Steve2UK

<snip> but most hoped this was a weak possibility <snip>

Evidence for this assertion?

Just like 'Villian' used to simply mean someone not living in the country side, but just in a village or town.

Incorrect - however it's spelled, it has never meant that.

"Middle English vilain, vilein, from Anglo-French, from Medieval Latin villanus, from Latin villa" - Merriam Webster Online

"Middle English vilein, feudal serf, person of coarse feelings, from Old French, from Vulgar Latin villanus, feudal serf, from Latin villa, country house" - American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

"from Old French vilein serf, from Late Latin vīllānus worker on a country estate, from Latin: villa" - Collins English Dictionary

etc.......

I don't readily forsee that a populist/popular mass social movement which has become essentially a way of life to so many people, hugely from a particular region of the country, is going to respect either the signals or the commands of those who are viewed as the problem, and an ages old problem at that.

People feeling their oats after years in the streets suddenly staring into a return to a future at least as bleak as the past may not pass as quietly into the night as certain others may like or expect.

This is not a wish, it is a concern. These folk want their issues addressed.

If the folk are smart they'll completely disconnect from Thaksin, make their loyalties clear, and petition the state for a redress of grievances. If the state is smart, the state will recognize the legitimacy of their concerns and address them one by one.

Under such circumstances, perhaps reasonable electoral processes can continue or dare I say be improved.

Good to see acknowledgement that these people have (presumably well-founded and sincerely-held?) issues and grievances rather than all just being x baht per day "zombies", "morons", "dupes", "rent-a-crowd" etc - which seems to be the repetitive norm for many here.

Petitioning the Thai state for a "redress of grievances" doesn't have a great track record of success for the petitioners - cf. "Assembly of the Poor" and other precedents. IMO the reconciliation pitch (passed down via the power-brokers) will include:

- amnesties all round for offences deemed largely political (regardless of shirt colour - and, of course, uniform)

- Thaksin's assets largely unfrozen (i.e "we've sorted out his main gripe - he's OK with that, so drop it")

- measures designed to show promise of increased incomes/benefits for the (mainly rural) poor and near-poor

- panel set up to consider further more meaningful reforms to the 2007 constitution (so as to look and feel more like the 1997 version - but with extra safeguards)

In short - play ball and all the above goodies are yours. The vast majority of those with issues are far from being revolutionaries and are self-interested - and thus IMO can be relied on to buy in to a government (or "state") that they perceive to be genuinely ready to address (most of) their concerns. Democratic process (as it's understood in the West) will be low on the list of their priorities if the rest of the "deal" looks credible to deliver as advertised.

No one is interested in reconciliation, least of all Chavalit. Chavalit's talk of reconciliation and the possibility of a national unity government is laughable given his machinations last week with Hun Sen and Thaksin during the Hua Hin ASEAN meeting. Beyond Chavalit, no one is positioned to be a national conciliator either, to include Abhisit.

The period of the past several years has been an unavoidable period of tumult and disorder - unavoidable because opposing sides see no room for compromise and completely reject those who disagree. The differences are fundamental in their nature. So the past several years and continuing into the future present an irreconcilable crucible which the country must endure, at least until the natural course of events provides the focal point, at which time the future can be clarified in one way or another.

Neither side is going to share power in government with the other because each side wants to be in charge when the time comes. There are only irreconcilable differences.

I've yet to see anyone actually identify quite what Chavalit's "machinations" were or are supposed to have been - notwithstanding two opinion pieces on consecutive days from Veera in Bangkok Post which set out to hint at some dark purpose for the visit to Hun Sen without either time managing to say what that purpose was. Care to shed some light on the subject?

Otherwise, it seems we largely agree insofar as I put a figure of four/five on your "several years.... of tumult and disorder" - i.e. from 2005/6 until today - with another looking set to follow and the same "natural course of events" in mind. Where we seem to differ is in the view that reconciliation is impossible. Left to themselves, I also don't see the opposing sides reconciling; my premise throughout is that I don't see them being left to themselves that much longer - too much ongoing harm is being done to others' interests and those stakeholders want to see an end to it sooner rather than later/too late.... and won't want to leave it just to "be clarified in one way or another". On that basis, I would expect appropriate signals to be sent out to let the interested parties know which way the winds are going to be blowing - and that they'd better fall into line if they know what's good for them and want a seat at the new table. Needless to say, from this premise it also follows that both political sides will recognise that neither can be "in charge".

Not the best advertisement for Thai democracy, but a rather less pessimistic view of a less haphazard and more "managed" future than the one you describe - and IMO a logical progression from the unfinished business of September 2006.

