Constitution Court Acquits Thai Democrat

[rubl]

I will, however, point out one aspect of your post and that is if people do support the red shirts, then they do support Thaksin.

That's just not true. If you look at someone like Giles Ungpakorn, you'll see that he's very sympathetic to the reds but was a critic of Thaksin.He's very clear about this and, in fact, it's hardly surprising that a Trotskyite would be critical of a capitalist bastard like Thaksin, whilst being sympathetic to a movement predominantly of the urban and rural poor. The reds are clearly a broad church - maybe too broad - and whilst the inane Thaksin-red-Thaksin-red merry-go-round may read nicely in rags like the Nation, it's balls.

What some seem to forget is that there is a significant difference between party line, party leaders and the 'common' members. Enough examples can be found to say Thaksin = PTP = red-shirts = PTP = Thaksin.

Having said that only means the organization and the leaders are close to synonyms. UDD leaders had frequent calls with Thaksin, red-shirts listened to the UDD leaders (like burn-it-my-way Arisman), etc., etc..

The tragedy is that the common red-shirt with valid griefs have had their cause high-jacked by professional demagogues who seem bound on re-instating k. Thaksin and his power clique. The "I'll make you rich" from k. Thaksin may have helped. Better to be duped and exploited by your local elite who you've known for decades than being ruled by those from far-away Bangkok.

The last few years have seen billions spent on 'get back Thaksin'. If that money and especially the effort had been spent differently ......

Edited November 30, 2010 by rubl

[whybother]

So your statement above don't reflect some reality but only what you believe, some mistakes in your memory and ignoring that what you have forgotten or maybe never knew.

So my hint, for cases where the Democrats weren't lucky, but lose in a by-election, check the yellow carded 'vote buyer'.

And i have another question for you: How many seats won the Democrat in a former 'PPP constitution' in by-elections?

So how many by-elections were there after the 2007 election because of banned (red card or yellow card) MPs? And how many did the PPP win?

I don't understand your question, or the relevance, particularly in relation to future elections.

Ok ... seems you don't know either.

But I did find some information that reflects what I remember being discussed a few months ago.

The 2007 election resulted in 233 seats to PPP and 165 to the Democrats. The PPP got 3 red cards and 8 yellow cards, and the Democrats got 1 yellow card. I can't find specific results of those by-elections.

In 2008, as a result of the PPP (and 2 smaller coalition parties) being disbanded, there were 29 by-elections. The Democrats gained 7 seats from those by-elections.

Maybe you can find some more information to answer some of your own questions.

[Robby nz]

When you go back and look at reports from as far back as 2009 and see things like those below:

Thaksin openly claims his leadership of the Pheu Thai Party

Pheu Thai MP Surapong Towijakchaikul on Thursday quoted ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra as saying

he remains the actual party leader and dismissing a call to name a new puppet leader.

"Thaksin says he is the party leader and that he will return to contest the next general election by running for a House seat in Chiang Mai," Surapong said.

He was speaking after his trip to Dubai to wishing Thaksin a happy birthday. Thaksin will be 60 on July 26, seen as an auspicious occasion to reach the fifth-cycle of the 12-part Chinese zodiac.

-- The Nation 2009/07/16

Gen Chaovalit Appointed as Supreme Commander of People's Army of Thailand

Core supporters of Thaksin Shinawatra reveal that the former prime minister has appointed General Chaovalit Yongchaiyud as the Supreme Commander as the People's Army of Thailand. The news comes as core leaders of the red shirts return to Thailand today from a trip to Dubai to discuss political issues with Thaksin.

Don't name candidate yet: Thaksin

By Naya Jittanon

The Nation

Thaksin Shinawatra, patriarch of the Pheu Thai Party, told opposition MPs yesterday to wait until the House of Representatives is dissolved before unveiling its candidate for the next prime minister.

Right up till today:

Fugitive former PM Laos-bound

By The Nation

Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra is going to Laos within a few days, a source from the Pheu Thai Party revealed yesterday.

The source said Thaksin was now in Vietnam, where some opposition party MPs met him to seek advice on by-elections being held on December 12.

