Another Abhisit Flip-Flop Vendor Arrested

[george]

Another Abhisit flip-flop vendor arrested

BANGKOK: -- Police arrested a flip-flop vendor at the red shirt rally at Ratchaprasong intersection, and confiscated about 100 pairs of flip-flops bearing the PM’s face.

ASTV-Manager reports that at 9 pm on 19 Nov, police arrested Kornkamon Pornhit who was selling flip-flops printed with the face of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva at the red-shirt rally at Ratchaprasong intersection, and confiscated about 100 pairs.

Pol Maj Gen Ronnasilp Pusara, Metropolitan Police commander, said that the police made the arrest to check whether the flip-flops were considered items prohibited by the announcement of the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) or not. However, he said that the vendor might probably be fined only for obstructing the footpath.

Earlier, at about 11.30 am, Army Chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, in his capacity of Head of the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, issued a CRES order under the Emergency Decree to prohibit possession or distribution of any goods, clothing, or other materials which bear pictures, illustrations or anything that will instigate unrest or cause disunity among the public.

The penalty for the offence is imprisonment for up to two years, or a fine of up to 40,000 baht, or both.

Source: http://www.prachatai3.info/journal/2010/11/31976

[Humphrey Bear]

If someone is wearing the sandals the portrait cannot be seen, therefore will not cause unrest or disunity. Therefore also the selling of such items should not be a punishable offence.

Whatever happened to the urinal targets of Osama? I had several that I placed in appropriate urinals around the world. They did not cause unrest or disunity either - everyone did what they had to and moved on.

[geriatrickid]

If someone is wearing the sandals the portrait cannot be seen, therefore will not cause unrest or disunity. Therefore also the selling of such items should not be a punishable offence.

Whatever happened to the urinal targets of Osama? I had several that I placed in appropriate urinals around the world. They did not cause unrest or disunity either - everyone did what they had to and moved on.

Are these vendors compensating the people who's images are being used? I don't think so. It's therefore theft of trade dress and "brand image". If the victim complains and brings suit, fine the vendors for this infringement of rights.

[otherstuff1957]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

[Boater]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

[Siripon]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

Absolutely correct. The police should arrest the PAD vendors retroactively to prevent themselves being accused of double standards!

[whybother]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

I was wondering who the woman was, but assumed the guy was Abhisit. Looking again, it does look like Thaksin.

Given that the current flip-flops are supposed to be of Abhisit and Suthep, I'm guessing they just picked out a file picture and hoped no one would notice.

[MikeyIdea]

If someone is wearing the sandals the portrait cannot be seen, therefore will not cause unrest or disunity. Therefore also the selling of such items should not be a punishable offence.

Whatever happened to the urinal targets of Osama? I had several that I placed in appropriate urinals around the world. They did not cause unrest or disunity either - everyone did what they had to and moved on.

To put a face on something worn on the lowest part of the body is a very severe insult in Thailand, they are clearly seen enough to be insulting. A "public person" hurt as much as a civilian, no difference. I just think that it is common sense that someone who badly insults another person should be punished for it

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Of course written only to point out that IMO, insults of course should be punishable. Do you still have the same opinion?

[asiawatcher]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

... especially with the title "MOST WANTED" - someone got the pic wrong .... more responsible reporting.

[Thai at Heart]

If someone is wearing the sandals the portrait cannot be seen, therefore will not cause unrest or disunity. Therefore also the selling of such items should not be a punishable offence.

Whatever happened to the urinal targets of Osama? I had several that I placed in appropriate urinals around the world. They did not cause unrest or disunity either - everyone did what they had to and moved on.

To put a face on something worn on the lowest part of the body is a very severe insult in Thailand, they are clearly seen enough to be insulting. A "public person" hurt as much as a civilian, no difference. I just think that it is common sense that someone who badly insults another person should be punished for it

I will not get violent or anything if you insult me, I will just comment that since your parents were so useless at teaching you manners, I bet they aren't missed by anyone now when they are dead

Of course written only to point out that IMO, insults of course should be punishable. Do you still have the same opinion?

Did anyone ask Abhisit if he is offended?

[Thailand]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

I think you are right.

Whoever's mugshot is on them better get those dreadful things off the streets of Bangkok to make way for the child porn which seems to be acceptable!

