Ferangled

The police had to talk to him all the time because they were afraid that he would commit suicide.

Give him a big knife and 10 mins in a room on his own, save everyone a lot of bother.

This guy clearly isn't the same guy pictured in the earlier thread... who was that actually a picture of?

Same guy, now a bit fatter with a shaved head and no sun bathing.

Do you know that for a fact or just assuming that's the case? Looks like a totally different person to me, not just because of the hair, skin tone but shape of face, facial features etc?

Pretty irrelevant really, but knowing the incompetence of most reporting here it wouldn't surprise me if the photo on the original thread was actually of someone completely different... possibly the Frenchman, bar owner or ex-husband... who may now be innocently mistaken for the Nazi killer and lynched on the street... stranger things have happened here!

It's a real shame that some on here take this as an opportunity to cast aspersions on the victim's character... it's totally irrelevant; the poor girl was viciously murdered; no one deserves such a brutal end. Herman's clearly a sandwich short of a picnic and there's no justification for his actions whatsoever.

Whether or not your girlfriend/ wife is cheating on you is no excuse for violent behavior let alone murder... some of the posters on here are clearly disturbed and this thread is bringing people's own insecurities to the surface. Some people need to take a long hard long in the mirror and change their outlook on life before it ends in misery.

If you cannot buy a car in cash than you cannot afford it.

I expect the great majority of cars bought all over the world, to include in western nations, are bought via loan versus cash. I don't think I would classify folks who have bought vehicles via a loan as not being able to afford it; maybe they didn't have a large sum of cash to buy the vehicle outright but most can afford it through cash flow management (i.e., monthly payments). Of course this assumes the amount of money incoming (work/investments) each month exceeds the required outgoing amount (bills).

I expect you are correct, most cars are bought on credit and sadly that's the problem; common perception is what we can "afford" equals what we can "afford to borrow".

The point being that if you could actually afford it you wouldn't need to borrow the money! It's totally down to the interpretation but this is a good indication of how desensitized we have become to borrowing, it's seen as normal, especially for high ticket items...

For example, if asked if you could afford to buy me drink, but you only had 5 baht in your pocket at the time, you would probably say no but if you were asked if you could afford to buy a new car, you would probably reason that you could, albeit by borrowing the money...

In my opinion it's a slippery slope... I wonder how many people actually have savings these days? I'm going to digress here but earlier I made reference to my old Grandpa and the sage words this WW2 vet had for me on the subject of borrowing, I think only fair I present his current circumstances....

Having worked hard his entire life, paid cash for his cars, his house, his holidays, he managed to accrue a nice nest egg of savings. My Grandma fell ill a few years back and was taken into a nursing home while my Grandpa's savings were emptied to pay for her care. The local council are now selling his house from under him. My Grandma shares her home with entirely state funded patients, whose families couldn't "afford" to pay for their care.... but seem to be able to afford to drive BMWs to visit them.

So in hindsight we're probably all better off doing <deleted> all constructive, saving nothing, borrowing as much as we can and living like a bunch of miscreants... buy a house? Why bother, by the time you pay off your mortgage the state will probably take it to pay for your care in your old age!

I see some cunning shenanigans going on here, with the link to the article using the "Hub" word but the article it's linking to strangely devoid of it...

Some new TV policy as a result of the extra interest generated by adding the word "hub" liberally to all news threads...?

"Thais would have to be among the most irresponsible people in the world regarding money."

Personally I would have thought that title should be reserved for the US http://www.usdebtclock.org/

No other country even comes close...

Generally a bit of a non story, figures are dubious in the extreme - 15 million families surveyed? That's stretching the imagination somewhat!

Most Thais I know actually live to their means much better than their western counterparts, who are so accustomed to life in debt it's seen as normal... mortgage, car loan, credit cards, overdraft, store cards etc. You're seen as the exception to the rule if you're not in debt.

Yep. No other country comes close. And no other country created the global economy. By the way, most Thais are in debt, as another article just revealed (today). That isn't surprising. Thailand is one of the slowest-growing ASEAN economies. You have no idea what you're talking about. The only reason you know Western economies are in debt is because they're honest about they're economic straits.

You are clearly an economic mastermind. The global economy was not created by the US, it is by definition based on the economies of all nations... Yes, the US have created much of the damage to it, the current climate of debt and the vast overspending of their population is indicative of the problems faced by the global economy as a whole.

