Yunla; I believe you've managed to put the entire issue in "a nut-shell" in a very eloquent & brilliant manner !

If there would have been a "Rudyard Kipling Award", I am convinced you would have won it ! !

Admirer

Thanks for the compliment, I don't really see any literary connection between me & any writers of the past. I'm not an eloquent writer, and for another fact I know about a hundred times less facts & figures about Thailand than most TV forumers do.

I just read the Thai news headlines here in the morning, read the responses & post something if I feel compelled to, then go back to my work elsewhere. Most of the time when I'm reading about Thaksin & this current pseudo-government. I feel only a deep sense of sorrow & a sort of numb horror. I've been visiting Thailand since 1976, I own property here & have many Thai friends who I love dearly & consider to be my only remaining family. They are working-class Bangkok people & it breaks my heart truly to see them being scammed constantly by this and earlier regimes. I see this voiding-law & return of Thaksin as a bleak and desperate chapter in this nations history.

I was told once that every person / nation has to hit absolute rock bottom before they bounce back and start working every day to succeed & to only move forward positively. The example I was given was drug addicts, who will never break the habit until they seriously O.D. and wake up in hospital after coma, and swear "never again" & genuinely mean it. They have to reach that complete breakdown-state before they change. This applies to countries too. I felt Thailand had hit rock bottom many times in the past, most recently in 2010 with the red-mob, and a rich fugitive setting up poor farmers as sacrificial pawns in a hideous chess game. In late 09 I actually felt that even though Thailand needed a lot of work to clean up the system, it was starting to head in the right direction very slowly. In 2010 during the "burn Bangkok to the ground" redmob speeches, the blood tipping onto the gates etc. I knew that the "rock bottom" years were still ahead. Thailand has not hit rock bottom yet, and so it has not had the system-shock that will make it wake up & walk into the 21st century clear-headedly as a law-abiding & well-regulated meritocracy. I think that maybe the next decade will be the crashing-to-the-floor stage, followed by the bouncing-back. Its impossible to tell when and how because so many people at the higher echelons are playing the game by their own rules, its impossible to know the outcome until it happens IMO. But anyone can see that overturning the Supreme Court's guilty verdict on Thaksin just because he considers himself above the law, is a completely different system to democracy, it is a regression to criminal oligarchy and might-is-right.

A guilty person who is wasting this much money, time, and human lives, just to clear his own tarnished name, is an arrogant and unrepentant wastrel. A guilty person who commits these actions at state-level in a poor developing-world nation that is socially and economically fragile at this time, is an uncaring despot.

He could have walked away with his stolen money & lived out his days in the type of luxury that most people can not even dream of, yet he hovers vulture-like over this nation, fermenting divisions, unbalancing people's lives, and uprooting the first green shoots of a fledgling democracy.

Yunla; I believe you've managed to put the entire issue in "a nut-shell" in a very eloquent & brilliant manner !

If there would have been a "Rudyard Kipling Award", I am convinced you would have won it ! !

Admirer

+1 Brilliant.

What you say about Thaksin was true 12 years ago. I was talking about today. I notice you skip over the part about the resistance Abhist had to put up within his coalition. Also the terrorism he had to combat. If you think he was wrong just look at how Syria is doing it. He did it in as humane away as the red shirts would let him.

Thaksin In his time he did do some good things but he was in a time of world economics success. And he had the power behind him. If he had used all that power for the betterment of Thailand instead of lining his pockets. He would not have been thrown out. He had very little resistance his undoing is the same that he has now and will not allow him to ever return. EGO actually I think he might fear a bullet is here with his name on it.

What has he done for Thailand lately over 90 dead as a result of his ego. 10 months back in power and the poor red shirts have not one thing to show for it other than the money they got for the Bangkok insurrection and the money they got for voting for him.

Get into 2012 The red shirts have no body to lead them. As I said the Dem's are not a possibility because of the crap they were fed. You criticize me for calling them uneducated what do you think the leaders were calling them when they had to set up a school to teach them what democracy is. Or do you think as I do brainwash them into believing the only true democracy was doing it there way.

Yes the red shirts only happened after the coup but they were all ready in the wings. just waiting for the other two Thaksin led governments to fall on their face. Where they could then try to bring their leader back with illegal means. Or are you saying invasion of hospitals is legal? That is a yes or no question.

