Thailand's Political Crisis - Compromise Is Still Possible

[jdinasia]

lol .. ummm nope ... like I said I deleted the slang for mafia.

the others are literary devices like an "angry mob" which calls to mind people with torches off to burn Frankenstien and his monster .... because that clearly does not describe an orderly (and not even very rowdy) protest Rally ....

I am VERY careful not to throw around words insinuating people are "mafia" ... and equally careful not to wonder publicly about whether groups are being paid to attend rallies etc.

But geeeze if one wants to work with definitions ... read my signature and figure out who posted that nonsense!

Edited March 20, 2006 by jdinasia

[lukamar]

Beautiful Girls with Guns

asd your a pervert.. You got more pictures? Please......

[Kan Win]

"asd" The Big Un’s always Win in Kan watch and see.

Ahh so who do you support then……..

Darknight

Why do you want to do a Mime course, you can't even put your make-up on

mattnich

"was it you ?"

Totster

1. That's right. If you want to look like a real Geisha you don't put any on the back of the neck..

2. Oooooerrrrruegggh... I'm a ghost...

So am I ... Oooooooeeeurghhh...

3. " No you can't have some of mine.... you've got plenty of your own...."

P.S. Just an observation... these two young Thai lads Kan speak pretty good English, Kan't they...!!

4. "Now all we need is a couple of carrots and some lumps of coal and we'll really look like snowmen..."

5. " do you Johnsons or Shower to Shower...?"

Wolfie

Do you know how stupid you look with that stuff on your face?

britmaveric

Wow the skin whitener cream really works well!!!

bkkmadness

1. "So let me get this right. Is this Kan Win guy going to pay us 20 baht each for posing in his photo, or is it 20 baht between us?"

2. "hold on, Songkran doesn't start until tomorrow, we could be in serious trouble here"

3. "That bkkmadness certainly is the caption king"

"Yeah, but he's a bit up his own a*se"

"A bit!? He's writing an imaginary conversation about himself on a forum now!"

"I blame it on the coffee dude"

The_Moog

"If we look like him, maybe they'll let us into Neverland."

Insight

"It's supposed to bring good luck when a bird does this....?"

"Lets get lotto tickets..."

jayenram

What did you say they call it, Yorkshire pudding?

So what do we do with it now?

Tornado

"mammy, how I love ya, how I love ya"

devildog683

"this is why we should never excite an elephant again!"

gburns57au

1. you had to grab that bag of treated banknotes........didnt ya ?????

2. I told you it was your turn to be Tonto!!!!

3. If we walk away casual like...they will never suspect it was us who done the car job

Thetyim

" I thought you had the razor "

jackr

"D'you think a pair of balaclavas would've been more appropriate?"

lampard10

I don't care what it says on the can. This Mr Gillette is not all he's cracked up to be.

Yours truly,

Kan Win

Edited March 20, 2006 by Kan Win

[jdinasia]

From Voice of America

Thai Political Confrontation Provokes Debate over Democracy

By Scott Bobb

Bangkok

17 March 2006

Bobb report - Download 595k

Listen to Bobb report

Thais demonstrate against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinwatra

In Thailand, tens of thousands of protesters continue their daily rallies demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, while thousands of farmers from the provinces have gathered in Bangkok to show support for the prime minister. Mr. Thaksin has refused to resign, saying he will launch political reform after snap elections in two weeks. But the fate of the election is in doubt because of a boycott by the three main opposition parties.

For one week, opponents of Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra have maintained an around-the-clock vigil outside his offices, chanting for Mr. Thaksin to "get out."

But one week ago the embattled prime minister brought together 100,000 supporters, who chanted for him to "fight."

Thaksin Shinawatra

Mr. Thaksin enjoys wide support in the countryside, where two-thirds of all Thais live, and he says to resign would be to betray the poor he has sworn to help.

The prime minister responded to the protests by dissolving parliament last month and calling early elections. He says he is acting democratically and accuses his opponents of trying to oust him through non-constitutional means.

Chulalongkorn University Professor Thitinan Pongsudhirak says the standoff is highlighting divisions within Thai society.

