PAD Sets Off Crusade Against Thai Charter Rewrite

[animatic]

Right on schedule and 110% expected.

This is the run up to another Oct 7 incident and it all goes down hill from there.

But likely MUCH worse this time.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

Can't believe these people still think they have any relevance to the political scene.

[phiphidon]

I put my answers between in color

The Thai Rak Thai party had several major objections to the draft constitution.

1. It disagreed with an appointed Senate, claiming that it reflected a condescending view of the electorate. It is a good argument, that can be discussed.
   
2. It disagreed with Article 299, which provided amnesty to the military junta for staging the September coup. Without such articles we would have military rule forever. How the junta can go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety.
   
3. It disagreed with Article 173, which forbade ministers who are MPs from voting for a Prime Minister facing a censure motion, claiming that it undermined the authority of elected politicians. No idea on that point.
   
4. It disagreed with Articles 257 and 259, which barred politicians from interfering in the work of bureaucrats, claiming that it would make it difficult for governments to implement their policies. bureaucrats must act according to the laws which are set by the parliament. If they don't do that they are wrong and loose their job. If direct interfering without laws is possible than it opens the door to massive abuse of power and that is exactly what TRT did. Transfer of the bureaucrat in that golf place case and installing Thaksins brother in law as police chief shows how important such a law is.
   
5. It noted fear of a return to bureaucratic rule in government, with too much power handed to officials and the courts. Yes that would be very disturbing if bureaucrats and courts can stop politicians from corruption. I don't believe that bureaucrats or courts make problems setting policies that help Thailand.
   

That shows the intentions very well. They don't want any checks or balance they want the full power them self. And obviously not for doing something good.

I'm not going to even try debating with you with a mindset like that but your answer to point 2 is just risible:

"Without such articles we would have military rule forever. How the junta can go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety".

I don't know which part of the world you come from but generally in a democracy, even one as unformed and minimalistic as this one, it's not considered (apart from in some army minds) that a military coup is to be encouraged.

"How can the junta go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety". Priceless!

[animatic]

It was up to the people to vote for the Charter just as it was up to them to vote for whichever party they chose in any of the elections. Of course people are fooled all the time in Thailand and it's unlikely to ever change.

Oh did you also read the parts about;

'the junta-appointed National Assembly elected 200 of its members as candidates for the Constitution Drafting Assembly. The voting was fraught with irregularities.'

And also;

'100 were approved by the junta to act as potential constitution drafters. The 100 included prominent anti-Thaksin critics'

How about;

'The junta directly appointed 10 drafters to join the Constitution Drafting Assembly. They included anti-Thaksin activist and former National Security Council head'

Oh and let's not forget;

'The Committee on Information and Public Dissemination of the Constitution Drafting Assembly led an advertising campaign to persuade voters to favour the draft constitution. Media used included all television, cable and radio stations, websites, print media outlets, government agencies, education institutions, billboards and places where crowds gather. All state-run schools and universities were involved in the campaign. Spots were aired from 6 am until 10 pm with the message "Approve: New Constitution, close to the people". Billboards saying, "Love the King Care about the King. Vote in a referendum. Accept the 2007 draft charter." were placed throughout the Northeast.'

So the illegal thing was that the government made promotion for their constitution? And only deciding the constitution in parliament like for the 1997 is more democratic?

Making some changes in parliament without referendum to help some super rich is democratic?

And by the way what are the bad things in the 2007 constitution? Name some.

Thaksin doesn't get his way is the main sticking point.

[h90]

Right on schedule and 110% expected.

This is the run up to another Oct 7 incident and it all goes down hill from there.

But likely MUCH worse this time.

Thaksins brother in law as police boss.......

[h90]

I put my answers between in color

The Thai Rak Thai party had several major objections to the draft constitution.

1. It disagreed with an appointed Senate, claiming that it reflected a condescending view of the electorate. It is a good argument, that can be discussed.
   
2. It disagreed with Article 299, which provided amnesty to the military junta for staging the September coup. Without such articles we would have military rule forever. How the junta can go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety.
   
