« Prev Page 6 of 6 4 5 6 Please log in to reply 147 replies to this topic

[OzMick]

Buchholz, on 2012-05-13 17:20:07, said:

You're confused. I thought it would be obvious who my idol is

And there was I thinking it had something to do with transformer protection.
Buchholz Relays - Transformerworld

www.transformerworld.co.uk/buchholz.htm - Cached
Buchholz Relays. A Buchholz relay is a gas and oil operated device installed in the pipework between the top of the transformer main tank and the conservator.

[Jawnie]

whybother, on 2012-05-13 12:20:35, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 12:11:14, said:

The problem is that the military and the entrenched power interests want to keep this law.  The fact that the Army claims to be protecting the monarchy is simply hateful nonsense.  The reality is that it keeps the Army and it's traditional base of support in power.  Any politician, political group, or acting Thai government, which might make a serious attempt at repealing Article 112 would be unceremoniously removed from power by the Army under the guise of "protecting the monarchy" including the use of Article 112 against opposition individuals. This is the nasty, backward, and self-perpetuating anti-democratic governance Thais find themselves with.

That might explain why the current government don't want to repeal the law, but it doesn't explain why they are spending 400 million baht setting up a war room specifically looking for people that are breaking this law.

I don't know where the money comes from for these people.

My sense is that support for Article 112 and/or the open pledge to not change it is a litmus test for Thai politicians.  I see at the same as the "no new taxes" pledge that Republican politicians in the US must make - 112 is a sort of 'third rail' of Thai politics.  

The PTP has no choice but to support 112 to the point of setting up a war room.  They could then, as a previous poster mentioned, simply not bring any 112 charges and could get a far amount of mileage / time from such a strategy.  I could forsee, however, events occurring wherein the Army or Democrats could insist on LM charges being laid for specific offenses they perceive, and then take PTP to task for not doing so or for foot dragging.  In any case, those who support 112 have the upper hand in Thai politics and any opposition to 112 is a big-time losing issue for anyone opposing it.

[lungmi]

OzMick, on 2012-05-13 17:28:43, said:

Buchholz, on 2012-05-13 17:20:07, said:

You're confused. I thought it would be obvious who my idol is

And there was I thinking it had something to do with transformer protection.
Buchholz Relays - Transformerworld

www.transformerworld.co.uk/buchholz.htm - Cached
Buchholz Relays. A Buchholz relay is a gas and oil operated device installed in the pipework between the top of the transformer main tank and the conservator.

It's this?
 image13.jpg   40.09K   0 downloads

Edited by lungmi, 2012-05-13 22:27:02.

[OzMick]

phiphidon, on 2012-05-13 16:36:49, said:

bigbamboo, on 2012-05-13 13:06:02, said:

whybother, on 2012-05-13 12:20:35, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 12:11:14, said:

The problem is that the military and the entrenched power interests want to keep this law.  The fact that the Army claims to be protecting the monarchy is simply hateful nonsense.  The reality is that it keeps the Army and it's traditional base of support in power.  Any politician, political group, or acting Thai government, which might make a serious attempt at repealing Article 112 would be unceremoniously removed from power by the Army under the guise of "protecting the monarchy" including the use of Article 112 against opposition individuals. This is the nasty, backward, and self-perpetuating anti-democratic governance Thais find themselves with.

That might explain why the current government don't want to repeal the law, but it doesn't explain why they are spending 400 million baht setting up a war room specifically looking for people that are breaking this law.

Article 112 is now clearly a political tool and Thailand has enough of those in parliament already.

It was first used as a political tool by the abhisit government, that much is obvious. As far as I am aware no one has been arrested under Article 112 under this government  - please tell me if I am wrong.

Perhaps more interesting is those that haven't been, and should have. Join he criminal conspiracy and avoid prosecution.

[Skywalker69]

lungmi, on 2012-05-13 22:24:20, said:

OzMick, on 2012-05-13 17:28:43, said:

Buchholz, on 2012-05-13 17:20:07, said:

You're confused. I thought it would be obvious who my idol is

And there was I thinking it had something to do with transformer protection.
Buchholz Relays - Transformerworld

www.transformerworld.co.uk/buchholz.htm - Cached
Buchholz Relays. A Buchholz relay is a gas and oil operated device installed in the pipework between the top of the transformer main tank and the conservator.

It's this?
 image13.jpg   40.09K   0 downloads

Stay off the chili.

