Thai PM Abhisit Still Standing After Deadly Protests

[mazeltov]

Exactly --- a very simple and straightforward process.

The partylist EXECUTIVES that were not replaced from PPP, couldn't be replaced because of the nature of the system. The people affected by this are not the PPP supporters. The people affected by this are the BJT supporters. They aren't crying though.

The by elections saw former PPP MP slots taken up by other parties more than they were replaced by PTP candidates (out of 29 by-elections from the disbanding of PPP for PROVEN electoral fraud --- PTP pickd up only 5 MP's. In other words out of the 29 MP seats that had to have new elections PPP/PTP lost 24 ---)

WRONG. because that 29 by-elections weren't only about the lost seats of 29 banned PPP excecutives.

Exactly is something else. Accuracy seems to be not in your interest.

edit to add

Somchai and Samak have been on the party lists in the elections. Their seat didn't het relaced by by-elections?

how you come up with BJT supporters are affected by this? Care to explain?

Edited June 2, 2010 by mazeltov

[whybother]

Exactly --- a very simple and straightforward process.

The partylist EXECUTIVES that were not replaced from PPP, couldn't be replaced because of the nature of the system. The people affected by this are not the PPP supporters. The people affected by this are the BJT supporters. They aren't crying though.

The by elections saw former PPP MP slots taken up by other parties more than they were replaced by PTP candidates (out of 29 by-elections from the disbanding of PPP for PROVEN electoral fraud --- PTP pickd up only 5 MP's. In other words out of the 29 MP seats that had to have new elections PPP/PTP lost 24 ---)

WRONG. because that 29 by-elections weren't only about the lost seats of 29 banned PPP excecutives.

Exactly is something else. Accuracy seems to be not in your interest.

What were the other by-elections about? Did some MPs retire at the same time that the PPP MPs were banned?

[jayboy]

Bottom line - there is NO requirement or reason why Abhisit has to call an election. He is an elected MP and he was elected PM by the elected MPs. Whether there is "huge pressure" or not, he can call an election whenever he wants between now and December 2011.

I agree.There's no dispute about his constitutional right to hold out to the last possible moment.But he will lack a satisfactory democratic mandate the longer he leaves it.

What is this "democratic mandate" and "voted for by the people" (you didn't say that, but others have in this argument)?

How is Abhisit's election to PM any different than any other Thai PM?

He was elected an MP by the people. He has majority support of the MPs, that gives him a democratic mandate to govern the country. He will have that democratic mandate until he calls an election. How does he lose that the longer he waits?

edit: and the earlier question - How do you say that Samak was "elected" but Abhisit was not "elected"?

I have previously outlined the constitutional position (on which we are agreed) and have gone on to stress the moral responsibility of any popularly unelected PM to seek a mandate as soon as practically convenient.But I do agree that Abhisit can hang on until late 2011 if he wants to.

The elephant in the room is of course the way that Abhisit came to power and the role of the military, the courts and the Privy Council in guiding him to his present position.One doesn't have to subscribe to every detail but in the round there is a very strong argument that the fish is stinking.It's reasonable to surmise that it's not particularly Abhisit's determination to hang on that causes anger but the contempt and arrogance of a small elite in the face of the Thai people.

Edited June 2, 2010 by jayboy

[mazeltov]

Exactly --- a very simple and straightforward process.

The partylist EXECUTIVES that were not replaced from PPP, couldn't be replaced because of the nature of the system. The people affected by this are not the PPP supporters. The people affected by this are the BJT supporters. They aren't crying though.

The by elections saw former PPP MP slots taken up by other parties more than they were replaced by PTP candidates (out of 29 by-elections from the disbanding of PPP for PROVEN electoral fraud --- PTP pickd up only 5 MP's. In other words out of the 29 MP seats that had to have new elections PPP/PTP lost 24 ---)

WRONG. because that 29 by-elections weren't only about the lost seats of 29 banned PPP excecutives.

Exactly is something else. Accuracy seems to be not in your interest.

What were the other by-elections about? Did some MPs retire at the same time that the PPP MPs were banned?

5555, you remind me of anothermember, he claimed to knew everything better and how the parliamentarian system works, but actually was totally was clueless about the details.