Interesting how you equate uneducated with a lower class. As far as I am concerned they just know less than me because I had 12 and a half years of real schooling where if you failed you did not move on to the next grade. It is just a fact not a measurement of class. They were completely happy with the parliamentary system until it didn't work for them. Then all of a sudden they have to have democracy instead. Why did they not change over to democracy when they had the power why wait until they no longer have the power?

The reason the parliamentary system no longer worked for them (the red shirt supporters) is because an Army stole the country by way of a coup. They then tore up the constitution and wrote a new one that benefited them.

I only mentioned the term "uneducated" because you initially referred to it. Specifically because the Yellow shirt Army aligned group used this as a reason to justify to the world about breaking the nation's law. They attempted to imply that the any person that voted against them was not worthy of a vote in an election. If that's not thinkiong you are superior then what is? Whether a person is educated or not is meaningless, in Democracy it means one citizen, one vote. It seems you are trying define what democracy is. Well, I can't answer that, but I'm quite certain when an army takes over the nation by gun (not ballot), then that is not a democracy. Also it's evident (by the last several elections) that the majority of Thais do not want any army run country. While I don't think Thaksin is a good choice either, but this is what majority of Thais have chosen.

Your view of democracy is simplistic and ignores its acknowledged inherent weaknesses. Democracy depends on an educated electorate capable of making rational decisions based on information made easily available by a free and critical media. If you think those conditions are met here you are delusional.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute talk with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

"Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time." E. B. White

Maybe this will help you phiphidon............

It would have helped if it hadn't been for the fact that those are red shirt guards. Blackshirts are more than likely to look like the chap in this video who appears to have lost his uniform (0' 13" in) but then again who knows.

[media=]

Maybe this will help you phiphidon............

It would have helped if it hadn't been for the fact that those are red shirt guards. Blackshirts are more than likely to look like the chap in this video who appears to have lost his uniform (0' 13" in) but then again who knows.

Oh very funny Don. Those persons wearing black shirts aren't "black shirts" they're "red shirt guards". Until they pick up a gun, then they are "FAKE red shirts" or simply "holding the gun for safety until it can be returned to the army."

Your refusal to speculate, or discuss other's speculation, is that there is simply no positive explanation for an armed group in a peaceful protest. This is a fact recognised by the courts. But let's change that and make a precedent that anything is fair as political expression as long as you win.

And what about Thaksin's other crimes? Will he be tried on those as well? Will he be in Thailand to face his charges?

Had Thaksin stayed in Thailand and faced his charges, served what ever little time they would have given him, like the red shirts are doing now because of him, none of this would have happened. No red shirts dead from all the violence, no red shirts in jail. And Thaksin could be fighting shoulder to shoulder with his red shirts, instead of playing politics from behind the curtain like a puppet master. Thaksin needs to face and be held accountable for all his crimes.

... what a sad, pathetic tragedy Thailand is turning itself into ... I mean really, have these people lost their minds? ... do these people really think anything good can possibly come from this idiocy? ... my God, I want out of here so badly!

I wish the reds would see him for what he is. Used their deaths for his own self serving purposes and craps in their faces with the PM not even showing to give compensation. All about one man. So sad for the truly poor in Thailand.

You are assuming they do not? Are you really so condescending toward the “poor”?

Ask yourself why do the Red shirts support Taksin? Why do the Red shirts not support Democrats?

Why was Taksin (who himself is an elite) kicked out of the circle of Elites club by the military?

If Red shirts don’t support Taksin, then who will the Redshirts support? Who will push their cause and stand up against the elites? If no one, then they are back to supporting Taksin and his political group.

well they for sure will live to regret it I can guarantee that 100% + same as most now regret supporting Mugabwie and all other tin pots who when they got real power just made their poor peoples lives hell. Ive already to 60% of our money out but being a little well off well probably be OK since Taksin and his mob are not about to hurt rich in case later it is done to them. Your totally nieve.

I wish the reds would see him for what he is. Used their deaths for his own self serving purposes and craps in their faces with the PM not even showing to give compensation. All about one man. So sad for the truly poor in Thailand.

You are assuming they do not? Are you really so condescending toward the “poor”?

