To all the posters pouring scorn on the only politician speaking sense, show me an alternative from the current administration. They have all abandoned their stations.

Some more questions for the same group who will surely decline to answer because they lack the ken.

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for?

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing?

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

If you can't answer these questions then you should not be posting your twisted distorted nonsense in response to someone who can.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for...

Ask Korn he admitted the Dems outspent others in the last election...and it didn't work

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing...

Ask Suthep he is the master at preventing people from exercising their electoral rights...

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

They should throw out the vote and make it mandatory that reps attend voting sessions ...

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

They have the right to complain and oppose a "charge" a charge is not the same as a finding or conviction..

Everyone has the right to charge and defend against charges...

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

Unless there is a complete gag order and in most free countries...yes it is fair to criticize courts and legal bodies... It is called the adversarial system... and given the context here... hardly impartial bodies,,,,

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

I believe the Mp should represent his/her constituency and find the definition of "what is right" measured by the highest moral or ehtical personal integrity.....but we are talking about politicians here... so that may entirely be moot...

You prove my case

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Fact: Thai wife says we all want elections, but we want fair elections

The Thai People who are not sheep of a corrupt Government, we the people are aware of alleged corruption and abuses of authority by the current PTP Party

and the negative effects on the country associated with the influence of former prime minister Thakin Shinawatra.

In Jan 2014 the Election Commission (EC) had repeatedly stated it could not guarantee a fair election, but the Caretaker Government insisted on going ahead with it in a bid to whitewash its wrongdoings.

In Feb... was this a Democratic Election .............. No

Unless an election is fair, it can not be democratic.

Government supporters continued to threaten independent organisations, the people and political parties which opposed it. and the police fail to perform their duties.

Ms Yingluck had never called for the pro-government and red-shirt demonstrators to behave, suggesting that she supported the actions of these same redshirt demonstrators.

We the Thai People have witnessed red-shirt demonstrators threaten other party members without facing arrest.

The Democrat Party has also been threatened, many times if they want to campaign in Issan

During the 2005 general election, a political canvasser belonging to his party in Phichit province had been told to stop his campaigning.

When the threat was ignored, the canvasser was shot dead in front of his house three days before the election. Police have still not arrested any suspects

In 2014 things are even worse. Anti-government demonstrators were being ambushed on a main Hyway and no suspects had been arrested.

Under these circumstances, No other party but the PTP is safe to campaign for votes in the North East of Thailand

“The [Democrat] party conducted a survey of potential candidates nationwide and found that 80% had no safe place to campaign for votes, except those in the South, Bangkok and parts of the Central Plains.

So, is this a democratic Election, is it fair if only one political party can campaign for votes but others cannot,

FACT: Before we can have another Election in Thailand, the next Election must be FAIR to all Parties

Maybe your wife should run for office.

Oh my god no

she has a big enough head now

Having someone in Parliment that believes in the truth would never be allowed under PTP

One post removed

11) Do not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

To all the posters pouring scorn on the only politician speaking sense, show me an alternative from the current administration. They have all abandoned their stations.

Some more questions for the same group who will surely decline to answer because they lack the ken.

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for?

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing?

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

If you can't answer these questions then you should not be posting your twisted distorted nonsense in response to someone who can.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for...

Ask Korn he admitted the Dems outspent others in the last election...and it didn't work

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing...

Ask Suthep he is the master at preventing people from exercising their electoral rights...

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

They should throw out the vote and make it mandatory that reps attend voting sessions ...

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

They have the right to complain and oppose a "charge" a charge is not the same as a finding or conviction..

Everyone has the right to charge and defend against charges...

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

Unless there is a complete gag order and in most free countries...yes it is fair to criticize courts and legal bodies... It is called the adversarial system... and given the context here... hardly impartial bodies,,,,

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

I believe the Mp should represent his/her constituency and find the definition of "what is right" measured by the highest moral or ehtical personal integrity.....but we are talking about politicians here... so that may entirely be moot...

The answer to all your questions is

What is and what is not a fair Election

with out fair elections they can not be a true democracy

Can people get more ignorant and arrogant than this Abhisit?

Does he even realize how many Thais had pinned their hopes on him many years ago to finally change this country for good- he failed them miserably ? I don't think any ex- Thai PM has ever disappointing his followers more than him (including my Thai family)!

I still believe that he made the biggest mistake in his political life when he became a military installed PM against the will of the majority of the Thai people - if he would have had any integrity he would have said no! Instead he went for the power without the mandate of the people!

