International alarm mounts over Thai coup

[rubl]

One difference between the UDD and the current government is that the UDD never seized control of all media in the country and imposed censorship. It can be difficult to say when marketing ends and propaganda begins, but once media has been seized and censorship imposed, I think the line has clearly been crossed. Of course Big Brother will use control of the media to assure the people that these controls are necessary to protect them.

You forgot that Yingluck tried to shut down Blue Sky but CC wouldn't have it.

Pretty sure that didn't happen. YL govt threatened to take action against backers of Blue Sky, not shut it down.

and the CAPO threatened news outlets not to publish any news which could be interpreted as positive towards PDRC and other anti-government protesters.

In the mean time the 'World' seems disinterested with Thailand's internal problems. Of course, personally I'm waiting for some more statements from Robert A. about how we should see the situation

[brewsterbudgen]

I'd be interested in knowing your sources. But, assuming for the moment you have presented and accurate and unbiased description of the UDD tactics, Dr Weng sounds like the equivalent of Carl Rove in the Republican Party of the US during the George W. Bush presidency. Except that the UDD was not in government in Thailand.

One difference between the UDD and the current government is that the UDD never seized control of all media in the country and imposed censorship. It can be difficult to say when marketing ends and propaganda begins, but once media has been seized and censorship imposed, I think the line has clearly been crossed. Of course Big Brother will use control of the media to assure the people that these controls are necessary to protect them.

Djjamie "unbiased"???? I don't think even he would agree with that!

[heybruce]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Apparently I can not mention that constitution without reminding people that it was "approved" in a referendum in which the only choices were to approve the constitution or continue to live under military rule. You know that rubl.

[heybruce]

There are also some people here who think it's legitimate to remove a prime minister for hosting a cooking show or re-assigning a minister appointed by her predecessor. I think there should be legal means to remove heads of state for serious crimes, but not trivial offenses.

It's the law that perjury and nepotism are offenses that can lead to a PM's dismissal.

If the various Thaksin governments that have ruled for the vast majority of the past 15 years felt these laws were unjust, they could have easily had them changed with their majority in Parliament.

p.s. Even though he perjured himself in court, the actual permanent removal of the aforementioned PM was effected when the Party Financier in Dubai decided unilaterally to not have proxy Samak return as PM, but instead selected proxy Somchai to be PM.

Are you new to this? The 2007 Constitution written at the directions of the military included conflict of interests rules for elected officials, but not for the civil service or military. It also made half the senate appointed, making changes to the constitution impossible without the approval of the traditional elites in these appointed positions.

News Flash from 1997 for the astute heybruce:

The same conflict of interest law that Yingluck violated was also written in the "People's Constitution" of 1997.

Section 111

A member of the House of Representatives shall not, through the status or position of member of the House of Representatives, interfere or intervene in the recruitment, appointment, reshuffle, transfer, promotion and elevation of the salary scale of a Government official holding a permanent position or receiving salary and not being a political official, an official or employee of a State agency, State enterprise or local government organisation, or cause such persons to be removed from office.

Changes to the constitution are not impossible, just more difficult, but surely with the 87 posts in this thread detailing how and why PTP was the majority, it could have achieved what it set out to do.

Heck, they almost got something as utterly incredulous as a blanket amnesty passed.

However, in the end, perjury and nepotism (or conflict of interest, as you say), are viewed unfavorably and considered illegal in most countries besides Thailand and any government, even the ever-popular PTP, trying to remove those from the criminal code would be looked upon unfavorably, eg. trying to make perjury no longer illegal.

You ignored the part about the 2007 constitution making half the Senate appointed with members selected by traditional institutions. That pretty much made it impossible for the PTP to change the constitution. In fact a large number of senators were charged with violating the constitution for trying.