Ask yourself why do the Red shirts support Taksin? Why do the Red shirts not support Democrats?

Why was Taksin (who himself is an elite) kicked out of the circle of Elites club by the military?

If Red shirts don’t support Taksin, then who will the Redshirts support? Who will push their cause and stand up against the elites? If no one, then they are back to supporting Taksin and his political group.

The problem with your whole post is that you assumed Thaksin was on there side. The reason they supported him was because he promised them they would all be rich in 6 months he was going to improve there schools and any thing else they wanted right away.

While the democrats made no such promises they set things in motion to bring about those desires (other than the be rich in 6 months) but they would take a lot of time not just happen today as Thaksin led them to believe. Also you forget that 40 of their supporters were Thaksin trained and not that up on social justice. This was a big problem the Dem's had to work with.

As I see it the red shirts who blindly followed Thaksin fell into two camps the big one being the uneducated one's and the other one's receiving cash for there part in it.

As it stands now yes who are they going to follow Thaksin has been back in power now for about 10 months and all they have seen is prices going up. Give Abhist the kind of support that they gave Thaksin and they will begin to see results they will be able to see them not rely on talk.

Yes indeed who are they to follow they won't believe in Abhist because of the indoctrination that Thaksin's hired mouth pieces and goons fed them and they are slowly seeing that in 10 months they are still no better off.

No. In Thailand politics when it's the little people fighting for democracy against military run governments, then the little people will always end up dead, such as in 1973, 76 & 92. But in this case those same people realized that elites themselves were fighting against each other. Thaksin was taking on the establishment for whatever reason he was kicked out. There was a belief that supporting Thaksin, could result in change and they wouldn't be any worse of under Thaksin than the alternative. Remember, the red shirt movement only began after the coup. He was also the person that brought in universal affordable health care). In past 75 years of "democracy" there was nothing. The Redshirts are not stupid and only wanted long needed change from military totalitarianism. They chose Thaksin as there was no real alternative. Thaksin needed them, so it was an easy match.

Your reference to "uneducated" people demonstrates only how you feel superior to others, and is the way the elite maintain an impression that they are some how better than the lower classes. The Democrats have never offered anything to the poor except more of the same. The same "know you place in this (feudal) society" rhetoric.

Total absolute BS and twadle

Your view of democracy is simplistic and ignores its acknowledged inherent weaknesses. Democracy depends on an educated electorate capable of making rational decisions based on information made easily available by a free and critical media. If you think those conditions are met here you are delusional.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute talk with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

"Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time." E. B. White

Ozmick you appear to be using a lot of quotations nowadays, did you get a book as a birthday present?

The struggle for universal suffrage was always opposed by those, like Churchill who came from a privileged background. I suggest you look more deeply at his time much earlier as Home Secretary rather than PM in WW11, to understand his political viewpoint.

The UK was dragged into allowing its masses to vote at a time when education was perhaps as poor as Thailand's, using rote learning, nationalism, imperial history, a culture of servility, leaving school at 11 years old, etc. In fact it was probably worse since there were far fewer sources of information than today.

That was changed by the mobilisation of the working classes by idealists such as Keir Hardie in the late 19th century.

I accept that there is, as far as I know, no Thai Keir Hardie but suggesting that voters must have a high level of education is nonsense. Power would never change hands since the legislators have the ability to decide upon how well the state education system operates and what is the level of education required to vote.

In Thailand it already requires that an MP must be a graduate, that has never been the case in most real democracies

Maybe this will help you phiphidon............

It would have helped if it hadn't been for the fact that those are red shirt guards. Blackshirts are more than likely to look like the chap in this video who appears to have lost his uniform (0' 13" in) but then again who knows.

Oh very funny Don. Those persons wearing black shirts aren't "black shirts" they're "red shirt guards". Until they pick up a gun, then they are "FAKE red shirts" or simply "holding the gun for safety until it can be returned to the army."

Your refusal to speculate, or discuss other's speculation, is that there is simply no positive explanation for an armed group in a peaceful protest. This is a fact recognised by the courts. But let's change that and make a precedent that anything is fair as political expression as long as you win.

google images red shirt guards

A guilty person who is wasting this much money, time, and human lives, just to clear his own tarnished name, is an arrogant and unrepentant wastrel. A guilty person who commits these actions at state-level in a poor developing-world nation that is socially and economically fragile at this time, is an uncaring despot.

