Thai Court Verdict 'May Spark More Violence'

[nurofiend]

Red Shirt Leader Dokjik did more than provide the addresses and phone numbers of the judges.

He incited the assembled Red Shirts to call and intimidate the judges and their families. Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws.

As an appointee of Yingluck's Cabinet appointee, his actions reflect on those of the government.

That, to date, no repercussions have occurred to him reflects the Yingluck government condoning his actions.

His simply apologizing for his criminal act does not exclude culpability and prosecution and hardly reflects any sort of repercussion..

.

.

"Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws".

Regarding your statement above - I take it you are referring to the alleged phone call to the CC Presidents' driver from an "elderly man" saying that if they didn't stop blocking the constitution amendment bill "they" would send 20 Million Red Shirts over?

Oh well, nothing further to say...................

Well maybe just one thing, how's that dem mp's premeditated murder trial going, what's that, it's all gone quiet on that front, surely not, what did abhisit say, Nothing?

i was going to ask if he is found guilty will "his actions reflect on those of the government"?

he's up on july 19th btw, i must have missed the thread about it on here though.

[Emptyset]

But this is the whole point many people seem to be missing. The court did NOT suspend the parliamentary readings of the bill. The courts made a clear statement that they needed time to consider the content and in the meantime the Parliment could still continue the readings of the bill if it wished as the court had no power to suspend the readings. Subsequently it was the house speaker and PTP who decided not to continue reading the bills.

In fact the court did order a suspension of the debate on the bill. It's just that PT deliberated for a while over whether parliament had the authority to defy the court order. Now they've decided to step back on both the constitutional amendments and the reconcilliation biills.

[Buchholz]

Red Shirt Leader Dokjik did more than provide the addresses and phone numbers of the judges.

He incited the assembled Red Shirts to call and intimidate the judges and their families. Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws.

As an appointee of Yingluck's Cabinet appointee, his actions reflect on those of the government.

That, to date, no repercussions have occurred to him reflects the Yingluck government condoning his actions.

His simply apologizing for his criminal act does not exclude culpability and prosecution and hardly reflects any sort of repercussion..

.

.

"Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws".

Regarding your statement above - I take it you are referring to the alleged phone call to the CC Presidents' driver

No, but if you have something to counter the assertion of that particular allegation, it would be more productive than your "nothing further to say."

If you think it's easily dismissed because of the numbers involved, the Red Shirts throw out insane numbers all the time. The absurd number claims by the caller hardly disprove the allegation. If anything, it heightens the intimidation of receiving a call from a nutter.

.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

But this is the whole point many people seem to be missing. The court did NOT suspend the parliamentary readings of the bill. The courts made a clear statement that they needed time to consider the content and in the meantime the Parliment could still continue the readings of the bill if it wished as the court had no power to suspend the readings. Subsequently it was the house speaker and PTP who decided not to continue reading the bills.

In fact the court did order a suspension of the debate on the bill. It's just that PT deliberated for a while over whether parliament had the authority to defy the court order. Now they've decided to step back on both the constitutional amendments and the reconcilliation biills.

Indeed they did

The Constitution Court yesterday informed Parliament secretary-general Pitoon Poomhiran that it had accepted the complaints for hearing. Therefore, Parliament should halt deliberations until the court had finished considering the complaints whether the charter amendment bill was against the current Constitution or not.

The third and final reading of the charter amendment bill had been scheduled for Tuesday, June 5, but was postponed indefinitely

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/561235-pheu-thai-mps-slam-constitution-court-want-to-proceed-with-third-reading/

[phiphidon]

Red Shirt Leader Dokjik did more than provide the addresses and phone numbers of the judges.

He incited the assembled Red Shirts to call and intimidate the judges and their families. Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws.

As an appointee of Yingluck's Cabinet appointee, his actions reflect on those of the government.

That, to date, no repercussions have occurred to him reflects the Yingluck government condoning his actions.

