UDD calls for international observation of referendum

[jayboy]

Well, I suspect its pointless, but just for fun I would like to respond to your last statement. UDD opposed the amnesty law that sparked the PDRC shutdown and led directly to the coup (the aim of the shutdown).

How brave of them to risk their stipend! A pity that bravery didn't last until the parliamentary vote (you do know that quite a few UDD "leaders" are also PTP party list MPs?)

BTW they spoke in opposition to amnesty for Abhisit and Suthep; they were apparently fine and dandy for an amnesty for the man who pays them, and for themselves.

Yes, I agree with all you say here. But that doesn't in any way undermine the argument. The contention here is that the UDD is not independent of Thaksin. But the truth is that Thaksin was fine with an amnesty for the murder charges against Suthep and Abhisit. He is an old-style politician and understands and supports impunity for elites. The UDD, on the other hand, stands for equal justice, and an end to the double standards that allow the rich (be they politicians or the sons and daughters of billionaires) to literally get away with murder. The difference between their perception of Thaksin and their perception of Suthep and Abhisit is that they think the charges against Thaksin were politically motivated and without merit and unjust, while they think those against Abhisit and Suthep (that they ordered the killing of their friends and colleagues) entirely justified.

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

[JAG]

There is absolutely no need for international observers. Have we not already heard how the UN, US, EU, ASEAN, and just about every other acronym down to and including the Midsomer Norton Branch of the Womens Institute (MSN WI) understand and applaud the efforts being made to follow the roadmap...

Edited April 25, 2016 by JAG

[DM07]

Thailand need international observers to monitor E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G, from this referendum to the next (hahahahaha!) elections!

Having said that: UDD...how does your own medicine taste?

[craigt3365]

The UDD leader noted that there is still a lot of confusion regarding the referendum law, particularly Section 61 which specifies that anyone who uses rude or aggressive language, intimidation or violent means against the referendum will be liable to ten years imprisonment and/or a fine of 200,000 baht and may lose their voting right for five years.

Seems this might be the crux of the matter. This forbids the UDD from using violent street protests against the referendum. Love it! Great stuff as it applies to all political parties, but only one is complaining about it. These street protests have to go....

[halloween]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

[sawadee1947]

very good idea

[jayboy]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

[craigt3365]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

Why didn't the UDD ask for international observers during the last election? Where there was rampant vote buying by all sides, as was widely reported.

I think there's more to this than we are seeing....and no personal insults, please.

[In Town]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

Its too much for them. If you read all the comments you will see not a single one of the UDD/Thaksin haters have addressed the actual issue. Hilarious.

[In Town]

Why didn't the UDD ask for international observers during the last election? Where there was rampant vote buying by all sides, as was widely reported.

I think there's more to this than we are seeing....and no personal insults, please.

There were international observers at the last election, but what difference does it make to this question about the referendum? Please try, just once, to address the topic. Please.

[craigt3365]

Why didn't the UDD ask for international observers during the last election? Where there was rampant vote buying by all sides, as was widely reported.

I think there's more to this than we are seeing....and no personal insults, please.

There were international observers at the last election, but what difference does it make to this question about the referendum? Please try, just once, to address the topic. Please.

Hmmm....here, the deputy PM says he doesn't trust Westerners. And rejects observers.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/03/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

[jayboy]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

Why didn't the UDD ask for international observers during the last election? Where there was rampant vote buying by all sides, as was widely reported.

I think there's more to this than we are seeing....and no personal insults, please.

You don't seem to follow events very closely and your comments on vote buying suggest you might want to look more carefully at the evidence.There were international observers at the last election which, despite some abuses, were held to be free and fair.

[lkv]

Hmmm....here, the deputy PM says he doesn't trust Westerners. And rejects observers.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/03/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

"I don't respect farangs" is specifically what he is saying in the Asian Correspondent article. Edited April 25, 2016 by lkv

[scorecard]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

Hear ye, hear ye, god from above who cannot be wrong or slanted and has little respect for others has spoken.

[In Town]

Hmmm....here, the deputy PM says he doesn't trust Westerners. And rejects observers.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/03/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

"I don't respect farangs" is specifically what he is saying in the Asian Correspondent article.

I don't really get what Suthep's rejection of observers in 2011 has to do with the last election or the referendum. Some keep saying that the UDD didn't ask for observers in the past, whereas in the article above Suthep complains that they always ask for observers. I'm confused.

[jayboy]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

Hear ye, hear ye, god from above who cannot be wrong or slanted and has little respect for others has spoken.

I am often wrong and admit it.I do not however tolerate cant and blind prejudice.Do I take it you support international scrutiny of the referendum and its run up to ensure fair play? So far the Junta seems determined to stifle debate.Are you going to show some back bone and agree with me on this?

[scorecard]

THe UDD are the antithesis of free speech and their bully boy tactics while PT were in power created climates of fear.