He could have walked away with his stolen money & lived out his days in the type of luxury that most people can not even dream of, yet he hovers vulture-like over this nation, fermenting divisions, unbalancing people's lives, and uprooting the first green shoots of a fledgling democracy.

guess it seems to obvious to ask if that fledgling democracy was before or after the coup....

Maybe not really on topic, but personally I think we have a democracy still in it's infancy and figures who show dictatorial streaks stunting it's growth. That covers both 'interesting' figures like k. Thaksin and General Sonthi. IMHO

What you say about Thaksin was true 12 years ago. I was talking about today. I notice you skip over the part about the resistance Abhist had to put up within his coalition. Also the terrorism he had to combat. If you think he was wrong just look at how Syria is doing it. He did it in as humane away as the red shirts would let him.

Thaksin In his time he did do some good things but he was in a time of world economics success. And he had the power behind him. If he had used all that power for the betterment of Thailand instead of lining his pockets. He would not have been thrown out. He had very little resistance his undoing is the same that he has now and will not allow him to ever return. EGO actually I think he might fear a bullet is here with his name on it.

What has he done for Thailand lately over 90 dead as a result of his ego. 10 months back in power and the poor red shirts have not one thing to show for it other than the money they got for the Bangkok insurrection and the money they got for voting for him.

Get into 2012 The red shirts have no body to lead them. As I said the Dem's are not a possibility because of the crap they were fed. You criticize me for calling them uneducated what do you think the leaders were calling them when they had to set up a school to teach them what democracy is. Or do you think as I do brainwash them into believing the only true democracy was doing it there way.

Yes the red shirts only happened after the coup but they were all ready in the wings. just waiting for the other two Thaksin led governments to fall on their face. Where they could then try to bring their leader back with illegal means. Or are you saying invasion of hospitals is legal? That is a yes or no question.

Interesting how you equate uneducated with a lower class. As far as I am concerned they just know less than me because I had 12 and a half years of real schooling where if you failed you did not move on to the next grade. It is just a fact not a measurement of class. They were completely happy with the parliamentary system until it didn't work for them. Then all of a sudden they have to have democracy instead. Why did they not change over to democracy when they had the power why wait until they no longer have the power?

The reason the parliamentary system no longer worked for them (the red shirt supporters) is because an Army stole the country by way of a coup. They then tore up the constitution and wrote a new one that benefited them.

I only mentioned the term "uneducated" because you initially referred to it. Specifically because the Yellow shirt Army aligned group used this as a reason to justify to the world about breaking the nation's law. They attempted to imply that the any person that voted against them was not worthy of a vote in an election. If that's not thinkiong you are superior then what is? Whether a person is educated or not is meaningless, in Democracy it means one citizen, one vote. It seems you are trying define what democracy is. Well, I can't answer that, but I'm quite certain when an army takes over the nation by gun (not ballot), then that is not a democracy. Also it's evident (by the last several elections) that the majority of Thais do not want any army run country. While I don't think Thaksin is a good choice either, but this is what majority of Thais have chosen.

Besides giving themselves amnesty, how does the current constitution benefit the military?

Sent from my shoe phone

A guilty person who is wasting this much money, time, and human lives, just to clear his own tarnished name, is an arrogant and unrepentant wastrel. A guilty person who commits these actions at state-level in a poor developing-world nation that is socially and economically fragile at this time, is an uncaring despot.

He could have walked away with his stolen money & lived out his days in the type of luxury that most people can not even dream of, yet he hovers vulture-like over this nation, fermenting divisions, unbalancing people's lives, and uprooting the first green shoots of a fledgling democracy.

guess it seems to obvious to ask if that fledgling democracy was before or after the coup....

I think you are mistaking my comment about the state of democracy here for a partisan argument about my politics. I don't have a vote here & I'm as happy to criticise any party if they are breaching laws that protect normal citizens and the stability of the nation. Thailand does not & has never had a fully functioning democracy. I felt that there were hopeful green-shoots signs a few times over the years, but now I think we can start talking about autocracy under this regime.