[phaethon]

Reminds me of the time Benjamin Butler was the Union's military governor of occupied New Orleans during the US civil war. He issued a proclamation that any ladies of the town who disrespected anyone in Union uniform would be treated as if they were whores, i.e. arrested as such.

The reaction of the New Orleans pottery industry was:

Now that image too, when the item was in use, couldn't be seen, but the message is fairly clear: It's the thought that counts.

Edited November 23, 2010 by phaethon

[housepainter]

Is Abhisit the man or the woman or both?

As for inciting a riot or whatever ................ surely the very picture of Thaksin is enough to set some people off. So where do you draw the line?

It illustrates the lack of freedom of speech and the right to protest peacefully. I don't agree with the red shirts but would argue they do have the right to peaceful protest.; that should include within a democracy the right to satirical ilustration, but clearly it does not.

The whole reason being in their immature and fuddled way the Thais do not understand either satire or freedom. Hence, the mysterious highest institution that no one can comment on. And as we know as foreigners here it is a subject without name not to be mentioned even supportatively or positively or ingratiatingly for fear of being understood.

So don't expect anything approaching Western / Oz / Us standards any time this side of a new millenium.

This is sent via my black berri on the way to civilisation, at least I'm out of it for a while.

[Skywalker69]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

Me too

[rubl]

Is Abhisit the man or the woman or both?

As for inciting a riot or whatever ................ surely the very picture of Thaksin is enough to set some people off. So where do you draw the line?

It illustrates the lack of freedom of speech and the right to protest peacefully. I don't agree with the red shirts but would argue they do have the right to peaceful protest.; that should include within a democracy the right to satirical ilustration, but clearly it does not.

The whole reason being in their immature and fuddled way the Thais do not understand either satire or freedom. Hence, the mysterious highest institution that no one can comment on. And as we know as foreigners here it is a subject without name not to be mentioned even supportatively or positively or ingratiatingly for fear of being understood.

So don't expect anything approaching Western / Oz / Us standards any time this side of a new millenium.

This is sent via my black berri on the way to civilisation, at least I'm out of it for a while.

I think the PM has made it clear he doesn't like his image on slippers, also we still do have the E.D. in Bangkok. With the 'mishap' a few weeks ago in Ayutthaya it would be clear that slippers with PM Abhisit on/in it would not be tolerated. So far so good. Compared to 'western' standards the police reaction is overdone, but within legal limits. Certainly within limits a few other countries in the region apply.

If the picture in the OP would be really from Ratchaprasong one or two days ago I'm sure some of the peaceful protesters would have caused the slippers to disappear

[SkyHigh]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

If it is Thaksin face, seller will get medal of honor from Gov.

It's new law, not explicitly written but widely accepted as commom practice.

[phiphidon]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

... especially with the title "MOST WANTED" - someone got the pic wrong .... more responsible reporting.

They are, these flip flops were on sale at a PAD rally some time back - the point was presumably to show double standards as the women vendor in question was not arrested even retroactively. It might have helped if the article had pointed that out.............

[rubl]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

... especially with the title "MOST WANTED" - someone got the pic wrong .... more responsible reporting.

They are, these flip flops were on sale at a PAD rally some time back - the point was presumably to show double standards as the women vendor in question was not arrested even retroactively. It might have helped if the article had pointed that out.............

The government at that time didn't see a reason, they were too busy trying to get a legal framework to allow the safe return of their lord and master k. Thaksin. K. Noppadon who normally is very keen on suing couldn't be bothered either. This implies the current government may be over-reacting, it don't imply the government is wrong.

Edited November 23, 2010 by rubl

[phiphidon]

They are, these flip flops were on sale at a PAD rally some time back - the point was presumably to show double standards as the women vendor in question was not arrested even retroactively. It might have helped if the article had pointed that out.............

The government at that time didn't see a reason, they were too busy trying to get a legal framework to allow the safe return of their lord and master k. Thaksin. K. Noppadon who normally is very keen on suing couldn't be bothered either. This implies the current government may be over-reacting, it don't imply the government is wrong.

I'm not implying the government is wrong. I was pointing out to those who didn't know otherwise why the picture was of flip flops not bearing the images of Suthep and Abhisit.

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

[Thai at Heart]

They are, these flip flops were on sale at a PAD rally some time back - the point was presumably to show double standards as the women vendor in question was not arrested even retroactively. It might have helped if the article had pointed that out.............