[binjalin]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Apparently I can not mention that constitution without reminding people that it was "approved" in a referendum in which the only choices were to approve the constitution or continue to live under military rule. You know that rubl.

also no 'anti' campaign was permitted - Hobson's Choice which we will get again... undoubtedly

the 2015 'new' constitution

actually if they tackle the BIG THREE : judiciary, lese majeste and corruption it might bring some peace (call me a cynic but I'm doubtful but hopeful)

[heybruce]

Hence the references to 1984; as George Orwell clearly explained, if you want to control how people think you must control the language they use. It's amazing how people will do it to themselves. Soon the "goodthinkers" will be writing "Thaksin double ungood." Big Brother will be pleased.

Your right and that is why they had the UDD indoctrination schools that was set up and funded by 2 accused terrorists and an ex communist and her husband Dr Weng.

The eager young communist, Dr Weng, was in Thailand's underground movement 20 years ago now plays a major role in the UDD and was taught that propaganda should be blunt, simple and repeated incessantly to be effective. The UDD have shunned hard policy debates in favor of simple credos of justice denied and the hypocrisy of elites. Your narrative feeds into that.

A tactic he uses is to keep saying that "we are a peace-loving people". The many factions folded into the UDD organization are not told what the real strategy is because they might not agree and they might not act their part convincingly. The UDD supporters will feed upon this rhetoric like a new born baby on his mothers nipple, but rest assured Dr Weng being highly educated and thoroughly knowledgable on Maoist theory produces this narrative in line with his teachings.

So when you say "Big Brother" will be pleased. Unfortunately I have to agree with you going by your post.

I'd be interested in knowing your sources. But, assuming for the moment you have presented and accurate and unbiased description of the UDD tactics, Dr Weng sounds like the equivalent of Carl Rove in the Republican Party of the US during the George W. Bush presidency. Except that the UDD was not in government in Thailand.

One difference between the UDD and the current government is that the UDD never seized control of all media in the country and imposed censorship. It can be difficult to say when marketing ends and propaganda begins, but once media has been seized and censorship imposed, I think the line has clearly been crossed. Of course Big Brother will use control of the media to assure the people that these controls are necessary to protect them.

OK. Did Carl Rove have to flee America and hide in a foreign country because he was going to be persecuted for communist activities in America? The in the communist country he went too, he learnt all about the tactics I described above. Interesting. I cannot see it anywhere though.

UDD didn't control the media because they never had the power too. Trust me if they had the power there would be red shirt radio only and red villages only all over Thailand. They were starting at the top and working down. They even wanted to paint the police stations UDD red. The only thing they won't be painting red anymore is the blood on the streets of bBangkok thanks to the General seizing power and stopping the senseless killings of innocent protestors.

Let's just say we are lucky the UDD movement make up a minority within Thailand or else this dream of total control would have materialized.

The General is up north talking to the people, paying the people, giving free health care. If the red shirts had that power the same generosity could not be said. And that goes for the PDRC as well.

Move forward and reconcile my friend or you will be left behind.

And the military does control all media because they do have the power. Got it. Absolutely no parallels to Big Brother there.

[djjamie]

Your right and that is why they had the UDD indoctrination schools that was set up and funded by 2 accused terrorists and an ex communist and her husband Dr Weng.

The eager young communist, Dr Weng, was in Thailand's underground movement 20 years ago now plays a major role in the UDD and was taught that propaganda should be blunt, simple and repeated incessantly to be effective. The UDD have shunned hard policy debates in favor of simple credos of justice denied and the hypocrisy of elites. Your narrative feeds into that.

A tactic he uses is to keep saying that "we are a peace-loving people". The many factions folded into the UDD organization are not told what the real strategy is because they might not agree and they might not act their part convincingly. The UDD supporters will feed upon this rhetoric like a new born baby on his mothers nipple, but rest assured Dr Weng being highly educated and thoroughly knowledgable on Maoist theory produces this narrative in line with his teachings.

So when you say "Big Brother" will be pleased. Unfortunately I have to agree with you going by your post.

