Bluespunk Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration." Really? I thought at the time of the coup there was only a caretaker govt due to the failure of the elections held to elect a govt. I also thought yingluck had been removed as caretaker PM by then as well. I really should pay more attention. Thank goodness AFP is there to put me right. Indeed you should. There was a caretaker government in situ (not "only" - this is , or should be, the normal state of affairs for a government that has dissolved parliament and awaiting elections to be organised and held, which were due to be scheduled for July 20th, I remember). So the caretaker government that were the representatives of the Thai Nation were prevented from holding that election by the Army Generals seizing power, hence "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration". Is that clear enough for you? No, don't think so. There was an election that failed because it was boycotted across the country. Is that clear to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration." Really? I thought at the time of the coup there was only a caretaker govt due to the failure of the elections held to elect a govt. I also thought yingluck had been removed as caretaker PM by then as well. I really should pay more attention. Thank goodness AFP is there to put me right. hey, Bluespunk, the statement is actually correct, grammatically and factually, and it doesn't disagree with your interpretation either. Factually, hmm, I'll think on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDiva Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration." Really? I thought at the time of the coup there was only a caretaker govt due to the failure of the elections held to elect a govt. I also thought yingluck had been removed as caretaker PM by then as well. I really should pay more attention. Thank goodness AFP is there to put me right. Indeed you should. There was a caretaker government in situ (not "only" - this is , or should be, the normal state of affairs for a government that has dissolved parliament and awaiting elections to be organised and held, which were due to be scheduled for July 20th, I remember). So the caretaker government that were the representatives of the Thai Nation were prevented from holding that election by the Army Generals seizing power, hence "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration". Is that clear enough for you? actually he seized power after the reds started killing/blowing up innocent kids and women and threatened to start a war as well as declare their own state and the ptp were letting/encouraging them to do it , I suppose that would have been your preferred outcome Well, you have your opinion - and you're welcome to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TheDiva Posted March 5, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 5, 2015 "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration." Really? I thought at the time of the coup there was only a caretaker govt due to the failure of the elections held to elect a govt. I also thought yingluck had been removed as caretaker PM by then as well. I really should pay more attention. Thank goodness AFP is there to put me right. Indeed you should. There was a caretaker government in situ (not "only" - this is , or should be, the normal state of affairs for a government that has dissolved parliament and awaiting elections to be organised and held, which were due to be scheduled for July 20th, I remember). So the caretaker government that were the representatives of the Thai Nation were prevented from holding that election by the Army Generals seizing power, hence "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration". Is that clear enough for you? No, don't think so. There was an election that failed because it was boycotted across the country. Is that clear to you? Well No, actually. Does your explanation that the election failed because of "boycotting across the country" reflect the reality? Not any mention of the reality of the Courts restricting powers available to the police to ensure the voting went ahead, election ballot boxes being held "hostage", voters physically restrained and attacked whilst attempting to vote, which eventually resulted in a controversial ruling by the CC (not for the first time) that the Election was null and void because the voting was not completed in one day (due to said blockading and attacks on voters). You also neglect to mention that another Election was scheduled for the 20th July. But if you really feel the need to make excuses for a military junta overthrowing the democratic process, fill your boots, there's a few other posters on here I'm sure would enjoy your company. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thian Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I like it the way it is now. No demonstrations, no killings, no roadblocks. Corruption is being stopped, Thailand is being improved and cleaned from streetvendors.... There's still much more work to do, Bangkok has to become a real Metropole with good public transport, civilised people and also rules which have to be maintained. