Pheu Thai vows to defy Constitutional Court's ruling on election

[SICHONSTEVE]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

[rametindallas]

We also dont know this OP heading is true or accurate, it IS the Nation after all

If it's not true or accurate and the PTP has actually said they will wholeheartedly abide by the Court's decision on the case, then it shouldn't be difficult to find that.

We await your research.

Presumably you have read the whole of the Nation article presented in the OP as but a fragment. Based on your post however you seemed to have missed the PTP statement quoted verbatim yet buried deep at the end of the article. So for your edification, and to show the sensationalism of the Nation headline, I post here the PTP quotes buried by the Nation at the end of its article:

Cancelling a "democratic" poll would lead to more rifts, the party said in its statement. The court's willingness to consider the case "without a mandate" would be dangerous for the rule of law. It would cause a crisis of faith in the justice system, it said.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people in the fight for the people's sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court or independent organisations according to the Constitution. The party is always ready for the election, which allows the people to decide on the political future on their own."

The statement said that if the court rules that the February 2 election should be nullified, it would set a bad standard for political parties, as they would be aware they could lose an election and come out and obstruct a poll being staged.

The last sentence is especially important to the integrity of democracy, which is not a strong point of the Democratic Party.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. As decided by whom? The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, As decided by whom? especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," As decided by whom? it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people They mean 'their supporters only' in the fight for the people's' their supporters only' sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court It's called division of powers. The electorate cannot supercede the constitution as defined by the Constitutional Court. The government has taken a three year old electoral mandate (which they may no longer have) and claim that gives them a higher power than the Constitutional Court. Saying it doesn't make it so. or independent organisations according to the Constitution As decided by whom?

The parts you quote are the most damning of the Puea Thai Party in the whole article. They condemn themselves from their own mouths. They are finished as a power in Thailand unless they can win a civil war as the rest of Thailand is now awake and has had a belly-full of their shenanigans. They can 'talk' all they want but if they act on their irresponsible, crazy talk, they are just begging for more legal action against them. Time for Dr. T and his corrupt cronies to give it up. Times have changed and the old ways of buying people and propagandizing don't work in the internet age.

[lildragon]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

Thais can't because they listened to the whims of the maniacal Suthep and...........elitist backers and refused to play ball in the election. They could of ran and made good, working and transparent policies while dealing blows to PTP with the rice scheme and some of their other failings.

But no, getting in by coup seems to be easier

[Publicus]

We also dont know this OP heading is true or accurate, it IS the Nation after all

If it's not true or accurate and the PTP has actually said they will wholeheartedly abide by the Court's decision on the case, then it shouldn't be difficult to find that.

We await your research.

Presumably you have read the whole of the Nation article presented in the OP as but a fragment. Based on your post however you seemed to have missed the PTP statement quoted verbatim yet buried deep at the end of the article. So for your edification, and to show the sensationalism of the Nation headline, I post here the PTP quotes buried by the Nation at the end of its article:

Cancelling a "democratic" poll would lead to more rifts, the party said in its statement. The court's willingness to consider the case "without a mandate" would be dangerous for the rule of law. It would cause a crisis of faith in the justice system, it said.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people in the fight for the people's sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court or independent organisations according to the Constitution. The party is always ready for the election, which allows the people to decide on the political future on their own."

The statement said that if the court rules that the February 2 election should be nullified, it would set a bad standard for political parties, as they would be aware they could lose an election and come out and obstruct a poll being staged.

The last sentence is especially important to the integrity of democracy, which is not a strong point of the Democratic Party.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. As decided by whom? The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, As decided by whom? especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," As decided by whom? it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people They mean 'their supporters only' in the fight for the people's' their supporters only' sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court It's called division of powers. The electorate cannot supercede the constitution as defined by the Constitutional Court. The government has taken a three year old electoral mandate (which they may no longer have) and claim that gives them a higher power than the Constitutional Court. Saying it doesn't make it so. or independent organisations according to the Constitution As decided by whom?

The parts you quote are the most damning of the Puea Thai Party in the whole article. They condemn themselves from their own mouths. They are finished as a power in Thailand unless they can win a civil war as the rest of Thailand is now awake and has had a belly-full of their shenanigans. They can 'talk' all they want but if they act on their irresponsible, crazy talk, they are just begging for more legal action against them. Time for Dr. T and his corrupt cronies to give it up. Times have changed and the old ways of buying people and propagandizing don't work in the internet age.