It sort of makes a mockery of the claims that PTP and the reds are not controlled by Thaksin.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

What some seem to forget is that there is a significant difference between party line, party leaders and the 'common' members. Enough examples can be found to say Thaksin = PTP = red-shirts = PTP = Thaksin.

Saying "Thaksin and the reds are the same" is not the equivalent of saying "Thaksin and some of the leadership of the reds are the same". The latter might be true, the former clearly is not.

[Buchholz]

Since your claim was that the reds and Thaksin were one and the same, it doesn't really matter whether or not they've said anything about Giles's Marxism. And whilst you may not agree with it, it - Marxism - is a perfectly legitimate political position to take so please, save the crap about 'ranting'. As for Giles talking about Thaksin, he's certainly mentioned it on his blog - I remember very clearly reading it there. He may have said something in his most recent book but I can't remember off the top of my head and I can't now remember where I put it so I can't check immediately.

I look forward to reading whatever you come up with.

My description of his rantings wasn't giving "crap" to Marxism, it was in reference to how he goes about extolling it.

Anyway, due to his fugitive status overseas, he's less of a factor in the Reds "movement" than the others I mentioned earlier, it's just that his particular brand of how things should be run seemed so out of whack with the overwhelming majority of his countrymen, that I've always been curious as to why the Reds did not complete his marginalization by simply saying the Red leadership does not agree with his advocating the dismantling of the country.

The Reds remain, however, with or without Giles, inextricably tied to Thaksin.

[jdinasia]

So your statement above don't reflect some reality but only what you believe, some mistakes in your memory and ignoring that what you have forgotten or maybe never knew.

So my hint, for cases where the Democrats weren't lucky, but lose in a by-election, check the yellow carded 'vote buyer'.

And i have another question for you: How many seats won the Democrat in a former 'PPP constitution' in by-elections?

So how many by-elections were there after the 2007 election because of banned (red card or yellow card) MPs? And how many did the PPP win?

I don't understand your question, or the relevance, particularly in relation to future elections.

Ok ... seems you don't know either.

But I did find some information that reflects what I remember being discussed a few months ago.

The 2007 election resulted in 233 seats to PPP and 165 to the Democrats. The PPP got 3 red cards and 8 yellow cards, and the Democrats got 1 yellow card. I can't find specific results of those by-elections.

In 2008, as a result of the PPP (and 2 smaller coalition parties) being disbanded, there were 29 by-elections. The Democrats gained 7 seats from those by-elections.

Maybe you can find some more information to answer some of your own questions.

The 2007 elections .......

This was before Newin and the rest defected (when it was obvious that Thaksin would not be coming back)

Edited November 30, 2010 by jdinasia

[SergeiY]

Until such time as the rank and file Reds disown and disavow and disassociate from the Reds like Arisaman, Jakrapob, Issan Rambo, Sae Daeng, and Kwanchai who all favor violent upheavels as the means to achieve their goals, the entire "movement" is tainted. That these same rank and file languish in jails without legal and financial support from the leadership after doing their bidding speaks the loudest over what the leadership is concerned with.

Until such time as the somewhat more moderate reds like Sombat become the overwhelming driving force behind the "movement", it is justifiably scorned. An excellent opportunity to begin to raise the level of credibility of the Reds came yesterday when Jatuporn announced a new leadership for the Reds. Did he announce a moderate like Sombat was taking the helm? No. He announced more of the same in the form of Weng's wife.

lol

Sombat is suddenly a moderate red for you?

You just want score rant points against the reds without caring much about that your arguments are coherent.

If it were for Sombat to become the 'new leader' you would just find something to complain and probably not telling us that he is a 'moderate'.

That "only a matter of time" has arrived for Sombat, "the former NGO worker", who is currently the editor of the Red News and Voice of Thaksin publications.

He has announced a new Red Rally for this Sunday, October 10th, which will include the obligatory demand at Ratchaprasong for the release of the Red Leaders, a flowery tribute to their fallen Red comrade, Seh Daeng, at his assassination site on Rama IV road, parade through Ban Kai and Din Daeng, before finishing off at the Democracy Monument for the mandatory affirmation of their democratic and peaceful Red history.

