Originally Posted by wwinit

Alan - Don't touch upon Superman Never Smiles. You might be jailed without reasons based on Article 112. Just discuss the Red Shirts or Yellow Shite then. ha ha

Originally Posted by wolf5370

There's more to it than that unfortunatly. Thaksin was elected twice, but then he called an illegal election (which was boycotted) - illegal because he did not give enough time as per the law for the other candidates to run a campaign. He then illegally stayed on as caretaker PM without calling a legitimate election - he also had rearranged the old guard to put his family and friends at the top (like promoting his low ranking brother in law to the head of the army!) in both military and civil service. The writing was on the wall at this point - the military have always been powerful here and they do not take kindly to these tactics. It had all the hall marks of a democratic dictatorship. Officially really he was not ousted at all, as when he left Thailand, he wasn't really the PM anyway. He was then banned from politics (by judges from his own party one might add) for 5 years and his party disbanded (TRT) - he was found guilty (his wife also) and sentenced and did a runner before sentancing and before other charges came to court - so if the courts had had the ability to impeach him and prosecute him in office (which would have been a bad idea when he was here) he would have been kicked out anyway and probably gone to gaol to.

The coup was military - and they handed over the reigns as they said they would do. There were several goverments before the democrats, which was as legal as the British coalition is, an amalgam of parties because not enough votes for any one. The Dems got in simply because earlier TRT aligned parties, some big ones, swapped sides (bit like Churchil walking across the floor in the Commons).

The Reds were not throwing out the coup makers - this is a myth that is continually put forward here - it is very wrong. They forced the collapse of a legitimate party with guns, bombs, vandalism and riots - they choked the political process with constant deflections and propaganda - we hear lots about the 30 baht medical Thaksin put in (whereby any Thai can get medical help for 30 baht - which was not subsidised properly and caused many rural clinics and hospitals to collapse) - but little is even known about the fact that the Dems brought in a properly funded free medical for the poor (which was quickly and quietly abandoned when Yingluck got in in favour of worthless popuar policies - like tablet PC's, rice price fix, first time new car buyer aid, minimum wage!). They were offered a fair election (early election) by the Dem PM (Abhisit) within the time frame they originally asked - and then were turned down flat - the government bent to their demands and yet they stayed camped out and building fired baracades of lorry tyres. There is absolutley nothing the Reds should be proud of in my opinion - and they are set to destroy the country economically now they are in charge.

They are up to their old tricks again - in fact further this time - we have schools being set up across the North East and other poor districts called Red Schools - these teach the kids the politics of the Reds in all that they do - brain washing (tell me how this is different from Communist schools of the same ilk - or even Islamic fundamentalist schools).

As to succession - the Governemnt can not change it in any way - only the King can do that. They have no remit for it and it would take a revolution to change that fact (besides the King has last Veto - he could simply stamp "Vetoed" on any such legislation). Succession will fall to the crown prince. There is still very, very strong feeling for the monarchy here (there is also very active Les Majeste laws) - no politicl party would outwardly suggest touching the monarchy in any way - it would be political (at least) suicide. It is a mute point here - no one wants to talk about it - and doing so will attract ire.

And the constitution here is rewritten all the time.

Originally Posted by hawaiinem

In regards to Sin Sot…..if the parents have both passed away, and the woman has been married before and now divorced, is the Sin Sot still required or expected from the brothers and sisters?

Originally Posted by nonthaburi

You always pay in the end one way or another!