3. It disagreed with Article 173, which forbade ministers who are MPs from voting for a Prime Minister facing a censure motion, claiming that it undermined the authority of elected politicians. No idea on that point.
   
4. It disagreed with Articles 257 and 259, which barred politicians from interfering in the work of bureaucrats, claiming that it would make it difficult for governments to implement their policies. bureaucrats must act according to the laws which are set by the parliament. If they don't do that they are wrong and loose their job. If direct interfering without laws is possible than it opens the door to massive abuse of power and that is exactly what TRT did. Transfer of the bureaucrat in that golf place case and installing Thaksins brother in law as police chief shows how important such a law is.
   
5. It noted fear of a return to bureaucratic rule in government, with too much power handed to officials and the courts. Yes that would be very disturbing if bureaucrats and courts can stop politicians from corruption. I don't believe that bureaucrats or courts make problems setting policies that help Thailand.
   

That shows the intentions very well. They don't want any checks or balance they want the full power them self. And obviously not for doing something good.

I'm not going to even try debating with you with a mindset like that but your answer to point 2 is just risible:

"Without such articles we would have military rule forever. How the junta can go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety".

I don't know which part of the world you come from but generally in a democracy, even one as unformed and minimalistic as this one, it's not considered (apart from in some army minds) that a military coup is to be encouraged.

"How can the junta go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety". Priceless!

In my mindset the German army would have staged a coup against Adolf Hitler and saved us the second world war. In your mindset the second world war was the better option.

In my mindset a peaceful coup in Thailand was the better option. In your mindset the better option would be that the border police shot peaceful protester, women and children.

In my mindset democracy is a tool to find the best possible leader. If a mad man, a killer comes in power who is also able to destroy the system of checks and balances than the tool democracy has failed its job.

But that isn't the topic here, because Thaksin wasn't democratic elected and he also wasn't caretaker PM at the time of the coup.

He was just an average Banana Republic Dictator and the military reestablished democracy. (Please check the facts on several one party list elections in a row with corrupt election commission and still Thaksin could not win enough MPs (even without other parties). And more or less appointed himself as PM.

[phiphidon]

I put my answers between in color

The Thai Rak Thai party had several major objections to the draft constitution.

1. It disagreed with an appointed Senate, claiming that it reflected a condescending view of the electorate. It is a good argument, that can be discussed.
   
2. It disagreed with Article 299, which provided amnesty to the military junta for staging the September coup. Without such articles we would have military rule forever. How the junta can go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety.
   
3. It disagreed with Article 173, which forbade ministers who are MPs from voting for a Prime Minister facing a censure motion, claiming that it undermined the authority of elected politicians. No idea on that point.
   
4. It disagreed with Articles 257 and 259, which barred politicians from interfering in the work of bureaucrats, claiming that it would make it difficult for governments to implement their policies. bureaucrats must act according to the laws which are set by the parliament. If they don't do that they are wrong and loose their job. If direct interfering without laws is possible than it opens the door to massive abuse of power and that is exactly what TRT did. Transfer of the bureaucrat in that golf place case and installing Thaksins brother in law as police chief shows how important such a law is.
   
5. It noted fear of a return to bureaucratic rule in government, with too much power handed to officials and the courts. Yes that would be very disturbing if bureaucrats and courts can stop politicians from corruption. I don't believe that bureaucrats or courts make problems setting policies that help Thailand.
   

That shows the intentions very well. They don't want any checks or balance they want the full power them self. And obviously not for doing something good.

I'm not going to even try debating with you with a mindset like that but your answer to point 2 is just risible:

"Without such articles we would have military rule forever. How the junta can go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety".

I don't know which part of the world you come from but generally in a democracy, even one as unformed and minimalistic as this one, it's not considered (apart from in some army minds) that a military coup is to be encouraged.

"How can the junta go back to democracy if they fear for their own safety". Priceless!

In my mindset the German army would have staged a coup against Adolf Hitler and saved us the second world war. In your mindset the second world war was the better option.