[whybother]

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 21:45:54, said:

whybother, on 2012-05-13 12:20:35, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 12:11:14, said:

The problem is that the military and the entrenched power interests want to keep this law.  The fact that the Army claims to be protecting the monarchy is simply hateful nonsense.  The reality is that it keeps the Army and it's traditional base of support in power.  Any politician, political group, or acting Thai government, which might make a serious attempt at repealing Article 112 would be unceremoniously removed from power by the Army under the guise of "protecting the monarchy" including the use of Article 112 against opposition individuals. This is the nasty, backward, and self-perpetuating anti-democratic governance Thais find themselves with.

That might explain why the current government don't want to repeal the law, but it doesn't explain why they are spending 400 million baht setting up a war room specifically looking for people that are breaking this law.

I don't know where the money comes from for these people.

My sense is that support for Article 112 and/or the open pledge to not change it is a litmus test for Thai politicians.  I see at the same as the "no new taxes" pledge that Republican politicians in the US must make - 112 is a sort of 'third rail' of Thai politics.  

The PTP has no choice but to support 112 to the point of setting up a war room.  They could then, as a previous poster mentioned, simply not bring any 112 charges and could get a far amount of mileage / time from such a strategy.  I could forsee, however, events occurring wherein the Army or Democrats could insist on LM charges being laid for specific offenses they perceive, and then take PTP to task for not doing so or for foot dragging.  In any case, those who support 112 have the upper hand in Thai politics and any opposition to 112 is a big-time losing issue for anyone opposing it.

Why was there a need to spend an extra 400 million baht on a war room?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[oldsailor35]

Jawnie, on 2012-05-11 10:56:00, said:

Better still would be to get rid of Article 112 altogether.  It is a pathetically backward law which protects nothing and is only about hate.  Thailand will always be considered as a 3rd-rate, backwater country until this law is gone.

Yep , hate and manipulation.

[houseinbkk]

GentlemanJim, on 2012-05-11 09:25:07, said:

I find it odd that the DSI is in the business of recommending that charges be dropped. Surely that is the sole responsibility of the Prosecution Office and the Justice Department?

You think the police dont have a huge involvement in who gets prosecuted and who doesnt in the West? if so you've lots to learn.

I say good not one person should spend a second worrying about arrest for a vile law.

[Siam Simon]

whybother, on 2012-05-14 00:34:48, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 21:45:54, said:

whybother, on 2012-05-13 12:20:35, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 12:11:14, said:

The problem is that the military and the entrenched power interests want to keep this law.  The fact that the Army claims to be protecting the monarchy is simply hateful nonsense.  The reality is that it keeps the Army and it's traditional base of support in power.  Any politician, political group, or acting Thai government, which might make a serious attempt at repealing Article 112 would be unceremoniously removed from power by the Army under the guise of "protecting the monarchy" including the use of Article 112 against opposition individuals. This is the nasty, backward, and self-perpetuating anti-democratic governance Thais find themselves with.

That might explain why the current government don't want to repeal the law, but it doesn't explain why they are spending 400 million baht setting up a war room specifically looking for people that are breaking this law.

I don't know where the money comes from for these people.

My sense is that support for Article 112 and/or the open pledge to not change it is a litmus test for Thai politicians.  I see at the same as the "no new taxes" pledge that Republican politicians in the US must make - 112 is a sort of 'third rail' of Thai politics.  

The PTP has no choice but to support 112 to the point of setting up a war room.  They could then, as a previous poster mentioned, simply not bring any 112 charges and could get a far amount of mileage / time from such a strategy.  I could forsee, however, events occurring wherein the Army or Democrats could insist on LM charges being laid for specific offenses they perceive, and then take PTP to task for not doing so or for foot dragging.  In any case, those who support 112 have the upper hand in Thai politics and any opposition to 112 is a big-time losing issue for anyone opposing it.

Why was there a need to spend an extra 400 million baht on a war room?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

It's very possibly a 'detente' thing between this government and the military.

[Buchholz]

oldsailor35, on 2012-05-14 00:52:36, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-11 10:56:00, said:

Better still would be to get rid of Article 112 altogether.  It is a pathetically backward law which protects nothing and is only about hate.  Thailand will always be considered as a 3rd-rate, backwater country until this law is gone.

Yep , hate and manipulation.

which will continue for the foreseeable future under Yingluck's administration's stated opinions.

.

[thaihome]

phiphidon, on 2012-05-13 11:54:12, said:

So, in the same manner as you have taken the fact that I see no reason to lie to you about my previous posts criticising the red shirts etc. but you will not accept that, I will take the abscence of evidence provided in response to my question as proof that there were no people arrested for handing out anti monarchy pamphlets at this rally. Therefore it was just another lie dropped in casually to the thread with the aim to get people to think it's the truth. Such is the state of debate on this forum.

