Suthep urges supporters to vote for draft charter

[diehard60]

If he wants people to support it you can bet they will now go against it. I still want to know why he is not in jail for murder and other things???

[JAG]

In 2010 a certain general showed what he was prepared to to do with those elements of the army which he could trust.

That is what is keeping the lid on

(JAG, Post #19 above)

You may be right.

I would argue however that 'force of arms' is not the primary reason for this. Nobody is talking about guns 'n such.

It is their ability to incarcerate people on a whim.

Their is no appetite for confronting a trained military. Especially from membership of the UDD, which is approximately 80% Female, never mind a political organization like the PTP. Anyone who suggests otherwise is seeking to demonize them with self-serving ulterior motives.

But their ability to apprehend, arrest and detain indefinitely that cuts across all sectors of civilian society, with a judiciary in their pocket......Mothers, old people, students, you name them....That is where their real power lies.

That is certainly very much part of, possibly most of it.

Their demonstrated willingness to kill ruthlessly is the backstop which they hope will allow them to continue their oppression unopposed.

If you like (although like is an unfortunate word in this context) it was the act which set the context for how they govern.

Rather as the Thamassat University massacre set the context for the 70s and 80s?

Edited September 2, 2015 by JAG

[scorecard]

"president of the People's Democratic Reform Foundation (PDRF)"

Again

The good folks from the Anti-Democrat Party and their soul brothers on that side of the political divide segmenting themselves. Creating all sorts of entities when in effect they are all comprised of the same faces.

Little do they realize, just attaching themselves to the promotion of this charter, these people will do more damage to their cause than a zillion attacks on the charter from the other side. What should really be a death-knell if Abhisit joins Suthep in lauding this thing....... They don't need to say anything....... Just tie-ing their star to it, will send a huge adverse message to the electoral majority who have continually turfed them at election time.

This article is a case-in-point......Suthep's pronouncements don't sway anyone who hasn't already been swayed. They simply prompt an uptick and more fierce response from all others.

Never mind...Interesting times for us inconsequential Farang political junkies.

Just your opinion.

[Mot Dang]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

[Baerboxer]

If he wants people to support it you can bet they will now go against it. I still want to know why he is not in jail for murder and other things???

The same reason Thaksin and his lackeys aren't.

[Linky]

I suppose the press asked him a question and answered it, he is fully entitled to have an opinion, I see no foul there, so are the red leaders, they can say they don't agree with it but that is not campaigning - it is a simple opinion that is all

No the red leaders are not allowed to say they dont agree with it.

They have requested permission to do so.

[MZurf]

I suppose the press asked him a question and answered it, he is fully entitled to have an opinion, I see no foul there, so are the red leaders, they can say they don't agree with it but that is not campaigning - it is a simple opinion that is all

No the red leaders are not allowed to say they dont agree with it.

They have requested permission to do so.

While on the opposite side everything smells of roses, of course.

[Baerboxer]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

[Emster23]

No government ever shut down a press or silenced those who supported it. "No campaign rule on vote" is a load of whale dreck

[GeorgesAbitbol]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

For this charter, as long as it suits the military (who would be able to seize power as son as they want) and the establishment, it is a good charter and the opposition must shut up or they will face lese-majeste or defamation or prison

[JAG]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

Indeed that is a difficult task.

This charter doesn't even pay lip service to doing that. It is designed to ensure that a small section of Thai society shall remain in control no matter who is elected to govern, and enshrines the mechanisms to allow them to over turn the will of the electorate whenever they see fit (whenever it is in their interests).

[dageurreotype]

Really? Who is this muppet anyway? Who died and made him God? Remarkably silent on the nation's biggest terrorist threat to date and then when the junta think they've safely pacified the populace with their bungling and obfuscation, the police having shamelessly bribed themselves with three million baht, so far, and openly this time, (I mean they can can't they, who's going to stop them?) They wheel this old fraud out again to back up their continuing illegitimacy. This self proclaimed 'reforming' 'government'? And just who are they? Is it beginning to dawn on anyone yet they're just a bunch of thieves in khaki with bigger guns? This country's screwed.

