mazeltov

His stance towards the recent Bangkok is interesting given that a year ago he stated that "the UDD would consider possible armed attacks".

did he? don't forget, its BBC news. can you trust that source?

Isn't one of the big reasons for the emergency decree the inability of the police to maintain order? Even the army has problems, but a bit better than the police force....especially in many Issan provinces. If the police enforced the laws, we wouldn't have had the problem in Bangkok....or many of the other areas they refused to do what they were suppose to....right?

No, wrong.

Anybody else feeling dread at the concept of the following?

Thailand + Railways + over 338km/h (I agree with the maths problem, but let's just work with this number)

That said, as I think that trains are the best form of transport, I am hoping I am alive long enough to enjoy an unfettered journey from Singapore to John O' Groats.....and potentially (if the Russian/Chinese high speed network develops) in under 7 days.

That makes two of us.

sounds like an old colonialist dream.

Literacy of 30,000 third graders substandard

...

So much for substandard literacy....Albert Einstein is a fine example for a genius with dyslexia next to another -living- giant: Bill Gates and his fellow computer nerd.....Steve Jobs.

A few more? Nelson Rockefeller, Churchill, Alexander Graham Bell, Henri Ford, Thomas Jefferson...

You see....substandard literacy doesn't mean a thing.

LaoPo

My thoughts exactly. I knew Albert Einstein had trouble with Math. I didn't realize he was dyslexia.

Both is BS and not true. Einstein was not dyslexic and he didn't had trouble with Math. Its a myth that Einstein was not good in school, widely believed but factually incorrect.

One biographer got something wrong, other copied and it without a own research. The mass media, the tabloid press knows that their audience isn't much into theoretical physics and uncertain principles of quantum mechanics in 4D, but their readers love human touch and biographical stories like this one and so it gets reprinted and retold again and again.

Gives people who are/were actually really not one of the more smarter kids the feeling that it might be the case that they could be somewhat other 'special', despite what the teacher said or how other school kids call them. Some of them may have even developed their own theories of something/everything, but facing dilemma that "all others don't get it"

Thaksin try to benefit the phone users by dropping the cut taken by TOT & CAT for doing nothing. he was badly burned. Now, no one dare to touch TOT & CAT for that reason. Not even Mark or Korn. Else, double standard.

All the Tax free profits he made from the sale of his telephone empire,wish I could get burned that badly.

Just build up your own 'telephone empire' and sell it when its big. than you don't have to look at others full of envy.

If [PAD] push the government too far, eventually, Abhisit will let the law deal with them.

I wouldn't count on it. The PAD leaders are military and privy council. If Abhisit tries anything against the PAD, they'll disolve his party and get rid of him, not the other way around. Sadly.

The Dems are in the government, not the PAD. And these Dems don't need to be pushed by the PAD to stand in somewhat ugly nationalistic corner, that is exactly where the Dems coming from, including Abhisit. Don't draw wrong assumption because Abhisit was in Oxford.

If any monkeys steal and rip apart solar panels, they'll be dead in short order -- solar panels include large quantities of phosphine, and especially arsenic trihydride (about 2 tons per megawatt), which is so toxic that it was proposed as a chemical weapon before the Second World War.

Solar panels are a toxic time-bomb, since manufacturing them involves a witch's brew of nasty chemicals, the consequences of which may be dire once they end up in landfills

OK, please suggest a better way of producing electricity.

Oil: See the spills in Nigeria or Gulf of Mexico.

Nuclear: See the many accidents all over the place, even in developed countries. No final solution for the waste.

Water: See the protests against environmental impact of dams.

Coal: Dangerous mining, and lots of air polution.

Wind: Not only not efficient, but ugly to the core. (Actually, with continuing research, wind may become a serious alternative in the future)

What did I forget? Or are you not using electricity?

Something what the sunshine power hippies like to forget when they praise the "clean " energy. That isn't true.

The 'panel industry' speaks all the time of recycling. but we know what happen with all the other electronic scrap.

There are limits for the PV industry. We need much more energy than solar panels can provide. solar energy is still in the experimental stage.

