Thread: Investigators fail to identify killers of foreign journalists

^ Things are moving that way; actually they started that way.

Thaihome - honest to God - how could you say it's a Democracy when the courts continually deny the choice of the people by banning their parties and elected politicians until the choice of the majority has been completely hollowed out?

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Not to mention that the courts are not unbiased.

Well that's the point though in'it?

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Well that's the point though in'it?

No, actually not in this case. The point is that nothing is going to make Thaihome face reality as long as he can hide behind formalities.

I'm cutting and pasting from another discussion because I think it's relevant to this thread


Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
what truth ? that's the reds were peace loving terrorists ?

Let's just for the sake of argument admit that the Reds were the most evil armed and murderous mindless terrorists around. (Abhisit did mention Al Quaeda in New York) and agree that the best thing that could happen to them is that they all be shot. Let's admit that of these terrorists just one or two were killed by government forces unintentionally by warning bullets shot above heads that fell to the ground.

No, this government can't even accept the slightest responsibility.

As far as I can see, the government and army have not claimed responsibility for even one death. No not just deaths. They have not claimed responsibility for even one injury caused by their bullets.

Can anyone correct me on this? Have the army anywhere issued a statement saying that so-and-so was shot by the army at 1300 hours while he was throwing a bomb, committing arson, firing an RPG, whatever. Or even by complete accident. Just one.

Yes , Butterfly, "what truth". The truth I was talking about is the details. Painstakingly collected, comprehensive, evidence. Who was where when and what happened. Do you see any evidence that the government is at all interested in this. And just to pre-empt your usual comments I know you will say "but the redshirts...". Doesn't matter. Governments especially of the democratic kind that this one claims to be are held to different standards of accountability than terrorists..

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Originally Posted by Mid

hey ThaiHome does this shit happen in a democracy ?

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...t-airport.html (Suvarnabhumi - Zone 2 Parking Lot at Airport Closed off by Armed Men)

That is a business dispute, is it not? Taking place by the way outside the terminal the turnoff for which is before the police barricades.

Your naïveté is sometimes amazing. You often seem to me as if you a 12 year old.
TH

OK a "business" dispute, with politics involved as the Transport Minister has got involved, and by extension using the present governments loose application of the emergency decree, could be deemed an unlawful assembly. Now tell me it's a democracy again.

Bangkok Post : PIC seeks international understanding on April-May riot

PIC seeks international understanding on April-May riot

• Published: 4/10/2010 at 05:02 PM
• Online news: Local News

The People’s Information Center (PIC) has sought international understanding on the April-May crackdown that it was a kind of state violence against demonstrators, according to its representative who just returned from Brussels and Geneva.

The PIC is a loose alliance of human rights independent activists, academics, lawyers and online media.

The week-long visit of the PIC member ended prior to Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s bilateral talks in Brussels this morning with European Commission’s president Jose Manuel Barroso.

During the 23 Sep-1 Oct advocacy trip, the PIC representative, whose name was withheld, has met desk officers on Southeast Asia from the EC, the European Council (Human Rights Unit), and desk officers of the EU Parliament, staff of various UN working groups on disappearance, freedom of expression, summary execution, human rights defenders, arbitrary detention and on counter-terrorism.

The Thailand desk officer of Geneva-based UN office of the Human Rights Council also had a session with the PIC activist.

The PIC mission was to disseminate information about little-known fates of the crackdown victims and to see how the international community viewed the April-May incidents that resulted in over 90 deaths.

“The EU and UN officers regarded the casualties stemmed from the clashes between the protesters and the government. While they acknowledged the presence of armed protesters during demonstration, they think it’s a state violence and there needs to be a thorough investigation on every single incidents to ensure accountability,” the PIC sources said.

The EU and UN were also interested in the work of the Kanit-chaired Truth for Reconciliation (TRC) since they saw certain limitations of the fact-finding panel that had not gained trust and confidence from the defeated protesters, sources said.

“They even acknowledged the prevalent human rights violations including the persistent curb of freedom of expression before the May crackdown,” sources said.

The activist had provided the international players with update information about the neglected plight of the political detainees and the relatives of the deaths who were seeking justice for their loved ones.

Information about the other side of Thailand’s rights situation should be widely known as the UN Human Rights Council was now chaired by a Thai diplomat, the PIC said.

“It’s unfortunate that even a request made since January this year by the UN special rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism Martin Scheinin, long before the May incident has also been rejected by the Thai government,” sources said.

