New constitution a recipe for more problems, red shirts say

[George Graham]

4 hours ago, sweatalot said:

The only recipe for trouble is the existence of the red shirts

Agreed, but, trouble for whom? A bunch of feudal fascists with there minds still stuck in the 13th century. Bring it on you reds.

[Stargeezr]

The last couple happened, because a corrupt Billionaire, and his sister tried to keep bleeding Thailand

of a lot of money for themselves. The  red shirts are p*szed ,  because just like the Democrats in the US

they hated to lose.

Geezer

[candide]

36 minutes ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

The last couple happened, because a corrupt Billionaire, and his sister tried to keep bleeding Thailand

of a lot of money for themselves. The  red shirts are p*szed ,  because just like the Democrats in the US

they hated to lose.

Geezer

This is a bit confused. The Democrats lost elections. Did YL lose elections?

[Becker]

43 minutes ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

The last couple happened, because a corrupt Billionaire, and his sister tried to keep bleeding Thailand

of a lot of money for themselves. The  red shirts are p*szed ,  because just like the Democrats in the US

they hated to lose.

Geezer

You are partially right that the last coup happened because the established elite were not allowed their costumary free access to the coffers (that's what you're saying, right?), but there were several other reasons as well - and most of them can't be discussed here.

The red shirts are pissed because they are repeatedly voted into power only to have it taken away from them by the elite. How you equate that with the situation in the US is beyond me but since you're a Trump supporter and rely on "alternative facts" there is no use debating with you using real, provable facts.

 

It's also quite funny to see a Trump supporter defending the establishment against a populist movement that overturned the established order. But I'm fairly certain you don't see the irony.

Wonder what kind of posts we would have seen from you if Trump was kicked out of the WH by the old establishment in Washington (after having won the election on populist policies and mainly getting votes from the less educated masses in the countryside), the constitution was torn up and voting and assembly rights suspended.

Still don't see the irony? Didn't think so.

[sjaak327]

13 hours ago, StefanBBK said:

Constitution change seems to be an easy, too easy thing. I would recommend constitution change to be only allowed with 75% of voter support. Possibly adding that 50% of eligible votes must be reached too, in case of low turnout.

In that case this constitution didn't even come close to reaching that target ! Not to mention the way the referendum was conducted. You know, no debate, the prospect of a prison sentence up to ten years , fingerprinted ballots and a few more transgressions.

 

I get it, governments with a solid electoral mandate should not change a constitution, it's much better to let generals with a few guns tear it apart and introduce a new one...

[sjaak327]

12 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

Agree; who are they? Are they officially recognized at law or in terms of an organized group of people with a specific manifesto and goals aligned to developing Thailand with equal opportunity, equal rights and equal justice, and much improved education? 

 

Why did their non-elected leader not make this statement? 

Priceless. The PM is unelected and self appointed, the NLA is unelected and appointed by the junta, the constitution drafters are unelected and appointed. Yet you want the red shirt leader to be elected ? Are you serious ?

 

No of course not, since the red shirts have never had any political power, there is no need whatsoever for them to be elected. Elected by whom I might ask ?

 

Of course, as any individual or organisation, they have every right to make statements about Thailand's political future, and in this case they are 100% correct..

[onthesoi]

The constitution was approved by landslide(61% vs 38%) referendum just last year.

 

 

It seems the red shirts only care about democracy when it suits their agenda.

 

What a surprise, the areas that benefited most from the Shinawatra rice scam voted against.

Edited January 28, 2017 by onthesoi

[candide]

12 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

The constitution was approved by landslide(61% vs 38%) referendum just last year.

 

It seems the red shirts only care about democracy when it suits their agenda.

Somebody already answered before

1 hour ago, sjaak327 said:

 

Additionally can you remind us what was the alternative choice? A constitution written by the unelected PM, according to the unelected PM'S statements.

Edited January 28, 2017 by candide

[Thechook]

15 hours ago, smedly said:

and who exactly are these redshirt people - who voted for them to even have an opinion on the matter

That's the junta spirit.  Yes how dare thais  outside of Bangkok have an opinion.  Who do these people think they are.

