Plus

I think I had Linux for half a year now.

Is it too fast?

There was a story of the impact of US sanctions on jewellry trade.

Some 85% of all stones from Burma are sold by small businesses, and they are the ones that are severely affected because Thailand, the world's biggest ruby trading center, can't sell the jewellry to the biggest clients anymore.

So those small traders are either going bust or selling their stones to Burmese government, which is very thankful because now it gets more business than ever.

Right now there's evaluaiton of that policy going on, with several US representatives travelling in the border areas to see the impact for themselves. Hopefully this policy is going to be reconsidered once they submit their reports.

It is virtually impossible in China or Thailand for an individual or family to go from pauper to wealthy in one or two generations.

How about Surayud who rose from a son of a communist killed in a fight with the state to a Prime Minister's position, or Privy Councilor, allegedly pulling the strings behind the coup.

Or how about Thaksin being forced to sell coffee in front of his house to make the ends meet.

The fact is - Thailand is full of success stories.

The most expert and tuffest of US Army soldiers were walking around wearing caps that had "Made in China" tags inside them. Bush cancelled that contract.

I think you got it all totally wrong. Those caps were made in Burma.

That's how the story got in the news in the first place - for the Burma connection.

I was reading ubuntu forums and came across this one hundred fourteen page thread (yes, 114) on whether Linux is better than Windows, and, so far on page 9, I still haven't encountered ONE single abusive post.

Come to think of it, I've never seen an abusive post on any of Linux forums.

Sure, Linux is a struggle, but I'm so much happier to go through it with these people than with any of the i-fans or generic (pirate) Windows crowd.

Sorry I was too IQ-challenged to join in earlier, that's life, you don't get to choose your parents (or preferable operating system).

What can Windows do that Linux can't

Disclaimer - happier doesn't mean easier.

police state n. A state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic, and political life of the people.

merriam webster: a political unit characterized by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures

Wikipedia: The term police state describes a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive.

The inhabitants of a police state experience restrictions on their mobility, and on their freedom to express or communicate political or other views, which are subject to police monitoring or enforcement. Political control may be exerted by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional state.

It fails to mention the democratic legitimacy of such state.

What if the majority of citizens support it?

This is the question that could be asked regarding Thai LM laws, too.

Lip service to democracy and human rights.

Yes, Obama is well accepted, but he is accepted for his image, not for his actions or achievements (of which there are none, btw, internationally). He has yet to walk the talk.

Yes, Clinton was well accepted in Asean, a big hit. She sold them the new US image.

What I am saying is that when it comes to actually doing something that image needs to be backed up by real commitment, and I don't see anything specific from Americans yet. They might come up with something in the future, there's still time, but so far it's nothing.

She'd be happy to see Asean expelling Burma. Is she nuts? That would be a fuc_king revolution, it's just not going to happen no matter what. Clinton expressing this desire publicly just shows she has no clue how these things work here. It's either that or she is playing some very clever game.

Of course if any changes are to happen, they must happen in the mind first. The US got that far. But after that there are two scenarios - it either works or you realise you've been conned. I don't know if it's 50/50 now. The things we've been promised are just too good to be true. As much as I want to see Asean getting tough on Burma, I'm weary it won't work out. It's the US last chance, their credility will be destroyed forever if they don't back up their promises.

Why didn't they bring up the land case to sue him before 2549 coup?

Who is they?

Both the police and public prosecutors are appointed by the government. They are not in the position to risk their careers and try to prosecute their boss.

National Counter Corruption Commission, the only agency capable of dealing with politicians, was undermined when TRT controlled senate appointed pro-government commissioners. They were in the job for a couple of months before being convicted of corruption, of all things, for awarding themselves illegal payraises. So there was no NCCC for a long while, even Thaksin controlled one.

Also, in those days Thaksin denied any connection to the deal, which made him legally immune. It was only after a whistle blower from a bank came up with a copy of Thaksin signed document that he became liable for prosecution. Why that whistle blower didn't go public while Thaksin was in power? Well, there was a case of "Shipping Moo" who was killed just as he was about to testify against Shin Corp, and there was Muslim layer who was abducted in the broad daylight by the police. The whistle blower had all the reasons to be worried about his/her own safety. It is possible that his/her name still haven't been disclosed.

It is impossible to write a law that covers all aspects and details of posting stuff on the Internet. I think it's more reasonable to leave it to judges discretion.

The site owner kept someone's private pictures for two months despite objections. If it was a few hours in the middle of the night it would have been a different story. Use your discretion.

As for graffiti on a house - if someone hacked into your side and defaced it, you are not supposed be liable. Again, it's up to the police and the judge to decide if the site was really hacked by third parties.

As for registrations and terms of use - that's an agreement between the owners and the users, it's absolutely meaningless to the state.

