Shutdown is illegal, govt warns

[englishoak]

I would assume that it's illegal because Suthep has not said it would be a simple protest. He has called on people to block traffic in the entire city, cut electricity and water supply.

What part of that seems "legal" to you?

Demonstrations are disruptive. Not illegal. That's what seems legal to me. The water supply and electricity threats were directed at specific buildings I think. Yes they are illegal but the protests, despite the fact they will cause a lot of problems are not illegal.

Right, blocking all the traffic in a city is not illegal. How about you try it in London, Paris, New York. Let's see if they believe you that it's completely legal.

It's done a lot in Paris, especially by farmers. All demonstrations block traffic and cause disruption. It's a consequence of people exercising their democratic right to protest. Suthep may be a fascist loon, but this threatening BS that PT is coming out with is no different from his "only I'm right" intolerant attitude. People have the right to protest.

Dosn't mean its legal, there is a protest and then theres camping in a public area for weeks or putting up a stage without permits, messing with public services etc etc, im sure a dozen and more laws are consistently broken by protesters not least rioting.

Pretty normal for a gov to tell people this or that is illegal whoever is in and whatever country if it dissuades a few all the better. I have no idea what some here are whining about.

[canuckamuck]

Not that I am on either side, but the government could turn the shutdown to their advantage. All they have to do is allow the anti-dems to siege the city and in a very short time the people of Bangkok will turn against the anti-dems. They could also set up a temporary government seat in a more government friendly venue.

Edited January 5, 2014 by canuckamuck

[lovetotravel]

How can any of these government officials be taken seriously when some of them gave moral and financial support to the protesters that shut down Bangkok in 2010?

And how can they be taken seriously when they put 5 family members in top positions to be elected......It is not a government it is a Shinawatra enterprise

I'd rather have 5 members of the same family on the ballot, allowing people to have them "elected" than a non-elected "people's council".

Elections are always better than no elections, no matter who's on the ballot. People can vote "no" if they don't like the choices.

You're missing the bigger picture. The protests are about getting the corrupt politicians out (mainly the Shin clan), reforming the current political mess, and then having an election. Just ramming one through isn't going to solve anything other than allowing the current group to remain in power and enrich themselves at the expense of the average citizen.

We're in a catch 22 here. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[Thait Spot]

I would assume that it's illegal because Suthep has not said it would be a simple protest. He has called on people to block traffic in the entire city, cut electricity and water supply.

What part of that seems "legal" to you?

Demonstrations are disruptive. Not illegal. That's what seems legal to me. The water supply and electricity threats were directed at specific buildings I think. Yes they are illegal but the protests, despite the fact they will cause a lot of problems are not illegal.

Right, blocking all the traffic in a city is not illegal. How about you try it in London, Paris, New York. Let's see if they believe you that it's completely legal.

It's done a lot in Paris, especially by farmers. All demonstrations block traffic and cause disruption. It's a consequence of people exercising their democratic right to protest. Suthep may be a fascist loon, but this threatening BS that PT is coming out with is no different from his "only I'm right" intolerant attitude. People have the right to protest.

Dosn't mean its legal, there is a protest and then theres camping in a public area for weeks or putting up a stage without permits, messing with public services etc etc, im sure a dozen and more laws are consistently broken by protesters not least rioting.

Pretty normal for a gov to tell people this or that is illegal whoever is in and whatever country if it dissuades a few all the better. I have no idea what some here are whining about.

The police were the ones rioting and preventing the emergency services from doing their job. Are they in jail?

As I recall things the PDRC gave Yingluck the opportunity to end the protests by coming clean about the rice scam. She didn't take it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[fish fingers]

Not that I am on either side, but the government could turn the shutdown to their advantage. All they have to do is allow the anti-dems to siege the city and in a very short time the people of Bangkok will turn against the anti-dems. They could also set up a temporary government seat in a more government friendly venue.

"anti-dems" why not add "yellow shirt" or "rich elite"

these are the people of bangkok protesting btw, plus many more from outside.

Edited January 5, 2014 by fish fingers

[ManopY]

...

Yet their handling of the Dec 26th ruckus with their 'men in black' on rooftops clearly exacerbating the situation

...

The men in black on the rooftops were clearly unarmed as shown in the photos.

In case you're not aware, most if not all riot police around the world wear black. What do you want them to wear? Pink tutus?

You're basically saying that everyone with black shirts is evil?

You say that The men in black on the roof top (police) where unarmed!

Please have a look at those pictures!

You can clearly see the those weapons are rifles!

Click on them to zoom!

