Plus

.

bonus question just for you. What is the reason behind that a by-election was hold in Surat Thani? Why the seat for the MP, the representative of constituency Surat Thani became vacant? Who is the the Ex-MP and who is the new elected MP?

i guess you don't know that. anyone else, who knows it without looking up for it?

Suthep resigned as MP after the EC put him on the list of people who hold shares in state concessionaires, "True" in his case.

The by-election was to fill that empty seat and Democrats put his relative in the race. Don't remember if it's a brother or brother in law.

Could the mods clarify the rules regarding posting articles from Bangkok Post?

I thought due to the copyright issues only a couple of sentences can be posted.

Has anything changed?

It would really be a boon because access to Bangkok Post archives is not free, it would be easier to search for them on Thaivisa if they are freely posted here.

Well with the Nation as a TVF partner I somehow think The Post allowing free access

and full posting to their competitor's web presence is a non starter.

So what's the deal now?

The full BP article was posted by Webfact, a moderator himself.

If not for that, I'd just think a newbie made a little mistake, BP articles have been clipped to comply with copyright before.

Would be nice if the rule was lifted, there are plenty of articles that I want to quote but can't access on BP site.

My take on this:

None of the politicians above need to be charged unless there is evidence their give instructions do perform actions that would lead to the outcome it had. They were more likely than not incompetent, not evil.

The ones that should be charged is the police officials that should know how their gear works and know what theit tactics will do if done - and yet ordered it.

The politicians would be the ones appologizing and stepping down to show backbone and moral responsibility for lacking any control - it's ineptitude, but not criminal negligence.

But as we know that most TRT/PPP/PT politicians (shared with many others too) lack any moral fiber, them stepping down or apologizing for anything is a slim chance.

Well, for one thing, there were some officers who were not charged, as NACC said they were only following orders. And Somchai, Chavalit and others were ruled to be responsible. NACC studied all the relevant documents and evidence for nearly a year. I guess they know a lot better who ordered what in the space of just few hours on that fateful day.

It's only the beginning, btw, the case should pass prosecutors scrutiny and some names could be dropped from the list, and some could be added. Attorney General's office is the next body that would check if Somchai really had not idea what was going to happen, as he claims now with a piece of blackened paper.

Could the mods clarify the rules regarding posting articles from Bangkok Post?

I thought due to the copyright issues only a couple of sentences can be posted.

Has anything changed?

It would really be a boon because access to Bangkok Post archives is not free, it would be easier to search for them on Thaivisa if they are freely posted here.

...Mr Sathit should reconsider, and refocus his criticism on the issues instead of on the interviewer.

Heh heh, I agree - why is that people at Mcot think that they should provide space for anti-government propaganda? Jom is just a messenger, problems at Mcot run deeper than him.

There were no empty hotels on New Years day.

There's a general decline in tourism worldwide, don't make a mistake of attributing all of it to the airport closure.

Yeah, condemnation from PTP MPs, right.

Who's first? That guy (Karun) who tried kick-boxing in parliament himself?

..

So, what's the deal with not paying bills by PTP? Do you think it will send a strong message for the future elections? Will they be able to increase their vote if they treat businesses who work with them like that?

SCB, owned by the crown property, prepared the sale of Shin Corp. And it was sold after a lot of pressure to sell it due to conflict of interest corruption.

Can you tell me what the jiggering of the tax law was? I have asked many, but never been able to get an answer.

I think there was a reshuffle of executives at SCB after that deal.

Tax was due on transactions that led to the sale, when the family consolidated all their shares in one account, two or three days prior to the sale itself.

Those transactions were done off market and had to be taxed.

Thanks, Rumford.

The quote is from six months ago and taken out of context.

"Community radio and television stations were popping up easฌily across the country, and many of them were used to voice political propaganda and instigate violence.

"So why do [the media] need freedom?" Satit asked."

You could read it if Satit asked whether ability to broadcast political propaganda is the underlying cause in demands for media freedom. That they actually want freedom of propaganda, which is not the same.

... no self respecting government in the world would have permitted an illegal occupation in a location like this?

Do you know what you are talking about? Aren't you confusing govt house occupation with Oct 7 crackdown at the parliament?

If you are talking about the parliament - Democrats allowed red to surround it as well and there was no bloodshed or any violent incidents, apart from some red idiots hurling huge rocks through passing car windows.

PAD has encircled the parliament at night, Somchai held an urgent meeting mentioned in Hammered's post. At that meeting the security measures were decided on.

