Red-shirts, Thai govt put differences behind

[webfact]

Reds, govt put differences behind
The Nation


A group of red-shirt supporters gather in Rayong to provide moral support to the government and Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

Rallies planned in different parts of nation to counter anti-amnesty move

BANGKOK: -- The ruling Pheu Thai Party and the red shirts plan to put aside their differences over amnesty in order to consolidate their strengths in fighting off their opponents.

"Under the circumstances, infighting should stop so we can face outside threats," Deputy Commerce Minister Nuttawut Saikuar said in his Facebook message yesterday.

The red shirts and the coalition lawmakers plan to hold a series of rallies aimed at countering the anti-amnesty protesters.

Nuttawut called for unity among government supporters for what he said was "the fight to safeguard democracy".

The red shirts are expected to kick off their own political rally at the Supachalasai Stadium tomorrow afternoon.

The red shirts will organise another nine stages around the country.

This week, they would launch five stages and start tomorrow at Supachalasai Stadium, from Monday to Friday at Khon Kaen, Chiang Mai, Udon Thani and Chon Buri.

Red shirts from Pathum Thani have already organised a public meeting to air their support for the administration and have distributed flyers attacking Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and MP Suthep Thaugsuban for attempting to unseat an elected government.

Meanwhile, former legislative leader Meechai Ruchuphan has called on the government to heed the people's voice. He warned that the situation would worsen if it used force against the people.

"The government is facing a tough situation and the use of force would lead to chaos and tragedy," he said.

The government should think and act quickly on pacifying the protesters and the best way is to engage the opponents in talks, he added.

Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila said he suspected the government had made a tactical retreat in the legislature in order to launch an offensive campaign to fan pro-amnesty sentiment.

The government, he said, had not really abandoned its push for blanket amnesty, arguing that the red-shirt rallies were designed to fan sentiment before the next round of debate in the legislature.

"Yingluck Shinawatra, the first female prime minister, has shown her true colours as a leader - willing to pitch the people against each other," he said. He said that relevant parties should turn the political movement - as evidenced by the number of people pouring onto the streets - into a constructive opportunity to bring about reforms.

Protesters, led by the Students and People Network for Thailand's Reform, are still camped out at Makkhawan Rangsan Bridge, near Government House, despite rumours of a possible crackdown.

Metropolitan Police commissioner Lt-General Kamronwit Thoopkrajang said police were not planning to disperse the crowds.

Police forces were instructed to keep protesters away from restricted areas, he said.

Secretary-general to the PM, Suranand Vejjajiva, said he was concerned that prolonged protests could tarnish the country's reputation. Should rally organisers drag on protests until Monday, coinciding with the International Court of Justice's ruling on Preah Vihear, it would not bode well for the country, he said. He urged Suthep to end the protests.

Regarding the red-shirt rally, he said the government was obliged to allow people to air their opinions. Police would be in charge of enforcing law and order to prevent confrontation between opposing sides, he said.

He warned anti-amnesty protesters not to fall prey to the ploy to unseat the government. Should the situation escalate, the government would have no choice but to carry out strict law enforcement, he said.


-- The Nation 2013-11-09

[BigDave48]

This is the first time I have written in this forum. I usually frequent it as a reader and observer, but I am now feeling that it is time to sign up and have my say, because i see things on the tipping point and this could get very ugly.

This current government are ridiculous in that every maneuver they take is seen through almost immediately. Not just by political commentators, but all observers with even the slightest smattering of an education.

Everyone can see that they are now going to attack from the streets by instigating the situation on the ground and seeding the streets with pro-amnesty red-shirts in an attempt to inflame a confrontation so they feel they have the right to initiate a 'crackdown'.

They are playing a very dangerous game. They are splitting the reds straight down the middle and sending them to war, while all the time they are bleating that they admire 'peaceful protests'.

There is no clearer message in my mind. This government is no way backing down from this amnesty bill. Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila was absolutely correct, and this is what has been in my mind the moment the PT party said they were backing off a few days ago... They were buying time to gather themselves and go on the offensive, but not themselves, no, it's not their style. This is a classic Thaksin maneuver where he/they are reverting back to March 2010 and sending in the sacrificial lambs to someone's possible slaughter. While all the time they sit in their ivory towers and watch with a self satisfying smirk on their faces.