Yep, you've worked yourself into a lather of questions there, so I hope someone from the Pheu Thai Party responds to your post to help you get through what obviously is a particularly tense time for some. If no one from PTP assists you, you might consider writing to PTP itself and hope for the best.

If you try the above but still don't get your satisfaction, I would refer you to the statement to the press yesterday at the Constitutional Court by the Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, attributed to him by Digital Content, that the government will of course accept the ruling of the Constitutional Court, whatever the ruling may be.

[rametindallas]

If it's not true or accurate and the PTP has actually said they will wholeheartedly abide by the Court's decision on the case, then it shouldn't be difficult to find that.

We await your research.

Presumably you have read the whole of the Nation article presented in the OP as but a fragment. Based on your post however you seemed to have missed the PTP statement quoted verbatim yet buried deep at the end of the article. So for your edification, and to show the sensationalism of the Nation headline, I post here the PTP quotes buried by the Nation at the end of its article:

Cancelling a "democratic" poll would lead to more rifts, the party said in its statement. The court's willingness to consider the case "without a mandate" would be dangerous for the rule of law. It would cause a crisis of faith in the justice system, it said.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people in the fight for the people's sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court or independent organisations according to the Constitution. The party is always ready for the election, which allows the people to decide on the political future on their own."

The statement said that if the court rules that the February 2 election should be nullified, it would set a bad standard for political parties, as they would be aware they could lose an election and come out and obstruct a poll being staged.

The last sentence is especially important to the integrity of democracy, which is not a strong point of the Democratic Party.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. As decided by whom? The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, As decided by whom? especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," As decided by whom? it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people They mean 'their supporters only' in the fight for the people's' their supporters only' sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court It's called division of powers. The electorate cannot supercede the constitution as defined by the Constitutional Court. The government has taken a three year old electoral mandate (which they may no longer have) and claim that gives them a higher power than the Constitutional Court. Saying it doesn't make it so. or independent organisations according to the Constitution As decided by whom?

The parts you quote are the most damning of the Puea Thai Party in the whole article. They condemn themselves from their own mouths. They are finished as a power in Thailand unless they can win a civil war as the rest of Thailand is now awake and has had a belly-full of their shenanigans. They can 'talk' all they want but if they act on their irresponsible, crazy talk, they are just begging for more legal action against them. Time for Dr. T and his corrupt cronies to give it up. Times have changed and the old ways of buying people and propagandizing don't work in the internet age.

Yep, you've worked yourself into a lather of questions there, so I hope someone from the Pheu Thai Party responds to your post to help you get through what obviously is a particularly tense time for some. If no one from PTP assists you, you might consider writing to PTP itself and hope for the best.

If you try the above but still don't get your satisfaction, I would refer you to the statement to the press yesterday at the Constitutional Court by the Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, attributed to him by Digital Content, that the government will of course accept the ruling of the Constitutional Court, whatever the ruling may be.

You are always speaking for the PTP so I asked ONE question: As decided by whom? Anything you write that does not answer that one question is non-responsive. Maybe you don't know how to debate an issue; maybe you have no answer. It's OK, I never expected much from you.

[Robby nz]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

Thais can't because they listened to the whims of the maniacal Suthep and...........elitist backers and refused to play ball in the election. They could of ran and made good, working and transparent policies while dealing blows to PTP with the rice scheme and some of their other failings.

But no, getting in by coup seems to be easier

Why is it that the reds supporters cant understand that a coup would be counter productive to Suthep and the Dems ? And could only advantage Thaksin.

Should there be a coup the first thing that would happen would be that Thaksin and his puppets would scream to the world that their democraticaly elected Govt was once again deposed by he military, World sympathy for them, nothing for Suthep, nothing for the Dems.

The second would be that Thaksin would have an excuse to bring out his armed reds to fight the army, but they wouldn't take on the army, we have heard the strategy from Ko Tee just the other day, what amounts to attack soft targets all over the country.

And if you think you would be safe then consider : Farang ruai maak, the cause needs what you have, bang.

[SICHONSTEVE]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

Thais can't because they listened to the whims of the maniacal Suthep and...........elitist backers and refused to play ball in the election. They could of ran and made good, working and transparent policies while dealing blows to PTP with the rice scheme and some of their other failings.