I'd be interested in knowing your sources. But, assuming for the moment you have presented and accurate and unbiased description of the UDD tactics, Dr Weng sounds like the equivalent of Carl Rove in the Republican Party of the US during the George W. Bush presidency. Except that the UDD was not in government in Thailand.

One difference between the UDD and the current government is that the UDD never seized control of all media in the country and imposed censorship. It can be difficult to say when marketing ends and propaganda begins, but once media has been seized and censorship imposed, I think the line has clearly been crossed. Of course Big Brother will use control of the media to assure the people that these controls are necessary to protect them.

OK. Did Carl Rove have to flee America and hide in a foreign country because he was going to be persecuted for communist activities in America? The in the communist country he went too, he learnt all about the tactics I described above. Interesting. I cannot see it anywhere though.

UDD didn't control the media because they never had the power too. Trust me if they had the power there would be red shirt radio only and red villages only all over Thailand. They were starting at the top and working down. They even wanted to paint the police stations UDD red. The only thing they won't be painting red anymore is the blood on the streets of bBangkok thanks to the General seizing power and stopping the senseless killings of innocent protestors.

Let's just say we are lucky the UDD movement make up a minority within Thailand or else this dream of total control would have materialized.

The General is up north talking to the people, paying the people, giving free health care. If the red shirts had that power the same generosity could not be said. And that goes for the PDRC as well.

Move forward and reconcile my friend or you will be left behind.

And the military does control all media because they do have the power. Got it. Absolutely no parallels to Big Brother there.

That's right. The same power the UDD yearn for.

Funny you say "Big Borther" The last 3 years big brother was running things. yinglucks big brother.

I would rather General Preyuth as the leader as opposed to Jatuporn. I think deep down you would too.

Reconcile mate. Leave the bitterness behind in the shadows where they belong.

[uty6543]

Everyone instead of going back and saying who did what to who why not look forward and try to put the past behind us and make suggestions about how the country should move forward and what should be in the new constitution.

I'll start it off with how about shorter time between elections (2 years) so if there is a problem with any government not too long to wait to vote again.

No protests to block any public highways.

Edited June 2, 2014 by uty6543

[heybruce]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

[Thailand]

"Analysts say the fact that the junta is detailing its economic plans is another suggestion that it expects to be in power for some time.!"

[heybruce]

Everyone instead of going back and saying who did what to who why not look forward and try to put the past behind us and make suggestions about how the country should move forward and what should be in the new constitution.

I'll start it off with how about shorter time between elections (2 years) so if there is a problem with any government not too long to wait to vote again.

No protests to block any public highways.

1. Transparent competitive bidding on all government contracts.

2. Transparency in all government spending, including military spending, unless there is a clear and urgent need for secrecy.

3. All government employees with any contract award responsibilities or spending authority, including military officers, must declare all assets and sources of income. If any of these assets or sources of income can be reasonably construed to represent a conflict of interest, the person either divests himself/herself of the assets and income or is removed from any position with contract and spending responsibilities. Severe penalties for non-compliance.

4. Libel laws relaxed so news media can report any verifiable fact without fear of legal consequences.

I can think of others, some of which can not be posted under current rules. I think those listed are the minimum if the government truly wants to significantly reduce corruption. However I don't expect to see any of my list included in the reforms.

By the way, I did not think of these myself and they aren't fantasy rules. All countries with reasonably clean government have and enforce rules similar to these.

[ginjag]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

Martyrs ???? in who's eyes ??? near all family have been in court at one time or another---fine example of an upstanding family.

Your last 2 lines are a complete waste of time and space---just a joke. Pathetic to say the least, what a loser if this cr#p is all you can come up with.

Better then next time you don't get excited to reply and rush it. Now you have given us a laugh out of your non rushed reply. Leave it out will you give it all a rest, I fly Emirates via Dubai regular--try it. Dubai is a nice stopover--sure you'd be welcome.

