Eric Loh

Come on reds . . . defend or excuse this . . . or will you finally accept that Thaksin/Yingluck/PT/UDD etc don't give a shit nor have they ever given a shit about "the poor" who they were allegedly "helping".

The only thing they were interested in was solidifying their power over "the poor" and enriching themselves obscenely whilst doing so. All in the guise of "democracy" . . . it's all one big <deleted> joke and so so many of you just can't see it still.

Oh, they can see it Tatsujin, they just can't admit it because they are either too stubborn and don't want to lose face, are too thick and just don't understand what is happening, are trolls and want to keep baiting and taunting people into arguments (eg. phipodon) or are paid to post crap.

The Shins have never cared about the poor, they were simply the cheapest and easiest way to buy their way into power/money ect. Anyone with half a brain can see that.

Why all this innuedos unless you are baiting and taunting yourself. Why this off tangent posting when the subject is all about bad storage due to the extended storage period. If it is a storage problem, the owners of the warehouses will have to compensate the government. Anyone with half a brain can see that.

So it's a storage issue.

Posted by Eric Loh: You said that the previous government answered to one which you later admitted that they subject to those who voted them into power. That's a contradiction.

When the previous government dissolved Parliment, they are giving back the power to the people whom they are answerable to. The people mandate who they want as leaders. If they don't performed as it happened previously, citizens spoke out, attract and organize supporters and demand a re-election. That's the democratic process.

If you support democracy with blatant corruption that is your choice - but many Thai people did not like that and fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on ones point of view) it took a military coup to bring that to an end at this time.

Sorry to burst your bubble. I don't support blatant corruption and it should take an election not a military coup to put an end to this. I hope you are not saying this because you are align to the Dem Party and that they can't win an election in a straight fight.

"Soft" approach? The daily speeches I can deal with. The rounding up of political opponents and sentencing to lengthy prison sentences I don't consider to be a soft approach.

How many have been rounded up and sentenced so far? Not seen any examples of political show trials yet as you seem to suggest,

Yingluck, her sister, Chalerm, Tharit, Jatuporn, Nat, Arisman and his missus, - all been treated softly, not banged up.

Sure some were called in and told to behave or else. Stopped the daily attacks and killings didn't it.

Who. apart from Sondhi (hardly one of Big T's lackeys), has been given a lengthy sentence so far?

Wonder what happened to this Thai woman after she made a three-finger sign signalling her opposition to the military coup near Asoke BTS station back in June of this year.

Hopefully she is still safe and healthy. Unlike those poor children murdered by Shin supporters. They never opposed anything. Too young.

The difference is that those poor children were killed by scoundrels and ought to be convicted by the full extend of the law and all are following the case. While the Asoke lady was taken in by the authority that has the law and we know nothing of it. Ain't this of serious concern to you?

And the politicians before him answered to no one (except their financial backers) either! Eventually all will answer to someone.

Democracy should be for the good of all people, NOT just those who led the democracy at the expense of those who "voted" them into power.

I hope you realized that you contradict yourself in your two sentences.

Two separate statements.

The first answering to your "he answer to know one."

The second is about how democracy could/should work. I do not see any "contradiction".

You said that the previous government answered to one which you later admitted that they subject to those who voted them into power. That's a contradiction.

When the previous government dissolved Parliment, they are giving back the power to the people whom they are answerable to. The people mandate who they want as leaders. If they don't performed as it happened previously, citizens spoke out, attract and organize supporters and demand a re-election. That's the democratic process.

Very theoretically. With uneducated people who get lied at. Vote buying and media control democracy doesn't work.

The absolute minimum would be free and critic media.

Hard to argue with those who belittle the uneducated as gullible and lacking intelligence on voting decision. Get use to the fact vote buying has very little influence on results. Media control? Happening now.

Until he cancel martial law, he is still authoritative and imposing his hard stance on the citizen who can't gather and express their opinion. Soft is never in his vocabulary as he answer to no one.

And the politicians before him answered to no one (except their financial backers) either! Eventually all will answer to someone.

Democracy should be for the good of all people, NOT just those who led the democracy at the expense of those who "voted" them into power.

I hope you realized that you contradict yourself in your two sentences.

Two separate statements.

The first answering to your "he answer to know one."

