Thai Government, Protesters Edge Towards Talk

[rainman]

Is anyone following The Nation's updates on the talks? Horrible spelling, completely one-sided journalism.

You obviously do not speak Thai .... the conversation is one sided .... they keep on repeating the same points and Abhisit theirs their points apart. With calm and deducted reasoning .... so it is one sided!

W

I do understand what they're saying, but I was talking about The Nation's comments. Of course the conversation is one-sided, Abhisit doesn't have anything to say. The conversation is one-sided because Abhisit isn't interested in dissolving parliament and calling new elections. He's obviously scared that he will lose the next election, otherwise he would have called for new elections a long time ago and we wouldn't need to go through all of this.

[siampolee]

What of course would have been interesting would have been the inclusion of say ''three of the current demonstrators off of the street.''

These are the very people that the Red Shirt three man negotiation team claim to represent, yet they are the very people being denied a voice in the matter.

Perhaps the fear is that the ordinary man and woman on the street do not share the same ideas as their self elected leadership.

[lannarebirth]

Is anyone following The Nation's updates on the talks? Horrible spelling, completely one-sided journalism.

You obviously do not speak Thai .... the conversation is one sided .... they keep on repeating the same points and Abhisit theirs their points apart. With calm and deducted reasoning .... so it is one sided!

W

I do understand what they're saying, but I was talking about The Nation's comments. Of course the conversation is one-sided, Abhisit doesn't have anything to say. The conversation is one-sided because Abhisit isn't interested in dissolving parliament and calling new elections. He's obviously scared that he will lose the next election, otherwise he would have called for new elections a long time ago and we wouldn't need to go through all of this.

Let's say, due to coercive threats and demands from demonstrators he dissolved Parliament. Let's suppose he won the next election. Based on that precedent, why would anyone think that we wouldn't be right back at this point a few months later?

[rainman]

What of course would have been interesting would have been the inclusion of say ''three of the current demonstrators off of the street.''

These are the very people that the Red Shirt three man negotiation team claim to represent, yet they are the very people being denied a voice in the matter.

Perhaps the fear is that the ordinary man and woman on the street do not share the same ideas as their self elected leadership.

So you're suggesting that the red shirts sends one of the protesters to the meeting to talk with Abhisit? Surely you're also suggesting that Abhisit also should send an average person then, to be fair, right? So what exactly, in your opinion, would the talks between 2 average Thais with no political position achieve? Let's just say, your idea doesn't make sense, and we'll leave it at that.

The red shirt leaders may be self elected, but Abhisit is army-elected.

Edited March 28, 2010 by rainman

[jdinasia]

Is anyone following The Nation's updates on the talks? Horrible spelling, completely one-sided journalism.

You obviously do not speak Thai .... the conversation is one sided .... they keep on repeating the same points and Abhisit theirs their points apart. With calm and deducted reasoning .... so it is one sided!

W

I do understand what they're saying, but I was talking about The Nation's comments. Of course the conversation is one-sided, Abhisit doesn't have anything to say. The conversation is one-sided because Abhisit isn't interested in dissolving parliament and calling new elections. He's obviously scared that he will lose the next election, otherwise he would have called for new elections a long time ago and we wouldn't need to go through all of this.

LOL ... Abhisit represents more than 50% of the country through his coalition. There is noneed for him to call new elections. I am sure he will do so at some point before his term is up, but I am also sure he won't be bullied into it by Jatuporn or Weng ((Or Arisman or Sae Daeng ---- the people the red's on this forum try NEVER to acknowledge!))

It is clear that the Dems are gaining strength and followers across the country and that the next elections could very well return them to office with slightly improved numbers than they have right now (as the head of a coalition government)

[ChiangMaiFun]

I think some should not be so full of GLEE that simple Thai people may not have the Eton and Oxbridge and privileged education that KA has – stop being so ******* arrogant! The poor of this country may not be articulate but they are human – and deserve better… andn so KA has proved he is a good debater and clever – reasoned and articulate – I agree (I actually like him) but you are being fooled by illusory ‘winning’ -

Better at debate? Yes

Clever? Yes

Articulate? Yes

The bourgeoisie on TV cheers! Hooray for our hero! and…? What about the people? Something very basic disturbs me… it is this – you just don’t ‘get it’

[rainman]

Is anyone following The Nation's updates on the talks? Horrible spelling, completely one-sided journalism.