Enjoy, Bangkok.

[Buchholz]

What some seem to forget is that there is a significant difference between party line, party leaders and the 'common' members. Enough examples can be found to say Thaksin = PTP = red-shirts = PTP = Thaksin.

Saying "Thaksin and the reds are the same" is not the equivalent of saying "Thaksin and some of the leadership of the reds are the same". The latter might be true, the former clearly is not.

"some" of the leadership? Which of the leadership is not beholding to Thaksin? Which leader has publicly stated the Reds aren't about Thaksin? Which leader denied Thaksin an opportunity for a phone in or video link to a Red rally?

The leadership of any movement establish the focus and direction of that movement.

How many rank and file Reds have said, "we don't want our leaders" or "we disagree with our leaders" or "we're not going to do what our leaders want"?

[SweeneyAgonistes]

...his advocating the dismantling of the country....

What a bizarre, and bizarrely unjustified, thing to say.

Giles never rants. He's not a particularly skilled writer but he's not a ranter either.

Of course, the type of Socialism which Giles supports has very marginal support in Thailand. That's certainly true but the point is that - and sorry for harping on about this but you seem remarkably deaf to a very simple idea - saying that the reds are Thaksin is disproved by a single counter-example. I've made that counter-example. Now you might want to admit this and amend your claim to something along the lines of 'Thaksin has an influence over the reds', which is certainly true but which is also significantly different.

[jdinasia]

...his advocating the dismantling of the country....

What a bizarre, and bizarrely unjustified, thing to say.

Giles never rants. He's not a particularly skilled writer but he's not a ranter either.

Of course, the type of Socialism which Giles supports has very marginal support in Thailand. That's certainly true but the point is that - and sorry for harping on about this but you seem remarkably deaf to a very simple idea - saying that the reds are Thaksin is disproved by a single counter-example. I've made that counter-example. Now you might want to admit this and amend your claim to something along the lines of 'Thaksin has an influence over the reds', which is certainly true but which is also significantly different.

Actually, Giles and his change of tune is the exception that PROVES the rule that Red=Thaksin. (and he does rant!)

[Buchholz]

Until such time as the rank and file Reds disown and disavow and disassociate from the Reds like Arisaman, Jakrapob, Issan Rambo, Sae Daeng, and Kwanchai who all favor violent upheavels as the means to achieve their goals, the entire "movement" is tainted. That these same rank and file languish in jails without legal and financial support from the leadership after doing their bidding speaks the loudest over what the leadership is concerned with.

Until such time as the somewhat more moderate reds like Sombat become the overwhelming driving force behind the "movement", it is justifiably scorned. An excellent opportunity to begin to raise the level of credibility of the Reds came yesterday when Jatuporn announced a new leadership for the Reds. Did he announce a moderate like Sombat was taking the helm? No. He announced more of the same in the form of Weng's wife.

lol

Sombat is suddenly a moderate red for you?

You just want score rant points against the reds without caring much about that your arguments are coherent.

If it were for Sombat to become the 'new leader' you would just find something to complain and probably not telling us that he is a 'moderate'.

He's more moderate than the likes of other Reds like Arisaman, Nattawut, Jatuporn, et al.

Pretty sad, huh, when all it takes to be labelled a moderate is to not tell people to burn all Muslim mosques to the ground like Arisaman did.

I'll leave your crystal ball readings as to what I will post in some future scenario to the mysticism-believers.

That "only a matter of time" has arrived for Sombat,

That post was a misidentifying error on my part in that past. Somyot is the editor of those Red publications.

The Sombat I've been referring to in the above is the subject of this thread:

Thai Red Shirt Reformer Seeks To Empower Grass Roots

[Buchholz]

...his advocating the dismantling of the country....

What a bizarre, and bizarrely unjustified, thing to say.

Giles never rants. He's not a particularly skilled writer but he's not a ranter either.