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration." Really? I thought at the time of the coup there was only a caretaker govt due to the failure of the elections held to elect a govt. I also thought yingluck had been removed as caretaker PM by then as well. I really should pay more attention. Thank goodness AFP is there to put me right. Indeed you should. There was a caretaker government in situ (not "only" - this is , or should be, the normal state of affairs for a government that has dissolved parliament and awaiting elections to be organised and held, which were due to be scheduled for July 20th, I remember). So the caretaker government that were the representatives of the Thai Nation were prevented from holding that election by the Army Generals seizing power, hence "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration". Is that clear enough for you? No, don't think so. There was an election that failed because it was boycotted across the country. Is that clear to you? Well No, actually. Does your explanation that the election failed because of "boycotting across the country" reflect the reality? Not any mention of the reality of the Courts restricting powers available to the police to ensure the voting went ahead, election ballot boxes being held "hostage", voters physically restrained and attacked whilst attempting to vote, which eventually resulted in a controversial ruling by the CC (not for the first time) that the Election was null and void because the voting was not completed in one day (due to said blockading and attacks on voters). You also neglect to mention that another Election was scheduled for the 20th July. But if you really feel the need to make excuses for a military junta overthrowing the democratic process, fill your boots, there's a few other posters on here I'm sure would enjoy your company. Hmm, no, no, not really. While I do agree that sutheps madness had some effect in bangkok in some places, across the country as a whole the elections were boycotted on a voluntary basis. For myself I thought that was stupid but that's me. As for what the courts did…they enforced the laws as they stood at the time. An election was scheduled for July 20th? Had the EC/CC/whoever agreed on this, can't remember [genuinely can't] Was it going to be any different? However, that aside AFP is still wrong in stating an elected govt was in power. They weren't, PT had resigned. My views on coups are a different issue. My gripe here is with AFP and their constant misrepresentation of the truth. Edited March 5, 2015 by Bluespunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artisi Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Probably the best move would be to beg Thaksin to come back, rally all his upstanding, well qualified, and eager to be back in their rightful seat friends and reform a useful, dedicated government for the betterment of Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bkkcanuck8 Posted March 5, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 5, 2015 I like it the way it is now. No demonstrations, no killings, no roadblocks. Corruption is being stopped, Thailand is being improved and cleaned from streetvendors.... There's still much more work to do, Bangkok has to become a real Metropole with good public transport, civilised people and also rules which have to be maintained. Corruption is not "being stopped". Lots of talk, a little action, some vendettas are being disguised as purely corruption cleanup.... One of the largest mafias in Thailand is run by military which has never been cleaned up. You don't think that the current selection of very wealthy military got that way by their salaries do you? Parents push their daughters to marry either police or military officers because that is where the money is -- why is that? Then with the current group (even potentially to his brother) they say they will explain where the money came from, but then silence.... There has been a lot of talk, some disruption of corruption when it was by the "wrong people" (making room for it to go into the right pockets in the future) but it is not being stopped.... they are just going from a published price list (like Shinawatra) to a negotiated fee again.... and making sure it goes back in the right pockets.... populism by Shinawatra was putting it in the wrong pockets. The military made it IMPOSSIBLE to clear out the demonstrators, threatened officials if they used any traditional non-lethal force used in western countries for that purpose (tear gas, water trucks with irritant).... because they supported them all along. That support of course would never have been offered to red occupations which were dealt with with incompetent and deadly force (from some magical force not any of their people). 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taony Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I like it the way it is now. No demonstrations, no killings, no roadblocks. Corruption is being stopped, Thailand is being improved and cleaned from streetvendors.... There's still much more work to do, Bangkok has to become a real Metropole with good public transport, civilised people and also rules which have to be maintained. Which part of Bangkok do you live in? I want to move there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Of course the prime minister coup leader army GENERAL Prayuth would object to having the junta's coup leader's banned from politics. What were they thinking? True, true. The previous coup leader turned respectful politician, joined the Pheu Thai led coalition government and voted for the blanket amnesty bill to make double sure he had it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Shameless? Return to democracy, oppose banning of politicians, but of course ban the NLA members from seeking political office in elections? Yes, shameless. Could you please elaborate a wee bit? What makes you describe the words of PM Prayut as 'shameless' Why don't you state your opinion first so then we are on a level playing field. Why should I? You wrote 'shameless' and seem unable to explain why you did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Thai junta chief rejects proposal to bar coup leaders from office of course he rejects it. How in heavens name will he follow in Prem's footsteps if