CDC's Meechai insists explanation of draft charter must be straightforward and honest

[sjaak327]

"There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand"

As far as the constitution is concerned you'll find more knowledge amongst our dear TVF members than amongst all Thai.

Oh, by the way 'informed mostly by the CDC themselves' ? Seems a bit of a contradiction.

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Yeah, not a model immigrant. The Thai electorate has been able to hear the two major political parties in this country outright rejecting the draft, with reasons given. Let's hope that most take the trouble to vote, a no would be inevitable in that case, unless the Junta is cheating.

Not sure what the contradiction is in informed by the CDC, is rubl claiming they don't speak the truth ?

[rubl]

Oh my, ask for an English version of the draft constitution in order to be able to better judge straightforward and honest explanations and get condemned for it.

The juicy bit and pieces already translated are from various 'working versions' of the draft and come from various people not all of them beyond 'innovative' translation work.

Interesting the 'no need to read the constitution'. Well, better to state your uninformed opinion I guess?

PS I also fear almost no Thai will read the draft constitution, just like almost no Thai read either 1997 or 2007 version. It would seem they are really trusting that others know what they are doing without the need to check.

We have been informed rubl, and mostly by the CDC themselves, are you claiming the CDC isn't accurately reporting on it's own document ?

There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand. Even in our home country, the percentage of people that actually would read a constitution is small.

The only chance this draft is approved is when the turnout is incredibly low. A bit like that referendum recently in The Netherlands. At least there, they do have a minimum turnout for a referendum to be valid. 30%. They barely made it with 32%. Of course this referendum does not have to be followed by the government, personally I believe for good reasons. 32% turnover, of which 60% voted no, this means that only 17.6% of the electorate voted no, that's a number that is way to low.

For the draft referendum, there isn't even a minimum turnout required, and that could be the only chance they have to get a yes...

Oh by the way, according to the same CDC the draft constitution up for vote can and will be changed post the referendum, maybe that's why it is called a draft.

"There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand"

As far as the constitution is concerned you'll find more knowledge amongst our dear TVF members than amongst all Thai.

Oh, by the way 'informed mostly by the CDC themselves' ? Seems a bit of a contradiction.

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Well, with what some posters here write and claim it would seem that a handful of TVF posters have more 'knowledge' of constitutions in general and the Thai version in particular than the Thai. Of course if you think that's negative towards the Thai I agree, but it would seem the unfortunate truth.

Now if you think I should ignore inconvenient truths in order to show a better attitude to Thais and thereby be allowed to stay here with your permission, I suggest you try to wake up.

[rubl]

"There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand"

As far as the constitution is concerned you'll find more knowledge amongst our dear TVF members than amongst all Thai.

Oh, by the way 'informed mostly by the CDC themselves' ? Seems a bit of a contradiction.

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Yeah, not a model immigrant. The Thai electorate has been able to hear the two major political parties in this country outright rejecting the draft, with reasons given. Let's hope that most take the trouble to vote, a no would be inevitable in that case, unless the Junta is cheating.

Not sure what the contradiction is in informed by the CDC, is rubl claiming they don't speak the truth ?

Nice try sjaak327, but you wrote you didn't need to read the constitution as you were 'informed' enough by the bits you found elsewhere and suggested even the CDC informed you. Now since you don't believe them (at least that seems the point in your posts) you seem to think they're not speaking the truth. No problem, you're entitled to your opinion, not even a need to come with facts and the parts in the constitution you didn't read, to prove you're right.

Edited May 13, 2016 by rubl

[sjaak327]

"There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand"

As far as the constitution is concerned you'll find more knowledge amongst our dear TVF members than amongst all Thai.

Oh, by the way 'informed mostly by the CDC themselves' ? Seems a bit of a contradiction.

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Yeah, not a model immigrant. The Thai electorate has been able to hear the two major political parties in this country outright rejecting the draft, with reasons given. Let's hope that most take the trouble to vote, a no would be inevitable in that case, unless the Junta is cheating.

Not sure what the contradiction is in informed by the CDC, is rubl claiming they don't speak the truth ?

Nice try sjaak327, but you wrote you didn't need to read the constitution as you were 'informed' enough by the bits you found elsewhere and suggested even the CDC informed you. Now since you don't believe them (at least that seems the point in your posts) you seem to think they're not speaking the truth. No problem, you're entitled to your opinion, not even a need to come with facts and the parts in the constitution you didn't read, to prove you're right.