The world largest solar power station will have a capacity of 73 MW, clearly a prestige object. average solar plants have a much lower output, 10 MW-20MW is called large and that also only when the sun shines. that is not much.

That solar power plant needs space. for 70 MW expect an area of at least 300 ha, that are 600 football field, that have to kept monkey free and free from plants. nature have to step back on a large scale for that environmental friendly energy of 70 MW (when sky is clear and sun shines)

Your modern and average nuclear power station has a capacity of 1000MW = 1 GW. around the clock 24/7 also when it rains.

The worldwide production of photovoltaic cells and modules in 2009 had a capacity of around 12 GW.

PV is still expensive. one of the newer and cheaper ways with a growing market share is Cadmium telluride (CdTe) PV technology.

here comes the next limit. tellurium is a extremely rare element. rarer than gold. it doesn't make the solar panels significant expensive, but the problem is that the yearly production of tellurium is just a few hundred ton, more cannot be found and digged out.

10 tons tellurium for 100 MW PV. So the natural limit of tellurium resources will also limit the yearly production of these CdTe PV cell to a few GW per year.

There is a lot of sun coming down to earth, providing lot of energy, but we don't have enough solar cell to collect that what we need. not today and not tomorrow. it will take few decades more before solar plant gave a significant market share and can replace other technologies.

And not forget, it isn't that clean energy, you won't be that happy and not that uncritical when they build a PV manufacturing plant behind your house.

Thailand have to take back what is belong to us. Including Angkor Wat.

Ok, let's see, Angkor Wat is a HINDU temple dedicated to the Hindu god Vishnu, in Angkor, Cambodia, built in the early 12th century for King Survavarman II, a Khmer King. So how is you think it belongs to Thailand????

Oh, I know, you learned in the wonderful Thai school system that it was built by Thai, and therefore belongs to them, right????

Allover Europe people were busy for centuries to build temples for a bizarre cult, worshiping that dude on the cross, INRI, Iesus Nazarenus, Rex Iudaeorum. "Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews". And these places therefore belongs to who????

Do you know that your counter-argument isn't that much smarter if not dumber specially because you think you are in a position to bitch about the school system someone might have visited. What makes you think the your education was anyhow better?

In the 12th century there was no Thailand, but also no Cambodia. I don't know where you come from but i guess also there like all over there world the borders between the then existing realms, empires, kingdoms or territories under the reign of whoever where quite different from todays borders between todays states, nations, countries and so on.

So what? did you learn at your school that the 12th century is the point where we have to look into the history to decide if something belong to this country or to that country?

What tells you that there is some lineage between the heydays of Angkor and todays Cambodia? Ancient countries are foreign countries. And the Angkor kingdom is gone, the people are dead, the died long, long time ago. todays people have not much to do with them. ancestry and inheritance a myth.

Going hundreds of years back in history to claim a territory will not work out, but it will also not work to deny any claim. because there was once a Suryavarman, who build a temple for Vishnu.

Trying to belittle Thai people, because their culture roots not in 100% original Thai but borrows, adopt or is influence also by other cultures and claim that all Thai people don't knew it because they don't learn it at school will also not work out. that are ignorant and disrespectful statements. Every nation has its more or less delusional beliefs about heritage that could be easy deconstructed.

At the moment some Thai go gaga, showing signs of a nationalistic mania. But if you start to mock all Thai using stereotypes and generalisation you are not much better than the nationalistic blockheads.

You might want to say that every thing you say applies to the red shirt's also. They were the ones in power who started this fiasco. They started it for the same reason Abhisit carries it on. It looks good to the average Thai pure and simple.

One of the things that really gets me is that they imply King Rama v was not aware of what he was doing. What they are saying in a nice polite way is he was a idiot and didn't know what was going on.

What you talking about? What did the 'red shirts' start when they were in power?

Do you mean the Samak government who did nothing else but agreed and support the Cambodian bid to getting that temple listed as World Heritage Site. Then Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama was attacked by Democrats in the parliament and by the PAD on the street for signing a deal with Cambodia. The Democrats started a censure motion over this. The constitutional court found that Noppadon as FM has violated the constitution because the signing the deal with Cambodia was only a cabinet decision without holding a parliamentary debate over it.