You obviously do not speak Thai .... the conversation is one sided .... they keep on repeating the same points and Abhisit theirs their points apart. With calm and deducted reasoning .... so it is one sided!

W

I do understand what they're saying, but I was talking about The Nation's comments. Of course the conversation is one-sided, Abhisit doesn't have anything to say. The conversation is one-sided because Abhisit isn't interested in dissolving parliament and calling new elections. He's obviously scared that he will lose the next election, otherwise he would have called for new elections a long time ago and we wouldn't need to go through all of this.

LOL ... Abhisit represents more than 50% of the country through his coalition. There is noneed for him to call new elections. I am sure he will do so at some point before his term is up, but I am also sure he won't be bullied into it by Jatuporn or Weng ((Or Arisman or Sae Daeng ---- the people the red's on this forum try NEVER to acknowledge!))

It is clear that the Dems are gaining strength and followers across the country and that the next elections could very well return them to office with slightly improved numbers than they have right now (as the head of a coalition government)

More than 50% of the country after enough MPs were disqualified to gain the majority, and after jumping in bed with Newin, who's banned from politics. Quite a coalition government you got there. You must be so proud.

[ChiangMaiFun]

LOL ... Abhisit represents more than 50% of the country through his coalition. There is noneed for him to call new elections. I am sure he will do so at some point before his term is up, but I am also sure he won't be bullied into it by Jatuporn or Weng ((Or Arisman or Sae Daeng ---- the people the red's on this forum try NEVER to acknowledge!))

It is clear that the Dems are gaining strength and followers across the country and that the next elections could very well return them to office with slightly improved numbers than they have right now (as the head of a coalition government)

More than 50% of the country after enough MPs were disqualified to gain the majority, and after jumping in bed with Newin, who's banned from politics. Quite a coalition government you got there. You must be so proud.

HEAR, HEAR... but they won't listen... JD and all the closed ears yellows - they really believe their propaganda - they just shout - legality!

Gob Ni Kala

[siampolee]

So what exactly, in your opinion, would the talks between 2 average Thais with no political position achieve? Let's just say, your idea doesn't make sense, and we'll leave it at that.

There's no political agenda, the man and the woman on the street have to live with whatever the new elite or the old elite may decide. I believe in common sense not a pork barrel full of self enriching ideas for certain people.

'' It's tough at the top, however it's tougher at the bottom because you're holding the rest of the pile up.''

Democracy is for all not the select leaders

[jdinasia]

I do understand what they're saying, but I was talking about The Nation's comments. Of course the conversation is one-sided, Abhisit doesn't have anything to say. The conversation is one-sided because Abhisit isn't interested in dissolving parliament and calling new elections. He's obviously scared that he will lose the next election, otherwise he would have called for new elections a long time ago and we wouldn't need to go through all of this.

LOL ... Abhisit represents more than 50% of the country through his coalition. There is noneed for him to call new elections. I am sure he will do so at some point before his term is up, but I am also sure he won't be bullied into it by Jatuporn or Weng ((Or Arisman or Sae Daeng ---- the people the red's on this forum try NEVER to acknowledge!))

It is clear that the Dems are gaining strength and followers across the country and that the next elections could very well return them to office with slightly improved numbers than they have right now (as the head of a coalition government)

More than 50% of the country after enough MPs were disqualified to gain the majority, and after jumping in bed with Newin, who's banned from politics. Quite a coalition government you got there. You must be so proud.

LOL --- you mean Newin's faction that was part of the last 2 governments? You weren't crying about Newin then. Then again your Reds are being led by Thaksin (banned from politics AND a convicted felon!). As for MP's being banned --- there were by-elections .. but some were sick enough of Thaksin's greed to not go back and side with PPP/PTP (aka TRT3)

edit ----

Yes CMF I do in fact mention legality ... and a real morality (unlike the morality you suggest that makes deserting the people that elected you an appropriate thing to do). Rule of Law is an important thing in Democracy ... the sour-grapes of people that admit the legitimacy of the current government but "feel" that it is wrong just really don't matter so much. They just need an education and to start making plans for the next elections.

Edited March 28, 2010 by jdinasia

[Roob]

Snap referendum to decide whether the house should be dissolved or not.Let the people decide.It is not right for 100000 to force a judgement.Majority rules.My belief is that it is a legally elected government but how else can violence be avoided.The danger of this is setting a precedent for future minorities to force future governments hands.The complexity of the last elections does make this unique as is evidenced by the endless debate in this forum and many other forums.