Nice try ? The parts about the senate, how it will be composed and what powers they hold have been discussed by the CDC in great detail. I understand you seem to be determined to try and derail the discussion with irrelevancies, but it is what it is. A constitution not geared towards real democracy, but geared towards making elections matter less.

I don't claim the CDC is lying, I claim they will try to sell their draft to the Thai electorate, they will explain to that same electorate why the draft is good for Thailand.

What they actually should say is, the draft is good for the precious few that get a behind the scenes power base without the need to gain votes made possible by this draft.

Now are you now denying the parts of the constitution that handle the senate aren't facts ? That I and many posters on here are misunderstanding those parts ? That PT and the democrats, who have been able to read the Thai version of the draft, are misunderstanding those as well.

Nah rubl, quit derailing the thread and man up.

[heybruce]

"There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand"

As far as the constitution is concerned you'll find more knowledge amongst our dear TVF members than amongst all Thai.

Oh, by the way 'informed mostly by the CDC themselves' ? Seems a bit of a contradiction.

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Well, with what some posters here write and claim it would seem that a handful of TVF posters have more 'knowledge' of constitutions in general and the Thai version in particular than the Thai. Of course if you think that's negative towards the Thai I agree, but it would seem the unfortunate truth.

Now if you think I should ignore inconvenient truths in order to show a better attitude to Thais and thereby be allowed to stay here with your permission, I suggest you try to wake up.

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

[rubl]

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Yeah, not a model immigrant. The Thai electorate has been able to hear the two major political parties in this country outright rejecting the draft, with reasons given. Let's hope that most take the trouble to vote, a no would be inevitable in that case, unless the Junta is cheating.

Not sure what the contradiction is in informed by the CDC, is rubl claiming they don't speak the truth ?

Nice try sjaak327, but you wrote you didn't need to read the constitution as you were 'informed' enough by the bits you found elsewhere and suggested even the CDC informed you. Now since you don't believe them (at least that seems the point in your posts) you seem to think they're not speaking the truth. No problem, you're entitled to your opinion, not even a need to come with facts and the parts in the constitution you didn't read, to prove you're right.

Nice try ? The parts about the senate, how it will be composed and what powers they hold have been discussed by the CDC in great detail. I understand you seem to be determined to try and derail the discussion with irrelevancies, but it is what it is. A constitution not geared towards real democracy, but geared towards making elections matter less.

I don't claim the CDC is lying, I claim they will try to sell their draft to the Thai electorate, they will explain to that same electorate why the draft is good for Thailand.

What they actually should say is, the draft is good for the precious few that get a behind the scenes power base without the need to gain votes made possible by this draft.

Now are you now denying the parts of the constitution that handle the senate aren't facts ? That I and many posters on here are misunderstanding those parts ? That PT and the democrats, who have been able to read the Thai version of the draft, are misunderstanding those as well.

Nah rubl, quit derailing the thread and man up.

It would seem you only want to believe those who tell you what you want to hear. Furthermore without having the complete draft charter in English you're just stuck in repeating all those arguments others have come up with. Next you try to do some 'cherry picking' and come with 'derailing'.

Seems you don't like it when others rather make up their mind on their own.

Edited May 13, 2016 by rubl

[rubl]

"There are precious little uninformed people in Thailand"

As far as the constitution is concerned you'll find more knowledge amongst our dear TVF members than amongst all Thai.

Oh, by the way 'informed mostly by the CDC themselves' ? Seems a bit of a contradiction.

rubl continues to show his contempt for the Thai people. It makes one wonder why he is here.

Well, with what some posters here write and claim it would seem that a handful of TVF posters have more 'knowledge' of constitutions in general and the Thai version in particular than the Thai. Of course if you think that's negative towards the Thai I agree, but it would seem the unfortunate truth.

Now if you think I should ignore inconvenient truths in order to show a better attitude to Thais and thereby be allowed to stay here with your permission, I suggest you try to wake up.

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

[sjaak327]

Nice try ? The parts about the senate, how it will be composed and what powers they hold have been discussed by the CDC in great detail. I understand you seem to be determined to try and derail the discussion with irrelevancies, but it is what it is. A constitution not geared towards real democracy, but geared towards making elections matter less.