The man is so full of himself that he still does not realize that he is a thing of the past - nobody in his right mind wants to associate with him as the failed ex-PM with blood on his hands he can only do one thing - disappear from the political stage forever - he and the Democrats are totally insignificant to the future of this country - he is the biggest failure in Thai political history.

He and the Democrats are non electable to most of the Thai electorate - they should vacate the political stage and make room for a new party with new leaders who might have some real new ideas instead of cheap copies of Thaksin's so called popular policies to try and swing the electorate or get into power again without being elected.

"The Democrats are ready for an election whenever the election process is fair enough, he said." - what does he mean by that? When will the election process be fair enough for him? - Once he silenced, intimidated and disenfranchised all those who do not want to vote for him?

I hope he does not come up with the "vote buying myth" - because his own deputy leader admitted that the democrats spent more money on vote buying last time around than the PT party!

Or maybe he means that maybe the Thai people can go and elect the leaders they want without being stopped and intimidated by Suthep's thugs?

Or maybe it's fair enough once Suthep has his "reforms" in place to make sure they win an election - which they never could in real life?

Abhisit has become irrelevant - he should step aside and then maybe the Democrat party will survive - with him as leader they are doomed - he has no new ideas and zero charisma - he is a boring member of the so called elite who are against change in a country that needs change more than any other country in the region - Abhisit stands for the same old - he is part of the rich, low class arrogant elite in this country who looks down on the poor.

He has become so insignificant that he is not even used as a pawn anymore in the political game that is playing out behind the scenes at the moment.

For me personally he is the biggest disappointment - as me and my Thai family had once great hopes in him and the Democrats - the moment he associated himself with crooks like Suthep and became his puppet these hopes where destroyed, the moment he sided with criminals staging a coup to rob the country once more instead of getting rid of Thaksin by legal means our trust in him was betrayed.

The economic performance of the last Democrat led government was an absolute disaster - and corruption was as widespread as during the reign of PT.

The trust he betrayed can never be restored - Abhisit and Suthep should go and with them a dark chapter of Thai political history should be closed - make place for new people who might restore the trust people once had in the Democrats - as long as they are seen as the puppets of the anti-democrat movement behind the scenes they will never win an election!

You have many good points in my opinion, but you do not mention others equally important.

Vote buying is deplorable and needs to be stopped obviously, but it was not the decisive factor.

But right now there are no free & fair elections - see post #12 from tezzainoz

If elections were free and fair then the situation would be very different don't you think?

the question is how do we get to a point where free and fair elections are possible, regardless if Abhisit would stand or not?

To all the posters pouring scorn on the only politician speaking sense, show me an alternative from the current administration. They have all abandoned their stations.

Some more questions for the same group who will surely decline to answer because they lack the ken.

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for?

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing?

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

If you can't answer these questions then you should not be posting your twisted distorted nonsense in response to someone who can.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for...

Ask Korn he admitted the Dems outspent others in the last election...and it didn't work

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing...

Ask Suthep he is the master at preventing people from exercising their electoral rights...

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

They should throw out the vote and make it mandatory that reps attend voting sessions ...

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

They have the right to complain and oppose a "charge" a charge is not the same as a finding or conviction..

Everyone has the right to charge and defend against charges...

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

Unless there is a complete gag order and in most free countries...yes it is fair to criticize courts and legal bodies... It is called the adversarial system... and given the context here... hardly impartial bodies,,,,

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

I believe the Mp should represent his/her constituency and find the definition of "what is right" measured by the highest moral or ehtical personal integrity.....but we are talking about politicians here... so that may entirely be moot...

You prove my case

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

? Huh...? what case...? read my original post... i stated known facts out there in the real world... not scorn as you imply and I answered your questions.... but this thread isn't about you or me ..it is about the claim the Nation made by inferring Abhisit as the Messiah...which is about as ridiculous as nipples on a turtle... the piece reads like a PR brochure for the Democratic Party ...

To all the posters pouring scorn on the only politician speaking sense, show me an alternative from the current administration. They have all abandoned their stations.

Some more questions for the same group who will surely decline to answer because they lack the ken.

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for?

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing?

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

If you can't answer these questions then you should not be posting your twisted distorted nonsense in response to someone who can.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for...

Ask Korn he admitted the Dems outspent others in the last election...and it didn't work

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing...

Ask Suthep he is the master at preventing people from exercising their electoral rights...

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

They should throw out the vote and make it mandatory that reps attend voting sessions ...