The second is about how democracy could/should work. I do not see any "contradiction".

You said that the previous government answered to one which you later admitted that they subject to those who voted them into power. That's a contradiction.

When the previous government dissolved Parliment, they are giving back the power to the people whom they are answerable to. The people mandate who they want as leaders. If they don't performed as it happened previously, citizens spoke out, attract and organize supporters and demand a re-election. That's the democratic process.

Until he cancel martial law, he is still authoritative and imposing his hard stance on the citizen who can't gather and express their opinion. Soft is never in his vocabulary as he answer to no one.

And the politicians before him answered to no one (except their financial backers) either! Eventually all will answer to someone.

Democracy should be for the good of all people, NOT just those who led the democracy at the expense of those who "voted" them into power.

I hope you realized that you contradict yourself in your two sentences.

Until he cancel martial law, he is still authoritative and imposing his hard stance on the citizen who can't gather and express their opinion. Soft is never in his vocabulary as he answer to no one.

Read the interim constitution for who PM Gen Prayuth answers to.

BTW I fear some will only be satisfied if PM Prayuth invites Thaksin to come back and take over.

In the mean time I hope Thai will co-operate with NRC and CDC to make a more reliable base for a real democracy.

If you mean Section 19-20, then you surely know that it's necessary to have respect for the form of government especially an interim constitution by the military.

Until he cancel martial law, he is still authoritative and imposing his hard stance on the citizen who can't gather and express their opinion. Soft is never in his vocabulary as he answer to no one.

Ok rubl, I'll dumb it down for you as far as it can be dumbed down. When I wrote:

"I want a Thailand to have a democracy very unlike the government (it remains to be seen how democratic it will be) that will come out of this mess."

I meant that I want Thailand to have a real democratic government, not whatever weak excuse for democracy that the junta is putting together.

If you still don't follow, find an English speaker to explain it to you.

Come on, Heybruce , cut the crap.

you made a mistake, I suggested rephrasing, you voice some more BS, I counter with more explanations, you go back to square one and ask what's the matter.

Well let me tell you in very plain text

You suggest that democracy = government, interchangeble. Even in the post I reply to now you still do that "democratic government, not what weak excuse for democracy ...".

A government is not a democracy and a democracy is not a government. A government can function democratically and most do so mostly in a democracy.

If you want to discuss democracy Thai special style as part of the topic you should take more care in how you formulate your statements.

Yes, let's cut the crap. Way back on post 333 I replied to one of your posts with:

""Of course, it may be that in your country of origin no one would have a problem with an offshore criminal controlling your government and that not really illegally as well?"

Let's see, choose any country with a well established democracy, imagine the military of this country staging a coup to deposed a popular elected leader, then imagine the military junta charging this leader with corruption and a military installed government convicting him, and finally imagine the leader choosing to stay in exile while he publicly promotes political parties and policies similar to those that originally got him elected.

Under those circumstance I can see voters in a number of western democracies voting for this 'offshore criminal', in fact I can see people who normally wouldn't vote for him or his party doing so as a protest against the coup. As to the legality of it, I don't know about other countries, but it obviously was legal in Thailand or the Democrats would have been brought the matter up in the courts (we've been over that before, remember?).

"You want to return to the democracy Thailand had. That democracy was a flawed and failed one."

First, don't assume you know what I want, and don't conjecture unless you can provide evidence to support your conjectures.

I don't want to return Thailand to the democracy it had, I want Thailand to have a democracy that isn't continually threatened by a military coup and isn't based on a constitution written by the military. I want a Thailand to have a democracy very unlike the government (it remains to be seen how democratic it will be) that will come out of this mess."

Rather than address any of my statements in a substantive form, you retreated into nit-picking the words I used.

I would also like a democracy which isn't constantly threatened by corrupt politicians or businessmen. A democracy which doesn't need the military to stop a stepped down ex-PM from corrupting parliament, senate, courts and institutions. A democracy which doesn't need to stop a clone PM who is controlled by a criminal fugitive abroad.

Maybe we have a chance now, assuming Thais can unite in reforms rathers than continuing the political bickering.

I also like a democracy which isn't constantly threatened by coups. A democracy which doesn't need the military to take side for vested interest and corrupting the country.