FYI. PPP wasn't the only party that got banned/dissolved at the same time.

for the other by-elections that came later ... carded by the EC where the investigations took some more time, disqualifications because of faulty asset declaration and so on.

for example Mr. Suthep Thaugsuban seats got vacant after he had to resign from his MP seat, because he got disqualified by Constitutional Court for having allegedly violated the charter. This by-election in a Surat Thani constituency was won by a democrat candidate again, Mr. Thani Thaugsuban.

There were other by-elections around that time everybody was looking at because it was in the north east and a battle between PTP and BJT candidates.

------------

PS: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/rea...newsid=30090112

Note: the Nation headline is: "List of MPs banned by the Constitution Court's ruling"

not actually correct. it seems to be the list of all banned party ececutives of the three banned parties. But not all banned party executives were also member of the parliament(MP). And members of the cabinet don't had to be also members of the parliament. I think that was the case for Matchima Thipataya, non of their executives were MPs, the cabinet members appointed 'non-MPs'

edit: to add link to Nation with List of banned

Edited June 2, 2010 by mazeltov

[hammered]

Guys there were the 29 by elections of whioch the coalition won 20 odd increasing its majority. Then there were 2 more in the Isaan with PTP holding their seats. Then the Dems made a again in Nonthaburi from PTP. Then a Prachinburi Dem resigned and BJT slaughtered PTP in the seat with Dems not running. Then a Dem held Suthep's old seat. And they are the ones I remember. Oh and a Dem passed away and I dont remember if they held that yet

[Robby nz]

How many seats the PTP has in parliament? Do you know that? 200? is that true?

Why there are only 475 seats and not 480? What happen to the missing 5? Do you know that?

How many no-confidence votes got Samak when the Democrats launched their censure motion debate? Do you know that?

But keep talking about prison haircuts.... Are you a hairdresser or how do you know that?

Try looking around like here:

[ snip full q_uote of a The Nation article]

But you wouldnt believe the Nation would you? More yellow BS right?

As for missing seats possibly they were looted by the reds

The link to The Nation article is here:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Vote-...u-30130710.html

Trusting in printed numbers in a The Nation article? You must be a new reader. That is also not a question of red or yellow but one of reliable and accurate journalism.

Sorry, the Nation article don't answered the question how many seats the PTP have in parliament.

According to this source*:

http://mp.parliament.go.th/biographical/fr...PersonList.aspx

it are 189 seats.

200 is wrong.

so you are clueless about the missing seats?

The missing seats were stolen from the electorate. That are former party list PPP seats that got not refilled with by-election after the PPP dissolution. What means the people who voted for them are not more represented in the parliament.

The Nation article has also not the answer why a haircut is so important for you.

*note: there are different figures between the english and the that language version. also for the total number of MPs. But it is still a better source than The Nation.

Seems my prediction is correct, see bold.

Didnt bother to look at your link after reading the small print, how accurate can something be that quotes two different numbers? whether in two languages or one.

Please tell me how many people get to vote for LIST MP seats in Thailand?

I note from your posts Mazeltov that you are another sponsered by Red Bull

[mazeltov]

Guys there were the 29 by elections of whioch the coalition won 20 odd increasing its majority. Then there were 2 more in the Isaan with PTP holding their seats. Then the Dems made a again in Nonthaburi from PTP. Then a Prachinburi Dem resigned and BJT slaughtered PTP in the seat with Dems not running. Then a Dem held Suthep's old seat. And they are the ones I remember. Oh and a Dem passed away and I dont remember if they held that yet

There was also a Dem MP leaving the party on protest.

The +20 seat increasing the majority of the government where actually not all taken from the now opposition. this +20 is a little bit misleading, because it included seats from the former PPP ally Chart Thai party, the Slip-archa team.

The dems for example won only 7 new additional seats, but not all came from the ex-PPP, but also from constituency with banned Chart Thai members new coalition partner.

but the new coalition was formed and Abhisit as PM elected before the 29 by-election were hold, this 29 seats were vacant for around 30-45 days. so later after the coalition was build the coalition got additional 20 seats on their side. and at least half of this +20 they had hypothetical safe with the switch of team Slip-Archa.