"A minority of Thailand has chosen to eject a popularly elected leader from office. So now the minority who are trying to overthrow Thaksin, they must pay more attention to the countryside," he said. "The urban-rural divide was what led Thaksin to power in the first place."

Independent observers acknowledge that Mr. Thaksin's populist policies have done a great deal for Thai people, in particular the poor.

But they say the prime minister has become authoritarian and has used his power to undermine independent regulatory bodies, muzzle the news media and intimidate his critics.

They also say that because of self-censorship in the Thai mass media, the rural poor, who have less access to other sources of information, are not aware of the abuses.

The author of several books on Thailand, Chris Baker, says Mr. Thaksin's critics believe that Thai democracy, which is just emerging from decades of military dictatorship, is under threat.

"It puts a lot of onus on the people who feel that to allow him [Thaksin] to continue will be to allow the democratic gains of the last 30 years to be further and further eroded. Therefore they feel some kind of duty to get out on the streets and try and get rid of him," Baker said.

Both Mr. Thaksin and his critics agree that changes to Thailand's nine-year-old constitution are needed, but they cannot agree on procedures.

Mr. Thaksin proposes to convene an independent panel after the election to draft amendments. The opposition says there can be no real reform as long as the prime minister is in power.

But author Chris Baker says the crisis has underscored the need for constitutional reform.

"One of the gains from this event is a chance to correct some of the mistakes in the 1997 constitution," he said. "But it is very difficult, given the way the independent institutions were undermined by Thaksin and his group so easily."

Baker concludes that it will take a great deal of political intelligence to correct the constitutional deficiencies.

Senior military officers and royal advisors, fearing violence, have called on Mr. Thaksin and his opponents to negotiate a compromise.

But Thammasat University Professor Somphob Manarangsan says positions have hardened.

"I do not think it is going to be easy for both sides to have a dialogue because they use a different framework, different points of agreement to debate or dialogue," he said.

Some Thai experts say that if the deadlock continues, an article (7) in the constitution could be invoked that allows Thailand's King Bhomibol Adulyadej in times of crisis to appoint a neutral government to oversee constitutional reforms and new elections.

The revered monarch has intervened directly in Thai politics only on a few occasions and then only after violent confrontations.

Thailand, in June, is to begin celebrating the king's 60th year on the throne. Professor Somphob says, as a result, a solution to the current crisis is urgently needed.

"That is a very important and critical point for Thai society. The quicker we can settle this dispute, the better for the Thai people," he said.

Many are praising the Thai people for demonstrating political maturity in avoiding violence.

And some of the country's institutions are showing greater independence.

The state-owned broadcast media, after an initial silence, have been broadcasting full coverage of the anti-government demonstrations. And a Thai court this past week dismissed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against a journalist who had criticized the prime minister.

But fear continues to mount that a prolonged confrontation could degenerate into violence, which would further undermine the democracy that both sides say they seek to protect.

----

Voice of America website ... story http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-03-17-voa25.cfm

Am opening a new thread in General topics with this ... Titled-- Who is protecting Thai Democracy?

[lukamar]

Chavalit cool on 'middleman PM'

BP. ANUCHA CHAROENPO WASSANA NANUAM

Former prime minister Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh has given a cool response to the call for a royally-bestowed prime minister under Article 7 of the constitution. He said under the current circumstances, there is no need for a ''middleman'' to step into the picture as the people in government still deserve a measure of respect, although the government should also take heed of its critics.

A middleman is understood to refer to a royally-bestowed prime minister under Article 7 of the constitution.

Gen Chavalit described the ongoing showdown between conflicting groups as ''another stage in the development in Thai politics'' and as long as it had no long-term catastrophic spill-over effects, it should be deemed as progress.

Brushing aside a prediction that the crisis could explode into violence as each opposing party is adamant about defeating the other, Gen Chavalit said it is understandable that the parties involved in the conflict want to stand firm in their respective positions and emerge triumphant, but the means of doing this must be by talking and not resorting to violence.

He said there there had only been verbal attacks from either side so far, and the impasse would not last for too long.

Asked whether caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra should step down like he himself did in 1997, Gen Chavalit said his resignation came after he had solved all the economic problems that occurred during his administration.

''I stepped down after I had already put the problems right. I resigned not because I was irresponsible and left all the mess behind,'' he said.

