chownah

The party's use of Thai Rak Thai policies in its campaign is also included in the investigation report.

I don't know exactly what they mean by "use of Thai Rak Thai policies".....but starting from the assumption that this means that the PPP can not promote the same policies as the TRT....starting with this assumption then a theoretic arguement might be that if the TRT promoted respect for someone of very very high authority would it then be illegal for the PPP to have the same policy? What I'm trying to ask is....is it realistic to think that a policy should be barred from use by the PPP just because it was a policy of the TRT previously?...maybe this isn't what they are talking about.

Chownah

The concept of private ownership is that when one owns something one can sell it in the way that one chooses. If someone wants to determine the terms of some sale then someone should either get involved as a buyer or seller. Of course there is a third option...if someone could organise huge demonstrations that are disruptive of social order and do this every week for a series of months then the terms of the sale might be changed....or the people involved might be driven into exile at least even if the sale goes through.

chownah

Another way to look at this:

Suppose you are bald....that is a birth defect....this I guess is the result of kamma. Should one mourn this?....why? If your baldness causes you grief then this is the result of kamma. You probably can not fix your baldness (ok, with some new drugs you can at least temporarily hide it) but you definitely can develop the knowledge that allows you to stop having negative reactions to it. The same thing can be applied to a parent who has a bald child....should they mourn the fact?...they can not fix their child's baldness but they can develop the knowledge that allows them to stop having negative reactions to it.

Chownah

Would cut flowers come close?

You bet its possible - there are a couple of Dutch man up in Chang Rai who grow flowers in greenhouses (for the European market) - anyway, if I is not mistaken they are BOI reg'd and their monthly turnover is in the millions (of Baht).

Is this figure for cut flowers delivered to Europe...including cleaning, cutting, packaging, shipping to Europe and delivery to the market?

Chownah

Can we all please stop replying Silly-cha-cha-juan?

The posts will hopefully be deleted anyway and by enabling this sick individual we are perpetuating his illness.

Chownah

It's a very common thing to borrow money and use the land for collateral. HOWEVER, the second plot sounds suspicious to me. If it can be sold for 300,000 to 500,000, why doesn't her uncle sell it himself?

I think the uncle owes someone else 80k for the land, so he can't sell it. It seems like these loans don't actually give the title to the loanor, but some other paper indicating that the land can't be sold until the debt is paid. I reckon that's called a lien in faranglish? The idea of paying it off and then selling it was my halfbaked idea. She didn't seem that interested in it since she can't farm it without putting more money into clearing it.

Go with her to the bank and get a copy of the chanotes before you agree and let your friends look at them for you....you go with her...verify that the bank is holding them and that they are not in a lock box only with her holding the key....maybe have the bank official indicate which text it is on the back of the chanote which shows the transaction (I think it will be listed on the back but not sure).

Also, with a bank loan there should be some loan papers...or receipts for money alreay paid...or loan statements either monthly or yearly....have a look....

Chownah

the loans aren't from the bank, they are from individuals. the chanotes are at the bank. as you can see, it's all very confusing . i'm not clear how these loans are legalized, but my gf assures me that there is "paper" involved.

thanks for the replies

If there is paper involved then get a copy of the paper....if the loan has nothing to do with the bank then the chanote is just being held in someone's private lock box at the bank...in the US we call it a safetydeposit box...you know....the ones where it takes two keys...you have one and the bank has one and you go check in to access your box..there is a yearly fee.....I guess the chanote is being kept there....that's were we keep our chanotes and there is not money borrowed against them at all....so nothing unusual about that. If there is paper then look at the paper...get a copy...have your friends examine it for you...

If you do end up paying a sizeable amount of money to spring the chanote you might consider asking before hand if you could get a lease on it in your name...ask for 30 years..maybe let her negotiate you down to 15 years....or something......tell her its for tax purposes....ell her you want the land office to record it on the back of the chanote (this is how it is done when done correctly)....see what she says....

Chownah

I think if you planted teak trees and then waited about a hunderd years you could probably get 1.4 million baht per rai.