For Christ's sake, will you ever stop giving this criminal on the run attention?

Thaksin this, Thaksin that. Who cares what he thinks. He is old hat. Yesterday's news. A turd.

The recent Issan poll said that Thaksin is second to Prayuth in popularity. Seem lots still care and seeing major media are reporting on tiny morsel of Thaksin's news, he yet to be old hat and yesterday news. Among female, guess who is the most popular?

Asking currency exchange rates aside i was asking if the cost of living was the same that's it. I know it isn't the same in every country. I was just asking since the ruppiah for example is so small how do you even factor in the cost of living. It was just me lamenting on it.

ultimate weapon ... are you an Indian Singaporean?

The reason I ask is the constant reference to the Indian Rupiah.

.

Rupiah is Indonesia currency while rupee is India. Can be confusing at times.

Oh wow, so much has passed since my last post. I will not try to backtrack. Instead I will present another aspect of this issue. One of the interesting things I found about the Thai society is its structure. The very difference in the use of personal pronouns for men and women sets out right from the start where everyone is in the social structure. I can understand that people from the west may find such a notion abhorrent. However, since I am a Chinese, I do not find this matter too disturbing. In fact, I find it useful.

So what I am driving at (or driveling about, depending on your attitude towards mumbling old men)?

The point I am trying to make is that democracy, as I understand the west understands it, does not work with the Thai mentality. Thais, as far as I can make out, tend to keep things simple. So what if the Luk Phi has inherited his position from his father who inherited it from his father who inherited it from ... The main point is that the Luk Nong are being well taken care of. And that's basically all that the Luk Nong are really interested in.

Actually that's not exactly my personal opinion. I am just repeating what some Thais have told me about the present situation.

The best way to know if Thais care about democracy is by looking at election turn out and compare with our Asian peers and perhaps some western countries. Election turn out is a good barometer to gauge whether there are disenchantment, indiffences or contentment. A good turnout will mean that the electorate cherish and value their democratic freedom and will use election to express their political preference.

In a study recently between 1998-2011, Thailand rank second only to Indonesia at 69% and 81% respectively in voters turnout. Compare that to Singapore at 36%. Tells a lot don't they. Take Indonesia, since the last coup by Suharto, there is growing support for the newly established democratic institution despite of all the politician corruption and vote buying. That's a good example of allowing uninterrupted democracy to flourish and grow.

Thailand numbers are even better than the biggest democracy in the world, India. S Korea and Japan have the highest turnout and only single digit from Thailand.

Democracy works in Thailand despite of the reoccurring coups and the power of the establishment to try defranchised a segment of the society and putting barriers to stop political parties from becoming too electable. As the North and North East prosper from their huge potential and connectability, they will demand a bigger voice in choosing who they want as leaders.

I missed out quoting some numbers for western countries. Most scored above 85% in voters turnout. Not suprise at all considering that they cherish their democractic rights for freedom of expression and who they mandate as leaders.

Oh wow, so much has passed since my last post. I will not try to backtrack. Instead I will present another aspect of this issue. One of the interesting things I found about the Thai society is its structure. The very difference in the use of personal pronouns for men and women sets out right from the start where everyone is in the social structure. I can understand that people from the west may find such a notion abhorrent. However, since I am a Chinese, I do not find this matter too disturbing. In fact, I find it useful.

So what I am driving at (or driveling about, depending on your attitude towards mumbling old men)?

The point I am trying to make is that democracy, as I understand the west understands it, does not work with the Thai mentality. Thais, as far as I can make out, tend to keep things simple. So what if the Luk Phi has inherited his position from his father who inherited it from his father who inherited it from ... The main point is that the Luk Nong are being well taken care of. And that's basically all that the Luk Nong are really interested in.

Actually that's not exactly my personal opinion. I am just repeating what some Thais have told me about the present situation.

The best way to know if Thais care about democracy is by looking at election turn out and compare with our Asian peers and perhaps some western countries. Election turn out is a good barometer to gauge whether there are disenchantment, indiffences or contentment. A good turnout will mean that the electorate cherish and value their democratic freedom and will use election to express their political preference.