Edited September 2, 2015 by dageurreotype

[Mot Dang]

Really? Who is this muppet anyway? Who died and made him God? Remarkably silent on the nation's biggest terrorist threat to date and then when the junta think they've safely pacified the populace with their bungling and obfuscation, the police having shamelessly bribed themselves with three million baht, so far, and openly this time, (I mean they can can't they, who's going to stop them?) They wheel this old fraud out again to back up their continuing illegitimacy. This self proclaimed 'reforming' 'government'? And just who are they? Is it beginning to dawn on anyone yet they're just a bunch of thieves in khaki with bigger guns? This country's screwed.

JAG #41, has got it right, but I am tired of blaming the elite. My wife tells me I worry more about the future of Thailand than the Thais do. Hell, I think she's got that right. Some communities, North and South, are so used to being under the yoke (imaginary or otherwise), have given up. Hate and disrespect just keeps bubbling in the background, perpetrated by the establishment, Suthep and previous administrations of all colour.

And you sir are right as well. I have no love for either Khun Suthep or Mr. T. They are both self-serving and egotistic (I choose my words carefully). K. Suthep's frantic grasping for power (and wealth) wounded Thailand immensely. Costing billions and pushing communities further apart. What does he care ? He added no value to society through his actions, other than removing the T-family grasp on power, by putting a military government in power, one that most probably will not relinquish power for quite a while. And Mr. T. A very rich man, who got richer whilst in power. But I did see personally some good performed by his administration in impoverished communities in the Issan. But not enough. And not balanced by assisting Southern communities. Again the wedge was driven in that bit more.

You ask where K. Suthep has been ? He decided to become a monk for a while. He didn't always make friends during his BKK escapades. Bad karma to wack a monk. Bit similar to a Thai boxer who thru the towel in fighting Jeff Fennick a few years ago in Australia. He put on the robes because bad people had money on him.

I wont say that the country is screwed, after 34 years I still have faith, and a lot of people relying on me to help them get thru all this shit. But I do believe, as far as K. Suthep and Mr. T are concerned, "Karma is a bitch". Hope she pays them both a visit.

Edited September 2, 2015 by Mot Dang

[Fat Haggis]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

It was the number of seats that were open to the SNP in Scotland as to the reason why they got more than UKIP overall. All elections are about the seats, nothing more, as a Nation, Scotland voted in the SNP, I don't hear any complaints about the number of seats Sinn Feinn got compared to UKIP either, it's always people using Scotland as an example. Very poor comparison/example, the people of Scotland voted labour out, and the SNP in as the Tory/Lib coalition failed to keep their end of the bargain after Scotland votes NO in last years Independence Referendum, Westminster stitched up the Scottish No voters, so payback was a rout of labour, and a country with more representation in Westminster.

I do wonder how many of you decrying Thai democracy constantly whined about the same lack of democracies in your countries of origin ?

When is this draft constitution referendum, I was sure it was this month? Nobody in our village knows anything about it, no large envelope with the draft constitution in this house here either, when I asked my wife and her friends if they were voting they actually thought it was just the people in Bangkok who got to vote on this.

Seems very clever if there's to be no canvassing, as people outside of bangkok are like the proverbial mushrooms, has any other expat seen/received any mention of the referendum vote in their areas? I'm hoping that it's not being kept quiet so that the people in places likely to "upset" the norm are excluded? I wouldn't have thought so.

[LannaGuy]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

some FACTS please? I know it it's 'inconvenient' for you

UKIP leader LOST his seat and UKIP got less than 15%? what's this statement "in the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP" you are simply making up BS - why?

you think, obviously, that a royalist right wing military junta is better than an imperfect democracy? this imperfect democracy has probably given you a fairly 'easy' life in the West yet you come here and pontificate that an unelected military junta is better??? hypocrite

Edited September 2, 2015 by LannaGuy

[Mot Dang]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

some FACTS please? I know it it's 'inconvenient' for you

UKIP leader LOST his seat and UKIP got less than 15%? what's this statement "in the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP" you are simply making up BS - why?

you think, obviously, that a royalist right wing military junta is better than an imperfect democracy? this imperfect democracy has probably given you a fairly 'easy' life in the West yet you come here and pontificate that an unelected military junta is better??? hypocrite

Your nuts. Did I say anything like that. Those are your assumptions, don't put words into my posting that aren't there. You have no idea how much I despise the junta, that is why I dearly love that they will go asap. If and when Thailand becomes a democracy again, I would accept it however imperfect. But because I have loved ones both in the North and the South, I see the inequalities that affect them both, see the way previous administrations, and the junta, perpetuate the hatred between them, I want things to be better and equal. You don't know me, you don't know who I am and what I do for my communities. This is a forum where I am allowed to express my opinion and not get harassed by wannabees like you. Go flame someone else.

