EC to meet military and security top officials Tuesday

[webfact]

POLITICS
EC to meet military and security top officials Tuesday
The Nation


Prayuth

"You want the Army to come out and act, right?" OK, if we do, we will not return [to the barracks] : Army chief

BANGKOK: -- The Election Commission (EC) said yesterday military and security chiefs have accepted an invitation to attend a meeting on Tuesday to discuss the political climate ahead of planning for a new election - provided they do not have a conflicting engagement.

At the meeting, the EC will brief the military and security chiefs on what happened during the January 26 and February 2 elections that led to a ruling by the Constitutional Court recently to nullify the February 2 poll.

"In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election," EC secretary-general Puchong Nutrawong said.

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit called on the EC to allow representatives of 53 political parties to join the meeting.

Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend.

"Why won't the EC listen to political parties as well. The EC chose to consult only the military commanders and security agencies," he said.

Meanwhile, Army chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha has responded to widespread calls for the Army to act against the Yingluck Shinawatra government and the so-called Thaksin regime by possibly staging a coup.

"You want the Army to come out and act, right?" he said.

"OK, if we do, we will not return [to the barracks], I can ensure you of that."

He also commented on an earlier statement he made in response to calls for the Army to stage a coup against the Yingluck government.

"How can employees of a company oust the company's executives?" he had said.

His statement went viral on the Internet, with many people criticising him for his perceived support of the Yingluck government and not the country.

The Army chief claimed the statement was misinterpreted as he had meant it to be taken in more general terms.


-- The Nation 2014-04-05

[Fryslan boppe]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

[Thait Spot]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

You've been calling "coup" in every thread like a deranged pigeon for months.

Where is it?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[bkkjames]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

You've been calling "coup" in every thread like a deranged pigeon for months.

Where is it?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

at this point I believe he is hoping for one in order to not look like such a prat.

[Thai at Heart]

This is getting quite comical now.

[MaxLee]

This is getting quite comical now.

Wring it can become quite serious now, remember, the people kinda asked the army to come out, and if they get what they asked for, the army won't return to the barracks. That's what those spoilt kindergarten kids from each opposition party gets for their I, I, I- me-me-me-first autoDEMOcracy,... A Thailand ruled by the military, is what unfortunately most opposition followers deserve, by dragging innocent people into their games who will unfortunately suffer the most.

Imagine you have an army officer at each and every house guarding your actions in your daily life from morning to night each and every day, even asking for permission to go to the toilet or buying food, watching TV programs or using the internet, etc... for all eternity

Edited April 5, 2014 by MaxLee

[BillyBobThai]

I guess this means the court will render it's verdict on Wed.

[Publicus]

The right wing posters came to this thread to find the poster Fb already at the starting gate. When Fb isn't already at the starting gate he's always running among the head of the pack. The Far Right Feudal Majority at TVF are certain there must be a law or a rule about this but can't find one. They know Fb is gonna be there at any given thread and it's got 'em spooked. They've met their match in grim determination and then some.

Gen Prayuth has fired a shot in both directions across the bow of each side when he says if the army executes a martial law military mutiny coup d'état it will be forever, as in doomsday for each side. This however is much more directed at his natural constituency the PDRC which had originally planned to incite a coup but had failed.

So the general has made it clear to all the lunatics running the asylum that if the army has to come out it will be for keeps. I hope the Far Right Majority here take note of how fragile their feudal paradise has become, for which they can thank K Suthep and his backers.. .

Edited April 5, 2014 by Publicus

[winstonc]

The right wing posters came to this thread to find Fb already at the starting gate. When he's not already at the starting gate he's always running among the head of the pack. The Far Right Majority at TVF are certain there must be a law or a rule about this but can't find one. They know Fb is gonna be there, at any given thread and it's got 'em spooked.

Gen Prayuth has fired a shot in both directions across the bow of each side when he says if the army executes a martial law military mutiny coup d'état it will be forever, as in doomsday for each side. This however is much more directed at his natural constituency the PDRC which had originally planned to incite a coup but had failed.

So the general has made it clear to all the lunatics running the asylum that if the army has to come out it will be for keeps. I hope the Far Right Majority here take note of how fragile their feudal paradise has become, for which they can thank K Suthep and his backers.. .

wrong yet again..you can thank this government that has bought it all on themselves and is dragging the people down with them..right wing..hahahaha.

