ggold Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellodolly Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 You win some and you lose some. They say justice is blind, who ever came up with those words most have lived in Thailand. Seems the only winners every time regardless of outcome are the lawyers! Yes and unfortunately the tax payers are paying the bills for the Governments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellodolly Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! True and it is driving a wedge in between them selves. they now have red shirts who want Thaksin out of politics. In other words let Yingluck carry her own golf bag. That would be a sight to sell tickets to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tingtongteesood Posted February 13, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 13, 2014 Suteb wants to overthrow the 'The Shinawat regime' - he doesn't mind if PT are in goverment as long as Taksin, family, cronies, money politics is out and real democracy has a chance of then working as it should...RIGHT ON ! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellodolly Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting. "Section 70. Every person shall have a duty to uphold the nation, religions, the King and the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution. Section 71. Every person shall have a duty to defend the country, to protect benefits of the nation and to obey the law. Section 72. Every person shall have a duty to exercise his right to vote at an election." Full text here. Seems to me that Section 71 indicates that if you don't protest against the corruption you are not doing your duty. For Thai's of course we expats sit on the side and make a wide variety of comments. Sorry I did not read the full text but does it say you are breaking the law if you do not vote. Or even if you take money for your vote it is OK. My mind works different than a lawyers so I have difficulty in understanding their writing. Some times I even loose the intent of it they throw in so many words that are not necessary. If I was to write it I would simply say you are breaking the law if you don't vote. Or it is not mandatory to vote. Also Your vote will not count if it is found to have been paid for. Reminds me of that old joke I heard in Canada. What do you call 100 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean. Answer a good start. Spelling Edited February 13, 2014 by hellodolly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiok Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) Suthep has said many times that he does not want the election to go ahead but the court has decided that he does not want to stop the democratic proccess. the protest is against election Before Reform .. get your facts right! Edited February 13, 2014 by shiok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Anybody actually read this? "The court said Suthep and his group might have committed many other violations, such as breaking criminal laws, but said it was the responsibility of agencies under the justice system to charge them under the relevant laws. " The court is correct. They have made a judgement on the charges laid before them, over which they have jurisdiction. The police should enforce the law, and provide reports of breakages to the AG's office who will decide whether to prosecute or not. If proceeding they should decide under which law(s) prosecutions will be sought which will determine which court has jurisdictions. We all know the system here is flawed. This is made worse by numerous politicians opening their mouths and spouting off all sorts of threats, and people like Tarit who makes the law up as he goes along to suit what he's been told to do. Just like a soap - bears little relation to reality, but here its difficult to find reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Suthep has said many times that he does not want the election to go ahead but the court has decided that he does not want to stop the democratic proccess. He isn't against the democratic process which is why the courts threw it out!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggold Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! True and it is driving a wedge in between them selves. they now have red shirts who want Thaksin out of politics. In other words let Yingluck carry her own golf bag. That would be a sight to sell tickets to watch. I liked the headline a couple days ago where it stated that PT had rejected Thaksins idea of talks! I wondered of there was a power play going on within PTP maybe some are getting fed up with the Shinclan grip on on the party!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binjalin Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! by the ammart yes... but they will still win any democratic election and eventually Thailand WILL change for the better away from this feudalistic system which so many TVF posters seems to endorse and support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggold Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! by the ammart yes... but they will still win any democratic election and eventually Thailand WILL change for the better away from this feudalistic system which so many TVF posters seems to endorse and support by the ammart yes, I think you'll find the rice farmers will be slapping a few faces soon too! So not just by the amart but by the people! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRSoul Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting. If you can read those 3, what's stopping you from reading 68? Selective blindness? I see why you skipped 69. BTW isn't "you all" an indicator of red-neck-ness? Edited February 13, 2014 by JRSoul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binjalin Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 by the ammart yes, I think you'll find the rice farmers will be slapping a few faces soon too! So not just by the amart but by the people! true they have screwed up the Rice gig but this thread is about the court case - anyway they will still win any election as the vast majority of Thais do not want the ammart elitist Dems in power - that's democracy folks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ratcatcher Posted February 13, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! by the ammart yes... but they will still win any democratic election and eventually Thailand WILL change for the better away from this feudalistic system which so many TVF posters seems to endorse and support You seem to be obsessed with the "ammart". The protests in Bangkok are far more than a few thousand of the elite, ammart families. Ordinary working class people are fed up with the way the Thaksin machine, and that is exactly what it is, has been creaming off billions of baht over the last few years. If the Puea Thai Party could cut itself loose from the Shinawatra influence, ( an almost impossible task I agree), then I'm sure there would be less resistance from the people presently protesting. Get rid of the Shin clan and get some genuine hard working people to run for office would be a start. However this discussion is pointless as long as the Puea Thai continues to exercise its power in the "feudalistic" red village system where the local lord of the manor (kamnan) tells people what to do and how to vote. Thaksin's feudal system is merely a smaller, yet still powerful, version of the system you so detest. The wealthy Thaksin cronies exercising power over millions of poorer farmers and others in those areas, for their own financial benefit.. Sorry, forgot to mention Yingluck. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggold Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 by the ammart yes, I think you'll find the rice farmers will be slapping a few faces soon too! So not just by the amart but by the people! true they have screwed up the Rice gig but this thread is about the court case - anyway they will still win any election as the vast majority of Thais do not want the ammart elitist Dems in power - that's democracy folks! that's funny considering it looks increasingly likely that Yingluk and company will be before the courts on charges of corruption over the rice scam!- That's democracy folks...... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawker9000 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting. "Section 70. Every person shall have a duty to uphold the nation, religions, the King and the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution. Section 71. Every person shall have a duty to defend the country, to protect benefits of the nation and to obey the law. Section 72. Every person shall have a duty to exercise his right to vote at an election." Full text here. Seems to me that Section 71 indicates that if you don't protest against the corruption you are not doing your duty. For Thai's of course we expats sit on the side and make a wide variety of comments. Sorry I did not read the full text but does it say you are breaking the law if you do not vote. Or even if you take money for your vote it is OK. My mind works different than a lawyers so I have difficulty in understanding their writing. Some times I even loose the intent of it they throw in so many words that are not necessary. If I was to write it I would simply say you are breaking the law if you don't vote. Or it is not mandatory to vote. Also Your vote will not count if it is found to have been paid for. Reminds me of that old joke I heard in Canada. What do you call 100 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean. Answer a good start. Spelling You might be right, but I'm not sure the word "duty" means that it's actually a violation of law NOT to, in the sense of it being prosecutable in the absence of some specific implementing statute. I say MIGHT - the constitution will have been drafted in Thai of course, making this a translation, putting a LOT of weight on whatever thai word or phrase was translated into the English word "duty"... People seize on these translations of thai documents at the detail level and tend to run amok. These sections also all contain the words "every person", but obviously a foreigner in the country is a "person", but not expected or able to vote. Has anyone in Thailand ever actually been prosecuted for failure to vote? What exactly does it even mean to have a duty to "uphold the religions..."? And so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 by the ammart yes, I think you'll find the rice farmers will be slapping a few faces soon too! So not just by the amart but by the people! true they have screwed up the Rice gig but this thread is about the court case - anyway they will still win any election as the vast majority of Thais do not want the ammart elitist Dems in power - that's democracy folks! that's funny considering it looks increasingly likely that Yingluk and company will be before the courts on charges of corruption over the rice scam!- That's democracy folks...... Quite!! Just where they are going to find 300 eligible candidates in such little time for the election will be a physical impossibility (even for Thaksin). It will be the reds blocking the next election in attempting to stop the 'ammart fascists' getting into power through democratic means - what will their excuse be on this?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting. "Section 70. Every person shall have a duty to uphold the nation, religions, the King and the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution. Section 71. Every person shall have a duty to defend the country, to protect benefits of the nation and to obey the law. Section 72. Every person shall have a duty to exercise his right to vote at an election." Full text here. Seems to me that Section 71 indicates that if you don't protest against the corruption you are not doing your duty. For Thai's of course we expats sit on the side and make a wide variety of comments. Sorry I did not read the full text but does it say you are breaking the law if you do not vote. Or even if you take money for your vote it is OK. My mind works different than a lawyers so I have difficulty in understanding their writing. Some times I even loose the intent of it they throw in so many words that are not necessary. If I was to write it I would simply say you are breaking the law if you don't vote. Or it is not mandatory to vote. Also Your vote will not count if it is found to have been paid for. Reminds me of that old joke I heard in Canada. What do you call 100 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean. Answer a good start. Spelling You might be right, but I'm not sure the word "duty" means that it's actually a violation of law NOT to, in the sense of it being prosecutable in the absence of some specific implementing statute. I say MIGHT - the constitution will have been drafted in Thai of course, making this a translation, putting a LOT of weight on whatever thai word or phrase was translated into the English word "duty"... People seize on these translations of thai documents at the detail level and tend to run amok. These sections also all contain the words "every person", but obviously a foreigner in the country is a "person", but not expected or able to vote. Has anyone in Thailand ever actually been prosecuted for failure to vote? What exactly does it even mean to have a duty to "uphold the religions..."? And so on. What, as in.........you thought it your duty to point this out even though you weren't obliged to!!! So basically. people don't have to vote if they don't want to, although they are being ever so naughty boys and girls in not doing so!!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish fingers Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 If the rice farmer do make it to Bangkok in numbers, I imagine they will be pretty angry, and might end up on the receiving end of a nasty police hiding - cue the army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
than Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 This is a good reason now for PRDC lawyer to ask different court to drop charge for sedition and treason..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 (edited) So just what do you have to say and do to violate sec 68??? You probably need some guns, some goons and to actually get off your butt and try to overthrow something or at least advocate violent measures. Talking crap on stage does not constitute a credible threat, although he has almost certainly broken a truckload of other laws. Of course the loony brigade of Thaivisa are still going to insist he is a "terrorist". Edited February 13, 2014 by Crushdepth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Anybody actually read this? "The court said Suthep and his group might have committed many other violations, such as breaking criminal laws, but said it was the responsibility of agencies under the justice system to charge them under the relevant laws. " Yep, read it ...... But PTP only know the Sledgehammer-Walnut technique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny! Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election. I think the reds are getting more slaps than most recently! by the ammart yes... but they will still win any democratic election and eventually Thailand WILL change for the better away from this feudalistic system which so many TVF posters seems to endorse and support Do you seriously believe that Thaksin is not part of the feudalistic system and its patronage networks? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scamper Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 The right to protest - whatever Chalerm says - is a constitutional right. The fuel of the PDRC movement was the amnesty bill, but it's also subsequently been sustained by anger over corruption and the rice scandal in particular. All of these are sweeping public concerns, and are more than reasonable grounds for opposing the Yingluck administration. In addition, both the amnesty bill and the rice scandal are headed to court, as the basis for impeachment proceedings. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggold Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 by the ammart yes, I think you'll find the rice farmers will be slapping a few faces soon too! So not just by the amart but by the people! true they have screwed up the Rice gig but this thread is about the court case - anyway they will still win any election as the vast majority of Thais do not want the ammart elitist Dems in power - that's democracy folks! that's funny considering it looks increasingly likely that Yingluk and company will be before the courts on charges of corruption over the rice scam!- That's democracy folks...... Quite!! Just where they are going to find 300 eligible candidates in such little time for the election will be a physical impossibility (even for Thaksin). It will be the reds blocking the next election in attempting to stop the 'ammart fascists' getting into power through democratic means - what will their excuse be on this?? ah you mean the fascists that are trying to stop democratic protests, claiming it to be a insurrection, only for the courts to throw it out! Or the fascists that don't want the rice farmers to join the PDRC demontrators! I wonder why? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post SICHONSTEVE Posted February 13, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 13, 2014 The right to protest - whatever Chalerm says - is a constitutional right. The fuel of the PDRC movement was the amnesty bill, but it's also subsequently been sustained by anger over corruption and the rice scandal in particular. All of these are sweeping public concerns, and are more than reasonable grounds for opposing the Yingluck administration. In addition, both the amnesty bill and the rice scandal are headed to court, as the basis for impeachment proceedings. If you are a red - then nothing hurts more than the truth!!! So much damage has been done in such a short time........so many lies been told, corrupt practices taken place, and incompetence shown that they are 'doomed' without a doubt!!! Even the great Houdini couldn't wriggle his way out of this mess. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 We all know (although some find it difficult to acknowledge) that the true fascists are the corrupt Thaksin model. The only democrats here are...............well, as their name implies -The Democrat Party!!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smedly Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I liked the headline a couple days ago where it stated that PT had rejected Thaksins idea of talks! I wondered of there was a power play going on within PTP maybe some are getting fed up with the Shinclan grip on on the party!! my second post on this, two things I've noticed in the aftermath of the election one of the coalition parties speaking up and being reprimanded by Charlem not widely known the outcome of the 8 million votes and who they actually voted for Reading between the lines - I think of the 8 million votes PTP did not get a majority of them, I have a feeling one of the coalition parties got more than PTP or a fair share of them just my thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I liked the headline a couple days ago where it stated that PT had rejected Thaksins idea of talks! I wondered of there was a power play going on within PTP maybe some are getting fed up with the Shinclan grip on on the party!! my second post on this, two things I've noticed in the aftermath of the election one of the coalition parties speaking up and being reprimanded by Charlem not widely known the outcome of the 8 million votes and who they actually voted for Reading between the lines - I think of the 8 million votes PTP did not get a majority of them, I have a feeling one of the coalition parties got more than PTP or a fair share of them just my thoughts I doubt it. But it would be absolutely hilarious were it to be so!! I wouldn't mind seeing fresh elections with the Democrats taking part as I think that they (the Democrats) could potentially win now. Lets face it, the elections were virtually unhindered in their strongholds and they could only muster a fraction of votes that they would expect to get. It is obvious that many voters didn't bother and nearly every one will be a lost PTP vote or from them changing their allegiance to another party!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasteddie Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 This court should be the first thing to be reformed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now