Democrat Party moves to remove PM Yingluck, two ministers

[mikemac]

Unfortunately, JRSoul, Goat roper made a statement and I simply asked for some clarification on said statement, so in his response instead of the requested clarification he chose to say I am "naïve and uninformed", and well to be brutally honest I have on occasion been guilty of both charges, BUT,,, I'm reasonably sure there is no conviction of theft of tax payers money, so this IMOP makes his statement a fiction

So I ask you who now is naïve and uninformed?

People are entitled to their opinion, as long as it is not passed off as fact. I just think Goat roper could try using facts instead,

and when challenged on an issue try backing it up with said fact's,

then he might have a little more credibility.

You have got to be kidding !

The only mistake GoatRoper made was responding to a troll !

[aussieinthailand]

a troll in you opinion, but a fair question I think

[Moruya]

The Democrats are so pathetic. Agreed they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers) but every 4 year old can learn them what the word "democracy" means. They think Democrat is something like the DDR, the second D means Democratic too, or people, in the name of that of stingy China.

They have not even 20% of the votes, can someone please move to disband this anti democratic party?

Whatever planet you live on, I hope they have good mental health workers

[JRSoul]

Unfortunately, JRSoul, Goat roper made a statement and I simply asked for some clarification on said statement, so in his response instead of the requested clarification he chose to say I am "naïve and uninformed", and well to be brutally honest I have on occasion been guilty of both charges, BUT,,, I'm reasonably sure there is no conviction of theft of tax payers money, so this IMOP makes his statement a fiction

So I ask you who now is naïve and uninformed?

People are entitled to their opinion, as long as it is not passed off as fact. I just think Goat roper could try using facts instead,

and when challenged on an issue try backing it up with said fact's,

then he might have a little more credibility.

Having read his original statement and your reply, I notice that the only mention of conviction is yours. Thaksin has been charged but not yet convicted, due to his self-imposed absence, of several financial crimes. Playing with words doesn't change that fact, nor does his sister's ill-fated attempt to whitewash him.

Off the top of my head I can recall 2 such crimes; the loan to Myanmar to buy Shin Corp equipment, and nearly a billion dollars worth of loans that immediately went bad, after much of it passing through his son's account.

[cornishcarlos]

Unfortunately, JRSoul, Goat roper made a statement and I simply asked for some clarification on said statement, so in his response instead of the requested clarification he chose to say I am "naïve and uninformed", and well to be brutally honest I have on occasion been guilty of both charges, BUT,,, I'm reasonably sure there is no conviction of theft of tax payers money, so this IMOP makes his statement a fiction

So I ask you who now is naïve and uninformed?

People are entitled to their opinion, as long as it is not passed off as fact. I just think Goat roper could try using facts instead,

and when challenged on an issue try backing it up with said fact's,

then he might have a little more credibility.

Having read his original statement and your reply, I notice that the only mention of conviction is yours. Thaksin has been charged but not yet convicted, due to his self-imposed absence, of several financial crimes. Playing with words doesn't change that fact, nor does his sister's ill-fated attempt to whitewash him.

Off the top of my head I can recall 2 such crimes; the loan to Myanmar to buy Shin Corp equipment, and nearly a billion dollars worth of loans that immediately went bad, after much of it passing through his son's account.

This was from the 1st search on google... They mention conviction !!

"Thaksin Shinawatra was sentenced to two years' imprisonment in absentia over a corrupt land deal. In a ruling that made him the first Thai politician to be convicted of corruption committed while prime minister, Thaksin was found to have violated conflict of interest rules in helping his wife buy land from a state agency at a reduced price.^[122]"

Edited November 18, 2013 by cornishcarlos

[aussieinthailand]

So now you've looked at GoatRopers comment that Thaksin "stole tax payers money", and now I ask you this, is a man innocent until proven guilty?

until then this is just an allegation from a bias point of view and certainly not fact, or do you prefer shoot first and then ask questions?

I'm just asking

[fab4]

The Democrats are so pathetic. Agreed they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers) but every 4 year old can learn them what the word "democracy" means. They think Democrat is something like the DDR, the second D means Democratic too, or people, in the name of that of stingy China.

They have not even 20% of the votes, can someone please move to disband this anti democratic party?