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

They have the right to complain and oppose a "charge" a charge is not the same as a finding or conviction..

Everyone has the right to charge and defend against charges...

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

Unless there is a complete gag order and in most free countries...yes it is fair to criticize courts and legal bodies... It is called the adversarial system... and given the context here... hardly impartial bodies,,,,

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

I believe the Mp should represent his/her constituency and find the definition of "what is right" measured by the highest moral or ehtical personal integrity.....but we are talking about politicians here... so that may entirely be moot...

You prove my case

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

? Huh...? what case...? read my original post... i stated known facts out there in the real world... not scorn as you imply and I answered your questions.... but this thread isn't about you or me ..it is about the claim the Nation made by inferring Abhisit as the Messiah...which is about as ridiculous as nipples on a turtle... the piece reads like a PR brochure for the Democratic Party ...

You didn't answer the questions at all. It was all party political nonsense on behalf of the incumbents.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Until laws are uniformly enforced, until education is a priority instead of a privilege, until the Constitution safeguards the people for whom it was to have been written...there can be no peace, no ten-cent saviors and no real growth.

.

You didn't answer the questions at all. It was all party political nonsense on behalf of the incumbents.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Hogwash..... Your questions were loaded and skewed to the max... you just don't like the answers...but matters not carry on.... Abhisit speaks sense all right nonsense...he is a willow in the wind but never mind... he won't factor in more than expressing his non-sense anyway...i believe he has lost the momentum he may have had last Songkran... but let me ask you this...in lieu of Leekpai and Abhisit and Suthep...is there any other Democrat that might offer the party a better chance in an election..? ( nothing veiled here...) curious... as I asked in my original comment...I sincerely hope there can be and am willing to entertain that idea...

To all the posters pouring scorn on the only politician speaking sense, show me an alternative from the current administration. They have all abandoned their stations.

Some more questions for the same group who will surely decline to answer because they lack the ken.

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for?

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing?

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

If you can't answer these questions then you should not be posting your twisted distorted nonsense in response to someone who can.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

What should happen to a candidate when votes are paid for...

Ask Korn he admitted the Dems outspent others in the last election...and it didn't work

What should happen when the opposition is physically abused when canvassing...

Ask Suthep he is the master at preventing people from exercising their electoral rights...

When MPs cheat in house voting, what should their party do?

They should throw out the vote and make it mandatory that reps attend voting sessions ...

If their party fails to discipline them, do they have the moral ground to complain when they are charged?

They have the right to complain and oppose a "charge" a charge is not the same as a finding or conviction..

Everyone has the right to charge and defend against charges...

Should the offending party criticise the courts and legal bodies?

Unless there is a complete gag order and in most free countries...yes it is fair to criticize courts and legal bodies... It is called the adversarial system... and given the context here... hardly impartial bodies,,,,

In cases such as the amnesty bill, would you expect you MP to vote for what is right or vote with the party in a censure debate?

I believe the Mp should represent his/her constituency and find the definition of "what is right" measured by the highest moral or ehtical personal integrity.....but we are talking about politicians here... so that may entirely be moot...

The answer to all your questions is

What is and what is not a fair Election

with out fair elections they can not be a true democracy

I'm with these people, reforms before ________.

As we all wake up this morning to realize that Khaosod's lead story yesterday was actually mostly fiction and an elementary schoolboy's attempt to embroider a Thaksin fantasy that portraits Suthep as something of a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Count Dracula - we find that Suthep never at any point suggested that he wanted to be prime minister. Ever. Nor had Suthep at any point characterized himself as the leader of a coup. Ever. What Suthep did suggest is that a prime minister could be nominated by the people, pending royal approval.

Having said that, it will never happen, and not only that, should not happen. Suthep is bending the constitution here. The constitution allows for the nomination of an interim prime minister in the event of a parliamentary vacuum through articles 172 and 173. But that is for the Constitutional Court to decide. Not Suthep. And Suthep ought to know that this narrative too easily plays into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Suthep's skills for inspiring support and public enthusiasm are undeniable, and he has also without question been key in bringing about a real climate and thirst for reform. The Yingluck administration would not be in the tenuous position it's in without the mobilization efforts of Suthep since November to build populous support. The rallies and walks are a symbol of peaceful expression, and they are an ebullient and positive image to maintain. But at this point Suthep really should just shut up. It's time for him to take a back seat. Let the judicial process do what it's supposed to do - and that is to constitutionally uphold the law. This process should at all times be a constitutional process. There are two key verdicts coming up - the NACC and the Constitutional Court. Concerning the later, if they find Yingluck guilty of abuse of power, they will doubtless base their entire ruling on the precepts of the constitution. As long as the courts' rulings are heard and respected, this crisis will be resolved constitutionally, as it should.