Next morning the police moved in without any warning or negotiations with PAD leaders. They were firing tear gas into the crowd, sometimes indiscriminately, sometimes aiming directly at people. They didn't leave any exit routes for the crowd either.

Somchai and Chavalit are among those who ordered that first assault.

Then, after the first wave and reports of hundreds of casualties, people killed, people with severed limbs, the police attacked again, and that is reflected in NACC indictment, too.

After the morning fiasco Chavalit promptly resigned, btw, around noon.

Somchai's waving blacked out papers is inappropriate at this point - the case should be tried in court, not in media. It's too late to argue his innocence before the public. Is he going to do "Thaksin", too? Is he going to call the court a joke if he loses the case?

because thaksin got airtime at all PM's Office Minister Satit "So why do [the media] need freedom?" Wongnongtaey got gaga as usual.

read here what they think at the Bangkok Post about this http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion...d-press-freedom

Where did you get this quote from?

It's not in the BP article you linked. Are you, by any chance, putting your own words into Satit's mouth and then castigating him for that?

And Veera is being naive there - state media should not be broadcasting PR pieces for convicted fugitives who call the state judiciary a joke. Maybe Chom didn't break any particular laws, but so didn't Satit. Technically they are both clear.

The desire to free state media from govt propaganda doesn't mean that it should carry anti-government propaganda instead.

>>>>

A few weeks after the airport takeover most of the tourists were back for New Year holidays. The effect was short-lived.

..implication is that the illegitemate product of a military coup, and a junta appointed judiciary, is democracy, because american foreign policy says so.

Of course not.

They installed a government that for once listened to the people, ministers who were ashamed of stealing from the people, and parliament that represented the people.

And they didn't appointed judiciary. Post-coup Constitution Court was staffed with judges from other top courts, not military barracks, and top judiciary is NOT under army's boot - they get their own audiences and inspiration directly from the Head of State.

"They installed" is not good enough, certainly not a democracy there then.

Yeah, but that government is long gone while Thaksin inspired election fraud still lives on, under the guise of "democracy".

I don't see how publically saying something "undermines" the rule of law. It is the integrity of the courts and their historic decisions that do more to undermine their authority than anything else.

You are just being silly.

What does make a deeper impression on the public - a verdict that took nine hours to read and was televised a year ago or a remark "It's a joke" repeated over and over again.

And why do you think reds need to go to Sanam Luang rallies and listen how the courts are corrupt if they can make up their minds themselves?

Are you in denial of the existence of the power to persuade other people?

Why is it that reds need all sorts of red media? Don't they trust their own flock to see through the alleged propaganda?

maybe the PM should ask himself why the political influence of Mr. Thaksin is still so strong.

He knows it very well.

One part of the reason is that he has a free access to his faithful to present his side of the story and badmouth all his opponents. Now they look like a brainwashed mob speaking a totally different language and believing in totally absurd explanation of events.

Now Thaksin tried the same on state run media and any government should have stopped it.

The problem was not Thaksin's interview per se, it's the way he was allowed to present himself in a favorable light and without any challenges.

If, for some reason, he'd agreed to be interviewed by Yoon the way Abhisit was, perhaps Dems would be praising Mcot, not threatening it.

Bottom line - it was their sloppy job as journalists that brought the govt's rath, their own abuse of the trust people put in media professionals.

Jom and his bosses at Mcot were probably just testing the water.

They, of all people, know how to abuse their positions and cry about media freedom at the same time. These guys never ran a politically unbiased story in their lives.

Perhaps they thought if Democrats are not ordering to run any propaganda they can start working for the old boss.

Satit had to put them in place.

All this complaining about media freedom is for internet junkies consumption only.

You are talking about belief while being a proponent for the only repeated solution that is proven to not work.

That is usually the sign of a person with strong belief. Discard facts if they conflict with the belief, 'we are doing this anyway'.

I didn't invent the current reaction to the crisis. Don't pin it on me - there's a worldwide consensus, at least among people with real responsibilities, among policymakers.

It is absurd to call them all wrong because some dude on youtube says so.

The case was absolutely clear cut - Prime Minister and his family are prohibited from entering into any bidding contracts with the state.

It doesn't matter if the bidding was rigged, if the state was disadvantaged, if the state won or loss money on the deal - it just cannot be done.

Don't forget it took a coup and several months of investigations to prove only that much - he knew of his wife's transactions. The chance of uncovering and prosecuting all possible negative effects and transgressions in that deal is very very low, and impossible if Thaksin remained in charge.

That's probably why the law doesn't require proof of corruption, simply entering into the bidding is enough.