As to the honesty of US economics, you have clearly been asleep for a few decades...

Thanks for the correction. The Bretton Woods Conference was clearly masterminded by others. Blah, blah, blah...so who do you hold up as the model for the world's economy? Please enlighten those of us who are so ignorant.

US or UN? I think you are mistaking the global economy and the economic policies set out at the Bretton Woods Conference, which forgive me if I'm wrong, were deliberated by over 40 nations not solely the US...

Sorry it seems you took offense to my original post, labelled me ignorant, then failed to actually respond to anything I'd written... then took further offense when corrected on your terminology.

Blah, blah, blah... has never been the most convincing statement, but I guess suffices when you have nothing worth actually contributing.

"Thais would have to be among the most irresponsible people in the world regarding money."

Personally I would have thought that title should be reserved for the US http://www.usdebtclock.org/

No other country even comes close...

Generally a bit of a non story, figures are dubious in the extreme - 15 million families surveyed? That's stretching the imagination somewhat!

Most Thais I know actually live to their means much better than their western counterparts, who are so accustomed to life in debt it's seen as normal... mortgage, car loan, credit cards, overdraft, store cards etc. You're seen as the exception to the rule if you're not in debt.

Yep. No other country comes close. And no other country created the global economy. By the way, most Thais are in debt, as another article just revealed (today). That isn't surprising. Thailand is one of the slowest-growing ASEAN economies. You have no idea what you're talking about. The only reason you know Western economies are in debt is because they're honest about they're economic straits.

You are clearly an economic mastermind. The global economy was not created by the US, it is by definition based on the economies of all nations... Yes, the US have created much of the damage to it, the current climate of debt and the vast overspending of their population is indicative of the problems faced by the global economy as a whole.

As to the honesty of US economics, you have clearly been asleep for a few decades...

"Thais would have to be among the most irresponsible people in the world regarding money."

Personally I would have thought that title should be reserved for the US http://www.usdebtclock.org/

No other country even comes close...

Generally a bit of a non story, figures are dubious in the extreme - 15 million families surveyed? That's stretching the imagination somewhat!

Most Thais I know actually live to their means much better than their western counterparts, who are so accustomed to life in debt it's seen as normal... mortgage, car loan, credit cards, overdraft, store cards etc. You're seen as the exception to the rule if you're not in debt.

Yea, the U.S. definitely has a BIG debt but it is a country of over 300 million folks and has the largest economy in the world. Maybe a better comparison of debt would be to use a Percentage of GDP approach. With that approach and according to this 2011 CIA Fact Book estimate the U.S. is number 32 with plenty of western nations (mostly European nations) having a much higher percentage of GDP debt...and one wonders why Japan hasn't went belly-up yet with it HUGE percentage of GDP debt (maybe it's because the Japanese public holds much of the debt vs other countries). Thailand is number 78 on the list. No shortage of different debt rankings and ways to rank order the debt.

http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/world_debt/world_debt.html

The figures at the bottom of the page make interesting reading, showing total debt in comparison to economy (GDP)....

Only 3 countries listed here have a total debt exceeding the figures given for economy - US, Japan and Italy... clearly much of the bigger picture is lost with these sorts of statistics.

In regard to Japan's debt - Japan is a unique example. It holds a MASSIVE 225% debt to economy ratio. This is only possible because of loyalty of Japanese people to the Japanese government. Japan's people are the main buyers of Japanese government debt, and as long as they blindly buy the debt, and interest rates don't go up, they can practically run up the debt indefinitely.

This is all well and good but as you read on....The issues start when everyone starts wondering how they will get the money back. !!?!!

I think the same applies across the board - it's all well and good while there is an open ended source of credit and no one asks too many questions but how long can this go on? It's like a house of cards just waiting for one card to be removed and they'll all collapse...

It begs the question, how are the population of these countries expected to manage their own spending and debt when their nations can't?

The only responsible form of debt is a mortgage for a home because the alternative is paying rent. Even then, you need to choose modestly and weigh all factors.

If you cannot buy a car in cash than you cannot afford it.

Credit cards should never be used.

LMAO!

Hardly anyone on the planet pays cash for a car.