Actually, a person was arrested at March 2011 rally, she was detained by UDD guards and handed over the police and later released.  I was mistaken that she was in prison, confusing that with the incident in 2009 where UDD guards detained Wanchai Saetan at the 2009 Songkran protest who was given 15 years, reduced to 10 for pleading guilty.

Now, back to finding your post that were cirtical of the UDD and PTP?  Who is telling the lies?
TH


The case of Khun “Pla” and UDD
Mon, 14/03/2011 - 14:42 | by prachatai
Jim Taylor
The case of Khun “Pla” (ปลา), a freelance media writer, arrested by police handing out information on 112 at the UDD rally on Saturday needs to be highlighted, not for the case itself (though that is important) but the manner in which she was arrested. Depressingly, she was handed over to the police by seven rude UDD guards (three were actually police hired as UDD guards) who then took her to the police station between 6-7 hours until after the demonstration finished and then released.


Thailand: End Harsh Punishments for Lese Majeste Offenses
December 3, 2011
...The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), which led mass anti-government protests in 2009 and 2010, and supports the current government, has also pressed for the enforcement of the lese majeste laws. The UDD leadership urged their supporters to arrest anyone with lese majeste materials and hand them over to the police. In one such case, UDD security guards detained Wanchai Saetan on April 6, 2009, after they found him distributing what they considered to be anti-monarchy leaflets near a UDD protest at the Government House, the prime minister’s office. Wanchai was later sentenced to 15 years in prison, reduced to 10 years for pleading guilty.

[phiphidon]

thaihome, on 2012-05-14 08:49:45, said:

phiphidon, on 2012-05-13 11:54:12, said:

So, in the same manner as you have taken the fact that I see no reason to lie to you about my previous posts criticising the red shirts etc. but you will not accept that, I will take the abscence of evidence provided in response to my question as proof that there were no people arrested for handing out anti monarchy pamphlets at this rally. Therefore it was just another lie dropped in casually to the thread with the aim to get people to think it's the truth. Such is the state of debate on this forum.

Actually, a person was arrested at March 2011 rally, she was detained by UDD guards and handed over the police and later released.  I was mistaken that she was in prison, confusing that with the incident in 2009 where UDD guards detained Wanchai Saetan at the 2009 Songkran protest who was given 15 years, reduced to 10 for pleading guilty.

Now, back to finding your post that were cirtical of the UDD and PTP?  Who is telling the lies?
TH


The case of Khun “Pla” and UDD
Mon, 14/03/2011 - 14:42 | by prachatai
Jim Taylor
The case of Khun “Pla” (ปลา), a freelance media writer, arrested by police handing out information on 112 at the UDD rally on Saturday needs to be highlighted, not for the case itself (though that is important) but the manner in which she was arrested. Depressingly, she was handed over to the police by seven rude UDD guards (three were actually police hired as UDD guards) who then took her to the police station between 6-7 hours until after the demonstration finished and then released.


snip irrelevant quote

So 3 days of frantic searching since your

"When are the cases against the Red Shirts that were passing out anti-monarchy pamphlets at the very rally that Jatuporn spoke at going to have their cases dropped and be released from jail (they didn’t get bail)."

post and you come up with this

"well actually it was only one person, who wasn't handing out anti-monarchy pamphlets, and wasn't arrested, who was wrongly taken to a police station by people who didn't have the authority to do so, and then released without the police taking any action". (my paraphrase of your quote)

That obviously doesn't help your case so you helpfully supply "details" of an incident that happened 2 years earlier.

Well forgive me if I don't jump to attention, clap you on the back and say "Cor Blimey Guv, fair cop, you got me banged to rights" in my best mockney.

"Now, back to finding your post that were cirtical of the UDD and PTP? Who is telling the lies?"

I know who is, the question is, do you?

Edited by phiphidon, 2012-05-14 11:50:44.

[gemini81]

whybother, on 2012-05-14 00:34:48, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 21:45:54, said:

whybother, on 2012-05-13 12:20:35, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-13 12:11:14, said:

The problem is that the military and the entrenched power interests want to keep this law.  The fact that the Army claims to be protecting the monarchy is simply hateful nonsense.  The reality is that it keeps the Army and it's traditional base of support in power.  Any politician, political group, or acting Thai government, which might make a serious attempt at repealing Article 112 would be unceremoniously removed from power by the Army under the guise of "protecting the monarchy" including the use of Article 112 against opposition individuals. This is the nasty, backward, and self-perpetuating anti-democratic governance Thais find themselves with.

That might explain why the current government don't want to repeal the law, but it doesn't explain why they are spending 400 million baht setting up a war room specifically looking for people that are breaking this law.