His simply apologizing for his criminal act does not exclude culpability and prosecution and hardly reflects any sort of repercussion..

.

.

"Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws".

Regarding your statement above - I take it you are referring to the alleged phone call to the CC Presidents' driver f

No

OK what call/s to intimidate the judges subsequently happened or are we just supposed to take your word for it?

[tlansford]

What if, and just what if they were indeed breaking the law and got disbanded? Would that still be a mistake or have you already concluded with your irrefutable understanding of Thai laws that they indeed have not broken any. You didnt leave an option in your statement that if they do disband the party, it must be a big mistake.

As has been pointed out by tlansford, it's obvious that they haven't broken any laws and the whole case is completely baseless. And furthermore the fact that the court accepted the case is in itself unconstitutional. I believe Thida is correct, the judges should resign for bypassing the legal procedures in accepting the case.

Is Tlansford a Thai lawyer and KNOWS for a fact or is it perhaps just his opinion? Not very obvious.

As for your belief that Thida being correct, I'm not going to say whether it's wrong or right. Just keep in mind that it's being disputed in court right now and best to wait and accept the answers. I'm willing to accept whatever answer comes out.

the other paper had the pro/contra arguments today on the front page and it was laughable. At least to me.

But your point is hypothetical, "if they broke the law..." and while IMO not so useful to pursue (being hypothetical), still, in the current situation, do you think that dissolving the PTP would be a wise choice, or could the court perhaps go down some other path wrt penalties even if it were to rule against the government? IMO dissolving the PTP would set in motion a reaction against the courts which could reasonable easily escalate. And I personally would not want to see that happen.

As for the court actually finding that the PTP has broken the law, I just don't see where the court is going to be able to justify that decision. No, I am not a lawyer. But it is clear that courts around the world often make decisions based on ideology - Citzens United and the US Supreme Court 5-4 decision finding that multinational corporations are people with a right to free speech and furthermore equating free speech with money, therefore concluding that corporations (as well as individuals) are allowed to spend unlimited funds in elections. Clearly a decision that undermines democracy and the decision was also clearly decided along the court's ideological lines.

The ideology of the CC in Thailand is clear, therefore it would not be unreasonable to expect a decision that follows those ideological lines - whether it is logical or not. They already accepted this petition by making a special interpretation of the word "and".

[GentlemanJim]

What if, and just what if they were indeed breaking the law and got disbanded? Would that still be a mistake or have you already concluded with your irrefutable understanding of Thai laws that they indeed have not broken any. You didnt leave an option in your statement that if they do disband the party, it must be a big mistake.

As has been pointed out by tlansford, it's obvious that they haven't broken any laws and the whole case is completely baseless. And furthermore the fact that the court accepted the case is in itself unconstitutional. I believe Thida is correct, the judges should resign for bypassing the legal procedures in accepting the case.

Is Tlansford a Thai lawyer and KNOWS for a fact or is it perhaps just his opinion? Not very obvious.

As for your belief that Thida being correct, I'm not going to say whether it's wrong or right. Just keep in mind that it's being disputed in court right now and best to wait and accept the answers. I'm willing to accept whatever answer comes out.

the other paper had the pro/contra arguments today on the front page and it was laughable. At least to me.

But your point is hypothetical, "if they broke the law..." and while IMO not so useful to pursue (being hypothetical), still, in the current situation, do you think that dissolving the PTP would be a wise choice, or could the court perhaps go down some other path wrt penalties even if it were to rule against the government? IMO dissolving the PTP would set in motion a reaction against the courts which could reasonable easily escalate. And I personally would not want to see that happen.

As for the court actually finding that the PTP has broken the law, I just don't see where the court is going to be able to justify that decision. No, I am not a lawyer. But it is clear that courts around the world often make decisions based on ideology - Citzens United and the US Supreme Court 5-4 decision finding that multinational corporations are people with a right to free speech and furthermore equating free speech with money, therefore concluding that corporations (as well as individuals) are allowed to spend unlimited funds in elections. Clearly a decision that undermines democracy and the decision was also clearly decided along the court's ideological lines.