And thus the problem... I always remember the sage words of my old Grandpa, when buying a car ensure you have saved funds equal to twice the price for when it goes wrong.... if you don't stay on yer bike!

These words have served me well, I always pay cash for cars, get the best prices as a result and a "real" price at that, not having to add interest to the purchase price. With the incredible 2nd hand market in Thailand, this has led to over 10 years of virtually cost less motoring... we buy a car, use it for 2/3 years, then invariably sell it for nigh on exactly what we paid for it! Prices are ludicrously high, but if you play the system well that actually works in your favor.

Interest is often ignored when it comes to property, especially in the mortgages vs rent debate. When you calculate the actual amount paid taking into account 25 years of interest, in many cases house purchase becomes a nonsense and it would actually have been cheaper to rent long term! Of course again if you pay cash for property, you enjoy the same benefits as with a car, better purchasing power = a better price, and the price you pay is just that, not the agreed price + x amount of years of interest.

7 years in the same house here, having paid equivalent to 10 years rent to purchase land and house, paid in cash. If I'd mortgaged the same house over 20 years it would have cost me the equivalent of nearer 30 years rent.... then subtract any repairs, maintenance etc and it would have been a nonsense purchase. As it is, I am happy that we have saved money by buying, in another 3 years the investment would have paid for itself and if we sell the sales price is 100% profit, with the original purchase price writing off the rent...

"Thais would have to be among the most irresponsible people in the world regarding money."

Personally I would have thought that title should be reserved for the US http://www.usdebtclock.org/

No other country even comes close...

Generally a bit of a non story, figures are dubious in the extreme - 15 million families surveyed? That's stretching the imagination somewhat!

Most Thais I know actually live to their means much better than their western counterparts, who are so accustomed to life in debt it's seen as normal... mortgage, car loan, credit cards, overdraft, store cards etc. You're seen as the exception to the rule if you're not in debt.

#29 said "anything that puts a dent in the profits of organised crime, and this is obviously the work of an international syndicate, is worth persuing"... well, if you really wanted to put a dent in organized crime then you would legalize it, because it's illegality is the only reason it's worth so much money. I'm surprised you couldn't figure that out.

Alcohol and cigarettes are legal, but people still illegally smuggle them, legalising will only solve part of the problem, if it is legalised a standard pricing structure will be established, but there will still be people wanting to pay less than retail, it will still be smuggled for that reason, and organised crime will still be involved.

Can you grow either in your garden? I suggest that it would be nigh on impossible for the powers that be to apply similar extortionate taxes to a product that could simply be grown by the consumer if prices/ tax were too high.

That remains the main reason that there is no incentive for the laws to be changed; as an illegal product the prices are high and revenues huge for those involved.

US learned alot from prohibition, creating a lucrative international trade in illegal drugs is a major earner on many sides; just look who benefits from the massive budgets created for the "war on illegal drugs"...

Legality would save the tax payer $billions but cost some very influential people/ companies those very same $billions... morality doesn't enter into it, this is basic maths.

Tom’ is a specifically Thai gender identity where lesbian women dress, act and speak in a masculine fashion

Surely "Tom" is just a common Thai abbreviation of the term "Tomboy" used widely to describe females that act or dress in a masculine manner. In my experience just because a Thai girl is labelled a "Tom" doesn't indicate that she's actually a practicing lesbian.

My wife's niece is a classic Tomboy, boys clothes, boys hairdo etc even to the extent of having feminine "girl friends". They're not actually indulging in a lesbian relationship, they are just teenagers having a bit of fun. Thais seem generally to be very accepting of this and similar deviations from the accepted "norm".

While I have the greatest sympathies with the victims and their families, I feel this article is just sensationalist BS starting with the OTT headline. In my experience the Thai BiB have a reluctance to investigate anything properly without financial motivation and don't limit their incompetence exclusively to lesbian murder cases as this article suggests....

55555,they're not actually lesbians yet How would you know,watch this space.I've been here a long time and seeing is believing.

errr.... quite, thanks for your constructive innuendo.

If she does indeed become a lesbian as she gets older then great, whatever floats her boat... as long as she's happy I'm quite sure her family and friends wouldn't be especially surprised or critical about it; that was the point of the post... In my experience Thais are generally very accepting of behavior different from the accepted "norm".