[onthesoi]

7 hours ago, candide said:

 Did YL lose elections?

 

No, Yingluck used public money to buy elections, but then she lost her right to be a politician when she became a criminal.

[SaintLouisBlues]

10 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

The constitution was approved by landslide(61% vs 38%) referendum just last year.

Remind us all of the open and transparent debate that preceded the referendum

[onthesoi]

1 minute ago, candide said:

Somebody already answered before

 

 

Don't be silly, unless he has a time machine he cant answer a post before it's made.

 

& his post says nothing about mine.

 

 

[onthesoi]

1 minute ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Remind us all of the open and transparent debate that preceded the referendum

 

Us all? do you represent some kind of group?

 

I had plenty of debate in Thailand with Thais before, during and after the referendum... what your experience was I cannot say!

[candide]

1 minute ago, onthesoi said:

 

Don't be silly, unless he has a time machine he cant answer a post before it's made.

 

& his post says nothing about mine.

 

 

Sorry I quoted the wrong post. Here it is

1 hour ago, sjaak327 said:

In that case this constitution didn't even come close to reaching that target ! Not to mention the way the referendum was conducted. You know, no debate, the prospect of a prison sentence up to ten years , fingerprinted ballots and a few more transgressions.

 

I get it, governments with a solid electoral mandate should not change a constitution, it's much better to let generals with a few guns tear it apart and introduce a new one...

 

[onthesoi]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Additionally can you remind us what was the alternative choice?

 

Are you saying the referendum only had one voting choice?

[SaintLouisBlues]

Just now, onthesoi said:

Us all? do you represent some kind of group?

 

I had plenty of debate in Thailand with Thais before, during and after the referendum... what your experience was I cannot say!

Yes, my group is called the Thaivisa Forum members. While you may have shared your prejudices informally with some Thais, there was no public debate allowed through the mass media

[candide]

5 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

No, Yingluck used public money to buy elections, but then she lost her right to be a politician when she became a criminal.

Your comparison was completely incoherent. That is what I mentioned. Now you can explain us (TVF members, not a particular group) Why you think it was coherent instead of obfuscating.

[candide]

2 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

Are you saying the referendum only had one voting choice?

Yes, the choice between a constitution written by the Junta and a constitution written by the Junta.

Anyway this debate is becoming ridiculous and I bet it will not last long time before it is erased.

[sjaak327]

1 hour ago, onthesoi said:

The constitution was approved by landslide(61% vs 38%) referendum just last year.

 

 

It seems the red shirts only care about democracy when it suits their agenda.

 

What a surprise, the areas that benefited most from the Shinawatra rice scam voted against.

A referendum where debate was not allowed, a referendum where the secrecy of voting was not ensured (fingerprinted ballots), where a special law was devised that could land someone in jail for up to ten years if they so much as had an opinion about the draft ? Pray tell, how is it even possible that the green area in the south is green ? The democrats (that green area is their political powerbase) have spoken against the draft in strong words. Does anyone even believe that election was fair, honest and representative ? With the absence of any outside observers and all the above, it is safe to say the referendum was rigged, and it lacked enough turnout to be representative.

 

Approved my ass. Forced through people's throat is the only correct phrase. Did you forget the alternative ? There was no choice, as a no would have a very similar constitution being put active.

 

Astonishing that some people are actually stupid enough to fall for this. If I were you I would refrain from posting...

[sjaak327]

1 hour ago, onthesoi said:

 

No, Yingluck used public money to buy elections, but then she lost her right to be a politician when she became a criminal.

Carefull now, she has not been found guilty of anything yet. Criminals are the members of the junta, they broke the law for all to see....

[sjaak327]

1 hour ago, onthesoi said:

 

Are you saying the referendum only had one voting choice?

i think he is saying exactly that !

 

Anyone that did pay attention knows this. You must have been out of the country, or sleeping, or drunk. But following the Junta's own words, yes the choice was vote yes and get the draft constitution, vote no and get the interim constitution, amended to resemble the draft constitution.