I don't claim the CDC is lying, I claim they will try to sell their draft to the Thai electorate, they will explain to that same electorate why the draft is good for Thailand.

What they actually should say is, the draft is good for the precious few that get a behind the scenes power base without the need to gain votes made possible by this draft.

Now are you now denying the parts of the constitution that handle the senate aren't facts ? That I and many posters on here are misunderstanding those parts ? That PT and the democrats, who have been able to read the Thai version of the draft, are misunderstanding those as well.

Nah rubl, quit derailing the thread and man up.

It would seem you only want to believe those who tell you what you want to hear. Furthermore without having the complete draft charter in English you're just stuck in repeating all those arguments others have come up with. Next you try to do some 'cherry picking' and come with 'derailing'.

Seems you don't like it when others rather make up their mind on their own.

What arguments would that be Rubl ? Are you denying the 200 senators are all going to be appointed ?

Are you denying they have the power to send the government packing ?

Are you denying the CDC has proposed those 200 senators will have a vote in who becomes the PM, effectively broadening the number of voters from 500 to 700 ?

Those three points are reason enough to reject the charter, it's really that simple.

Maybe you should start learning some Thai, so you can read the whole charter on your own, after all you live in Thailand, you know how we in Holland are determined immigrants learn our language, maybe they should do the same in Thailand, that way you are sure not to trail behind.

Others simply rely on the press and the CDC to avoid being trailed behind.

[sjaak327]

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

That's rich coming from someone raised in a western country and apparently doesn't have a problem with a senate that has far reaching powers, and whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect.

The word democracy is not applicable here rubl.

[heybruce]

Well, with what some posters here write and claim it would seem that a handful of TVF posters have more 'knowledge' of constitutions in general and the Thai version in particular than the Thai. Of course if you think that's negative towards the Thai I agree, but it would seem the unfortunate truth.

Now if you think I should ignore inconvenient truths in order to show a better attitude to Thais and thereby be allowed to stay here with your permission, I suggest you try to wake up.

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

Once again, rubl cannot refute a post, so he replies with nonsense.

In case you've forgotten, I'm the one who maintains the Thai people are ready for democracy and a proper debate on the draft constitution, you are the one who maintains they are not. How can my position be described as anything but respect for the Thai people, while yours described as anything but contempt?

[rubl]

Nice try ? The parts about the senate, how it will be composed and what powers they hold have been discussed by the CDC in great detail. I understand you seem to be determined to try and derail the discussion with irrelevancies, but it is what it is. A constitution not geared towards real democracy, but geared towards making elections matter less.

I don't claim the CDC is lying, I claim they will try to sell their draft to the Thai electorate, they will explain to that same electorate why the draft is good for Thailand.

What they actually should say is, the draft is good for the precious few that get a behind the scenes power base without the need to gain votes made possible by this draft.

Now are you now denying the parts of the constitution that handle the senate aren't facts ? That I and many posters on here are misunderstanding those parts ? That PT and the democrats, who have been able to read the Thai version of the draft, are misunderstanding those as well.

Nah rubl, quit derailing the thread and man up.

It would seem you only want to believe those who tell you what you want to hear. Furthermore without having the complete draft charter in English you're just stuck in repeating all those arguments others have come up with. Next you try to do some 'cherry picking' and come with 'derailing'.

Seems you don't like it when others rather make up their mind on their own.

What arguments would that be Rubl ? Are you denying the 200 senators are all going to be appointed ?

Are you denying they have the power to send the government packing ?

Are you denying the CDC has proposed those 200 senators will have a vote in who becomes the PM, effectively broadening the number of voters from 500 to 700 ?

Those three points are reason enough to reject the charter, it's really that simple.

Maybe you should start learning some Thai, so you can read the whole charter on your own, after all you live in Thailand, you know how we in Holland are determined immigrants learn our language, maybe they should do the same in Thailand, that way you are sure not to trail behind.

Others simply rely on the press and the CDC to avoid being trailed behind.

I neither deny nor confirm, my dear chap. I just don't like to rely on the local press nor the international one in this. As such I do not even have the right info to say you're right or wrong in your three points. Mind you, as strong an opponent as you seem to be I would not be surprised if some is somewhat imaginative and written in the 'right' way to stress your point. Of course, you didn't write it yourself, others did for you.