But no, getting in by coup seems to be easier

You can't possibly call that an election!!! It was a fiasco from the beginning which became an even bigger fiasco later on.

You cannot deny that they were warned by the EC that it probably couldn't and shouldn't be run - as per usual, the government didn't listen to anyone else than 'the idiot' that is Thaksin!! All they achieved is to waste an additional 3.8 billion tax payers baht through their folly.

When a free and fair election does take place, I think that the 'no' votes and abstentions from disillusioned PTP voters will win the day and the Democrats will romp it.

As for the coup, I think that Thaksin needs it more than the Democrats at the moment!!!

[Publicus]

Presumably you have read the whole of the Nation article presented in the OP as but a fragment. Based on your post however you seemed to have missed the PTP statement quoted verbatim yet buried deep at the end of the article. So for your edification, and to show the sensationalism of the Nation headline, I post here the PTP quotes buried by the Nation at the end of its article:

Cancelling a "democratic" poll would lead to more rifts, the party said in its statement. The court's willingness to consider the case "without a mandate" would be dangerous for the rule of law. It would cause a crisis of faith in the justice system, it said.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people in the fight for the people's sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court or independent organisations according to the Constitution. The party is always ready for the election, which allows the people to decide on the political future on their own."

The statement said that if the court rules that the February 2 election should be nullified, it would set a bad standard for political parties, as they would be aware they could lose an election and come out and obstruct a poll being staged.

The last sentence is especially important to the integrity of democracy, which is not a strong point of the Democratic Party.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. As decided by whom? The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, As decided by whom? especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," As decided by whom? it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people They mean 'their supporters only' in the fight for the people's' their supporters only' sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court It's called division of powers. The electorate cannot supercede the constitution as defined by the Constitutional Court. The government has taken a three year old electoral mandate (which they may no longer have) and claim that gives them a higher power than the Constitutional Court. Saying it doesn't make it so. or independent organisations according to the Constitution As decided by whom?

The parts you quote are the most damning of the Puea Thai Party in the whole article. They condemn themselves from their own mouths. They are finished as a power in Thailand unless they can win a civil war as the rest of Thailand is now awake and has had a belly-full of their shenanigans. They can 'talk' all they want but if they act on their irresponsible, crazy talk, they are just begging for more legal action against them. Time for Dr. T and his corrupt cronies to give it up. Times have changed and the old ways of buying people and propagandizing don't work in the internet age.

Yep, you've worked yourself into a lather of questions there, so I hope someone from the Pheu Thai Party responds to your post to help you get through what obviously is a particularly tense time for some. If no one from PTP assists you, you might consider writing to PTP itself and hope for the best.

If you try the above but still don't get your satisfaction, I would refer you to the statement to the press yesterday at the Constitutional Court by the Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, attributed to him by Digital Content, that the government will of course accept the ruling of the Constitutional Court, whatever the ruling may be.

You are always speaking for the PTP so I asked ONE question: As decided by whom? Anything you write that does not answer that one question is non-responsive. Maybe you don't know how to debate an issue; maybe you have no answer. It's OK, I never expected much from you.

You miscategorize me and you wrongly state I am "always speaking for the PTP." You mischaracterize me and, worse yet, you are erroneously accusatory.

Your vain attempt to manipulate a response to your faulty allegations is transparent.

I am not responsible for your own misinterpretations and misconceptions relative to others, nor can anyone else be held responsible for your own self-created mindset. I'm not obligated or required to conform to your misperceptions of me, nor is any other poster at TVF in such a circumstance as this.

I occasionally read your posts and see they fall right in with so many that know no bounds or limits to their OTT contempt and intolerance toward others.

[Publicus]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

Lots of obfuscation, incorrect assumptions, half-truths and more manure.

The Yingluck government has an attitude of "respect your vote till it's counted" with "thank you * 3, please go home now, we have a mandate". Just like the rule of the people is very popular in countries with "Democratic" in their official country name.

The Yingluck government HAS made mistakes, they assumed that with a 'mandate' they could ignore all and push for big brothers safe return. A passport to a criminal fugitive, imagine. 700++ billion lost in a rice scam and no accounting, only conflicting numbers.

As for Thaksin's convictions, well as far as I know there's only one, for "conflict of interests". The other cases await his return to be able to continue. None seems to be 'trumped up"

As for 'amart', well always nice to say 'amart' in a post which tries to absolve Thaksin the innocent Amply Rich billionair criminal fugitive.