I don't know where the money comes from for these people.

My sense is that support for Article 112 and/or the open pledge to not change it is a litmus test for Thai politicians.  I see at the same as the "no new taxes" pledge that Republican politicians in the US must make - 112 is a sort of 'third rail' of Thai politics.  

The PTP has no choice but to support 112 to the point of setting up a war room.  They could then, as a previous poster mentioned, simply not bring any 112 charges and could get a far amount of mileage / time from such a strategy.  I could forsee, however, events occurring wherein the Army or Democrats could insist on LM charges being laid for specific offenses they perceive, and then take PTP to task for not doing so or for foot dragging.  In any case, those who support 112 have the upper hand in Thai politics and any opposition to 112 is a big-time losing issue for anyone opposing it.

Why was there a need to spend an extra 400 million baht on a war room?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

Yes, there probably was: graft. How much of that really went toward it? Sound likes an excuse to put money in one's pocket.

[kimamey]

phiphidon, on 2012-05-11 12:11:07, said:

coma, on 2012-05-11 08:40:27, said:

dam_n it! If there is someone I would like to see this law applied to it would have to be this lunatic.

And would that be admitting that you like the law to be used in a political sense?

I thought it had been already for quite some time.

I think coma is like me. I disagree with the LM laws as I think they are used or in this case not used for political reasons and are entirely unnecessary for their claimed purpose.  I'd just like to him locked up.  Probably that's not the right attitude but he is just irritating.

[Jawnie]

Buchholz, on 2012-05-14 06:51:02, said:

oldsailor35, on 2012-05-14 00:52:36, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-11 10:56:00, said:

Better still would be to get rid of Article 112 altogether.  It is a pathetically backward law which protects nothing and is only about hate.  Thailand will always be considered as a 3rd-rate, backwater country until this law is gone.

Yep , hate and manipulation.

which will continue for the foreseeable future under Yingluck's administration's stated opinions.

.

You Yingluck haters don't get it in regard to Article 112.  It simply isn't possible for her Administration to even talk about or attempt to change it.  She would be deposed in a heartbeat.  She's already the 'wrong' person / party with regard to the Army and elites.  Any mention of changing the law would bring her down.  Seriously....she is powerless to do anything.   So, she's got to position herself as favoring it - it would be a huge mistake for her to opposite it.  I say this even though I think the law needs to be done away with YESTERDAY.  Only the Thai people and the public at large can create the environment to change the law.  I see the law staying firmly in place, especially upon succession.

[Buchholz]

Jawnie, on 2012-05-14 13:23:17, said:

Buchholz, on 2012-05-14 06:51:02, said:

oldsailor35, on 2012-05-14 00:52:36, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-11 10:56:00, said:

Better still would be to get rid of Article 112 altogether.  It is a pathetically backward law which protects nothing and is only about hate.  Thailand will always be considered as a 3rd-rate, backwater country until this law is gone.

Yep , hate and manipulation.

which will continue for the foreseeable future under Yingluck's administration's stated opinions.

.

You Yingluck haters don't get it in regard to Article 112.  It simply isn't possible for her Administration to even talk about or attempt to change it.  She would be deposed in a heartbeat.  She's already the 'wrong' person / party with regard to the Army and elites.  Any mention of changing the law would bring her down.  Seriously....she is powerless to do anything.   So, she's got to position herself as favoring it - it would be a huge mistake for her to opposite it.  I say this even though I think the law needs to be done away with YESTERDAY.  Only the Thai people and the public at large can create the environment to change the law.  I see the law staying firmly in place, especially upon succession.

You Yingluck lovers don't get it. There's quite a few in her administration that have openly talked about changing it. It's been an integral part of the Red Shirt literature for a long time and their representatives that are now in the administration as MP's could move on it if they wanted to.
Rally after rally, the Pheu Thai supporters were told of its evilness and how gosh, if only we were in power, by God, it would be changed.
All these empty speeches were just yet another issue the masses were deceived with by what is now, the government.

The ultimate irony is that rather than at least curtail it, the Pheu Thai have actually expanded its scope with establishing its LM War Room.

.

Edited by Buchholz, 2012-05-14 14:31:18.

[Briggsy]

OzMick, on 2012-05-11 09:59:22, said:

NCFC, on 2012-05-11 09:36:16, said:

Thai courts always side with whomever is currently in power

Thaksin might well disagree. If it were true, why are obvious cases such as this and Yingluk's perjury short-circuited before they reach a court?

Actually you have just proved NCFC's point. Although it might appear that getting the most votes means you hold the power, at certain times real power has resided with other institutions usually connected with the military. All is not as it appears on the surface. The judges are well aware of which way the wind [of power shift] is blowing.