Complete and utter bullcrap. The UDD and Jataporn never ever have tried to limit speech or prevent anyone from participating in elections. You have somehow inverted reality in your own mind, but just because you say it doesn't make it true in any way. We all know who controls speech and prevents fair elections, and it is not the UDD. Its not even Thaksin.

Their attempts to prevent any event allowing political views they disagreed with were frequent and always threatened violence if they didn't get their way shows their utter disregard for free speech.

Oh yes, you are right. How could I have forgotten that they muzzled Suthep, Abhisit and Issara, and closed down Blue Sky TV. Yes, neither the Democrats or PAD or PDRC were ever allow to spew their filthy hatred on the airwaves or in print. Newspapers everywhere were prevented from reporting news, and political parties were not allowed to meet. Yes, I think I remember now.

Perhaps your selective memory remembers their attacks on peaceful protesters who dares challenge PTP's clumsy attempts to whitewash Thaksin, the crook you claim has little to do with UDD.

Or does your amnesia recall the murder of little children and how it was warmly applauded and cheered by Red Shirt leaders and PTP members at a public rally with the terds on the platform leading those cheers?

And the impartial RTP simply looked on and even under the control of super sleuths Chalerm and Tarit never managed to catch and charge anyone. Even those who fell into their clutches for shooting at anti Shin protesters were somehow let go without charges.

Use of the defamation laws, computer crimes laws, shooting at people, lobbing grenades and bombs, throwing shit and HIV infected blood, burning coffins outside the homes of people they didn't like with photos of those people attached, suggesting kidnapping of the current PM's daughters, threatening the families of farmers who protested because PTP lied about paying them - and all under the command of their non democratically elected appointed by schhhh we know who leaders.

UDD - easy to see why you think they're such a democratic independent organization. Can you show one instance where they ever criticized or opposed Thaksin, Yingluck or the PTP?

Well, I suspect its pointless, but just for fun I would like to respond to your last statement. UDD opposed the amnesty law that sparked the PDRC shutdown and led directly to the coup (the aim of the shutdown).

And what you don't mention, probably deliberately, is they opposed it for a reason - because it would have meant abhisit and suthep would be pardoned in regard the charges of murder.

Edited April 25, 2016 by scorecard

[scorecard]

Actions talk, BS walks. UDD are mercenary agitators and propagandists, loyal only to the man who selects and pays them, allowed a tad of independence to maintain popularity, and follow the party line of "We dun nuffink rong!".

Abhisit didn't ask for, want or need amnesty from the baseless charges brought against him.

Abhisit didn't need an amnesty because he knew the charges - far from baseless (a different matter from guilt) - would disappear.There was never a snowball's chance in hell that he or Suthep would ever face justice.

Back a little closer to the topic, why isn't Jatuporn and his UDD mates expressing their opinions from a prison cell? Surely their charges have been delayed long enough (by the appointment of some of the defendants as MPs) and justice is long overdue for their criminal and mercenary incitation of arson, violence and insurrection.

After your Pavlov dog slavering, let's get even closer to the topic.

Is the introduction of a credible international observer organisation a good idea to ensure a fair referendum? Naturally its terms of reference would include scrutiny of how fair the run up to the poll had been in terms of the government permitting all sides to debate and criticise.

A bit too much for you? Okay let's get back to semi educated snarling about Jatuporn which seems to be thecomfort zone for some.

Hear ye, hear ye, god from above who cannot be wrong or slanted and has little respect for others has spoken.

I am often wrong and admit it.I do not however tolerate cant and blind prejudice.Do I take it you support international scrutiny of the referendum and its run up to ensure fair play? So far the Junta seems determined to stifle debate.Are you going to show some back bone and agree with me on this?

'I am often wrong and admit it'. The joke of the year.

[jayboy]

Why didn't the UDD ask for international observers during the last election? Where there was rampant vote buying by all sides, as was widely reported.

I think there's more to this than we are seeing....and no personal insults, please.

There were international observers at the last election, but what difference does it make to this question about the referendum? Please try, just once, to address the topic. Please.

Hmmm....here, the deputy PM says he doesn't trust Westerners. And rejects observers.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/03/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

Frankly you will just have to do better than this.A statement by Suthep before the election is not evidence as I would have thought obvious.

There was quite extensive international monitoring as this post election VOA report notes.

http://www.voanews.com/content/asian-observer-group-commends-thai-election-cites-minor-flaws--125003034/141777.html

Edited April 25, 2016 by jayboy

[jayboy]

Hear ye, hear ye, god from above who cannot be wrong or slanted and has little respect for others has spoken.

I am often wrong and admit it.I do not however tolerate cant and blind prejudice.Do I take it you support international scrutiny of the referendum and its run up to ensure fair play? So far the Junta seems determined to stifle debate.Are you going to show some back bone and agree with me on this?

'I am often wrong and admit it'. The joke of the year.

So you wriggle away from a quite reasonable question which I suppose was inevitable.This thread is about international scrutiny of the referendum and its run up and you just can't bring yourself to support it.I'm taking an educated guess this is because you anticipate any impartial body's conclusions might not shore up your prejudices.