Chownah

OK then....I'm relieved....I thought someone was going to take a really big version of those wire things that chef's use and and whisk them into a frappe or something......I was going to ask you for a link or a reference or something to verify that they even had such big wire beater things available......so....thanks for the explanation.

Chownah

whisk

To move somewhere quickly; "The President was whisked away in his limo"

A frenchman giving English lessons to an englishman in Thailand.

The end is near.

whisk

verb - To beat with a quick light brushing or whipping motion to incorporate air and add volume, usually with a wire whisk. noun - A wire kitchen utensil used for beating food by hand

www.clabbergirl.com/Glossarypage.htm

I wouldn't argue with the clabbergirl unless you want to get clabbered....or whisked away in the middle of the night.

Chownah

So if we assume that there are likely to be rallies against the PPP created by the PAD. Does anyone have any idea what the outcome would be?

Another coup? Removal of the Parliament?

If people think that the PAD are some kind of altruistic idealists with only the good of Thailand at heart, I somehow think this to be far from the truth.

I think it is fair to say that there is wide disagreement on what the outcome would be. Some people think that the PAD can no longer attract large crowds or at least not large enought to force anything....some people think the crowds would be so large that either the gov't would be forced to change or the military would form another dictatorship...some people think the gov't would send the army to crush the demonstrations...some think the demonstrations would send the army to crush the gov't......if you've got a horse you should enter the race!

Chownah

Well if the outcome is so ambiguous, it would be best to hope that the PAD thinks very long and hard exactly how it wants to behave. The last thing the country needs is pictures of people on the streets being battered which I fear could happen this time.

I think its fair to say that everyone here hopes that the outcome will not include violence....except perhaps for Plus's internal representation of Samak who will be cheering the massacre.

Chownah

P.S. I really want to be sure that everyone knows that what I meant above is that Plus's internal representation of Samak is cheering the massacre...and NOT that Plus is cheering it...I think that Plus hopes for a non-violent outcome like the rest of us.

Chownah

"whisked away in the middle of the night" means "whisked away in the middle of the night".

You are the one suggesting execution by death squad.

Get lost.

I've had it with your personal insults.

Hello there Tony,

I also understood your "whisked away in the middle of the night"-comment to mean deathsquads. Most people will understand it that way, I think. Just who is doing the WHISKING, anyway? - what do you mean? - what were you trying to say???

-AG

Jeez!

If you read my original post, I said "I suspect quite a few, will be whisked away in the middle of the night and we'll wake up with another hours old coup one of these mornings."

Were there any death squads with the last coup? NO

Was anyone in government killed killed by the militrary? NO

In this context, whisked away means temporarily brought somewhere safely and quietly to neutralize the government in power at that moment.

OK then....I'm relieved....I thought someone was going to take a really big version of those wire things that chef's use and and whisk them into a frappe or something......I was going to ask you for a link or a reference or something to verify that they even had such big wire beater things available......so....thanks for the explanation.

Chownah

So if we assume that there are likely to be rallies against the PPP created by the PAD. Does anyone have any idea what the outcome would be?

Another coup? Removal of the Parliament?

If people think that the PAD are some kind of altruistic idealists with only the good of Thailand at heart, I somehow think this to be far from the truth.

I think it is fair to say that there is wide disagreement on what the outcome would be. Some people think that the PAD can no longer attract large crowds or at least not large enought to force anything....some people think the crowds would be so large that either the gov't would be forced to change or the military would form another dictatorship...some people think the gov't would send the army to crush the demonstrations...some think the demonstrations would send the army to crush the gov't......if you've got a horse you should enter the race!

Chownah

You can't publicly, on national TV, implicate royal family in 1976 events, or in any other events, for that matter. Giles knows very well that someone, anyone, HAD TO pull him off the air.

That's fine but what about the "fact" that "The Peoples’ Movement was poisoned by the P.A.D. leadership which dragged too many people into supporting the “yellow-ribbon” coup.".....or was Giles only speaking fact when he said something you agree with and only giving his opinion when he said something you disagree with?....or do you agree when I suggest it is a "fact".