"they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers)"

I think you'll find, if you cast your mind back, that the 2006 coup-makers were amnestied by the national-referendum in 2007, and not by the much-later Democrat-led coalition-government ?

For some reason PTP & Thaksin (who Thinks !?) did not follow the same route, and put his amnesty to a national referendum, perhaps they were less-than-confident in it passing ?

Do you remember the NSC (Junta) being asked by the Constitutional Court to put a vote to the electorate in a referendum as to whether they wanted their Constitution rewritten and have the inclusion of an amnesty for all those responsible for the coup that had ripped up their constitution?No, neither do I.

So you could possibly forgive the PTP for not wanting to submit to a special procedure made up by the Constitutional Court of having two referendums. The CC then said that the PTP could amend the constitutional one article at a time and debate it in parliament which they have done.

And the Dems get more and more desperate to try and stop this happening claiming it's not democratic.

People have short memories and forgot that abhisit ammended the constitution to mess about with the constituencies and party lists (removing constituencies in the north) hoping to favour his partys chance of winning an election (he still couldn't do it) without having a referendum.

[JRSoul]

So now you've looked at GoatRopers comment that Thaksin "stole tax payers money", and now I ask you this, is a man innocent until proven guilty?

until then this is just an allegation from a bias point of view and certainly not fact, or do you prefer shoot first and then ask questions?

I'm just asking

Hitler, Stalin, Mao and many other criminals never faced court; are they all innocent too? The loan to Myanmar is a historical fact even if the court is yet to hear the case. Keep playing semantics, you convince nobody but yourself and the other sycophants.

[bigbamboo]

The Democrats are so pathetic. Agreed they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers) but every 4 year old can learn them what the word "democracy" means. They think Democrat is something like the DDR, the second D means Democratic too, or people, in the name of that of stingy China.

They have not even 20% of the votes, can someone please move to disband this anti democratic party?

"they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers)"

I think you'll find, if you cast your mind back, that the 2006 coup-makers were amnestied by the national-referendum in 2007, and not by the much-later Democrat-led coalition-government ?

For some reason PTP & Thaksin (who Thinks !?) did not follow the same route, and put his amnesty to a national referendum, perhaps they were less-than-confident in it passing ?

Do you remember the NSC (Junta) being asked by the Constitutional Court to put a vote to the electorate in a referendum as to whether they wanted their Constitution rewritten and have the inclusion of an amnesty for all those responsible for the coup that had ripped up their constitution?No, neither do I.

So you could possibly forgive the PTP for not wanting to submit to a special procedure made up by the Constitutional Court of having two referendums. The CC then said that the PTP could amend the constitutional one article at a time and debate it in parliament which they have done.

And the Dems get more and more desperate to try and stop this happening claiming it's not democratic.

People have short memories and forgot that abhisit ammended the constitution to mess about with the constituencies and party lists (removing constituencies in the north) hoping to favour his partys chance of winning an election (he still couldn't do it) without having a referendum.

And then the new constitution was put to the people and they voted for it....... and they didn't even get paid.

How 'undemocratic' is that?

Edited November 18, 2013 by bigbamboo

[fab4]

The Democrats are so pathetic. Agreed they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers) but every 4 year old can learn them what the word "democracy" means. They think Democrat is something like the DDR, the second D means Democratic too, or people, in the name of that of stingy China.

They have not even 20% of the votes, can someone please move to disband this anti democratic party?

"they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers)"

I think you'll find, if you cast your mind back, that the 2006 coup-makers were amnestied by the national-referendum in 2007, and not by the much-later Democrat-led coalition-government ?

For some reason PTP & Thaksin (who Thinks !?) did not follow the same route, and put his amnesty to a national referendum, perhaps they were less-than-confident in it passing ?

Do you remember the NSC (Junta) being asked by the Constitutional Court to put a vote to the electorate in a referendum as to whether they wanted their Constitution rewritten and have the inclusion of an amnesty for all those responsible for the coup that had ripped up their constitution?No, neither do I.

So you could possibly forgive the PTP for not wanting to submit to a special procedure made up by the Constitutional Court of having two referendums. The CC then said that the PTP could amend the constitutional one article at a time and debate it in parliament which they have done.

And the Dems get more and more desperate to try and stop this happening claiming it's not democratic.