Without the ultra nationalistic rabble-rousing by the Democrats and the PAD there wouldn't be a problem.

3 provinces in Cambodia is actually Thailand.

The half of Thailand is formerly a part of the Khmer Empire.And the second belongs to Malayans. The real Thailand is hidden somewhere at Lanna (which is, of course, formerly a part of Chinese Empire and built by Chinese escaped from Genghiz Khan's ords invading from the north).Read your own histtory, kiddo. And don't post stupidity.

Including Angkor Wat.

You're a prime example of the Thai Education System, especially in the area of History, which is more about fantasy than actual fact. The Khmer Empire existed LONG before Siam even came into being, and it included MOST of what is now Thailand. Ankor Wat and Preah Vihear are both HINDU temples, NOT Buddhist, and were built by the Khmer. After the breakup of the Khmer Empire, then the Lanna Kingdom came into being, with the original capital in Chiang Rai, but later moved to Chiang Mai by King Mengrai in 1291, with the wall around the city being completed in 1296. By the way, do you even know what "Lanna" means? Did they actually teach you in school? In case they didn't, it means "Land of a Million Rice Fields".

As for your comment about the 3 provinces in Cambodia belonging to Thailand, after the joining of the Siam and Lanna kingdoms, Thailand went on a mission of conquest to conquer everyone they could. They invaded what was left of the Khmer Empire, which is now Cambodia, as well as Lao, and even parts of Vietnam. But just like the Burmese couldn't hold on to Chiang Mai and other parts of what is now Thailand, Thailand couldn't hold on to what they had conquered, and were gradually forced to give it up, mainly by the French, who began to take control of most of South East Asia.

They eventually signed a treaty with the French that gave up ALL the land they had conquered EAST of the Mekong River, which included Cambodia and Lao. So, they took, by war, land that didn't belong to them, but then had to give it back when a "Bigger Bully" (the French) came on the scene. So, those three provinces never really belong to them in the first place.

Again, try doing so research before you make comments that reflect your lack of knowledge and the ineffectual Thai Education System.

My bet is on the 'kid'. That poster behind the young gal avatar seems to be well versed in the story telling of the different histories and calculate exactly what to write to trigger your predictable replies.

Your schoolmaster approach hints that yourselves just got a glimpse on the basics of 'history' how its taught in the compulsory education system or distributed as entertainment product on history channels. That isn't History with the capital letter and in the end not much different from histories and the construction of the past your can hear in Thai schools.

Your way of thought and interpretation of histories, these auxiliary constructs to explain the past or much more legitimate the 'present' are pretty much 19th century. 'history' as epic narratives to claim ancestry to heroes of the past, filled up with faux lineage and fictional continuity and much more story telling to legitimate the then young national states.

My guess is also that your talents in cultural studies came to the conclusion that you think Thai humour always come with a boing sound, so that those who visited only inferior Thai schools will know at what point they have to laugh.

Now Jakraprob is saying that elections and rallies are "childish aims". Whatever could he mean?

source?

Karl Jackson, professor of Southeast Asian Studies at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, was far more sympathetic towards Thaksin. He said poor Thai people could easily identify themselves with a man who went from rags to riches, whose family barely had a warm place to sleep after Thaksin's father died. The evolution of a grass-roots political movement, empowered somewhat b Thaksin but not necessarily needing his support to function, was for real, Jackson insisted.

Prof. Jackson should lose his tenure for espousing this kind of propagandist nonsense.

"Seng Sae Khu [Thaksin's Chinese grandfather] made his fortune through tax farming. The Khu/Shinawatra family later founded Shinawatra Silks and then moved into finance, construction and property development. Lert Shinawatra opened a coffee shop and several businesses, and grew oranges and flowers in Chiang Mai's San Kamphaeng district. By the time Thaksin was born, the extended Shinawatra family was one of the richest and most influential in Chiang Mai." At age 16, Thaksin helped run one of his father's cinemas. source - Wikipedia

I don't know too many cinema owners in Thailand who are wearing rags.

I agree 100%, complete <deleted> from a man who should know better..