As for immigrants learning the language, well if I remember correctly you're supposed to have some knowledge of the Thai language and culture when you want to be successful in applying for residency and certainly for the Thai nationality. Do you want to suggest a few more articles in the charter to cover this?

[rubl]

Well, with what some posters here write and claim it would seem that a handful of TVF posters have more 'knowledge' of constitutions in general and the Thai version in particular than the Thai. Of course if you think that's negative towards the Thai I agree, but it would seem the unfortunate truth.

Now if you think I should ignore inconvenient truths in order to show a better attitude to Thais and thereby be allowed to stay here with your permission, I suggest you try to wake up.

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

Once again, rubl cannot refute a post, so he replies with nonsense.

In case you've forgotten, I'm the one who maintains the Thai people are ready for democracy and a proper debate on the draft constitution, you are the one who maintains they are not. How can my position be described as anything but respect for the Thai people, while yours described as anything but contempt?

Once more Heybruce twists and turns and continues the denigration of fellow posters.

I can do without your type of respect, thank you.

Now as I wrote in my first post in this topic, if only we had a reasonable English translation of the draft charter. As it is I'm only bombarded by cheap rhetoric, distractions by others who do not think they have a need to read as they 'know' already having been instructed or educated by others. How nice.

Edited May 13, 2016 by rubl

[rubl]

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

That's rich coming from someone raised in a western country and apparently doesn't have a problem with a senate that has far reaching powers, and whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect.

The word democracy is not applicable here rubl.

That's rich, the reference to the 'raised in a western country'. Just because I was I keep asking for a (by me) readable translation of the charter.

BTW " whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect." ? Now that's an interesting interpretation of the Thai text.

[heybruce]

You claim, without evidence, that a handful of posters on TV forum know more about constitutions in general than the Thai. If you mean a few experts know more than the average Thai, that is almost certainly true and consistent with the definition of "expert".

However you seem to be claiming that some TV members know more about this constitution than any Thai, again without any proof. That is definitely contempt for the Thai people, based on unsubstantiated claims that you now describe as "inconvenient truths". I describe that as contempt, arrogance, bigotry, etc.

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

Once again, rubl cannot refute a post, so he replies with nonsense.

In case you've forgotten, I'm the one who maintains the Thai people are ready for democracy and a proper debate on the draft constitution, you are the one who maintains they are not. How can my position be described as anything but respect for the Thai people, while yours described as anything but contempt?

Once more Heybruce twists and turns and continues the denigration of fellow posters.

I can do without your type of respect, thank you.

Now as I wrote in my first post in this topic, if only we had a reasonable English translation of the draft charter. As it is I'm only bombarded by cheap rhetoric, distractions by others who do not think they have a need to read as they 'know' already having been instructed or educated by others. How nice.

"twists and turns", rubl's favorite nonsense post when he has nothing worth posting.

Regarding "denigration of fellow posters", I believe the words you used while denigrating the Thai people were "inconvenient truths". Of course you offered no evidence to prove your denigration.

[sjaak327]

Nice try ? The parts about the senate, how it will be composed and what powers they hold have been discussed by the CDC in great detail. I understand you seem to be determined to try and derail the discussion with irrelevancies, but it is what it is. A constitution not geared towards real democracy, but geared towards making elections matter less.

I don't claim the CDC is lying, I claim they will try to sell their draft to the Thai electorate, they will explain to that same electorate why the draft is good for Thailand.

What they actually should say is, the draft is good for the precious few that get a behind the scenes power base without the need to gain votes made possible by this draft.

Now are you now denying the parts of the constitution that handle the senate aren't facts ? That I and many posters on here are misunderstanding those parts ? That PT and the democrats, who have been able to read the Thai version of the draft, are misunderstanding those as well.

Nah rubl, quit derailing the thread and man up.

It would seem you only want to believe those who tell you what you want to hear. Furthermore without having the complete draft charter in English you're just stuck in repeating all those arguments others have come up with. Next you try to do some 'cherry picking' and come with 'derailing'.

Seems you don't like it when others rather make up their mind on their own.

What arguments would that be Rubl ? Are you denying the 200 senators are all going to be appointed ?