I know that many Thai's use the word Tom to describe lesbians in general, that's not to say that's correct use of the word, you may have noticed Thais often use many other western phrases incorrectly.... Let's face it Tom isn't a Thai name and boy isn't a Thai word, it's an adopted Western phrase often used incorrectly.

Another poster picked up on the fact that actually in the case of a lesbian couple where there's a masculine partner and a feminine partner, Tom is used to describe the partner fulfilling the "male" role and Dee is used to describe the more feminine partner... that indicates to me that Tom is actually referring simply to a masculine female not specifically their sexual preferences... let's face it how would you know unless you were their partner anyway?!

I'd also caution members that believe simply putting any question to their Thai partner makes them an authority on anything; I have over 10 Thai staff here at work, and I've just put the same question to each of them and had a whole range of totally different responses!

I think the real issue here is that this sensationalist BS article is suggesting that there is some sort of widespread anti-lesbian agenda in Thailand when clearly that's not the case, there's a just a fairly useless police force and a whole pile of unsolved crimes, of which only a tiny percentage actually have lesbian victims.

Incidentally do you realize that you've called yourself louse not Louise? Seems quite fitting given the way you latched onto my post like some sort of parasite!

Tom’ is a specifically Thai gender identity where lesbian women dress, act and speak in a masculine fashion

Surely "Tom" is just a common Thai abbreviation of the term "Tomboy" used widely to describe females that act or dress in a masculine manner. In my experience just because a Thai girl is labelled a "Tom" doesn't indicate that she's actually a practicing lesbian.

My wife's niece is a classic Tomboy, boys clothes, boys hairdo etc even to the extent of having feminine "girl friends". They're not actually indulging in a lesbian relationship, they are just teenagers having a bit of fun. Thais seem generally to be very accepting of this and similar deviations from the accepted "norm".

While I have the greatest sympathies with the victims and their families, I feel this article is just sensationalist BS starting with the OTT headline. In my experience the Thai BiB have a reluctance to investigate anything properly without financial motivation and don't limit their incompetence exclusively to lesbian murder cases as this article suggests....

Wow are you naive!

Care to clarify that comment or even attempt to contribute constructively?!

One year batteries are a very bad idea, and show poor craftsmanship and a planned obsolescence curve that will cost the government a HUGE amount of money annually. Worst, how are 12 service centers going to supply 900,000 batteries NEXT year and each subsequent year?

Tablets are a good idea. Shenzhen is NOT.

Scrap the bid, reopen it to other companies, let Shenzhen eat dirt.

Tablets are a bad idea. Can you tell me WHAT tablet manufacturers offer a STANDARD battery warranty longer than 12 mths.

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

Quite why you'd be interested escapes me, given your in depth, critical assessment of tablets much akin to Mr Mackey's line on drugs "Tablets are bad m'key!".

Clearly consumers don't agree with you, with over 20 million tablet sales in the 1st quarter of this year alone!

According to Forrester Research, tablets are rapidly becoming the primary device of choice for millions of people around the world. Sales of tablet computers in 2016 are predicted to hit 375 million, and 760 million tablets could be in use worldwide. Compared to the 56 million tablets purchased worldwide in 2011, that’s a compound annual-growth rate of 46 percent.

Every major tablet player will offer a 2 year warranty on the batteries if desired but 1 year is standard.... much the same as virtually every other portable electronic device on the market... you could apply the same question to laptops used in schools.

http://eee.asus.com/eeepad/transformer-prime/features/

For all you technophobes, IMO the future looks something like this but running windows 8... bringing the best aspects of tablets and laptops together.

As to tablets in Thailand's schools? In a perfect world yes, in reality no... I would love to see priority given to improving teacher/ student ratios, quality of teachers, internet access, facilities, some focus on exercise and sports - this in particular is woeful in Thailand, the link between being physically and mentally fit seemingly lost here.

Yes, iPad changed the game, yes, Androids are not the same as clunky WinXp tablets of 2005, but there's no proof that these new device adoption will be any more lasting.

Sales figures and trends would dispute that, with tablet sales set to top 760 million devices by 2016... sales figures for this year alone look set to reach 120 million.

There was a similar reluctance to implementing computers in schools originally, just watch this space... also the distinction between laptops and tablets are going to become pretty irrelevant with the arrival of Windows 8 tablets with integrated keyboard docks IMO.