[johndpoole]

QUESTION(s) ...

It is my understanding that there is a commitment to have elections in 2011.

Is this correct?

And if yes, are these the regularly scheduled elections?

[jdinasia]

Snap referendum to decide whether the house should be dissolved or not.Let the people decide.It is not right for 100000 to force a judgement.Majority rules.My belief is that it is a legally elected government but how else can violence be avoided.The danger of this is setting a precedent for future minorities to force future governments hands.The complexity of the last elections does make this unique as is evidenced by the endless debate in this forum and many other forums.

Actually that aint a half-bad idea ... but one-man one-vote They could do it alongside a charter referendum that has to be held at some point anyways.

[lannarebirth]

QUESTION(s) ...

It is my understanding that there is a commitment to have elections in 2011.

Is this correct?

And if yes, are these the regularly scheduled elections?

Yes and yes.

[Roob]

Actually that aint a half-bad idea ... but one-man one-vote They could do it alongside a charter referendum that has to be held at some point anyways.

Excuse my ignorance but what is the charter referendum?

[jdinasia]

Excuse my ignorance but what is the charter referendum?

The constitution changes that both sides have said they want to see voted on. The Democrats want that to happen on their watch.

[way2muchcoffee]

Excuse my ignorance but what is the charter referendum?

A change in the constitution that is put to the voters to decide.

Edited March 28, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[anotherpeter]

What of course would have been interesting would have been the inclusion of say ''three of the current demonstrators off of the street.''

These are the very people that the Red Shirt three man negotiation team claim to represent, yet they are the very people being denied a voice in the matter.

Perhaps the fear is that the ordinary man and woman on the street do not share the same ideas as their self elected leadership.

So you're suggesting that the red shirts sends one of the protesters to the meeting to talk with Abhisit? Surely you're also suggesting that Abhisit also should send an average person then, to be fair, right? So what exactly, in your opinion, would the talks between 2 average Thais with no political position achieve? Let's just say, your idea doesn't make sense, and we'll leave it at that.

The red shirt leaders may be self elected, but Abhisit is army-elected.

Actually, Abhisit was elected by the majority of elected MPs. That makes him elected by the majority of the Thai voters.

[Netfan]

Is anyone following The Nation's updates on the talks? Horrible spelling, completely one-sided journalism.

Why not watch it yourself and make your own judgements:

http://www.thailandoutlook.tv/tan/

I'm watching it on TV, but I find this comment from The Nation a rather poor piece of journalism:

THE NATION: Oh no. Weng wants to give another lecture.

Seriously, what kind of journalist writes something like that?

Well, obviously this was being written on the fly. But Weng was going on and on and on earlier. So much so that Veera had to give him a nudge to wrap it up. As you are so concerned with one-sidedness, I would have thought you would have jumped on Weng's little comment at the end about seeing on BBC and CNN soldiers trying to kill demonstrators last year. An out and out lie (unless Thaksin told him he saw it, so he actually believes he saw it), which the assembled Reds will take as gospel. Talk about being irresponsible.

[johndpoole]

QUESTION(s) ...

It is my understanding that there is a commitment to have elections in 2011.

Is this correct?

And if yes, are these the regularly scheduled elections?

Yes and yes.

Thanks. Then I am really confused with anyone siding with the Reds at this point. I am all for protests and demanding things such as finding ways to increasing jobs in the rural parts of the country or more affordable and free social services but demanding disbanding government and calling for elections immediately is insane.

I really could care less if the current PM was elected directly by the people given the corruption in the last admin. and the commitment to continue to hold elections on their regular time table. That is .. if they are truly using this time to put in safeguards to prevent this kind of widespread corruption from occuring again and clear laws on how future successions might take place in the event of such corruption. Be it Yellow or Red, you cannot change law under mob pressure and mentality.

It is a bumpy road to democracy especially coming out of a very corrupt system but the one thing that is synonyms with democracy is the right for the people to pick (elect) their leaders. That and a strong constitution that shouldn't need to be changed dramatically with each new leader. There are too many examples of constitutions around the globe they can use to not go by this trial and error approach.

[ovaltina]

Well, obviously this was being written on the fly. But Weng was going on and on and on earlier. So much so that Veera had to give him a nudge to wrap it up. As you are so concerned with one-sidedness, I would have thought you would have jumped on Weng's little comment at the end about seeing on BBC and CNN soldiers trying to kill demonstrators last year. An out and out lie (unless Thaksin told him he saw it, so he actually believes he saw it), which the assembled Reds will take as gospel. Talk about being irresponsible.

