Protest leader vows to eliminate Thaksin regime

[h90]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Check the facts and constitution. Thaksin had at this time an illegal one party government (not different than North Korea). So it can be discussed if the coup was even a coup....

The only thing to do, when the care taker period expires, is to inform the king who has than some options. (the same is in many countries just often it is the president instead of the king).

So hero Thaksin broke the "peoples constitution" which the red shirts defend all the time unless the brake it themself.

[Artisi]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Do you blindly believe everything reported in Wikipedia, for your interest, in academia Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source and cannot be cited as a reliable reference - ever wondered why?

[whybother]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Do you blindly believe everything reported in Wikipedia, for your interest, in academia Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source and cannot be cited as a reliable reference - ever wondered why?

In this case it's not an issue of whether wikipedia is right or wrong. It's more about the relevance to the discussion.

Yes. There were elections in 2005 and 2006. That doesn't change the fact that Thaksin wasn't the elected PM at the time of the coup, and that Abhisit was elected PM in parliament and wasn't appointed by the courts.

[waza]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Well done moradave you learnt how to research. From the same source you quoted..........

"Thaksin announced on 4 April 2006 that he would not accept the post of Prime Minister after Parliament reconvened, but would continue as Caretaker Prime Minister until then.

He then delegated his functions to Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Wannasathit, moved out of Government House, and went on vacation."

"After taking a one-month leave, Thai Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra returned to work at Government House Monday, convening a security meeting dealing with the growing violence in the country's three southernmost provinces of Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat."

Without a sitting Parliament, Thai Rak Thai MPs are in disarray.........How long can Thaksin sustain his role as a caretaker prime minister, which has absurdly exceeded 90 days - the time period during which a new election must be held after the end of the House session as required by the Constitution? http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/07/07/opinion/opinion_30008188.php

The coup occurred 5 months later.

Edited November 22, 2013 by waza

[ThaiSETtrader]

Back to the subject of the article.

Lets make a comparison -

I wonder what would happen in the U.K if a Labour government that had been voted for overwhelming by the people and had won all elections since 2001, was ousted by conservative / establishment alliance that proposed to suspend democracy and install a royally appointed government for the next five years or so?

Anyone who thinks that a dissolution of the house is a good idea, should consider what would happen after that. It will not solve anything and will only lead to more problems much much worse than today.

Yes, this PTP government is corrupt and has their own agenda but is the alternative much better?

The only way I can see to move this country forward is for the democrat / establishment alliance to retreat and focus their efforts on the next election where they can offer some policies that will entice the electorate to vote for them. This would give the Thai people a genuine choice at the next election and strengthen democracy.

Democracy, as dysfunctional as it is in Thailand, needs to be respected.

If all sides respect the democratic process, the country can move forward. The endless cycle of coups (military or judicial or otherwise) has to end and will only result in more unrest.

We should also remember that Thailand is relatively new to democracy and the fist 100 years or so of democracy in western nations was hardly plain sailing.

@thaisettrader

Edited November 22, 2013 by ThaiSETtrader

[moradave]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Well done moradave you learnt how to research. From the same source you quoted..........

"Thaksin announced on 4 April 2006 that he would not accept the post of Prime Minister after Parliament reconvened, but would continue as Caretaker Prime Minister until then.

He then delegated his functions to Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Wannasathit, moved out of Government House, and went on vacation."

"After taking a one-month leave, Thai Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra returned to work at Government House Monday, convening a security meeting dealing with the growing violence in the country's three southernmost provinces of Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat."

Without a sitting Parliament, Thai Rak Thai MPs are in disarray.........How long can Thaksin sustain his role as a caretaker prime minister, which has absurdly exceeded 90 days - the time period during which a new election must be held after the end of the House session as required by the Constitution? http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/07/07/opinion/opinion_30008188.php

The coup occurred 5 months later.

Are you saying that The Nation is a more reliable source than Wikipedia?

And does all of this justify a coup when new elections have been scheduled for October? Or is the coup because new elections have been scheduled for October?

If there is a better general source of information on the net than Wikipedia, I would like to know what it is.

[gemini81]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Jeez Dave..welcome to Thailand, time to do some research, and not wikipedia, thats like using urban dictionary to find the definition of Obama.

[thaicbr]

 

 

 

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

 2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

 

 

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

 

 

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

 

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

 

Well done moradave you learnt how to research.  From the same source you quoted..........