Quite gulf between the two posts.

I would commend tilac2 for his reasoned and analytical expository discourse.

[SICHONSTEVE]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

Lots of obfuscation, incorrect assumptions, half-truths and more manure.

The Yingluck government has an attitude of "respect your vote till it's counted" with "thank you * 3, please go home now, we have a mandate". Just like the rule of the people is very popular in countries with "Democratic" in their official country name.

The Yingluck government HAS made mistakes, they assumed that with a 'mandate' they could ignore all and push for big brothers safe return. A passport to a criminal fugitive, imagine. 700++ billion lost in a rice scam and no accounting, only conflicting numbers.

As for Thaksin's convictions, well as far as I know there's only one, for "conflict of interests". The other cases await his return to be able to continue. None seems to be 'trumped up"

As for 'amart', well always nice to say 'amart' in a post which tries to absolve Thaksin the innocent Amply Rich billionair criminal fugitive.

Quite gulf between the two posts.

I would commend tilac2 for his reasoned and analytical expository discourse.

Now would that bias reflect your warped take on things fitting in well with his flawed thinking by any chance??

[Publicus]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

Lots of obfuscation, incorrect assumptions, half-truths and more manure.

The Yingluck government has an attitude of "respect your vote till it's counted" with "thank you * 3, please go home now, we have a mandate". Just like the rule of the people is very popular in countries with "Democratic" in their official country name.

The Yingluck government HAS made mistakes, they assumed that with a 'mandate' they could ignore all and push for big brothers safe return. A passport to a criminal fugitive, imagine. 700++ billion lost in a rice scam and no accounting, only conflicting numbers.

As for Thaksin's convictions, well as far as I know there's only one, for "conflict of interests". The other cases await his return to be able to continue. None seems to be 'trumped up"

As for 'amart', well always nice to say 'amart' in a post which tries to absolve Thaksin the innocent Amply Rich billionair criminal fugitive.

Quite gulf between the two posts.

I would commend tilac2 for his reasoned and analytical expository discourse.

Now would that bias reflect your warped take on things fitting in well with his flawed thinking by any chance??

[rubl]

Presumably you have read the whole of the Nation article presented in the OP as but a fragment. Based on your post however you seemed to have missed the PTP statement quoted verbatim yet buried deep at the end of the article. So for your edification, and to show the sensationalism of the Nation headline, I post here the PTP quotes buried by the Nation at the end of its article:

Cancelling a "democratic" poll would lead to more rifts, the party said in its statement. The court's willingness to consider the case "without a mandate" would be dangerous for the rule of law. It would cause a crisis of faith in the justice system, it said.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people in the fight for the people's sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court or independent organisations according to the Constitution. The party is always ready for the election, which allows the people to decide on the political future on their own."

The statement said that if the court rules that the February 2 election should be nullified, it would set a bad standard for political parties, as they would be aware they could lose an election and come out and obstruct a poll being staged.

The last sentence is especially important to the integrity of democracy, which is not a strong point of the Democratic Party.

"The Pheu Thai Party accepts the conduct of constitutional organisations only under the Constitution and the law. As decided by whom? The party will not accept any conduct not constitutional and lawful, As decided by whom? especially dishonest use of laws as the tool for the purpose of political destruction," As decided by whom? it said.

"The party will stand firm beside the people They mean 'their supporters only' in the fight for the people's' their supporters only' sovereign power, not to let the sovereign power be in the hands of the Constitutional Court It's called division of powers. The electorate cannot supercede the constitution as defined by the Constitutional Court. The government has taken a three year old electoral mandate (which they may no longer have) and claim that gives them a higher power than the Constitutional Court. Saying it doesn't make it so. or independent organisations according to the Constitution As decided by whom?

The parts you quote are the most damning of the Puea Thai Party in the whole article. They condemn themselves from their own mouths. They are finished as a power in Thailand unless they can win a civil war as the rest of Thailand is now awake and has had a belly-full of their shenanigans. They can 'talk' all they want but if they act on their irresponsible, crazy talk, they are just begging for more legal action against them. Time for Dr. T and his corrupt cronies to give it up. Times have changed and the old ways of buying people and propagandizing don't work in the internet age.

Yep, you've worked yourself into a lather of questions there, so I hope someone from the Pheu Thai Party responds to your post to help you get through what obviously is a particularly tense time for some. If no one from PTP assists you, you might consider writing to PTP itself and hope for the best.