People have short memories and forgot that abhisit ammended the constitution to mess about with the constituencies and party lists (removing constituencies in the north) hoping to favour his partys chance of winning an election (he still couldn't do it) without having a referendum.

And then the new constitution was put to the people and they voted for it....... and they didn't even get paid.

How 'undemocratic' is that?

Did I forget to mention the ban on all demonstrations asking people to Vote No, the disenfranchisement of the Malay speakers in the south, oh and Martial Law being enacted in the North and North East Provinces

[jdinasia]

So now you've looked at GoatRopers comment that Thaksin "stole tax payers money", and now I ask you this, is a man innocent until proven guilty?

until then this is just an allegation from a bias point of view and certainly not fact, or do you prefer shoot first and then ask questions?

I'm just asking

Apparently you did not google the phrase I gave you earlier which would have cleared things up for you. Sad

[rubl]

The Democrats are so pathetic. Agreed they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers) but every 4 year old can learn them what the word "democracy" means. They think Democrat is something like the DDR, the second D means Democratic too, or people, in the name of that of stingy China.

They have not even 20% of the votes, can someone please move to disband this anti democratic party?

"they are specialists in passing amnesty laws (for coup makers)"

I think you'll find, if you cast your mind back, that the 2006 coup-makers were amnestied by the national-referendum in 2007, and not by the much-later Democrat-led coalition-government ?

For some reason PTP & Thaksin (who Thinks !?) did not follow the same route, and put his amnesty to a national referendum, perhaps they were less-than-confident in it passing ?

Do you remember the NSC (Junta) being asked by the Constitutional Court to put a vote to the electorate in a referendum as to whether they wanted their Constitution rewritten and have the inclusion of an amnesty for all those responsible for the coup that had ripped up their constitution?No, neither do I.

So you could possibly forgive the PTP for not wanting to submit to a special procedure made up by the Constitutional Court of having two referendums. The CC then said that the PTP could amend the constitutional one article at a time and debate it in parliament which they have done.

And the Dems get more and more desperate to try and stop this happening claiming it's not democratic.

People have short memories and forgot that abhisit ammended the constitution to mess about with the constituencies and party lists (removing constituencies in the north) hoping to favour his partys chance of winning an election (he still couldn't do it) without having a referendum.

1. The constitution has not be rewritten 80 - 90% of the text is identical, lots of clarifications legal experts agree upon and the big black blot of the '2006 coup leader amnesty'.

2. The Pheu Thai led government can amend article one by one, but in their democratic haste they seem to forget that controversial changes should not be pushed through with a simple parliametary majority. not if they at the same time talk about democracy, reconcilliation, forgive and forget.

3. and the Democratic party keeps on acting against the bullying of the Pheu Thai led government. As an opposition party should do in a democracy.

4. regarding constituency changes. Well read this http://www.zimbio.com/Thailand/articles/C4xOUFVJHcn/Constituency+number+changes

[angsta]

Why don't they have another election? Oh, wait...they can't win.

'Democracy' at its finest. Burma here we come...

Who can't win? If PTP are so sure of winning, why hasn't the new election already been announced?

Because they are in power so why do they need another election to prove they won the first one? What next another one just to check then one more just in case? And then one just for luck? <deleted>. They only lose when tanks are the only voters.

Angsta -- please read up on house dissolution and parliamentary democracies. In parliamentary democracies fresh elections are common when a government loses the confidence of the people on the street. They are mandatory after a successful no confidence vote. If you knew the history of politics here just in the last decade you could even make a case for house dissolution being the cause of all the current problems. (You would be wrong, ..... but

For example? Give me a few examples when governments have called elections because they lost a vote. I am trying to think when those two power houses of democracy the US and the UK last did it.

Some whinging yellow shirts is hardly the confidence of the people on the street. I live near Democracy Monument and on Friday you couldn't move for the amount of SUV's and BMW's illegally parked so they could attend the protest. Give me a break.

The people of Bangkok protest against Thaksin. This is news to two sets of people. The government run media (I am looking at you The Nation!) and the same ten or so Thai visa posters who for some strange reason think it's their life goal to save the poor people of Thailand from that nasty man from Chiang Mai. Some people need to spend more time with their wifes and families.