I hope the police are reasonable and if the owner didn't get a chance to see the pictures he wouldn't have been prosecuted.

If, however, he allowed them stay, he's liable.

In case of Prachatai, as I remember, the owners were charged after not removing LM stuff for quite some time, possibly months.

Just what does it mean - "confined to the Office of the Army Secretary for seven days"?

Does it mean she'll have to stay in her office all day with no chance of sneaking away for all her other jobs?

Back to Clinton. There's second part of her interview published today. She answered a few questions about China as well.

The way I see her - she simply carries the american torch that was given to her - make all the necessary noises about human rights, Tibet, defence of Taiwan etc but move on trying to cooperate in all the other areas.

In short - pay lip service, bank on Obama's popularity.

Eventually it's going to backfire on the US image abroad, perhaps even worse than Bush' years - at least he was straight about what he wanted.

You cannot both have and eat the cake.

Thaksin/reds accept the rules on when they are on the winning side. As soon as they lose, they throw the book out.

They want to scrap 2007 constitution, but not if there's a chance of winning snap elections.

Huawei are the new suppliers for the likes of Ais, Dtac and Cat, and they used to have Nokia, Ericsson and Siemens bidding for contracts. Doesn't matter if Huawei ripped off/reverse engineered someone else's original designs. They are here now, and they are going to stay.

Chinese will certainly not become a global financial player any time soon, I said they might/will get their own financial houses to support bilateral trade with their vassal countries, and it is going to be a huge chunk of a total market.

If there are no sand storms here in Thailand why is your head entrenched up your anus...

Very clever, and so pro-Thaksin. I'm convinced.

>>>>

There will be no surprise. Thaksin is simply building anticipation for his 60th birthday, being the fifth twelve year old cycle, it's very important, he needs everyone's attention, he needs to validate his importance.

"Fighting for the resources" doesn't mean actual wars, it will be a hot political war over disputed areas.

Both China and the US will fight for loyalty from smaller nations, to keep them as steady suppliers or as markets for their expanding companies. Huawei, for example, has made great inroads in Thai telecom market, though at the epxense of European, not American companies.

It's just a matter of time before they start stepping on American toes, too.

Or just wait until they start pushing their financial services. It would make sense if some Bananistan trade with China is financed by Chinese, not American banks.

I agree that Asean is not that important to either countries, but when it comes to votes either in the UN or WTO, Asean will count a lot.

Publicus, ordinary Chinese might be not interested in Thailand, it doesn't matter much, they do not set Chinese foreign policies.

>>>

As for giving the finger to your best customer - the US wants some actions in several areas, from IP to human trafficking, and Thais want reduced tariffs in return. If they get frustrated trying to satisfy US demands and come across some generous Chinese offer to make up for lost business - what do you think their reply to the US would be?

US tightening of sanctions on Burma hit Thai jewellry exporters very hard, for example. Being "democratic" might cost some serious money to Asean, that's why I say the US should bring really big carrots if it wants to see political pressure on Burma.

Groongthep, if you want to argue that Thailand has no chance of success in doing business with China - it's a big topic for another thread.

If you want to say they haven't been trying - you are plain wrong. There have been counless articles and interviews about it. The Nation even run a special weekly "China economy" supplement for a while, and in some schools they introduced mandatory Chinese lessons because that's where they see their future.

If you want to argue that the US has nothing to worry about its influence in Asean because China is not attractive to them anyway - it's a matter of opinion, and yours goes very much against the general trend.

I'm having a hard time understanding how you came up with these assumptions from what I wrote in my posts. Where exactly did I infer that Thailand had no chance of success in doing business with China? China is a great market for Thai agricultural products such as rice, tapioca, fish and as a source of tourists but it is not a good market for Thai manufactured goods. China competes with Thailand on a world wide basis for sales of manufactured goods. Until Thailand can produce manufactured goods of similar quality at cheaper prices than the Chinese, China will continue to be the preferred place for the rest of the world to buy these products and for their domestic market as well, all to the detriment of Thai and other ASEAN producers. Please don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say.

Nowhere did I say that they were not trying. Where did that assumption come from? CP sells lots of processed food in China and I'm sure there are other Thai companies doing well there too, but for the most part the Chinese see ASEAN countries as a place to sell their products not so much as a place from which anything but raw materials and maybe a few specialty items can be purchased.

Completely taken aback by your last paragraph. In your original post you were the one who inferred that ASEAN countries might disregard the North American market and just sell their cars, computers and toys in China instead. All I said was that it didn't make any sense. I never said that the ASEAN countries wouldn't love to improve trade with China, but why would ASEAN countries forsake a proven profitable market that they already have? The Nation's articles about the Chinese economy mostly hinge on hopes that China, with it's robust economy might pick up the slack in investing in Thailand where Japan, America and the EU has dissipated. They're teaching Thai kids to speak Mandarin so that they may become desirable employees if the Chinese decided to set up operations here not so that they go to China and set up Thai factories there.