[sjaak327]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

Martyrs ???? in who's eyes ??? near all family have been in court at one time or another---fine example of an upstanding family.

Your last 2 lines are a complete waste of time and space---just a joke. Pathetic to say the least, what a loser if this cr#p is all you can come up with.

Better then next time you don't get excited to reply and rush it. Now you have given us a laugh out of your non rushed reply. Leave it out will you give it all a rest, I fly Emirates via Dubai regular--try it. Dubai is a nice stopover--sure you'd be welcome.

What has Dubai got to do with anything. His post actually makes a lot of sense. Unless the junta does away with one man, one vote, the next elections will again be a massive win for PT. Their less then solid performance the last few years will not make one bit of difference, thanks to people who actually believe they have the right to ignore the will of the Thai electorate.

*edited out*

Edited June 2, 2014 by Scott

[heybruce]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

Martyrs ???? in who's eyes ??? near all family have been in court at one time or another---fine example of an upstanding family.

Your last 2 lines are a complete waste of time and space---just a joke. Pathetic to say the least, what a loser if this cr#p is all you can come up with.

Better then next time you don't get excited to reply and rush it. Now you have given us a laugh out of your non rushed reply. Leave it out will you give it all a rest, I fly Emirates via Dubai regular--try it. Dubai is a nice stopover--sure you'd be welcome.

So that's what an emotional and irrational sputter looks like when put in print.

[rubl]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Apparently I can not mention that constitution without reminding people that it was "approved" in a referendum in which the only choices were to approve the constitution or continue to live under military rule. You know that rubl.

also no 'anti' campaign was permitted - Hobson's Choice which we will get again... undoubtedly

the 2015 'new' constitution

actually if they tackle the BIG THREE : judiciary, lese majeste and corruption it might bring some peace (call me a cynic but I'm doubtful but hopeful)

Pray tell, what has the constitution to do with "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin". There is no entry which defines who can or cannot Skype-in into cabinet meetings as far as I know. Neither do I see what the 1997 or the 2007 constitution have to do with an International Community being less and less concerned or alarmed?

BTW if you want to know more about the 'junta' 2007 constitution, just read as a starter

"Thailand Law Journal 2009 Spring Issue 1 Volume 12

Deconstructing Thailand's (New) Eighteenth Constitution

Vitit Muntarbhorn"

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

[rubl]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

Be my guest, report me if you think I maligned you.

As for the rest, please ask Sergio Berluscuni for his view on the issue of being 'framed' by opponents.

[Neeranam]

Ten or so days on from the coup, and sanctions against Thailand have been largely inconsequential.

It seems international alarm is not as great as some would have us believe.

We will never know what's going on behind closed doors, Thailand's exports are down significantly and inflation is rising.

Ironically the wanted criminal as he is called has more travel rights around the world now than the Coup leaders.

On a plus side the baht is falling and for the first time in years its over 55 to the £.

Many analysts predict Thailand falling into recession whilst all around boom.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-05-29/thailands-coup-may-send-investors-to-its-asian-neighbors

Speak for yourself - not a plus for me earning Baht.

[ginjag]

Wow, too many comments to read all, but let me at least praise one from heybruce with the "government didn't have to listen to Thaksin".

Now that will impress the International Community for sure.

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

Martyrs ???? in who's eyes ??? near all family have been in court at one time or another---fine example of an upstanding family.

Your last 2 lines are a complete waste of time and space---just a joke. Pathetic to say the least, what a loser if this cr#p is all you can come up with.

Better then next time you don't get excited to reply and rush it. Now you have given us a laugh out of your non rushed reply. Leave it out will you give it all a rest, I fly Emirates via Dubai regular--try it. Dubai is a nice stopover--sure you'd be welcome.