Abhist likes to brag about this +20 from the by-elections in a kinda misleading way.

[ozzieman05]

Wait for June 24 peoples movement, they will show up all over the country on June 24.

Anyway the only way to find out which political wing, which party, is favoured by the electorate are elections.

And we all know what Abhisit thinks about elections and what he does to avoid them.

Good reminder for us all to get a fire insurance!

Maz is playing with his strawman again .... Abhisit OFFERED early elections so we know what he thinks about them. The reds spat on the offer and chose to burn things down. Why? Thaksin needs elections before October.

Key word is OFFERED. Abhisit offers earlier election all the time, he did that also last year to. IT NEVER HAPPENED.

He talks so much what he will do and so on, but a promise by Abhisit is worth nothing. You cannot trust him.

But what happen so far is that he boycotted the election in april 2006. aka avoiding them. Inlike the democracy movement UDD Abhisit did not much protest against the coup in September 2006, where election were on shedule for later this year.

And now all his offers never become true - he is avoiding elections.

If the red shirts want new election because they think the whole situation and the new starts after the junta regime was not fair to them and Abhisit isn't the legitimate PM why they should wait any 9 month longer? for what? Giving Abhisit more time to kill and surpress them? They have enough.

If you want to understand How the voting works in Thailand

Please note after MPs voted today in Parliament

The PM was put back into power by a good majority

So much for HE WILL LOOSE THE NEXT VOTE

the people vote MP's not PM's

and today we saw how MP;s want to vote

[mazeltov]

Guess it must be correct but cant explain those in PTP loyal to BJT and the break in Peau Pandin. There is apparently a group of up to 25 PTPers waiting to join BJT and the government Peau Pandiners may get booted. Quite confusing.

Maybe that's why the opposition did so poorly in the censure vote. The BJT loyal PTP MPs abstained or voted FOR the government. Maybe similarly for Peau Pandin.

Hello,

Don't make this silly 200 Ms are on the opposition fallacy.

Where did the opposition or the PTP poorly in the censure vote? Care to explain, case for case?

wasn't it more a sign that the coalition isn't that stable unlke as some yellow spinmeisters "independent and neutral" observer try to twist the results?

[Old Man River]

Guess it must be correct but cant explain those in PTP loyal to BJT and the break in Peau Pandin. There is apparently a group of up to 25 PTPers waiting to join BJT and the government Peau Pandiners may get booted. Quite confusing.

Maybe that's why the opposition did so poorly in the censure vote. The BJT loyal PTP MPs abstained or voted FOR the government. Maybe similarly for Peau Pandin.

Hello,

Don't make this silly 200 Ms are on the opposition fallacy.

Where did the opposition or the PTP poorly in the censure vote? Care to explain, case for case?

wasn't it more a sign that the coalition isn't that stable unlke as some yellow spinmeisters "independent and neutral" observer try to twist the results?

The bottom line, call it what you will, but it was a vote of confidence for Abhisit and his crew by the majority of the MP's who were elected by the people.

[rabo]

Guess it must be correct but cant explain those in PTP loyal to BJT and the break in Peau Pandin. There is apparently a group of up to 25 PTPers waiting to join BJT and the government Peau Pandiners may get booted. Quite confusing.

Maybe that's why the opposition did so poorly in the censure vote. The BJT loyal PTP MPs abstained or voted FOR the government. Maybe similarly for Peau Pandin.

Hello,

Don't make this silly 200 Ms are on the opposition fallacy.

Where did the opposition or the PTP poorly in the censure vote? Care to explain, case for case?

wasn't it more a sign that the coalition isn't that stable unlke as some yellow spinmeisters "independent and neutral" observer try to twist the results?

Hi,

They lost. The trick to bring down the government didn't work, the Thai people are not buying the "government is evil" line nor are the MPs. The tide has turned.

[Jimi007]

Guess it must be correct but cant explain those in PTP loyal to BJT and the break in Peau Pandin. There is apparently a group of up to 25 PTPers waiting to join BJT and the government Peau Pandiners may get booted. Quite confusing.