Edited April 25, 2016 by jayboy

[phoenixdoglover]

Well, sports fans, here we are at halftime, and it's been a close contest as predicted.

FREE n FAIRIES

On the one side, we've got the folks who are unambiguously supporting the call for international observers, regardless of whether they view UDD favorably or not. That's about 10 contributors.

UDD BADBOYS

On the other side, putting up a game fight, are the folks who have not expressed an opinion about election monitors, but have steadfastly criticized the UDD. That's about 9 contributors.

So it's effectively a dead heat!

There is still plenty of time, though, in the 2nd half of this "hot" thread.

Let's turn to our half time entertainment now. By way of introduction, only one poster has expressed an unequivocal "No" regarding election monitors, and that is (by proxy posting) our very own Deputy PM, and man about town, General Prawit Wongsuwan. He deserves a big hand for taking such a strong and principled stand; the principle being, "this isn't a general election". Now, with a heartfelt performance of "Alone Again, Naturally"...

Edited April 25, 2016 by phoenixdoglover

[Wilsonandson]

I have never supported Suthep, never, never ever.
But the UDD are big, beastly, brutes with their crew cuts and their horrid red country clothes and cowboy hats. I'll say one thing in favor of Suthep, he was on the front line when those monsters were attacking the PDRC camps. Brave fellow, he sacrifice so much for his fellow man. Not that I support him.

[craigt3365]

You don't seem to follow events very closely and your comments on vote buying suggest you might want to look more carefully at the evidence.There were international observers at the last election which, despite some abuses, were held to be free and fair.

I follow events very closely. And know for sure vote buying happens. Don't think it has much of an effect. But it definitely happens. As is widely reported.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2013/12/vote-buying-thaksin-and-the-democrats/

As for international observers, well...

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/03/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

[In Town]

Craig, I get it that Suthep doesn't like foreigners, but what about you. Are you in favour or against international observers?

[jayboy]

You don't seem to follow events very closely and your comments on vote buying suggest you might want to look more carefully at the evidence.There were international observers at the last election which, despite some abuses, were held to be free and fair.

I follow events very closely. And know for sure vote buying happens. Don't think it has much of an effect. But it definitely happens. As is widely reported.

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2013/12/vote-buying-thaksin-and-the-democrats/

As for international observers, well...

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/03/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

You just ignore the evidence I provided on international observers.You also provide a link to the notorious Stephen Young's nonsense - the comments on that article however provide a better picture than I ever could.

Of course vote buying goes on in Thai elections and you are right to conclude it doesn't have much of an effect.There's been a lot of detailed discussion on this and there's plenty of evidence online.Khun Korn - a leading Democrat - has much of interest to say on this subject.

As to the referendum as elsewhere noted it's extraordinary and comic that some people can't bring themselves to endorse international monitoring.

[craigt3365]

Craig, I get it that Suthep doesn't like foreigners, but what about you. Are you in favour or against international observers?

100% for it. Just question why the UDD wants something like this now and never pushed hard for it before. Again, I don't like either major political party.

[BSJ]

I don't think they should be bothering with the muppets at the UN, or the socialist clowns at the EU when all they need to do is ask their chums from China to lend a hand.

[heybruce]

The UDD leader noted that there is still a lot of confusion regarding the referendum law, particularly Section 61 which specifies that anyone who uses rude or aggressive language, intimidation or violent means against the referendum will be liable to ten years imprisonment and/or a fine of 200,000 baht and may lose their voting right for five years.

Seems this might be the crux of the matter. This forbids the UDD from using violent street protests against the referendum. Love it! Great stuff as it applies to all political parties, but only one is complaining about it. These street protests have to go....

Got it: You love a law stifling debate on the draft constitution before the referendum.

Regarding your claim that only one political party is complaining about the restrictions of free speech, perhaps only one party has the balls to do the right thing in the current environment.

[Holy Cinema]

The Dems have also been complaining, but they know what side their bread is buttered (and sliced up into nice little soldiers for them too)

[tukkytuktuk]

A Recap on what all the fuss is about on the upcoming Referendum Thailand 2016.

Snippets from the Nation Newspaper.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Senate-question-looms-over-charter-referendum-30284148.html

Besides deciding whether they accept the draft charter or not, voters will have to say if they want an appointed Senate to share power with the elected House of Representatives in selecting the next prime minister. Political parties may join hands in a silent conspiracy to say "No" to this. Pheu Thai doesn't like the proposal for obvious reasons, while the Democrats, in public at least, have also slammed the idea.

If the charter is passed and voters also say "Yes" to the additional question, the Senate will virtually become the biggest political party when selecting the prime minister is concerned.

Thailand has long been debating whether it really needs a senate and, if "Yes", whether the senators should come by "appointment" or from a direct election.

Thought I'd help the laymen understand. The low down on the Ref 2016, word up. Yer dig

Edited April 25, 2016 by tukkytuktuk