I meant that all the pieces are here for a democracy, freedom of information and communication between citizens using print and digital, a voting system, police force, votes for women, etc. Why it is fledgling is because it is lawless and unregulated & the democratic process is currently hamstrung by this criminal leviathan who keeps surfacing from the depths to take bites out of the social fund.

I used the word fledgling democracy as it is commonly used, to describe the "baby steps" of a democracy that is yet to find its stable footing and walk on. The UK is not a perfect nation, but their long-established democracy and leaders are legally accountable and closely monitored by independant agencies. In the UK terminally ill people are not left out in the street to die, because of the NHS which protects the poor along democratic principles. Closing the NHS would be political suicide for anyone in a democracy, but for a dictator it would be a mere signature over his morning coffee.

This is the best hope & raison d'etre of democracy, it is not just about having a vote, it is literally the process of accountability, leaders have to stay within an acceptable radius of behaviour to get re-elected & to not get imprisoned. Democracy combined with free media is a social tool for normal people to keep the leaders on a choker-leash. Thailand does not have democracy for this reason.

This regime / familial crime oligarchy are basically wasting national funds and crucial time, to pass laws that pardon their friends, families and hired thugs for all crimes committed, while shelving the important & essential infrastructure-building work, but can still find time to fly overseas and whip-up a spicy salad for photo-shoots.

Maybe this will help you phiphidon............

It would have helped if it hadn't been for the fact that those are red shirt guards. Blackshirts are more than likely to look like the chap in this video who appears to have lost his uniform (0' 13" in) but then again who knows.

Oh very funny Don. Those persons wearing black shirts aren't "black shirts" they're "red shirt guards". Until they pick up a gun, then they are "FAKE red shirts" or simply "holding the gun for safety until it can be returned to the army."

Your refusal to speculate, or discuss other's speculation, is that there is simply no positive explanation for an armed group in a peaceful protest. This is a fact recognised by the courts. But let's change that and make a precedent that anything is fair as political expression as long as you win.

google images red shirt guards

Red Shirt aficionado and photojournalist John LeFevre has a collection of red shirt guard images.

http://photo-journ.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/red-shirts-rally-843am.jpg

Red shirt “guards”

http://photo-journ.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/red-shirt-guards-1035am.jpg

Red shirt “guards” attempt to hold back protesters at the police line leading to the residence of Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanonda.

And what about Thaksin's other crimes? Will he be tried on those as well? Will he be in Thailand to face his charges?

If the proposed legislation is approved, the answers to your questions are:

Exonerated.

No.

Yes and no. Yes, he will be in Thailand and no, he won't face charges.

.

Your view of democracy is simplistic and ignores its acknowledged inherent weaknesses. Democracy depends on an educated electorate capable of making rational decisions based on information made easily available by a free and critical media. If you think those conditions are met here you are delusional.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute talk with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

"Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time." E. B. White

Ozmick you appear to be using a lot of quotations nowadays, did you get a book as a birthday present?

The struggle for universal suffrage was always opposed by those, like Churchill who came from a privileged background. I suggest you look more deeply at his time much earlier as Home Secretary rather than PM in WW11, to understand his political viewpoint.

The UK was dragged into allowing its masses to vote at a time when education was perhaps as poor as Thailand's, using rote learning, nationalism, imperial history, a culture of servility, leaving school at 11 years old, etc. In fact it was probably worse since there were far fewer sources of information than today.

That was changed by the mobilisation of the working classes by idealists such as Keir Hardie in the late 19th century.

I accept that there is, as far as I know, no Thai Keir Hardie but suggesting that voters must have a high level of education is nonsense. Power would never change hands since the legislators have the ability to decide upon how well the state education system operates and what is the level of education required to vote.

In Thailand it already requires that an MP must be a graduate, that has never been the case in most real democracies

Well aware that Churchill was a prize prick, but a great leader when needed.

I don't believe I said anything re a "high level" of education, though a better standard than that available in rural Thailand would certainly help. And I would expect that the UK had a higher degree of press freedom than available in Thailand during the Thaksin years, internet sure but not to many, and paid attendance at "democracy schools" peddling propaganda.

I also believe that the requirement for an MP to be a graduate has been dropped.

Not a book, Tropico

And what about Thaksin's other crimes? Will he be tried on those as well? Will he be in Thailand to face his charges?

If the proposed legislation is approved, the answers to your questions are:

Exonerated.