Please check my posts, I haven't suggested once that the "el cheapo Chinese devices" and the way in which the Thai government are implementing this scheme is correct, in fact the opposite.

"Maybe one school somewhere managed to use iPads for a couple of years" If that's what you think it demonstrates only that you are very out of touch! There are currently over 1.5 million iPads being used in education in the US alone... and that's ignoring Android and the vast numbers of privately owned tablets used for educational purposes.

Throughout history we have seen a knee jerk reluctance by some to embrace new technologies and trends, be interesting to see how this thread reads in 10 years time!

For anyone genuinely interested in the subject of tablet PCs in education, rather than simply using this thread as an excuse to further your ridicule of Thailand's political & educational systems or direct insults at other TV members, please try actually researching the subject:

http://dera.ioe.ac.u...tpcs_report.pdf

http://www.pcworld.c..._to_school.html

http://c9s.e2bn.net/..._literature.pdf

http://ctl.sri.com/p...p?Nick=tabletpc

So contrary to what many have posted here, it seems this whole concept isn't unique to Thailand and is actually seen as beneficial to education if implemented correctly. These studies range from UK to US to Singapore... and there's a common trend in the findings... if you care to take a break from spouting off and actually read them...

Personally I prefer to base my opinions on multiple studies performed by educational bodies than a few bitter old TV members who are clearly very backward in outlook and resistant to change.

If we were all so blinkered in our views we'd still be routinely burning witches...

Yeah, the common trend is that all these projects are seven-eight years old and since long have been abandoned, no matter how glowing the initial results were.

I think it's disingenuous to present these studies as a "proof of concept", hoping that no one would actually read them and wouldn't notice that in the long term all these projects look like failures.

Of course you can't see the reasons from the initial assessment presented here but it's not difficult to guess - need to upgrade the costly devices every couple of years, for example. Or that the interest in any gadget tapers off after a couple of months and without that initial extra motivation they are not as beneficial as in the beginning. Or that they don't comfortably integrate into the existing educational eco-system and require a lot of extra work from teachers without reducing their burden in any other areas.

In the end the negatives outweighed the positives and I see no reason why Thai project will turn out any better.

It's highly misleading to suggest that these projects have been "abandoned"; these were case studies conducted 7-8 years ago. My point being that this is hardly a new idea unique to Thailand; the concept has already been studied and case studies performed, years ago. The findings of which, contrary to your post, were generally favorable.

When you consider the advances that have been made with these devices over those 7-8 years, you'd be wrong to think these aren't already changing the ways students research information and the impact they have already had on the education system; whether the actual tablets are personal items or rolled out by the educational bodies.

1.5 million ipads are already being used in education in the states, according to Phil Schiller http://www.ipadinschools.com/ this number is only set to increase.

Intel have release the studybook, a tab aimed purely at the educational sector.... http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/04/10/intel.reveals.specs.of.tablet.for.schoolchildren/

http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/the-verizon-foundation-powers-maryland-schools-with-android-tablets-2012021/

http://mashable.com/2011/05/16/tablets-education/

Things have moved on a great deal in terms of the devices available... 7-8 years ago did you know anyone with a tablet? Only the introduction of the iPad made these devices mainstream.... that was in 2010, years after the studies I posted.

If you took the time to actually research this properly you would see that since the original case studies performed all those years ago, the numbers of schools and universities using such technologies and the number of schemes proposed are on the increase in a major way.

I suggest that once windows 8 is released with the ability to use legacy software on tablets with mouse and keyboard, this is set to dramatically change education methods globally....

That said I fully agree the scheme that we see in Thailand is fraught with issues and looks set for disaster. That's not to say the concept isn't sound, it just needs to be implemented in the correct way, with the correct devices.

...

You'll find I am actually sympathetic to Thailand and neither political party. All that separates them for me, is that one is supported by the majority of the population, the other isn't. Ignoring that indisputable fact leads us down a very slippery slope...

...

I'll dispute that "fact". They aren't even supported by a majority of the voters.

Sorry, did I miss another election or are you simply nitpicking? They weren't elected by the people of Thailand?

the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

...and they would have got probably the same result without Thaksin's violent riots, just a little later, and the much-discussed dead people, whom probably nobody will be held accountable for, would likely all still be alive today.