he did reject it? Besides, what else is he going to do after he returns from vacation? To reject the proposal to bar coup leaders from political office has nothing to do at all with the Privy Council. The Privy Council is a body advising H.M. the King of Thailand. K. Prem is appointed as president of the Privy Council by H.M. the King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 CDC chairman Jade Donavanik is up for an "attitude adjustment" Attitude adjustment? Don't think so, I think a total strip down and rebuild will be coming his way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I like it the way it is now. No demonstrations, no killings, no roadblocks. Corruption is being stopped, Thailand is being improved and cleaned from streetvendors.... There's still much more work to do, Bangkok has to become a real Metropole with good public transport, civilised people and also rules which have to be maintained. Oh please. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berybert Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 If the good general does run for the election and doesn't get voted in, you can bet he will bar anyone other than himself from being allowed to run in the recount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share Posted March 5, 2015 CHARTER WRITINGPrayut opposes proposal for two-year political sabbaticalKRIS BHROMSUTHITHE NATIONPM sees no reason to distrust junta appointees; general election likely in April 2016BANGKOK: -- PRIME MINISTER Prayut Chan-o-cha yesterday voiced his opposition to a proposed two-year exclusion from politics for members of the five junta-appointed organisations in a bid to prevent them from "inheriting power" gained from the coup.Prayut argued that if all of them are required to stay away from political office for two years, "there will be nobody to work".He saw no reason for mistrust of members of the five junta-appointed organisations.The prime minister, who is also head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), said that if the junta really wanted to remain in power after the new charter takes effect, "I will just not return the power."Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda said yesterday that he had no problem with the proposed ban. But he added that the prime minister, in his capacity as head of the NCPO leader would have the final say on this matter.A member of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC), Jade Donavanik, had earlier suggested a transitional clause to prohibit members of the NCPO, the CDC, the Cabinet, the National Reform Council and the National Legislative Assembly - also known as the "five rivers" - from holding any political positions for two years after the new constitution comes into effect."We will recommend that they are not allowed to enter politics for two years after the new constitution is endorsed. We are afraid about power hogging and conflict of interest," Jade said.The proposal was raised at yesterday's meeting of the constitution drafters. However, some CDC members expressed their opposition to it, arguing that it was "improper". The meeting later resolved to postpone debate on this matter.The CDC members are scheduled to discuss the matter at a closed-door meeting today, CDC spokesman Kamnoon Sidhisamarn said.Pheu Thai Party politician Amnuay Klangpha yesterday backed Jade's proposal, saying the exclusion would prove the sincerity of those involved that they would not get involved with any conflict of interest.The charter drafters yesterday inserted a temporary provision in the charter that gave the junta 180 days to hold a general election after the new constitution officially comes into effect. It is expected that the general election will be held around April next year.Article 307 stipulates that the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) is expected to deliberate and vote on election-related bills proposed by charter drafters within 60 days.The charter drafters are expected to propose those bills as soon as possible after the new constitution is officially enforced, which will be around October, hence it is expected that the NLA will pass electoral-related bills around January.After passing those bills, the NLA is likely to submit those bills to the Constitutional Court, which will have 30 days to approve them.Article 308 of the temporary provision states that a general election for the lower house of representatives must be held within 90 days after those electoral charter laws had been officially enforced.The general election is likely to be held in April.As for the Senate, Article 308 stipulates that their election process must be completed 60 days after lower house MPs had been elected.The charter drafters yesterday began their first day of deliberations on some 12 temporary provisions.The CDC members had yesterday completed nine of them and the rest will be completed by today, Kamnoon said. Article 311 is another significant article as it merges the Office of Ombudsman and the Office of National Human Rights Commission of Thailand. It states that the two offices shall be combined under the name "the Office of Ombudsman and Human Rights Protection".Other articles also state that the Cabinet and the NLA under the junta administration shall remain until the new elected members of both institutions are sworn into office. The NLA shall remain until both the lower and upper house members are elected through a general election next year.However, Kamnoon said it was still undecided how long the charter drafters and the National Reform Council should continue.Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Prayut-opposes-proposal-for-two-year-political-sab-30255436.html -- The Nation 2015-03-06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesetat2013 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I am still tryin to understand why P thinks that a political ban once elections return would prevent these people from doin their job now? Unless of course they are writing the new constitution to help their own futures instead of thailands future. It should not matter what the interim constitution says as it will be defunct once the new one is approved. Maybe im just ignorant to comprehend P's logic or perhaps I need a session in an attitude adjustment camp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbthailand Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 "He seized power after months of street protests led to the ousting of Yingluck Shinawatra's democratically elected administration." Really? I thought at the time of the coup there was only a caretaker govt due to the failure of the elections held to elect a govt. I also thought yingluck had been removed as caretaker PM by then as well. I really should pay more attention. Thank goodness AFP is there to put me right. hey, Bluespunk, the statement is actually correct, grammatically and factually, and it doesn't disagree with your interpretation either. Factually, hmm, I'll think on that. sure. It doesn't say anything more than "he seized power" and it was after Yingluck's administration had been "ousted" from power. And it attributes that to, in part, the street protests. There is really nothing wrong with the statement, is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbthailand Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Thai junta chief rejects proposal to bar coup leaders from office of course he rejects it. How in heavens name will he follow in Prem's footsteps if he did reject it? Besides, what else is he going to do after he returns from vacation? To reject the proposal to bar coup leaders from political office has nothing to do at all with the Privy Council. The Privy Council is a body advising H.M. the King of Thailand. K. Prem is appointed as president of the Privy Council by H.M. the King. you really know nothing of Thai history, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post joesanunu Posted March 5, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted March 5, 2015 The General surely could have ensured the election wasn't interfered with but instead, colluded with Suthep and his manufactured 'crisis.' Remember Suthep?... shutdown Bangkok, blocked the polls, threatened to kidnap the Prime Minister. That clown should be in jail, no?... but he was on a mission for an untouchable...friends of the Army. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSJ Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It's become increasingly obvious the PM wants to be the shining star of Thai politics for a considerable time. Let him stand in the next election and see if the people of Thailand feel the same. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tx22cb Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Perhaps I have been wrong - up to now I thought Prayuth was a Despot and another D word which is banned (you can look it up in a DICTionary). Now, I can see that, in truth, he is plainly a megalomaniac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesanunu Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It's become increasingly obvious the PM wants to be the shining star of Thai politics for a considerable time. Let him stand in the next election and see if the people of Thailand feel the same. According to The Nation, Thai people love him, love the coup and hope he stays longer. Amazing, the garbage they put in their headlines every day. Even more amazing, some farangs buy it! All the news they want you to hear..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15Peter20 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Prayuth is shameless. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ldiablo Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 So they are not really in it to help reform the country, they are actually doing it to hold on to power. Words right from the horses mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesanunu Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 This is what happens when the vultures in the biggest family in Thailand gets into a squabble. They don't care about the Thai people. The General is doing their dirty work. Doing as he's told like a good soldier. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKResort Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 No surprise here. No coup leader will work so hard, and give so many public explanations trying to boost its image, to pass its power to an elected Government. No way. Prayut is already on an election campaign...and soldiers use any strategy to win...not to "surrender". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerojero Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Surprise surprise surprise. Who would have thought he'd do this? Why bother challenging anything of coup leaders or supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneday Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Oops! Seems like someone at the CDC is going to need an "attitude adjustment". Going against Prayut...that's a no, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneday Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 "...adding that a ban on key junta figures now would discourage them working to reform the country..." Really? Did he seriously say that? If true, then that indicates the "key junta leaders" are only concerned with their own lives and could care less about the country, which means they should be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now