Maybe that's why the opposition did so poorly in the censure vote. The BJT loyal PTP MPs abstained or voted FOR the government. Maybe similarly for Peau Pandin.

Hello,

Don't make this silly 200 Ms are on the opposition fallacy.

Where did the opposition or the PTP poorly in the censure vote? Care to explain, case for case?

wasn't it more a sign that the coalition isn't that stable unlke as some yellow spinmeisters "independent and neutral" observer try to twist the results?

Hello, your cause or "side" lost again! So are we going have to hear that the PM wasn't legally elected again? I certainly hope not!

Edited June 2, 2010 by Jimi007

[mausplan]

My maid fled back to Maha Sarakham with her family when the fighting flared up near her Bangkok home at Lumpini. She just returned and saw Abhisit on TV today with the vote. She said, he is a good man, very straight. I asked about the Red shirts, does she like them , she said she does not like them. she is scared of them, that no one did in her village. I said is the Government bad , she said , the Government did not do a lot but she knows they have to look after all provinces.

She then said the local MP are no good , just give small money and ask for signature and then they go and buy big homes and big cars.

[mazeltov]

If you want to understand How the voting works in Thailand

Please note after MPs voted today in Parliament

The PM was put back into power by a good majority

So much for HE WILL LOOSE THE NEXT VOTE

the people vote MP's not PM's

and today we saw how MP;s want to vote

i understand that. but i don't see that big vicory for Abhisit. of course he had survived, but look at some pervious results:

In the 'same' Parliament

Samak got the votes of 310 MPS to become PM

Samak in a censure vote got 280 MPs confident

Somchai got the votes of 298 Mps to become PM

Abhisit got the votes of 235 Mps to become PM

Abhisit in a censure vote 246 Mps for him.

Comparing that helps maybe to understand why many people in Thailand are not that satisfied with the Abhisit regime.

if you look at the results of the other censure votes today, you will also see that some faction of the coalition government kinda dislike each other.

The bottom line, call it what you will, but it was a vote of confidence for Abhisit and his crew by the majority of the MP's who were elected by the people.

see the figures above. more than a few people maybe still not in favour for PM Abhisit

Hi,

They lost. The trick to bring down the government didn't work, the Thai people are not buying the "government is evil" line nor are the MPs. The tide has turned.

ditto: see the figures above.

what tide has turned? The result was actually expected. The coalition sticks together. 246 pro votes got Abhisit in last years censure debate. I thought that maybe one or two will swing. okay not.

Hello, your cause or "side" lost again! So are we going have to hear that the PM wasn't legally elected again? I certainly hope not!

ditto: see the figures above.

Its not my 'side' or my cause. Abhisit hasn't a overwhelming majority. Former PM did much better.

bottom line: Abhisits problem are far from over.

[gl9999]

ditto: see the figures above.

Its not my 'side' or my cause. Abhisit hasn't a overwhelming majority. Former PM did much better.

bottom line: Abhisits problem are far from over.

Wow you are soooo insightful! Of course Prime Minister Abhisit will have many problems to solve. It will not be easy but he's the man for the job. He's already proven himself coming out of the May crisis not only intact but in a stronger position. Lesser politicians would have been thrown out of power already.

[KireB]

Abhisit hasn't a overwhelming majority. Former PM did much better.

bottom line: Abhisits problem are far from over.

Bottom line is that Abhisit is teh lawfull Prime Minister of Thailand.

[mazeltov]

ditto: see the figures above.

Its not my 'side' or my cause. Abhisit hasn't a overwhelming majority. Former PM did much better.

bottom line: Abhisits problem are far from over.

Wow you are soooo insightful! Of course Prime Minister Abhisit will have many problems to solve. It will not be easy but he's the man for the job. He's already proven himself coming out of the May crisis not only intact but in a stronger position. Lesser politicians would have been thrown out of power already.

stronger position?

[animatic]

Abhisit got MORE votes re-validating his leadership NOW

after the clear out of Rajaprasong, than he got to be installed as PM.

His stock is rising and no PTP reddend spin can deflate that fact.