Thaksin's violent riots were absolutely unnecessary. He is the main instigator and he should be the one to be held accountable. But with some deal-making ("cash and contracts") everything will be settled and "reconciled". Most of the dead victims' families have been subdued accordingly with large cash payouts from the treasury (when it really should come from Thaksin himself).

So even though Abhisit supports investigations into the deaths, it's more likely that they'll be called off, for the sake of "reconciliation" and to "move forward".

Sadly we'll never know, but the fact is the party he is sympathetic towards is now in power while his seized assets, which many would have us believe were the only reason for the protests/ riots/ insurgency (pick one that sits best with your take on the events), have not been returned.

If this is correct, it would seem he has been unsuccessful in his aims and the fact that the Thai people have finally been permitted to elect their preferred party into power is purely an accidental bi product... incredible stuff!

The suggestion that they should have meekly waited a mere 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to have a democratically elected Government is ridiculous.

I wonder if the citizens of UK, US or Australia would be happy to see the military install their own PM/ President against the wishes of the majority of the population and then idly sit back and wait 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to elect their own?

I appreciate why the reds didn't much like the way that Abhisit came to power, and why they considered some of the "wranglings" that made it possible, undemocratic, but the fact was, Abhisit was the legitimate and legal leader of the country, and if they opposed the alleged interference of outside parties in the voting of him by MPs, why did they not oppose the alleged interference of outside parties in the voting of Somchai? Why? Well because in the case of Somchai, it was their beloved on the run criminal who was doing the interfering, and in their book, this sort of interference is fine and dandy. So what you have is people not fighting for democracy, but simply fighting for their side to be in power. Please stop suggesting otherwise. You might fool some people outside of the country who have but a fleeting interest in Thai affairs, but most of the people on this forum who live in Thailand know your argument to be a complete nonsense.

More blatant hypocrisy on display. I guess only one side is allowed to question what is legitimate or not? That sounds entirely democratic to me...

Just because you surmise that "what you have is people not fighting for democracy, but simply fighting for their side to be in power" doesn't make it factual and totally ignores the most recent election in Thailand, where the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

"But they demanded early elections, elections that they would have got anyway if instead of protesting, they waited just another 1.5 to 2 years, which is an insignificant amount of time in the bigger scheme of things."

Throughout history people have fought and died trying to gain the "privilege" of democracy. It's quite clear that many attach some considerable value to this idea, although obviously not too many here...

Very good point of you. But what you don't want to understand that the BJT and Democratic Party's coalition come forth through a completely normal democratic process. They formed a majority and in a democracy, and I am sure you agree, it's the majority that should rule!

By the way, you know that Thailand is a constitutional monarchy, in which coalitions are formed and where the citizens do not directly elect a government in contrast to a two-party system such as in the US for example. Several European countries are constitutional monarchies as well.

It was hardly a clear cut democratically elected majority by the people though was it?!

As I understand it, he won a parliamentary vote having lost two such votes previously but "good fortune" saw both of the previous PMs removed, one for being on a cookery show and the other banned for 5 years for being on the executive board of the PPP.

Even the forming of the coalition came across as extremely dodgy, with rumors of alleged coercion by Army Commander General Anupong Paochinda, a move labelled the "Anupong-style coup".

What is blatantly clear in the whole fiasco that is Thai politics, is that until the various politicians and parties stop bickering and start acting in the best interests of the people, it's the people of Thailand that really suffer.

I make no judgement on whether his actions were correct or not at the time - what I pointed out was his actions were the opposite of what he demanded the government do while he was in opposition. Normal hypocrisy for a politician.

In his own words....

When reporters asked why Somchai still stayed on despite such a crisis, Abhisit said, ‘I have no idea. I have never seen a person like this. If he were a normal human of the kind that I know, it would not have been like this.’

Nor do I want to make judgments, cause what really happened we will probably never find out.

The situations are in my opinion not comparable.

In Somchai's case it was the police who clearly aimed tear gas canister at people, aimed at legs, clearly to kill and maim protesters. The police is part of the government this, so anyone in the opposition would demand responsibility of the PM. Seems logic.

In the 2010 case, it was the government who was initially under attack by armed insurgents and protesters. Do you remember the daily grenade attacks on government building and banks (that coincidentally held Thaksin's money)? Before things got really out of hand, Abhisit offered new elections, and then on April 10 the armed red militia pushed the envelop a notch of 10 too far!