Are you denying they have the power to send the government packing ?

Are you denying the CDC has proposed those 200 senators will have a vote in who becomes the PM, effectively broadening the number of voters from 500 to 700 ?

Those three points are reason enough to reject the charter, it's really that simple.

Maybe you should start learning some Thai, so you can read the whole charter on your own, after all you live in Thailand, you know how we in Holland are determined immigrants learn our language, maybe they should do the same in Thailand, that way you are sure not to trail behind.

Others simply rely on the press and the CDC to avoid being trailed behind.

I neither deny nor confirm, my dear chap. I just don't like to rely on the local press nor the international one in this. As such I do not even have the right info to say you're right or wrong in your three points. Mind you, as strong an opponent as you seem to be I would not be surprised if some is somewhat imaginative and written in the 'right' way to stress your point. Of course, you didn't write it yourself, others did for you.

As for immigrants learning the language, well if I remember correctly you're supposed to have some knowledge of the Thai language and culture when you want to be successful in applying for residency and certainly for the Thai nationality. Do you want to suggest a few more articles in the charter to cover this?

Yes you indeed do need some Thai when you apply for a residency permit,

of course in Holland, any long term visa (we actually have only one, the D visum) requires certain nationalities to even do a language test PRIOR to being able to even apply for the visa. That way we ensure they are not totally clueless about the language of their country of choice. When they do arrive on that D visum, ALL nationalities are required to follow additional, lengthy courses to learn about society and language, among other things. Passing those courses is a hard requirement for both permanent residency and obtaining the Dutch nationality (one such other requirement is that you need to have stayed in Holland for at least five years for both ).

Anyway,

I am not suggesting anything regarding learning Thai, not only because such a requirement would be in the immigration law, not in the charter, but I'm not the one complaining about an English language version of the Charter, so naturally learning Thai would negate that need for the English translation.

The points I mentioned have been communicated by the CDC themselves, or the source if you will. So I am quite surprised that you seem to think that the CDC is offering all of us false information ? And how will they fare with all of those volunteers that are supposed to inform the Thai electorate about the draft ?

You are clutching at straws, amusing.

[sjaak327]

That's rich coming from someone raised in a western country and apparently doesn't have a problem with a senate that has far reaching powers, and whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect.

The word democracy is not applicable here rubl.

That's rich, the reference to the 'raised in a western country'. Just because I was I keep asking for a (by me) readable translation of the charter.

BTW " whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect." ? Now that's an interesting interpretation of the Thai text.

What part of appointed did you not get ?

Funny, here you complain about an English version of the draft, yet you claim I just wrote an interesting interpretation of the Thai text ? So you do speak Thai ? Otherwise how could you possibly make that claim ?

[baboon]

That's rich coming from someone raised in a western country and apparently doesn't have a problem with a senate that has far reaching powers, and whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect.

The word democracy is not applicable here rubl.

That's rich, the reference to the 'raised in a western country'. Just because I was I keep asking for a (by me) readable translation of the charter.

BTW " whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect." ? Now that's an interesting interpretation of the Thai text.

What part of appointed did you not get ?

Funny, here you complain about an English version of the draft, yet you claim I just wrote an interesting interpretation of the Thai text ? So you do speak Thai ? Otherwise how could you possibly make that claim ?

He keeps bleating on and on about an English translation as though everyone on here doesn't know that whatever it contains in any bloody language, he supports it.

[rubl]

It would seem you only want to believe those who tell you what you want to hear. Furthermore without having the complete draft charter in English you're just stuck in repeating all those arguments others have come up with. Next you try to do some 'cherry picking' and come with 'derailing'.

Seems you don't like it when others rather make up their mind on their own.

What arguments would that be Rubl ? Are you denying the 200 senators are all going to be appointed ?

Are you denying they have the power to send the government packing ?

Are you denying the CDC has proposed those 200 senators will have a vote in who becomes the PM, effectively broadening the number of voters from 500 to 700 ?

Those three points are reason enough to reject the charter, it's really that simple.

Maybe you should start learning some Thai, so you can read the whole charter on your own, after all you live in Thailand, you know how we in Holland are determined immigrants learn our language, maybe they should do the same in Thailand, that way you are sure not to trail behind.