Samak's was dropping like a stone, so to compare his rapid decent

to Abhisit's steady rise is a losing point, can't spin that,

no matter what flaming tire you strap it to.

Those PTP pratts caused all this trouble and converted NO ONE to their cause.

And lost thousands to boot and several MP's. Bathos to think otherwise.

Edited June 2, 2010 by animatic

[gl9999]

ditto: see the figures above.

Its not my 'side' or my cause. Abhisit hasn't a overwhelming majority. Former PM did much better.

bottom line: Abhisits problem are far from over.

Wow you are soooo insightful! Of course Prime Minister Abhisit will have many problems to solve. It will not be easy but he's the man for the job. He's already proven himself coming out of the May crisis not only intact but in a stronger position. Lesser politicians would have been thrown out of power already.

stronger position?

Oh yes. After the Red Shirts tried to burn down the city, you can bet that they've lost a lot of support because of the chaos they caused.

Prime Minister Abhist however has come out of the crisis stronger. He has shown patience in not sending the troops in early despite calls for him to do so. He offered the Red Shits a compromise which they reneged on after agreeing to it. He had no choice but to send the troops in to take out the terrorist. Trying to burn down the city after they lost only affirmed the PM's position about the terrorist.

The hard core Red Shits aren't going to vote for him in the next election anyway. But there are a lot of people who are sitting on the fence and you can bet they've moved over to PM Abhisit's side now.

[rabo]

Hi,

They lost. The trick to bring down the government didn't work, the Thai people are not buying the "government is evil" line nor are the MPs. The tide has turned.

ditto: see the figures above.

what tide has turned? The result was actually expected. The coalition sticks together. 246 pro votes got Abhisit in last years censure debate. I thought that maybe one or two will swing. okay not.

bottom line: Abhisits problem are far from over.

Yes, the vote would be expected under ordinary circumstances, but the times are anything but ordinary. The attempt to topple the government by triggering violence and then blaming the government didn't work. The coalition held, although a month ago it didn't look like it could. Aside from expected partisan alignment, today's vote expressed no lack of confidence in Abhisit's government, in spite of all that has happened. Remarkable.

The real turning of the tide though is in the reaction of the people, many of who have turned away from the red cause. This is understandable considering how Thai feel about violence, but it also means they have seen through the smoke screen, not surprising since it's their country. I think mostly foreigners would have trouble understanding the plot.

This is all a bit amazing if you look back at the situation in mid April with the government in shock and the reds running out of control. This turn arround, inspite of the government and even people like Kaset, is due to one man's effort. A real tour de force. No, all is not well, this is still Thailand and problems are stacked higher and deeper as usual. But, the direction has changed, or the tide has changed, whatever.

It is unfortunate that the red cause has been so damaged, but in the end it was damaged by the one who sought to divide and destroy for his own power. Maybe now the rural cause (forget the color red) can find better footing and participate in some real reconciliation. The Thai's also don't like division.

[mazeltov]

Abhisit got MORE votes re-validating his leadership NOW

after the clear out of Rajaprasong, than he got to be installed as PM.

His stock is rising and no PTP reddend spin can deflate that fact.

Samak's was dropping like a stone, so to compare his rapid decent

to Abhisit's steady rise is a losing point, can't spin that,

no matter what flaming tire you strap it to.

Those PTP pratts caused all this trouble and converted NO ONE to their cause.

And lost thousands to boot and several MP's. Bathos to think otherwise.

:facedesk:

Its explain in the thread. when Abhisit got appointed as PM the parliament lacked the 29 seats of the banned party executive. the 29 by-election were after his appointment.

In a march 2009 censure debate Abhisit got the support of 246 Mps.

steady rise? 5555 and 555555

[jdinasia]

Abhisit got MORE votes re-validating his leadership NOW

after the clear out of Rajaprasong, than he got to be installed as PM.

His stock is rising and no PTP reddend spin can deflate that fact.

Samak's was dropping like a stone, so to compare his rapid decent

to Abhisit's steady rise is a losing point, can't spin that,

no matter what flaming tire you strap it to.

Those PTP pratts caused all this trouble and converted NO ONE to their cause.

And lost thousands to boot and several MP's. Bathos to think otherwise.