[fab4]

Do you remember the NSC (Junta) being asked by the Constitutional Court to put a vote to the electorate in a referendum as to whether they wanted their Constitution rewritten and have the inclusion of an amnesty for all those responsible for the coup that had ripped up their constitution?No, neither do I.

So you could possibly forgive the PTP for not wanting to submit to a special procedure made up by the Constitutional Court of having two referendums. The CC then said that the PTP could amend the constitutional one article at a time and debate it in parliament which they have done.

And the Dems get more and more desperate to try and stop this happening claiming it's not democratic.

People have short memories and forgot that abhisit ammended the constitution to mess about with the constituencies and party lists (removing constituencies in the north) hoping to favour his partys chance of winning an election (he still couldn't do it) without having a referendum.

1. The constitution has not be rewritten 80 - 90% of the text is identical, lots of clarifications legal experts agree upon and the big black blot of the '2006 coup leader amnesty'.

2. The Pheu Thai led government can amend article one by one, but in their democratic haste they seem to forget that controversial changes should not be pushed through with a simple parliametary majority. not if they at the same time talk about democracy, reconcilliation, forgive and forget.

3. and the Democratic party keeps on acting against the bullying of the Pheu Thai led government. As an opposition party should do in a democracy.

4. regarding constituency changes. Well read this http://www.zimbio.com/Thailand/articles/C4xOUFVJHcn/Constituency+number+changes

So you ignored the question - as usual. You say 80 -90 % of the text is identical and where do we get that from? Because you say so? Legal Experts agree upon it. So what, others disagree. If you have time read Bjorn Dressels paper on Thailands Elusive Quest for a Workable Constitution 1997 - 2007. It might open your eyes, but I doubt it.

https://www.academia.edu/1080475/Thailands_Elusive_Quest_for_a_Workable_Constitution_1997_-2007

This article examines the main differences between the 1997 and 2007 versions of the Constitution and how these changes relate to the current unrest in Thailand. The analysis suggests that Thailand’s current instability is best understood in terms of how social struggles over access to power played out in constitutional choices. Though Thailand’s urban elites and middle class had driven the drafting of the earlier Constitution, when the populist leadership it produced threatened their interests they were quick to support the traditional military and royal networks in ousting the elected government and replace the People’s Constitution with one that is deliberately less democratic. Yet, because the drafting process failed to generate support beyond narrow elite circles, and the new institutional arrangements no longer provide the inclusive governance Thai people have come to expect, the new Constitution has generated tensions that suggest Thailand is unlikely to experience stability any time soon.

You want to see how your squeaky clean dems deal with amendments in the democratic fashion read this

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Coalition-partners-all-for-400-100-formula-as-Demo-30146250.html

Sorry , forgot to add this http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/05/30/thailands-electoral-rules/#_ftn1

Edited November 18, 2013 by fab4

[thaicbr]

Angsta -- please read up on house dissolution and parliamentary democracies. In parliamentary democracies fresh elections are common when a government loses the confidence of the people on the street. They are mandatory after a successful no confidence vote. If you knew the history of politics here just in the last decade you could even make a case for house dissolution being the cause of all the current problems. (You would be wrong, ..... but

For example? Give me a few examples when governments have called elections because they lost a vote. I am trying to think when those two power houses of democracy the US and the UK last did it.

Some whinging yellow shirts is hardly the confidence of the people on the street. I live near Democracy Monument and on Friday you couldn't move for the amount of SUV's and BMW's illegally parked so they could attend the protest. Give me a break.

The people of Bangkok protest against Thaksin. This is news to two sets of people. The government run media (I am looking at you The Nation!) and the same ten or so Thai visa posters who for some strange reason think it's their life goal to save the poor people of Thailand from that nasty man from Chiang Mai. Some people need to spend more time with their wifes and families.

Ok. That one's easy.. Thaksin in April 2006

"The elections followed the decision by Prime Minister Thaksin to dissolve the House of Representatives. King Bhumibol Adulyadej granted Thaksin a dissolution even though the last electionwas held only in February 2005, and even though Thaksin's party had a huge majority in the House. At the February 2005 election, the TRT won 375 seats out of 500, with its former coalition partner, theThai Nation Party taking 26 seats. The opposition Democratic Party of Thailand won 96 seats.