What has Dubai got to do with anything. His post actually makes a lot of sense. Unless the junta does away with one man, one vote, the next elections will again be a massive win for PT. Their less then solid performance the last few years will not make one bit of difference, thanks to people who actually believe they have the right to ignore the will of the Thai electorate.

*edited out*

If you bothered to read his post then you will see that Shins were to become martyrs the main one is stationed -Dubai.

Unless you think T.S. has nothing to do with Dubai.

His post has no sense unless you looked at another post by mistake.

Who said the Army was to do away with 1 man 1 vote ??? your prediction for PT next election win is as far fetched as Elvis living in a red village.

Quote again " what has Dubai got to do with anything"---It's HRH Q/E Coronation day today have another drink.

[sumtingwong]

Wow, you went all the way back to post #525 for that one, and violated forum rules by taking that short statement out of context.

However in that post I was replying to the question "How many countries in the western world would allow their country to be run by a convicted criminal via social media?". I was in a hurry and gave a rushed reply. Since you brought the issue back up, I'll answer the question properly.

If a modern western democracy had an elected leader who was very popular with a large segment of the population deposed by a military coup, then convicted of crimes by a government installed by the military, they would react very similarly (perhaps more violently) than Thailand. When a qualified democracy returned voters would eagerly vote for a candidate in regular contact with the exiled leader who promised to be the leaders "clone", and would support a government taking directions from the exiled leader. In fact I think most in western democracies would eagerly vote for and support such a government even if they didn't approve of many of its policies, just to send an "up yours" to the military.

As I've written before, when you make a martyr of an opponent, you make your opponent more powerful. Military coups have now made two members of the Shinawatra family into martyrs, and when elections return this will become clear. Too bad there couldn't have been an election right after the PTP had demonstrated years of incompetence and was at a low point in popularity.

All of the enthusiastic supporters of the coup should think about that. By supporting the coup you are supporting an action that increases the long-term power and influence of the Shinawatra family.

Martyrs ???? in who's eyes ??? near all family have been in court at one time or another---fine example of an upstanding family.

Your last 2 lines are a complete waste of time and space---just a joke. Pathetic to say the least, what a loser if this cr#p is all you can come up with.

Better then next time you don't get excited to reply and rush it. Now you have given us a laugh out of your non rushed reply. Leave it out will you give it all a rest, I fly Emirates via Dubai regular--try it. Dubai is a nice stopover--sure you'd be welcome.

What has Dubai got to do with anything. His post actually makes a lot of sense. Unless the junta does away with one man, one vote, the next elections will again be a massive win for PT. Their less then solid performance the last few years will not make one bit of difference, thanks to people who actually believe they have the right to ignore the will of the Thai electorate.

*edited out*

If you bothered to read his post then you will see that Shins were to become martyrs the main one is stationed -Dubai.

Unless you think T.S. has nothing to do with Dubai.

His post has no sense unless you looked at another post by mistake.

Who said the Army was to do away with 1 man 1 vote ??? your prediction for PT next election win is as far fetched as Elvis living in a red village.

Quote again " what has Dubai got to do with anything"---It's HRH Q/E Coronation day today have another drink.

I too will take that bet, I doubt there will even be a PTP party.

[brewsterbudgen]

That's right. The same power the UDD yearn for.

Funny you say "Big Borther" The last 3 years big brother was running things. yinglucks big brother.

I would rather General Preyuth as the leader as opposed to Jatuporn. I think deep down you would too.

Reconcile mate. Leave the bitterness behind in the shadows where they belong.

Nothing from any of your (many) posts suggests you are interesting in reconciling with the Pheu Thai Party! Why not try practising what you preach? How can reconciliation happen if dissent is not allowed?

[sjaak327]

What has Dubai got to do with anything. His post actually makes a lot of sense. Unless the junta does away with one man, one vote, the next elections will again be a massive win for PT. Their less then solid performance the last few years will not make one bit of difference, thanks to people who actually believe they have the right to ignore the will of the Thai electorate.