If ever Thailand needed the army to step in and dispose of this band of criminals, then it is now. Someone ought to dispatch an assassin to get rid of Thaksin or the next office put out an international arrest warrant via Interpol and have him brought back to justice.

What this government is doing is a last ditch effort to force this on everyone just so one man can come back absolved of all wrong-doing. They sense that their end is close, so lets add some volatile ingredients and stir the pot. Let's go out with Bangkok in civil upheaval. They know these sort of things have started civil wars in other countries.

[Emptyset]

Meanwhile, former legislative leader Meechai Ruchuphan has called on the government to heed the people's voice. He warned that the situation would worsen if it used force against the people.

"The government is facing a tough situation and the use of force would lead to chaos and tragedy," he said.

Indeed, but no one was talking about using force, quite the contrary in fact. At least until Suranand raised the prospect of "strict law enforcement". And more nonsense about making the country look bad. Are these people stupid? I mean, it's not just Suranand that has invoked the country's image as a reason to condemn protesters, similar things were said by the last government and, of course, it's the sort of rhetoric typical of military leaders. But surely they get that it's not open and democrat protest that makes the country look bad in the eyes of foreigners, it's inflexible and authoritarian governments that discourage protest and use excessive force to disperse protesters? Most foreigners, at least those from democratic countries, think protest is a good thing, a sign that people are engaged in the political process and able to voice their concerns.

Surely Suranand knows this, so why does he feel the need to say it given there's zero chance that any protester would take any notice of what he says?

[BigDave48]

Meanwhile, former legislative leader Meechai Ruchuphan has called on the government to heed the people's voice. He warned that the situation would worsen if it used force against the people.

"The government is facing a tough situation and the use of force would lead to chaos and tragedy," he said.

Indeed, but no one was talking about using force, quite the contrary in fact. At least until Suranand raised the prospect of "strict law enforcement". And more nonsense about making the country look bad. Are these people stupid? I mean, it's not just Suranand that has invoked the country's image as a reason to condemn protesters, similar things were said by the last government and, of course, it's the sort of rhetoric typical of military leaders. But surely they get that it's not open and democrat protest that makes the country look bad in the eyes of foreigners, it's inflexible and authoritarian governments that discourage protest and use excessive force to disperse protesters? Most foreigners, at least those from democratic countries, think protest is a good thing, a sign that people are engaged in the political process and able to voice their concerns.

Surely Suranand knows this, so why does he feel the need to say it given there's zero chance that any protester would take any notice of what he says?

If you noticed, the warning was only directed to the 'anti' amnesty protesters, who have been very peaceful up till now.

The fact that he probably already knows that PT is secretly instigating the deployment of protesters from the other side of the divide. It's a little like putting two pitbulls in the ring and point a gun at one of them with orders to take it down if there is any aggression.

[JRSoul]

It's not moral support Yingluk and PTP need, it's morals. I doubt their red shirt supporters have any to spare.

[webfact]

Move to mend divisions
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The red-shirt Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship (DAAD) has decided to launch a strategy of "advancing while making a retreat".

After meeting with the premier and key Pheu Thai executives on Thursday, red-shirt co-leader Jatuporn Prompan cancelled a rally yesterday in a move to avoid possible confrontation with anti-government protesters.

Jatuporn and other red-shirt leaders including Pheu Thai MP Weng Tojirakarn reportedly concluded that there was an urgent need to reunite the red-shirt movement after several key members of the movement openly voiced opposition to the government's blanket amnesty bill.

The DAAD's first rally to launch the strategy will be held at 4pm tomorrow at Bangkok's Supachalasai Stadium, followed by campaigns in the provinces, including Khon Kaen, Udon Thani, Chiang Mai and Chon Buri. These rallies are aimed at explaining the government's stance and mending divisions within the red-shirt movement.

In a move to reunite supporters, the red-shirt Asia Update station will also ask three key red-shirt leaders, including Jatuporn, to return after taking them off the air less than a week ago.

At this stage, it is unclear whether the government's counter measure in alliance with the reds will lead to clashes with Democrat protesters.

Meanwhile, a high-level security source inside the Yingluck Shinawatra administration insisted yesterday that the government had not made a mistake in handling the growing anti-blanket amnesty bill protests, which is now on the verge of snowballing into broader anti-government demonstrations.