In my mindset a peaceful coup in Thailand was the better option. In your mindset the better option would be that the border police shot peaceful protester, women and children.

In my mindset democracy is a tool to find the best possible leader. If a mad man, a killer comes in power who is also able to destroy the system of checks and balances than the tool democracy has failed its job.

But that isn't the topic here, because Thaksin wasn't democratic elected and he also wasn't caretaker PM at the time of the coup.

He was just an average Banana Republic Dictator and the military reestablished democracy. (Please check the facts on several one party list elections in a row with corrupt election commission and still Thaksin could not win enough MPs (even without other parties). And more or less appointed himself as PM.

Off topic, off the reservation, more like. Nothing more to say to you.

[birdpooguava]

Oh I thought you were just ignoring my pointing out that far from the yellow shirts just "sitting in front of it" they were actually in the terminal as well - an important distinction. Likewise saying that "Some have been jailed" - well they haven't have they? It's important that people know what really happened.

And they had knives, guns, bombs & barbed wire fences. Not to mention getting caught smoking meth & attempting to print money.

[sparebox2]

No way the army would stage a coup. They can't not after an internationally authenticated democratic election. When Hamas was democratically elected in did anyone but Israel do anything about it. No there will be no coup any time soon. It would be too damaging to Thailands reputation.

Didn't you say the same in early September 1996, a few day before that silly coup?

I suppose history repeats itself.

[GarryP]

Does it really matter? It will be revised, rewitten, amended, erased, unrevised, unrewitten, ad infintum depending on who is in power at the time and who's needs it serves.

[Buchholz]

Oh I thought you were just ignoring my pointing out that far from the yellow shirts just "sitting in front of it" they were actually in the terminal as well - an important distinction. Likewise saying that "Some have been jailed" - well they haven't have they? It's important that people know what really happened.

And they had knives, guns, bombs & barbed wire fences. Not to mention getting caught smoking meth & attempting to print money.

Was all that in the photo provided?

.

[Mosha]

Some got punished. My god they ALL should have got punished for hi-jacking an airport, even the mom and pops. The ones that didn't get punished will feel no problem to hi-jack the airport again. I suggest you book your tickets to KL. Looks like history is about to repeat itself.

They didn't hijack an airport. They parked themselves in front of it.

Should taxi drivers that protest at airports go to jail too? Baggage handlers that strike and cause chaos at airports for days?

What about protesters that set up barricades stopping tourist access to major tourist shopping areas?

I was never stopped going to shopping areas where the reds protested. They were polite and courteous even when being shot by the army. Why is it the airport was no longer operational. Their intention was to make the airport not operational. Delusion is something that most farang seccumb to in the land of smiles. Red or Yellow - its the professional version of the battle to get a table for the street meat vendors all over Thailand. I don't choose sides. We all know power leads to kickbacks.

I bet you couldn't go shopping after the fire though.

[billd766]

what about the red shirts over 90 dead as a result of their actions and tremendous damage done in a effort to burn Bangkok down and one of their leaders gets elected to parliament.

actually there are an astounding 12 Red Shirts in Parliament.

.

How many of the 12 actually stood for election and won the seat and how many are party list MPs?

[h90]

Oh I thought you were just ignoring my pointing out that far from the yellow shirts just "sitting in front of it" they were actually in the terminal as well - an important distinction. Likewise saying that "Some have been jailed" - well they haven't have they? It's important that people know what really happened.

And they had knives, guns, bombs & barbed wire fences. Not to mention getting caught smoking meth & attempting to print money.

Was all that in the photo provided?

.

No, as well it isn't true, but is sounds good in red propaganda. The quality here is going down again. All the red are on full speed again. Seems some big troubles are coming.....

[h90]

what about the red shirts over 90 dead as a result of their actions and tremendous damage done in a effort to burn Bangkok down and one of their leaders gets elected to parliament.

actually there are an astounding 12 Red Shirts in Parliament.

.

How many of the 12 actually stood for election and won the seat and how many are party list MPs?

I don't know, but party list MPs also stay for election (coming from a country where all MPs are party list MPs).