Gen Chavalit urged Mr Thaksin's opponents to be less harsh in their criticism. He said Mr Thaksin was more self-sacrificing than himself and had a good sense of when and how he should act.

Meanwhile, Mr Thaksin continued to parade his populist policies on the campaign trail in Chiang Rai.

At the provincial stadium packed with more than 50,000 people, Mr Thaksin said if and when he is voted back into office again, Thai people nationwide will be given a land title deed.

The title deeds would be issued following the commemoration of His Majesty the King's 60th accession to the throne, which falls on June 19, he said.

The premier also urged locals to ignore criticism, news and information about him from the television media which he said was aimed at sullying his reputation.

He called on Chiang Rai voters to exercise their voting rights and cast their ballots for Thai Rak Thai.

Other populist policies he upheld were the 30-baht-health-care scheme, village funds, SML loans, an education plan to give students at prathom 1 level a lap-top computer each and anti-poverty measures.

The premier said the reason he had not returned to work at Government House was not because he feared the demonstrators but he because he wanted to lessen tensions by avoiding confrontation.

[jdinasia]

The premier also urged locals to ignore criticism, news and information about him from the television media which he said was aimed at sullying his reputation.

There's another rich one ..... Hey y'all ..... I don't control all of the media anymore so DON'T LISTEN TO THEM .......

Remember in The Wizard of Oz .... when the Wiz gets busted ?......

[Old Man River]

Thaksin would be negotiating from strength, not weakness. He can continue to sit back and wait

Yeah but in reality he has no place to sit, his party has been accused of serious election fraud with witnesses and material evidence coming forward, and 200 candidates are already disqualified, he pins his hopes on elections that everyone else ignores and that won't produce any definite result in foreseebale future, stripped of privilege to chair HM's celebrations. What strength? He's a madman bubbling something to himself. "Without me Thailand will go bankrupt in two months, without me you can't survive, I'm the one who saved all of you... blah blah blah."

Plus, I am not trying to pick on you here, but Thailand has never had a clean election. Do some homework. Talk to some of the people at pollwatch. I realize this doesn't make it right, but it is, unfortunately, the norm.

Rhetoric aside, who do you really think the police and military will support if push comes to shove?

[Plus]

Most senior party members registering fake candidates and tampering with EC database? That's innovation even for Thailand. If the allegation is proved the whole party could be dissolved.

BUT, this is not the first time Democrats couldn't convince courts/judges/panels with their evidence.

I believe police and military will stand by the people this time around. If confrontation between protesters and supporters takes place I doubt the army will crack down on protesters. Dr. T is a pain in the neck for everyone involved. Life would be so much easier if he just stepped down.

I don't understand him at all now. Have you seen this yet?

We will march on Govt House after winning the election: PM

Vows to 'reclaim' compound after winning election, if his opponents don't vacate area

Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra said yesterday he would urge his supporters to accompany him to Government House if his opponents continue their protest outside the compound after the April 2 general election...

"Those people look down on people like you. They think they are smarter than you are. You must think out loud so they can hear that you want Thaksin to be your prime minister," he said....

What is it if not inciting violance?

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/03/21/nat...al_20003211.php

[ddoff]

I'm confused, I've just arived in the country and I missed the beginning of the current political crisis. I’m trying to get from the reports what did PM exactly do to provoke it. Judging by the scale of protests it should be something really serious. There are statements like “Thaksin Shinawatra has lost all legitimacy as Prime minister of Thailand” or “I see the ways of the TRT as a giant gang-rape of Thailand.” So what’s wrong with Thaksin?

[Old Man River]

Most senior party members registering fake candidates and tampering with EC database? That's innovation even for Thailand. If the allegation is proved the whole party could be dissolved.

BUT, this is not the first time Democrats couldn't convince courts/judges/panels with their evidence.

I believe police and military will stand by the people this time around. If confrontation between protesters and supporters takes place I doubt the army will crack down on protesters. Dr. T is a pain in the neck for everyone involved. Life would be so much easier if he just stepped down.

I don't understand him at all now. Have you seen this yet?