The source said the government expected anti-government demonstrators to eventually try and converge on Government House, but it was not an issue of major concern.

The source acknowledged, however, that the large number of protesters was a result of pent up anger against the administration in relation to several issues, including inflation, the rice-pledging scheme and the Bt2-trillion infrastructure project.

The source also criticised Deputy PM Pracha Promnog for spending too much time talking, while the so-called "ice-cream gang" led by the PM's secretary-general Suranand Vejjajiva continued to alienate itself from many within the ruling-Pheu Thai Party.

In a related development, a Pheu Thai source said many MPs blamed the strategic committee as wanting to help former PM Thaksin Shinawatra far too much and hence causing problems for red-shirt supporters, especially those who are still in jail.


-- The Nation 2013-11-09

[tominbkk]

Nice hat that one witchy lady is wearing. Indicative of the type of government the red shirt wasteoids want in place.

[Emptyset]

Meanwhile, former legislative leader Meechai Ruchuphan has called on the government to heed the people's voice. He warned that the situation would worsen if it used force against the people.

"The government is facing a tough situation and the use of force would lead to chaos and tragedy," he said.

Indeed, but no one was talking about using force, quite the contrary in fact. At least until Suranand raised the prospect of "strict law enforcement". And more nonsense about making the country look bad. Are these people stupid? I mean, it's not just Suranand that has invoked the country's image as a reason to condemn protesters, similar things were said by the last government and, of course, it's the sort of rhetoric typical of military leaders. But surely they get that it's not open and democrat protest that makes the country look bad in the eyes of foreigners, it's inflexible and authoritarian governments that discourage protest and use excessive force to disperse protesters? Most foreigners, at least those from democratic countries, think protest is a good thing, a sign that people are engaged in the political process and able to voice their concerns.

Surely Suranand knows this, so why does he feel the need to say it given there's zero chance that any protester would take any notice of what he says?

If you noticed, the warning was only directed to the 'anti' amnesty protesters, who have been very peaceful up till now.

The fact that he probably already knows that PT is secretly instigating the deployment of protesters from the other side of the divide. It's a little like putting two pitbulls in the ring and point a gun at one of them with orders to take it down if there is any aggression.

Yes, I did notice, hence I wondered why he thought they'd pay him any attention - anymore so than red shirts would pay attention to Suthep's opinion on how they should carry themselves. I doubt that PT are 'secretly instigating' anyone from the other side though. No need for secrecy, the red shirts are coming out openly, but I doubt they'll seek a clash - that would only play into the hands of those who *do* want to bring down the government and make the government look worse at a time when they're desperately trying to restore their credibility as a democratic government.

There are always rumours like this - the red shirts claimed that their were government instigators in their midst too, but there was little reason to believe it. I know there is a precedent though. In 1992 there was 'third hand' who tried to take things up a notch, supposedly it was Chavalit trying to precipitate force against the protesters in order to hasten Suchinda's demise. As it was, I don't think the third hand contributed much towards that, turns out the military were ready to kill anyway.

Especially as Thailand is (nominally at least) a democracy, public image is crucial. Especially with an already fragile government. Any violence will tend to play into the hands of the protesters and embolden them, the more cynical leaders of PAD (in 08) and the red shirts in 2010 realized this. Not that it came off, but the belief prior to 2010 was that if there were bodies on the street, the government had to go.

[15Peter20]

Nice hat that one witchy lady is wearing. Indicative of the type of government the red shirt wasteoids want in place.

I quite like the idea of a green government, and on that basis alone I wish them the best of luck!

Edited November 9, 2013 by 15Peter20

[roger rederer]

This is the first time I have written in this forum. I usually frequent it as a reader and observer, but I am now feeling that it is time to sign up and have my say, because i see things on the tipping point and this could get very ugly.

This current government are ridiculous in that every maneuver they take is seen through almost immediately. Not just by political commentators, but all observers with even the slightest smattering of an education.

Everyone can see that they are now going to attack from the streets by instigating the situation on the ground and seeding the streets with pro-amnesty red-shirts in an attempt to inflame a confrontation so they feel they have the right to initiate a 'crackdown'.

They are playing a very dangerous game. They are splitting the reds straight down the middle and sending them to war, while all the time they are bleating that they admire 'peaceful protests'.