Of course, the type of Socialism which Giles supports has very marginal support in Thailand. That's certainly true but the point is that - and sorry for harping on about this but you seem remarkably deaf to a very simple idea - saying that the reds are Thaksin is disproved by a single counter-example. I've made that counter-example. Now you might want to admit this and amend your claim to something along the lines of 'Thaksin has an influence over the reds', which is certainly true but which is also significantly different.

It might if Giles was an active and viable core Red Leader and at the forefront of their decision-making. That a some time Red stage speaker who fled the country ages ago and pooh-poohed Thaksin in the past doesn't all of a sudden disassociate the Reds from Thaksin.

[SergeiY]

Ok ... seems you don't know either.

But I did find some information that reflects what I remember being discussed a few months ago.

The 2007 election resulted in 233 seats to PPP and 165 to the Democrats. The PPP got 3 red cards and 8 yellow cards, and the Democrats got 1 yellow card. I can't find specific results of those by-elections.

In 2008, as a result of the PPP (and 2 smaller coalition parties) being disbanded, there were 29 by-elections. The Democrats gained 7 seats from those by-elections.

Maybe you can find some more information to answer some of your own questions.

Again:

These by-election are hold in constituencies were the previous 'winner' came from various political parties. Yes and sometimes a candidate from a different political party wins, sometimes the same party again and sometime the new version of a banned party.

There are more political parties than only PTP and the Democrats and not all by-election are about to re-assign a former PPP win of the general election.

Your statement "the Democrats actually gained some seats in by-elections that the PPP had won in the general election." is false.

True is that the current government and its coalition members won 20 seats of these 29 seats in that by-election.

What people tend to forget is that 19 of these seats 29 seats came from a banned party, Chart Thai and that the successor of Chart Thai, Chart Thai Phattana is part of the current government coalition. Albeit the new party has a little bit fewer seats than before the ban and that mostly because they lost 'their' constituencies to coalition partners. And thats how the Democrats gained a few more seats.

[NCFC]

So will we see malfeasance charges being brought against the Election Commission for not doing its job correctly?

Somehow I doubt it.

The Establishment (Democrat Party) gets caught misusing election funds, so the Establish (EC) has to bring a case against them. What the Establishment (EC) does, is to delay bringing charges knowing full well that the Establishment (Constitution Court) can then throw the case out on a technicality. Thus saving the Establishment (Democrat Party) to carry on as before.

Watch for more trickery in the TPI Polence case.

A complete mockery of democracy.

[jdinasia]

So will we see malfeasance charges being brought against the Election Commission for not doing its job correctly?

Somehow I doubt it.

The Establishment (Democrat Party) gets caught misusing election funds, so the Establish (EC) has to bring a case against them. What the Establishment (EC) does, is to delay bringing charges knowing full well that the Establishment (Constitution Court) can then throw the case out on a technicality. Thus saving the Establishment (Democrat Party) to carry on as before.

Watch for more trickery in the TPI Polence case.

A complete mockery of democracy.

Somehow I think you missed the relevant points here. The EC first said ... no case

The Reds threatened the EC

The EC changed its mind (already too late when the reds threatened them.)

[whybother]

Ok ... seems you don't know either.

But I did find some information that reflects what I remember being discussed a few months ago.

The 2007 election resulted in 233 seats to PPP and 165 to the Democrats. The PPP got 3 red cards and 8 yellow cards, and the Democrats got 1 yellow card. I can't find specific results of those by-elections.

In 2008, as a result of the PPP (and 2 smaller coalition parties) being disbanded, there were 29 by-elections. The Democrats gained 7 seats from those by-elections.

Maybe you can find some more information to answer some of your own questions.

Again:

These by-election are hold in constituencies were the previous 'winner' came from various political parties. Yes and sometimes a candidate from a different political party wins, sometimes the same party again and sometime the new version of a banned party.

There are more political parties than only PTP and the Democrats and not all by-election are about to re-assign a former PPP win of the general election.

Your statement "the Democrats actually gained some seats in by-elections that the PPP had won in the general election." is false.

True is that the current government and its coalition members won 20 seats of these 29 seats in that by-election.