Thaksin would never agree to an interview with an honest journalist.

Whatever other guys wrote in his praise in WSJ or Economist is irrelevant.

Either substantiate that statement or withdraw it.

Don't bother.On the subject of journalism (long history of wild and often comically offbeat accusations) Plus isn't to be taken seriously which is a pity because he's interesting on some other subjects

Apart from getting personal and vague on specifics...

There were some interesting posts by Journalist on how these interviews and articles are produced.

Those posts rather confirmed my cynicism when it comes to international media.

Thaksin would never agree to an interview with an honest journalist.

Whatever other guys wrote in his praise in WSJ or Economist is irrelevant.

Either substantiate that statement or withdraw it.

On January 15, 2007 Dan Rivers of the Bangkok bureau chief for CNN had an exclusive interview with Mr. Thaksin. The military junta tried to block that broadcast.

That interview ? There were absolutely NO hard questions. "Were you involved with New Eve's bombing? No? That's good." "What were you doing when the coup happened? Where you surprised?"

http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=61394

Was Rivers dishonest then? It appears it was either softball or no interview at all. Hazards of profession.

The only time when Thaksin had run into unpleasant questions was after Songkran riots. He had to push his version and it backfired when it totally contradicted reports from Bangkok.

This is the politician who never in his political life agreed to a public debate with opposition members.

So, to call that latest phone in and "interview" is misleading - it was a promotional piece in the form of FAQ.

But not use them over the long term exclusively.

Or excludively, if it can be a word.

Liberal marketeers do not give it any credit, just like any aggressive Christian sect, and they believe theirs is the only correct way.

I'm not excluding liberalism towards the markets as an idea, don't get me wrong, it's just at this point majority of professionals think it's inappropriate strategy to deal with the crisis.

They might be all wrong.

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

Ofcourse you will not, because reading [an opponents views and forming your response to them] might make you enlightened and that is a risk you cannot take.

It's for the same reason I don't read mormon literature or UFO magazines. Do I risk losing my chance at enlightenment in those areas too?

I tried to listen to that "libertarian" dude on youtube thrashing Keynesian economics. His uncompromising, one sided stand and offer of simple explanations to complex problems argued by thousands of economists world over immediately reminded me of some Christian missionary.

No, thank you, I don't want to be enlightened.

I also won't dare comment on economic details. I trust professional opinions on this, and so far there's consensus that era of free marketism is over, at least for the foreseeable future. Eventually it will come back but it will always be back and forth struggle - too much regulation, too little regulation, and so on.

Honest journalist would have asked a lot more probing and challenging questions.

You have rubbished almost every foreign journalist commenting on Thailand, even sometimes to the laughable extent of suggesting they (Times, WSJ, Straits Times, Economist) are directly or indirectly on Thaksin's payroll.I'm just wondering whether any established journalist exists that meets your exacting criteria.

I have specified Foreign because most Thai journalists are not known for probing or challenging (or let's face it even bothering to fact check).

And for chrissake don't come up with Drummond or Crispin.

Thaksin would never agree to an interview with an honest journalist.

Whatever other guys wrote in his praise in WSJ or Economist is irrelevant.

..implication is that the illegitemate product of a military coup, and a junta appointed judiciary, is democracy, because american foreign policy says so.

Of course not.

They installed a government that for once listened to the people, ministers who were ashamed of stealing from the people, and parliament that represented the people.

And they didn't appointed judiciary. Post-coup Constitution Court was staffed with judges from other top courts, not military barracks, and top judiciary is NOT under army's boot - they get their own audiences and inspiration directly from the Head of State.

Americans were very supportive of a long list Thai military strongmen all through post-WWII history.

Sometimes it was a matter of convenience, sometimes a matte of alternatives, I guess.

Gen Surayud has an outstanding reputation, btw, in part for reorganizing and streamlining the military. He was also in charge when Americans started their war on terror.

"Democratic" army chiefs like Thaksin's brother-in-law will never be regarded anywhere as high.

In Thailand it seems "democracy" is the last shelter of every scoundrel and used extensively (if not exclusively) by crooks to cover up their corruption.

Webfact, I think you should leave that Mosha's info but with a disclaimer that it is unconfirmed.

Not everything is reported in English media and not every Thai story can be followed and verified. Some breaking news stories are withdrawn from publication, too.

Even if that report is a rumor - it gives a background to how elections are run and covered here and you shouldn't trust anybody reporting on them.

There are all kinds of wild accusations thrown around against rival candidates that never check out, too. They are all part of the overall story.