CDC turns down invitation to join televised debate on new draft charter

[rooster59]

CDC turns down invitation to join televised debate on new draft charter

Kitti Cheevasittiyanon

BANGKOK, 24 July 2016 (NNT) – The Constitution Drafting Commission has turned down an invitation to join a TV debate on the draft charter.

CDC spokesman Norachit Sinhaseni said today that the Election Commission has however provided a list of participants in an upcoming debate on the proposed new Constitution. The televised debate will take place at Thai PBS on both July 25 and August 5.

The list was given to the CDC during a meeting between the charter drafters and the EC to discuss points and subjects of debate.

Mr. Norachit added that he has also talked with Election Commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn and discussed the intention, the idea and the objectives of the upcoming televised debate.

He said the debate will be presented as a platform for an exchange of opinions and not really as a basis for argument.

Nevertheless, the CDC confirmed that it won't participate in the debate because the charter drafters’ role is to explain the draft’s contents and details, rather than to refute other opinions that may be expressed.

-- NNT 2016-07-24

[Plutojames88]

Terms they use ( the military ) say more about their agenda than any debates would .

"Explain...."( force their view)

..."" Correct understanding "". ( Enforce their view by crushing opposing views)

False information""... ( criminalisation of negative viewpoints)

and "" misunderstandings""....( demonisation of slightest questioning)

Negative views become criminal viewpoints under Military law when "" interpretation is solely there's to define.

"" Rude "" is illegal ...punishable by fines or gaol .

You can say this "" the military have an agenda by inserting a clause that allows them to rule five more years by proxy and its undemocratic""

This can be interpreted as "" an attack on the national security, rude , and accusing , and illegal because in their eyes it's false."

You might end up in a ditch or rot in cell.

Chances are LM charges will be added to make it 30 years instead of ten.

Thailand is gone in this manifestation .Politically.

It's a third world military run country heading for possible civil upheaval .

Ironically the instrument creating that collision course is the very people claiming to appease strife.

The debate is dangerous and futile......with gulags and attitude adjustment at the beckon and call , and far worse for those brave enough to speak up....it's a travesty of justice this referendum is being hard wheeled through to the public with only the State line.

There is no why politically out.

The military will govern for years to come.

Until something gives

And this "" something"" will be born from the realisation the masses are largely ignored and unrepresented.

Basically the judicial , and government arms , are run with an absolute iron grip of military rule , draped in civil clothes and attire.....a general is still in charge of the nation .

Nothing has changed.

And the illusion of democracy remains.

This is army calling the shots.

Simple.

Dare speak against them?

Edited July 23, 2016 by Plutojames88

[djjamie]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

[Somtamnication]

"He said the debate will be presented as a platform for an exchange of opinions and not really as a basis for argument". Arai wa?

So it's not a debate, it is a cat sitting on your lap, claws out, while you pat its head.

[aussieinthailand]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

[WhizBang]

To add insult to injury, this 'debate' will NOT be aired live, but taped.

So lots of time to edit the 'debate' before it's shown.

This is a total farce. But this comment by Mr. Norachit says it all in a nutshell...

"He said the debate will be presented as a platform for an exchange of opinions and not really as a basis for argument."

[Rimmer]

A troll post and two replies have been removed

[brucec64]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

Give poor Jamie a break. We all know that he is so smitten with men in uniform that he can't think straight.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Maybe they could invite the two 8yrs old girls... Thaivisa don t mention this news, i am surprised...

[Hawk]

So the debate is not actually going to be a debate.

[MZurf]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Yes, I would say that the run-up to the referendum has been just as open and fair as the run-up to the Brexit vote, with a vigorous and free debate!!

[smedly]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

[MZurf]

Maybe they could invite the two 8yrs old girls... Thaivisa don t mention this news, i am surprised...

I'm not.

[MZurf]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

[smedly]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

are you calling me a troll because I see things differently to you, how pathetic

[klauskunkel]

So the debate is not actually going to be a debate.

Correct. This "undebate" is actually "a platform for an exchange of opinion" and also it is "not really a basis for argument". Instead it is a hybrid twist of a search for terminology to describe what is a farcical loss of plot in the face of force, arguably..., but in a good way And transparent. And corruption free. And assured to be in authorized, certified and professional hands of professional, certified and authorized authorities on the subject of non-debatable opinion platforms with unreal augmentative potential. I think, but I could be wrong, for the sake of argument, and it could be something much simpler, like they don't know what they are doing...