Reconciliation - much touted as a principled priority last December - is now not so much on the back burner as pushed off the stove.

That might have had something to do with the events in April this year.

Meaning that now there can't be any reconciliation - and that this government now has a doctor's note absolving them of any ongoing responsibility to try and achieve it? I suspect that that probably is how Abhisit sees it - hence my comments above.

In my analysis, and trying to look at it neutrally, Thaksin was a hands on, go do it, go get em leader. Abhisit is a delegator style manger. There are pros and cons to both styles. It is hard to compare as Thaksin had a whopping parlaimentary majority that were always united behind him while Abhisit has a comfortable majority but one that is based on fractious allies.

The intriguing thing about Abhisit as others have picked up on is the police chief choice. He has opposed extremely powerful people on this and has refused to back down. Why? Does he have backing of anyone powerful?

Looked at neutrally (which I take to mean irrespective of what one thinks of their policies), I largely agree with that comparison. Certainly, Thaksin talked about "Thailand Company" with himself as "CEO PM" and with "CEO diplomats and governors" - part of his "what I did in business I can do in politics" approach. By those lights, ministers were presumably just order-taking department managers with a token presence in cabinet/on the board; and parliament was pretty much an ongoing AGM of minor shareholders with little say in matters - just required to rubber-stamp the CEO's decisions from time to time.

The "delegator style" comment also seems appropriate for Abhisit - some of it just the political necessity of allowing his coalition partners to do the business-as-usual with their ministerial fiefdoms. If only for leaving the appallingly distracted and ill-informed Mrs Ranongruk Suwanchawee in a key position where she has woefully under-performed to the detriment of Thailand's IT needs (never mind her obsession with the LM campaign), the benefits of his hands-off "manager" approach are open to question. As you say, pro's and cons for both styles.

About the police chief issue, I can't see how I can comment meaningfully without breaking forum rules. Suffice it to say that if you have been following Bangkok Pundit and reading between his and commentators' lines, most of the likely answer is there............

<snip>

i think that Abhisit's time in office and his ability to lead is a hard thing to judge because of both the circumstances he came to power and the distractions he has had to deal with. If, and a big "if", the distractions disappear and if he can win the next general election, we might get a better idea of his capabilities.

Very big "ifs" (there are two) - and I see very little prospect of either happening. Without wanting to get into philosophical semantics, I think we generally judge "leadership" by results achieved - certainly more than by any number of good intentions. I can see the case for the argument which says that Abhisit's tenure has stopped things getting worse - I just don't agree with it. Reconciliation - much touted as a principled priority last December - is now not so much on the back burner as pushed off the stove. That doesn't surprise me - it was never in the cards dealt to Abhisit that he would be able to get very far with it....... even assuming he genuinely wanted to. For that reason if no other, the "distractions" are unlikely to disappear under his PM-ship.

As to winning the next general election (as and when it's allowed to occur), my view is that the real decision-makers are still re-configuring the usual shiftable power blocs to arrive at a Mk 2 version of a government more to their liking (Mk 3 version if you count the one formed after the 2007 election - very much not the result they were trying to engineer). My take is that Abhisit is not now seen as part of that new configuration - given that he has not delivered and is unlikely to deliver on damping things down sufficiently in readiness for the potential for increased instability that is coming when events take their inevitable and much-anticipated course

In the same way that the lesson was learned by most that the 2006 coup solved little, I believe it has been recognised that there must be at least the appearance of reconciliation underlying the next government to be formed - so as to neutralise more of the divisions that provoke the current distractions. By that stage, I see Abhisit as being too much of a square peg to fit into the round hole that's being prepared. If I'm right, then we're unlikely to see what he could be capable of as a real leader (i.e. with the ability/clout to get done what he wants done) in the foreseeable future.

A grand coalition presentable as a much-needed government of national unity in a time of national crisis seems to me the most likely outcome. In those extraordinary circumstances - and maybe in anticipation of them impending, don't be surprised to see many of the current obstacles to progress/reconciliation (unfreezing enough assets, un-banning enough politicians etc) pushed through and dealt with in quick succession. For leader of such a government, the likely qualifications are mainly as I mentioned above: a relatively harmless figure of sufficient status without too much baggage around whom it will be seen as reasonable to unite - a Prem Mk 2, if you like (and some will think Chavalit, for instance, qualifies). Needless to say, the usual arrangements for sharing out the ministerial spoils will be made - sufficient to buy off participants and give them reason to stay on board once the shockwaves start to subside.

