including both TRT victories, that also required buying the factions wang num yen, etc etc).

The unsavoury upcountry MP people will (no matter who is the main lead party) fail to provide any real contribution to the rural poor same as has occured in every election to date; that falls to the city folk - Thaksin/Somkid/Purachai in TRT and Korn in Dems; Korn's contribution for crop prices being probably the most significant change to the rural economy to date in a positive way.

Social welfare will be the technocrats also; social order technocrats....basically you get the picture right....the rural MPs are paid to secure the seats and majority, then live on graft, any real changes for the rural poor always comes from non rural folk. It's no surprise that TRT stopped helping the poor once all the technocrats of the first govt were pushed aside as the factions demanded more representation once they were actually part of TRT.

Which is the whole issue that the red shirts haven't faced up to. They need their own true local leaders. Who push rural agendas. When PPP were in power what was the first and last suggestion you heard from Jatuporn focused on improving the rural poor's long term growth? Or Jakapop?

[silence]

That's why this whole protest is an exercise in frustration. They are angry at the cityfolk; the threaten to bring petrol, to cause gridlock, to make Bangkok 'wake up'.

But when pushed, what exactly did Thaksin do that the current government is not doing and what exactly policy wise are you asking for, there is virtually not a single answer I have heard from a red shirter other than the holistic, he cares more than them answer - no actual tangible points of what they want other than they should listen to us.

A real rural political movement would have more than just

stop ignoring us

change the constitution back to the previous one even though the guy who ran the country ignored it back then

stop political intereference

give a pardon to that guy and forgive him of any future charges so he can come back and run the country

what exactly do they want from this democracy where people listen to people - right now I can do that on youtube. What is it that they actually want other than immediate next 24 hours actions?

[moresomekl]

The problem is, with a direct general election, like we got here in France, the chain of event would be way much simpler :

- General direct election of prime minister : A red leader ( T or else) is elected with a large majority.

- Stability for the next 5 years. End of the story.

This is Democracy and This scares a couple of Big Dudes in BKK apparently.

Not necessarily. The Democrats got more votes in the proportional component of the 2007 election. 39.63% of votes compared to 39.60% of the votes for the PPP.

Besides, it's just a different process, it doesn't make it any more or less of a democracy.

And, it doesn't make Abhisit any less legitimate.

1) Yes Abhisit is legitimate PM , no coup forecasted

2) Yes Thaksin was still legitimate PM (caretaker) back in September 2006 and removed by a coup . Totally illegal

From there one can assume

That the PM is only removed by a coup when it does not suit the BKK elite or whomever , and

that the rurals are treated as dummies . Which is precisely the point of the red shirt... and Thaksin

3) Yes Thaksin did some illegal transactions and manipulation

Election of the PM by direct suffrage , then nominated by HM , on recommendation by thai supreme court would remove party politics and machination inside the thai parliament since its no longer the thai parliament that elects the PM

It would also put a clear separation between the legislative (parliament with its own election) and executive branch of power (PM with its own election )

Thus it would make it much more difficult any PM to do what Thaksin did . Manipulate the laws

It would also make vote buying more difficult for the PM . Cant that easily buy 15 + millions voters without beeing noticed lol

The supreme court judges would be named by HM . They would be the guarantor of the constitution

Where does that leave us ? Well France is a republic , Thailand a constitutional monarchy . Different . But electoral system could be changed in Thailand . Would be an original system , does not mean it would not work

Yet at the core of the problem in Thailand as someone said here , is that thai parties do not concede defeat as they do in UK another constitutional monarchy . They spend their time sabotaging the parties that won , organising big demos and so on and so forth . In such atmosphere democracy can not work . Its a circus . Democracy is not chaos ...

THe other issue is the army which would have to accept subordination to the civil governement .

Now that must sound utopic LOL .

[termad]

The Court did not say that Samak was receiving a salary from the TV company they said that the expenses that he claimed from the company for his car and driver had to be construed as wages. Fair verdict?

The Democrats who couldn't win an election decided to boycott the election. They then said it was unfair that Thaksin had won an election because of the boycott. Thaksin didn't resign he offered to resign and hold a new election to prove that he had the people's mandate. A bit of a shining example to Abhisit don't you think?

What is your source for saying that Thaksin resigned and did so to get a popular mandate so that he could sell Shin Corp anyway? I've never heard of this.

After the last election (repeat after the last election the forty Phue Thai MPs known as the friends of Newin (Newin Chitbob one of Abhisit's masters) were bought and paid for by the Military and Ruling Elite families. Whilst Newin was negotiating with the Military a happily smiling Abhisit was photographed on a number of occasions with Newin.

After they were bought by the Military and Ruling Elite the forty Phue Thai Mps crossed the floor and joined Abhisit. They then formed a new party called Bhumjaithai Party. A party that has never stood for election. A party whose MPs are scared to visit their constituents after selling the millions of votes that they had received as Phue Thai MPs. After what they did the people in their constituencies will never vote for them again. This is one of the reasons that Abhisit won't call an election because he knows that he would lose because those forty Bhumjauthai MPs at least will be replaced with Phue Thai MPs.