Chownah

http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/20...racy/#more-2101

The link does not lead to the quote you give above.......it goes to some other Giles article.

It does. Scroll down to the fifth paragraph.

Samak wasn't the one who brought up October 6. It's one of the first questions of western any reporter unfamliar with Thai prcatice of dancing around this elephant in the living room. Samak just didn't handle it too well, especially during Al-Jazeera interview. Just an old man shooting off his mouth, no sign of intellegence or any other devious plans.

My mistake, indeed it does....also I found this there:

------------

"When I have tried to speak the truth about this I have faced censorship. Back in 2001, the Bangkok Post cut the section of my article which referred to the Palace and then tried to sue me when I complained. Recently, I was invited by ex-senator Chermsak to appear on a live T.V. programme about the 6th October on Mr Sonti’s A.S.T.V. channel. When I mentioned the role of all sectors of the ruling class, including the Palace, Mr Chermsak immediately received a phone call on his mobile from the owner Sonti. This is the same Sonti who was part of the Peoples Alliance for Democracy which complained that Thaksin had censored the media. I was not born yesterday and I know that the State and the business class control the media, but I never thought I would be lucky enough to see this kind of thing with my very own eyes."

-------------

It seems like this is saying that Sonti Liptonkul the chief of PAD censored his talk on ASTV.....I was surprised to find that!!

Chownah

Thaivisa would have had the same reaction had Samak posted that comment on here. Nothing wrong with Sonthi L. calling in and shutting Samak up because a very sensitive subject was mentioned by him. This is the tv station owner taking measures to avoid Lese Majeste or similar charges.

Would Samak have made the same comment on other channels?

You need to read the article in the link....it was not Samak that Sonthi L. censored...it was Giles Ji Ungpakorn whose article Plus was using to support his views on the extent of Samak's involvment in events leading up to the Oct 6 massacre. After finding what Plus had posted (after a false start when I couldn't find it because I hadn't looked thoroughly enough) I also found what I posted above....this is a statement by Giles Ji Ungpakorn that he was censored by Sonthi L. for talking openly about his views on Sonthi L's tv station ASTV. Seems that Sonthi L. was censoring free speach when it came to the massacre.....this is the first time I've read a direct accusation of Sonthi L. behaving badly...I'm wondering if anyone else has any information of a similar nature (dirt on Sonthi L.).

Also....upon going back an looking at the article again it becomes even clearer that Giles Ji Ungpakorn condemns Sonthi L. in that he also says, "The Peoples’ Movement was poisoned by the P.A.D. leadership which dragged too many people into supporting the “yellow-ribbon” coup."

This is the same Giles Ji Ungpakorn and the same article where Plus previously commented in this thread, "Even if I'm not a fan of Giles, he was talking about facts, not his opinions." I'm not sure if I agree with Plus's assessment of the factual nature of Giles's words but it seems that Plus is certain of it....what about you?...do you think that Giles is writing facts....or opinions? Is it a fact that "The Peoples’ Movement was poisoned by the P.A.D. leadership which dragged too many people into supporting the “yellow-ribbon” coup." With of course one of the prime leaders (if not THE prime leader) would be Sonthi L.

Chownah

....but I'm a bit sceptical when it comes to PAD's agenda...it seems to be filled with wonderful ideas but the implementation of these ideas seems to sometimes/often/usually fall short or wide of the rhetoric......PAD is not alone in Thai politics when it comes to incongruence between goals and actions...it is all too common pretty much across the board.

It's good to be skeptical sometimes...how, as a NGO Body can they implement their agenda, except through publicly voicing their opinions shortcomings of the "democratically elected" Government, to make them voices heard?

Since when are Demonstrations, publicly voicing opinions, "undemocratic"? It is an Opposition!

The very last part ...PAD is not alone in Thai politics when it comes to incongruence between goals and actions.... of you post says it all, doesn't it?

Isn't it a tad bit strange that quite some key positions have been replaced immediately after the "democratically elected" Government took over the helm, by figures very close to the ousted ex-Premier?