The thought must occur that it will be difficult to ensure that Thaksin stays bought off. Difficult to guarantee that, of course, but I think the calculation is that there will be such a tide of changed circumstances as to sweep away or at least neutralise most of the existing support for him....... it will just seem too parochial in the new scheme of things.

It seems lots of threads end up well off topic right now.

Guess nobody in these parts has a view on Thaksin/Abhisit and leadership

On the first comment - yes, I agree........ same old knee-jerk tit-for-tat responses recycled ad nauseam.

FWIW, I don't think there has been "leadership" as such since Thaksin's time as PM - which is not intended as a pro-Thaksin statement but merely an objective assessment of what we've seen from the four* figurehead holders of the title in the last three years. General Surayud - front-man installed by the junta; Samak - self-confessed surrogate for Thaksin; Somchai - no such confession that I recall but few doubt that it was more of the same; now Abhisit as titular PM of "his government of custom-made circumstances" in Thitinan's phrasing.

Four figureheads in succession. Sad to say, that leads me to think that "leadership" is low on the list of real-world (realpolitik, if you like) requirements for the post-coup role for the next PM......... certainly lower than being acceptable to - and compliant with the wishes of - the powers-that-be. With notions of at least the desirable appearance of reconciliation in mind, perhaps one should add "looks harmless" and "not too much baggage" to the list. All of which relegates "leadership" to a lowly quality - and maybe even a disqualification for the office.......

* Not counting Chaovarat.

,<snip> If you want the airport issues added, why not ALSO charge Sae Daeng and his redshirt attack team

for throwing hand grenades at PAD encampment at GH <snip>

Perhaps because no-one has produced any evidence that would make the charges stick - least of all you......... no matter how many times you repeat the categorical statement and get asked for your evidence.

It's your bank deciding the rate - not the Thai bank whose ATM (or over-the-counter service) you're using.

Actually that's not correct. I have several VISA bank debit cards and the rate is determined by VISA not the bank that you get the card from. A number of us have made test withdrawals that help determine this fact. I will assume MC debit cards work the same way.

Fine, that's of course more precise - the overseas bank's card is operating through Visa and the Visa rate is applied; ditto MC-based cards through MC. The result is the same. My point - for the OP's benefit - was just that it's not the choice of Thai bank that decides the rate.

Siam Commercial Bank is showing 33.14 this afternoon: http://www.scb.co.th/exchange/bk-txtexchange.htm

I also did a withdrawal at AEON this afternoon on my U.S. ATM card, got 33.36!! And that's including the U.S. bank's $1.50 charge for using an out-of-network ATM machine.

Mac

Mac, I think you effectively reinforce my point that the rate applied for this kind of transaction is (OK, seems to be) from the card-issuing overseas bank and has nothing to do with what SCB or any other Thai bank may be quoting as an exchange rate. I concede that that there are other views about this - but mine comes from close examination of the rates I have been getting from using various Thai bank ATMs (prior to 150 baht fee introduction) - as well as making over-the-counter withdrawals using a Visa Debit card (from the UK Nationwide bank).

For US users, particularly, there appear to be some wrinkles using MC-based "ATM cards", but the basic principle seems to apply. It's your bank deciding the rate - not the Thai bank whose ATM (or over-the-counter service) you're using.

Sorry for any sort of confusion,

Does anyone know what the exchange rate is at Aeon ATMs when you draw cash from your overseas bank account?

Aydhaya bank's rate is 33.0 B to 1 USD today for instance + 150 B service charge.

The subject is covered exhaustively in a long-running thread at: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thai-Banks-S...it-t255263.html

You probably won't want to trawl through nearly 80 pages of posts, so I can tell you that the near-universal consensus there is that you will get the same rate of exchange using a given debit/cash-card in an Aeon ATM as you will using the same card in any other Thai bank's ATM - e.g. Ayudhya - but without the 150 baht fee charged by non-Aeon ATM's.

The exchange rate applied is governed by your home (overseas) bank - regardless of which Thai bank's ATM you're using. That also means that the Thai bank won't be able to tell you the effective exchange rate - i.e. what you'll actually pay in US$ when your bank debits your account for the transaction.

Going back to your original post, I think it's apparent that Aeon would prefer that only their own customers use their ATM's, but the facts are as you describe - their machines are plastered with logo's of other networks that they will accept. Other banks' ATM screens sometimes even include a message saying "We welcome cards from other banks"; Aeon operate the same system but are just rather less welcoming. It's also the case that Aeon is primarily a source of readily available purchase finance/credit for a largely Thai market that needs it; put simply, they're not used to seeing (usually relatively well-heeled) foreigners using their services - thought that's presumably changing as so many of us are now heading for their uniquely fee-free ATMs.