If you try the above but still don't get your satisfaction, I would refer you to the statement to the press yesterday at the Constitutional Court by the Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, attributed to him by Digital Content, that the government will of course accept the ruling of the Constitutional Court, whatever the ruling may be.

The interesting part is that those care-taking Ministers of the dissolved caretaking Pheu Thai led government are saying the government will accept, but their Pheu Thai MP's, spokespersons, executives and others are voicing their contempt for any ruling they don't like.

[ThailandNoob]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

The PDRC is abandoning all pretense that the People's Council will be neutral. And I highly doubt that it is intended as a temporary measure. The army only handed back power after the coup because they were arrogant enough to believe the reds would lose the next election. The yellows will not repeat the same mistake.

When Hitler was granted power to pass legislation without parliamentary approval (he couldn't get a majority of the vote), it was officially only a temporary measure too.

The Democrats will never win a free and fair election anytime soon. How many people in the North and Northeast are going to vote for a party that gets into bed with a movement that denigrated them as "too stupid to vote"?

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[rubl]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

Lots of obfuscation, incorrect assumptions, half-truths and more manure.

The Yingluck government has an attitude of "respect your vote till it's counted" with "thank you * 3, please go home now, we have a mandate". Just like the rule of the people is very popular in countries with "Democratic" in their official country name.

The Yingluck government HAS made mistakes, they assumed that with a 'mandate' they could ignore all and push for big brothers safe return. A passport to a criminal fugitive, imagine. 700++ billion lost in a rice scam and no accounting, only conflicting numbers.

As for Thaksin's convictions, well as far as I know there's only one, for "conflict of interests". The other cases await his return to be able to continue. None seems to be 'trumped up"

As for 'amart', well always nice to say 'amart' in a post which tries to absolve Thaksin the innocent Amply Rich billionair criminal fugitive.

Quite gulf between the two posts.

I would commend tilac2 for his reasoned and analytical expository discourse.

You would, now wouldn't you.

BTW does the truth on Thaksin's just conviction for 'conflict of interest' hurt? Or the many cases which Thaksin didn't want to answer?

Back to the OP we have the Thaksin thinks Pheu Thai acts vowing to defy a possible ruling from the Constitutional Court. Probably also well reasoned, analytical in exposure?

[rubl]

The PDRC is abandoning all pretense that the People's Council will be neutral. And I highly doubt that it is intended as a temporary measure. The army only handed back power after the coup because they were arrogant enough to believe the reds would lose the next election. The yellows will not repeat the same mistake.

When Hitler was granted power to pass legislation without parliamentary approval (he couldn't get a majority of the vote), it was officially only a temporary measure too.

The Democrats will never win a free and fair election anytime soon. How many people in the North and Northeast are going to vote for a party that gets into bed with a movement that denigrated them as "too stupid to vote"?

Are they? Maybe only in your 'high' doubts?

BTW the Democrat party always won between 25% and 35% of seats in general elections contested. Since when is that "will never win"?

PS I like the last sentence. Indeed many people in North and NorthEast rather go to bed with Thaksin c.s. although the Fab4 elections seemed to indicated a growing dissatisfaction.

Edited March 20, 2014 by rubl

[SICHONSTEVE]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

The PDRC is abandoning all pretense that the People's Council will be neutral. And I highly doubt that it is intended as a temporary measure. The army only handed back power after the coup because they were arrogant enough to believe the reds would lose the next election. The yellows will not repeat the same mistake.

When Hitler was granted power to pass legislation without parliamentary approval (he couldn't get a majority of the vote), it was officially only a temporary measure too.

The Democrats will never win a free and fair election anytime soon. How many people in the North and Northeast are going to vote for a party that gets into bed with a movement that denigrated them as "too stupid to vote"?

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The people's council will probably not be neutral in respect of the fact that a very high majority of the sensible, clever, articulate and honest people needed to carry out the reforms will come from the educated side with yellow leanings. This is how it has to be I'm afraid. They should include some that can represent those from poorer backgrounds however, to act as a counter balance. They MUST be listened to - don't forget it is in everyone's interest to appreciate their gripes and help them out of their plight and putting this aspect at the top of their agenda is both important and essential for it to work!!

Even the PTP party have expressed the need for reforms. They are not able or capable of taking on something as complex as this unfortunately and it must be left for others to undertaket.