Abisit maybe never received any of the money - I don't know - but by accepting the millions of votes that those forty Phue Thai MPs brought with them he was also as surely bought as they were. So you see he has many masters.

Whether you still accept Abhisit as a PM with the mandate of the people is up to you but to do so one has to lower one's moral standards a little, don't you think?

Edited March 18, 2010 by termad

[moresomekl]

How about the earthquake in Haiti?

Thaksin is in Haiti now ?

He was last seen with Elvis in Montenegro.

Elvis started the Haiti earthquake with Thaksin?

Well I never.

Thaksin has been sighted in Braunau , the birth place of Hitler in Austria , Looking for relatives of Abhisit he said .

Dont believe that

[lovelomsak]

QWhen all is said and done I would be interested to know how many people here that are so opiniated and are authorities on this subject were voters in last election or will be in next election or if they are just outsiders with opinions on matters that donot concern them.

[ianf]

UG will be along in a minute to reply with an emoticon, for him it makes a strong case.

Someone seems to forget that the Thaksin was removed from office by an illegal military coup and that all his party's best politicians were banned from running for office. That might explain why many Thai people feel that democracy has been thwarted by the Bangkok elite.

Whoever was the mastermind that engineered the coup did so in the belief that the country was being hijacked by a despot and the situation would rapidly detriorate. The coup basically saved the country from itself. The beginning of this thread explained, quite coherently, why Absiht is legit - bearing in mnd that he is a democratically elected MP (Thaksin was NEVER elected). That is the situation as it is. In the current PM we have a leader who understands democracy and who is actively fighting corruption which is endemic to this society. That is, off course, a massive job. Meanwhile, the runaway Montenegrian is on a personal mission which is why there is no policy or great ideological movement beind his red troops. This leads us to a situation where various "reasons'' or this movement have to be invented.

However none of them stack up intellectually or ideologically. Truth is, the peasant's best hope is with the current leadership, who are, in the face of a lot of provocation, actually doing a remarkably good job. Mr T's mission is destructive and if successful will create more poverty and deeper divisions in this society.

[moresomekl]

Whoever was the mastermind that engineered the coup did so in the belief that the country was being hijacked by a despot and the situation would rapidly detriorate. The coup basically saved the country from itself. The beginning of this thread explained, quite coherently, why Absiht is legit - bearing in mnd that he is a democratically elected MP (Thaksin was NEVER elected). That is the situation as it is. In the current PM we have a leader who understands democracy and who is actively fighting corruption which is endemic to this society. That is, off course, a massive job. Meanwhile, the runaway Montenegrian is on a personal mission which is why there is no policy or great ideological movement beind his red troops. This leads us to a situation where various "reasons'' or this movement have to be invented.

However none of them stack up intellectually or ideologically. Truth is, the peasant's best hope is with the current leadership, who are, in the face of a lot of provocation, actually doing a remarkably good job. Mr T's mission is destructive and if successful will create more poverty and deeper divisions in this society.

Thaksin would have had to leave . He was on its way out LEGALLY , as he was just named by HM for a limited period .

A military coup is never a good idea . And it is illegal . That coup played a big role in todays problem

Thaksin won elections (the parliament majority in the current thai system ) in 2001 and 2005 .

The rest of your post is partisan , fine ok . At the end of the day its the thai ppl that will decide in a year or so

[termad]

You might also like to note that Abhisit has become very strong on this point, in fact very strong on all forms of corruption, even removing people from his own party from high positions, previously unheard of. And demaning much more accountability and transparency from the coalition partners, also unheard of in the past.

Give Abhisit a chance, he won't be able to stop corruption in one swoop, it will take years, but he's trying, also unheard of in the past.

What a load of tosh. There are at least four major corruption cases being investigated and Abhisit has tried to cover each one up what about the Ministry of Health for starters?

[moresomekl]

QWhen all is said and done I would be interested to know how many people here that are so opiniated and are authorities on this subject were voters in last election or will be in next election or if they are just outsiders with opinions on matters that donot concern them.

You got a point here . Mostly outsiders , myself included

[termad]

The Bhum Jai Thai party betrayed the electorate.

Remember they were instrumental in handing power to the Democrats via the parliamentary election.

No regard was shown to the people/electorate who placed these MPs in power.

Thats why the people feel so aggrieved.

New Pro/Red shirt candidates have been put in place to run against Bhum Jai Thai MPs in future elections-prior to the parliamentary election there were no rival candidates..why?..because(at that time)they were coalition partners.

Remember the Democrats have never won a electorate election.

I think you may find that every one of your points is incorrect

Enlighten me in that case.

When did the Democrats win an electorate election?

What pa

I think you will find that BJT promised not to form a coalition with PPP when they ran for office and then broke their word by doing so. The fact is that they answer to their electorate and nobody else.