Don't be surprised at conflicting information from local staff or even from head office personnel - it seems almost forbidden for them to say "I don't know" so they're more likely to say what they think is the case and assure you that they're right. Nothing new in Thailand.

Bagwan, thanks for the good intel from up country.

It's not all fanrangs know nothing and are disrespectful louts,

as some make it out.

I too have been asked delicately at times for opinions on events of the day.

Sometimes by red taxi drivers leaving swampy...

at the end of they ride they have often been scratching their heads,

and several said the equivalent of. I never thought of that.

Medical certificate? I got and submitted the usual one (100 baht to say you're breathing) at the time of my last extension in August.

Checked just now and I don't see it mentioned on the Immigration Bureau's list of required documents - but that surprised me.....

http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/en/ba...p?page=service# (Internet Explorer - doesn't work with Firefox)

1. Passport and its photocopy with certified true copy by the alien
   
2. Application Form ( TM 7) with one photograph (size 4x6 cm.)
   
3. Application fee: 1,900 Baht
   
4. Documents required are as follows;
   • The account deposit with the bank in Thailand of not less than 800,000 Baht.
     The proof of such evidence is the updated bank passbook with the certified letter from the bank showing the money in the account of not less than 800,000 Baht which has been deposited in the account for the previous 3 months. OR
     
     
   • Income from pension/social welfare of not less than 65,000 Baht per month.
     The proof of such evidence is a letter from the applicant's Embassy or Consulate in Thailand to certify that the applicant receives pension or other income of not less than 65,000 Baht per month. OR
     
   • A combination of the account deposite in the bank plus income (from pension or other source per yearX witha combined total of not less than 800,000 Baht.
     

Could you explain in more detail what you mean by "the Night Bazaar building?" I understand the Night Bazaar as an area, but I'm not sure which building your referring to. Which street do you mean?

I believe I've been to the book store you mentioned - it has 3 or 4 stories, no? Lots of art supplies? Can't say I saw a chess set there, but then again, I wasn't looking for one at the time.

Chess sets (mostly carved wood but some soft-stone) in the basement of the Night Bazaar building - north side of the street......... there's a section that is nothing but games, wooden puzzles etc.

As a general observation, the quality of most stuff inside the building seems way better than the souvenir/knock-off/tat stuff on the street stalls.

I also recommend the upper floor of the large book-store/stationery place on Rachawith - about 50-100 metres along from UN Irish pub heading east towards the moat.

Apologies: first of all I got my geography/compass wrong and the street I mean is Chang Klan - which runs north-south and has all the stalls on each side. The Night Bazaar "building" (sorry, I really don't another name for it) is a large roofed mall on the west side not far up from the new and grand Le Meridien Hotel. From the street, you'll see wide stairs going down into the basement (where the wooden games are - 2-3 shops/stalls somewhere in the middle) and also up to the floor above. The building itself is about 50 metres long and probably the same deep - there's also a gallery floor above the first two......... i.e. the place is pretty big - and unmissable once you're outside it . Incidentally, the gallery floors tend to be mainly antique (type) furniture, carvings, art objects etc - not impossible you'd find an arty chess set/board there.

We're talking about the same book/art supplies store in Rachawith - I think you want the top floor where they have various toys, games etc. Not a huge selection but I have seen chess sets there before.

amporn electronic store?

Thanks for the suggestion - I did look through the one in the Carrefour car park but no joy. I'll check via the repair place next to Icon.

I thoroughly recommend the Whole Earth restaurant on Sri Donchai - east from/close to the Chang Klan intersection. Nice atmosphere, smooth service and not expensive considering the quality and location. Huge choice of excellent Thai/Indian vegetarian dishes. Best tables (IMO) for what the OP appears to like are on the upper terrace/balcony that circles the main building. I've seen that they also have tables laid out in an area in the garden - though maybe not in the rainy season?

http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&q...0508&li=lmd

Well, having satisfied my desperate need for non-exploding/non-disintegrating clothes pegs....... I'm now on the hunt for replacement knobs for my car radio. Standard fit - they slide onto a half-moon-shaped spindle.

Sensible suggestions, please?

Chess sets (mostly carved wood but some soft-stone) in the basement of the Night Bazaar building - north side of the street......... there's a section that is nothing but games, wooden puzzles etc.