Please don't accuse me of bringing 'the education question' into the fray as I am simply stating it as it is!!

Give them you're trust and let them have a go - I don't think that you'd be disappointed with the outcome and Thailand will be on track to repair the damage inflicted on the people by this government.

The PDRC are not like Hitler and they have values as well as being sincere in their objectives to sort this mess out

Edited March 20, 2014 by SICHONSTEVE

[kuthow]

You've shot yourself in the foot here .

Of course Thaksin was guilty as hell back in 2001, but the Yellow mob thought he was on their side back then and they pulled the strings to get him off.

You cited an example of the courts being under external, improper control to support an argument that the courts are impartial and independent.

0/10 for you

Well, not-so-honest Bobby, the fact is that one of the judges said later on "He had just been elected, how could we have found him guilty".

Another of the ethically retarded ammart to whom it is a given that two wrongs make a right, and that five more wrongs piled on to the present time make it convincingly right. Leave these guys in place and there'll be ten more wrongs equaling five more rights as the former LOS continues to descend into this abyss of its own making. Hell, even a dog gets tired of chasing its own tail.

The stunted pseudo-intellectual that can't comprehend posters are not saying two wrongs make a right. What people are saying is just disputing your grossly inaccurate claim that decisions only go against one side.

There's plenty of evidence it's a two-way street.

[fab4]

The Democrats said they outspent on campaigning, not on voter payments.

Sent from my phone ...

The real issue is this. Chang Noi who occasionally writes in the nation.

So why the current panic about vote-buying? The upcountry electorate is richer, better educated, and more experienced at elections than ever before. In truth, the problem is not that upcountry voters don’t know how to use their vote, and that the result is distorted by patronage and vote-buying. The problem is that they have learnt to use the vote only too well.Over four national polls, they have chosen very consistently and very rationally.

And, of course, that may be the real problem. Back when many upcountry electors sold their votes, and as a result their weight in national politics was zero, nobody cared so much about vote-buying. But now the electors have got smart, they have to be stopped. The bleating about vote-buying and patronage politics is simply an attempt to undermine electoral democracy because it seems to be working.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/01/opinion/opinion_30082102.php

Edited March 21, 2014 by fab4

[HonestQuietBob]

The people's council will probably not be neutral in respect of the fact that a very high majority of the sensible, clever, articulate and honest people needed to carry out the reforms will come from the educated side with yellow leanings. This is how it has to be I'm afraid. They should include some that can represent those from poorer backgrounds however, to act as a counter balance. They MUST be listened to - don't forget it is in everyone's interest to appreciate their gripes and help them out of their plight and putting this aspect at the top of their agenda is both important and essential for it to work!!

Even the PTP party have expressed the need for reforms. They are not able or capable of taking on something as complex as this unfortunately and it must be left for others to undertaket.

Please don't accuse me of bringing 'the education question' into the fray as I am simply stating it as it is!!

Give them you're trust and let them have a go - I don't think that you'd be disappointed with the outcome and Thailand will be on track to repair the damage inflicted on the people by this government.

The PDRC are not like Hitler and they have values as well as being sincere in their objectives to sort this mess out

Peoples Council is a non starter.

It's pointless even speculating about it.

It just won't happen.

The only council Suthep is ever going to be allowed to appoint is the one in charge of the marshmallows at the Lumpini camp out.

The rest is ignorant and classist BS and a piss poor series of excuses to deny the people their right to elect their own government.

No self-respecting individual would allow such a system for themselves to live under but I can see how selfish bigots and right wing fanatics would promote such a system being forced upon others

How about you respect the people of Thailand and "give them your trust and let them have a go " at electing a government of their own choosing.

(hard post to write without using the word fascist)

[SICHONSTEVE]

The people's council will probably not be neutral in respect of the fact that a very high majority of the sensible, clever, articulate and honest people needed to carry out the reforms will come from the educated side with yellow leanings. This is how it has to be I'm afraid. They should include some that can represent those from poorer backgrounds however, to act as a counter balance. They MUST be listened to - don't forget it is in everyone's interest to appreciate their gripes and help them out of their plight and putting this aspect at the top of their agenda is both important and essential for it to work!!

Even the PTP party have expressed the need for reforms. They are not able or capable of taking on something as complex as this unfortunately and it must be left for others to undertaket.