Others simply rely on the press and the CDC to avoid being trailed behind.

I neither deny nor confirm, my dear chap. I just don't like to rely on the local press nor the international one in this. As such I do not even have the right info to say you're right or wrong in your three points. Mind you, as strong an opponent as you seem to be I would not be surprised if some is somewhat imaginative and written in the 'right' way to stress your point. Of course, you didn't write it yourself, others did for you.

As for immigrants learning the language, well if I remember correctly you're supposed to have some knowledge of the Thai language and culture when you want to be successful in applying for residency and certainly for the Thai nationality. Do you want to suggest a few more articles in the charter to cover this?

Yes you indeed do need some Thai when you apply for a residency permit,

of course in Holland, any long term visa (we actually have only one, the D visum) requires certain nationalities to even do a language test PRIOR to being able to even apply for the visa. That way we ensure they are not totally clueless about the language of their country of choice. When they do arrive on that D visum, ALL nationalities are required to follow additional, lengthy courses to learn about society and language, among other things. Passing those courses is a hard requirement for both permanent residency and obtaining the Dutch nationality (one such other requirement is that you need to have stayed in Holland for at least five years for both ).

Anyway,

I am not suggesting anything regarding learning Thai, not only because such a requirement would be in the immigration law, not in the charter, but I'm not the one complaining about an English language version of the Charter, so naturally learning Thai would negate that need for the English translation.

The points I mentioned have been communicated by the CDC themselves, or the source if you will. So I am quite surprised that you seem to think that the CDC is offering all of us false information ? And how will they fare with all of those volunteers that are supposed to inform the Thai electorate about the draft ?

You are clutching at straws, amusing.

With your twisting and turning you could be sitting next to Heybruce for all I know.

I never suggested the CDC could not be trusted, it you who relied on them and don't want to believe them because you have other, 'better' sources. It's you who does not feel the need to read and understand.

[rubl]

That's rich coming from someone raised in a western country and apparently doesn't have a problem with a senate that has far reaching powers, and whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect.

The word democracy is not applicable here rubl.

That's rich, the reference to the 'raised in a western country'. Just because I was I keep asking for a (by me) readable translation of the charter.

BTW " whose composition cannot possibly be influenced by the electoral, neither direct or indirect." ? Now that's an interesting interpretation of the Thai text.

What part of appointed did you not get ?

Funny, here you complain about an English version of the draft, yet you claim I just wrote an interesting interpretation of the Thai text ? So you do speak Thai ? Otherwise how could you possibly make that claim ?

He keeps bleating on and on about an English translation as though everyone on here doesn't know that whatever it contains in any bloody language, he supports it.

That's your opinion, uninformed and well.

So, no one has even tried to read the Thai version? Everyone just copies the bit-and-pieces they like or dislike, or told by others to like/dislike?

[baboon]

I posted no opinion. You will support the charter regardless of anything it contains.

[rubl]

You were looking in the mirror I guess.

Now if only we had a decent English translation of the draft charter we could have a very nice discussion without all the innuendo and insults and such. Seems insults are required when you're defending Democracy as you want to have it be.

Once again, rubl cannot refute a post, so he replies with nonsense.

In case you've forgotten, I'm the one who maintains the Thai people are ready for democracy and a proper debate on the draft constitution, you are the one who maintains they are not. How can my position be described as anything but respect for the Thai people, while yours described as anything but contempt?

Once more Heybruce twists and turns and continues the denigration of fellow posters.

I can do without your type of respect, thank you.

Now as I wrote in my first post in this topic, if only we had a reasonable English translation of the draft charter. As it is I'm only bombarded by cheap rhetoric, distractions by others who do not think they have a need to read as they 'know' already having been instructed or educated by others. How nice.

"twists and turns", rubl's favorite nonsense post when he has nothing worth posting.

Regarding "denigration of fellow posters", I believe the words you used while denigrating the Thai people were "inconvenient truths". Of course you offered no evidence to prove your denigration.

Well, even sjaak327 agrees that very few Thai will read the draft constitution. They seem to like to rely on their betters who 'of course' know all much better than they.

So if you have not read the draft and tried to understand it, asked more questions and so, how are you going to judge the CDC will give a straightforward and honest explanation of the charter? Are you simply repeating what others tell you?