What people tend to forget is that 19 of these seats 29 seats came from a banned party, Chart Thai and that the successor of Chart Thai, Chart Thai Phattana is part of the current government coalition. Albeit the new party has a little bit fewer seats than before the ban and that mostly because they lost 'their' constituencies to coalition partners. And thats how the Democrats gained a few more seats.

The point is, the Democrat party won 7 seats previously held by the PPP coalition. That means that they gained support since the 2007 election. Other by-elections since the 2008 have also shown no loss of support for the Democrats.

Which all comes back to the initial question: How does the PTP expect to win the next election?

[animatic]

Why did the court accept the case in the first place if it was late in filing the case. Seems like a waste of tax payer money. Justice once again is never served in Thailand.

Anti-government protesters force their way into Thailand's Election Commission building in Bangkok April 5, 2010. Hundreds of anti-government protesters forced their way into Thailand's Election Commission building on Monday.

The reason it wasn't filed within 15 days of the 'acknowledgment' of the case, was because they decided not to file it from lack reasons to,since their predecessors had already signed off on the changes in posters. And the later EC maintained that position until AFTER the incident pictured above. AKA the EC filed under extreme duress.

Edited November 30, 2010 by animatic

[ballpoint]

The point is, the Democrat party won 7 seats previously held by the PPP coalition. That means that they gained support since the 2007 election. Other by-elections since the 2008 have also shown no loss of support for the Democrats.

Which all comes back to the initial question: How does the PTP expect to win the next election?

If the PTP expected to win the next election the reds would not have turned down Abhisit's offer of November. Hell, it would all be over by now and either the PAD would be out protesting, or the reds would have to find a different excuse to do so (other than the "unelected government" claptrap they currently spout). If the PTP expected to win they would say "Ok Abhisit, you've mentioned April, dissolve parliament earlier, call elections and we'll refrain from attacking any non PTP campaigners in our strongholds". The PTP don't expect to win. Their best chance is to stir up so much trouble that the army intervenes and calls a blanket amnesty to restore order. With the PAD seemingly wanting a similar result, the bed could have some strange fellows lying in it together.

[hammered]

Ok ... seems you don't know either.

But I did find some information that reflects what I remember being discussed a few months ago.

The 2007 election resulted in 233 seats to PPP and 165 to the Democrats. The PPP got 3 red cards and 8 yellow cards, and the Democrats got 1 yellow card. I can't find specific results of those by-elections.

In 2008, as a result of the PPP (and 2 smaller coalition parties) being disbanded, there were 29 by-elections. The Democrats gained 7 seats from those by-elections.

Maybe you can find some more information to answer some of your own questions.

Again:

These by-election are hold in constituencies were the previous 'winner' came from various political parties. Yes and sometimes a candidate from a different political party wins, sometimes the same party again and sometime the new version of a banned party.

There are more political parties than only PTP and the Democrats and not all by-election are about to re-assign a former PPP win of the general election.

Your statement "the Democrats actually gained some seats in by-elections that the PPP had won in the general election." is false.

True is that the current government and its coalition members won 20 seats of these 29 seats in that by-election.

What people tend to forget is that 19 of these seats 29 seats came from a banned party, Chart Thai and that the successor of Chart Thai, Chart Thai Phattana is part of the current government coalition. Albeit the new party has a little bit fewer seats than before the ban and that mostly because they lost 'their' constituencies to coalition partners. And thats how the Democrats gained a few more seats.

The point is, the Democrat party won 7 seats previously held by the PPP coalition. That means that they gained support since the 2007 election. Other by-elections since the 2008 have also shown no loss of support for the Democrats.

Which all comes back to the initial question: How does the PTP expect to win the next election?

Winning elections is all about sitting MPs, provincial power players and canvassers. PTP had a lock on these in the Isaan and North and a few other rpovinces around Bangkok last time. If that remains the case they stand a good chance of winning. There is however, a lot of speculation that they are losing control of those needed people right now. We will see.

[animatic]

Well the expected Propaganda Fest is in full gear.

Seems if they can't win via dirty tricks go back to

ignoring facts and trying to make image more important

than reality.