Please don't accuse me of bringing 'the education question' into the fray as I am simply stating it as it is!!

Give them you're trust and let them have a go - I don't think that you'd be disappointed with the outcome and Thailand will be on track to repair the damage inflicted on the people by this government.

The PDRC are not like Hitler and they have values as well as being sincere in their objectives to sort this mess out

Peoples Council is a non starter.

It's pointless even speculating about it.

It just won't happen.

The only council Suthep is ever going to be allowed to appoint is the one in charge of the marshmallows at the Lumpini camp out.

The rest is ignorant and classist BS and a piss poor series of excuses to deny the people their right to elect their own government.

No self-respecting individual would allow such a system for themselves to live under but I can see how selfish bigots and right wing fanatics would promote such a system being forced upon others

How about you respect the people of Thailand and "give them your trust and let them have a go " at electing a government of their own choosing.

(hard post to write without using the word fascist)

You failed!!!

Edited March 21, 2014 by SICHONSTEVE

[Publicus]

@whybother

You wrote:

The Democrats said they outspent on campaigning, not on voter payments

Indeed, the source of the outspending was the Democratic Development Fund, which the court in 2010 found had in fact been used as an illegal political slush fund of the DP. The CC however tapped the DP on the hand and said don't do it again.

In other words, the red affiliated political parties get dissolved and actively removed from government while the DP remains in government despite seriously violating the electoral laws, using taxpayer funds besides. Thai courts thus provide the equal protection of the laws but only as long as some political and socio-economic groups remain more equal than others. Sort of like Suthep's more equal than others "People's Council."

[rubl]

The real issue is this. Chang Noi who occasionally writes in the nation.

Actually the real issue here is the ruling from the Constitutional Court we are waiting for.

10:54 on my mobile, any moment now

[rubl]

@whybother

You wrote:

The Democrats said they outspent on campaigning, not on voter payments

Indeed, the source of the outspending was the Democratic Development Fund, which the court in 2010 found had in fact been used as an illegal political slush fund of the DP. The CC however tapped the DP on the hand and said don't do it again.

In other words, the red affiliated political parties get dissolved and actively removed from government while the DP remains in government despite seriously violating the electoral laws, using taxpayer funds besides. Thai courts thus provide the equal protection of the laws but only as long as some political and socio-economic groups remain more equal than others. Sort of like Suthep's more equal than others "People's Council."

no offence, it's just that at times I have problems keeping up with news while doing a full-time job. Do you have some more info on that ? Thanks

[kuthow]

As delineated earlier in the thread with the specific Sections from the Legal Act, the Ombudsman IS empowered to lodge a petition with the Constitution Court.

That remains one of the issues before the court for it to determine. I for one expect the court to agree, which then will give it its constitutional basis to proceed on the question of nullifying the election. Until tomorrow however, when the CC rules accordingly, it remains an open question.

You may have taken note the EC also asserts the OB does not have the authority to initiate a cause of action in the CC. I expect that given the CC's inherent biases, the CC will agree with the OB, ruling against both the government and the EC to instead accept the OB's filing and then go ahead to nullify the election.

I expect the CC's inherent ability to read the Ombudsman Act will be the determining factor in agreeing with the OB's legal right to file the case.

Today it was shown that the CC can, in fact, read just fine.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[h90]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

It is always the same propaganda guide book.....Just in times of Internet and TV people won't believe it....

[rubl]

Back on topic one may wonder in what way the Pheu Thai party thinks they can defy the court ruling legally?

[Old Man River]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

The PDRC is abandoning all pretense that the People's Council will be neutral. And I highly doubt that it is intended as a temporary measure. The army only handed back power after the coup because they were arrogant enough to believe the reds would lose the next election. The yellows will not repeat the same mistake.

When Hitler was granted power to pass legislation without parliamentary approval (he couldn't get a majority of the vote), it was officially only a temporary measure too.

The Democrats will never win a free and fair election anytime soon. How many people in the North and Northeast are going to vote for a party that gets into bed with a movement that denigrated them as "too stupid to vote"?

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The people's council will probably not be neutral in respect of the fact that a very high majority of the sensible, clever, articulate and honest people needed to carry out the reforms will come from the educated side with yellow leanings. This is how it has to be I'm afraid. They should include some that can represent those from poorer backgrounds however, to act as a counter balance. They MUST be listened to - don't forget it is in everyone's interest to appreciate their gripes and help them out of their plight and putting this aspect at the top of their agenda is both important and essential for it to work!!