We will march on Govt House after winning the election: PM

Vows to 'reclaim' compound after winning election, if his opponents don't vacate area

Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra said yesterday he would urge his supporters to accompany him to Government House if his opponents continue their protest outside the compound after the April 2 general election...

"Those people look down on people like you. They think they are smarter than you are. You must think out loud so they can hear that you want Thaksin to be your prime minister," he said....

What is it if not inciting violance?

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/03/21/nat...al_20003211.php

The PM is using similar rhetoric that Sondhi has been using. I am sure he is getting tired as well. I agree that the police and military will support the people, we just disagree on who the people are. Thaksin held a clear majority after the election last year, and since the TRT are running unopposed, no reason to think that he won't have a clear majority again, albeit to a lesser extent. I think the police and military will support the majority of the people.

Personally, I have friends on both sides. I would love to see a compromise, although I now agree that is highly unlikely. Given the PAD's unwillingness to withdraw, the police will break up the demonstrations, hopefully using water cannons so that nobody gets hurt.

The only way for the Opposition to win this is to find hard proof that the PM still controlled shares in Shin Corp after he said he divested. I would expect Khun Korn is still digging into this, and we will have to see where it leads.

[jdinasia]

and who would they give this proof to ? The NCCC? The EC? etc etc?

[Old Man River]

and who would they give this proof to ? The NCCC? The EC? etc etc?

[/quote

Are you giving up on Democracy in Thailand already? Yes, many that have supposed to act as a check and balance have shirked their responsibilities to the Country in trade for their own political survival, but we shouldn't give up.

I trust that should hard evidence be uncovered, the Democrates would know how to handle it for the good of the Country.

[Plus]

Old Man, when I said that the army and the police will stand by the people I meant they aren't going to use water cannons to disperse the demonstrators . The only case where they might use force is to separate pro and anti Taksin crowds should they clash with each other.

PAD is out their asking Taksin to resign precisely because there aren't any legal channels left for them to bring him to justice. This is not normal. Protesters don't give up on Democracy, they want to restore it.

As for evidence - there isn't any to suggest the kids had any say in company's management! Their signatures don't mean much.

Discovering the evidence is not Democrats job anyway, and is quite beyond their reach. Tracing money transfers is outside their jurisdiction, for example. They can't order banks to disclose any information and they can't summon any witnesses. NCCC and AMLO are two agencies with sufficient powers but one is non-existent and the other is under complete government control.

Taksin successfully diverted people's attention to non-issues like elections. Popularity has nothing to do with breaking the law.

[Old Man River]

Old Man, when I said that the army and the police will stand by the people I meant they aren't going to use water cannons to disperse the demonstrators . The only case where they might use force is to separate pro and anti Taksin crowds should they clash with each other.

PAD is out their asking Taksin to resign precisely because there aren't any legal channels left for them to bring him to justice. This is not normal. Protesters don't give up on Democracy, they want to restore it.

As for evidence - there isn't any to suggest the kids had any say in company's management! Their signatures don't mean much.

Discovering the evidence is not Democrats job anyway, and is quite beyond their reach. Tracing money transfers is outside their jurisdiction, for example. They can't order banks to disclose any information and they can't summon any witnesses. NCCC and AMLO are two agencies with sufficient powers but one is non-existent and the other is under complete government control.

Taksin successfully diverted people's attention to non-issues like elections. Popularity has nothing to do with breaking the law.

As it pertains to crowd dispersals, I hope you are right.

You say there are no more legal channels left to bring him to justice. I can assure you, members of the TRT do not understand what the PM would be brought to justice for. What he did may be unethical for a PM, but it is not illegal. Until now, with all the accusations about everything under the sun, nobody has yet been able to produce hard evidence on anything. It has been said often that there are no secrets in Thailand. Still, no evidence. Instead, we see people chanting slogans, causing traffic problems and marching up and down to the Singaporean Embassy. This isn't going to get it done, and violence would be a big step backwards.

Therefore, unless The Palace gets involved, and this doesn't appear likely, hard evidence has to be obtained and then publicized. The only group who can get this done is the Democrates, and they are trying.

[Plus]

Have you read the news in the past couple of months?