[lildragon]

This is still very much a mute point for discussion. What does the proposed charter offer ? So many statements have been raised recently about possible geo-political and racial bias. What facts have been published about the nature/content of the charter to confirm this ?

If the proposed draft charter economically or politically favors only part of the electorate, then it is wrong and should be opposed, by any party. Right through recent history we have all seen the amassing of extreme wealth by those in power. For Thailand to enter the international community (for I think it has stumbled in the eyes of the world), every Thai must obtain equal opportunities. This by no means the case now. Racial and geo-political prejudices are out of control in some communities. I have two families, one in the North and one in the South, I see these prejudices first hand.

To be a true democracy this charter must give every vote an equal value. Economical advancement and infrastructure opportunities must be given to all communities, big or small. The charter cannot be based on the preferences of a few, on either side of the fence.

Define equal value?

In the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP and SNP. But SNP were rewarded with 56 MP's UKIP got one. Does that mean in constituencies with less people your vote is worth more? You get more representation for your buck?

In the USA the states elect equal representation. So again the more populous states get the same representation as the less populous one. Seems fair if you look at it from a states perspective, and easy to see why those who founded the country set that up, but maybe not so fair if you bring it down to individual level.

A true democracy - name one? Switzerland maybe? Other systems, of which they're are many, may allow a vote, but true democracy? Ask the people of Zimbabwe and NK. They get to vote alright.

So, it's very difficult to come up with a charter and system that really works and pleases everyone.

some FACTS please? I know it it's 'inconvenient' for you

UKIP leader LOST his seat and UKIP got less than 15%? what's this statement "in the UK vastly more people voted for UKIP" you are simply making up BS - why?

you think, obviously, that a royalist right wing military junta is better than an imperfect democracy? this imperfect democracy has probably given you a fairly 'easy' life in the West yet you come here and pontificate that an unelected military junta is better??? hypocrite

Your nuts. Did I say anything like that. Those are your assumptions, don't put words into my posting that aren't there. You have no idea how much I despise the junta, that is why I dearly love that they will go asap. If and when Thailand becomes a democracy again, I would accept it however imperfect. But because I have loved ones both in the North and the South, I see the inequalities that affect them both, see the way previous administrations, and the junta, perpetuate the hatred between them, I want things to be better and equal. You don't know me, you don't know who I am and what I do for my communities. This is a forum where I am allowed to express my opinion and not get harassed by wannabees like you. Go flame someone else.

I think he was replying to baerboxer there mot and not you

[dageurreotype]

double post

Edited September 3, 2015 by dageurreotype

[dageurreotype]

In 2010 a certain general showed what he was prepared to to do with those elements of the army which he could trust.

That is what is keeping the lid on

(JAG, Post #19 above)

You may be right.

I would argue however that 'force of arms' is not the primary reason for this. Nobody is talking about guns 'n such.

It is their ability to incarcerate people on a whim.

Their is no appetite for confronting a trained military. Especially from membership of the UDD, which is approximately 80% Female, never mind a political organization like the PTP. Anyone who suggests otherwise is seeking to demonize them with self-serving ulterior motives.

But their ability to apprehend, arrest and detain indefinitely that cuts across all sectors of civilian society, with a judiciary in their pocket......Mothers, old people, students, you name them....That is where their real power lies.

That is certainly very much part of, possibly most of it.

Their demonstrated willingness to kill ruthlessly is the backstop which they hope will allow them to continue their oppression unopposed.

If you like (although like is an unfortunate word in this context) it was the act which set the context for how they govern.

Rather as the Thamassat University massacre set the context for the 70s and 80s?

I agree, but with the caveat that the situation now is nothing like that of even ten years ago. Now news spreads rapidly via social media which is immediately picked up by international mainstream sources. They simply wouldn't get away with it, the story of the police giving themselves three million baht for the arrest of a suspect with no actual conviction as yet, proves just how blithely unaware of how they in particular and Thailand in general, are perceived on the world stage. Or perhaps they simply don't care. Their arrogance and hubris points to the latter.

[chuang]

Strange the yellow shirt mad monk is allow to ask his supporters to vote yes for the charter..whereas the government demanded the red shirt leaders not to instigate their supporters to vote no....LOL