[Rich teacher]

Says a lot about their opposition though.

No doubt. You have one side that is being run by a crook on the run, and the other side being run by a bunch of incompetents. I guess for your average poor voter, you might as well get a few hundred baht for your vote.

Also, the opposition doesn't have near the vote buying network that Thaksin does. They probably need to step that up.

Actually the Dem coalition tried to used Newin Chidchob, (who was siphoning copious amounts of money from the Interior, Commerce & Transportation Departments) to outbid Thaksin in the North & North-east, but was spectacularly unsuccessful.

Voters may accept money easily, but changing their political allegiance is another issue.

[canuckamuck]

Not that I am on either side, but the government could turn the shutdown to their advantage. All they have to do is allow the anti-dems to siege the city and in a very short time the people of Bangkok will turn against the anti-dems. They could also set up a temporary government seat in a more government friendly venue.

"anti-dems" why not add "yellow shirt" or "rich elite"

these are the people of bangkok protesting btw, plus many more from outside.

Easier to say Anti-dems (maybe it AD is even easier). Their immediate goal is to end to the democratic process. And replace it with something that they can control. Anti-democratic is quite accurate.

[Emptyset]

I would assume that it's illegal because Suthep has not said it would be a simple protest. He has called on people to block traffic in the entire city, cut electricity and water supply.

What part of that seems "legal" to you?

Demonstrations are disruptive. Not illegal. That's what seems legal to me. The water supply and electricity threats were directed at specific buildings I think. Yes they are illegal but the protests, despite the fact they will cause a lot of problems are not illegal.

Right, blocking all the traffic in a city is not illegal. How about you try it in London, Paris, New York. Let's see if they believe you that it's completely legal.

I've been on a few big marches in London over the years (gulf war etc) which I guess caused huge disruption but I guess that is what a big demonstration does.. get over it

You have to get police permission for even a quiet local march these days in the UK. And seven days in advance for marches within a mile of parliament. Don't agree with that, but it's true. I also think protests should be disruptive to some degree otherwise it's usually pretty pointless. I'm sure if I agreed with the goal of Suthep's protests I'd be defending their proposed plans here. But I don't so whilst I'm all in favour of the right to demonstrate, I'll leave it to others to defend and justify Suthep's plans.

Anyway, I think it's fair to point out this 'shutdown' isn't the same as simple march, as jackrich says. Especially now Suthep has said he's going to move protest bases to government buildings. Pretty sure deliberately blocking the roads is a crime too, but relatively minor in the scheme of things. However, if protesters turn up and don't deliberately block roads or occupy government buildings etc, then yeah. It's not illegal. Peaceful protest is still permitted under the ISA.

[isawasnake]

Now more than ever, I think this country is a total joke. I think "third world" is high praise for the kingdom. The minds that run things here are somehow intellectually, totally bankrupt - unless it comes to food or how to extort/steal money.

This country is a really bad version of Lord of the Flies.

[Emptyset]

As I recall things the PDRC gave Yingluck the opportunity to end the protests by coming clean about the rice scam. She didn't take it.

Thai Spot, when was this and what would coming clean have entailed? Wonder if Suthep would've accepted protesters' demands to come clean about the unfinished police stations, the palm oil shortage and the deal with Newin, amongst other things, if the shoe was on the other foot?

[fish fingers]

Not that I am on either side, but the government could turn the shutdown to their advantage. All they have to do is allow the anti-dems to siege the city and in a very short time the people of Bangkok will turn against the anti-dems. They could also set up a temporary government seat in a more government friendly venue.

"anti-dems" why not add "yellow shirt" or "rich elite"

these are the people of bangkok protesting btw, plus many more from outside.

Easier to say Anti-dems (maybe it AD is even easier). Their immediate goal is to end to the democratic process. And replace it with something that they can control. Anti-democratic is quite accurate.

some people like to forget what brought the people out in the first place.

[noitom]

The sitting government should welcome protests and recommendations for change. They should put up aluminum parade barricades so as to provide protesters with a "designated area" to protest and walk. Anyone breaking through the barricades would be arrested and put in police vans and delivered to a holding area pre-established like a football field. This is a prescribed police procedure to secure public areas in times of demonstration.

[noitom]

The protesters should plan global demonstrations outside the Thai embassies in major cities to call attention to their case against a corrupt and inept government.

[canuckamuck]

Not that I am on either side, but the government could turn the shutdown to their advantage. All they have to do is allow the anti-dems to siege the city and in a very short time the people of Bangkok will turn against the anti-dems. They could also set up a temporary government seat in a more government friendly venue.