I just watched the Bbc 'coverage' of this whole thing, which was <1 minute, consisted of a looped flim clip of some red people-carriers turning the same corner & then looping back, while this Bbc woman with the permanent Bad Hair Day just talked about how its all lovely & it all ok now. She didn't mention the 3 injured soldiers, who were grenaded by the reds. If Weng was right & the bbc is anti red propagandists , the Bbc would have really seized the grenade thing as opposed to not even mentioning it in the voice over. It scrolled briefly like micro text instead, inbetween the football & the weather.

Cnn will not even go near this story until there's an Arab angle. If some holidaying Sheik gets injured in the protests, Cnn reporters will outnumber protesters in Bkk for the next 10 years+.

[rainman]

I do understand what they're saying, but I was talking about The Nation's comments. Of course the conversation is one-sided, Abhisit doesn't have anything to say. The conversation is one-sided because Abhisit isn't interested in dissolving parliament and calling new elections. He's obviously scared that he will lose the next election, otherwise he would have called for new elections a long time ago and we wouldn't need to go through all of this.

LOL ... Abhisit represents more than 50% of the country through his coalition. There is noneed for him to call new elections. I am sure he will do so at some point before his term is up, but I am also sure he won't be bullied into it by Jatuporn or Weng ((Or Arisman or Sae Daeng ---- the people the red's on this forum try NEVER to acknowledge!))

It is clear that the Dems are gaining strength and followers across the country and that the next elections could very well return them to office with slightly improved numbers than they have right now (as the head of a coalition government)

More than 50% of the country after enough MPs were disqualified to gain the majority, and after jumping in bed with Newin, who's banned from politics. Quite a coalition government you got there. You must be so proud.

LOL --- you mean Newin's faction that was part of the last 2 governments? You weren't crying about Newin then. Then again your Reds are being led by Thaksin (banned from politics AND a convicted felon!). As for MP's being banned --- there were by-elections .. but some were sick enough of Thaksin's greed to not go back and side with PPP/PTP (aka TRT3)

edit ----

Yes CMF I do in fact mention legality ... and a real morality (unlike the morality you suggest that makes deserting the people that elected you an appropriate thing to do). Rule of Law is an important thing in Democracy ... the sour-grapes of people that admit the legitimacy of the current government but "feel" that it is wrong just really don't matter so much. They just need an education and to start making plans for the next elections.

When Newin was part of Thaksin's coalition, he wasn't banned from politics. Funny however that Newin's party can form a coalition with Abhisit after he was banned from politics, though. You need to get your facts straight before attempting to be smart.

[rainman]

What of course would have been interesting would have been the inclusion of say ''three of the current demonstrators off of the street.''

These are the very people that the Red Shirt three man negotiation team claim to represent, yet they are the very people being denied a voice in the matter.

Perhaps the fear is that the ordinary man and woman on the street do not share the same ideas as their self elected leadership.

So you're suggesting that the red shirts sends one of the protesters to the meeting to talk with Abhisit? Surely you're also suggesting that Abhisit also should send an average person then, to be fair, right? So what exactly, in your opinion, would the talks between 2 average Thais with no political position achieve? Let's just say, your idea doesn't make sense, and we'll leave it at that.

The red shirt leaders may be self elected, but Abhisit is army-elected.

Actually, Abhisit was elected by the majority of elected MPs. That makes him elected by the majority of the Thai voters.

...only after enough TRT/PPP MPs were disqualified to give the Democrat-coalition a majority, though. Shouldn't in that case elections be held instead?

[johndpoole]

What of course would have been interesting would have been the inclusion of say ''three of the current demonstrators off of the street.''

These are the very people that the Red Shirt three man negotiation team claim to represent, yet they are the very people being denied a voice in the matter.

Perhaps the fear is that the ordinary man and woman on the street do not share the same ideas as their self elected leadership.

So you're suggesting that the red shirts sends one of the protesters to the meeting to talk with Abhisit? Surely you're also suggesting that Abhisit also should send an average person then, to be fair, right? So what exactly, in your opinion, would the talks between 2 average Thais with no political position achieve? Let's just say, your idea doesn't make sense, and we'll leave it at that.

The red shirt leaders may be self elected, but Abhisit is army-elected.