Fairly simple isn't it? The dems and coalition are overall doing well and the recent attacks in BKK have strengthened them.

The PTP attacks couldn't even slap down Suthep! (and Suthep was the easiest target!)

Some infighting between one of the smaller parties and BJT isn't of much concern yet!

Abhisit is in the clear for a long time ... next will come another series of red shirt attacks. Why? Not for democracy, after all, the reds had 2 chances at early elections and blew it. No excuses ... they blew it and blew it badly just because the timeline offered didn't match Thaksin's needs! (Note --- every single day it appears that Thaksin will do anything to either regain his lost power ... or destroy Thailand in the process.)

[KireB]

Abhisit is in the clear for a long time ... next will come another series of red shirt attacks. Why? Not for democracy, after all, the reds had 2 chances at early elections and blew it. No excuses ... they blew it and blew it badly just because the timeline offered didn't match Thaksin's needs! (Note --- every single day it appears that Thaksin will do anything to either regain his lost power ... or destroy Thailand in the process.)

I am afraid you're spot on. The ventriloquist mr T. is still at large.

[Siripon]

Abhisit is in the clear for a long time ... next will come another series of red shirt attacks. Why? Not for democracy, after all, the reds had 2 chances at early elections and blew it. No excuses ... they blew it and blew it badly just because the timeline offered didn't match Thaksin's needs! (Note --- every single day it appears that Thaksin will do anything to either regain his lost power ... or destroy Thailand in the process.)

I am afraid you're spot on. The ventriloquist mr T. is still at large.

And if the terrorism charges are taken seriously, he may be reduced to jumping up and down on the small beach he owns in Montenegro.

[rabo]

:facedesk:

steady rise? 5555 and 555555

Here, a present to cheer kitty. facedesk =

[NaiGreg]

Yes, the vote would be expected under ordinary circumstances, but the times are anything but ordinary. The attempt to topple the government by triggering violence and then blaming the government didn't work. The coalition held, although a month ago it didn't look like it could. Aside from expected partisan alignment, today's vote expressed no lack of confidence in Abhisit's government, in spite of all that has happened. Remarkable.

The real turning of the tide though is in the reaction of the people, many of who have turned away from the red cause. This is understandable considering how Thai feel about violence, but it also means they have seen through the smoke screen, not surprising since it's their country. I think mostly foreigners would have trouble understanding the plot.

This is all a bit amazing if you look back at the situation in mid April with the government in shock and the reds running out of control. This turn arround, inspite of the government and even people like Kaset, is due to one man's effort. A real tour de force. No, all is not well, this is still Thailand and problems are stacked higher and deeper as usual. But, the direction has changed, or the tide has changed, whatever.

It is unfortunate that the red cause has been so damaged, but in the end it was damaged by the one who sought to divide and destroy for his own power. Maybe now the rural cause (forget the color red) can find better footing and participate in some real reconciliation. The Thai's also don't like division.

Thank you for saying this in such a clear and concise way that even the most severely reasoning-challenged members here can understand it. Your assessment/summary is completely congruous with what we have watched unfold over the last few months and years.

[jdinasia]

Yes, the vote would be expected under ordinary circumstances, but the times are anything but ordinary. The attempt to topple the government by triggering violence and then blaming the government didn't work. The coalition held, although a month ago it didn't look like it could. Aside from expected partisan alignment, today's vote expressed no lack of confidence in Abhisit's government, in spite of all that has happened. Remarkable.

The real turning of the tide though is in the reaction of the people, many of who have turned away from the red cause. This is understandable considering how Thai feel about violence, but it also means they have seen through the smoke screen, not surprising since it's their country. I think mostly foreigners would have trouble understanding the plot.

This is all a bit amazing if you look back at the situation in mid April with the government in shock and the reds running out of control. This turn arround, inspite of the government and even people like Kaset, is due to one man's effort. A real tour de force. No, all is not well, this is still Thailand and problems are stacked higher and deeper as usual. But, the direction has changed, or the tide has changed, whatever.

It is unfortunate that the red cause has been so damaged, but in the end it was damaged by the one who sought to divide and destroy for his own power. Maybe now the rural cause (forget the color red) can find better footing and participate in some real reconciliation. The Thai's also don't like division.