Even the PTP party have expressed the need for reforms. They are not able or capable of taking on something as complex as this unfortunately and it must be left for others to undertaket.

Please don't accuse me of bringing 'the education question' into the fray as I am simply stating it as it is!!

Give them you're trust and let them have a go - I don't think that you'd be disappointed with the outcome and Thailand will be on track to repair the damage inflicted on the people by this government.

The PDRC are not like Hitler and they have values as well as being sincere in their objectives to sort this mess out

Once the courts have rendered their opinions in the various cases, my view is the next government will be a coalition comprising the democrats that are not in alliance with Aphisit and the PTP not in alliance with Thaksin or Yingluck. You would be surprised, but there are several who qualify. These will all be MP's that have previously been elected by their constituents.

A people's elected, democratic government, without a military coup. Not impossible in the least.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[SICHONSTEVE]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

I love the bit where he calls the white-skinned "high class" Chinese racist and then say's that the Isaan people are probably superior to them!!!

I myself, regard everyone else on this earth as my equal - I am no better than they and they are no better than I.

What he also fails to appreciate is that the people's council is only a temporary and neutral (as can be) body that will disperse once it has done it's job by calling for free and fair elections whilst stepping down. I also believe that no one in this council can then stand in these fresh elections.

If done correctly, the reforms will almost certainly return a Democrat government because that is where the most able, honest, responsible and qualified politicians lie. Abhisit actually had better policies for the Northern/North Eastern people than Yingluck when he was in power and Korn skilfully managed the economy (turning growth around by an admirable 10% in one year) - in fact he won a highly prestigious award for this in hes tenure.

The Democrats have had the wake up call and should realise that they will never be forgotten again and this 'elite thing' is a thing of history never to be repeated!!!

Elect the Democrats and Thailand will go far!!!

The PDRC is abandoning all pretense that the People's Council will be neutral. And I highly doubt that it is intended as a temporary measure. The army only handed back power after the coup because they were arrogant enough to believe the reds would lose the next election. The yellows will not repeat the same mistake.

When Hitler was granted power to pass legislation without parliamentary approval (he couldn't get a majority of the vote), it was officially only a temporary measure too.

The Democrats will never win a free and fair election anytime soon. How many people in the North and Northeast are going to vote for a party that gets into bed with a movement that denigrated them as "too stupid to vote"?

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The people's council will probably not be neutral in respect of the fact that a very high majority of the sensible, clever, articulate and honest people needed to carry out the reforms will come from the educated side with yellow leanings. This is how it has to be I'm afraid. They should include some that can represent those from poorer backgrounds however, to act as a counter balance. They MUST be listened to - don't forget it is in everyone's interest to appreciate their gripes and help them out of their plight and putting this aspect at the top of their agenda is both important and essential for it to work!!

Even the PTP party have expressed the need for reforms. They are not able or capable of taking on something as complex as this unfortunately and it must be left for others to undertaket.

Please don't accuse me of bringing 'the education question' into the fray as I am simply stating it as it is!!

Give them you're trust and let them have a go - I don't think that you'd be disappointed with the outcome and Thailand will be on track to repair the damage inflicted on the people by this government.

The PDRC are not like Hitler and they have values as well as being sincere in their objectives to sort this mess out

Once the courts have rendered their opinions in the various cases, my view is the next government will be a coalition comprising the democrats that are not in alliance with Aphisit and the PTP not in alliance with Thaksin or Yingluck. You would be surprised, but there are several who qualify. These will all be MP's that have previously been elected by their constituents.

A people's elected, democratic government, without a military coup. Not impossible in the least.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

If the Shins are gone then that's all I care about!!

If the reforms go through as planned then I wouldn't mind a PTP government with fresh faces. Although to be honest it is far likely to be headed by the Democrats as they are simply smarter people and know how to govern!!

[rixalex]

The constitution was accepted as the Army said it would not give up power if it was not - Hobson's Choice

Blatant lie. The post coup interim government said that if the constitution was voted against in the referendum, then another one would be written. They never said that power would not be relinquished. You have simply made that up.

And it's funny how the same people who pour scorn on the referendum for that constitution and argue that the people didn't have a proper say, are the same people who support the constitution that came before it, a constitution for which there was no referendum whatsoever.