[Baerboxer]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

Do you for one minute imagine that is any different in other countries?

[MZurf]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

Do you for one minute imagine that is any different in other countries?

Yes. I know for a fact that that is not the case in the country I come from and I know for a fact that that is not the case in many other countries.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

are you calling me a troll because I see things differently to you, how pathetic

The fact that every time you write it is to say :

Thaksin did it(amnesty, censorship,...):it is bad

but now the army do the same or worse: it is right

As well as trying to justify a coup and the erratic actions of the army may have let us think you may be one...

[Baerboxer]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

What would happen in Australia if a government was voted in and then simply ignored laws it didn't like, did things without transparency and accountability, threatened, intimidated, and sued people who criticized, intimidated judges and openly said they would defy judgments they didn't like and that making the "wrong judgments would have consequences" and finally angered vast numbers of the people by trying to ram through an Amnesty Bill that would have whitewashed their party owner and de facto leader without adhering to parliamentary procedure?

Would the GG act? Would the courts or military act? To whom do they sear allegiance?

Can you imagine that analogy?

[MZurf]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

are you calling me a troll because I see things differently to you, how pathetic

I haven't called you a troll. I say your opinions are so far from what a person raised in a Western country normally have that you might be a troll. No Western democratic government agrees with you, they all have made it clear that they don't like the development regarding democracy and human rights in Thailand. That you find the junta's handling of the run-up to the referendum acceptable/laudable is beyond comprehension.

All NGO's that deal with human rights disagree with you. All major Western newspapers and TV stations disagree with you. For a clear and spot on article about the situation in Thailand I urge you to read an article dated July 21st in the latest Economist magazine (I hope that's vague enough to avoid breaking any forum rules).

When you've read it please reply and tell me what they got wrong.

[MZurf]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

What would happen in Australia if a government was voted in and then simply ignored laws it didn't like, did things without transparency and accountability, threatened, intimidated, and sued people who criticized, intimidated judges and openly said they would defy judgments they didn't like and that making the "wrong judgments would have consequences" and finally angered vast numbers of the people by trying to ram through an Amnesty Bill that would have whitewashed their party owner and de facto leader without adhering to parliamentary procedure?

Would the GG act? Would the courts or military act? To whom do they sear allegiance?

Can you imagine that analogy?

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't most/all democracies have provisions in place to handle wrongdoings by the government? I know for a fact that in the country I come from there is a constitutional court specifically for the purpose of handling impeachment of members of parliament, the government and the supreme court.

Edited July 24, 2016 by MZurf

[waldroj]

In the Preamble of the draft Constitution is says:

...In the implementation thereof, the Constitution Drafting Committee has built public awareness and understanding of the principles and justifications of all provisions on a periodic basis

so as to provide the opportunities for the public to widely access the Draft Constitution and its explanations through a variety of media and to allow public participation in the development

of the content of the Draft by providing recommendations on the revision it so requires. Upon completion, the Draft Constitution has been disseminated to the public with the summary of

explanations on its essence in a manner which enables the public to easily and generally understand it, and has organized a referendum to approve the entire Draft Constitution...

i.e. we've already created it, we've already told you it's available, we've already told you it's good for you, but there is just no way we are going to defend it (or be criticised) in public debate!

In other words - All Care and No Responsibility.

[Holy Cinema]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

What would happen in Australia if a government was voted in and then simply ignored laws it didn't like, did things without transparency and accountability, threatened, intimidated, and sued people who criticized, intimidated judges and openly said they would defy judgments they didn't like and that making the "wrong judgments would have consequences" and finally angered vast numbers of the people by trying to ram through an Amnesty Bill that would have whitewashed their party owner and de facto leader without adhering to parliamentary procedure?

Would the GG act? Would the courts or military act? To whom do they sear allegiance?

Can you imagine that analogy?

What if the moon was really made of green cheese ? It has the same relevance as your "analogy"

One things for sure, regardless of what the Government in Oz or any other Western country, their Armies wouldn't take to the streets and stage a coup.

The ADF/Army wouldn't be secretly working with the opposition behind the Government back.