 

"Thaksin announced on 4 April 2006 that he would not accept the post of Prime Minister after Parliament reconvened, but would continue as Caretaker Prime Minister until then.

He then delegated his functions to Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Wannasathit, moved out of Government House, and went on vacation."

 

"After taking a one-month leave, Thai Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra returned to work at Government House Monday, convening a security meeting dealing with the growing violence in the country's three southernmost provinces of Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat."

 

Without a sitting Parliament, Thai Rak Thai MPs are in disarray.........How long can Thaksin sustain his role as a caretaker prime minister, which has absurdly exceeded 90 days - the time period during which a new election must be held after the end of the House session as required by the Constitution?  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/07/07/opinion/opinion_30008188.php

 

The coup occurred 5 months later.

 

 

Are you saying that The Nation is a more reliable source than Wikipedia?

And does all of this justify a coup when new elections have been scheduled for October? Or is the coup because new elections have been scheduled for October?

 

If there is a better general source of information on the net than Wikipedia, I would like to know what it is.

No. He's saying read the whole bloody thing. Then go get some more info to back it up and read that as well. It boils down to Thaksin was NOT PM at the time of the Coup. He was caretaker PM and had been for to long. He should have called an election within 90 days of dissolution.

Sent from my phone with the app thingy.

[thaicbr]

He's achieved so much in the 3 weeks or so...all with no violence..no-one hurt (that I know of)....got bad legislation proposals quashed...gave an incompetent and corrupt government a major shake up.....gave TS (and 25000 others) a big set-back in his bid for freedom......good on him I say!

He is a seditionist wanting to overthrow an elected government by force. This is an act of treason, and should be punished accordingly. There is no "Thaksin" government. Thaksin's sister does not make it his government. He is a convicted felon living in exile.

Good grief.. I have never ever met someone on here that had such opaque vision.

Phua Thai is Thaksins political tool http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pheu_Thai_Party

He owns it, runs it and is in control of it. It has been stated many times in Thai and ENGLISH PRESS BY HIMSELF and others.

Suthep is also an idiot, a politician of the old school that Thailand would be best done with BUT he was careful to state Thaksin regime.. Not the government.

No matter how much control Thaksin has over Pheu Thai, it is still the people's government that was elected. Only the people can, and should, change it.

Unless they are breaking the law or constitution. I agree.

By the way it would be nice if they ACTED like the peoples government rather than the PERSONS GOVERNMENT.

More PEOPLE DIDN'T vote for PTP than did!

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_general_election,_2011 please read all of it and do some basic math.

Sent from my phone with the app thingy.

Edited November 22, 2013 by thaicbr

[moradave]

Following is from Wikipedia re Thaksin being elected in 2005:

2005 re-election campaign[

Under the slogans "Four Years of Repair – Four years of Reconstruction" and "Building Opportunities", Thaksin and the TRT won landslide victories in the February 2005 elections, sweeping 374 out of 500 seats in Parliament. The election had the highest voter turnout in Thai history.

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Jeez Dave..welcome to Thailand, time to do some research, and not wikipedia, thats like using urban dictionary to find the definition of Obama.

I think you are attacking the messenger, instead of the message. OK, give me a better general source of info on the net than Wikipedia

[whybother]

I think you are attacking the messenger, instead of the message. OK, give me a better general source of info on the net than Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a good general source of information, but not always correct, and not always complete.

It is always good to post relevant quotes from wikipedia when replying on a subject though.

[thaicbr]

Jeez Dave..welcome to Thailand, time to do some research, and not wikipedia, thats like using urban dictionary to find the definition of Obama.

I think you are attacking the messenger, instead of the message. OK, give me a better general source of info on the net than Wikipedia

Wiki is ok BUT Amsterdam had/has cleaned up and sanitized many Thaksin mentions and demonized some Democrat mentions.

so it pays to check the info, if possible. OH and read the whole thing.

[moradave]

Jeez Dave..welcome to Thailand, time to do some research, and not wikipedia, thats like using urban dictionary to find the definition of Obama.

I think you are attacking the messenger, instead of the message. OK, give me a better general source of info on the net than Wikipedia

Wiki is ok BUT Amsterdam had/has cleaned up and sanitized many Thaksin mentions and demonized some Democrat mentions.

so it pays to check the info, if possible. OH and read the whole thing.