The <deleted> and the attempt to make propaganda of it comes from you. Maybe there were a few orange trees more on the shin family farm and the Prof. didn't use wikipedia for his argument, but from 'rags to riches' is just an expression that should not be taken too literally.

I think its certain that the Prof. didn't had propaganda in mind and wanted to tell a slumdog fairy tale. And who knows if The Nation/Tulsathit quoted that professor accurate. And to answer the question why one of the richest Thai is so popular amongst the poor to mention that Thaksin wasn't born ultra rich, but is rather a self-made man and that let them to perceive Thaksin as one of themselves. Thai people don't hate rich people like the white nonworking class on the dole. To be rich is a dream for many, looking at Thaksin may give the poorer hope its also possible for them. the capitalist dream. motivation, hard work and a knack for it and success belongs to you. That is the way how Thaksin is seen by more than a few Thai people.

Unlike Abhisit who comes really from another planet for most Thais, and is not really perceived as one of them and probably never will. he is rich too, but he isn't a role model for success and advancement. and when asked where all his wealth comes from he can only say: I didn't do anything, its family inheritance.

Wikipedia lists under /Rags_to_riches also Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. Is that a fact or should wikipedia downgraded to be known as the cheap source of knowledge for the pseudo educated?

Sorry but Wikipedia is a NOTORIOUSLY inaccurate reference.

More so in the political sphere.

Precisely because it can be edited and re-edited by ANYONE.

One day it can say one thing and another the next.

There are politically biased cyber-teams doing JUST THAT daily.

Sorry this means nothing.

What you wrote, that I rebutted, was patently incorrect.

There is nothing more to say, it was not right,

and you have now just explained why your information was incorrect.

The new constitution was not written by the military, but by learned people and the like. Don't remember how input was asked/received to formulate. The referendum was relatively open, there was no obvious thread. Protest were not allowed, but voting was free. Don't know what would have happened if a majority would have voted against, that's speculation. Keep in mind that (at least) at first the army was greeted with flowers by ordinary citizens who started to be really upset by the slowly dictatorial behaviour of PM Thaksin. Papers were threatened with lawsuits or closure, journalists were shut up.

As you say yourself if you just ignore these facts you will fail to understand whats going on in Thai politics.

Ohh, flowers for the putschists, that is indeed a good argument for the military rule.

Of course Thaksin was not a PM without plenty controversies, but i heard he got some flowers at the airport when he returned after the coup.

Anyway, do you realise that specially in terms of civil liberties like freedom of expression and media freedom is has actually much more worse than it ever was under Thaksin.

Thailand currently ranking on 130. of 175 countries on the Press Freedom Index compiled and published by Reporters Without Borders

because in previous years the total number of countries in the list vary lets also compare the Notes/score Thailand got. a lower note indicated more freedom

Year/ note / rank

2009: 44.00 130. of 175 countries

2008: 34.50 124. of 173

2007: 53.50 135. of 169

2006: 33.50 122. of 168

2005: 28.00 107. of 167

2004: 14.00 59. of 167

2003: 19.67 82. of 166

2002: 22.75 65. of 135

http://en.rsf.org/spip.php?page=classement&id_rubrique=1001

There is the famous case of NGO-activist Supinya Klangnarong. In 2003 the newspaper Thai Post published a comment by her stating that Shin Corporation benefited from favours in the policies of the Thaksin governnment.

The company filled a lawsuit against her and the newspaper, some ridiculous claim of 400 mio for damage compensation and also for libel, a criminal offense in Thailand which can get you jail. Of course the public outcry was enormous. made that woman famous and a heroine for the the anti thaksin movement. Her case is often quoted as example for media suppression under Thaksin.

The libel case was finally rejected by the criminal court and she was acquitted of theses charges. That happened still under a Thaksin govt, before the coup.

I cannot remember any statements by Thaksin himself about the case, it was Shin Corp. who filled the case.

The current PM Abhisit files lawsuits by himself and is much more successful. Earlier this year two people got a 6 month /1 year jail sentence (suspended, cause first offender)for their defamatory claim the prime minister is unusually rich.

Abhisit brought also Jatuporn to the criminal court. The PM sued him for saying thatAbhisit had improperly behaved during an audience

Back to Supinya Klangnarong. She didn't welcomed the putschists with flowers, but was opposed the coup.