Back on topic, your original post to which all this refers back to implied that Hillary Clinton was here to do some arm twisting. All news reports have shown no evidence of any such thing. In fact they reflect just the opposite. Your post seemed to imply that China and the US were somehow diametrically opposed to one another and involved in some sort of neo cold war. It was and is my contention that the two basically cooperate quite well together. China has been of some help in trying to disuade North Korea from nuclear proliferation. With the exception of China's irritation over America's constant criticism of their human rights record (which I admit, has been rather hypocritical at times but is done mainly to appease domestic political factions) and America's support of an independent Taiwan, China and the US have friendly relations for the most part especially in light of what they where like just 30 years ago.

I can't follow all this "he said, she said" - suddenly there are unsaid distinctions between manifactured and agricultural goods with further raw/processed and exports/investments branching out even further, all exploding into hundreds and hundreds of words.

My point is that Asean is steadily coming under Chinese sphere of influence, first economically, then politically. It was in part because the region was abandoned by the previous US administration, but now this trend is irreversible. The fact is that Asean foreing policies will have to be run by China first. If the US wants something to be done over China's objections, it should bring carrots, lots of them.

Hillary promised reinvigoration of the US-Asean ties, fine, but I just don't see it. Which way would it go? Americans don't have any particular interests here.

The only subject of interest and controversy is Burma, and this is where she doesn't have any political leverage over Asean and I don't see how she can get any. I, frankly, don't think the US cares about Burma very much, they've got enough foreign conflicts on their hands already.

There's no cold war, yet. However it is inevitable that China and US will eventually start fighting for all kinds of resources, the Earth is not infinite.

Please keep your good faith that Thailand is better off with the Democrat Party compared to Taksin.

Well, there are no coups, the government is not blocked from doing its job, and the situation appears to be stable.

Reds have tried to create havoc and destabilise the government but the didn't succede and there's near zero chance of repeating their April performance.

What would happen if Thaksin was suddenly re-installed, breaking all the laws and rules and over opposition from the military, elites, middle classes, PAD etc etc?

That would be a nightmare.

I think it's really easy to decide which government would be better for Thailand at this point.

Reminds of Michael Scott, the boss the The Office TV series (US). He had great many surprises for his staff.

Any of our resident Thaksin lovers are going to walk around with Thaksin's mask themselves?

IE6 works on wine? I should try it out.

If only they had a solution for .net platform...

"We're grateful that we have a wonderful relationship with the military in Thailand, because we want to be ready to disaster assistance or any other cisis that may occur", she said in an interview with Suthichai Yoon yesterday.

There were Chinese riots in Bangkok, very long time ago.

Most Thai Chinese here (or in Malaysia for that matter) don't have any affiliation with China as a country, only as a culture.

In Thailand the integration and dedication are remarkable. Even those "Thai Chinese to save the country" t-shirts are remarkable, despite their nationalistic innuendoes. I mean, if you talk about chovinism - it seems in Thailand the "immigrants" are at the forefront.

Groongthep, if you want to argue that Thailand has no chance of success in doing business with China - it's a big topic for another thread.

If you want to say they haven't been trying - you are plain wrong. There have been counless articles and interviews about it. The Nation even run a special weekly "China economy" supplement for a while, and in some schools they introduced mandatory Chinese lessons because that's where they see their future.

If you want to argue that the US has nothing to worry about its influence in Asean because China is not attractive to them anyway - it's a matter of opinion, and yours goes very much against the general trend.

They've attacked Democrat leaders in the North quite a few times, and I'm confident they will do it again. It must be intimidating for Democrat campaigners, they don't get national coverage like Chuan if they get into trouble.

Abhisit has all the rights to demand the end to intimidating political opponents to have any meaningful elections. It's not Zimbabwe (yet).

>>>

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

Family is ready for Yingluck to lead Pheu Thai Party

By Thanitaya Thanapisutkul Naya Jaikawang

The Nation

Published on July 23, 2009

The call for the return of Thaksin Shinawatra is growing louder every day from the red shirts. Payap Shinawatra, Thaksin's younger brother, talks about his family's feelings on Thaksin's fate, and who should be Thaksin's political heir.

Q: How is Thaksin going to return to the country, with his back to the wall?

A: He will come back with the consent of people in the country, with legal consent. He will come back with pride.

Q: The most serious charge against him seems to be not being loyal to the institution of monarchy?

A: We are accused - but in fact we respect the institution. We know that we have to serve every member of the Royal Family. Because we are laymen, we do not know what we have done adversely to affect the monarchy. We can give our life to them, why are we accused of not being loyal?

Q: Do you discuss among the family why Thaksin faces such serious charges?