The ideology of the CC in Thailand is clear, therefore it would not be unreasonable to expect a decision that follows those ideological lines - whether it is logical or not. They already accepted this petition by making a special interpretation of the word "and".

Agreed. The courts would be making a massive mistake by dissolving the PTP. I think I am right and I recall from the past that a couple of MPs were deemed to have been guilty of breaking electoral rules and banned from Parliament because their election advertising banners were 1 inch too big! Frankly some of the electoral rules are beyond ridiculous.

Banning PTP would set the country back even further if that is possible and the red reaction would be both unpredictable and serious. Perhaps some significant party fines or the person (s) responsible for the issues to be held accountable and responsible would be far more appropriate than the entire party. I have no love for the PTP but banning the party is the wrong move, sending the wrong message and putting Thailand on the wrong path. If the dire situation the country finds itself in under PTP can in someway lead to the evolution of a working democracy then the pain will be worth it, but the process must be allowed to evolve and develop and not put back to square 1 every 12 months.

[Yunla]

Red Shirt Leader Dokjik did more than provide the addresses and phone numbers of the judges.

He incited the assembled Red Shirts to call and intimidate the judges and their families. Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws.

As an appointee of Yingluck's Cabinet appointee, his actions reflect on those of the government.

That, to date, no repercussions have occurred to him reflects the Yingluck government condoning his actions.

His simply apologizing for his criminal act does not exclude culpability and prosecution and hardly reflects any sort of repercussion..

.

.

It is also to be considered that people being intimidated in their own homes by call or visit, in a country where the police are corrupt, the police in many cases side with the highest bidder especially Thaksin, the people at those addresses must be absolutely terrified and too frightened to come forward and report it.

That is the whole point of intimidation, it is not about sending a solitary phone call or a visit, those acts carry the central notion that they are the first warning, and if the dissenter does not back-down then the next visit will be a lot more meaningful to them. Its the old fashioned laws of street-thugs, which PTP uses in place of parliamentary debate and consensus. The oldest law of the fascist bootboy is to visit people and put so much fear into them they would never dare report it to the police or the media.

The fact that red sympathisers are even willing to attempt a defense by dissecting a single phone call made by the PTP bootboys is disgusting to me, it completely ignores the human-rights abuse and crimes under Thai law that PTP committed by distributing personal information of dissenters to thugs in the first place.

That is the issue and not what came afterwards, especially considering the murky world of intimidation where it is rare to see a loving family-man taking any further action for fear of reprisals.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Yunla

[phiphidon]

Red Shirt Leader Dokjik did more than provide the addresses and phone numbers of the judges.

He incited the assembled Red Shirts to call and intimidate the judges and their families. Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws.

As an appointee of Yingluck's Cabinet appointee, his actions reflect on those of the government.

That, to date, no repercussions have occurred to him reflects the Yingluck government condoning his actions.

His simply apologizing for his criminal act does not exclude culpability and prosecution and hardly reflects any sort of repercussion..

.

.

"Unsurprisingly, that subsequently happened. He violated the law to higher degree than breaking privacy laws".

Regarding your statement above - I take it you are referring to the alleged phone call to the CC Presidents' driver

No, but if you have something to counter the assertion of that particular allegation, it would be more productive than your "nothing further to say."

If you think it's easily dismissed because of the numbers involved, the Red Shirts throw out insane numbers all the time. The absurd number claims by the caller hardly disprove the allegation. If anything, it heightens the intimidation of receiving a call from a nutter.

.

Bearing in mind you have since edited your post extensively (previously: No) I'll ask again, if you are not referring to the CC Presidents' driver call pick up what other event has subsequently happened or was it just another of those throwaway lines to see if anyone picks you up on it?