Officials believed endorsing such a visit in light of complicated domestic situations whereby the term “terrorists” was widely branded by the government against core protesting leaders and the prevalent assumption that several violence including bombings were undertaken by elements of terrorism would not be a good idea.

“Thailand has been perceived as a nation with strong human rights/democracy statutes. With the Thai chairmanship in wake of the political turbulence, Bangkok has become a sexy juicy target for investigation requests. In fact there are several other countries that the UN should place their questions,” said a senior government official, who conceded that accommodating any requests by the international organizations would be unlikely as the country remains fragile and fluid.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

it was a kind of state violence against demonstrators

You'll get NO International understanding with words such as that .

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Thaihome - honest to God - how could you say it's a Democracy when the courts continually deny the choice of the people by banning their parties and elected politicians until the choice of the majority has been completely hollowed out?

Because every single one of the current Members of Parliament are elected. Any that have been banned were replaced in by-elections. The courts have not denied the choice of the people, they may have made them choose again, but their right to an elected representative in Parliament has not been denied.

Those elected members have voted time and again for the Democrat coalition, just like before they voted for the PPP coalition. That is democracy. Show me where there is any movement to say any Member of Parliament is not representing his district and the people that voted for him are trying to have him removed.

In the face of these facts, all you can answer with is rhetoric and demagoguery.


Let me ask you this, if Newin (refusing to join the PTP) and Banharn had not joined the Democrats in the coalition and the PTP had been able to maintain a majority, would you be calling Thailand a democracy now?

TH

Originally Posted by Thaihome

The courts have not denied the choice of the people, they may have made them choose again, but their right to an elected representative in Parliament has not been denied.

simply amazing

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by Thaihome

The courts have not denied the choice of the people, they may have made them choose again, but their right to an elected representative in Parliament has not been denied.

simply amazing

You failed to answer the question. Its a simple question, just answer it.

If Newin and Banharn had not joined the Democrats in the coalition and the PTP had been able to maintain a majority, would you be calling Thailand a democracy now?

TH

I've no idea because it didn't happen and that's why IF is the biggest word in the English language .

Originally Posted by Mid

I've no idea because it didn't happen and that's why IF is the biggest word in the English language .

Nice dodge.

Try this one.

Name one Member of Parliment that is not elected.

TH

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

‘Some people have tried to convince the public that 91 people had been killed during the security forces’ operations, particularly on 19 May which was claimed to take most of the 91 lives.’ says the colonel. ‘The distorted claim that 91 people were killed is not true.’

Surely something definitely got lost in this translation?...

Never fails to amaze me how idiots like this can stand up and make a complete c*nt of themselves.

It has to be something to do with the medication he's taking or rather the medication he's not taking?

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Name one Member of Parliment that is not elected.

Others include 154 non elected (80 MPs through Party-lists and 74 Senators through party selection).

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ly_of_Thailand

The Senate does not vote for Prime Minister. We have had the discussion on party list members elected through proportional voting. They are elected members and that method is common in many democracies throughout the world.

So, you cannot name a MP that is not elected. The Parliament is sitting, enacting legislation, having no-confidence votes defeated and yet you claim there is no democracy in Thailand.

That claim is pure inaccurate political rhetoric that has been repeated so much that people such as you refuse to acknowledge simple facts. Thailand is run by an elected Parliament, like them or not, they are there.
Th

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Thailand is run by an elected Parliament

your beyond hope

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Thailand is run by an elected Parliament

your beyond hope

You have an opinion, but that does not make it a fact.

I readily admit that there are lots of influences (to put it mildly) around. But there is an elected House of Representative in place and not a single voter that I have heard says their representative is going against their wishes. Nor have I heard a single MP say he is being pressured to stay in any coalition.
TH

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by Thaihome

If Newin and Banharn had not joined the Democrats in the coalition and the PTP had been able to maintain a majority, would you be calling Thailand a democracy now?

IF the Kangaroo Courts had not bowed to phone calls from spokespeople for hi-so ex-generals, disbanding entire parties on flimsy evidence, and banned leaders because they appeared on TV cooking shows for 75 bucks, and IF the army had followed its orders GIVEN TO IT from the popularly elected government to peacefully break up the yellow shirt rallies, and IF the amart respected the will of the people and BOWED AS THEY SHOULD TO THE PEOPLE and IF the Army did not hold the entire Newin faction hostage at the Pullman Hotel and bribe them (figuratively at the point of a gun) to form the government they wanted --- would I be calling Thailand a democracy now?