As a general observation, the quality of most stuff inside the building seems way better than the souvenir/knock-off/tat stuff on the street stalls.

I also recommend the upper floor of the large book-store/stationery place on Rachawith - about 50-100 metres along from UN Irish pub heading east towards the moat.

yes, I do maintain (IMHO basis, natch) that their fish and chips is the equal or better of the best I have had in London, England.

Sorry, I've been in Pattaya and got confused with a F & C place that residents were talking about when I was there. That is why I quickly amended the post (but not quickly enough).

I just wanted to make sure that you think that West's fish and chips are as good as London's best. I've never had the plaesure of trying them there, but I have already heard that they were as excellent as Indian style curry is supposed to be in London, so I wanted to see how others who have been there responded to that statement.

UG - mai pen rai krub . From what I hear, being in Pattaya beats any doctor's sick note to excuse confusion.............

The place on Theobald's Rd is called the Fryers Delight and you pre-empted me on questoning your three choices

Fryers Delight IMHO is the best Fish & Chip shop in London if West's can produce F&C's better than them then he will surely be giving Charlie's and Piggies a run for there money.

anonymouse, I owe you at least a jar of pickled onions ("proper" ones ) for saving me further brain-racking about the name..... aka "Friars Delight" - one of the worst puns in catering?

Are you maintaining that there is a fish and chip shop in Chiang Mai that is as good as the best in London, England? That would be a nice surprise.

Hmmm, not often that one gets to reply to the same post twice - albeit that the post has now altered somewhat........

As you have reason to know, UG, "West" is not a "fish and chip shop" - so the comparison you suggest can't be made. West includes fish and chips (when not sold out) on a very varied/eclectic menu and, yes, I do maintain (IMHO basis, natch) that their fish and chips is the equal or better of the best I have had in London, England. For afficionados, the three London, England venues I have in mind are, in order of my preference:

1) Faulkners (Kingsland High Road - an athletic stone's throw from where I lived for some 30 years)

2) A place in Theobald's Road (whose name I unfortunately can't remember but it's also a firm favourite of many London cabbies - and I know better than to argue with the eaterie judgements of London cabbies)

3) Geales (Notting Hill)

I could also have mentioned the original Harry Ramsden outlets, but those are mainly in the north of England and I only got to them a few times in my student days. What with the passage of the years taking their toll on my all-too-subjective memory (plus global warming etc), I thought it inappropriate (and overly verbose - even for me) to include them in my original comparison.

Are we done now?

Are you maintaining that there is a fish and chip shop in Pattaya that is as good as the best in London, England? Why didn't you post this last week when I was there?

Not sure where or why Pattaya comes into this - I take it you mean Pattaya, Thailand and not a soon-to-be-unveiled Pattaya, Texas (Pop. 12)? Either way, I've never set foot in either........ so I can't - and wouldn't - comment on the relative quality of F&C available there.

I used to go often to London's three top F&C [fish and chips] eateries; what I had the other night was at least as good as their best.

Really now? Do you mean London Texas?

Thank you, UG. Inexact - not to say complacent - of me to leave out the "England" locator.

We insular Brits (even the half-German ones) have a regrettable tendency to regard the original London as being the only one of note - and to disregard johnny-come-lately imitators. Paris, Texas........ and now London, Texas*............ one can only marvel at what other delights and surprises the lone star state might hold.

So, I stand corrected - and will try to employ the locator in future. Bad enough to trigger the occasional mix-up with London, Ontario (BTW I mean the province in Canada - the country just above the USA on some maps - just in case there's a soon-to-be-unveiled Ontario, Texas); plainly, I naively underestimated the scope for confusion.

* "In the latter years of the twentieth century, the population [of London, Texas] rose to approximately 180."

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London,_Texas )

Brief update - I went back to try the fish & chips. Simply excellent, large piece of John Dory (better than cod to my taste) in a light/crisp batter and perfect chips (fries) with interesting home-made tartar-type sauce on the side. I haven't tried other fish and chips in CM - so no comparisons to make, but I used to go often to London's three top F&C eateries; what I had the other night was at least as good as their best.

Next time I'm there, I'll make a point of mentioning the earlier posts that seem to refer to standards in his absence - "Dave" (David) is certainly not "mythical". One other point: IMO, realistically 9.30pm is getting quite late for a place like West and given where it is - I'd certainly expect it to be winding down by that time and wouldn't arrive there much later than 8pm. Small (or no) comfort to NancyL and plainly unsatisfactory when someone has said (in English, presumably) the place is "definitely still open and welcomed our business" - not to mention consistency counts etc.