"anti-dems" why not add "yellow shirt" or "rich elite"

these are the people of bangkok protesting btw, plus many more from outside.

Easier to say Anti-dems (maybe it AD is even easier). Their immediate goal is to end to the democratic process. And replace it with something that they can control. Anti-democratic is quite accurate.

some people like to forget what brought the people out in the first place.

What brought them out was their inability to win by the rules. Not so hard to do what Thaksin did, The opposition could have started a party to fracture the northern stronghold. But they were too proud or too dumb.

[fish fingers]

win by the rules? like passing a sneakily altered Bill in the final Lower House vote at 4.25am while the nation was asleep, unaware of the coming political nightmare ...

I'm afraid Yingluck deserves what she gets.

[canuckamuck]

win by the rules? like passing a sneakily altered Bill in the final Lower House vote at 4.25am while the nation was asleep, unaware of the coming political nightmare ...

I'm afraid Yingluck deserves what she gets.

I wish they would all get what they deserve.

The biggest mistake was not winning elections, that's how you do it.

[fish fingers]

well, it looks like the Reds will shut down north Thailand on the 13th. I guess they didn't get their travel expenses paid this time.

Edited January 5, 2014 by fish fingers

[placidlake]

And these photos are not from the roof of the Ministry of Labour!

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[daboyz1]

What brought them out was their inability to win by the rules. Not so hard to do what Thaksin did, The opposition could have started a party to fracture the northern stronghold. But they were too proud or too dumb.

What brought them out was PTP trying to ram through an amnesty package for their paymaster at 4 am while also trying to change the constitution having to do with how Senators are elected/appointed. If they were brought out by their inability to win an election, they would've been out a year or two ago when they didn't win the last election.

An old-timer used to tell me "nothing good happens after midnight" I guess that goes for absolving your master of all previous legal sins as well.

[Publicus]

"Shutdown is illegal, govt warns"

Why is it against the law to join the protest? Annoying, disruptive, counter-productive, yes, all of these. But illegal? Is it against the law because it is against PT's wishes?

It's against the law because the leaders of the mobs in the streets have openly declared insurrection for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimately elected government and to prevent a legally called and scheduled election being conducted in accordance with the constitution.

The leaders of the insurrection have openly declared their intent to establish an arbitrarily anointed and still anonymous "People's Council" to rule absolutely over the nation after the negation of democracy and the constitutionally scheduled election.

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Citizens are responsible to themselves and to society to know these facts and to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions in either respect.

[Bluespunk]

"Shutdown is illegal, govt warns"

Why is it against the law to join the protest? Annoying, disruptive, counter-productive, yes, all of these. But illegal? Is it against the law because it is against PT's wishes?

It's against the law because the leaders of the mobs in the streets have openly declared insurrection for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimately elected government and to prevent a legally called and scheduled election being conducted in accordance with the constitution.

The leaders of the insurrection have openly declared their intent to establish an arbitrarily anointed and still anonymous "People's Council" to rule absolutely over the nation after the negation of democracy and the constitutionally scheduled election.

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Citizens are responsible to themselves and to society to know these facts and to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions in either respect.

None the less, it is still not illegal for people to protest. Suthep's fascist council and his goals are one thing, but people still have the right to protest. PT using the law to fit their needs as here and their inability to run the govt for the good of the country is why we are in this mess now. Edited January 5, 2014 by Bluespunk

[canuckamuck]

They may have a right to protest, but i would imagine a quick rule change will be in order if Suthep gets his council

[Publicus]

"Shutdown is illegal, govt warns"

Why is it against the law to join the protest? Annoying, disruptive, counter-productive, yes, all of these. But illegal? Is it against the law because it is against PT's wishes?

It's against the law because the leaders of the mobs in the streets have openly declared insurrection for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimately elected government and to prevent a legally called and scheduled election being conducted in accordance with the constitution.

The leaders of the insurrection have openly declared their intent to establish an arbitrarily anointed and still anonymous "People's Council" to rule absolutely over the nation after the negation of democracy and the constitutionally scheduled election.

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Citizens are responsible to themselves and to society to know these facts and to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions in either respect.

None the less, it is still not illegal for people to protest. Suthep's fascist council and his goals are one thing, but people still have the right to protest. PT using the law to fit their needs as here and their inability to run the govt for the good of the country is why we are in this mess now.

Then let the people vote in a legally called democratic election as scheduled and in accordance with the constitution.

I get the feeling here I'm talking to a gargoyle

.

[taff33]

How can any of these government officials be taken seriously when some of them gave moral and financial support to the protesters that shut down Bangkok in 2010?