Thaksin's decision to call early elections followed a mounting campaign of criticism of his personal financial dealings. In January the government changed regulations for telecommunications companies allowing an increase in foreign ownership from 24% to 49%, and within the same month he and his family sold its stake in Shin Corporation, a leading communication company, for 73 billion baht (about $US1.88 billion), an enormous profit on which the Shinawatras legally paid no tax, even though family members bought and sold shares in the company in a 24 hour period. This sparked a series of angry demonstrations in the capital. Nevertheless, Thaksin's parliamentary position was under no threat."

sOURCE:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thailand_legislative_election,_April_2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra#House_dissolution_and_election

[thaicbr]

Do you remember the NSC (Junta) being asked by the Constitutional Court to put a vote to the electorate in a referendum as to whether they wanted their Constitution rewritten and have the inclusion of an amnesty for all those responsible for the coup that had ripped up their constitution?No, neither do I.

So you could possibly forgive the PTP for not wanting to submit to a special procedure made up by the Constitutional Court of having two referendums. The CC then said that the PTP could amend the constitutional one article at a time and debate it in parliament which they have done.

And the Dems get more and more desperate to try and stop this happening claiming it's not democratic.

People have short memories and forgot that abhisit ammended the constitution to mess about with the constituencies and party lists (removing constituencies in the north) hoping to favour his partys chance of winning an election (he still couldn't do it) without having a referendum.

1. The constitution has not be rewritten 80 - 90% of the text is identical, lots of clarifications legal experts agree upon and the big black blot of the '2006 coup leader amnesty'.

2. The Pheu Thai led government can amend article one by one, but in their democratic haste they seem to forget that controversial changes should not be pushed through with a simple parliametary majority. not if they at the same time talk about democracy, reconcilliation, forgive and forget.

3. and the Democratic party keeps on acting against the bullying of the Pheu Thai led government. As an opposition party should do in a democracy.

4. regarding constituency changes. Well read this http://www.zimbio.com/Thailand/articles/C4xOUFVJHcn/Constituency+number+changes

So you ignored the question - as usual. You say 80 -90 % of the text is identical and where do we get that from? Because you say so? Legal Experts agree upon it. So what, others disagree. If you have time read Bjorn Dressels paper on Thailands Elusive Quest for a Workable Constitution 1997 - 2007. It might open your eyes, but I doubt it.

https://www.academia.edu/1080475/Thailands_Elusive_Quest_for_a_Workable_Constitution_1997_-2007

This article examines the main differences between the 1997 and 2007 versions of the Constitution and how these changes relate to the current unrest in Thailand. The analysis suggests that Thailand’s current instability is best understood in terms of how social struggles over access to power played out in constitutional choices. Though Thailand’s urban elites and middle class had driven the drafting of the earlier Constitution, when the populist leadership it produced threatened their interests they were quick to support the traditional military and royal networks in ousting the elected government and replace the People’s Constitution with one that is deliberately less democratic. Yet, because the drafting process failed to generate support beyond narrow elite circles, and the new institutional arrangements no longer provide the inclusive governance Thai people have come to expect, the new Constitution has generated tensions that suggest Thailand is unlikely to experience stability any time soon.

You want to see how your squeaky clean dems deal with amendments in the democratic fashion read this

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Coalition-partners-all-for-400-100-formula-as-Demo-30146250.html

Sorry , forgot to add this http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/05/30/thailands-electoral-rules/#_ftn1

oK..and?

ALL that told us was that the Democrats were trying to make it a bit easier to be an effective opposition, It still had to voted for.

I did note: without any representatives from the main opposition party, Pheu Thai, which has boycotted constitutional amendments.

[ianf]

Abhisit's idea of a General Election, all 146 votes? Dream on looser.

Abhisit is a thoroughly decent bloke whose public image has been distorted and defamed by Thaksin-inspired lies and more. It was in Thaksin's interests to turn him into a hate figure. Very transparent to anyone who has the intelligence to understand this.

Would you accept that at the very least he has lied about a couple of significant events in his political career and that he has been guilty of bad (in some cases very bad) judgement calls resulting in unnecessary loss of life (not just in 2010)? To accept that would need intelligence to come into play and dare I say the consumption of a lot of humble pie by the most extreme of followers?

Spin and lies. Cannot accept. It goes against the public history.