Yes. Et tu Brut?

Typical inaccurate, biased spin on actual events. Repeated enough times that I sometimes think you actually believe it.

PPP was banned based on video tape and eye witness that deputy party leader Yongyuth Tiyapairat gave money to local Chiang Rai officials invited to Bangkok for this purpose. It was not flimsy evidence. Here is what ANFREL said in there report on the 2007 elections:

Given the widespread nature of vote buying, it is natural that the ECT would wish to make use of all the resources at its disposal. This strategy did produce some positive results, shown most clearly in the investigation of Yongyuth Tiyapairat, a PPP candidate who successfully contested for a proportional representation seat in zone 1 in northern Thailand and was subsequently made Speaker of the House of Representatives. Using a hidden camera, Yongyuth was filmed bribing local government officials from the town of Chiang Rai to campaign on his behalf. The strength of such evidence – collected by the Special Branch police – lead to the ECT giving Yongyuth a ‘red card’.

Samak was not banned. Samak was disqualified and forced to resign as PM for 3 days because by his own words he was receiving 80,000 baht a month as an employee of Face Productions. When Parliament was due to re-elect him, a significant faction of his own party refused to attend the session and a quorum was not reached. Subsequently, Thaksin told the PPP to elect his brother-in-law PM. Which they did.

Somchai declared and state of emergency at the airport on November 27th and ordered the Police to clear the airport. The next day, the government withdrew the order. At no time was the Army given a direct order to clear out the airport. This again, is another lie repeated so many times that it is believed (note, even Wiki says this). As a mater of fact, in mid November, just about the time the emergency decree was announced, a meeting was held with Deputy PM Chavarat Charnvirakul, Newin Chidchob and national police chief Pol Gen Patcharawat Wongsuwan among others who agreed not to use force against the demonstrators. So Somchai’s own party and coalition partners were not backing the use of force to breakup the protest.

The Army did not hold the entire Newin faction hostage at the Pullman Hotel. That is lie that Giles and others made up. Newin was looking to leave for a long time.

A Sept 16, 2008 article in Asia Times noted that Newin was snubbed by Thaksin and was leading a faction of NE MP’s that were dissatisfied with a “lack of faith in the governing abilities of the rural northeastern constituency Thaksin and the PPP allege to represent through their pro-poor platform”.

His defection was in works as early as October 2008, when it was noticed he was no longer attending the twice weekly meetings of the 111 banned TRT politicians.

The deal to form the coalition was indeed done at the Pullman Hotel when Suthep meet with leaders of the Chart Thai, Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana, Puea Pandin Party, and Newin. There were no military present. After the deal was done and the night before it was to be announced the leaders had a meeting at Anupong’s residence.

There is no doubt that the military was happy with the Democrats forming a new coalition and there is speculation on what the reaction would have been if the PTP had been able to keep their coalition together.

The intimidation was by the PTP, with various threats made against the defecting MP’s, including coffins and such delivered to their homes. Many did end up staying at the Pullman the night before the PM vote. I do not mean to minimize any pressure that Anupong exerted, but to say Newin joined, even figuratively, at gun point and the faction was held hostage is ludicrous and nothing more then pure demagoguery.

This nothing more then hardball Thai politics at which Newin, and as event have shown, Anupong as well, excel at and had been in the works for some time as everyone knew the PPP was guilty and was going to be dissolved.

Again, the point remains, despite all your rhetoric and demagoguery, which I have just shown contains little truth, the current Parliament contains virtually the same members that were elected in 2007 and they have voted for a PM 3 times. Why one of the votes is suddenly undemocratic escapes me.

Below is a list of references from the time that make for interesting reading and refute all of TS assertions. Note I have not bothered to reference the Samak resignation nor the PPP dissolution as I have already done that many times.

Instead of the rants of a self professed western “social democrat” and others of the same ilk, parroting the writing of a paid propagandist, maybe we should see what how Thai people feel about their government.

In a survey conducted between June 13 and July 5, 2009, after the election of Abhisit as PM and after the 2009 Songkran Riots, The Asia Foundation, an international organization outside Thailand conducted a survey on Constitutional Reform and Democracy in Thailand. The survey was conducted through face-to face interviews with a random, nationally representative sample of 1,500 voters in Bangkok and 26 provinces nationwide (excluding the three southern border provinces).