Isn't it, is it?

I guess my view is that they promulgate ideas to arouse people to demonstrate as how they implement their agenda....and in my mind the ideas promulgated do not really result in an action taken in support of their ideals but rather another set of goals sometimes/often/usually.

I don't think I indicated that demonstrations or publicly voicing opinions is undemocratic...perhaps you are not responding to me with this statement...don't know.

As to people in key positions being replaced immediately....I don't think this is strange...I think this is usually what happens....every new gov't tries to put their best players in they positions where they can get maximum effect....that's politics.

Chownah

http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/20...racy/#more-2101

The link does not lead to the quote you give above.......it goes to some other Giles article.

It does. Scroll down to the fifth paragraph.

Samak wasn't the one who brought up October 6. It's one of the first questions of western any reporter unfamliar with Thai prcatice of dancing around this elephant in the living room. Samak just didn't handle it too well, especially during Al-Jazeera interview. Just an old man shooting off his mouth, no sign of intellegence or any other devious plans.

My mistake, indeed it does....also I found this there:

------------

"When I have tried to speak the truth about this I have faced censorship. Back in 2001, the Bangkok Post cut the section of my article which referred to the Palace and then tried to sue me when I complained. Recently, I was invited by ex-senator Chermsak to appear on a live T.V. programme about the 6th October on Mr Sonti’s A.S.T.V. channel. When I mentioned the role of all sectors of the ruling class, including the Palace, Mr Chermsak immediately received a phone call on his mobile from the owner Sonti. This is the same Sonti who was part of the Peoples Alliance for Democracy which complained that Thaksin had censored the media. I was not born yesterday and I know that the State and the business class control the media, but I never thought I would be lucky enough to see this kind of thing with my very own eyes."

-------------

It seems like this is saying that Sonti Liptonkul the chief of PAD censored his talk on ASTV.....I was surprised to find that!!

Chownah

Well, I once heard that they can't START eating after 12. They have no problems starting at 11 and going on until 1.

I suggest looking on the internet for some information about the rules that monks are supposed to follow..a good place to start is Access to Insight. There's lots of information on the internet about the monks rules and I'm sure you'll have no problem finding them.

Chownah

Go with her to the bank and get a copy of the chanotes before you agree and let your friends look at them for you....you go with her...verify that the bank is holding them and that they are not in a lock box only with her holding the key....maybe have the bank official indicate which text it is on the back of the chanote which shows the transaction (I think it will be listed on the back but not sure).

Also, with a bank loan there should be some loan papers...or receipts for money alreay paid...or loan statements either monthly or yearly....have a look....

Chownah

Do you mean that Samak's ridiculous comments on the number of victims might have actually been a catalyst for bringing more information to light about the massacre?...I mused once before that maybe he knew full well how controversial his comments would be and it was an attempt to focus attention on just exactly what did happen and who all was involved in that he figured that it would benefit him by having a tendency to clear his name of direct involvement........could this have been his intent?....should we thank Samak for focusing the nation on this dark chapter of Thai history?....inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

But at what expense to him? As you say it makes him look ridiculous. Or in my own words, it makes him look like a foolish, shameless, lying baboon. Samak doesn't strike me as the self-sacrificing type.

Nice try chownah, but your "theory " doesn't add up.

Well then....I don't see how Samak could have gotten to where he is today if he was JUST a foolish, shameless, lying baboon....seems like he would be smart enough to know that his comments would raise a furor....it seems pretty obvious to everyone else so I guess it would be obvious to him. What do you think his motive was?....fact is that it did focus attention on the massacre...again, this is not a surprise that it would do that....seems like he might have known that too.....so what IS the story?...inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

Ok, sorry, I thought it was your comment.

Even if I'm not a fan of Giles, he was talking about facts, not his opinions. Chang Noi is also not a diletant of Thai political history.