*edited out*

If you bothered to read his post then you will see that Shins were to become martyrs the main one is stationed -Dubai.

Unless you think T.S. has nothing to do with Dubai.

His post has no sense unless you looked at another post by mistake.

Who said the Army was to do away with 1 man 1 vote ??? your prediction for PT next election win is as far fetched as Elvis living in a red village.

Quote again " what has Dubai got to do with anything"---It's HRH Q/E Coronation day today have another drink.

Yes I am aware Thaksin is in Dubai, that still doesn't explain the relevance to the post of the one you responded to. Are you implying that anyone that even remotely seems to support PT should go there ?

My prediction that PT will win the next election isn't at all far fetched, in fact it has won any general election for over 13 years either using TRT PPP and PT. And they didn't win them with minimal difference either, at least two times they won by a landslide.

But I understand some people still haven't got the message. They will simply never learn, nor will they accept it. These kind of people would logically support a coup. It is these people that are the problem, nothing more and nothing less. Maybe they should go to Dubai instead !

[Piichai]

Ten or so days on from the coup, and sanctions against Thailand have been largely inconsequential.

It seems international alarm is not as great as some would have us believe.

We will never know what's going on behind closed doors, Thailand's exports are down significantly and inflation is rising.

Yeah, because nobody wants to be buy Thailand's aging rice. And inflation is rising just as predicted after the ridiculous minimum wage increase.

It just keeps getting better...

[sumtingwong]

How many elections did they win where more than 50% of the Thais voted for them? Exactly.

[lomatopo]

Out of one side of their mouth the Junta says that they had to seize power to prevent Thailand becoming another Syria, Libya, Egypt. And, out of the other side of their mouth, they (and their apologists) explain that Thailand is so unique that foreigners are not smart enough to understand the nuances of the political situation. And then they wonder why most of the educated world thinks they come across as silly children stuck in some sort "Groundhog Day" repetitive/denial pattern of behavior? Go figure.

[sjaak327]

How many elections did they win where more than 50% of the Thais voted for them? Exactly.

At least once (2005).

Of course to win a general election in a Multi party democratic system, one doesn't have to reach 50% of the votes, and in fact in most Multi party democracies there isn't a party that achieves this.

In fact even getting a majority of seats in parliament (which they did get in 2005 and 2011) isn't necessary to win an election. A party wins an election when it becomes the biggest party, which indeed since 2001 has Always been TRT, PPP or PT.

Good to note that in Multi party democracies it is almost unheard of for one party to grab a majority of seats in parliament.

[sumtingwong]

How many elections did they win where more than 50% of the Thais voted for them? Exactly.

At least once (2005).

Of course to win a general election in a Multi party democratic system, one doesn't have to reach 50% of the votes, and in fact in most Multi party democracies there isn't a party that achieves this.

In fact even getting a majority of seats in parliament (which they did get in 2005 and 2011) isn't necessary to win an election. A party wins an election when it becomes the biggest party, which indeed since 2001 has Always been TRT, PPP or PT.

Good to note that in Multi party democracies it is almost unheard of for one party to grab a majority of seats in parliament.

Also good to note, that when the party gets less than 50% of the vote, they can not say the majority of the voters voted for their party when the majority of the voters did not vote for their party. A mionority of the voters voted for their party.

[sumtingwong]

Out of one side of their mouth the Junta says that they had to seize power to prevent Thailand becoming another Syria, Libya, Egypt. And, out of the other side of their mouth, they (and their apologists) explain that Thailand is so unique that foreigners are not smart enough to understand the nuances of the political situation. And then they wonder why most of the educated world thinks they come across as silly children stuck in some sort "Groundhog Day" repetitive/denial pattern of behavior? Go figure.

Both can be true.

[ginjag]

What has Dubai got to do with anything. His post actually makes a lot of sense. Unless the junta does away with one man, one vote, the next elections will again be a massive win for PT. Their less then solid performance the last few years will not make one bit of difference, thanks to people who actually believe they have the right to ignore the will of the Thai electorate.