[Publicus]

The right wing posters came to this thread to find Fb already at the starting gate. When he's not already at the starting gate he's always running among the head of the pack. The Far Right Majority at TVF are certain there must be a law or a rule about this but can't find one. They know Fb is gonna be there, at any given thread and it's got 'em spooked.

Gen Prayuth has fired a shot in both directions across the bow of each side when he says if the army executes a martial law military mutiny coup d'état it will be forever, as in doomsday for each side. This however is much more directed at his natural constituency the PDRC which had originally planned to incite a coup but had failed.

So the general has made it clear to all the lunatics running the asylum that if the army has to come out it will be for keeps. I hope the Far Right Majority here take note of how fragile their feudal paradise has become, for which they can thank K Suthep and his backers.. .

wrong yet again..you can thank this government that has bought it all on themselves and is dragging the people down with them..right wing..hahahaha.

Militant right wing I'd meant to say.

[Tatsujin]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

[Tatsujin]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

You've been calling "coup" in every thread like a deranged pigeon for months.

Where is it?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

at this point I believe he is hoping for one in order to not look like such a prat.

Too late . . .

[Phuket Stan]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

You've been calling "coup" in every thread like a deranged pigeon for months.

Where is it?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

It is a deranged pigeon

[smedly]

This is getting quite comical now.

Fryslan boppe has been comical for months, he's the laughing stock of this forum along with his multiple id's - see how many "likes" this post gets and you'll get the idea

[smedly]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

100% correct and great post

The EC has the responsibility to hold an election, the last attempt failed - it is their duty to make sure that security experts and those responsible for providing security can deliver, there is absolutely no point in holding another round of elections if they are going to fail, the EC must be clear about this first before wasting another pile of money -

PTP should also note that it has FA to do with them and stay out of it, it is up to the police the army and the National Security Chief Thawil Pliensri to iron out the details and discuss the matter

Edited April 5, 2014 by smedly

[chrisrazz]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

Got to take issue with the last para. Whether or not there is a majority, the fact is there is one side in this that did not want an election. They obviously don't agree with your argument that PT would not get any majority, otherwise they would be licking their lips at the prospect of an election.

Edited April 5, 2014 by chrisrazz

[pisico]

This is getting quite comical now.

Wring it can become quite serious now, remember, , and if they get what they asked for, the army won't return to the barracks. That's what those spoilt kindergarten kids from each opposition party gets for their I, I, I- me-me-me-first autoDEMOcracy,... A Thailand ruled by the military, is what unfortunately most opposition followers deserve, by dragging innocent people into their games who will unfortunately suffer the most.

Imagine you have an army officer at each and every house guarding your actions in your daily life from morning to night each and every day, even asking for permission to go to the toilet or buying food, watching TV programs or using the internet, etc... for all eternity

QUOTE

"the people kinda asked the army to come out" Your words.

It was ONE reporter asking a question not the PEOPLE as you allege to justify the delusions of some.

Democracy has nothing to do with Suthep's self-appointment of a minority movement (of 65 millions Thais how many are supporting the PDRC?) and seize power from a democratically elected administration.

YS administration is not lily white and has little to show for but the alleged Democrats are as corrupt and with a history mired by malfeasance. Remember the Palm Oil Scam during Abhisit and Suthtep's times?

[sweatalot]

This is getting quite comical now.

Wring it can become quite serious now, remember, the people kinda asked the army to come out, and if they get what they asked for, the army won't return to the barracks. That's what those spoilt kindergarten kids from each opposition party gets for their I, I, I- me-me-me-first autoDEMOcracy,... A Thailand ruled by the military, is what unfortunately most opposition followers deserve, by dragging innocent people into their games who will unfortunately suffer the most.

Imagine you have an army officer at each and every house guarding your actions in your daily life from morning to night each and every day, even asking for permission to go to the toilet or buying food, watching TV programs or using the internet, etc... for all eternity

imagine you have an army officer at each and every house guarding your actions in your daily life

better than

you have a red shirt officer at each and every house guarding your actions in your daily life

you are kidding - may be it should happen to the criminals (I don't need to name them)

[winstonc]

fair enough sir

The right wing posters came to this thread to find Fb already at the starting gate. When he's not already at the starting gate he's always running among the head of the pack. The Far Right Majority at TVF are certain there must be a law or a rule about this but can't find one. They know Fb is gonna be there, at any given thread and it's got 'em spooked.