[tlansford]

[

- deleted -

As has been pointed out by tlansford, it's obvious that they haven't broken any laws and the whole case is completely baseless. And furthermore the fact that the court accepted the case is in itself unconstitutional. I believe Thida is correct, the judges should resign for bypassing the legal procedures in accepting the case.

Is Tlansford a Thai lawyer and KNOWS for a fact or is it perhaps just his opinion? Not very obvious.

As for your belief that Thida being correct, I'm not going to say whether it's wrong or right. Just keep in mind that it's being disputed in court right now and best to wait and accept the answers. I'm willing to accept whatever answer comes out.

the other paper had the pro/contra arguments today on the front page and it was laughable. At least to me.

But your point is hypothetical, "if they broke the law..." and while IMO not so useful to pursue (being hypothetical), still, in the current situation, do you think that dissolving the PTP would be a wise choice, or could the court perhaps go down some other path wrt penalties even if it were to rule against the government? IMO dissolving the PTP would set in motion a reaction against the courts which could reasonable easily escalate. And I personally would not want to see that happen.

As for the court actually finding that the PTP has broken the law, I just don't see where the court is going to be able to justify that decision. No, I am not a lawyer. But it is clear that courts around the world often make decisions based on ideology - Citzens United and the US Supreme Court 5-4 decision finding that multinational corporations are people with a right to free speech and furthermore equating free speech with money, therefore concluding that corporations (as well as individuals) are allowed to spend unlimited funds in elections. Clearly a decision that undermines democracy and the decision was also clearly decided along the court's ideological lines.

The ideology of the CC in Thailand is clear, therefore it would not be unreasonable to expect a decision that follows those ideological lines - whether it is logical or not. They already accepted this petition by making a special interpretation of the word "and".

Agreed. The courts would be making a massive mistake by dissolving the PTP. I think I am right and I recall from the past that a couple of MPs were deemed to have been guilty of breaking electoral rules and banned from Parliament because their election advertising banners were 1 inch too big! Frankly some of the electoral rules are beyond ridiculous.

Banning PTP would set the country back even further if that is possible and the red reaction would be both unpredictable and serious. Perhaps some significant party fines or the person (s) responsible for the issues to be held accountable and responsible would be far more appropriate than the entire party. I have no love for the PTP but banning the party is the wrong move, sending the wrong message and putting Thailand on the wrong path. If the dire situation the country finds itself in under PTP can in someway lead to the evolution of a working democracy then the pain will be worth it, but the process must be allowed to evolve and develop and not put back to square 1 every 12 months.

I'll be interested to see what happens.

BTW, banning entire political parties is one of the possible changes to the charter which would make a lot of sense to me. The reason for its existence is perfectly clear, and I don't think that it has anything (in reality) to do with anti-corruption measures or protecting democracy, although that is precisely how it has been justified.

Anyway, waiting, .... CC please don't throw a wrench into the high-season.

[473geo]

It is also to be considered that people being intimidated in their own homes by call or visit, in a country where the police are corrupt, the police in many cases side with the highest bidder especially Thaksin, the people at those addresses must be absolutely terrified and too frightened to come forward and report it.

That is the whole point of intimidation, it is not about sending a solitary phone call or a visit, those acts carry the central notion that they are the first warning, and if the dissenter does not back-down then the next visit will be a lot more meaningful to them. Its the old fashioned laws of street-thugs, which PTP uses in place of parliamentary debate and consensus. The oldest law of the fascist bootboy is to visit people and put so much fear into them they would never dare report it to the police or the media.

The fact that red sympathisers are even willing to attempt a defense by dissecting a single phone call made by the PTP bootboys is disgusting to me, it completely ignores the human-rights abuse and crimes under Thai law that PTP committed by distributing personal information of dissenters to thugs in the first place.