Here's a part of a recent Giles article that touches on the subject:

" In 2001, I was part of a fact-finding committee, set up by non-government organisations, to investigate the 6th October. We published a detailed report. It is quite clear that all the major sections of the Thai ruling class at the time were of the opinion that the Left-wing student movement had to be destroyed with violence. This was after all, one year after the Communist victories in Indo-China. When I say “all” sections of the ruling class, I mean the Palace, the army, the political parties, especially Chart Thai, and the business community. The students were attacked by the Border Patrol Police. Who gave the orders? We don’t know. Look at the scandal surrounding the B.P.P. today. Samak’s role as a young right-wing politician was to encourage the mob to attack the students and then to justify the events afterwards."

http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/20...racy/#more-2101

The link does not lead to the quote you give above.......it goes to some other Giles article.

Chownah

Well I do know that Dhammanando studied under Ajahn Boowa for some years and I also know the Dhammanando chooses his words carefully and is very well experienced in Buddhism. He may know things we don't. I can't vouch for his every word but I do believe that criticism is neccessary in all things and questions do need to be debated.. in the Kalama Sutta the Buddha said that we should never believe something until we have experienced it for ourselves and I go with that doctrine

At e-sangha, Dhammanando is a valued contributor. He has accumulated a wealth of knowledge on Therevada Buddhism...and other types of Buddhism as well. He also seems to be well read in a worldly way and is a very expressive writer. He has strong opinions about what is legitimate and what is not when it comes to Theravada Buddhism and he expresses his opinions freely. He is a human being and is not perfect. He has posted things which most unbiased observers would say are not polite or even tempered...especially concerning people who have held ordinations for women and then declared them to be monks (bhikhuni) and people involved in the Thai Forest Tradition. He did not back off from some of his inappropriate assertions (inappropriate for having made them in a public forum which requires respectful posting if nothing else) when their inappropriateness was pointed out. These same posts were eventually deleted from the forum since (I assume) the administration deemed them to be inappropriate. I want to stress that these inappropriate posts are just a tiny tiny fraction of all that he has contributed. The vast overwhelming 99.9% plus of his posting is exceedingly valuable and would be difficult information to find if not for his willingness to take his time to present some of what he knows.

I'm giving my view on this as a reply to your post because I want to agree that he seems to chose his words carefully but it is also my view that in a very few cases his words seem to be chosen from a perspective which is in my view inappropriate for placement on an internet forum and especially inappropriate for a monk......but then we like he are only human and I am surely at least as guilty on this account as my description of him.

Chownah

Except that indulging your whims doesn't get you anywhere.  And idealism is not factually correct. It sounds good as long as you only listen to the arguments you want to.  The Middle Path may be between both of those extremes,  but that doesn't mean it is a compromise ...  

At least not 'compromise' in the sense that you have 2 opposing parties negotiating... ( I'll eat meat if you meditate on it....  )   Meditation works,   thats why it is in the Path, not because it was something people could 'live with'.  People do take out what they can at any particular moment, but thats not 'compromise',  thats realism.  

Looks like a wordplay to me, and I didn't even use the word compromise in my original post. The austerity has its merits, sense indulgement is unavoidable, too.

I don't particulary care what you call the solution as long as it's not used as an excuse for gluttony.

Gluttony is really not a problem for monks usually if they follow the vinaya rules because the rules prohibit eating anything substantial after noon.

Chownah

I'm a licensed engineer and studied concrete when at University....if they mentioned carbonization of concrete I missed it...and I was a very serious student so if I missed it then it must have been a fairly minor point.

I went to the internet to read what he heck it was....now I understand but still don't remember it even being mentioned back at Uni.

Humid conditions with an atmosphere rich in CO2 combined with a porous concrete are what causes carbonization from what I have read...and the main problem associated with it is that it increases the porosity of the concrete which allows moisture to reach the rebar and then corrosion begins.

I seems that most structures would not be exposed to long periods of high humidity combined with an elevated CO2 level in the atmosphere...an example I found on the net was agriculture buildings (decomposing manure creates a moist atmosphere with elevated CO2 levels) and similar situations are probably difficult to find in residential buildings....even though some farangs do live like animals....varoom frisst du zo? (spelling?)