Gen Prayuth has fired a shot in both directions across the bow of each side when he says if the army executes a martial law military mutiny coup d'état it will be forever, as in doomsday for each side. This however is much more directed at his natural constituency the PDRC which had originally planned to incite a coup but had failed.

So the general has made it clear to all the lunatics running the asylum that if the army has to come out it will be for keeps. I hope the Far Right Majority here take note of how fragile their feudal paradise has become, for which they can thank K Suthep and his backers.. .

wrong yet again..you can thank this government that has bought it all on themselves and is dragging the people down with them..right wing..hahahaha.

Militant right wing I'd meant to say.

[Scamper]

For the supporters of Pheu Thai, everything Prompong says is golden. He's their boy. And what integrity ! He's been busy this week. He used to talking down to the EC, of course. ( Though he likes to keep in practice. ) But his time has been also hard-pressed to issue words that in effect try to keep court judges in line with what Pheu Thai considers preferable verdicts. Yes, Prompong's been a busy boy. But on the face of it, it is a bit rich for Pheu Thai - who have continually resisted meeting with the EC and prefers to talk to them ( or threaten more likely ) through the media - to keep them from meeting the very people who would likely provide real protection at the polls - the army - after CAPO did such a cracking job the last time. But grist for Pheu Thai supporters all the same. Opportunity to dust off those conspiracy theories, as well as the happy prospect of perhaps creating new ones.

[Bakseeda]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

Got to take issue with the last para. Whether or not there is a majority, the fact is there is one side in this that did not want an election. They obviously don't agree with your argument that PT would not get any majority, otherwise they would be licking their lips at the prospect of an election.

Chriss..... sit down, clear your head, and think again.... There is not any side who does not want an election... all sides want an election... But not all sides want a fair and equal election... Reform MUST happen so as to allow Thailand and its voters to have a fair and equal election. People should NOT be bullied, Peoples should not be bought..Candidates should be allowed to canvas wherever they like...Candidates should be allowed to go to the peoples and express their views without the threat of violence against them and their families... Red Democracy DOES NOT allow these basic needs... Election without Reform is not election...

[bkksteviejai]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

Got to take issue with the last para. Whether or not there is a majority, the fact is there is one side in this that did not want an election. They obviously don't agree with your argument that PT would not get any majority, otherwise they would be licking their lips at the prospect of an election.

The elephant in the room.

[Tatsujin]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

Got to take issue with the last para. Whether or not there is a majority, the fact is there is one side in this that did not want an election. They obviously don't agree with your argument that PT would not get any majority, otherwise they would be licking their lips at the prospect of an election.

The elephant in the room.

No elephants:

1. They want reforms before further elections take place.

2. They are hanging fire to see whether:

A. Yingluck gets banned (possibly for life)

B. The majority of the MP's get banned (possibly for life)

C. Pheu Thai itself gets banned

[DirtFarmer]

For the supporters of Pheu Thai, everything Prompong says is golden. He's their boy. And what integrity ! He's been busy this week. He used to talking down to the EC, of course. ( Though he likes to keep in practice. ) But his time has been also hard-pressed to issue words that in effect try to keep court judges in line with what Pheu Thai considers preferable verdicts. Yes, Prompong's been a busy boy. But on the face of it, it is a bit rich for Pheu Thai - who have continually resisted meeting with the EC and prefers to talk to them ( or threaten more likely ) through the media - to keep them from meeting the very people who would likely provide real protection at the polls - the army - after CAPO did such a cracking job the last time. But grist for Pheu Thai supporters all the same. Opportunity to dust off those conspiracy theories, as well as the happy prospect of perhaps creating new ones.

I hope the Military considers all the facts from all sides and makes a wise decision based on that and not colored loyalties we know exist..I wish them well not an easy task to face..I doubt any of us would like to be in their shoes...they are damned if they do and damned if they don't...

And this for the supporters of PDRC and their insurrectionist leaders from a short while ago on stage... Translated from Thai to English via Google...now I know not many accept that translation but this is what came up...in the alternative you can find a version in the other paper...

• Anti-government protesters have been asked to prepare for the " final battle" will be triggered by the removal of Yingluck Shinawatra by the NACC Committee . or Constitutional Court , whichever comes first .