Abhisit presents the correct formula here : respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. He's right. Democracy cannot survive without respect for the rule of law. If this current situation teaches us anything, it is that. Even here, though, in an article from The Nation - we have problems with catchy headlines. At no part in this article does Abhisit or any other Democrat characterize their party as a " saviour ". But what Abhisit does do here is to reiterate that the respect for the process of law is the foundation stone of democracy.

As we all wake up this morning to realize that Khaosod's lead story yesterday was actually mostly fiction and an elementary schoolboy's attempt to embroider a Thaksin fantasy that portraits Suthep as something of a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Count Dracula - we find that Suthep never at any point suggested that he wanted to be prime minister. Ever. Nor had Suthep at any point characterized himself as the leader of a coup. Ever. What Suthep did suggest is that a prime minister could be nominated by the people, pending royal approval.

Having said that, it will never happen, and not only that, should not happen. Suthep is bending the constitution here. The constitution allows for the nomination of an interim prime minister in the event of a parliamentary vacuum through articles 172 and 173. But that is for the Constitutional Court to decide. Not Suthep. And Suthep ought to know that this narrative too easily plays into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Suthep's skills for inspiring support and public enthusiasm are undeniable, and he has also without question been key in bringing about a real climate and thirst for reform. The Yingluck administration would not be in the tenuous position it's in without the mobilization efforts of Suthep since November to build populous support. The rallies and walks are a symbol of peaceful expression, and they are an ebullient and positive image to maintain. But at this point Suthep really should just shut up. It's time for him to take a back seat. Let the judicial process do what it's supposed to do - and that is to constitutionally uphold the law. This process should at all times be a constitutional process. There are two key verdicts coming up - the NACC and the Constitutional Court. Concerning the later, if they find Yingluck guilty of abuse of power, they will doubtless base their entire ruling on the precepts of the constitution. As long as the courts' rulings are heard and respected, this crisis will be resolved constitutionally, as it should.

Abhisit presents the correct formula here : respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. He's right. Democracy cannot survive without respect for the rule of law. If this current situation teaches us anything, it is that. Even here, though, in an article from The Nation - we have problems with catchy headlines. At no part in this article does Abhisit or any other Democrat characterize their party as a " saviour ". But what Abhisit does do here is to reiterate that the respect for the process of law is the foundation stone of democracy.

For Abhisit to be credited by you for the "correct formula" is an absurd notion.. considering his checkered past track record..it is all well and good to take the ideals I believe we all agree would be the framework for a higher moral ground moving forward....ie: respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. but it lacks sincerity coming from Abhisits mouth considering he does not practice what he preaches...

You didn't answer the questions at all. It was all party political nonsense on behalf of the incumbents.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Hogwash..... Your questions were loaded and skewed to the max... you just don't like the answers...but matters not carry on.... Abhisit speaks sense all right nonsense...he is a willow in the wind but never mind... he won't factor in more than expressing his non-sense anyway...i believe he has lost the momentum he may have had last Songkran... but let me ask you this...in lieu of Leekpai and Abhisit and Suthep...is there any other Democrat that might offer the party a better chance in an election..? ( nothing veiled here...) curious... as I asked in my original comment...I sincerely hope there can be and am willing to entertain that idea...

My questions were 100℅ related to the current conflict and are therefore fully relevant.

As I said, I didn't expect any true answers from the daengophiles

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"Dems can play saviour role: Abhisit"

Read article three times. Nowhere does it say he said this.

It's the article headline!!!

He points out what needs to be done in 3 steps - he doesn't have to say these words, just illustrate the means of how it can be accomplished. I would have thought that pretty obvious myself!!

As we all wake up this morning to realize that Khaosod's lead story yesterday was actually mostly fiction and an elementary schoolboy's attempt to embroider a Thaksin fantasy that portraits Suthep as something of a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Count Dracula - we find that Suthep never at any point suggested that he wanted to be prime minister. Ever. Nor had Suthep at any point characterized himself as the leader of a coup. Ever. What Suthep did suggest is that a prime minister could be nominated by the people, pending royal approval.