I did read tthe whole thing on Wiki. I am not a researcher, and I do not know what Amsterdam has done to the info on Wiki. I feel it is better to use short quotes to illustrate a point on a forum such as this.

[whybother]

I did read tthe whole thing on Wiki. I am not a researcher, and I do not know what Amsterdam has done to the info on Wiki. I feel it is better to use short quotes to illustrate a point on a forum such as this.

It would be good if you could clarify what points you were trying to illustrate.

[Thait Spot]

Now I'm not looking for some smart Alec to give me a Google map. But where oh where is Amsterdam when his favourite family is raping the posterior off democracy?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Artisi]

Jeez Dave..welcome to Thailand, time to do some research, and not wikipedia, thats like using urban dictionary to find the definition of Obama.

I think you are attacking the messenger, instead of the message. OK, give me a better general source of info on the net than Wikipedia

Wiki is ok BUT Amsterdam had/has cleaned up and sanitized many Thaksin mentions and demonized some Democrat mentions.

so it pays to check the info, if possible. OH and read the whole thing.

Hence my previous comment, regarding believing everything you read on Wiki.

[waza]

Are you seriously not aware that there were elections in 2006?

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the 2006 election:

After Thailand's April 2006 elections were declared invalid by the Constitutional Court, it was decided that new elections would be held on 15 October 2006. Due to delays in the nomination of a new election committee the election were likely to be moved to November, but then cancelled indefinitely after the military's overthrow of the Thai government.

Well done moradave you learnt how to research. From the same source you quoted..........

"Thaksin announced on 4 April 2006 that he would not accept the post of Prime Minister after Parliament reconvened, but would continue as Caretaker Prime Minister until then.

He then delegated his functions to Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Wannasathit, moved out of Government House, and went on vacation."

"After taking a one-month leave, Thai Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra returned to work at Government House Monday, convening a security meeting dealing with the growing violence in the country's three southernmost provinces of Pattani, Yala, and Narathiwat."

Without a sitting Parliament, Thai Rak Thai MPs are in disarray.........How long can Thaksin sustain his role as a caretaker prime minister, which has absurdly exceeded 90 days - the time period during which a new election must be held after the end of the House session as required by the Constitution? http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/07/07/opinion/opinion_30008188.php

The coup occurred 5 months later.

Are you saying that The Nation is a more reliable source than Wikipedia?

And does all of this justify a coup when new elections have been scheduled for October? Or is the coup because new elections have been scheduled for October?

If there is a better general source of information on the net than Wikipedia, I would like to know what it is.

Of course it is, to write an article for the Nation first you must be a journalist, the article must be written in accordance within accepted legal and professional guidelines and standards, then your article will be vetted by an editor, then its open to public scrutiny. Whilst anyone can write facts, fables or outright lies on wiki with very little overview and punishment for misleading.

Read above the coup was because Thaksin was the caretaker PM of and illegal caretaker government that was attempting to change both Thai laws and the constitution to retrospectively make his illegal, unconstitutional acts legal and other nefarious machination that we cant discuss on this forum, while tens of thousands of protestor had paralysed the Thai economy and were loosing their lives in protest against him.

Now stop your baiting

Edited November 22, 2013 by waza

[billd766]

Then the question to this protest leaders : why the majority of Thai people's chosen PM Yinluck by Democratic election as There's political leader of Thailand !!??

To put you back on track NOBODY from the public voted for Yingluck at all.

She is a party list MP and was in the #1 slot because her brother Thaksin put her there and then told ALL the PTP MPs to vote for her as PM and who among them would dare to disobey the master.

It was a private party vote and as Thaksin owns the PTP lock, stock and two smoking barrels his was the ONLY vote that counted. Not the MPs and certainly NOT the majority of the Thai people, they had NO say in it at all.

Perhaps you should communicate your information to Reuters (and indeed every other news agency domestic and international)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/03/us-thailand-election-idUSTRE76013T20110703

Otherwise there is a danger you would be seen as just another demented old nutjob (and I mean that caringly)

Thank you kindly for your concern.

Can you please tell me exactly which constituency Yingluck represents, how many of the hai people voted for her, who stood against her, how long she campaigned for them and what her policied were?