That is the issue and not what came afterwards, especially considering the murky world of intimidation where it is rare to see a loving family-man taking any further action for fear of reprisals.

I don't buy into your 'human rights' approach

It doesn't ring true from somebody who can label a large percentage of the Thai population 'idiots'.....you do a disservice to people who genuinely campaign for improved human rights

The current debate is highlighting the power plays in Thailand, also plays an important part in the attempt to open up and decipher the true mechanism of the Thai political and legal system. The overiding question emerging is.......The voters are allowed to vote for a party they wish to run the country.....but does this have any effect on power brokers who actually run the country......indeed it may be suggested the last constitutional rewrite was a very smart attempt to secure a future where the vote of the electorate may change the government of the day, but not the control mechanism.

Indeed it would appear Thailand is in the ridiculous situation whereby any elected government can be removed, just pick a method to apply.

When you work out who can apply the method to remove an elected government, you know who is actually running Thailand.

[Moruya]

And everyone that voted PT since charter change was one of the main points of their election campaign...

What did they endorse?

There are no details.

Don't you think the other promises are in some dire need of attention?

Irrelevant, they campaigned on scrapping or amending the 'junta constiitution' and surely that's the most important thing - it was an election promise... you do want to see them keep their promises to the electorate, right? The obvious possible changes would be getting rid of unelected senators, changing the selection proceedure of the judiciary and perhaps article 309.

Article 309 - which granted amnesty to the coup makers - is an interesting one. My friend actually thinks there's a route back for Thaksin through the amendment of this article. He says it could in effect annul the results of the coup, including the court cases etc. I haven't really looked into this so I don't know. Of course if the reconcilliation bills are passed this is irrelevant anyway.

Also, why do you have the impression PT aren't working on other things? They can do more than one thing at a time, you know. It's not like the cabinet and all PT MPs are spending 24 hours a day working on the constitutional changes. It's more like the opposition are spending most of their time focusing on this - especially as they now see it as a route back to power through possible PT dissolution.

Here is the relevant section on the PTP Campaign

2011 Election and Rise to Premiership

[edit] Election campaign

Promotion for Yingluck Shinawatra and her party at Pathum Thani Province, July 2011

Yingluck's main campaign theme was reconciliation following the extended political crisis from 2008 to 2010, culminating in the military crackdown on protesters which left nearly a hundred protesters dead and thousands injured. She promised to empower the Independent Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (ITRC), the panel that the Democrat Party-led government had set up to investigate the killings.^[23] The ITRC had complained that its work was hampered by the military and the government.^[24]

Yingluck also proposed a general amnesty for all major politically motivated incidents that had taken place since the 2006 coup, which could include the coup itself, court rulings banning Thai Rak Thai and People's Power Party leaders from seeking office, the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) seizures of Government House and Don Muang and Suvarnabhumi Airports, the military crackdowns of 2009 and 2010, and the conviction of Thaksin Shinawatra for abuse of power.^[25] The proposal was fiercely attacked by the government, who claimed that it would specifically give amnesty to Thaksin, and also result in the return to him of the 46 billion baht of his wealth that that the government had seized as a penalty. However, Yingluck denied that the return of seized assets was a priority for the Pheu Thai party, and repeated that she had no intention of giving amnesty to any one person. Abhisit claimed outright that Yingluck was lying and that amnesty to Thaksin actually was the Pheu Thai party's policy.^[26] The government blamed Pheu Thai for the bloodshed during the military crackdown.^[27]

Yingluck described a 2020 vision for the elimination of poverty.^[28] She promised to reduce the corporate income tax from 30% to 23% and then 20% by 2013 and to raise the minimum wage to 300 baht per day and the minimum wage for university graduates to 15,000 baht per month. Her agricultural policies included improving operating cashflow to farmers and providing loans of up to 70% of expected income, based on a guaranteed rice price of 15,000 baht per ton.^[29] She also planned to provide free public Wi-Fi and a tablet PC to every schoolchild (a Thai Rak Thai Party plan to provide one laptop per child was cancelled after the 2006 military coup).^[30]

[Yunla]

I don't buy into your 'human rights' approach

I've never heard the subject of protecting citizens human-rights referred to as not buying "into your human rights approach" before, although I'm sure Stalin's NKVD felt the same way when he picked Polish-sounding names out of the phone-book and had them executed for fun.