53% are fairly or very satisfied with the job the government is doing (question 1.6)

62% are in favor of keeping Article 237 that says that the Constitution Court can dissolve a political party and ban its senior executive members for 5 years if any senior executives are convicted of electoral fraud. (question 3.1)

Overwhelmingly they thought the military the right size (69%) rather than too small (11%), or too big (13%), with responses similar across regions, age and gender. (Question 3.5)

Seven in ten (70%) of Thais are satisfied to with democracy in Thailand. (Question 6.7)

63% of Thais perceive the country as somewhat (48%) or very democratic (15%)

The survey identified many problems as well, with the majority wanting to do away with the party list, going back to a fully elected Senate, and provincial governors being elected among them.

Its worth noting that the Asia Foundation was very disappointed with the results and you can tell this from the negative spin they put on many of the results. But they did have the integrity to publish the results and show the raw data.

To say that Thailand is not a democracy at this moment simply because of a series of court decisions and hard ball political deals is totally wrong. The problem is not a lack of democracy, the problem is until the voters are given the choice of local members of parliament that are not beholden to local faction leaders to be used a poker chips in a high stake game to win a majority, politics in Thailand will continue down this very rocky road. I firmly believe that the Thai middle class must rise to play a more active role to build a deep-rooted respect for the rule of law, democratic institutions, and free and fair elections that is sadly lacking in the current political faction leaders.
TH


The Asia Foundation : Survey > Constitutional Reform and Democracy in Thailand - A National Survey of the Thai People

Asia Times Online :: Southeast Asia news and business from Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam

We Miss You Newin... | Asian Correspondent

Newin Returns to the Fold | Asian Correspondent

Wrath Hath No Anger Than an Eel Scorned.. | Asian Correspondent

Newin, Abhisit, and Thaksin | Asian Correspondent

The Deal | Asian Correspondent

Pheu Thai MP to lead parliamentary official to meet police Friday


Red shirts plan to file complaint against govt with UN chief

Pheu Thai Party MP Jatuporn Promphan said Monday that the red-shirt movement will file a complaint with the United Nations secretary-general against the government.

Jatuporn said when UN chief Ban Ki-moon visits Thailand on October 26, the red-shirt people will submit a letter, photos and video CDs to him to show that the government had killed the people.

Jatuporn said the red-shirt people will also called on the UN chief to ask the Thai government to release "political prisoners" or the red-shirt leaders who are being detained.

Jatuporn called on the government not to prevent the red-shirt people from meeting the UN chief.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home...-30139916.html


Red shits will not be prevented from meeting UN chief: PM



Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said Tuesday that red shirt people would not be stopped filing complaint against the government with the United Nations secretary-general.

Abhisit said the red-shirt people could go ahead to submit their complaint to UN chief Ban Ki-moon when he visits Thailand on October 26.

Jatuporn Promphan, a red-shirt leader, said the red-shirt people would submit evidences to Ban Ki-moon to prove that the Thai government had massacred its own people.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home...-30140165.html

UN CHIEF'S VISIT

Red shirts could file complaint wih Ban Ki Moon : CRES

By The Nation

Red shirts would not be prevented from submitting complaint to United Nations chief Ban Ki-Moon who is scheduled to visit Thailand in two weeks, Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation's spokesman Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Friday.

The spokesman was speaking after attending a CRES meeting at the Army headquarters.Jatuporn Promphan, a red-shirt leader, had said the red-shirt people plan to submit a complaint plus evidences to Ban Ki-moon to prove that the Thai government had massacred its own people.

The UN chief is scheduled to stop over in Bangkok on October 26 before making a three-day official visit in Cambodia. He then will travel to Hanoi to chair UN-Asean Summit. Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva will also attend the Hanoi Summit.

Sansern told reporters that the red shirts should not do anything that would disturb the UN Chief's visit.

The CRES meeting, Sansern said, discussed the preparation plan to welcome Ban to the capital.

Abhisit had said that the red shirt people would not be stopped filing complaint against the government with Ban Ki Moon.

The premier said the UN secretary general will visit to discuss Bangkok's role in regional security cooperation.

Speaking during his weekly TV program, Abhisit said he extended the invitation to Ban Ki-moon to visit Thailand when he met the UN chief in Brussels during the 8th Asia-Europe Meeting.

The UN chief is scheduled to attend the UN-Asean summit in Hanoi at the end of the month so he will stop by in Bangkok on October 26, Abhisit said.