[AleG]

Jawnie, on 2012-05-14 13:23:17, said:

You Yingluck haters don't get it in regard to Article 112.  It simply isn't possible for her Administration to even talk about or attempt to change it.  She would be deposed in a heartbeat.  She's already the 'wrong' person / party with regard to the Army and elites.  Any mention of changing the law would bring her down.  Seriously....she is powerless to do anything.   So, she's got to position herself as favoring it - it would be a huge mistake for her to opposite it.  I say this even though I think the law needs to be done away with YESTERDAY.  Only the Thai people and the public at large can create the environment to change the law.  I see the law staying firmly in place, especially upon succession.

In your last sentence you'll find why Thaksin is quite happy to keep the LM as they are.

[OzMick]

Briggsy, on 2012-05-14 14:33:56, said:

OzMick, on 2012-05-11 09:59:22, said:

NCFC, on 2012-05-11 09:36:16, said:

Thai courts always side with whomever is currently in power

Thaksin might well disagree. If it were true, why are obvious cases such as this and Yingluk's perjury short-circuited before they reach a court?

Actually you have just proved NCFC's point. Although it might appear that getting the most votes means you hold the power, at certain times real power has resided with other institutions usually connected with the military. All is not as it appears on the surface. The judges are well aware of which way the wind [of power shift] is blowing.

Ah yes. Conspiracy Theory 101. It's not possible they are just doing their job?

BTW does your signature refer to you or your girlfriend(s)?

[Jawnie]

AleG, on 2012-05-14 16:37:55, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-14 13:23:17, said:

You Yingluck haters don't get it in regard to Article 112.  It simply isn't possible for her Administration to even talk about or attempt to change it.  She would be deposed in a heartbeat.  She's already the 'wrong' person / party with regard to the Army and elites.  Any mention of changing the law would bring her down.  Seriously....she is powerless to do anything.   So, she's got to position herself as favoring it - it would be a huge mistake for her to opposite it.  I say this even though I think the law needs to be done away with YESTERDAY.  Only the Thai people and the public at large can create the environment to change the law.  I see the law staying firmly in place, especially upon succession.

In your last sentence you'll find why Thaksin is quite happy to keep the LM as they are.

My last sentence does not mean political succession.  I mean royal succession.

[whybother]

Jawnie, on 2012-05-15 22:16:04, said:

AleG, on 2012-05-14 16:37:55, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-14 13:23:17, said:

You Yingluck haters don't get it in regard to Article 112.  It simply isn't possible for her Administration to even talk about or attempt to change it.  She would be deposed in a heartbeat.  She's already the 'wrong' person / party with regard to the Army and elites.  Any mention of changing the law would bring her down.  Seriously....she is powerless to do anything.   So, she's got to position herself as favoring it - it would be a huge mistake for her to opposite it.  I say this even though I think the law needs to be done away with YESTERDAY.  Only the Thai people and the public at large can create the environment to change the law.  I see the law staying firmly in place, especially upon succession.

In your last sentence you'll find why Thaksin is quite happy to keep the LM as they are.

My last sentence does not mean political succession.  I mean royal succession.

I believe AleG had that in mind.

Sent from my shoe phone

[Buchholz]

Buchholz, on 2012-05-13 11:36:54, said:

Buchholz, on 2012-05-11 17:09:43, said:

Jawnie, on 2012-05-11 10:56:00, said:

Better still would be to get rid of Article 112 altogether.  It is a pathetically backward law which protects nothing and is only about hate.  Thailand will always be considered as a 3rd-rate, backwater country until this law is gone.

Both Yingluck and Thaksin have said there will be no changes to the law.

Deputy PM Chalerm has even established an LM "War Room" to scrutinize for even additional offenders.

some very recent reiteration of her earlier voiced opinion....




PM Firm against Amending Lese Majeste Law

The prime minister affirms that the government has no plan to amend the Criminal Code's Article 112 on lese majeste.

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra insisted that the government will not meddle with the attempt for the amendment of the Criminal Code's Article 112 on lese majeste launched by the Campaign Committee for the Amendment of Article 112.

Yingluck noted that the matter was already discussed by government coalition parties and conclusion was reached.

The Campaign Committee for the Amendment of Article 112 said today that they will submit, along with their petition of 27,296 signatures,  their proposed amendment to the criminal code (article 112) to Parliament this Tuesday,

Yingluck will have no choice then but to "meddle."

.

Edited by Buchholz, 38 minutes ago.

[FOODLOVER]

PM firm mak mak!