Is that more the kind of human rights approach you would see me subscribe to. I am a human rights campaigner, and a believer in democracy, and I am a vocal opponent of dictatorships especially crime-family dictatorships. PTP have breached the laws of both human-rights and democratically acceptable procedure during their home-address distribution crimes.

It doesn't ring true from somebody who can label a large percentage of the Thai population 'idiots'

A lot of them voted for Yingluck out of tribal loyalty, family pressure and cash incentives. Of the remaining people who voted for Yingluck, it is my personal opinion, that people who would vote for the sister of a convicted fleeing criminal, the sister of a massmurderer who is accused of stealing hundreds of billions from the Thai state during his time in office, if people vote for his sister then they are idiots yes.

Because I am a democratic person, I believe in meritocracy "the best person for the job should get the job" and I promise you that there are far better qualified people than Yingluck who could have represented PTP as leader and been voted into office. But they chose Yingluck who has no career outside or inside politics to speak of, no debating skills, and avoids unscripted Q&A like its a swarm of killer bees. If you vote for a person like that you are an idiot in my opinion. And unlike you said in your post just now, Yingluck being useless and people voting for useless leaders being idiots has got nothing to do with me being a believer in and campaigner for human rights.

.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Yunla

[473geo]

I don't buy into your 'human rights' approach

I've never heard the subject of protecting citizens human-rights referred to as not buying "into your human rights approach" before, although I'm sure Stalin's NKVD felt the same way when he picked Polish-sounding names out of the phone-book and had them executed for fun.

Is that more the kind of human rights approach you would see me subscribe to. I am a human rights campaigner, and a believer in democracy, and I am a vocal opponent of dictatorships especially crime-family dictatorships. PTP have breached the laws of both human-rights and democratically acceptable procedure during their home-address distribution crimes.

It doesn't ring true from somebody who can label a large percentage of the Thai population 'idiots'

A lot of them voted for Yingluck out of tribal loyalty, family pressure and cash ncentives. Of the remaining people who voted for Yingluck out of faith in her, It is my personal opinion, that people who would vote for the sister of a convicted fleeing criminal, the sister of a massmurderer who is accused of stealing hundreds of billions from the Thai state during his time in office, if people vote for his sister then they are idiots yes. Because I am a democratic person, I believe in meritocracy "the best person for the job should get the job" and I promise you that there are far better qualified people than Yingluck who could have represented PTP as leader and been voted into office. But they chose Yingluck who has no career outside or inside politics to speak of, no debating skills, and avoids unscripted Q&A like its a swarm of killer bees. If you vote for a person like that you are an idiot in my opinion and unlike you said in your post just now, Yingluck being useless and people voting for useless leaders being idiots has got nothing to do with me being a believer in and campaigner for human rights.

.

Thanks for making my point so efficently

[Yunla]

Thanks for making my point so efficently

You're most welcome, anytime.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Yunla

[MILT]

In a democracy there is no place for violence, people who make this threat then do not like democracy. They only pretend they like democracy. If violence is done due to a court or any law decision then the violators need to be punished. But I have seen many times that this is not true in Thailand. So as they say talk is cheap and there is no democracy in Thailand

Some reporter has written 'may spark violence', on the other hand it might not.

You are right though about there being no democracy in Thailand, the army see to that and are forever lurking ready to take over at the drop of a hat.

Sorry I accidentally hit the "like" button. The "Army"? are you sure about that? I would look at the graft, nepotism, positions of influence, above the law attitude of the government and billions of baht seized as the current thwarter of democracy.

