How complicate? Royally complicated!
And the comedy rolls on. A couple of tidbits from that article:
[ul][li]Army officers can arrest anyone they damn well please based on nothing other than their suspicion.[/li][li]Civilians are tried in military courts.[/li][li]Lèse majesté is still being used as a weapon against political opponents of the junta.[/ul][/li]
And what’s the royalty doing about it? Well, not a damn thing. Here’s a thought: lèse majesté is defined as insulting the dignity of the monarch; however, Thailand’s monarch has no dignity, as evidenced by the current situation in Thailand, so it’s impossible for anyone to insult a dignity that joke does not have.
I’m so disappointed in this thread. I was expecting some world-class, grade-A Pitting. Instead, I’m learning.
Monty continues to link the junta to the King. It’s more likely that the junta assumes excessive power because the 89-year old King is so infirm that he can no longer exercise the forceful role he once had.
The Crown Princess’s toilet is an ignorant and irrelevant distraction. What is not irrelevant is the Crown Prince, heir apparent to the throne, who appears to be a very different man from his father. I may wish to join in the Pitting when the throne changes hands.
And now Monty agrees with one of my points. These laws are used as judicial weapons by politicans and have very little to do with the King.
No, Monty said upthread that the crowned heads should waive all penalties for violations of Lèse majesté.
I suppose if I was a constitutional monarch I would strive to promote balance, conciliation, infrastructure and charity. Though voluntary abdication might be a better course.
So you support the present King of Thailand whose reign has been lauded by respected and informed people all around the world for his promotion of balance, conciliation, infrastructure and charity ? (Or, instead do you join in the ignorant blaming of a deeply ill 89-year old man for his country’s present woes?)
If the King has powers - which he does - that means he also has duties, and if he cannot fulfill his duties than maybe he should abdicate, or appoint a Regent. What he cannot do is remain king and avoid responsibility for the state of his realm.
Thai royalty has long and often proved that they are quite content and supportive of that BS law and everything that goes along with it.
I suppose if you were a constitutional monarch, your country would have a constitution.
Yep. And an even better choice is to have a government of the people’s choice, not the military’s, running the country. “The king is frail and so you can’t blame him” doesn’t work because that joke has not been frail all along. septimus continues to rant, the king continues to be a joke, and Thais continue to suffer. All is well in the world!
:smack: :smack: So round and round in circles we go. You’ve never deigned to offer an opinion on the efficacy of Thaksin’s “elected” governments. Should we now infer you think they were better for the country than the present junta? 
It’s perfectly fine to believe that a lousy elected administration is preferable an efficient dictatorship - in fact, believing so is the basis of democratic government. Personally, I loath and despise my own country’s elected Prime Minister, but I would defend him to the death if the opposition party *I voted for *attempted a coup d’etat. I want them to win, but I want them to win according to the rules.
Belief in democracy is the belief that the process is more important than the results.
Wait a moment. The present junta, like those before it, will go the king or his regent to ask permission to stop martial law. Why will they need to do that when they didn’t ask his permission to overthrow the legal government in the first place. You might recall that the legal government had the king’s approval. Basically what I’m getting from you is that you, along with the junta, think they know better than the Thai electorate and the king on how to rule the country. Your use of quotes for elected is also telling.
Exactly right. And septimus continues to try to switch the conversation away from one simple fact: the king is a joke.
I can’t decide if Thailand’s dictators think government should be run like Starship Troopers, Fahrenheit 451, or 1984; perhaps they want it to be a combination. Courtesy of The Washington Post comes this latest outrage, in which a woman is arrested, not for maligning the royalty, but for not responding to others who did malign the royalty. Yes, you read that correctly; she’s been arrested for not saying what the junta thinks she should have. From the link:
More at the link.
Look, I know that without a monarchy, the junta would still be doing what they’re doing now. The point is that they’re doing it under the pretense of defending the current monarchy. And the monarchy is knowingly complicit in this abuse.
Do you have an opinion on oven-baked confections w/r/t their veracity?
You and me, both, except when I try to learn I keep thinking of Deborah Kerr and Yul Brynner.
And SD, do I know you IRL? Snarky, semi-pro standup who was touring recently but who went back to a telemarketing job before your Big Break?
Yeah, that narrowed the field to several thousand people, but I thought I would ask.
Okay; I like humor as much as the next person. I even like humor at my own expense. However, I’m not getting this one.
Fortune cookies, perhaps?
That’s as far as I can get, though.
Hmmm…could be except for one thing. Fortune cookies aren’t baked; they’re basically miniature pancakes folded into the trademark shape.
Maybe it’s a “let them eat cake” thing? I don’t know how, but that’s all I’ve got.
Yes.