You may support the reds for other reasons

and you may say you don't want Thaksin back,

but the reality is supporting PTP and Red Shirts

taking control defacto MEANS supporting Thaksin's return.

The positions are not mutually exclusive not matter what

wishful thinking of separation is imagined.

Edited November 30, 2010 by animatic

[rubl]

Ok ... seems you don't know either.

But I did find some information that reflects what I remember being discussed a few months ago.

The 2007 election resulted in 233 seats to PPP and 165 to the Democrats. The PPP got 3 red cards and 8 yellow cards, and the Democrats got 1 yellow card. I can't find specific results of those by-elections.

In 2008, as a result of the PPP (and 2 smaller coalition parties) being disbanded, there were 29 by-elections. The Democrats gained 7 seats from those by-elections.

Maybe you can find some more information to answer some of your own questions.

Again:

These by-election are hold in constituencies were the previous 'winner' came from various political parties. Yes and sometimes a candidate from a different political party wins, sometimes the same party again and sometime the new version of a banned party.

There are more political parties than only PTP and the Democrats and not all by-election are about to re-assign a former PPP win of the general election.

Your statement "the Democrats actually gained some seats in by-elections that the PPP had won in the general election." is false.

True is that the current government and its coalition members won 20 seats of these 29 seats in that by-election.

What people tend to forget is that 19 of these seats 29 seats came from a banned party, Chart Thai and that the successor of Chart Thai, Chart Thai Phattana is part of the current government coalition. Albeit the new party has a little bit fewer seats than before the ban and that mostly because they lost 'their' constituencies to coalition partners. And thats how the Democrats gained a few more seats.

The point is, the Democrat party won 7 seats previously held by the PPP coalition. That means that they gained support since the 2007 election. Other by-elections since the 2008 have also shown no loss of support for the Democrats.

Which all comes back to the initial question: How does the PTP expect to win the next election?

Winning elections is all about sitting MPs, provincial power players and canvassers. PTP had a lock on these in the Isaan and North and a few other rpovinces around Bangkok last time. If that remains the case they stand a good chance of winning. There is however, a lot of speculation that they are losing control of those needed people right now. We will see.

Hope you don't mind if I like to change 'chance of winning' into 'consolidating'. It would mean PTP be the largest party with 30+% with Dem's very close behind. Maybe a bit of movement between PTP, BJT and small splinter parties. If that happens who will be able to get a majority coalition together and the right to provide PM + cabinet is an interesting question I do not dare to answer.

[SergeiY]

lol

Sombat is suddenly a moderate red for you?

You just want score rant points against the reds without caring much about that your arguments are coherent.

If it were for Sombat to become the 'new leader' you would just find something to complain and probably not telling us that he is a 'moderate'.

He's more moderate than the likes of other Reds like Arisaman, Nattawut, Jatuporn, et al.

Pretty sad, huh, when all it takes to be labelled a moderate is to not tell people to burn all Muslim mosques to the ground like Arisaman did.

I'll leave your crystal ball readings as to what I will post in some future scenario to the mysticism-believers.

That post was a misidentifying error on my part in that past. Somyot is the editor of those Red publications.

The Sombat I've been referring to in the above is the subject of this thread:

Thai Red Shirt Reformer Seeks To Empower Grass Roots

Ahh, okay.

There is

Somyot/Somyos Prueksakasem-suk, leader of the June 24 faction of the red shirts (and editor of some red publications)

and

Sombat Boon-ngam-anong, leader of the Red Sunday group.

Both seems to organizing various red shirt protest meetings and rallies and aare getting quoted in the news from time to time.

Your moderate Sombat seems to be specialised in protest on Sunday and is all about the death during the violent crackdown.

Don't pretend that you would differentiate much between the different and sometimes very distinct Reds.

That "only a matter of time" has arrived for Sombat, "the former NGO worker", who is currently the editor of the Red News and Voice of Thaksin publications.

He has announced a new Red Rally for this Sunday, October 10th, which will include the obligatory demand at Ratchaprasong for the release of the Red Leaders, a flowery tribute to their fallen Red comrade, Seh Daeng, at his assassination site on Rama IV road, parade through Ban Kai and Din Daeng, before finishing off at the Democracy Monument for the mandatory affirmation of their democratic and peaceful Red history.