[billd766]

what about the red shirts over 90 dead as a result of their actions and tremendous damage done in a effort to burn Bangkok down and one of their leaders gets elected to parliament.

actually there are an astounding 12 Red Shirts in Parliament.

.

How many of the 12 actually stood for election and won the seat and how many are party list MPs?

I don't know, but party list MPs also stay for election (coming from a country where all MPs are party list MPs).

AFAIR each political party is awarded an extra number of MPs depending on the number of MPs who actually won a seat and got elected.

Copied from Wikipedia

The National Assembly of the Kingdom of Thailand is a bicameral legislature composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives. Combined, the Assembly has 650 members, 576 of which are elected (500 MPs and 76 Senators). Others include 74 non elected (74 Senators through party selection). The majority of elections in Thailand follows the First Past the Post system which is used in the elections for the 375 members of the House of Representatives and 76 members of the Senate. The remaining 125 members of the House are elected by party list proportional representation.

So there are only 375 actual elected MPs and 125 from the party list with a proportion for each party depending on the number of MPs elected.

I think that TRT has around 50 "seats to be allocated" to whoever they wish to "give" the seat to.

It appears that of 500 seats in the House of representatives 25% are "up for grabs" as it were and a party could if they wish nominate anyone for a seat, provided that the person meets the qualifications.

Even Mickey Mouse were he qualified.

So 25% of the House of Representatives actually represent no constituents.

That includes the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

Edited April 19, 2012 by billd766

[Buchholz]

what about the red shirts over 90 dead as a result of their actions and tremendous damage done in a effort to burn Bangkok down and one of their leaders gets elected to parliament.

actually there are an astounding 12 Red Shirts in Parliament.

.

How many of the 12 actually stood for election and won the seat and how many are party list MPs?

AFAIK, all of them are Party-list MP's. None stood as a constituency MP and locally voted in.

.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Buchholz

[HOMERUNBANGKOK]

I am as neutral as one could get when it comes to the colored shirt divide.

There were so many similarities, most strikingly the use of armed thug like "guards" around the perimeters and stages of both the yellow and the red protests.

But one thing that really stuck out in my mind, having meandered through both protest sites, out of need not desire I might add, is the amount of human waste and garbage on the streets, the sidewalks, the grass, and the klongs during the yellow protests. I remember saying to my wife..."How can these people pledge love to the King and treat his neighborhood this way. It was truly revolting.

Reality is I think a great majority of the actual protesters were one and the same...got 500.00 baht to wear yellow shirts in 08-09 and 500.00 baht to wear red ones during 2010 and would all happily take 500 baht to wear purple ones in 2013 if someone asked.

The protest organizers and leaders themselves of course were different, but to me it seemed the Red Village in 2010 was much better organized and paid more attention to the environment and did a better job of keeping human excrement and trash under control.

Here is to hoping Thailand will one day soon see a new generation of politicians who truly understand what compromise and maturity means.

When you tell you have seen that, than you are a liar. I have been several times to the yellow protests and they were cleaner than human possible. They permanent cleaned, made it a big topic and later used that as propaganda, that they are cleaner than the red one.

Chamlong inspected everything several times per day, picked up single pieces of paper himself and was very upset if he could find a small mess somewhere.

so if you tell you have that seen many times, than you lie, because I have been there.

Payment: I can't guarantee for everyone there, but many people I know who were there did not receive any money, and I doubt that people who have a new Mercedes care about 500 Baht. My wife donated 1000-5000 Baht every time she went there.

Obviously you are sympathize with the red one and try that "the are all the same bad"-strategy......

I sympathize with the fact that Thailand has not reached its potential and grown in the scope it could as a global citizen because of polarized politics. Lost opportunity costs in my book are the greatest losses of all. I am an American and my home country is sliding backwards down the same slippery slope. My global political leanings are probably far far far away from what you think they are. Probably stun you to know I have a letter of appreciation from the govt when my neighbor Mark, (who by the way is a gentleman and a scholar in my eyes) was in office. Got it as a result of my actions in the early morning hours after one of the ugliest nights in this countries history and it was presented for my act of goodwill to people of all sides, yellow red, army, police, mercedes drivers and moto taxis......want to call me a liar on that one as well????