Having said that, it will never happen, and not only that, should not happen. Suthep is bending the constitution here. The constitution allows for the nomination of an interim prime minister in the event of a parliamentary vacuum through articles 172 and 173. But that is for the Constitutional Court to decide. Not Suthep. And Suthep ought to know that this narrative too easily plays into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Suthep's skills for inspiring support and public enthusiasm are undeniable, and he has also without question been key in bringing about a real climate and thirst for reform. The Yingluck administration would not be in the tenuous position it's in without the mobilization efforts of Suthep since November to build populous support. The rallies and walks are a symbol of peaceful expression, and they are an ebullient and positive image to maintain. But at this point Suthep really should just shut up. It's time for him to take a back seat. Let the judicial process do what it's supposed to do - and that is to constitutionally uphold the law. This process should at all times be a constitutional process. There are two key verdicts coming up - the NACC and the Constitutional Court. Concerning the later, if they find Yingluck guilty of abuse of power, they will doubtless base their entire ruling on the precepts of the constitution. As long as the courts' rulings are heard and respected, this crisis will be resolved constitutionally, as it should.

Abhisit presents the correct formula here : respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. He's right. Democracy cannot survive without respect for the rule of law. If this current situation teaches us anything, it is that. Even here, though, in an article from The Nation - we have problems with catchy headlines. At no part in this article does Abhisit or any other Democrat characterize their party as a " saviour ". But what Abhisit does do here is to reiterate that the respect for the process of law is the foundation stone of democracy.

For Abhisit to be credited by you for the "correct formula" is an absurd notion.. considering his checkered past track record..it is all well and good to take the ideals I believe we all agree would be the framework for a higher moral ground moving forward....ie: respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. but it lacks sincerity coming from Abhisits mouth considering he does not practice what he preaches...

What is "checkered" about Abhisit's past?

Where has he failed to respect the law?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

.

As we all wake up this morning to realize that Khaosod's lead story yesterday was actually mostly fiction and an elementary schoolboy's attempt to embroider a Thaksin fantasy that portraits Suthep as something of a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Count Dracula - we find that Suthep never at any point suggested that he wanted to be prime minister. Ever. Nor had Suthep at any point characterized himself as the leader of a coup. Ever. What Suthep did suggest is that a prime minister could be nominated by the people, pending royal approval.

Having said that, it will never happen, and not only that, should not happen. Suthep is bending the constitution here. The constitution allows for the nomination of an interim prime minister in the event of a parliamentary vacuum through articles 172 and 173. But that is for the Constitutional Court to decide. Not Suthep. And Suthep ought to know that this narrative too easily plays into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Suthep's skills for inspiring support and public enthusiasm are undeniable, and he has also without question been key in bringing about a real climate and thirst for reform. The Yingluck administration would not be in the tenuous position it's in without the mobilization efforts of Suthep since November to build populous support. The rallies and walks are a symbol of peaceful expression, and they are an ebullient and positive image to maintain. But at this point Suthep really should just shut up. It's time for him to take a back seat. Let the judicial process do what it's supposed to do - and that is to constitutionally uphold the law. This process should at all times be a constitutional process. There are two key verdicts coming up - the NACC and the Constitutional Court. Concerning the later, if they find Yingluck guilty of abuse of power, they will doubtless base their entire ruling on the precepts of the constitution. As long as the courts' rulings are heard and respected, this crisis will be resolved constitutionally, as it should.

Abhisit presents the correct formula here : respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. He's right. Democracy cannot survive without respect for the rule of law. If this current situation teaches us anything, it is that. Even here, though, in an article from The Nation - we have problems with catchy headlines. At no part in this article does Abhisit or any other Democrat characterize their party as a " saviour ". But what Abhisit does do here is to reiterate that the respect for the process of law is the foundation stone of democracy.

For Abhisit to be credited by you for the "correct formula" is an absurd notion.. considering his checkered past track record..it is all well and good to take the ideals I believe we all agree would be the framework for a higher moral ground moving forward....ie: respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. but it lacks sincerity coming from Abhisits mouth considering he does not practice what he preaches...

What is "checkered" about Abhisit's past?

Where has he failed to respect the law?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Read my original post..... google ......Abhisit Corruption Leekpai corruption Suthep corruption and start from there...after that look globally and not just at the Bangkok Post and the Nation for starters..

As we all wake up this morning to realize that Khaosod's lead story yesterday was actually mostly fiction and an elementary schoolboy's attempt to embroider a Thaksin fantasy that portraits Suthep as something of a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Count Dracula - we find that Suthep never at any point suggested that he wanted to be prime minister. Ever. Nor had Suthep at any point characterized himself as the leader of a coup. Ever. What Suthep did suggest is that a prime minister could be nominated by the people, pending royal approval.