• "When that day comes , we are seized power soon after the constitutional provision that sovereignty belongs to Thailand ," Suthep Thaugsuban secretary of the Reform Committee, Democratic People said after a meeting with his allies on Saturday . .

• " That will be the day when we can declare himself emperor right now because of the power back to the people . Term shall be legal.

• "When I become Emperor , we will seize the assets of members of the Shinawatra family . , We will not allow them. Travel abroad . They had to report to us. , We will appoint the prime minister and the King's name will be countersigned by me.

• " After that we will set up a council which will lead to reform before it can proceed with a fresh election . " He said.

• "PDRC will not set up a political party and we will not allow our name to be used as a function of politics is to protect the interests of the country after the success we are. Back to home as either victory or defeat - ... there is no middle ground in this battle . "

And I post this to say "Buyer beware" because no matter what side you are on in this doesn't matter...what matters is the result you may get from someone who has been reading his own press way too much... hoping against hope his opposition will take it for what I hope it is... vain babbling

Edited April 5, 2014 by DirtFarmer

[cocopops]

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

Got to take issue with the last para. Whether or not there is a majority, the fact is there is one side in this that did not want an election. They obviously don't agree with your argument that PT would not get any majority, otherwise they would be licking their lips at the prospect of an election.

The elephant in the room.

No elephants:

1. They want reforms before further elections take place.

Entirely correct.

But for "reforms", one could just as easily say "an opportunity to make national policy and run the executive government for 18 months without any form of parliamentary opposition". Which is an unreasonable expectation even if the PM is found guilty of negligence or takes advice from an ex-politician convicted of various things.

Thailand has free and fair elections. No credible organization, journalist or even Democrat politician has ever claimed that recent elections were not won by the party that received the most votes, or that any significant number of these votes were cast under duress or solely for remuneration[1]. If this were not so, there would be reason to support some kind of emergency reforms before proceeding. If the elections were somehow being stolen, it would be entirely reasonable to support bypassing them in order to restore sovereignty to the people. But they are not. And so it is not.

If Yingluck & co. have committed crimes or operated unconstitutionally, then they should be punished accordingly. But that shouldn't add up to handing power to any unelected group for any significant amount of time. Ban the offenders and proceed directly with elections. Just like they would in any stable western democracy.

[1] If this is not the case, please post a link. I would very much like to see it.

Edited April 5, 2014 by cocopops

[tingtongteesood]

This is getting quite comical now.

Wring it can become quite serious now, remember, , and if they get what they asked for, the army won't return to the barracks. That's what those spoilt kindergarten kids from each opposition party gets for their I, I, I- me-me-me-first autoDEMOcracy,... A Thailand ruled by the military, is what unfortunately most opposition followers deserve, by dragging innocent people into their games who will unfortunately suffer the most.

Imagine you have an army officer at each and every house guarding your actions in your daily life from morning to night each and every day, even asking for permission to go to the toilet or buying food, watching TV programs or using the internet, etc... for all eternity

QUOTE

"the people kinda asked the army to come out" Your words.

It was ONE reporter asking a question not the PEOPLE as you allege to justify the delusions of some.

Democracy has nothing to do with Suthep's self-appointment of a minority movement (of 65 millions Thais how many are supporting the PDRC?) and seize power from a democratically elected administration.

YS administration is not lily white and has little to show for but the alleged Democrats are as corrupt and with a history mired by malfeasance. Remember the Palm Oil Scam during Abhisit and Suthtep's times?

Oh come on, that doesn't even come close to even beginning to be as corrupt as 450 billion baht just disappeared not to mention the raft of other wrongdoings PT et al have committed !

[tingtongteesood]

"Prompong said the EC so far had not agreed to allow party representatives to attend"

I can understand why.

Effectively, a meeting between the anti-election Committee and the military/security people is a meeting of anti-democrats.......It is accepted by many people that the military has been a participant in this anti-democracy activism, not security as they pretend....Combine them with the anti-Electoral Commission, and they will decide all be their lonesome, how to obstruct and/or avoid the next election. Consistent with the demands of the Lumpini crowd. But couch it in all sorts of reasons associated with security.

You will note I don't call it 'anti-Govt.' protests...That motive is misleading and merely cover to try and lend legitimacy to coup-intentions, under pretense of indignant issue opposition.....Stuff that rightfully belongs in Parliament.