From wikipeida:

In February 2006, 28 senators submitted a petition to the Constitutional Court calling for the prime minister's suspension for conflicts of interest and improprieties in the sell-off of Shin Corp under articles 96, 216 and 209 of the Thai constitution. The senators said the prime minister violated the Constitution and was no longer qualified for office under Article 209, but the court rejected the petition on 16 February.

That's not just unethical, that's illegal, at least in senators' eyes.

The whole list of accusations against Taksin is too long for this thread.

[Old Man River]

Have you read the news in the past couple of months?

From wikipeida:

In February 2006, 28 senators submitted a petition to the Constitutional Court calling for the prime minister's suspension for conflicts of interest and improprieties in the sell-off of Shin Corp under articles 96, 216 and 209 of the Thai constitution. The senators said the prime minister violated the Constitution and was no longer qualified for office under Article 209, but the court rejected the petition on 16 February.

That's not just unethical, that's illegal, at least in senators' eyes.

The whole list of accusations against Taksin is too long for this thread.

Plus, the Constitutional Court voted to not take the case as there was no hard evidence that the constitution had been violated. The Senate felt they were still obligated to take the case and then seek out the evidence. The majority of the Constitutional Court opined differently taking a very narrow view on what their obligations are. This stance was highly disappointing.

You are correct that the whole list of accusations against Thaksin is a long list, but they are accusations only. There is no list of evidence. As unappealing as it may seem to you (and me), failing hard evidence or intervention by The Palace, in time it will be business as usual.

[boppia]

The TRT - Thaksin story is about :

Censorship

Corruption

Censorship

Corruption

Censorship

Corruption

and so on

Oh you can mix in cronyism and nepotism with that

Of course millions of Thais believe allegations.

As the TRT controls so much the government, its judiciary and its other departments they refuse to address the allegations of corruption openly and in many cases at all.

[britmaveric]

Democracy vs mob rule??? I'll pick elections any day.

[jdinasia]

Mob? again what has the opposition done that's against the rules? (PAD either for that matter)

If you were in Thailand Brit ... and betting weren't illegal there'd be a beer bet on this noe!

[boppia]

So any democratic ruler can do what he wants?

Brit you do know that the people in the countryside don't know anything about the allegations against Thaksin, right?

So you basically want people that know nothing of the allegations against Thaksin to vote and you think that's a good example of democracy?

Democracy is more than people picking a name. It's about having information and making a choice. The people in the countryside who have no sources of alternative information which isn't controlled by the government really aren't getting the whole story. We don't even have the whole story.

When the allegations against Thaksin are sincerely addressed by an objective panel with free access to all information necessary to make a decision as to whether there has been an abuse of power the whole truth will come out.

[britmaveric]

Well gentlemen yes I believe even the ill informed have rights to choose who they want regardless of how bad the particular candidate may be. I think its naive to think those educated in BKK know any better than their country counterparts.

Democracy is about 1 person 1 vote - the person doesnt need any information about a particular candidate. (unwise to not know what you are voting for, yes) He/she could like them because they have a great smile or charming personality. Elections plain and simple are about popularity if the truth be told.

Hypothetical - what would you say if those in country were informed of everything those in BKK, still voted TRT and supported Thaksin?

[boppia]

You know Brit, I would like to say that I would accept a Thaksin win but I can't.

Here's one for you:

If a Prime Minister told his bodyguards to gun down fifty flowersellers in the street for fun and they did it. And later people protested for justice against the deaths of these people in mass as they are now. Would an election resolve the matter? Would the crime be forgotten. If the Governing party won the majority of the seats in a snap election like this one would you say the issue of the deaths is over? It would have to be as the corrupt government would never prosecute itself. The PM would have won and would never face justice for his crimes. Do elections solve everything.

Saddam could kill hundreds of thousands of shiites because most of the people thought it was okay?

Killing a few jews is okay because most people don't care?

Okay, these are extreme cases but does an election mean that someone doesn't have to be responisble for their crimes? IF TRT wins do you really think Thaksin will be fairly investigated?

[britmaveric]

Unfortunately those investigating are just as corrupt as who they are investigating.

The scenario you described - if they could prove without a doubt that the PM ordered said executions then clearly he would have to go. (jail) Unfortunately everything Thaksin has done has been within the rules and the allegations have been thus far unfounded.