Instead of being thankful that the junta take civil liberties away in order to freed her and all other Thai from the dictatorial Thaksin she took part in protests, tried to enter the parliament building where the unelected and by junta appointed assembly hold a session.

So guess what happend, yep new criminal charges against her:

read about here: http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/2732/

Today she is active in the Thai Netizen Network and Campaign for Popular Media Reform (CPMR)

google her or that /thainetizen_dot_organisation

the usual suspects would her activities against censorship and pro-freedom of expression and right to access of information probably slag off as a paid by Thaksin campaign against the government.

For all the issues from the Big List Of All The Bad Things The Thakisn Government Did it is generally recommended to check who exposed or addressed these things first and then check what these critics of the Thaksin government have to say today.

"The current government also won a free and fair election..."

Says who? This Government WAS NOT chosen based on election, do you know? It was delegated IN Parliament by MPs after the party which won in election was forbiden by the court about some elctorial frauds. That is base of the problem. So where you get this, REALLY?

With all due respect, I don't think you have all your facts straight. This government WAS chosen based on election under the rules of a parliamentary democracy. Yes, the previous party lost out in some part due to a few convictions on electoral fraud (you think electoral fraud is OK?). However, the vast majority of the Pheua Thai MPs from the last election remain in parliament. The PT lost power to the Democrats because of the defection of a number of minority parties. When the PT was in power it was in a coaltion, same as the Democrats now. If you consider the previous Pheua Thai government as legitimate, you have no logical basis for considering the current Democrat government as not legitamate.

Any Pheua Thai or Red supporters who disagree with what I have said, I would appreciate it if you would respond in a respectful and fact-based manner. I am open to any counter-arguments that are put in such a way.

Disagreeing with you makes one to a PTP or Red Shirt supporter? Or are only those allowed to reply?

Legitimacy as Prime Minister isn't just something that can be reduced to the number of MP who voted for Abhist as the new PM (235 MP's).

Technically it is maybe right, but politics involves human beings, their society, their history, their believes and opinion, what the politicians say, what the acedemics says, what the newspaper writes, what the people say .... 'legitimacy of a PM has broader semantics than your logic, is a rather complex issue that doesn't fit into an excel sheet or a short 'get your facts straight' web board entry.

And there Abhisits legitimacy is an issue of debate. Never heard before that it was and is questioned? 'Silent coup' or 'judical coup' were and are terms not only used red shirt propaganda.

But if you don't read international papers, even The Nation published shortly after Abhisits election as PM an article with the headline: Legitimacy, or lack there of, is the main problem faced by prime minister-elect Abhisit Vejjajiva.

Let me quote a a few lines from this Nation article, for a short recap and mostly because it describes also how Abhisit 'victory' was perceived by the PAD aka yellow shirts and Abhisit supporter:

Before people start to argue, yes it is written by Pravit Rojanaphruk. Pravit has opinions that are always a little bit different of that what people usually expect from The Nation.

Funny part is the yellow statement. If i would wrote at this board that Abhist came into power thanks to the PAD bully & rally action and how the coalition was formed is nothing else than an "Anuphong-style coup d'etat." i would get called a 'paid red propaganda poster' by the usual suspects and probably also by those who where 2 years ago web-active PAD apologists.

Anyway, what we could discuss is how the different sources argue or take a look at why Abhisits legitimacy is questioned. If you are not completely naive or clueless or the Dems spokesman you have to admit that Abhisits path to become is not without controversy.

Last year in a BBC interview with Abhisit, the interviewer Zeinab Bedawi covered that issue and mentioned Abhists probably will know that his critics say 'Prime minister Abhisit is a nice guy, but he became prime minister in a way that lacks democratic legitimacy' He replied 'I am surprized by that!' and comes then with his textbook style explanation. the majority of MPs vote, open and transparent, according to the constitution. ...

I am pretty sure that if another journalist would ask a similar question, Abhisit would use even years later exactly the same words and phrases. including the his start sentence 'I am surprized by that!'

watch the interview here^{[starts at 4:45]}: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/business/2009/g20/7946122.stm

Abhisit gave also an explanation why Kasit was picked for the job as foreign minister.