Given that virtually every reference to any events prior to 2010 have been removed, it's a tad difficult for anyone to counter this!

That said I'd agree the situations were very different, but that doesn't excuse the hypocrisy displayed by the conflicting sentiments expressed back then as opposition, then by his actions as PM, and then by the current sentiments expressed in the OP.

You'd be forgiven for thinking these were actually made by 3 entirely different individuals going by the same name...

"But they demanded early elections, elections that they would have got anyway if instead of protesting, they waited just another 1.5 to 2 years, which is an insignificant amount of time in the bigger scheme of things."

Throughout history people have fought and died trying to gain the "privilege" of democracy. It's quite clear that many attach some considerable value to this idea, although obviously not too many here...

The suggestion that they should have meekly waited a mere 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to have a democratically elected Government is ridiculous.

I wonder if the citizens of UK, US or Australia would be happy to see the military install their own PM/ President against the wishes of the majority of the population and then idly sit back and wait 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to elect their own?

As to the selective deletion of various posts, making references to past statements and events; IMHO when assessing the truth and accuracy of any political statement the natural process is to compare this to previous statements made by the same individual.

I'd suggest that this is entirely relevant given the varying stances taken with regard to the varying positions held. The blatant hypocrisy on display is alarming and very pertinent to this thread.

"... in defence of Markaew, representative democracy does work ... really ... elected representatives do generally reflect he values of the majority of the constituency that selects them.

... you have to exclude examples as slime ball Americans President Richard Nixon, or Senator John Edwards, since they deceived their constituency to win their votes ... but, Thai politicians? ... c'mon ... jeez, there is hardly any question as to their deep corruptness ... Thai voters know that ... they accept it (in overwhelming numbers [70%+/-], as documented by ABAC polls year after year) ... they elect them anyway.

... what is an observer of human nature to conclude about the average Thai of voting age? ... representative democracy works ... it really does ... while there are certainly exceptional individuals amongst the average, generally painting the majority of a constituency with the same color as the representative they elect is quite reasonable.

... incidentally, as Markeaw, I do not live here insulated in the glorious oblivity of a farang cocoon ... I get Thai cultural values very up-close and personal (and I go nowhere near the thousands of brothels that infect this deeply troubled nation) ... emersed in Thais ... for 12+ years now ... that is the only way a farang might 'get it', and then only after several years ... so, take your best shot Ferangled, or move along."

Yet again you have failed to actually pick up on the content of any of my posts, failed to actually reply to anything I've written... and just launched on a rant about representative democracy... take my best shot?! At what?! What are you blithering on about?! Did you even read my post? I was directly replying to this:

"The problem here is you don't get out enough among average Thais and your eyes are glazed over with denial. They are quick to scam and leach money/beer/possessions/food at every opportunity. By the way, I don't live in Bangkok and I live among the Thais."

I disagree with the sentiment expressed by Markaew that your average Thai is purely out to scam and leach money, beer, possessions and food at every opportunity. You it would appear support this grossly distorted generalization...

This is certainly not representative of the average Thai in my experience... your experience is clearly different, again I'd suggest that you question why it is that you promote this response from people, when clearly many others don't. Please support your statement rather than changing the topic entirely and making assumptions about my lifestyle.

It would appear to me that you have had some bad experiences and are making vast generalizations as a result. These views show more of your critically dysfunctional outlook on life and inability to connect with your Thai counterparts than they reflect on the outlook of your "average Thai"...

If you are indeed a parent that nurtures such a depressing view of the population of the country you reside in, I'd suggest you think long and hard about what's best for your children and not comment on what's best for others when you know nothing of their situation. To attempt to raise children in what you perceive as such a dangerous and flawed environment is sheer lunacy.

Please try to defend your views without making wild assumptions about others. As for picking up on your basic grammatical mistakes Markaew, seems pretty relevant to me given this is a thread about education and you are putting yourself forward as an authority on this and parenting. Perhaps you should return to school and learn basic spelling and grammar before expecting people to take your views on education seriously....

Why am I not surprised that you chose only to comment on that small part of my response, and, yet again, failed to answer any of the actual content? I guess it was such a "weak argument" that you struggled to compose a literate response...