The ADF/Army wouldn't be looking after its own self serving interests.

Generals from autocratic establishments in today's Modern world's rarely make good Presidents/Prime Ministers.

[smedly]

so anyone like to commit to what outcome they would expect/want from the referendum

If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix

If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix

and for those that keep banging on about a "return" to democracy - no such a thing has ever existed here in Thailand which is why elected governments keep failing because of abuse and corruption at every level

IMO opinion if the "No" vote is the majority they should just put the new charter into law anyway, many of the worlds so called successful constitutional democracies were never started with a referendum anyway simply because most of the people were not equipped to understand what it was.

Going forward I think for the first time Thailand will actually have an elected government forced to act in the interest of the country and people rather than themselves or individuals.

Some have incorrectly claimed that the next PM will be elected by the Senate - that is complete nonsense, the lower house majority will elect the next PM, simple as that

"If it is a "No" majority many here will be calling it a fix. If it is a majority "Yes" the same group will still be calling it a fix"

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

are you calling me a troll because I see things differently to you, how pathetic

I haven't called you a troll. I say your opinions are so far from what a person raised in a Western country normally have that you might be a troll. No Western democratic government agrees with you, they all have made it clear that they don't like the development regarding democracy and human rights in Thailand. That you find the junta's handling of the run-up to the referendum acceptable/laudable is beyond comprehension.

All NGO's that deal with human rights disagree with you. All major Western newspapers and TV stations disagree with you. For a clear and spot on article about the situation in Thailand I urge you to read an article dated July 21st in the latest Economist magazine (I hope that's vague enough to avoid breaking any forum rules).

When you've read it please reply and tell me what they got wrong.

all the stuff you mention is happening because we are in a transitional status - a lockdown if you want to call it that, it is not a permanent state, if you go back to when the coup took place the country was going down the shtter fast, people were dying in the streets while the government told police to do nothing, active terrorists were killing routinely using bombs grenades and heavy weapons, the red Thaksin terrorist movement were threatening sedition and setting up training camps in the north weaponising and training civilians for war - what government on the planet would promote such a thing all because - read bareboxers post above pretty much nails it.

This situation in Thailand is right now severe lockdown and for good reason, they have effectively silenced the thugs for the time being while radical changes are in the works, will they work ? well as I have said many times I am willing to wait and see, I have also made strong protest and been extremely critical of things I disagree with coming from the current government.

[smedly]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

What would happen in Australia if a government was voted in and then simply ignored laws it didn't like, did things without transparency and accountability, threatened, intimidated, and sued people who criticized, intimidated judges and openly said they would defy judgments they didn't like and that making the "wrong judgments would have consequences" and finally angered vast numbers of the people by trying to ram through an Amnesty Bill that would have whitewashed their party owner and de facto leader without adhering to parliamentary procedure?

Would the GG act? Would the courts or military act? To whom do they sear allegiance?

Can you imagine that analogy?

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't most/all democracies have provisions in place to handle wrongdoings by the government? I know for a fact that in the country I come from there is a constitutional court specifically for the purpose of handling impeachment of members of parliament, the government and the supreme court.

and if the sitting government decides to ignore such courts have judges threatened and attempt to dismantle them - what does that tell you ?????? I cannot believe you don't see what was going on or chose to totally ignore it....seriously

[TPI]

Of course CDC should not be involved. it would be like the directors of a movie being on the movie review panel.

CDC formulate the charter and others debate the pro's and con's of it.

Good to see televised open debate on the subject though. Open televised debate had been sorely lacking with previous governments so much so they absolutely refused to debate anything. It was an illusion of democracy if you will.

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

Careful mate! While Ozy's are famous for stating their opinion we're not in Collingwood now, the mango's who run the place have very little patience with those who are percieved to not agree wholeheartly with their view!

Just a whisper in your shell like!

[MZurf]

Yes, because either way the old elite will retain power. Only a tiny minority of TV posters do not realize this (or are trolling).

are you calling me a troll because I see things differently to you, how pathetic

I haven't called you a troll. I say your opinions are so far from what a person raised in a Western country normally have that you might be a troll. No Western democratic government agrees with you, they all have made it clear that they don't like the development regarding democracy and human rights in Thailand. That you find the junta's handling of the run-up to the referendum acceptable/laudable is beyond comprehension.