The government at that time didn't see a reason, they were too busy trying to get a legal framework to allow the safe return of their lord and master k. Thaksin. K. Noppadon who normally is very keen on suing couldn't be bothered either. This implies the current government may be over-reacting, it don't imply the government is wrong.

I'm not implying the government is wrong. I was pointing out to those who didn't know otherwise why the picture was of flip flops not bearing the images of Suthep and Abhisit.

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

The CRES can legally compel the government and civil service of the day to do what it says it has to do.

This is why in an of itself, it can become an extremely odious structure for the country. It is open to massive abuse. Whilst the structure was set up for times of extreme trouble, which one could say exists today, it should not be used as some kind of super committee to run the country for the medium term.

[rubl]

I'm not implying the government is wrong. I was pointing out to those who didn't know otherwise why the picture was of flip flops not bearing the images of Suthep and Abhisit.

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

Bit overdone I think, most visiting this forum will be able to recognize the image of K. Thaksin and his ex.

The 'law' you refer is just one of the details of having an E.D. in place and part of a larger part of law. To have it promulgated (i.e. made know to the public) just serves to remind pepole. As such the law cannot be rescinded just like that. The part specific to the E.D. can be made no longer applicable by rescinding / ending the E.D.

As for 'Abhisit's request', what request ?

[phiphidon]

I'm not implying the government is wrong. I was pointing out to those who didn't know otherwise why the picture was of flip flops not bearing the images of Suthep and Abhisit.

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

Bit overdone I think, most visiting this forum will be able to recognize the image of K. Thaksin and his ex.

The 'law' you refer is just one of the details of having an E.D. in place and part of a larger part of law. To have it promulgated (i.e. made know to the public) just serves to remind pepole. As such the law cannot be rescinded just like that. The part specific to the E.D. can be made no longer applicable by rescinding / ending the E.D.

As for 'Abhisit's request', what request ?

Oh Rubi, please. OK I was wrong to use the word promulgated - Dear Gen Prayuth was upset by seeing flip flops with said peoples faces on and reacted by ordering a ban on subversive goods with jail penalties attached for the "wrongdoers". You know as well as I do that I cannot quote sources from the other paper. Can I suggest that you investigate for yourself what I am talking about with regard to a) the ban and b, Abhisits request and subsequent rejection. I'm not making this stuff up.

[phiphidon]

I'm not implying the government is wrong. I was pointing out to those who didn't know otherwise why the picture was of flip flops not bearing the images of Suthep and Abhisit.

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

Bit overdone I think, most visiting this forum will be able to recognize the image of K. Thaksin and his ex.

The 'law' you refer is just one of the details of having an E.D. in place and part of a larger part of law. To have it promulgated (i.e. made know to the public) just serves to remind pepole. As such the law cannot be rescinded just like that. The part specific to the E.D. can be made no longer applicable by rescinding / ending the E.D.

As for 'Abhisit's request', what request ?

Oh and by the way I count 6 people who were "questioning" the images. Next.

[rubl]

I'm not implying the government is wrong. I was pointing out to those who didn't know otherwise why the picture was of flip flops not bearing the images of Suthep and Abhisit.

Unfortunately it's not the government that is over reacting - the "law" was promulgated by CRES and signed by one General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the "law" will not be rescinded despite Abhisits "request". Now tell me who is in charge again?

Bit overdone I think, most visiting this forum will be able to recognize the image of K. Thaksin and his ex.

The 'law' you refer is just one of the details of having an E.D. in place and part of a larger part of law. To have it promulgated (i.e. made know to the public) just serves to remind pepole. As such the law cannot be rescinded just like that. The part specific to the E.D. can be made no longer applicable by rescinding / ending the E.D.

As for 'Abhisit's request', what request ?

Oh Rubi, please. OK I was wrong to use the word promulgated - Dear Gen Prayuth was upset by seeing flip flops with said peoples faces on and reacted by ordering a ban on subversive goods with jail penalties attached for the "wrongdoers". You know as well as I do that I cannot quote sources from the other paper. Can I suggest that you investigate for yourself what I am talking about with regard to a) the ban and b, Abhisits request and subsequent rejection. I'm not making this stuff up.