Thank you for saying this in such a clear and concise way that even the most severely reasoning-challenged members here can understand it. Your assessment/summary is completely congruous with what we have watched unfold over the last few months and years.

If only it were over --- and some of the regional bosses had a better understanding of what is becoming a new political reality in Thailand (and about time too!)

[mazeltov]

:facedesk:

steady rise? 5555 and 555555

Here, a present to cheer kitty. facedesk =

ahh, cute. (==) thank you.

but i prefer the basic version.

[mazeltov]

Murder in the name of reconciliation

By Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

Published on June 3, 2010

Two weeks after the May 19 military crackdown on mostly unarmed red-shirt protesters and the burning of more than 30 spots in Bangkok, it appears as if it all took place for nothing. Those who hate continue to hate, while those who wanted the red shirts to be punished got what they wanted. Yet there's been no reflection.

Of the 89 killed since April 10, most were red-shirt protesters. The movement continues to be cracked down upon and intimidated with arrests under the emergency decree - all in the name of national reconciliation.

Talk of reconciliation is empty if you shut the ears, eyes and mouths of those very people you claim you want to reconcile with and arrest those who call for a small protest outside an emergency-ruled area, as happened to Chulalongkorn University history lecturer Suthachai Yimprasert. He was arrested and released after a week, while his "co-conspirator", Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, the leftist editor of "Voice of Taksin" magazine, who does not have the status of academic, remains a political detainee.

One human-rights activist ranted that even in the aftermath of the darkest day in modern Thai history - October 6, 1976 - the names of those arrested were made public. This time, two weeks after May 19, we still don't have such a list.

Also, how long will Bangkok and the 23 other provinces be ruled under the emergency decree? Should it continue for another month, or until the next general election is held late next year? We are now at the mercy of the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime and those behind him who are deeply insecure and addicted to the idea of emergency rule in order to sustain an illusion of political normalcy.

In this climate of "reconciliation", transparency, rights to political assembly and due process of law are gone, as arbitrary arrests and censorship under the emergency "law" becomes the new norm. One disturbing "truth" is the story behind the death of six people at Pathum Wanaram Temple.

Though Abhisit told the lower House that an "independent" committee would be set up to find out the truth, the government's statement, released in English and dated as early as May 20 - one day after the tragedy - purportedly stated with absolute certainty that it was "a well-planned operation on the part of the armed group who knowingly took advantage of the temple's designation as a safe area �".

So why the need for a committee when "the definitive truth" is already readily available a mere day after the incident? I think the government's failure to fly the national flag at half mast even for a day to mourn the loss of lives is probably the most sincere reflection of the authority's sentiments. The fact that most red-shirt leaders failed to come up with even a single sentence to express a sense of contrition for those who lost their lives , properties or were undeservedly affected is equally inexcusable.

Many people, be they red or non-red, were left to deal with the pain and sorrow by themselves. A red-shirt contact said on Tuesday that many fellow members of the movement upcountry felt that they have no place to stand. Their mass-media outlets have all been shut down, while their arch-enemies - the yellow shirts - are taking great pleasure in their defeat. For many, death seems to be the only way out.

Some red shirts from the cities have visited their fellow protesters upcountry to sympathise, while others are learning how to shoot so they can seek revenge.

Back in Bangkok, a hundred small notes mourning the burning down of the Siam Theatre were left at the site. Only one of these notes expressed condolences for those who were killed - the rest were more disturbed that a fire had consumed their favourite movie theatre.

-- The Nation June 3, 2010

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/...n-30130765.html

[jackdawson]

let's understand this , politically .

the reds at the height of the ratchaprasong squatting nonsense were offered a november election . they didn't accept .

then they got sent backing back to issan w/ their tails between their legs .

their strategy failed completely .

they got nothing in the budget

and the PM is stronger than ever

other than some of the best parts of bkk having been torched , it couldn't have turned out better .

(when they not drunk on lao kao) let them be willing to die and practice shooting ; we'll see how far the army lets them south NEXT TIME on route 2

Edited June 2, 2010 by jackdawson