 

The referendum did not offer any choice.

 

[Scott]

Some off-topic posts and replies removed.   Continue and you will receive a suspension.  

[onthesoi]

15 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

 yes the choice was vote yes and get the draft constitution, vote no and get the interim constitution, amended to resemble the draft constitution. The referendum did not offer any choice.

 

That's just some nonsense you made up!

 

 

[sjaak327]

3 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

That's just some nonsense you made up!

 

 

No it is not. Those are the Junta's own words. You don't read any papers, don't watch the news ? Their own words, nothing more and nothing less. For reference use Google or Bing, can't be bothered to do that for you...

 

Funny, you use terms like landslide, but you have no clue whatsoever about the subject at hand !

Edited January 28, 2017 by sjaak327

[onthesoi]

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

No it is not. Those are the Junta's own words. You don't read any papers, don't watch the news ? Their own words, nothing more and nothing less. For reference use Google or Bing, can't be bothered to do that for you...

Nice try, but its up to you to support your own proposition.

 

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Funny, you use terms like landslide, but you have no clue whatsoever about the subject at hand !

Meanwhile back on planet earth:  61% vs 38% is a landslide voting result!

[sjaak327]

4 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

Nice try, but its up to you to support your own proposition.

 

Meanwhile back on planet earth:  61% vs 38% is a landslide voting result!

Lol, no debate, special laws, no observers, extremely low turnout. And.. they didn't even voted for the final draft, it is being amended as we speak !

 

Not sure who you are trying to fool here, but precious little people believe this charade. Only the gullible and a few with an agenda.

 

In which camp are you ? I will give you the benefit of the doubt, you have an agenda. Better luck next time, almost nobody is buying this..

 

Oh, and no, not up to me to support my own proposition, it isn't, the Junta themselves have publicly announced exactly what I was saying. Why do you think at least three posters that bothered to respond to you all say the same thing ?

 

Do your own research, or remain cluesless...

Edited January 28, 2017 by sjaak327

[candide]

30 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

That's just some nonsense you made up!

 

 

If referendum fails, I will draft constitution myself: Thai junta head

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/6351

Edited January 28, 2017 by candide

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

That's just some nonsense you made up!

 

 

A summary of the propaganda and censorship on the referendum, plus:

 

" If the referendum fails to deliver a majority “yes" vote, some immediate questions arise: What criteria will be placed on a fresh constitution? Who will draw it up? How long will it take? Can elections be postponed indefinitely while this process drags on? "

http://time.com/4423508/thailand-referendum-constitution/

 

The process would either start over with the junta making up the rules as it went along, or the junta would have imposed a constitution.  Sjaak is correct, the junta did give itself the option of choosing a constitution if the one written for them was rejected.  The internet is kind of slow so I won't look up the specific news articles, however if you aren't aware of this you either weren't here or weren't paying attention.

[robblok]

3 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

A referendum where debate was not allowed, a referendum where the secrecy of voting was not ensured (fingerprinted ballots), where a special law was devised that could land someone in jail for up to ten years if they so much as had an opinion about the draft ? Pray tell, how is it even possible that the green area in the south is green ? The democrats (that green area is their political powerbase) have spoken against the draft in strong words. Does anyone even believe that election was fair, honest and representative ? With the absence of any outside observers and all the above, it is safe to say the referendum was rigged, and it lacked enough turnout to be representative.

 

Approved my ass. Forced through people's throat is the only correct phrase. Did you forget the alternative ? There was no choice, as a no would have a very similar constitution being put active.

 

Astonishing that some people are actually stupid enough to fall for this. If I were you I would refrain from posting...

They could have abstained or voted no.. they did not.. however you like to paint it they had a choice.

[robblok]

How typical for the red shirts to start trouble already, there was an added question on the referendum about the PM and it was voted in with a landslide also something they could have voted no against and still vote yes for the constitution. So it seems the public did not mind too much.