I indicated why I have a problem with a few of your posts in this thread. Too many assumptions, not backed by proof. Use of language in a way which suggests a status without really saying so. Some I think downright wrong and I wrote why I think so.

As for 'investigate yourself, I don't make stuff up', why should I? I haven't read about this before and less willing to spent time and investigate what you suggest. May I ask you to PM me some links ?

[phiphidon]

You may not be bothered, but other people may be interested so here are two sources;

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/11/21/politics/PM-to-discuss-ban-on-goods-with-his-image-30142809.html

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7205565.html

5 other sources are in the other paper, 3 under opinions, one under news local, one under news politics. Help yourself, or not.

[rubl]

You may not be bothered, but other people may be interested so here are two sources;

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/11/21/politics/PM-to-discuss-ban-on-goods-with-his-image-30142809.html

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7205565.html

5 other sources are in the other paper, 3 under opinions, one under news local, one under news politics. Help yourself, or not.

So, what's your point ? You said "Can I suggest that you investigate for yourself what I am talking about with regard to a) the ban and b, Abhisits request and subsequent rejection. I'm not making this stuff up."

How does that match with 'We have to find a balance and see what is suitable so this will not cause more conflicts,' and 'He said he would discuss the issue with Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan at their meeting yesterday.' (Nation)

The other newsflash has a.o. 'The PM is afraid CRES's ban may violate human rights and finally induce to conflicts.'

So? 'request - rejection' ? Maybe you posted the wrong links ?

Edited November 23, 2010 by rubl

[jayjay0]

I may be wrong, but the pictures on the sandals shown look more like Pojeman and Thaksin than Abhisit!

i was thinking exaclty the same

That was my first impression also.

[creck]

So, what's your point ? You said "Can I suggest that you investigate for yourself what I am talking about with regard to a) the ban and b, Abhisits request and subsequent rejection. I'm not making this stuff up."

How does that match with 'We have to find a balance and see what is suitable so this will not cause more conflicts,' and 'He said he would discuss the issue with Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan at their meeting yesterday.' (Nation)

The other newsflash has a.o. 'The PM is afraid CRES's ban may violate human rights and finally induce to conflicts.'

So? 'request - rejection' ? Maybe you posted the wrong links ?

Seems very clear to me.

I have never laughed so much since I saw on TV the police knocking on a hotel room door and a redshirt climbing down from the window.

Things absolutly impossible in the rest of the world can happen here. It's amazing.

The PM is is the only normal one here. The police and army have been showing thier usual strange reactions.

[MikeyIdea]

*********

The whole reason being in their immature and fuddled way the Thais do not understand either satire or freedom. Hence, the mysterious highest institution that no one can comment on. And as we know as foreigners here it is a subject without name not to be mentioned even supportatively or positively or ingratiatingly for fear of being understood.

**********

Not correct housepainter. There is no problem at all to bring up the monarchy in a positive manner. Here's one perfectably acceptable and true comment; The king of Thailand is the only one I know of who the last 30 years have worked on long term flood prevention in Thailand

[jayjay0]

Is Abhisit the man or the woman or both?

As for inciting a riot or whatever ................ surely the very picture of Thaksin is enough to set some people off. So where do you draw the line?

It illustrates the lack of freedom of speech and the right to protest peacefully. I don't agree with the red shirts but would argue they do have the right to peaceful protest.; that should include within a democracy the right to satirical ilustration, but clearly it does not.

The whole reason being in their immature and fuddled way the Thais do not understand either satire or freedom. Hence, the mysterious highest institution that no one can comment on. And as we know as foreigners here it is a subject without name not to be mentioned even supportatively or positively or ingratiatingly for fear of being understood.

So don't expect anything approaching Western / Oz / Us standards any time this side of a new millenium.

This is sent via my black berri on the way to civilisation, at least I'm out of it for a while.

I liked you better when you said you were leaving you had, had it. Now you are threatening to come back.

Why?

You obviously have no understanding of true culture. You are in need of a artificial reality to survive. Why would you want to subject your self to a culture you consider inferrior. Out of curiosity do you stick your little pinky out when you are drinking tea. If in fact you drink it. I seem to recall your post on a earlier thread where you went in for the seedier bars in Pattaia.

Just a point of interest for you here in the land you seem to have no use for we have a marvelous invention called the spell checker.Interesting how you separate western standards from Oz standards. and Us standards makes no sense what so ever.

Have a god day