If she is NOT a constituency MP then she must be a party list MP, selected and nominated by the PTP party.

If that is correct then she was voted in by the PTP party MPs and therefore NOT by the Thai public at all.

Who proposed her to be a party list MP and #1 at that. Why it was big brother Thaksin (I am finished with politics in Thailand forever) himself that did that.

Of course he only "advised" the party and who would argue with such good advice coming from a pillar of Thai society?

Would you please carefully read my reply and tell me honestly if and where I am incorrect?

Thank you so much.

Signed another demented old nutjob.

I am old so I do agree with you there.

[billd766]

I think you are attacking the messenger, instead of the message. OK, give me a better general source of info on the net than Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a good general source of information, but not always correct, and not always complete.

It is always good to post relevant quotes from wikipedia when replying on a subject though.

Very true.

[moradave]

Then the question to this protest leaders : why the majority of Thai people's chosen PM Yinluck by Democratic election as There's political leader of Thailand !!??

To put you back on track NOBODY from the public voted for Yingluck at all.

She is a party list MP and was in the #1 slot because her brother Thaksin put her there and then told ALL the PTP MPs to vote for her as PM and who among them would dare to disobey the master.

It was a private party vote and as Thaksin owns the PTP lock, stock and two smoking barrels his was the ONLY vote that counted. Not the MPs and certainly NOT the majority of the Thai people, they had NO say in it at all.

Perhaps you should communicate your information to Reuters (and indeed every other news agency domestic and international)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/03/us-thailand-election-idUSTRE76013T20110703

Otherwise there is a danger you would be seen as just another demented old nutjob (and I mean that caringly)

Thank you kindly for your concern.

Can you please tell me exactly which constituency Yingluck represents, how many of the hai people voted for her, who stood against her, how long she campaigned for them and what her policied were?

If she is NOT a constituency MP then she must be a party list MP, selected and nominated by the PTP party.

If that is correct then she was voted in by the PTP party MPs and therefore NOT by the Thai public at all.

Who proposed her to be a party list MP and #1 at that. Why it was big brother Thaksin (I am finished with politics in Thailand forever) himself that did that.

Of course he only "advised" the party and who would argue with such good advice coming from a pillar of Thai society?

Would you please carefully read my reply and tell me honestly if and where I am incorrect?

Thank you so much.

Signed another demented old nutjob.

I am old so I do agree with you there.

In regard to Abhisit being elected democratically, I ask this question:

“Was he elected by a plurality vote by all the Thai voting

People for either himself or his party?”

The answer is no.

Ask the same question about Yingluck.

The answer is yes.

I rest my case.

Edited November 23, 2013 by moradave

[JAG]

Sadly my friend you are wasting your time. Most on this forum reject the views of the Thai electorate as irrelevant.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[moradave]

Sadly my friend you are wasting your time. Most on this forum reject the views of the Thai electorate as irrelevant.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

So if you don't agree with a majority on this forum, just shut up and go away.

I feel the views of the Thai electorate are relevant.

What is a forum for if not to discuss differing points of view?

[billd766]

Quote moradave post #113

In regard to Abhisit being elected democratically, I ask this question:

“Was he elected by a plurality vote by all the Thai voting

People for either himself or his party?”

The answer is no.

Ask the same question about Yingluck.

The answer is yes.

I rest my case.

My response

Firstly this is NOT about Abhisit but Yingluck.

However just to keep you happy, Abhisit WAS elected by his party and does NOT represent any constituents.

NO she was not elected by any of the Thai people other than those of the PTP.

In both cases the PM is elected by the party which gains the most seats and CAN form a government

If I am wrong then please tell me which constituency in Thailand she represents and what were the voting number results.

If you can prove me wrong then you win your case, if not you lose.

However Abhisit is NOT the PM and is not supposedly running the country.

Yingluck is only a de jure PM while her brother Thaksin IS the de facto PM and IS running the country illegally from overseas.

[moradave]

Quote moradave post #113

In regard to Abhisit being elected democratically, I ask this question:

“Was he elected by a plurality vote by all the Thai voting

People for either himself or his party?”

The answer is no.

Ask the same question about Yingluck.

The answer is yes.

I rest my case.

My response

Firstly this is NOT about Abhisit but Yingluck.

However just to keep you happy, Abhisit WAS elected by his party and does NOT represent any constituents.