A: It is the karma of the family and the country. If the country is unfortunate because people in the country are divided, then it is the bad karma of the country. I want to ask: how it is possible that one man alone can bring glory or bring down the country?

Q: But he had the power as the country leader?

A: When he had the power, did he abuse it? It is true that power comes with responsibility and morality, but whoever has the power must use it firmly and absolutely. When Thaksin was in power, the country was in bad shape so he had to use power more resolutely, more than thinking of morality.

Q: Are the red shirts helping Thaksin for the karma he did by seeking a Royal pardon?

A: People who are petitioning have sympathy for him and realise his good deeds and competency and want him back to help solve problems facing the country. Personally, I want to put it as "seeking a Royal decision" so that problems are resolved.

Q: But what about the righteousness?

A: When there is a strong intention, the righteousness completely vanishes. Sometimes love and sincerity is above righteousness.

Q: Do you think if the move puts the pressure on the Royal power?

A: Those who love Thaksin want compassion and sympathy (to solve the problems) and want guidance to bring about peace in the country. If society only thinks of right or wrong, the country will continue to suffer. Compassion is above law.

Q: Do you think the Shinawatra family should lead the Pheu Thai Party?

A: Why not? Many parties are developing in that direction. We should look to see if that person can bring prosperity to the party and the country.

Q: The party will be criticised that it cannot exist without Thaksin?

A: You cannot deny that this party was born from Thakin who has brought it success. It is impossible to say that it has nothing to do with Thaksin.

Q: Reports have it that Thaksin has decided to have Yingluck (Khun Poo) lead the party. Is she suitable?

A: In terms of management, closeness and control over MPs, Khun Poo is suitable. In terms of popularity, Chalerm has it. But [when giving] a house, you give [it] to your children or family members.

Q: Some people said it is not worth it because the whole family will fall victim to politics.

A: If you want to play Songkran but you don't want to get wet, then don't play. There is hot, cold water, nice-smelling, and stinking water. If you are going to play, you have to accept it. There is no success without obstacles.

Q: Have you asked Khun Poo if she is ready to politically play Songkran?

A: If it is necessary, she has to.

Q: So the family still supports each other in politics?

A: We do not support our family to play politics because they have the same last name; but we look at qualifications: Who is strong? If it is our relatives, then we are proud.

Q: What is the party's direction on bringing Thaksin home?

A: We will point out his good deeds and mistakes. If his good deeds are more than his mistakes, he should be able to return to the country and be accepted by the people.

Q: That means Thaksin must come back without any charges against him?

A: Suppose I have one baht in debt, but 5,000 baht in cash. Since I have much more money than debt, you have to accept me, right?

Q: Will it affect the country's justice system?

A: No.

Q: So the court verdict is not sacred?

A: No, we have a process to make it correct. We must have a new verdict by allowing appeal. There are many ways out.

Q: His case went through only one court, so we have to amend the law for him?

A: Suppose your house has a hole, you will allow your house to collapse because of this hole? That is up to you. We should plug up the hole so we live peacefully. Who invented law? Man. Why should we attach or stick to the law that we write forever? [in] those days this law [might have been] right, but not today. Do you want change and improvement?

Q: Do you think the country will achieve national reconciliation, if Thaksin is allowed to come back without being found guilty of any offence?

A: Yes. Every problem will end. If we think of his ability and competency, problems surrounding him are small.

Q: If the Pheu Thai Party comes back to power, will the country achieve reconciliation?

A: I have no idea. If I have power, I will prostrate myself before Abhisit, asking him to join forces in making the country prosper. You do not need to make me part of the government, let me remain as the Opposition, but can we clear up some problems?

Q: Is this what the Pheu Thai Party want?

A: No this is my personal desire.

Q: Is there a chance the Pheu Thai Party [would] join the Democrat Party in the coalition government?

A: As the saying goes, water cannot be with fire - but in one person there is earth, water, wind and fire [all] together.

Q: What are the conditions?

A: I have no idea. Today we have to put out the fire raging in the country. If we continue to quarrel, the country will be destroyed.

Q: Are you confident the party will win the next general election?

A: Yes very confident. But I do not know whether we will be the government or the opposition. We may get more MPs by 30 per cent.

The Nation

I keep up with the news fairly well and I have seen no evidence whatsoever that any ASEAN country wants to integrate with China, except maybe Burma.

"It's the economy, stupid."

Chinese exports account for only 20% of their GDP so there's a huge domestic market to tap in by either exporters or investors. Taiwan and South Korea managed to keep their exports going by focusing on China instead of the West, (according to Pridiyatorn Devakula).

Anyway, the first accounts of Clinton visit are in. I think she managed to keep everyone interested without giving out any real carrots.

"Long standing relationships", "new chapter", "fresh commitment", bla bla bla - what's in it for Thailand?

I absolutely love her description of Thai politics as "spicy".