So, 'twists and turns', but ignoring the charter, ignoring the need to read and understand, relying on 'a few good men', etc., etc.

[baboon]

You haven't read the draft and tried to understand it, yet you support it nonetheless. Obviously you must be simply repeating what others tell you.

Edited May 13, 2016 by baboon

[rubl]

You haven't read the draft and tried to understand it, yet you support it nonetheless.

I have frequently said in my opinion the 2007 constitution should have been used as starting point. It gave improvements over the 1997 version, had been law for seven years and various discussions (and attempts) showed the areas which needed to be reviewed.

You're right though, I didn't read the current draft in Thai. Even in Dutch reading law is not my most favourite pastime. Mind you I did (try to) read the 2014 Interim version and the April 2015 draft, but with near everything really rewritten it takes time to understand which parts relate between versions and one was really interim and the other soon dead-in-the-water.

Now of course you don't have a problem, you're just against nonetheless.

Edited May 13, 2016 by rubl

[baboon]

You haven't read the draft and tried to understand it, yet you support it nonetheless.

I have frequently said in my opinion the 2007 constitution should have been used as starting point. It gave improvements over the 1997 version, had been law for seven years and various discussions (and attempts) showed the areas which needed to be reviewed.

You're right though, I didn't read the current draft in Thai. Even in Dutch reading law is not my most favourite pastime. Mind you I did (try to) read the 2014 Interim version and the April 2015 draft, but with near everything really rewritten it takes time to understand which parts relate between versions and one was really interim and the other soon dead-in-the-water.

Now of course you don't have a problem, you're just against nonetheless.

You have not read the current draft in any language and tried to understand it but you support it nonetheless. Obviously you must be simply repeating what others tell you.

[rubl]

You haven't read the draft and tried to understand it, yet you support it nonetheless.

I have frequently said in my opinion the 2007 constitution should have been used as starting point. It gave improvements over the 1997 version, had been law for seven years and various discussions (and attempts) showed the areas which needed to be reviewed.

You're right though, I didn't read the current draft in Thai. Even in Dutch reading law is not my most favourite pastime. Mind you I did (try to) read the 2014 Interim version and the April 2015 draft, but with near everything really rewritten it takes time to understand which parts relate between versions and one was really interim and the other soon dead-in-the-water.

Now of course you don't have a problem, you're just against nonetheless.

You have not read the current draft in any language and tried to understand it but you support it nonetheless. Obviously you must be simply repeating what others tell you.

Pray tell me where I have written I support the current draft?

Not having written against it doesn't mean nor implies I'm in favour. As such your conclusion in faulty, but then all else having failed I guess you think it's time for some baiting and provoking?

[baboon]

Not having written against it doesn't mean or imply you are in favour, but in favour you are, despite not having read it in any language and tried to understand it. Obviously you must simply be repeating what others tell you.

[heybruce]

Once again, rubl cannot refute a post, so he replies with nonsense.

In case you've forgotten, I'm the one who maintains the Thai people are ready for democracy and a proper debate on the draft constitution, you are the one who maintains they are not. How can my position be described as anything but respect for the Thai people, while yours described as anything but contempt?

Once more Heybruce twists and turns and continues the denigration of fellow posters.

I can do without your type of respect, thank you.

Now as I wrote in my first post in this topic, if only we had a reasonable English translation of the draft charter. As it is I'm only bombarded by cheap rhetoric, distractions by others who do not think they have a need to read as they 'know' already having been instructed or educated by others. How nice.

"twists and turns", rubl's favorite nonsense post when he has nothing worth posting.

Regarding "denigration of fellow posters", I believe the words you used while denigrating the Thai people were "inconvenient truths". Of course you offered no evidence to prove your denigration.

Well, even sjaak327 agrees that very few Thai will read the draft constitution. They seem to like to rely on their betters who 'of course' know all much better than they.

So if you have not read the draft and tried to understand it, asked more questions and so, how are you going to judge the CDC will give a straightforward and honest explanation of the charter? Are you simply repeating what others tell you?

So, 'twists and turns', but ignoring the charter, ignoring the need to read and understand, relying on 'a few good men', etc., etc.