Do you think i am not normal to prefer such idiotic things? Mate, the point is: that WILL be for sure(or going tto be already) if no election general level.

That is what i prefer. Election is a cure for divisions in Thailand. Benefit for all but for recent Government, we could guess according to this so called victory.

Do you honestly believe that Democrat, Pheua Pandin, CTP, and BJT candidates will be able to campaign freely in the North and Northeast at this time without fear of harassment or violence?

During the televised negotiations that occurred early on in the occupation of Bangkok the redshirt leaders decried the constitution as the largest problem in Thailand and declared it the root of all of the troubles. Don't you think then that the constitution should be amended before the next general election so that we do not see history repeat itself?

You maybe wanna study the cases of violence in the last, the 2007 election. And how freely campaigning was, under martial law, in 2007.

As for today days without fear of harassment or violence: What you think could happen if some concerned citizen would try to walk through the city holding a banner with " "I saw dead people at Ratchaprasong" " written on? In Bangkok or Chiang Mai or Chiang Rai for example. Not a big group, just a few maybe close of being a group of five.

The possible restrictions and suppression of the right to campaign freely is indeed of concern and something to worry about. It is even worse, you don't have to be campaign on behalf of a certain political party, it is enough to openly admit that you are pro-election to put yourself at risk.

Just look at the recent past what happened when ordinary citizens, innocent people demanding democracycame together on the streets of Bangkok in a rally for elections.

Elections as the fundamental element of a democracy seems to be not in favour of every group and party in the political scene Thailands. Some prefer Rule by Decree over Rule by the People.

You forget what is the problem with that constitution. In case you don't know:

It is the JUNTA constitution. Wouldn't you as democracy lover object if the the military launched a coup, violates the 'old' constitution, declared martial law all over the country and then writes a new constitution?

Of course the junta hold a referendum about this new constitution. But protest against the junta wasn't allowed and declared illegal and so was it for that referendum.

If you know nothing about the Junta thing or just ignore these facts you will fail to understand whats going on in Thai politics.

The PM did not promise to foreign media that there would be an election this year. The offer was made during negotiations with redshirt leaders during their illegal and violent occupation of central Bangkok. The redshirt leaders rejected the offer and declined to negotiate further. This resulted in thousands injured and many deaths as protesters repeatedly attacked military lines during the containment operation. At the end we saw the immolation of Bangkok by redshirt supporters.

The PM did suggest recently that elections could be held early next year. The primary requirement being that all sides actively come to the table to begin a much needed reconciliation. The PTP has thus far refused to participate and flatly opposes any kind of reconciliation efforts made by the government. Their supporters have continued to take up arms and at present are waging a guerrilla war against the government and citizens of Thailand.

This is why an early election is unlikely.

Yeah, and these red shirt people even dared to vote for the opposition party for the terrorists in the recent by-election.

If it is real really democracy what they want, they should have voted for the ruling party and show support the government.

This is why an early election is unlikely.

Nation say all CCTV is not working. I wonder if someone order it to be switch off?

Who knows?

The Nation also publish articles with the headline :"Bomb spoils Panich win" without even to mention a bomb in the article.

^^

And all what is need for your sun fun flower power plant grows on trees?

If your 5 MW station performs little bit weak on a rainy you still have that convenient power socket in the wall at your home, right?

I am amazed at how close it actually was - at least for the time being the doubt the reds had any say in Thailand's progress (as opposed to future) is doubtful.

???

Can you try again? I don't understand.

P.S. Did we hear from the fugitive Jakrapob tonight? He's been incommunicado for ages.

To monitor him was the job of the governments best man in the Thaksin & Co. hunt - Vice Foreign Minister Panich Vikitsreth. But i guess after he won a MP seat he will be busy now with looking after his constituency.

Anyway, i guess the statement below is still valid:

"The government is closely monitoring Jakrapob Penkair's movements, though his whereabouts are still unknown, Panich said." The Nation, April 28, 2009

RickBradford makes it look like wind is bad in all scenarios - or at least he's keen on publicizing the worst news in that regard. Wind power works well in some places and doesn't work well in other places. What studies have been done in Thailand?