Having said that, it will never happen, and not only that, should not happen. Suthep is bending the constitution here. The constitution allows for the nomination of an interim prime minister in the event of a parliamentary vacuum through articles 172 and 173. But that is for the Constitutional Court to decide. Not Suthep. And Suthep ought to know that this narrative too easily plays into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Suthep's skills for inspiring support and public enthusiasm are undeniable, and he has also without question been key in bringing about a real climate and thirst for reform. The Yingluck administration would not be in the tenuous position it's in without the mobilization efforts of Suthep since November to build populous support. The rallies and walks are a symbol of peaceful expression, and they are an ebullient and positive image to maintain. But at this point Suthep really should just shut up. It's time for him to take a back seat. Let the judicial process do what it's supposed to do - and that is to constitutionally uphold the law. This process should at all times be a constitutional process. There are two key verdicts coming up - the NACC and the Constitutional Court. Concerning the later, if they find Yingluck guilty of abuse of power, they will doubtless base their entire ruling on the precepts of the constitution. As long as the courts' rulings are heard and respected, this crisis will be resolved constitutionally, as it should.

Abhisit presents the correct formula here : respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. He's right. Democracy cannot survive without respect for the rule of law. If this current situation teaches us anything, it is that. Even here, though, in an article from The Nation - we have problems with catchy headlines. At no part in this article does Abhisit or any other Democrat characterize their party as a " saviour ". But what Abhisit does do here is to reiterate that the respect for the process of law is the foundation stone of democracy.

I don't think that anything from the 'Thai Sun' or 'Thai Daily Sport' even (if it is still being printed) doesn't deserve the time for me to read such drivel!!!

As we all wake up this morning to realize that Khaosod's lead story yesterday was actually mostly fiction and an elementary schoolboy's attempt to embroider a Thaksin fantasy that portraits Suthep as something of a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Count Dracula - we find that Suthep never at any point suggested that he wanted to be prime minister. Ever. Nor had Suthep at any point characterized himself as the leader of a coup. Ever. What Suthep did suggest is that a prime minister could be nominated by the people, pending royal approval.

Having said that, it will never happen, and not only that, should not happen. Suthep is bending the constitution here. The constitution allows for the nomination of an interim prime minister in the event of a parliamentary vacuum through articles 172 and 173. But that is for the Constitutional Court to decide. Not Suthep. And Suthep ought to know that this narrative too easily plays into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Suthep's skills for inspiring support and public enthusiasm are undeniable, and he has also without question been key in bringing about a real climate and thirst for reform. The Yingluck administration would not be in the tenuous position it's in without the mobilization efforts of Suthep since November to build populous support. The rallies and walks are a symbol of peaceful expression, and they are an ebullient and positive image to maintain. But at this point Suthep really should just shut up. It's time for him to take a back seat. Let the judicial process do what it's supposed to do - and that is to constitutionally uphold the law. This process should at all times be a constitutional process. There are two key verdicts coming up - the NACC and the Constitutional Court. Concerning the later, if they find Yingluck guilty of abuse of power, they will doubtless base their entire ruling on the precepts of the constitution. As long as the courts' rulings are heard and respected, this crisis will be resolved constitutionally, as it should.

Abhisit presents the correct formula here : respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. He's right. Democracy cannot survive without respect for the rule of law. If this current situation teaches us anything, it is that. Even here, though, in an article from The Nation - we have problems with catchy headlines. At no part in this article does Abhisit or any other Democrat characterize their party as a " saviour ". But what Abhisit does do here is to reiterate that the respect for the process of law is the foundation stone of democracy.

For Abhisit to be credited by you for the "correct formula" is an absurd notion.. considering his checkered past track record..it is all well and good to take the ideals I believe we all agree would be the framework for a higher moral ground moving forward....ie: respect for the rule of law, negotiations, and reform. but it lacks sincerity coming from Abhisits mouth considering he does not practice what he preaches...

What is "checkered" about Abhisit's past?

Where has he failed to respect the law?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Read my original post..... google ......Abhisit Corruption Leekpai corruption Suthep corruption and start from there...after that look globally and not just at the Bangkok Post and the Nation for starters..