Chownah

P.S. If you are worried about this I suggest just keeping a good coat of paint covering the concrete as this should stop the process altogether...or nearly so.

Chownah

Anyway a couple of minor points

Vietnam in the south fell in April 1975 - about a week after the KR took power in Cambodia.

Thanks for the correction.

Chownah

Miss Saigon is my favourite musical ;-)

Back on subject - I really wish there was more to read about Thailand in this era but there are gaps in the history etc through choice of the Thai's that will probably never see the light of day.

I do hope there is more published about the current era though and the recent conference at Thammasat recently might be a watershed.

Do you mean that Samak's ridiculous comments on the number of victims might have actually been a catalyst for bringing more information to light about the massacre?...I mused once before that maybe he knew full well how controversial his comments would be and it was an attempt to focus attention on just exactly what did happen and who all was involved in that he figured that it would benefit him by having a tendency to clear his name of direct involvement........could this have been his intent?....should we thank Samak for focusing the nation on this dark chapter of Thai history?....inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

Separate PAD threads need to be merged. Mods?

It might be good to have two different threads so that we don't get a mish mash of overlapping replies to different discussions.

Chownah

Of these, Samak Sundaravej is one of the most prominent. Hence Acharn Ji Ungphakorn’s little exam for him. Q1: Did he back the radio station which was screaming "Kill them, kill them" on the eve of the massacre? Q2: Did he claim the Thammasat students were working for the Vietnamese communists? Q3: Did he, basically, approve? The answers to this exam are easy. Samak’s major role in these events is well-known.

COMMENT: I am not sure that Samak’s role in the “October 6 affair” is that well known. Yes, Samak was certainly on the “right” of the political perspective, but I think the claims that Giles/Ji makes seem a little of a stretch.

So Ji Ungpakorn posted rhetorical questions to Samak, the answer was supposed to be yes to all three. Chang Noi says Samak's role is well known. Then comes Chownah with an opinion on what is stretch and what is not. It's their word against Chownah's, and he displayed and even admitted himself that he knows next to nothing about Thai political life.

Samak, btw, sued Ji for libel but then he withdrew the suit (on advice of judges).

This was the era before the Internet, and even current archives don't stretch earlier than 2000.

>>>>

Separate PAD threads need to be merged. Mods?

You are mistaken. The comment was not made by me...it is part of the article that I was quoting....I delimited the article with a series of dashes before and after....I'll reproduce the portion of the ariticle which I used before to be sure this is clear....I have argued with the moderators that comments made by posters should be made clearer so that misunderstandings like this don't occur but they have not taken action on my suggestions....I almost never put comments within other people's text....if I ever do this I will make it abundently clear that a comment is mine.....so.....the text again delimited by a line of dashes with nothing added by myself:

-----------------

Given the prominent linking of Samak’s name to October 6 one would seemingly think that he was some prominent leader, but he was at best a minor player in the events of October 6, 1976. The most prominent link to Samak and October 6 is this Chang Noi article from 2000:

Of these, Samak Sundaravej is one of the most prominent. Hence Acharn Ji Ungphakorn’s little exam for him. Q1: Did he back the radio station which was screaming "Kill them, kill them" on the eve of the massacre? Q2: Did he claim the Thammasat students were working for the Vietnamese communists? Q3: Did he, basically, approve? The answers to this exam are easy. Samak’s major role in these events is well-known.

COMMENT: I am not sure that Samak’s role in the “October 6 affair” is that well known. Yes, Samak was certainly on the “right” of the political perspective, but I think the claims that Giles/Ji makes seem a little of a stretch.[6]

On “backing the radio station”, was this Samak’s radio station or a Samak program? The prominent radio station at the time that was attacking the students was a military radio station, the Armoured Division Radio Station, and I assume this is the radio station that Giles/Chang Noi was referring to. This was under the military’s control, not Samak’s. Now, you can rightfully criticise Samak for supporting such radio stations putting out nationalist propaganda, but then you should criticise all other members of the military-bureaucracy for supporting such a radio station. I am little bemused why Samak was singled out here.

---------------