There is no clearer message in my mind. This government is no way backing down from this amnesty bill. Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila was absolutely correct, and this is what has been in my mind the moment the PT party said they were backing off a few days ago... They were buying time to gather themselves and go on the offensive, but not themselves, no, it's not their style. This is a classic Thaksin maneuver where he/they are reverting back to March 2010 and sending in the sacrificial lambs to someone's possible slaughter. While all the time they sit in their ivory towers and watch with a self satisfying smirk on their faces.

If ever Thailand needed the army to step in and dispose of this band of criminals, then it is now. Someone ought to dispatch an assassin to get rid of Thaksin or the next office put out an international arrest warrant via Interpol and have him brought back to justice.

What this government is doing is a last ditch effort to force this on everyone just so one man can come back absolved of all wrong-doing. They sense that their end is close, so lets add some volatile ingredients and stir the pot. Let's go out with Bangkok in civil upheaval. They know these sort of things have started civil wars in other countries.

Listen to yourself: "If ever Thailand needed the army to step in" "ought to dispatch an assassin". Hmm.........very peaceful and grown up. In order to do what may I ask? Oh.... I geddit! To stop a democratically elected government carrying out policies that are unpopular with the minority parties, same as the rest of democracies worldwide. Back to your bar stool buddies of the Tea Party and you can carry on obsessing yourselves with one man.

[Hawkman]

This is the first time I have written in this forum. I usually frequent it as a reader and observer, but I am now feeling that it is time to sign up and have my say, because i see things on the tipping point and this could get very ugly.

This current government are ridiculous in that every maneuver they take is seen through almost immediately. Not just by political commentators, but all observers with even the slightest smattering of an education.

Everyone can see that they are now going to attack from the streets by instigating the situation on the ground and seeding the streets with pro-amnesty red-shirts in an attempt to inflame a confrontation so they feel they have the right to initiate a 'crackdown'.

They are playing a very dangerous game. They are splitting the reds straight down the middle and sending them to war, while all the time they are bleating that they admire 'peaceful protests'.

There is no clearer message in my mind. This government is no way backing down from this amnesty bill. Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila was absolutely correct, and this is what has been in my mind the moment the PT party said they were backing off a few days ago... They were buying time to gather themselves and go on the offensive, but not themselves, no, it's not their style. This is a classic Thaksin maneuver where he/they are reverting back to March 2010 and sending in the sacrificial lambs to someone's possible slaughter. While all the time they sit in their ivory towers and watch with a self satisfying smirk on their faces.

If ever Thailand needed the army to step in and dispose of this band of criminals, then it is now. Someone ought to dispatch an assassin to get rid of Thaksin or the next office put out an international arrest warrant via Interpol and have him brought back to justice.

What this government is doing is a last ditch effort to force this on everyone just so one man can come back absolved of all wrong-doing. They sense that their end is close, so lets add some volatile ingredients and stir the pot. Let's go out with Bangkok in civil upheaval. They know these sort of things have started civil wars in other countries.

Listen to yourself: "If ever Thailand needed the army to step in" "ought to dispatch an assassin". Hmm.........very peaceful and grown up. In order to do what may I ask? Oh.... I geddit! To stop a democratically elected government carrying out policies that are unpopular with the minority parties, same as the rest of democracies worldwide. Back to your bar stool buddies of the Tea Party and you can carry on obsessing yourselves with one man.

Obsessing over one man? Isn't that what this Government are currently doing over the needs of the people and the country?

It's PT who are obsessing over one man. Once this country moves on from this "one man", then this country can go back to normality. He is the root of the problem.

How anyone can stick up for a bill that will whitewash 25,000 cases of corruption, is beyond words.

[Hawkman]

The Country is divided.

The government creates a bill that they say will reunite country, though the contents of the bill will create more anger and divide.

People protest over the bill that the government created that they said will reunite the country, though the contents of the bill will create more anger and divide.

Other people will come and protest against the people who are protesting over the bill that the government created that they said will reunite the country, though the contents of the bill will create more anger and divide.

And they call this a bill that will reunite and bring unity?

Edited November 9, 2013 by Hawkman

[h90]

Nothing that money can't fix......

Thaksin sold us, blablabla rift, don't need him, blabla

Next time again ready to fight for him.