You made the comment. You should show the convictions

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

You didn't answer the questions at all. It was all party political nonsense on behalf of the incumbents.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Hogwash..... Your questions were loaded and skewed to the max... you just don't like the answers...but matters not carry on.... Abhisit speaks sense all right nonsense...he is a willow in the wind but never mind... he won't factor in more than expressing his non-sense anyway...i believe he has lost the momentum he may have had last Songkran... but let me ask you this...in lieu of Leekpai and Abhisit and Suthep...is there any other Democrat that might offer the party a better chance in an election..? ( nothing veiled here...) curious... as I asked in my original comment...I sincerely hope there can be and am willing to entertain that idea...

My questions were 100℅ related to the current conflict and are therefore fully relevant.

As I said, I didn't expect any true answers from the daengophiles

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Typical ..they may have been relevant to the current conflict but not to the piece in this thread......but you can't answer either... matters not..carry on with color campaign..

................This is part two of the Suthep Abhisit Leekpai plan... but both Leekpai and Abhiset have their own ghosts to contend with... Leekpai's government was brought down by the corruption of none other than Suthep...it is all public record...Abhisit has several cases pending which have been unattended lo these many years by the "independent agencies" and was also tainted by the corruption/back room deals/shenanigans of yep ...Suthep...and several will expire in the next twelve to 15 months... probably because it is not in the interest of this group of cowboys...to expedite or bring them to a close ....all public record...so...I'm not tossing my hat in this ring..and I hardly think the general consensus now keeps Abhisit's choir boy image any longer...

The Abhisit government was charged in several cases of corruption, particularly related to spending under the Thai Khem Khaeng economic stimulus program. After much public pressure, Abhisit appointed Banlu Siripanich head of an investigative committee to investigate allegations within the Ministry of Public Health. Banlu's committee's findings included: bribery by a supplier of ambulances; irregularities in the purchase of UV fans; overspending on construction of building; inflated prices for machines and equipment.

Abhisit's Social Development and Human Security Minister also resigned due to a corruption scandal. In addition, Apirak Kosayodhin, the Democrat Party Governor of Bangkok, were indicted by the National Counter Corruption Commission on 11 November 2008 for corruption in the purchase of 6.6 billion baht in fire-fighting equipment. Apirak resigned from his office on 13 November.

Democrat MPs saw their personal net worth increase by 4.3 billion baht while Abhisit was Prime Minister. Democrat financier Kalaya Sophonphanit's personal wealth increased by 422 million baht, while the wealth of MPs Wilat Chanpitak and Chalermlak Kebsap increased by 303 and 302 million baht respectively. 10 out of 10 MPs whose wealth increased the most during Abhisit's premiership were all Democrat MPs.[210]

TPI illegal donation scandal

In early 2009, the Democrat Party was accused by the Opposition of receiving 258 million baht in illegal donations from businessman-turned-politician Prachai Leophairatana. Prachai was the founder of failed petrochemical firm TPI Polene (which was under rehabilitation under the Financial Institutions Development Fund) as well as advertising shell companies Messiah Business and Creation. In the lead-up to the 2005 general election, while Abhisit was Deputy Party Leader, TPI Polene allegedly transferred the funds to Messiah Business and Creation, which then transferred the funds to senior Democrat Party leaders and their relatives in batches of less than 2 million baht each to over 70 separate bank accounts (2 million baht is the maximum that banks can transfer without reporting to the Anti-Money Laundering Office).[211] The opposition claimed that the Democrats never reported the donation, which was far in excess to legal limits, to the Election Commission.[212] Abhisit denied the allegations, claiming that his party's accounts had been checked by auditors. Other Democrat Party leaders claimed that "the alleged donation never took place" and that the "party never obtained it."[213] Receiving and using an unlawful donation could result in the dissolution of the Democrat Party and the banning of its executives from political office for violating the Political Party Act.

The Opposition raised the issue in a debate of no-confidence, and accused Abhisit of approving false account reports for 2004 and 2005 to the EC and filing false information.[214] The government won the vote, despite the Bangkok Post calling the evidence against the Democrats "overwhelming" and even the pro-Democrat Nation called the Opposition's presentation "clear-cut."[215][216] However, the scandal was subsequently investigated by the Department of Special Investigation. The DSI prepared a 7,000 page report which it submitted to the Election Commission in early 2010.

The EC claimed that the DSI report contained many holes.

Yes... the very same EC that was appointed by coup leaders...so that is not unexpected...

Now I am sure that there will be posters who will attempt to disavow these facts and are free to do so...but the fact remains Abhisit remains the front for a far more sinister group that only use the banner of Democracy as it's hue and cry... many things of which we cannot speak here...and it really is a shame we can't because it is indeed an inherent factor and one that should not be taken lightly...and will soon all be played out in the open.... and the eventualities I am sure will catch many off guard..