Enjoy, Bangkok.

[ChiangMaiFun]

You continually mis-quote me and continue to show that you are very arrogant indeed - many people on here have caught onto you as a poster said yesterday.

No "misquoting" done here ... and the poster yesterday is the guy that does the most "name-calling" on the board. It was good of you not to address any of the content in the post that you quoted with this answer though!

So, directly ....

1) Have you not in the past associated the Red shirts with the Labor Union movements in Europe and stated that violence was part of what it took for the labor union movement to gain ground? (I agree that you openly say that you do not condone violence now, but that you have associated the violence of the labor union movements as necessary and the reds with the labor union movement, which in my mind negates your claims to not agreeing with violence.) Don't you find it strange that the Thai labor unions took stands against the redshirts and Thaksin?

2) Have you not changed tactics from saying that there has been a paradigm shift in Thailand, to now saying a social/cultural shift that will take 3-4 decades? (What country in the world has NOT had a cultural shift in 30-40 years/.)

3) Am I arrogant? Sure!

4) Is the red movement totally tied up with the "bring back Thaksin" movement? Absolutely

5) Are the people quoted in the OP pro-Thaksin? Absolutely

6) Do you balk against the stereotype of saying that Reds are pro-Thaksin while continuing to label anti-Thaksin people as "yellow fellows"? Absolutely (pot:kettle:black)

Very simply --- the fight is between 2 (possibly 3) strong power blocs in Thailand. The government, strangely, isn't one of those blocs.

edit to add: Giles U. is not widely accepted by the reds --- even though he has appeared on red stages. The fact that Giles U. has run away from Thailand to escape prosecution is quite telling. That he is at the extreme lunatic fringe and being quoted here as proof that the red movement is less pro-Thaksin is also telling. That Giles stands for something that only the smallest minority in Thailand would approve of, but is being used in this argument is again ... telling. That apparently his own co-workers at Chula turned him in for his crimes ... LOL

I loosely linked labour movements as an example of change in societies not to link any approval of violence - you are very selective in your hatchet job on my posts. I never said there HAD been a cultural shift but there was one HAPPENING now (I have always said 'decades') - please go read up on the subject as your understanding is woeful at best.

[wackysleet]

Well the expected Propaganda Fest is in full gear.

Seems if they can't win via dirty tricks go back to

ignoring facts and trying to make image more important

than reality.

You may support the reds for other reasons

and you may say you don't want Thaksin back,

but the reality is supporting PTP and Red Shirts

taking control defacto MEANS supporting Thaksin's return.

The positions are not mutually exclusive not matter what

wishful thinking of separation is imagined.

So in effect what your saying is that anyone that supports the cause and injustices being done to the majority of the people that support the reds are pro Thaksin, what a crock of shit.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Well the expected Propaganda Fest is in full gear.

Seems if they can't win via dirty tricks go back to

ignoring facts and trying to make image more important

than reality.

You may support the reds for other reasons

and you may say you don't want Thaksin back,

but the reality is supporting PTP and Red Shirts

taking control defacto MEANS supporting Thaksin's return.

The positions are not mutually exclusive not matter what

wishful thinking of separation is imagined.

So in effect what your saying is that anyone that supports the cause and injustices being done to the majority of the people that support the reds are pro Thaksin, what a crock of shit.

They won't understand or accept the difference - everyone who is sypathetic to the poor and downtrodden and undertstands the frustrations of the reds is a Thaksin supporter (not true), pro-violence (not true) and stupid (not true).

[rubl]

Well the expected Propaganda Fest is in full gear.

Seems if they can't win via dirty tricks go back to

ignoring facts and trying to make image more important

than reality.

You may support the reds for other reasons

and you may say you don't want Thaksin back,

but the reality is supporting PTP and Red Shirts

taking control defacto MEANS supporting Thaksin's return.

The positions are not mutually exclusive not matter what

wishful thinking of separation is imagined.