No.

Yes and no. Yes, he will be in Thailand and no, he won't face charges.

.

Would not Thaksin want a deal signed sealed and delivered before he sets foot back in Thailand?

In Thailand it already requires that an MP must be a graduate, that has never been the case in most real democracies

I also believe that the requirement for an MP to be a graduate has been dropped.

Correct.

Just for the record, that requirement under the wonderful 1997 Constitution's Article 107(3) was not included in the evil 2007 Constitution.

.

In Thailand it already requires that an MP must be a graduate, that has never been the case in most real democracies

I also believe that the requirement for an MP to be a graduate has been dropped.

Correct.

Just for the record, that requirement under the wonderful 1997 Constitution's Article 107(3) was not included in the evil 2007 Constitution.

.

Rumour that Banharn Silpa-archa only have Primary 4 education. That doesn't stop him from becoming a PM.

It is difficult to see how any judicial system which has laws retrospectively changed years later to exonerate selected individuals cannot be considered to be compromised..... even in a 'miracle year'.

I guess you are correct but when were coups made legal?

Coups seem to take the place of impeachment and conviction,

in a land where they never have the balls to make the laws strong enough

to remove thieves and brigands from the top offices.

If coups are accepted by the society as a whole,

and not just decried by the losers only, then they are a part

of what society accepts, and thus not illegitimate.

With 19 of them, so far, it seems to be a relief valve for a particular type

of societal disfunction, in a society not used to functioning as the rest of

the world expects it should.

Not saying this is good or that it always works well,

but this appears to be how it functions here,

because it does NOT function normally, and never has the last 80 years.

Why; is a doctoral thesis of massive proportions.

Clearly some sociological / philosophical differentiation from the west is

even greater here that the rest of Asia. We can bemoan it, but only slow,

gradual time will change it. In this case the young, learning of the better way,

accepting it over time, and the old dinosaurs dying off and being replaced

by modern thinkers.

Laws such as this proposal can only be seen as a death-throe of the old ways,

trying to claw back for one more shot, and likely the pendulum will swing back

the other way soon. We still have far too many dinosaurs and junior dinos in power.

It is difficult to see how any judicial system which has laws retrospectively changed years later to exonerate selected individuals cannot be considered to be compromised..... even in a 'miracle year'.

I guess you are correct but when were coups made legal?

Coups seem to take the place of impeachment and conviction,

in a land where they never have the balls to make the laws strong enough

to remove thieves and brigands from the top offices.

If coups are accepted by the society as a whole,

and not just decried by the losers only, then they are a part

of what society accepts, and thus not illegitimate.

With 19 of them, so far, it seems to be a relief valve for a particular type

of societal disfunction, in a society not used to functioning as the rest of

the world expects it should.

Not saying this is good or that it always works well,

but this appears to be how it functions here,

because it does NOT function normally, and never has the last 80 years.

Why; is a doctoral thesis of massive proportions.

Clearly some sociological / philosophical differentiation from the west is

even greater here that the rest of Asia. We can bemoan it, but only slow,

gradual time will change it. In this case the young, learning of the better way,

accepting it over time, and the old dinosaurs dying off and being replaced

by modern thinkers.

Laws such as this proposal can only be seen as a death-throe of the old ways,

trying to claw back for one more shot, and likely the pendulum will swing back

the other way soon. We still have far too many dinosaurs and junior dinos in power.

Was Thaksin staying as PM after he was not approved not a coup as well? How would removing someone holding the PM office illegally be an illegal coup? Was the 2010 riots a failed illegal coup attempt?

It is difficult to see how any judicial system which has laws retrospectively changed years later to exonerate selected individuals cannot be considered to be compromised..... even in a 'miracle year'.

I guess you are correct but when were coups made legal?

Coups seem to take the place of impeachment and conviction,

in a land where they never have the balls to make the laws strong enough

to remove thieves and brigands from the top offices.

If coups are accepted by the society as a whole,

and not just decried by the losers only, then they are a part

of what society accepts, and thus not illegitimate.

With 19 of them, so far, it seems to be a relief valve for a particular type

of societal disfunction, in a society not used to functioning as the rest of

the world expects it should.

Not saying this is good or that it always works well,

but this appears to be how it functions here,

because it does NOT function normally, and never has the last 80 years.