However, concentrated solar would work in parts of Thailand. It would be more efficient and cheaper than nuclear, besides all the other advantages over nuclear (safer, free fuel, less security, no decommissioning costs, no cost to hide radioactive garbage, etc.) Plus there's small chance rowdies like the Reds or Muslim insurgents will be tempted to take it over a solar field for political leverage. Seeing how easily the Reds commandeered downtown Bkk, it would likely be as easy or easier to take over a nuclear power plant. They could do it with a pick-up truck full of rowdies waving bamboo sticks.

Here's a URL of what a sensible energy future for Thailand could look like,

if EGAT authorities weren't so hel_l-bent on joining the nuclear club:

Some of the text (I boldified some it): Located in Sicily and operated by the utility ENEL (BIT:ENEL), Archimede is a 5 megawatt CSP plant that uses molten salts to capture the heat generated by the sun's energy. Archimede is the world's first concentrating solar power plant to use molten salts to capture heat. Most conventional CSP plants use pressurized oil to capture heat and molten salts to store heat so the plant can run during the night or on days where there is no sun.

However, molten salts have several advantages over pressurized oil. First, they can operate at higher temperatures (550°C instead of 390°C). This means the power output and energy efficiency of concentrating solar power plants will be increased. Using molten salts for both heat capture and storage will allow a CSP plant to run 24 hours a day for multiple days without sun.

Additionally, the non-toxic, cheap molten salts are safe for the environment. Finally, using molten salts allows the steam turbines used in the CSP process to operate at the standard pressure/temperature regulations that fossil fuel plants run on -- meaning conventional power plants could easily be retrofitted to be CSP plants.

when it comes to fear-mongering of nuclear energy the civil protesters and poor victims of Thaksin in the south suddenly turn out to be muslim rowdies and insurgents who would attack such a plant.

Hydroelectricity has really some power, but we all know what happen if you mess with the water ways.

Solar PV isn't that clean energy either. The panels have to be produced, that is a dirty toxic process, they contain toxic chemicals and will become scrap one day.

I agree, concentrated solar power is clever but you should have boldified the capacity of that fancy mirror field too, how many MW you can get with good sunshine and no rain or clouds.

And don' argue like EGAT would plan and invest nothing in renewable energy. Solar energy is hot in Thailand. They want build the world largest solar power plant, but even the world largest one will have 'only' a capacity of 78 MW. Your average solar power plant has a much lesser output. like the 5 MW of your example, at high noon, on a sunshiny day.

The nukes makes 1000 MW each, day and night, no matter if it rains or not and its kinda cheap.

The suspect, however, admitted he is an admirer of Khattiya and his ideology.

Which is?

Next to turning commies into good people is it Tossapit Rajatham, the 10 virtues of the king. In which he saw a concept not only for an emperor or the sovereign, but any individual in a leader position, principles an executive of any organisation should use as guideline.

before wild speculations start here some facts:

Cases of election related violence in the 2007 election:

• 18 December: Three armed soldiers from ISOC were arrested by police while monitoring the house of Sa‐nguan Pongmanee, PPP candidate. The incident took place in front of Sa‐nguan's house in Muang district, Lamphun.
  
• 17 December: A truck belonged to Thawisak Pho‐Ngarm (37), canvasser of Aphinan Kambang Pue Phan Din candidate in Prajuab Kirikhan, was torched. The incident took place near Thawisak house in Mu 1 tambon Khao Noi, Pran Buri district, Prajuab Kirikhan. Thawisak reported that he had been threatened before. After the incident, Thawisak has been relocated to a safe house in Bang Saphan district (provided by Aphinan, exact location unknown). A complaint was filed with local police.
  
• 15 December: Prasong Sintuchai, canvasser of PPP in Prae and village headman in Mu 8 tambon Hua Muang, Song district, was shot dead in his house.
  
• 14 December: Den Yongkit (57), Canvasser of PPP in Muang district, Krabi, reported an assassination attempt. Gunmen opened fire into his house in Mu 11 tambon Krabi Noi, Muang district. No one was injured.
  