Now you, I am not sure of, except for the fact you have a hard time listening to what someone might say, and can only revert to name calling and making negative inferences if someone sees or perceives what they saw differently than was your view or perception. A poster child for polarization if there ever was one. Hearing and listening are two different things.

Now please, go check your meds and try to be a bit nicer to people. It can go a long way in securing a positive balance in the karma account.

[metisdead]

A bringing HM the King into the discussion has been removed. Go to the following link and read the post:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/479383-no-discussion-of-the-monarchy-in-political-context/

[h90]

AFAIR each political party is awarded an extra number of MPs depending on the number of MPs who actually won a seat and got elected.

Copied from Wikipedia

The National Assembly of the Kingdom of Thailand is a bicameral legislature composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives. Combined, the Assembly has 650 members, 576 of which are elected (500 MPs and 76 Senators). Others include 74 non elected (74 Senators through party selection). The majority of elections in Thailand follows the First Past the Post system which is used in the elections for the 375 members of the House of Representatives and 76 members of the Senate. The remaining 125 members of the House are elected by party list proportional representation.

So there are only 375 actual elected MPs and 125 from the party list with a proportion for each party depending on the number of MPs elected.

I think that TRT has around 50 "seats to be allocated" to whoever they wish to "give" the seat to.

It appears that of 500 seats in the House of representatives 25% are "up for grabs" as it were and a party could if they wish nominate anyone for a seat, provided that the person meets the qualifications.

Even Mickey Mouse were he qualified.

So 25% of the House of Representatives actually represent no constituents.

That includes the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

yes but in many countries all are elected with only this system. Like you get 25 % of the votes nation wide, and there are 200 seats, so you get 50 people. From Nr. 1 to Nr. 50 of your list. Before the election there are always fights for the position on that list....

[h90]

what about the red shirts over 90 dead as a result of their actions and tremendous damage done in a effort to burn Bangkok down and one of their leaders gets elected to parliament.

actually there are an astounding 12 Red Shirts in Parliament.

.

How many of the 12 actually stood for election and won the seat and how many are party list MPs?

AFAIK, all of them are Party-list MP's. None stood as a constituency MP and locally voted in.

.

yes but the party list is voted for and subsequential their party list MPs. Very common in Europe.

It has the disadvantage that you don't directly vote for a person you trust.

But it has the advantage that it makes vote buying very difficult.

Say: a party may get between 20 and 30 %

To make it easy the parliament has 100 seats.

Candidate 0-19 isn't interested in vote buying, as they are safe.

Candidate 30-100 isn't interested as it is hopeless

So these 20-30 need to buy votes countrywide which is extreme expensive. So it is much better to try to get a better position on the list.

I don't want to judge which system is better??

[Buchholz]

Oh I thought you were just ignoring my pointing out that far from the yellow shirts just "sitting in front of it" they were actually in the terminal as well - an important distinction. Likewise saying that "Some have been jailed" - well they haven't have they? It's important that people know what really happened.

And they had knives, guns, bombs & barbed wire fences. Not to mention getting caught smoking meth & attempting to print money.

Was all that in the photo provided?

.

No, as well it isn't true, but is sounds good in red propaganda. The quality here is going down again. All the red are on full speed again. Seems some big troubles are coming.....

That does seem to be the pattern.

.

[heiwa]

What is obvious to me is the reds and yellows have about as much chance of success living in harmony as the posters on this board. Very few men can overcome childishness. The only solution for Thailand is coups, and more coups, and more coups. History has shown this again and again. The military will always do the best job at governing Thailand (or lack of governing). At least you will all have a rest - at least until the civil war starts. You can always move to Laos. It was like Thailand used to be when no-one dared to open their mouth - good and bad. $550 for a one year visa in Laos. Not a bad deal.

Edited April 19, 2012 by heiwa

[Buchholz]

actually there are an astounding 12 Red Shirts in Parliament.