Why; is a doctoral thesis of massive proportions.

Clearly some sociological / philosophical differentiation from the west is

even greater here that the rest of Asia. We can bemoan it, but only slow,

gradual time will change it. In this case the young, learning of the better way,

accepting it over time, and the old dinosaurs dying off and being replaced

by modern thinkers.

Laws such as this proposal can only be seen as a death-throe of the old ways,

trying to claw back for one more shot, and likely the pendulum will swing back

the other way soon. We still have far too many dinosaurs and junior dinos in power.

Was Thaksin staying as PM after he was not approved not a coup as well? How would removing someone holding the PM office illegally be an illegal coup? Was the 2010 riots a failed illegal coup attempt?

A very good point.

Thaksin had resigned, after not being renewed as failed Acting PM,

because he screwed up the snap election. The Election commission on

the way to jail, for apparent collusion with his party no less.

His term as acting PM had expired.

He was not renewed, his Deputy PM became officially Acting PM

He unilaterally took back the Acting PM job, and called himself PM.

a week after he PUBLICLY RESIGNED. Saying " The country needs me."

but he NEVER returned to the palace for confirmation, likely sure he would be turned down,

or published his position in The Royal Gazzette as constitutionally required.

There was the obviously faked attempt to blow him up,

and create an SOE or martial law, which specifically was talked of.

Then he paraded himself at the UN as Thaliands Prime MInister,

when he legally was not. Something had to give;

Either his ego or something more forceful.

The 2009 and 2010 riots were blatant attempts at a coup from the street.

Obviously with hopes that water-mellon Army and police would stand up

to the other side if enough deaths occurred.

And now the whitewash of it all.

IMHO the party list method of appointing MPs in Thailand is a corrupt system used for political payback and election of cronies, especially in PTP's case. Would people reknown for brutish behaviour and facing serious criminal charges be elected any other way? What sort of people would willingly select Yongyuth or Chalerm as their representative in the nation's parliament?

Every MP, and you have to be an MP to be a Minister, in my country has to convince an electorate that he/she is the best person to represent them at ALL levels of government. John Howard, our last Liberal PM not only lost an election, he lost his seat as well to a well-respected female journalist. With the party list system, how do you get rid of someone like Thaksin?

BTW I am not claiming the oz electoral system is perfect. In senate elections, a Tasmanian senator requires < 50,000 votes where a NSW senator needs > 600,000, which has led to balance of power being held by a succession of religious bigots, greenies and others unrepresentative of the nation.

Copied from another thread - more appropriate here.

Good photo, don, but what's that in the background? Boys been doing a little fire-lighting have they?

Was Thaksin staying as PM after he was not approved not a coup as well? How would removing someone holding the PM office illegally be an illegal coup? Was the 2010 riots a failed illegal coup attempt?

A very good point.

Thaksin had resigned, after not being renewed as failed Acting PM,

because he screwed up the snap election. The Election commission on

the way to jail, for apparent collusion with his party no less.

His term as acting PM had expired.

He was not renewed, his Deputy PM became officially Acting PM

He unilaterally took back the Acting PM job, and called himself PM.

a week after he PUBLICLY RESIGNED. Saying " The country needs me."

but he NEVER returned to the palace for confirmation, likely sure he would be turned down,

or published his position in The Royal Gazzette as constitutionally required.

There was the obviously faked attempt to blow him up,

and create an SOE or martial law, which specifically was talked of.

Then he paraded himself at the UN as Thaliands Prime MInister,

when he legally was not. Something had to give;

Either his ego or something more forceful.

The 2009 and 2010 riots were blatant attempts at a coup from the street.

Obviously with hopes that water-mellon Army and police would stand up

to the other side if enough deaths occurred.

And now the whitewash of it all.

He had not resigned. He stated he was not going to seek the PM's post in the coming election, the October 15th 2006 election that was royally endorsed that you neglect to mention http://app.mfa.gov.sg/pr/read_content.asp?View,4889, . This date was later postponed because of a clash with Ramadan. The Senate selected 4 Senior Judges and a Deputy Attorney General on September 8th 2006 to become the new Election Commissioners. So all was going ahead for an election until the Coup..................

A post containing copyrighted photos has been removed, post links to the photos in future.