• 9 December: Payong Ananthasuk (52), former TAO chairman in tambon Boyang, and also canvasser of Chada Thaiseth and Nophadol Pholsen Chart Thai candidates in Uthai Thaini, was shot dead. He was shot in his house (Mu 6 Ban Ngiew Pom, tambon Boyang, Sawang Arom district) with a shotgun.
  
• 7 December: Somsak Morichat, Democrat candidate in Chiang Mai, reported an assassination attempt. He was shot (which he narrowly escaped) with 11mm gun while he was visiting his canvassers in that evening. He reported many phone threats telling him to withdraw from the contest. Somsak represents indigenous constituency (Karen). Democrat coordination center in Chiang Mai requested police protection for Somsak.
  
• 1 December: Manit Pijitbanjong (45), Democrat canvasser in Pak Payom distict, Pattalung, was shot dead. He was killed with a shotgun while driving his pickup truck on a local road in Ban Tro, tambon Tamnan, Muang district.
  
• 19 November: Mayusoh Satapo (54), canvasser of Dr Waemahadi Waedao Pue Phan Din candidate in Narathiwat, was shot and seriously injured. Mayusoh was attacked with M16 and AK47 rifles while driving his pickup truck on a local road in Mu 1 tambon Lamphu, Muang district, Narathiwat.
  
• 5 November: Binsoh Masae (48), canvasser of Narong Duding Democrat candidate, and village headman in Mu 5 Ban Paju, tambon Patae, Yaha district, was shot dead with bodyguard. Binsoh was attacked with AK47 rifles while driving his pickup truck on a local road in front of a mosque in Mu 7 Ban Kato, tambon Patae, Yaha district, Yala.
  
• 22 October: Dr Charnchai Silapauaychai Phrae (53), PPP canvasser and PAO chairman of Prae, was shot dead while jogging in a sports stadium in Muang district.
  
• 5 October: Man Rodkeaw (66), PPP canvasser, and kamnan of tambon Ban Na, Wachirabarimi district, was shot dead with his bodyguard. He was shot with M16 rifles while driving his pickup truck on a local road in Mu 8 Ban Huay Hang, tambon Nong Lum, Wachirabarami district, Pijit.

source: Report of the International Election Observation Mission by The Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL)

http://www.anfrel.org/report/thailand/thai_2007/THAI%20MISSION_2007.pdf

Asked why he did not win by a bigger margin, Panich said the party felt satisfied with the results, as many pollsters had earlier predicted that he would win only 4 to 5 per cent more than his rival.

Just for the record, anyone knew some of these prediction by those many pollsters? My weak memory says me that it was quite the opposite, PTP did better as predicted.

'Better'?

PTP candidate did worse than the last candidate fielded by the group.

And he did far worse than Jutaporn and other liers said they 'knew' he would be doing, i.e. he did not win...

Source?

Did worse than which candidate?

Have you a link to some of these 'many pollsters'? Please post not what some PTP heads had declared in campaign speeches. here is quite understandable that they didn't say will will lose. The other dude got that already wrong.

I mean the prediction of some independent political observers. Surveys by opinion research institutes. I missed the polls that spoke of a small margin of only 4-5 per cent. but the real outcome is pretty close to that (Dems 50.4%; PTP 42.7%) I remember only polls that predicted a wider gap, like the exit poll by Suan Dusit Rajabhat University (Dems 52.8; PTP 40.9%) for example and of course the one that they did one week ago.(Dems 50,1% PTP 34,3%). The was also a survey conducted by Police Special Branch (Dems 60%; PTP 40%).

So if you know better and more than I and if you know pollsters that predicted a better and higher outcome for the PTP candidate than the final result or the once with that small margin of 3-4 per cent and so on, please post them. that was my question.

can you back up your claim or not (like so often and like the other usual suspects who post fact free fantasies).

This is just my opinion and it might offend people but I believe it to be true

The government has been far to nice to the red shirts. They have been more concerned about looking good than they have in punishing the criminals. The red shirts should have been crushed. As is they were merely coddled told it was not there fault and given free rides home.

Time to think of Thailand and not what is nice for the red shirts. Give them the same consideration they gave Bangkok. If the situation was reversed they would not handle you in such a nice way.