[metisdead]

Several posts commenting on other posters and self moderation have been removed.

[tlansford]

too funny

I personally think that dissolving the PTP will lead to massive street riots, what do you think?

We have to wait 7 days.... I'll be on pins & needles all week...

[OzMick]

"....might spark violence." Give us a break! It doesn't matter what the decision will be, the red horde (herd? whored?) have decided that they don't like the judges, therefore they have no right to exist and should quietly disappear.

The billion baht batteries have been installed in the red energiser bunny, and it will continue to beat the drum of violence (actual or threatened) until the baht run out.

[OzMick]

too funny

I personally think that dissolving the PTP will lead to massive street riots, what do you think?

We have to wait 7 days.... I'll be on pins & needles all week...

I think the CC has better reasons than this (use of banned politicians, nomination of persons facing criminal charges) to disband PTP. Of course it will lead to street riots. Destabilising the country won the election for PTP, why shouldn't it be used to get the other results that they can't get democratically.

[Moruya]

too funny

I personally think that dissolving the PTP will lead to massive street riots, what do you think?

We have to wait 7 days.... I'll be on pins & needles all week...

I think the CC has better reasons than this (use of banned politicians, nomination of persons facing criminal charges) to disband PTP. Of course it will lead to street riots. Destabilising the country won the election for PTP, why shouldn't it be used to get the other results that they can't get democratically.

In this case it will be purely defining how the Constitution can be amended and under what circumstances. PTP wil not be disbanded (yet).

PTP will walk away, tail beween it's collective legs and mutterings from Chalerm and the rest of the intelligentsia.

The Red Shirts will hold a rally and promise 10 billion people - 30,000 will turn up

Cases against Jatuporn and Jeng and the rest of the firey mouthed brigaed will continue

The PTP will be fed a legal win and the same day the red shirts will lose a leader to the slammer

Thida's beauty will continue to fade as she ,ore and more resembles the sour faced puss of and old comme that she is

The red shirts will fade into insignificance

The yellow shirts will do the same

People will come to understand that Thaksin=amart, redshirt=tools

in 2015 Abhisit will be re-elected

The Thai people will benefit from a true government

Wild flowers will blom in every soi

Milk and honey will be free at each participating 7/11

Nobody will remember the dark old days of Thaksin

Nobody will remember Thaksin

[Moruya]

too funny

I personally think that dissolving the PTP will lead to massive street riots, what do you think?

We have to wait 7 days.... I'll be on pins & needles all week...

I think the CC has better reasons than this (use of banned politicians, nomination of persons facing criminal charges) to disband PTP. Of course it will lead to street riots. Destabilising the country won the election for PTP, why shouldn't it be used to get the other results that they can't get democratically.

In this case it will be purely defining how the Constitution can be amended and under what circumstances. PTP wil not be disbanded (yet).

PTP will walk away, tail beween it's collective legs and mutterings from Chalerm and the rest of the intelligentsia.

The Red Shirts will hold a rally and promise 10 billion people - 30,000 will turn up

Cases against Jatuporn and Jeng and the rest of the firey mouthed brigaed will continue

The PTP will be fed a legal win and the same day the red shirts will lose a leader to the slammer

Thida's beauty will continue to fade as she ,ore and more resembles the sour faced puss of and old comme that she is

The red shirts will fade into insignificance

The yellow shirts will do the same

People will come to understand that Thaksin=amart, redshirt=tools

in 2015 Abhisit will be re-elected

The Thai people will benefit from a true government

Wild flowers will blom in every soi

Milk and honey will be free at each participating 7/11

Nobody will remember the dark old days of Thaksin

Nobody will remember Thaksin

[Bagwan]

Can any one advise/point to institutions that can help these clowns to learn how politics works

I could name a few where these clowns ought to be residents.