NO she was not elected by any of the Thai people other than those of the PTP.

In both cases the PM is elected by the party which gains the most seats and CAN form a government

If I am wrong then please tell me which constituency in Thailand she represents and what were the voting number results.

If you can prove me wrong then you win your case, if not you lose.

However Abhisit is NOT the PM and is not supposedly running the country.

Yingluck is only a de jure PM while her brother Thaksin IS the de facto PM and IS running the country illegally from overseas.

From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_general_election,_2011

Leader Yingluck Shinawatra

Party Pheu Thai

Leader since 16 May 2011

Leader's seat Party List (#1)

Seats before 189

Seats won 265

Seat change 76

Popular vote 15,744,190

Percentage 48.41%

Abhisit Vejjajiva

Party Democrat

Leader since 6 March 2005

Leader's seat Party List (#1)

Seats before 173

Seats won 159

Seat change 14

Popular vote 11,433,762

Percentage 35.15%

If Thaksin is illegally running the country from overseas, where is the criminal indictment in a court of law.

Once again, I rest my case.

Edited November 24, 2013 by moradave

[Jay Sata]

Lots of talk about the electorate but no mention of the money they receive for their votes.

Anyone who has spent a long time in Thailand has seen the buying of country peoples votes.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[billd766]

Quote moradave post #113

In regard to Abhisit being elected democratically, I ask this question:

“Was he elected by a plurality vote by all the Thai voting

People for either himself or his party?”

The answer is no.

Ask the same question about Yingluck.

The answer is yes.

I rest my case.

My response

Firstly this is NOT about Abhisit but Yingluck.

However just to keep you happy, Abhisit WAS elected by his party and does NOT represent any constituents.

NO she was not elected by any of the Thai people other than those of the PTP.

In both cases the PM is elected by the party which gains the most seats and CAN form a government

If I am wrong then please tell me which constituency in Thailand she represents and what were the voting number results.

If you can prove me wrong then you win your case, if not you lose.

However Abhisit is NOT the PM and is not supposedly running the country.

Yingluck is only a de jure PM while her brother Thaksin IS the de facto PM and IS running the country illegally from overseas.

From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_general_election,_2011

Leader Yingluck Shinawatra

Party Pheu Thai

Leader since 16 May 2011

Leader's seat Party List (#1)

Seats before 189

Seats won 265

Seat change 76

Popular vote 15,744,190

Percentage 48.41%

Abhisit Vejjajiva

Party Democrat

Leader since 6 March 2005

Leader's seat Party List (#1)

Seats before 173

Seats won 159

Seat change 14

Popular vote 11,433,762

Percentage 35.15%

If Thaksin is illegally running the country from overseas, where is the criminal indictment in a court of law.

Once again, I rest my case.

Once again you got it wrong.

Yingluck Shinawatra is NOT the leader of the PTP. He is called Jarupong Ruangsuwan

She is NOT the Secretary General of the PTP. He is called Phumtham Wechayachai.

She is NOT the Party Spokesman for the PTP. He is called Prompong Nopparith.

She IS the #1 party list MP and she IS the PM, real or clone, nobody really cares.

The party slogan for the PTP is Slogan ขอคิดใหม่ ทำใหม่ เพื่อไทยทุกคน... อีกครั้ง

"Let us rethink and redo for all Thais...Again"

Obviously a slogan which is ignored especially the part about redo for all Thais.

Don't you EVER do ANY resrarch before you post.

Go to Google and look up any of the posts about PTP, Yingluck ot Thaksin and read before you write yet another long obfuscating and incorrect answer and please try to keep on topic.

Oh and the bit about the criminal indictment for Thaksin must come from the government who have yet to revoke his illegally obtained passport, or to bring him back to Thailand for bail jumping and to answer other offences. That of course won't happen with the PTP running the show.

Of course there was nothing stopping him from flying to Thailand over the weekend and standing on the stage next to Suthep and proclaiming his innocence either. But that would take courage and morals sadly found lacking in Thaksin or the PTP.

[moradave]

Quote moradave post #113

In regard to Abhisit being elected democratically, I ask this question:

“Was he elected by a plurality vote by all the Thai voting

People for either himself or his party?”

The answer is no.

Ask the same question about Yingluck.

The answer is yes.

I rest my case.

My response

Firstly this is NOT about Abhisit but Yingluck.