[Baerboxer]

This is the first time I have written in this forum. I usually frequent it as a reader and observer, but I am now feeling that it is time to sign up and have my say, because i see things on the tipping point and this could get very ugly.

This current government are ridiculous in that every maneuver they take is seen through almost immediately. Not just by political commentators, but all observers with even the slightest smattering of an education.

Everyone can see that they are now going to attack from the streets by instigating the situation on the ground and seeding the streets with pro-amnesty red-shirts in an attempt to inflame a confrontation so they feel they have the right to initiate a 'crackdown'.

They are playing a very dangerous game. They are splitting the reds straight down the middle and sending them to war, while all the time they are bleating that they admire 'peaceful protests'.

There is no clearer message in my mind. This government is no way backing down from this amnesty bill. Green Group coordinator Suriyasai Katasila was absolutely correct, and this is what has been in my mind the moment the PT party said they were backing off a few days ago... They were buying time to gather themselves and go on the offensive, but not themselves, no, it's not their style. This is a classic Thaksin maneuver where he/they are reverting back to March 2010 and sending in the sacrificial lambs to someone's possible slaughter. While all the time they sit in their ivory towers and watch with a self satisfying smirk on their faces.

If ever Thailand needed the army to step in and dispose of this band of criminals, then it is now. Someone ought to dispatch an assassin to get rid of Thaksin or the next office put out an international arrest warrant via Interpol and have him brought back to justice.

What this government is doing is a last ditch effort to force this on everyone just so one man can come back absolved of all wrong-doing. They sense that their end is close, so lets add some volatile ingredients and stir the pot. Let's go out with Bangkok in civil upheaval. They know these sort of things have started civil wars in other countries.

Listen to yourself: "If ever Thailand needed the army to step in" "ought to dispatch an assassin". Hmm.........very peaceful and grown up. In order to do what may I ask? Oh.... I geddit! To stop a democratically elected government carrying out policies that are unpopular with the minority parties, same as the rest of democracies worldwide. Back to your bar stool buddies of the Tea Party and you can carry on obsessing yourselves with one man.

PTP are all about one man. He owns them, sets the strategy, defines the policies and calls the plays. He even handpicks the team.

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. That is why they avoid a referendum. They know they won't win one.

One man orchestrates all this corruption and upheaval for his and his clan's benefit, at the expense of a country and its people.

The breadth and depth of the people protesting at a bill that would whitewash all crimes committed by this criminal fugitive, as well as many of his family and gang, and destroy the principles of law should give you an idea of reality, although your post indicates not,

In democratic countries, elected governments must work with regard to the constitution and laws and respect the law and courts. The current regime does neither. They act illegally and without any morals or ethics. They wouldn't last 5 minutes as a political party in any true democracy.

[jayboy]

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

[Siripon]

The red shirts know full well that all the Pheua Thai MPs sold them down the river when they voted for the blanket amnesty.

'Red shirts, your deaths mean nothing now, all we want to do is bring back our master' was the very clear message.

I saw Jatupon in an interview with Sorrayuth just a few days ago saying the red shirts could not accept this, the end of the soi was a dead end, not a successful resolution.

And now 3 days later it's the usual bleating,' They're trying to bring the government down, we must unite'

Withdraw all the amnesty bills unconditionally and the government can try to continue, though all credibility has gone- Yingluk really should resign (3 times).

[waza]

A group of red-shirt supporters (who couldn't find alternative funding) gather in Rayong to provide moral support to the government and Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

But now there is many factions of the redshirts they should have different names so we can identify who is who. These are what Justaporn named the "pro Thaksin redshirts", which comprise of 20% of the UDD, the anti-amnesty redshirts are the other 80%.

Edited November 9, 2013 by waza

[JRSoul]

A group of red-shirt supporters (who couldn't find alternative funding) gather in Rayong to provide moral support to the government and Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

But now there is many factions of the redshirts they should have different names so we can identify who is who. These are what Justaporn named the "pro Thaksin redshirts", which comprise of 20% of the UDD, the anti-amnesty redshirts are the other 80%.

Can I suggest that Jatuporn's 20% be called the Brotherhood of Red Thais - the BORT?