So what you are saying is if anyone disagrees with you then their opinions are “grossly distorted generalizations” have “critically dysfunctional outlook on life”, and an “inability to connect with your Thai counterparts”. And your comments about “Please try to defend your views without making wild assumptions about others” is exactly what you are guilty of. You apparently do not have room for other people’s opinions and you dismiss them as dribble. Quite frankly, I am surprised that you have survived in Thailand at all because of your rigid attitude because Thais generally will not accept that approach. I am guessing by your uninformed display I would say you do not work with Thais, you do not have a Thai supervisor, you don’t have a job, you have not been in Thailand very long, or you are incredibly bitter about something else altogether.

I do not make generalizations about a single event or episode. I make my comments from years of experiencing Thais in Bangkok and in poorer provinces (where I live now). I have found Thais are very consistent with their behavior and if my perspective seems to reflect a negative view of that behavior then that is what I perceive. They are consistent in management, their approach toward foreigners, and how they live their lives, so it’s easy to make a comment about Thais that is inclusive of all Thais.

I make comments in this forum to help others not to look at Thailand through rose colored glasses because if they do, they will disappointed and broke in short order. Also, I look at other poster’s comments and try to learn from their experiences. You should try to do the same.

You clearly have deep seated emotional issues and are unable to comprehend what a "gross generalization" you made. You say you don't make generalizations and then go on to do just that... it appears I don't have to contradict you because you do a good job of that yourself.

As I've pointed out a number of times, my experiences have led me to believe that making wild generalizations about people are ill advised and I don't agree with trying to attribute an average outlook to any group comprising of millions of different individuals.

There are bad elements in every society, it's a shame you can't see past that and feel the need to attribute that as a good indicator for the the entire population. I'm afraid that is your issue, not mine.

And not that it's any of your business but I have lived here for a considerable amount of time, am very happy, have my own company here and a significant number of Thai employees, most very trustworthy, hardworking and honest. In over 10 years here no one has ever stolen from me, broken into my car or my house.

I have a number of good Thai friends, none of whom have tried"to scam and leach money/beer/possessions/food at every opportunity."

Like I've said before, these views show more of your critically dysfunctional outlook on life and inability to connect with your Thai counterparts than they reflect on the outlook of your "average Thai". There's good and bad in every society, but it appears you can't see the good for the bad. That's a crying shame. Perhaps you didn't get enough hugs from your parents, who knows!

I wish you and your family the best of luck in living life in your current paranoid, delusional state, enjoy. Just don't expect everyone to share your distorted outlook on life...

Claiming that this isn't hypocrisy just demonstrates blatant bias. It's convenient for your stance to label one protest as peaceful and another as armed insurgency.

The facts however would dispute your carefully chosen words:

More than 90 people, mostly civilians, were killed and nearly 1,900 wounded during the 2010 rallies

Digest that fact then consider these words...

"Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people."

If you really can't see the hypocrisy in that statement, given the events of 2010, you are being entirely selective with your reasoning.

The PAD did not use or had grenades, rocket launchers, armed militias, LPG tankers, blood collections, hospital raids, killing of radio hosts, attack of army personnel and take their tanks and weapons, attack army barracks, steal corpses (evidence) from hospitals, attack rallies of those with an other opinion, attack gay parades, threaten people in villages to vote for certain political party, kill soldiers near Democracy Monument .....................should I go on!

Name 1 country in the world, without functioning riot police where eventually the army would not step in!

Did I suggest they did? I only commented on the blatant hypocrisy on display. Sorry if that upsets you but it's true, your rant does nothing to address that.

It's very easy to be critical as the opposition but not so easy to apply that same criticism to yourself when in power.

Calgaryll are you back?

See what I mean?! What a way to prove a point! Label me as your arch nemesis Red supporter because I dare to suggest that Abhisit is guilty of hypocrisy. I dare to say even the man himself would be able to accept that as part and parcel of Thai politics...

Can you not see through your bias and realize that statement cuts both ways? It applies to both sides of the political spectrum, try reading it again:

"It's very easy to be critical as the opposition but not so easy to apply that same criticism to yourself when in power."

This could easily be applied to a number of PT MPs, who are themselves now finding that it's not easy to run a country without attracting criticism from the opposition.