I wish Abhisit was his own man..I really do.. I like him... he is fairly adept at handling tough questions...and for that I give him credit...but unfortunately he too is too engrained in the patronage-client system of politic which has little or nothing to do with Democracy ...sin nam jai.. (Gifts of Good WIll) the giving of monetary perks when bidding on contracts...etc ... during his time in office it has been reported that the "good will" perks went from 20-30% to 30-40%...

The World Justice Report says, that Thailand’s civil justice system, is under political influence.

But enough on Abhisit... there is plenty of stuff out there on him if you bother to check...

Nobody currently in the thrust of Politics is clean.... I daresay politics does not lend itself to be a pristine process of Democracy...but I truly do believe that now fronting Abhisit would be a major stumble on the Dems part.. He is too polarized already and the majority of voters see him as the enemy... course' nobody is asking me what I think so I am just spouting off here just like all the rest...

but...I think a better play for the Dems is to front somebody that hasn't been targeted by as much vehemence by the opposition as Abhisit has.. he surely cannot win a legitimate election.

Does anybody know a more moderate Dem or is there a list somewhere to look at of people they can offer as a potential candidate that doesn't come with as much baggage...? I just don't see him as being able to move country forward given the stands he has taken...

It is all about posing. Showing off a haughty, better than thou rhetoric but, while in office: did he acted on those alleged principles?

Why then choose a confirm corrupt politico such as Suthep to be his DPM? Abhisit is beholden to the archaic system of patronage and feudalism. He is part of the problem.

Meanwhile, back in Lilliput-Ammart-Bangkok Kool-aid addicts keep mumbling:

But, but, in spite of those few lapses in judgement and quasi corruption scams and/or schemes, Abhisit means well.

After all, he is a Democrat and everybody knows that Democrats can do no wrong. Only the bad, bad Reds are bad.

.

You made the comment. You should show the convictions

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

When you get to a computer...do your own due diligence... hard to do on nexus 7 I know...but... just do some more research... or keep your head in the sand...not gonna do your homework for you... if you can disprove anything I posted feel free..

Everyone knows that Suthep and Abhisit are just puppets to the same masters, but nice try in trying to seperate yourselves!

and is Yingluck not a puppet to an even dangerous Master

A puppet is a puppet is a puppet. A puppet does not change its nature if the shirt is Red or Yellow. Sorry WS, could not resist it!

The Democrats are plain losers who have never won any elections and are only good at causing or instigating street protests to come into power! Bunch of losers who only cater for the ammart and the rich thai chinese. And for analysis purposes, whenever they are in power, the thai economy is always down and also they are not so clean as they claim they are....there has been so many past court cases filed against them for corruption too. And they some of them are educated oevrseas.....they are only exenophobic especially against farangs. (please take note of that most of you TV users.)

You didn't answer the questions at all. It was all party political nonsense on behalf of the incumbents.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Hogwash..... Your questions were loaded and skewed to the max... you just don't like the answers...but matters not carry on.... Abhisit speaks sense all right nonsense...he is a willow in the wind but never mind... he won't factor in more than expressing his non-sense anyway...i believe he has lost the momentum he may have had last Songkran... but let me ask you this...in lieu of Leekpai and Abhisit and Suthep...is there any other Democrat that might offer the party a better chance in an election..? ( nothing veiled here...) curious... as I asked in my original comment...I sincerely hope there can be and am willing to entertain that idea...

My questions were 100℅ related to the current conflict and are therefore fully relevant.

As I said, I didn't expect any true answers from the daengophiles

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Typical ..they may have been relevant to the current conflict but not to the piece in this thread......but you can't answer either... matters not..carry on with color campaign..

Really? I think you should read what Abhisit said once more.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

You made the comment. You should show the convictions

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

When you get to a computer...do your own due diligence... hard to do on nexus 7 I know...but... just do some more research... or keep your head in the sand...not gonna do your homework for you... if you can disprove anything I posted feel free..

I don't need a computer in any form to tell me that Abhisit has no convictions.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Both sides have always been corrupt, are probably still corrupt and will probably be corrupt in the future. After all T.I.T we are talking about.

Thai people, who don't want corruption ( I do believe that there are some, who really don't), now just need to figure out, which one is the least corrupt out of the bunch and which one won't bankrupt the nation, with it's corrupt practices.