[h90]

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

[jayboy]

 

 

 

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

 

 

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

 

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

 

 

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

 

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

 

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[ballpoint]

A group of red-shirt supporters (who couldn't find alternative funding) gather in Rayong to provide moral support to the government and Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

But now there is many factions of the redshirts they should have different names so we can identify who is who. These are what Justaporn named the "pro Thaksin redshirts", which comprise of 20% of the UDD, the anti-amnesty redshirts are the other 80%.

Can I suggest that Jatuporn's 20% be called the Brotherhood of Red Thais - the BORT?

And when they gather together it be referred to as an excrescence of red shirts.

[jayboy]

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Sorry - missed out a negative in the "to be clear" sentence

[h90]

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There is also no evidence that the PTP would have won without vote buying.

Can we agree on these facts:

1) Thaksin is smart, and specially smart with his money, right?

2) On the last elections was almost full scale vote buying, by most or all of the large parties, right?

3) Considering the population of Thailand that sums up to crazy amounts of money, right?

4) Before the election all the major parties make some serious polls, and have a general idea how the election results will be. Maybe +/- 5 or 10 %

5) Do you think Mr. Thaksin would have paid a fortune of money, if he is sure that people would vote him without payment? No because half of his voters would have sitting at home not voting anyone. While the Democrats just don't have the resources in Nord and Nordeast.

Therefor the results of the election can't be accepted. No matter if it is Thaksin or Abhisit who wins with vote buying. Vote buying is wrong no matter if the winner fits the own political opinion or not.

[jayboy]

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There is also no evidence that the PTP would have won without vote buying.

Can we agree on these facts:

1) Thaksin is smart, and specially smart with his money, right?

2) On the last elections was almost full scale vote buying, by most or all of the large parties, right?

3) Considering the population of Thailand that sums up to crazy amounts of money, right?

4) Before the election all the major parties make some serious polls, and have a general idea how the election results will be. Maybe +/- 5 or 10 %

5) Do you think Mr. Thaksin would have paid a fortune of money, if he is sure that people would vote him without payment? No because half of his voters would have sitting at home not voting anyone. While the Democrats just don't have the resources in Nord and Nordeast.

Therefor the results of the election can't be accepted. No matter if it is Thaksin or Abhisit who wins with vote buying. Vote buying is wrong no matter if the winner fits the own political opinion or not.

Opening proposition.No you are wrong.All the evidence supports the reality that PTP won an electoral mandate.Your suggestion PTP would not have won without vote buying is simply incorrect.Not even the opposition makes that foolish claim.The international monitoring agencies certainly didn't.

As to the "facts"

1.Agreed though have reservations whether he would have been as successful in a business environment where level playing field.Also have reservations about his judgement - tendency to overreach even meglomania.

2.No,You are wrong.There was vote buying but not "full scale" and did not affect results.

3.Can't comment on crazy bar talk.

4.Correct

5.Can you quantify "fortune" because I have seen no other evidence? You seem to think there is a logical argument.But there isn't.In fact regardless of payment for votes one way or the other the majority in the North and North East were never going to vote Democrat.That's really all I'm saying - vote buying (which I believe you hugely exaggerate) did not affect the end result.

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

Edited November 9, 2013 by jayboy

[rubl]

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

The legitimacy of this government is much in doubt as we have statements from themselves on it:

- Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts

- she's my clone

- skyping-in giving orders

- I'm the golf caddy

- lots of MPs dropping by for ...

- various interview indicating who is in charge.

And that's just from those involved in this government

[h90]

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There is also no evidence that the PTP would have won without vote buying.

Can we agree on these facts:

1) Thaksin is smart, and specially smart with his money, right?

2) On the last elections was almost full scale vote buying, by most or all of the large parties, right?

3) Considering the population of Thailand that sums up to crazy amounts of money, right?

4) Before the election all the major parties make some serious polls, and have a general idea how the election results will be. Maybe +/- 5 or 10 %

5) Do you think Mr. Thaksin would have paid a fortune of money, if he is sure that people would vote him without payment? No because half of his voters would have sitting at home not voting anyone. While the Democrats just don't have the resources in Nord and Nordeast.

Therefor the results of the election can't be accepted. No matter if it is Thaksin or Abhisit who wins with vote buying. Vote buying is wrong no matter if the winner fits the own political opinion or not.

Opening proposition.No you are wrong.All the evidence supports the reality that PTP won an electoral mandate.Your suggestion PTP would not have won without vote buying is simply incorrect.Not even the opposition makes that foolish claim.The international monitoring agencies certainly didn't.