PAD has backed itself into a corner I'm afraid, and Thaksin has called their bluff. I have the feeling that it never occurred to them that he wouldnt resign.

Edited March 22, 2006 by britmaveric

[jdinasia]

Well gentlemen yes I believe even the ill informed have rights to choose who they want regardless of how bad the particular candidate may be. I think its naive to think those educated in BKK know any better than their country counterparts.

Democracy is about 1 person 1 vote - the person doesnt need any information about a particular candidate. (unwise to not know what you are voting for, yes) He/she could like them because they have a great smile or charming personality. Elections plain and simple are about popularity if the truth be told.

Hypothetical - what would you say if those in country were informed of everything those in BKK, still voted TRT and supported Thaksin?

Brit ... Naive? OMG ....

So ... the deliberately misinformed and underinformed (gov't censorship and self censorship by the press due to Gov't influence) and ill-informed are in the same class? As for naivety ... why would it be naive to think that people with more access to information might be in a better position to make an informed decision?

Democracy in it's truest form IS about one person one vote! That however is not practiced anywhere in the world that I know of. However ..... and this is a HUGE however in this case; Patronage ... vote buying (alleged) ...influencing the courts and independant bodies that oversee and regulate abuse of power etc are NOT part of any democratic process. Thailand is not a Presidential form of democracy ... no-one voted for Thaksin.

Democracy is always (in current practice around the globe) practiced with a checks and balances system. In Thailaland the Parlaiment is elected. They put forward the name of the PM. The PM constitutes the Gov't<executive> and the Parlaiment the legislative and there is supposed to be an independant judiciary. One of the powers of the PM is to dissolve Parlaiment in the case of the Government and the Parlaiment not being able to function because they are at odds.

The current situation doesn't fit that bill at all. The PM dissolved Parlaiment the day after his son was indicted for issues around the sale of Shinco .... Strange .. this stops Parlaiment from censuring him ... stops the opposition from having time and opportunity to rally people to the cause of democracy due to the 90 day rule.

As for your hypothetical ------- If the facts were out AND Thaksin were eligible to be PM again I'd have no problem with it ... after all Thaksin wasn't all that bad for me at all!

[britmaveric]

And you don't think the opposition has paid people off? It's sad to say, but the major players in this whole affair are pretty much the same. (no difference) Getting rid of the currently elected PM won't change a thing - that is a guaranteed.

[jdinasia]

Brit You are great about avoiding every issue raised. I think you just do this as a wind up ..... but hope you come back to thailand soon!

[britmaveric]

Brit You are great about avoiding every issue raised. I think you just do this as a wind up ..... but hope you come back to thailand soon!

I've yet to see a valid issue to give a response to....

[jdinasia]

like I said ... wind-up ... sometimes TiT may not mean This is Thailand ... sometimes it may mean Troll in Training :-)

[britmaveric]

like I said ... wind-up ... sometimes TiT may not mean This is Thailand ... sometimes it may mean Troll in Training :-)

Seriously now if everyone had the same opinion how boring of a debate would that be? Either of us could be right or wrong, only time will tell.

[Plus]

Getting rid of the currently elected PM won't change a thing

Oh it will. The very next step after removing Taksin is Constitutional reforms that would strenghten check and balances system and limit powers of the executive branch.

You can argue that the crooks will eventually find a way around the new rules, but it doesn't mean reforms are useless. If need arises, next round of reforms will take place.

Old Man River,

... the Constitutional Court voted to not take the case as there was no hard evidence that the constitution had been violated.

They wouldn't recognise "hard evidence" if it hit them on the head. In fact for majority judges there's no such concept as "hard evidence" against Thaksin. They probably didn't accept the case because there's no chance of Thaksin winning it.

That's the point of having "friendly" judges - so that they overlook any evidence against you. It doesn't in any way guarantee that independent judicial review will produce the same results.

Look at the "fake candidates" circus. There are filmed testimonies of about a dozen people related to three-four different cases. Detailed accounts of meetings, arrangments, and payments. Would it be considered "evidence"? What exactly would they accept as evidence? They defy common sense and make mockery of justice.

Edited March 22, 2006 by Plus