As the saying goes 'i'ts water under the bridge'one must look forward not back wards.

[Spalpeen]

"Shutdown is illegal, govt warns"

Why is it against the law to join the protest? Annoying, disruptive, counter-productive, yes, all of these. But illegal? Is it against the law because it is against PT's wishes?

It's against the law because the leaders of the mobs in the streets have openly declared insurrection for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimately elected government and to prevent a legally called and scheduled election being conducted in accordance with the constitution.

The leaders of the insurrection have openly declared their intent to establish an arbitrarily anointed and still anonymous "People's Council" to rule absolutely over the nation after the negation of democracy and the constitutionally scheduled election.

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Citizens are responsible to themselves and to society to know these facts and to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions in either respect.

.

Absolutely! Agree 100%.. It hasn't occurred to Bluespunk and his ilk that if Dear Leader Suthep and his fascist Peoples Council take over they're not going to tolerate any red shirt anti government protests down at Democracy Monument. We know that for sure because Suthep is already facing murder charges in connection with his last stint in government.

Right now the opposition party in Bangladesh is also refusing to take part in elections. Bangladesh is not a country you want to be taking your example from.

[ginjag]

"Shutdown is illegal, govt warns"

Why is it against the law to join the protest? Annoying, disruptive, counter-productive, yes, all of these. But illegal? Is it against the law because it is against PT's wishes?

It's against the law because the leaders of the mobs in the streets have openly declared insurrection for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimately elected government and to prevent a legally called and scheduled election being conducted in accordance with the constitution.

The leaders of the insurrection have openly declared their intent to establish an arbitrarily anointed and still anonymous "People's Council" to rule absolutely over the nation after the negation of democracy and the constitutionally scheduled election.

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Citizens are responsible to themselves and to society to know these facts and to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions in either respect.

So we have to say again red shirt job in BKK--illegal ???? Then the said government had to act and got them out--at some cost but it was then violent before the army got involved.

Oh but now the same people say it is illegal----idiots have to be, due to short memory.

The last siege the reds admin thought they could do what they wanted--it was stopped rightfully. Now listen to the same people--illegal -amazing if your gullible .

[GentlemanJim]

Shutdown is illegal, govt warns

And so is stealing 30% from almost all Government contracts to put in the pockets of MP's, Ministers and Government Officials, So is giving a fugitive criminal his passport back, so was instigating riots and killings in 2010 etc etc etc. You reap what you sow Surapong, isn't karma a bitch.

I want to know, if this govt can come up with this remarkaable figures, one would think they would be able to come up with numbers about the rice scheme. Curious. Am I missing something here?

My thoughts exactly ! How do they come up with a figure that would be so subjective as 200 Billion yet cannot come up with an objective figure for the rice pledging scheme which merely requires somebody to count bags of rice, which should all be logged into each storage warehouse (i mean it must be as each storage warehouse is paid for the amount of rice they hold, and they must know how many cheques go out for that each month, therefore how much rice there is). The Government is a scam and it is clear that ream loads of instructions are arriving everyday from Thaksin of Arabia. It would be cool if Singapore or Malaysia were to raise the issue that they do not believe Thailand should be included in Asean next year as it is clear she is not ready.

Edited January 5, 2014 by GentlemanJim

[FangFerang]

I must say I have never been a fan of Suthep, but today I will join the protests. I will walk out of my living room, march down the hall, into the toilet and take a dump for deader leader Suthep. I strongly urge everyone else to come out and join me.

Bizarre and funny as your avatar.

[GentlemanJim]

"Shutdown is illegal, govt warns"

Why is it against the law to join the protest? Annoying, disruptive, counter-productive, yes, all of these. But illegal? Is it against the law because it is against PT's wishes?

It's against the law because the leaders of the mobs in the streets have openly declared insurrection for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimately elected government and to prevent a legally called and scheduled election being conducted in accordance with the constitution.

The leaders of the insurrection have openly declared their intent to establish an arbitrarily anointed and still anonymous "People's Council" to rule absolutely over the nation after the negation of democracy and the constitutionally scheduled election.

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Citizens are responsible to themselves and to society to know these facts and to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions in either respect.

Mmmm!

Any government of the world has the inherent right to defend itself against insurrection of any kind - it is the government's sovereign right to preserve and protect itself in the interests of the nation, its people, the constitution.

Couldn't agree more....BUT you clearly imply - unless you are Dems and those guilty of insurrection are Reds,( as your posting history on here would display) is that about it or are there anymore caveats to put on it?