All NGO's that deal with human rights disagree with you. All major Western newspapers and TV stations disagree with you. For a clear and spot on article about the situation in Thailand I urge you to read an article dated July 21st in the latest Economist magazine (I hope that's vague enough to avoid breaking any forum rules).

When you've read it please reply and tell me what they got wrong.

all the stuff you mention is happening because we are in a transitional status - a lockdown if you want to call it that, it is not a permanent state, if you go back to when the coup took place the country was going down the shtter fast, people were dying in the streets while the government told police to do nothing, active terrorists were killing routinely using bombs grenades and heavy weapons, the red Thaksin terrorist movement were threatening sedition and setting up training camps in the north weaponising and training civilians for war - what government on the planet would promote such a thing all because - read bareboxers post above pretty much nails it.

This situation in Thailand is right now severe lockdown and for good reason, they have effectively silenced the thugs for the time being while radical changes are in the works, will they work ? well as I have said many times I am willing to wait and see, I have also made strong protest and been extremely critical of things I disagree with coming from the current government.

"all the stuff you mention is happening because we are in a transitional status - a lockdown if you want to call it that, it is not a permanent state,"

It has now been more than two years and I have yet to see a transition in any positive direction. What transition are you referring to?

"if you go back to when the coup took place the country was going down the shtter fast, people were dying in the streets while the government told police to do nothing, active terrorists were killing routinely using bombs grenades and heavy weapons.."

The yellow protests led by Suthep (in cohort with the "PM" according to Suthep ) were petering out and their last desperate move was to block the elections. Then came the coup. Violence is never the answer but I fully understand the people who had repeatedly voted the Shins into power being pissed off at the old elite. The demonstrations led by Suthep and friends against an elected government is the clearest example of sedition I've seen.

The fact that you support the junta means you have a hope they can "fix" Thailand despite two years of lies and nothing (there will be elections in 2014, 2015, 2016, no police reform, no military reform, no judiciary reform). After a number of coups that didn't fix anything what makes you hopeful this time around will be different. I'm really curios as to what is is that makes you hopeful because I just don't see it.

BTW, did you read that article in the Economist?

[MZurf]

Ohhh Jamie, I can't for the life of me understand how you can today say "Good to see televised open debate" . with just 2 weeks before the election and only 2 televised platforms to talk about issues.

And the current laws framing any opinion's that the junta can interpret as "ride, unnationalistic, false, or causing trouble and disturbing peace" then these people can be GAOLED!!!!!!!

Do you seriously believe the information and opportunity to discuss the draft is fair? or is it ramming the junta line down the country's throat?

And lastly do you think it ok when a vote yes = military power and a vote no = military power?

The EC has traveled about the world on tax payers expense to look at how other counties run referendums, and this B______T is what they come up with.....

You know for a fact this would not fly back in OZ but you back the military riding over the people as they see fit, Where is your Aussie tradition of a fair go?

Do you remember the last time the government used the military to ride over the people of Australia? Yeah mate, bloody Eureka stockade!!!

Wear is your national pride?

What would happen in Australia if a government was voted in and then simply ignored laws it didn't like, did things without transparency and accountability, threatened, intimidated, and sued people who criticized, intimidated judges and openly said they would defy judgments they didn't like and that making the "wrong judgments would have consequences" and finally angered vast numbers of the people by trying to ram through an Amnesty Bill that would have whitewashed their party owner and de facto leader without adhering to parliamentary procedure?

Would the GG act? Would the courts or military act? To whom do they sear allegiance?

Can you imagine that analogy?

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't most/all democracies have provisions in place to handle wrongdoings by the government? I know for a fact that in the country I come from there is a constitutional court specifically for the purpose of handling impeachment of members of parliament, the government and the supreme court.

and if the sitting government decides to ignore such courts have judges threatened and attempt to dismantle them - what does that tell you ?????? I cannot believe you don't see what was going on or chose to totally ignore it....seriously

An I cannot believe that you believe that coup no. 13 is the answer....seriously. ESPECIALLY after what has (not) happened during the last 2 + years.

[smedly]

here some food for thought

do you think the democratic elected PM of the Philipeans is more like Thaksin or The current PM

A fine example of how democracy in SEA opperates when a despot dictater is elected and there are no laws or controls in place to stop him, watch how that one progresses