So in effect what your saying is that anyone that supports the cause and injustices being done to the majority of the people that support the reds are pro Thaksin, what a crock of shit.

Sorry, but in effect what you are saying I cannot really follow. Would you care to explain ?

If PTP's main program point for the election is 'get Thaksin back', if PTP = UDD, Thaksin talks about 'his' red-shirts, etc., etc., either the majority of those PTP/UDD/red-shirts want Thaksin back and therefor support him, or only the leaders and the common folk need to shut up and do what they do best: serve as cannon fodder

PS IMHO

[jdinasia]

Well the expected Propaganda Fest is in full gear.

Seems if they can't win via dirty tricks go back to

ignoring facts and trying to make image more important

than reality.

You may support the reds for other reasons

and you may say you don't want Thaksin back,

but the reality is supporting PTP and Red Shirts

taking control defacto MEANS supporting Thaksin's return.

The positions are not mutually exclusive not matter what

wishful thinking of separation is imagined.

So in effect what your saying is that anyone that supports the cause and injustices being done to the majority of the people that support the reds are pro Thaksin, what a crock of shit.

They won't understand or accept the difference - everyone who is sypathetic to the poor and downtrodden and undertstands the frustrations of the reds is a Thaksin supporter (not true), pro-violence (not true) and stupid (not true).

Wrong again ---

Many of us that are Pro-government and Anti-Thaksin also "feel the pain" of the rural poor in Thailand. That being said, since the PTP has one stated goal --- and the UDD has one stated goal --- and the red shirt movement backs up the PTP/UDD ---- then currently to be a "red" and claim that Thaksin is not at the center of it all is senseless.

The day that the reds drop Thaksin they will certainly get a little more support from many people. The day the reds stop violence and threats of violence, they will get even more.

[chuang]

Democrats Acquitted on Technicality

The court reasoned their acquittal on the fact that the Election Commission did not file the charges in accordance to Article 93 of the Constitution.

-- Tan Network 2010-11-29

Is the EC being bribed to file a late complaint...even if filed on time i am sure the kangaroo court would still acquit the Democrats...the whole system of governance..army, police judiciary etc etc is under the control of the " amartaya "..

they have treated the thai people as fools....

[ChiangMaiFun]

Well the expected Propaganda Fest is in full gear.

Seems if they can't win via dirty tricks go back to

ignoring facts and trying to make image more important

than reality.

You may support the reds for other reasons

and you may say you don't want Thaksin back,

but the reality is supporting PTP and Red Shirts

taking control defacto MEANS supporting Thaksin's return.

The positions are not mutually exclusive not matter what

wishful thinking of separation is imagined.

So in effect what your saying is that anyone that supports the cause and injustices being done to the majority of the people that support the reds are pro Thaksin, what a crock of shit.

They won't understand or accept the difference - everyone who is sypathetic to the poor and downtrodden and undertstands the frustrations of the reds is a Thaksin supporter (not true), pro-violence (not true) and stupid (not true).

Wrong again ---

Many of us that are Pro-government and Anti-Thaksin also "feel the pain" of the rural poor in Thailand. That being said, since the PTP has one stated goal --- and the UDD has one stated goal --- and the red shirt movement backs up the PTP/UDD ---- then currently to be a "red" and claim that Thaksin is not at the center of it all is senseless.

The day that the reds drop Thaksin they will certainly get a little more support from many people. The day the reds stop violence and threats of violence, they will get even more.

I, too, wish they would drop the 'Thaksin Back' stance but I see the whole thing in a much larger context than thee

[whybother]

Democrats Acquitted on Technicality

The court reasoned their acquittal on the fact that the Election Commission did not file the charges in accordance to Article 93 of the Constitution.

-- Tan Network 2010-11-29

Is the EC being bribed to file a late complaint...even if filed on time i am sure the kangaroo court would still acquit the Democrats...the whole system of governance..army, police judiciary etc etc is under the control of the " amartaya "..

they have treated the thai people as fools....

No, I think it was more that they were being forced to file a complaint. They decided a number of times previously not to file it, until they had reds on their doorstep giving them a bit of encouragement.