How many of the 12 actually stood for election and won the seat and how many are party list MPs?

AFAIK, all of them are Party-list MP's. None stood as a constituency MP and locally voted in.

yes but the party list is voted for and subsequential their party list MPs. Very common in Europe.

I don't want to judge which system is better??

Yes, I understand it and no, I'm not saying any system is better.

It is what it is and the dozen Red Shirts were selected from the Party-list roster, rather than individually elected in by a local constituency.

.

[billd766]

AFAIR each political party is awarded an extra number of MPs depending on the number of MPs who actually won a seat and got elected.

Copied from Wikipedia

The National Assembly of the Kingdom of Thailand is a bicameral legislature composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives. Combined, the Assembly has 650 members, 576 of which are elected (500 MPs and 76 Senators). Others include 74 non elected (74 Senators through party selection). The majority of elections in Thailand follows the First Past the Post system which is used in the elections for the 375 members of the House of Representatives and 76 members of the Senate. The remaining 125 members of the House are elected by party list proportional representation.

So there are only 375 actual elected MPs and 125 from the party list with a proportion for each party depending on the number of MPs elected.

I think that TRT has around 50 "seats to be allocated" to whoever they wish to "give" the seat to.

It appears that of 500 seats in the House of representatives 25% are "up for grabs" as it were and a party could if they wish nominate anyone for a seat, provided that the person meets the qualifications.

Even Mickey Mouse were he qualified.

So 25% of the House of Representatives actually represent no constituents.

That includes the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

yes but in many countries all are elected with only this system. Like you get 25 % of the votes nation wide, and there are 200 seats, so you get 50 people. From Nr. 1 to Nr. 50 of your list. Before the election there are always fights for the position on that list....

I have a feeling that is called proportional representation though I have never been in a country (that I know of) that actually practises it.

I have just looked it up on Wikipedia and found this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation

[heiwa]

Here we go again. Yellows making a noise, then reds making a noise, then another coup. And then there will be really pissed of reds who will be none to happy and whom many believe will start a civil war - at the very least a very scary place to live.

[Jingthing]

Here we go again. Yellows making a noise, then reds making a noise, then another coup. And then there will be really pissed of reds who will be none to happy and whom many believe will start a civil war - at the very least a very scary place to live.

I think this time, yes violence, but no new coups and the Thaksinistas totally consolidate power and create a long standing Chavez style regime. Not democratic but lots of elections ... Just my take on it. I just feel that the Thaksin forces have really taken over now so things won't be the same. Edited April 19, 2012 by Jingthing

[heiwa]

Here we go again. Yellows making a noise, then reds making a noise, then another coup. And then there will be really pissed of reds who will be none to happy and whom many believe will start a civil war - at the very least a very scary place to live.

I think this time, yes violence, but no new coups and the Thaksinistas totally consolidate power and create a long standing Chavez style regime. Not democratic but lots of elections ... Just my take on it. I just feel that the Thaksin forces have really taken over now so things won't be the same.

I concede a coup would by folly leading to civil war. But when the yellows and reds are at each others necks again - on the streets of Bangkok - or even the Yellows alone - the army of course will have no option but to stage a coup - even though they will know it will lead to civil war. This will go its natural course. Some countries just are resistant to democracy. I am certain that there will be a need for a lot more blood before this country ever settles down. It'll be a bigger version of the Deep South. And don't anyone tell me history does not repeat. You must remember blood letting is no such a big deal here. You really have to have a Thai perspective. Someone killed here - just pay up 400K baht and the caravan gets rolling again - as in the Deep South - or does it really? Edited April 19, 2012 by heiwa

[h90]

Yes, I understand it and no, I'm not saying any system is better.

It is what it is and the dozen Red Shirts were selected from the Party-list roster, rather than individually elected in by a local constituency.

.

Currently both systems have big problems......Can't judge what is better.

[visionchaser45]

PAD Now, that's a misnomer if ever I saw one. It is an alliance a very few people who want nothing at all to do with democracy. But, hey, what's in a name?

Edited April 19, 2012 by visionchaser45