Actually, Abhisit was elected by the majority of elected MPs. That makes him elected by the majority of the Thai voters.

I am on your side but don't like this argument because HE WAS NOT elected by the people. In fact his party lost the election to Thaksin and unless you get into unproven election fraud... it is a bad road to go down, in my opinion.

I really think his being the PM now has to be sold as the truth and that is something needed to be done and your (Thai's) elected officials, by majority, chose this as the best route to handle the situation until the next scheduled elections. More to the point is that Thai's need to accept the motto we all have while here (The Thai Way) and realize it is what it is and elections are coming again soon.

What is really crazy is that I don't hear any of the Red Shirts complaining about current policy in terms of their needs. It is just bitterness and accusations that the current ruling party is the elite who have always run the country. If they has any sense they would can the issue on demanding elections now and focus on things they can actually get from the government such as increasing tourism, transportation, affordable healthcare in the rural regions and so on. They could actually get these things now and make a better life for their families. Instead the only thing they could possible get now is the opposite and if they were to get their way it would be another few years of turmoil before they get anything that actually helps them.

[rainman]

I just watched the Bbc 'coverage' of this whole thing, which was <1 minute, consisted of a looped flim clip of some red people-carriers turning the same corner & then looping back, while this Bbc woman with the permanent Bad Hair Day just talked about how its all lovely & it all ok now. She didn't mention the 3 injured soldiers, who were grenaded by the reds.

Where's your proof that the grenades were thrown by red shirts? Or is that an assumption?

[neverdie]

Ohh dear, its easy to see a certain farang red shirter as at his usual again

[rainman]

Thanks. Then I am really confused with anyone siding with the Reds at this point. I am all for protests and demanding things such as finding ways to increasing jobs in the rural parts of the country or more affordable and free social services but demanding disbanding government and calling for elections immediately is insane.

If asking for the house to be dissolved and new elections called is insane, how would you describe a legitimately elected government overthrown by an army coup. What would that be called? Democracy?

[rainman]

Ohh dear, its easy to see a certain farang red shirter as at his usual again

ThaiVisa should really put up a disclaimer before joining which states that other people might have different opinions than your own. This way, people like yourself wouldn't get confused every day. Don't you think?

[hammered]

I think some should not be so full of GLEE that simple Thai people may not have the Eton and Oxbridge and privileged education that KA has – stop being so ******* arrogant! The poor of this country may not be articulate but they are human – and deserve better… andn so KA has proved he is a good debater and clever – reasoned and articulate – I agree (I actually like him) but you are being fooled by illusory ‘winning’ -

Better at debate? Yes

Clever? Yes

Articulate? Yes

The bourgeoisie on TV cheers! Hooray for our hero! and…? What about the people? Something very basic disturbs me… it is this – you just don’t ‘get it’

It is actually a silly concept to think of winner and loser in this context. Whgat is needed apart form exchanging ideas and hopefully agrreing on at least a basic outline is for the reds to be seen as reasonable by tyheir opponets and Abhisit to be seen as reasonable by his oppnents. We are not talking about ogres here but the people the country will need to put this to bed. Understanding across divides is needed.

I thought Abhisit and Veera both did that well today. The other speakers were less memorable

[jdinasia]

More than 50% of the country after enough MPs were disqualified to gain the majority, and after jumping in bed with Newin, who's banned from politics. Quite a coalition government you got there. You must be so proud.

LOL --- you mean Newin's faction that was part of the last 2 governments? You weren't crying about Newin then. Then again your Reds are being led by Thaksin (banned from politics AND a convicted felon!). As for MP's being banned --- there were by-elections .. but some were sick enough of Thaksin's greed to not go back and side with PPP/PTP (aka TRT3)

When Newin was part of Thaksin's coalition, he wasn't banned from politics. Funny however that Newin's party can form a coalition with Abhisit after he was banned from politics, though. You need to get your facts straight before attempting to be smart.

LOL and when Newin's faction was part of PPP?

At the House of Representatives meeting yesterday, Somchai obtained 298 votes compared to 163 for Abhisit. Somchai, Abhisit, House Speaker Chai Chidchob and his two deputies Samart Kaewmeechai and Apiwan Wiriyachai abstained.

Newin's faction has been part of the last 3 coalitions .... That is why you cry about Newin's faction. Yet again you weren't crying when his faction was part of PPP and PTP My facts are straight .. too bad yours aren't