stanley2550 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 The Circus Is Back! Thai Politics is liking watching the old U.S.A. television series...F-TROOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley2550 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Please, do we have to put of with advertisements of stock reccomendations! What an invasion of space! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley2550 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 It truly is amazing that a convicted criminal can run a country via his sister. Only in Thailand...what a great place...extortion, graft, blackmail, fraud is the order of the day.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 TO MR ABISHIT AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY !!! YOU LOST !! THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND HAVE VOTED AND CAST YOU ASIDE !! GROW UP STOP BEING CHILDISH ACCEPT IT AND MOVE ON !! LOOK AT YOURSELVES AND ASK THE QUESTION WHY YOU LOST !! Is your CAPS lock key stuck? Just maybe the Democrats lost because PTP broke the law. We'll never know. As pointed out a few pages ago, if an athlete wins through cheating, they get disqualified. Why should elections be different? Just because PTP got the most seats doesn't mean that the law should be ignored. But the gold medal doesn't go to second place when they cheat as well. Painfully obvious both parties acted illegally but now one party has the shits because it didn't cheat as good as the other. If the Democrats cheated, someone better lodge a complaint with the EC ... like, today. But besides that, in this case, the "gold medal" will be handed over to the new-PTP (if PTP are banned). It's not 2008. The new-PTP will still have a majority (or close to it - not actually sure how many MPs would be banned) AND support of the smaller parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley2550 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Its rather refreshing to know that we expats can never be citizens...I do realize that we expats have problems in our own countries from which we come from, but it does make one happy that were we born in the west where there is still some sanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley2550 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Anyone here want to exchange their Birtish, American, Canadian, Australian etc citizenship (passport) for a Thai Passport and ctizenship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimjim Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I've no doubt vote buying went on in this election, but it probably happens on both sides to different degrees. Which party is more guilty? I don't know but I seem to remember last time more proof was found against Puea Thai(or whatever it was called before that) candidates than Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallaby Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Anyone here want to exchange their Birtish, American, Canadian, Australian etc citizenship (passport) for a Thai Passport and ctizenship? We in oz are in a shambles as well. Because both major parties didn't get enough seats to hold power Labor sucked up to the 4 independants better than the Libs. Now we basically have a govt run by 4 senators. Minority rules. Oh joy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackr Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 (edited) Its rather refreshing to know that we expats can never be citizens... You most certainly can. You're also allowed to make more than one comment per post. Edited July 9, 2011 by jackr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 What a farce.. for a country that puts so much on not loosing face they're doing a pretty good job of it at the moment.. Yep...... next campaign promise will be free Botox injections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuang Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Abhisit is a "little man" who speaks with a twisted tongue.. first he conceded defeat in the election and wows to be a constructive opposition....now he is trying to create mayhem and chaos or even civil war just to satisfies his selfish ends... why can't the Democrats accept that they had lost the peoples' mandate..a very very sour loser.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Abhisit is a "little man" who speaks with a twisted tongue.. first he conceded defeat in the election and wows to be a constructive opposition....now he is trying to create mayhem and chaos or even civil war just to satisfies his selfish ends... why can't the Democrats accept that they had lost the peoples' mandate..a very very sour loser.... PTP has an impressive record of electoral fraud. Let's see if they can get canned for a third time in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Abhisit is a "little man" who speaks with a twisted tongue.. first he conceded defeat in the election and wows to be a constructive opposition....now he is trying to create mayhem and chaos or even civil war just to satisfies his selfish ends... why can't the Democrats accept that they had lost the peoples' mandate..a very very sour loser.... Considering Abhisit hasn't spoken on this issue, he hasn't twisted anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I predict another military coup within the next 2 years just like last time. Will probably boil over when the sister tries to get the families ill gotten money back and/or Taskin tries to come back into the country. I seriously doubt Thaksin will wait that long to try both of those. He comes off as rather a selfish man, yes? If he just faded away long ago and/or just served his light jail sentence, imagine how different things would be now. The day when Thaksin returns without causing friction is still quite a way off, I think. First the PTP have to deal with any EC/Dem challenge to the legality of their government. Then they have to get the judiciary onside whilst staving off Dem/Military pressure for that not to happen. Thaksin hasn't come across as the buccaneering type. I don't think he'll want to take a risk where his own safety/freedom is at stake. That means being patient a fair bit longer. This assumes that Thaksin will not think the mandate lets him return for the December wedding and not care about causing friction. It's like he has drawn a line in the sand to get this done by. Friction causes heat and often fires, like a hotbox on a train, it can light the whole cargo on fire if not caught in time,. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlastikbinLina Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Surprise,surprise! The people have had their say, hopefully he courts will throw this out before it even gets off the ground. Upholding anything like this would probably be the simple way to allow the military to do exactly what they said they won't on the basis that they would be intervening in a potential civil war. Let the democratically elected government to get on with their job, if they fail the people will have an opportunity to go to the polls again in the future. So you are in favour of any wrong-doing by the winning party being overlooked because they won? Personally my hope is that laws are not thrown out the window, but abided by, and that it can be shown that Puea Thai did. If they didn't, well then they get what's coming. Disenfranchising the voters choice will only lead to one big sh*t fight. Sore losers always lose anyway. It 's just a matter of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 ... Is thedistribution of a few bahts worth of noodles really a serious election act violation? ... It was the local branch of the EC that included the "noodles incident" in their election report. The Democrats have nothing to do with that. Everyone seems to have forgotten that just, before the election, Pheu Thai asked the EC to disband the Democrats ... because they "criticised it's candidates". Lets not let a small local incident about noodles distract from the real issues. I would view dissolution for criticizing candidates as a ridiculous charge. But letting banned, self exiled and convicted Thaksin control, finance and, dictate positions and membership positions to the party is an extremely serious charge, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Abhisit is a "little man" who speaks with a twisted tongue.. first he conceded defeat in the election and wows to be a constructive opposition....now he is trying to create mayhem and chaos or even civil war just to satisfies his selfish ends... why can't the Democrats accept that they had lost the peoples' mandate..a very very sour loser.... It could be considered constructive to anti-corruption thinkers that removingtThaksins stranglehold on PTP would be very constructive for Thailands politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sungod Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Abhisit is a "little man" who speaks with a twisted tongue.. first he conceded defeat in the election and wows to be a constructive opposition....now he is trying to create mayhem and chaos or even civil war just to satisfies his selfish ends... why can't the Democrats accept that they had lost the peoples' mandate..a very very sour loser.... 2 pints of what ever you are drinking please, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerry1011 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Well... to me it is clear that the Democrats are the ones not interested in any kind of reconciliation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf5370 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 (edited) And to think this party calls itself "Democrat." They have absolutely no grasp of the term. They lost, Puea Thai won with a true voting mandate. Move on. anyone with a brain saw this coming weeks ago except PTP and Thaksin. He is banned from all politics for 5 years but he still inserted himself into the process,.who broke the law. My Oh My Mr. Thaksin did but as usual who doesn't care about the laws of Thailand Mr. Thaksin. And you think the PTP or Thaksin didn't see it either - it was a carefully planned risk: PTP executive count lowered and moved into hardline areas (PTP areas). If they are found guilty - even if the party is banned - those seats will go to by-election and remain the same colour. A new party name will be thought up (probably with a P in it!) and the same people will be in, controlling the government - with the same PM. In a few months Thaksin will be cleared of his ban (expired) so can resume. Think how it might have gone differently without Thaksin's support over the last 2 years, let alone the election. Even if they lose the battle, they win the war. Edited July 9, 2011 by wolf5370 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awohalitsiktoli Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Perhaps all the Thaksin haters and by implication Democrat supporters will now wake up and realize the true nature of the people they support. No-one who support the current government support democracy. The people in as free and fair election as you are ever going to have in Thailand have decided and they've come out in their millions to defeat the current administration. This current Democratic Party move (Democratic? - what a joke) opens the door for a return to seeing tanks on the streets of Bangkok yet again. I dont suppose it will be long. Democracy in Thailand? Surely you jest. It does not exist on either side of the political spectrum--which is actually one-sided (the rich rule). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Don't you just love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowardV Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 The Reds will not accept this objection on the grounds that whatever laws were put into effect by those who put Abhisit into power are null, and for the very same reasons. They never considered Abhisit to have come into a position of power by legitimate means. Thaksin was ousted by a military coup, and after Samak, who came into power via democratic process, was declared to have conflicting interests (the prime minister had his own TV show), Abhisit was appointed -- by the same political regime that came into power through military force. Therefore, any laws passed during that time by that regime would be considered undemocratic and thus, illegitimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Even if they lose the battle, they win the war. A word that is intrinsically linked with Thaksin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 If the democrats were interested in reconciliation for Thailand, then they would not have filed this. The most pertinent statement so far! Just a thought - isn't Thaksin's 5 years nearly up? Could this be why the election was called early? Was it only yesterday that I posted "How long before somebody lodges a complaint against Thaksin's blatant participation?" (or something to that effect)? They call people who ignore court rulings "scoff-laws" and their treatment is often quite harsh. I knew a young lad who continued to drive without a licence - the first offence got him a stiff fine, the others 6 months in the pokey. I don't know if Thai electoral law has such provisions, but I live in hope. That's exactly why the election was called before the bans expire. With Thaksin and 105 TRT heavyweights banned until October and several other eloquent chaps detained without trial this seemed the ideal moment for the Democrats to sneak a victory - unfortunately for them, they hadn't reckoned with K. Yingluck - or their own bankrupt policies. So now they're going to get their friends in the judiciary (all part of the same Bangkok elite of course) to steal power from the poeple again! But calling the elections early (the main Red demand) was a legitimate tactical ploy even if unsuccessful. The fact that Mr T could not resist joining in was his own decision. The court case will not steal power from the"people," PTP will still be able to form a govt, and there is no again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 The Reds will not accept this objection on the grounds that whatever laws were put into effect by those who put Abhisit into power are null, and for the very same reasons. They never considered Abhisit to have come into a position of power by legitimate means. Thaksin was ousted by a military coup, and after Samak, who came into power via democratic process, was declared to have conflicting interests (the prime minister had his own TV show), Abhisit was appointed -- by the same political regime that came into power through military force. Therefore, any laws passed during that time by that regime would be considered undemocratic and thus, illegitimate. The Reds have never accepted any laws period - I would of thought that a number of the laws that they violated in 2009 and 2010, were certainly in place even during the reign of Thaksin. The fact is, that Thaksin and his bunch of thugs have been breaking laws for the past 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 The Reds will not accept this objection on the grounds that whatever laws were put into effect by those who put Abhisit into power are null, and for the very same reasons. They never considered Abhisit to have come into a position of power by legitimate means. Thaksin was ousted by a military coup, and after Samak, who came into power via democratic process, was declared to have conflicting interests (the prime minister had his own TV show), Abhisit was appointed -- by the same political regime that came into power through military force. Therefore, any laws passed during that time by that regime would be considered undemocratic and thus, illegitimate. I would have thought that the restriction on banned MPs being involved in election campaigning was in the 1997 ("Peoples") constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpoint Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 He cheated in 2006. He was banned. His proxy party cheated in 2007. They were banned. He is obviously heavily involved in the latest proxy, let the judgement be made. Some of the deluded members seem to think there's a "3 strikes and you're innocent" rule out there. Just because you have a criminal's view of justice doesn't change the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I thought the people have chosen already ? In all "Democracy" voice of people is usually legitimate . I understand they might be disappointed but I don think it will help to reunited Thais. Competely correct. If the people have chosen then the Democracts have to bow their heads to this desision. I am not a great Thaksin fan. It was the Pheu Thai's election policy to bring Thaksin back to Thailand without jail and the people have chosen Pheu Thai even with this program. I believe that they have a green light to bring him back and he will have to be pardoned by the right authorities, because its the will of the people. This is unfortunate, but nothing can be done to stop this from happening short of a coup. " It was the Pheu Thai's election policy to bring Thaksin back to Thailand without jail............" Their policy as stated was exactly the opposite of this...........but everybody knew they were lying, so that's all right then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtoad Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 He cheated in 2006. He was banned. His proxy party cheated in 2007. They were banned. He is obviously heavily involved in the latest proxy, let the judgement be made. Some of the deluded members seem to think there's a "3 strikes and you're innocent" rule out there. Just because you have a criminal's view of justice doesn't change the law. Thaksin will cry out the usual cons statement, "I was stitched up Guv, honest". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now