*edited out*

If you bothered to read his post then you will see that Shins were to become martyrs the main one is stationed -Dubai.

Unless you think T.S. has nothing to do with Dubai.

His post has no sense unless you looked at another post by mistake.

Who said the Army was to do away with 1 man 1 vote ??? your prediction for PT next election win is as far fetched as Elvis living in a red village.

Quote again " what has Dubai got to do with anything"---It's HRH Q/E Coronation day today have another drink.

Yes I am aware Thaksin is in Dubai, that still doesn't explain the relevance to the post of the one you responded to. Are you implying that anyone that even remotely seems to support PT should go there ?

My prediction that PT will win the next election isn't at all far fetched, in fact it has won any general election for over 13 years either using TRT PPP and PT. And they didn't win them with minimal difference either, at least two times they won by a landslide.

But I understand some people still haven't got the message. They will simply never learn, nor will they accept it. These kind of people would logically support a coup. It is these people that are the problem, nothing more and nothing less. Maybe they should go to Dubai instead !

MARTYRS was his post about----read it

2nd paragraph is just a load of PTP propaganda, heard it all before and now all it is good for is a laugh. Your lot are virtually dead and buried, give up, just rejoice if they happen to be re born and learnt from their horrid governing.

3rd paragraph rubbish, so I suppose 90+% of TVF posters are the problem and the few others --well it's them only that have all their marbles intact ????

[sjaak327]

How many elections did they win where more than 50% of the Thais voted for them? Exactly.

At least once (2005).

Of course to win a general election in a Multi party democratic system, one doesn't have to reach 50% of the votes, and in fact in most Multi party democracies there isn't a party that achieves this.

In fact even getting a majority of seats in parliament (which they did get in 2005 and 2011) isn't necessary to win an election. A party wins an election when it becomes the biggest party, which indeed since 2001 has Always been TRT, PPP or PT.

Good to note that in Multi party democracies it is almost unheard of for one party to grab a majority of seats in parliament.

Also good to note, that when the party gets less than 50% of the vote, they can not say the majority of the voters voted for their party when the majority of the voters did not vote for their party. A mionority of the voters voted for their party.

Of course ! I do not see anyone claiming this, do you ? The last government, which was a coalition government indeed had more then 50% of the votes, something that is equally good to note. Of course that minority was 48% last time, and actually resulted in a clear majority of seats, which ultimately is the only thing that matters.

[Fat Haggis]

How many elections did they win where more than 50% of the Thais voted for them? Exactly.

At least once (2005).

Of course to win a general election in a Multi party democratic system, one doesn't have to reach 50% of the votes, and in fact in most Multi party democracies there isn't a party that achieves this.

In fact even getting a majority of seats in parliament (which they did get in 2005 and 2011) isn't necessary to win an election. A party wins an election when it becomes the biggest party, which indeed since 2001 has Always been TRT, PPP or PT.

Good to note that in Multi party democracies it is almost unheard of for one party to grab a majority of seats in parliament.

Also good to note, that when the party gets less than 50% of the vote, they can not say the majority of the voters voted for their party when the majority of the voters did not vote for their party. A mionority of the voters voted for their party.

The reverse to this of course is that when you mutli parties stand in elections, they can hardly say that the majority people voted for them either, get rid of the multi parties or form a coalition and there could have been a very real possibility of them together gaining more than 51% ...sadly it will never be proven, it's been explained to you numerous times now that what a majority means, you need to start looking up the definition, as you're clearly not getting it, if there are 4 parties in the election, and they all get 50%, 20%, 15%, 15% respectively, then 50% is still enough to win the most seats in the house, and are still classed as the majority, think of it in the same way that whilst 50% maybe didn't vote for the winners, it also means that anywhere between 50% and 80% didn't vote for your party either !!!