The Dems (nor anyone else) has to WIN they just have to have a coalition of more than 50%. End of story. When did any of the Thaksin parties win without commiting electoral fraud?

Please take a look at the raw numbers on party votes from 2007.

Sorry can you please tell me when the Bhumjaithai Party actually stood in an election as the party didn't even exist before the last election.

[rixalex]

What is your source for saying that Thaksin resigned and did so to get a popular mandate so that he could sell Shin Corp anyway? I've never heard of this.

Thaksin dissolved parliament after he had sold Shin Corp and when he realised that a lot of Thai people were unhappy about many aspects of that deal. He called new elections knowing that should he win - which was highly likely what with the tight grip he had established on power - he would be able to shut these people up and prevent the deal being scrutinized any further.

The courts have of course since spoken on this matter and proved that the people who were upset, had every right to be, and it's a good thing that the polls weren't used to decide on his guilt - that's not what polls are for after all, is it?

[moresomekl]

What a load of tosh. There are at least four major corruption cases being investigated and Abhisit has tried to cover each one up what about the Ministry of Health for starters?

Really ? Sure of that ?

Well when Abhisit is rich corruption will stop then , it will take many years , yes agree LOL .

Unless there is a coup . Then i buy you dinner

[termad]

The AOT closed the airport, after the Thaksin government did not evict them. Thaksin's fault.

More tosh - he wasn't the Prime Minister then.

[way2muchcoffee]

The AOT closed the airport, after the Thaksin government did not evict them. Thaksin's fault.

More tosh - he wasn't the Prime Minister then.

He most certainly was - just not in title. The reality is that the Somchai government acted at the beck and call of Mr. T.

[termad]

The AOT closed the airport, after the Thaksin government did not evict them. Thaksin's fault.

That should actually be "Thaksin's puppet government".

After the government house protests went bad for the government and police, the government didn't have the support of the police to remove them by force.

They didn't know how to handle the protests, so they didn't handle them at all.

It's interesting that some of the red rhetoric has been about "If the government can't handle a million protestors, then they should step down".

EDIT: But it was still the PAD's fault.

More tosh still. The prime minister requested the Army to fulfil their standing duty as an aid to the Civil Power. Anupong refused to do so. If you were here at the time you must remember his famous quote as it was published in the English Language papers. Quote Let them sack me - we'll just have another Coup! End quote

Edited March 18, 2010 by termad

[moresomekl]

08:08:49']The AOT closed the airport, after the Thaksin government did not evict them. Thaksin's fault.

More tosh - he wasn't the Prime Minister then.

He most certainly was - just not in title. The reality is that the Somchai government acted at the beck and call of Mr. T.

Gosh you assume that Somchai was some kind of robot , and the red shirts the same ?

Its always the same here ....

[termad]

The Bhum Jai Thai party betrayed the electorate.

Remember they were instrumental in handing power to the Democrats via the parliamentary election.

No regard was shown to the people/electorate who placed these MPs in power.

Thats why the people feel so aggrieved.

New Pro/Red shirt candidates have been put in place to run against Bhum Jai Thai MPs in future elections-prior to the parliamentary election there were no rival candidates..why?..because(at that time)they were coalition partners.

Remember the Democrats have never won a electorate election.

I think you may find that every one of your points is incorrect

Enlighten me in that case.

When did the Democrats win an electorate election?

What pa

(don't think you finished your post ...)

All the MPs in the previous government and the current government were elected in the 2007 election (or subsequent by-elections).

Both the PPP and the Democrats did not get 50% of the voted MPs. So both formed coalition governments. It just happens that the current coalition involves the Democrats and not the PPP.

Also, see post #75.

Can you tell me which election returned Bhumjaithai MPs. You do seem to be ducking the question.

[termad]

What is your source for saying that Thaksin resigned and did so to get a popular mandate so that he could sell Shin Corp anyway? I've never heard of this.

Thaksin dissolved parliament after he had sold Shin Corp and when he realised that a lot of Thai people were unhappy about many aspects of that deal. He called new elections knowing that should he win - which was highly likely what with the tight grip he had established on power - he would be able to shut these people up and prevent the deal being scrutinized any further.

The courts have of course since spoken on this matter and proved that the people who were upset, had every right to be, and it's a good thing that the polls weren't used to decide on his guilt - that's not what polls are for after all, is it?

You talking absolute rubbish. He didn't disolve Parliament after he sold Shin I think that your time scale is out.

[way2muchcoffee]

Gosh you assume that Somchai was some kind of robot, and the red shirts the same ?

Its always the same here ....

Were you here then? Somchai was exactly a robot. To argue otherwise is laughable.

Edited March 18, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[WinnieTheKhwai]

The Bhum Jai Thai party betrayed the electorate.

Can you tell me which election returned Bhumjaithai MPs. You do seem to be ducking the question.

The last election returned the seats for the people who are now Bhumjaithai after they jumped ship. That makes them elected and legitimate members of parliament, and can vote and support anyone who pays the most they want.

Edited March 18, 2010 by WinnieTheKhwai