As to the "facts"

1.Agreed though have reservations whether he would have been as successful in a business environment where level playing field.Also have reservations about his judgement - tendency to overreach even meglomania.

2.No,You are wrong.There was vote buying but not "full scale" and did not affect results.

3.Can't comment on crazy bar talk.

4.Correct

5.Can you quantify "fortune" because I have seen no other evidence? You seem to think there is a logical argument.But there isn't.In fact regardless of payment for votes one way or the other the majority in the North and North East were never going to vote Democrat.That's really all I'm saying - vote buying (which I believe you hugely exaggerate) did not affect the end result.

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

If you did not see full scale vote buying you either don't live in Thailand or you never leave house, or you maybe stay at Silom road.....denying that is just ridiculous, it was outside downtown everywhere in Nord, Nordeast and a bit reduced in the South and it was not a bit in secret.

And the international monitoring agencies were discussed to dead....don't want to start that again...just google how many people did what.

Give it up, it is undefendable...The only excuse is that others do it as well, and who stops first loose but it doesn't make it any more democratic.

[jayboy]

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

The legitimacy of this government is much in doubt as we have statements from themselves on it:

- Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts

- she's my clone

- skyping-in giving orders

- I'm the golf caddy

- lots of MPs dropping by for ...

- various interview indicating who is in charge.

And that's just from those involved in this government

I appreciate English isn't your first language so no cheap shots on my part.Legitimacy in this context means fairly elected and with a clear mandate.What happened thereafter is of course open for discussion.

[jayboy]

Opening proposition.No you are wrong.All the evidence supports the reality that PTP won an electoral mandate.Your suggestion PTP would not have won without vote buying is simply incorrect.Not even the opposition makes that foolish claim.The international monitoring agencies certainly didn't.

As to the "facts"

1.Agreed though have reservations whether he would have been as successful in a business environment where level playing field.Also have reservations about his judgement - tendency to overreach even meglomania.

2.No,You are wrong.There was vote buying but not "full scale" and did not affect results.

3.Can't comment on crazy bar talk.

4.Correct

5.Can you quantify "fortune" because I have seen no other evidence? You seem to think there is a logical argument.But there isn't.In fact regardless of payment for votes one way or the other the majority in the North and North East were never going to vote Democrat.That's really all I'm saying - vote buying (which I believe you hugely exaggerate) did not affect the end result.

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

If you did not see full scale vote buying you either don't live in Thailand or you never leave house, or you maybe stay at Silom road.....denying that is just ridiculous, it was outside downtown everywhere in Nord, Nordeast and a bit reduced in the South and it was not a bit in secret.

And the international monitoring agencies were discussed to dead....don't want to start that again...just google how many people did what.

Give it up, it is undefendable...The only excuse is that others do it as well, and who stops first loose but it doesn't make it any more democratic.

You seem not to grasp the point.Even setting aside the views of monitoring agencies and the official opposition (Abhisit has never made your claim), whether there was vote buying or not and to what degree, the result wasn't affected.That's all I'm saying.

If you dislike electoral democracy (and I'm assuming you don't as a former PAD propagandist) that's a different argument.I might even agree with you on some aspects (tyranny of majority etc).

[rubl]

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

The legitimacy of this government is much in doubt as we have statements from themselves on it:

- Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts

- she's my clone

- skyping-in giving orders

- I'm the golf caddy

- lots of MPs dropping by for ...

- various interview indicating who is in charge.

And that's just from those involved in this government

I appreciate English isn't your first language so no cheap shots on my part.Legitimacy in this context means fairly elected and with a clear mandate.What happened thereafter is of course open for discussion.

Jayboy, for your information, a few things already happened before the July 3rd election. Things just escalated a bit after.

PS the explanation of the context of legitimacy didn't really need the prefix "English not my first language". Especially since your "legitimacy in this context" suggests that you also have legitimacy in other context.

Edited November 9, 2013 by rubl

[Robby nz]

Rallies planned in different parts of nation to counter anti-amnesty move

It would seem the reds have already been holding meetings around the country to drum up support for their anti-anti amnesty bill group'

The attached photo which was posted on facebook is of a meeting held in Nan yesterday.

I leave it up to each of you to gage its success.