UDD calls for international observation of referendum

[tukkytuktuk]

I have never supported the junta or Suthep but I find Jatuporn and his band of bandits repulsive to say the least. So there! You big toad! Bet your upset now, 555555

[In Town]

I have never supported the junta or Suthep but I find Jatuporn and his band of bandits repulsive to say the least. So there! You big toad! Bet your upset now, 555555

What does this have to do with the issue? Nothing, I guess. Four pages and no UDD hater has expressed an opinion on the actual issue. Weird, and sort of sad.

[Bluespunk]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Bluespunk

[JAG]

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.

Perhaps because at the last election parties were allowed to campaign against a government policy without facing 10 years in jail or being carted off by the army for arbitrary detention.

[nausea]

I think Thailand should accept reality. It needs an appointed Senate in the short term with veto powers, much as the UK has a House of Lords, just to get anything done, or restore a semblance of democracy. Then it's a going to be a struggle between the elected and the appointed. What's for sure is the Army needs to withdraw from the conflict. I'm sorry, but it just ain't acceptable anymore to have the army running things, however nice and paternalistic they may be.

[Wilsonandson]

I think Thailand should accept reality. It needs an appointed Senate in the short term with veto powers, much as the UK has a House of Lords, just to get anything done, or restore a semblance of democracy. Then it's a going to be a struggle between the elected and the appointed. What's for sure is the Army needs to withdraw from the conflict. I'm sorry, but it just ain't acceptable anymore to have the army running things, however nice and paternalistic they may be.

Yep, just bend over Jatuporn and take it like a man. Now there's a thought for you all before bedtime.

[baboon]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

But shouldn't that be dealt with at the point in the future when it becomes an issue? Are we not getting too far forward of ourselves here? Edited April 25, 2016 by baboon

[jayboy]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

[tbthailand]

ah, another "shoot the messenger" thread...

[halloween]

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

If UDD and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents, why are their opponents routinely harassed and intimidated when they attempt to electioneer and canvass in UDD controlled areas? Why do they need to set up "red villages" where contrary thought is not allowed?

Edited April 25, 2016 by halloween

[Bluespunk]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

History suggests they won't. While I agree they and PT or whatever the next thaksin vehicle is called will probably win an election, they will not want anyone watching their antics too closely. Especially the UDD. They are thugs.

[Plutojames88]

Red = honest and internationally acceptable and great man Thaksin .

Yellow = dubious spoil sports hate loosing

Army= oppressors

Increasing the world media will portray these stereotypes .

Thailand is entering the Spin zone

[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....

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.

The law doesn't stifle debate, just eliminates associated violence. A great thing, right? Something that was definitely needed in the past.

You are probably right, both parties are complaining about this referendum. Thailand isn't in a good place right now.

[phoenixdoglover]

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.

The law doesn't stifle debate, just eliminates associated violence. A great thing, right? Something that was definitely needed in the past.

You are probably right, both parties are complaining about this referendum. Thailand isn't in a good place right now.

Actually, the law does stifle debate. Yesterday, the DPM clarified that any announcements for or against the referendum that appear in the media will be a violation of the law. I guess that means you can have a debate in private. That's stifling by any reckoning.

[jayboy]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

History suggests they won't. While I agree they and PT or whatever the next thaksin vehicle is called will probably win an election, they will not want anyone watching their antics too closely. Especially the UDD. They are thugs.

Nonsense and completely illogical post again and history suggests no such thing.The PTP has everything to gain from international scrutiny and will be keen to have observers.Why would the most popular political movement in Thailand wish to torpedo its own efforts.As to UDD there are thugs throughout Thai politics including the army ,Suthep mob and before that the red and yellow shirts.

As I recall the last group seeing to interfere in elections were Suthep thugs.

[jayboy]

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.

The law doesn't stifle debate, just eliminates associated violence. A great thing, right? Something that was definitely needed in the past.

You are probably right, both parties are complaining about this referendum. Thailand isn't in a good place right now.

The law does stifle debate and it is odd you think otherwise since we have almost daily evidence of this fact.lll

I don't think there is a popular dislike of the referendum as such, more a dislike of an undemocratic charter and a bullying military seeking to impose it.

1

[craigt3365]

The law does stifle debate and it is odd you think otherwise since we have almost daily evidence of this fact.lll

I don't think there is a popular dislike of the referendum as such, more a dislike of an undemocratic charter and a bullying military seeking to impose it.

1

I think there are 2 parts to this. One, for sure they are stifling debates on the referendum. In a variety of ways. But this one part I think is what's getting them upset:

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.

[Bluespunk]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

History suggests they won't. While I agree they and PT or whatever the next thaksin vehicle is called will probably win an election, they will not want anyone watching their antics too closely. Especially the UDD. They are thugs.

Nonsense and completely illogical post again and history suggests no such thing.The PTP has everything to gain from international scrutiny and will be keen to have observers.Why would the most popular political movement in Thailand wish to torpedo its own efforts.As to UDD there are thugs throughout Thai politics including the army ,Suthep mob and before that the red and yellow shirts.

As I recall the last group seeing to interfere in elections were Suthep thugs.

I'm talking about PTs attitude when in power. That's when they unleash their udd bully boy thugs to suppress views they don't like or want to be heard.

Where have I defended suthep?

Edited April 26, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Holy Cinema]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

History suggests they won't. While I agree they and PT or whatever the next thaksin vehicle is called will probably win an election, they will not want anyone watching their antics too closely. Especially the UDD. They are thugs.

But you and several others are more than vocal that this coup/junta would be different despite what history itself has produced?

History also suggests that the Army will start to clamp down on dissent and opinions too, as it's looking ominous as to the direction they're taking, and how they're unable to handle opinions that differ from theirs..

So you cannot sit there in judgement of ANY Group, as History has shown that they are all doing the same thing over and over and over again.

[jayboy]

Just because the issue you want to discuss isn't seen as important to others as the hypocrisy of the UDD making this call does not mean that the discussion taking place is not valid.

From what I can tell no one views international observers as a negative thing, it is common behaviour in elections the world over. The problem is that those calling for it are not a force for good or democratic change.

They are violent thugs who, if or when they are once more in the ascendancy and take power, will have no truck with international observers.

Your logic is haywire.Whatever one's views of the UDD, the reality is they and their allies stand to benefit more from free and fair elections than their opponents.Why therefore should they have "no truck" with international observers?

History suggests they won't. While I agree they and PT or whatever the next thaksin vehicle is called will probably win an election, they will not want anyone watching their antics too closely. Especially the UDD. They are thugs.

Nonsense and completely illogical post again and history suggests no such thing.The PTP has everything to gain from international scrutiny and will be keen to have observers.Why would the most popular political movement in Thailand wish to torpedo its own efforts.As to UDD there are thugs throughout Thai politics including the army ,Suthep mob and before that the red and yellow shirts.

As I recall the last group seeing to interfere in elections were Suthep thugs.

I'm talking about PTs attitude when in power. That's when they unleash their udd bully boy thugs to suppress views they don't like or want to be heard.

Where have I defended suthep?

Oh I see you have shifted away from behaviour at elections to behaviour when in power.Understandable given your original proposition was so demonstrably false.

In any case I don't really recognise your description of PTP in power when in reality they were bounced from pillar to post.

Besides if we are to look for bully boy thugs we don't need to look very far nor travel back in time.