So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions between like-minded anti-democrats.

I'm going to take issue with your "interpretation" of events (again).

Firstly: "In order to host the next election, the EC wishes to ask the military and security authorities to evaluate the situation and set guidelines, particularly on security affairs for the election,"

So, the EC (who are the ones expected to run the elections and oversee security) ask to speak to those who will actually be performing those duties, i.e. the Police and the Army, to clarify what they has happened previously and how they should do things in the future.

This has nothing to do with ANY of the parties, not PT, not Dems, not PDRC not any party, which is WHY they are not invited. The "parties" don't get a say in how the elections are run, they get told how they are run, and that applies to both/all sides so stop complaining that PT weren't invited, neither were the Dems. It's got nothing to do with any of them at this stage. They will be told AFTER how the elections will be run. That's the duty and responsibility of the EC to make that decision and only the EC following advice from said security forces.

"So no, they don't want the PTP representing the electoral majority to be privy to these cozy discussions" . . . well, that might be how YOU interpret things, but please stop trying to intimate (as you always do) that this somehow equates to a "majority" . . . your delusions on the popularity of the red shirts/UDD/PT/Thaksin are completely misplaced right now. If there was an election right this moment, I doubt very much if PT would get much more than 25% of the vote, and with a very large proportion of "no votes" cast as there isn't an acceptable opposition to many also at this moment. The point being there is no way in hell that PT would get ANY majority just at the moment.

Got to take issue with the last para. Whether or not there is a majority, the fact is there is one side in this that did not want an election. They obviously don't agree with your argument that PT would not get any majority, otherwise they would be licking their lips at the prospect of an election.

Chriss..... sit down, clear your head, and think again.... There is not any side who does not want an election... all sides want an election... But not all sides want a fair and equal election... Reform MUST happen so as to allow Thailand and its voters to have a fair and equal election. People should NOT be bullied, Peoples should not be bought..Candidates should be allowed to canvas wherever they like...Candidates should be allowed to go to the peoples and express their views without the threat of violence against them and their families... Red Democracy DOES NOT allow these basic needs... Election without Reform is not election...

And when PT welcomed with open arms 300 people from a former Thaksin party that had been banned for political fraud, they lost whatever tiny shred of credibility they may have had left at that time, how are we supposed to trust those people to be fair during an election ?...

[Just1Voice]

Ok, now this is frigtening! In the paper that can't be quoted, Suthep clearly states that once Yingluck is gone, "we", meaning him and his group, will take power, confiscate all holdings of the Shins, and basically hold them as prisoners in Thailand. Then "we" will submit a name to HM for PM, which will be "countersigned" by Suthep himself. He says "our word" will be law. Guess what the constitution says doesn't matter.

I'm sorry, but this guy has completely lost the plot, and has become even more of a megalomaniac than Thaksin. This is a man who needs to be stopped in his tracks. God help Thailand if this man gains control of the power. Hopefully, the military won't allow that to happen, but TIT, so you never know.

[Publicus]

fair enough sir

The right wing posters came to this thread to find Fb already at the starting gate. When he's not already at the starting gate he's always running among the head of the pack. The Far Right Majority at TVF are certain there must be a law or a rule about this but can't find one. They know Fb is gonna be there, at any given thread and it's got 'em spooked.

Gen Prayuth has fired a shot in both directions across the bow of each side when he says if the army executes a martial law military mutiny coup d'état it will be forever, as in doomsday for each side. This however is much more directed at his natural constituency the PDRC which had originally planned to incite a coup but had failed.

So the general has made it clear to all the lunatics running the asylum that if the army has to come out it will be for keeps. I hope the Far Right Majority here take note of how fragile their feudal paradise has become, for which they can thank K Suthep and his backers.. .

wrong yet again..you can thank this government that has bought it all on themselves and is dragging the people down with them..right wing..hahahaha.

Militant right wing I'd meant to say.

Very militant far out right wing, yes.

[15Peter20]

I thought the role of the EC focused on the validity and organization of elections. The clue is in the name - ELECTION Commission. But so far we've had them weighing in on issues having nothing to do with elections and now they're setting up meetings with the army. 'Mission creep' would be putting it very politely. They are clearly a bunch of tools but the question is, who is using them?

Edited April 5, 2014 by 15Peter20