However just to keep you happy, Abhisit WAS elected by his party and does NOT represent any constituents.

NO she was not elected by any of the Thai people other than those of the PTP.

In both cases the PM is elected by the party which gains the most seats and CAN form a government

If I am wrong then please tell me which constituency in Thailand she represents and what were the voting number results.

If you can prove me wrong then you win your case, if not you lose.

However Abhisit is NOT the PM and is not supposedly running the country.

Yingluck is only a de jure PM while her brother Thaksin IS the de facto PM and IS running the country illegally from overseas.

From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_general_election,_2011

Leader Yingluck Shinawatra

Party Pheu Thai

Leader since 16 May 2011

Leader's seat Party List (#1)

Seats before 189

Seats won 265

Seat change 76

Popular vote 15,744,190

Percentage 48.41%

Abhisit Vejjajiva

Party Democrat

Leader since 6 March 2005

Leader's seat Party List (#1)

Seats before 173

Seats won 159

Seat change 14

Popular vote 11,433,762

Percentage 35.15%

If Thaksin is illegally running the country from overseas, where is the criminal indictment in a court of law.

Once again, I rest my case.

Once again you got it wrong.

Yingluck Shinawatra is NOT the leader of the PTP. He is called Jarupong Ruangsuwan

She is NOT the Secretary General of the PTP. He is called Phumtham Wechayachai.

She is NOT the Party Spokesman for the PTP. He is called Prompong Nopparith.

She IS the #1 party list MP and she IS the PM, real or clone, nobody really cares.

The party slogan for the PTP is Slogan ขอคิดใหม่ ทำใหม่ เพื่อไทยทุกคน... อีกครั้ง

"Let us rethink and redo for all Thais...Again"

Obviously a slogan which is ignored especially the part about redo for all Thais.

Don't you EVER do ANY resrarch before you post.

Go to Google and look up any of the posts about PTP, Yingluck ot Thaksin and read before you write yet another long obfuscating and incorrect answer and please try to keep on topic.

Oh and the bit about the criminal indictment for Thaksin must come from the government who have yet to revoke his illegally obtained passport, or to bring him back to Thailand for bail jumping and to answer other offences. That of course won't happen with the PTP running the show.

Of course there was nothing stopping him from flying to Thailand over the weekend and standing on the stage next to Suthep and proclaiming his innocence either. But that would take courage and morals sadly found lacking in Thaksin or the PTP.

I did research. That is why I am quoting Wikipedia. I am only reporting facts as I found them from reliable sources. Are you? If Thaksin is running the government illegally, is bail jumping, has an illegal passport, and the Thailand government will do nothing, why hasn't he been arrested by Interpol and indicted before the World Court?

If I am off-topic, I am sorry.

Edited November 25, 2013 by moradave

[whybother]

I did research. That is why I am quoting Wikipedia. I am only reporting facts as I found them from reliable sources. Are you? If Thaksin is running the government illegally, is bail jumping, has an illegal passport, and the Thailand government will do nothing, why hasn't he been arrested by Interpol and indicted before the World Court?

If I am off-topic, I am sorry.

Thaksin skipped bail in 2008.

His passport was cancelled by the government in 2009.

His passport was re-issued by this government and personally delivered by Foreign Minister. The government have been asked a number of times how and why they issued a passport to a fugitive.

I think you need to do some research about the "World Court" if you think they would look at this case.

[moradave]

I did research. That is why I am quoting Wikipedia. I am only reporting facts as I found them from reliable sources. Are you? If Thaksin is running the government illegally, is bail jumping, has an illegal passport, and the Thailand government will do nothing, why hasn't he been arrested by Interpol and indicted before the World Court?

If I am off-topic, I am sorry.

Thaksin skipped bail in 2008.

His passport was cancelled by the government in 2009.

His passport was re-issued by this government and personally delivered by Foreign Minister. The government have been asked a number of times how and why they issued a passport to a fugitive.

I think you need to do some research about the "World Court" if you think they would look at this case.

I agree with you that the "World Court" will probably do nothing.

If his passport was reissued, how can it be invalid?

Then the only way to bring Thaksin to justice is through regime change, which is exactly what Suthep is trying to do. I maintain that, in a democracy, the correct way to do this is through free and open elections, not civil disobedience which might lead to violence.