You obviously ignored my post where I explained the obvious, so I'll do it again:

The CDC wrote the d*mned thing, they are incapable of giving an objective assessment of it. Just as an author is incapable of giving an objective review of his own work. That, and the fact that the junta is detaining anyone critical of the document and banning public discussions that it doesn't control is enough to convince me the draft is cr*p.

This view is supported by reviews of the constitution written by people who have more patience with reading legalese than I do. It's also supported by history; the military has a poor track record when it comes to constitutions.

If the constitution had been written by people with a track record of supporting democracy I would be more open-minded about it. Even then I wouldn't read a constitution that is over 200 pages long. The very length of the document is suspicious.

[sjaak327]

Yes you indeed do need some Thai when you apply for a residency permit,

of course in Holland, any long term visa (we actually have only one, the D visum) requires certain nationalities to even do a language test PRIOR to being able to even apply for the visa. That way we ensure they are not totally clueless about the language of their country of choice. When they do arrive on that D visum, ALL nationalities are required to follow additional, lengthy courses to learn about society and language, among other things. Passing those courses is a hard requirement for both permanent residency and obtaining the Dutch nationality (one such other requirement is that you need to have stayed in Holland for at least five years for both ).

Anyway,

I am not suggesting anything regarding learning Thai, not only because such a requirement would be in the immigration law, not in the charter, but I'm not the one complaining about an English language version of the Charter, so naturally learning Thai would negate that need for the English translation.

The points I mentioned have been communicated by the CDC themselves, or the source if you will. So I am quite surprised that you seem to think that the CDC is offering all of us false information ? And how will they fare with all of those volunteers that are supposed to inform the Thai electorate about the draft ?

You are clutching at straws, amusing.

With your twisting and turning you could be sitting next to Heybruce for all I know.

I never suggested the CDC could not be trusted, it you who relied on them and don't want to believe them because you have other, 'better' sources. It's you who does not feel the need to read and understand.

Sorry, but where did I ever claim to have better sources ? Let me spell it out to you one last time, the points I mentioned is from documents and interviews or announcements from the CDC themselves.

So the question still stands, do you think the CDC gave us false information, and that in fact the senate isn't appointed as was claimed ? Of course you are not going to answer, but going to spend several more post claiming things I have never actually said...

[tbthailand]

so it seems that the farang from below sea-level has bumped up the post count dramatically on this topic.

not bad for having nothing to say....

[rubl]

Once more Heybruce twists and turns and continues the denigration of fellow posters.

I can do without your type of respect, thank you.

Now as I wrote in my first post in this topic, if only we had a reasonable English translation of the draft charter. As it is I'm only bombarded by cheap rhetoric, distractions by others who do not think they have a need to read as they 'know' already having been instructed or educated by others. How nice.

"twists and turns", rubl's favorite nonsense post when he has nothing worth posting.

Regarding "denigration of fellow posters", I believe the words you used while denigrating the Thai people were "inconvenient truths". Of course you offered no evidence to prove your denigration.

Well, even sjaak327 agrees that very few Thai will read the draft constitution. They seem to like to rely on their betters who 'of course' know all much better than they.

So if you have not read the draft and tried to understand it, asked more questions and so, how are you going to judge the CDC will give a straightforward and honest explanation of the charter? Are you simply repeating what others tell you?

So, 'twists and turns', but ignoring the charter, ignoring the need to read and understand, relying on 'a few good men', etc., etc.

You obviously ignored my post where I explained the obvious, so I'll do it again:

The CDC wrote the d*mned thing, they are incapable of giving an objective assessment of it. Just as an author is incapable of giving an objective review of his own work. That, and the fact that the junta is detaining anyone critical of the document and banning public discussions that it doesn't control is enough to convince me the draft is cr*p.

This view is supported by reviews of the constitution written by people who have more patience with reading legalese than I do. It's also supported by history; the military has a poor track record when it comes to constitutions.

If the constitution had been written by people with a track record of supporting democracy I would be more open-minded about it. Even then I wouldn't read a constitution that is over 200 pages long. The very length of the document is suspicious.

The Thai version of the current draft charter is 105 pages in a PDF as I downloaded from the government website. Anyway it's not really less or more 'thick' than either 2007 or 1997 version. Now that's really suspicious. Also totally distracting from actual contents.

Anyway, for someone who doesn't believe the CDC you seem to have lots of faith in others who might be just as 'biassed' as they don't want it one way or another.