In a study recently between 1998-2011, Thailand rank second only to Indonesia at 69% and 81% respectively in voters turnout. Compare that to Singapore at 36%. Tells a lot don't they. Take Indonesia, since the last coup by Suharto, there is growing support for the newly established democratic institution despite of all the politician corruption and vote buying. That's a good example of allowing uninterrupted democracy to flourish and grow.

Thailand numbers are even better than the biggest democracy in the world, India. S Korea and Japan have the highest turnout and only single digit from Thailand.

Democracy works in Thailand despite of the reoccurring coups and the power of the establishment to try defranchised a segment of the society and putting barriers to stop political parties from becoming too electable. As the North and North East prosper from their huge potential and connectability, they will demand a bigger voice in choosing who they want as leaders.

Really the big ticket items that affect a major part of daily expenses. Say for renting a 1 bedroom apartment in Singapore will cost around SD1,800-SD2,000 while relatively similar 1bedroom will cost SD600-SD800. Or a taxi ride that start from SD4.50 (I think) while in Bangkok is about SD1.80 approx. Don't talk about cars as the COE and car in Singapore can buy 2.5 cars in Thailand. Straightly comparing Singapore and Bangkok, cost of living is less than half.

Both the PTP and Democrats are being diplomatic as they and others know full well the reason for the coup, to say the outcomes for reform are going to benefit the Thai people is misleading , possibly anything decisive will be a miracle, if anything the purpose for the coup was to introduce real reform , there will be reform, but except for a few scraps, it will not be what the Thai people expect. .

Are you blind or what ? There has been huge reform already and the Thai people have benefitted greatly from it for the most part. There are some who have lost out, mostly the ones that have been doing things illegally so boo hoo to them.

Another Takky red fan boy who just can't face the truth the military did the best thing for the country by defeating his corrupt hero.

Guess I am blind also in that case, as I have not seen any huge reforms either yet.

I have seen the military fix some of the mistakes the previous government made but i hope you don't count that as huge reforms.

(and it is sometimes questionable who was to blame for those mistakes; its pretty hard to pay farmers if nobody is willing to lend you money as they are feeling your government will be overthrown soon and helping them now leaves you out of favor with the next government).

And please refrain from all the "red shirt" and "yellow shirt" comments. Not everybody who has the same point of view is automatically a "red shirt" and therefore a "Taksin supporter". Try to deal in facts, not in labels.

And just for fun; grab a newspaper of a year ago and you will see the exact same headlines as you see now: Thailand will crack down on (insert something that is illegal or damaging" and Thailand vows to become the hub of "insert something positive or profit making". Its all the same: lots of talk and little change.

"and it is sometimes questionable who was to blame for those mistakes; its pretty hard to pay farmers if nobody is willing to lend you money"

This old chestnut again that highlights why the reform process will be bumpy. It is hard to refrain from the labels when you fit so very neatly into the red label.

So you think the PTP didn't pay the farmers because no one would lend them money? Seriously? Non payment without a slither of a doubt is the PTP's fault and to think otherwise is a credit to the PTP ministry of propaganda and the hard work of the UDD reducation schools that teach hate and division under the handle of democracy.

13th of September 2013 - The cabinet approved a total budget of 270 billion baht for the governments rice pledging scheme, Deputy Commerce Minister Yanyong Puangraj. They said they had the money. They lied.

16th of September, 2013 - THE FINANCE MINISTRYs sub-committee assessing the cost of the rice pledging scheme fears the scheme will break budget. The PTP were warned.

September 25, 2013 Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has said the government was not considering further loans because it would have enough money from selling rice from its stocks to fund the scheme." yingluck lied.

http://www.newsdaily...ce-scheme-going

8th of October - The World Bank said that the rice pledging scheme had proven to be the most costly and would ring up a bill of 115 billion to 150 billion baht per harvest. The reply - Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Niwatthamrong Bunsongphaisan categorically dismissed the World Banks estimate that the Thai government will incur up to 400 billion baht in losses from the rice pledging scheme for two harvests. He went on to say the Finance Ministry should help secure more funding to meet the 270 billion baht target already approved by the cabinet to be used for the 2013-14 harvests. Turns out the World Bank were right. Hang on. yingluck said on the 25th of Sept they didn't need more loans? The PTP and yingluck lied.

November the 4th - Protests start

12th November 2013 - IMF called on Thailand to ditch rice support scheme. The PTP said no. The PTP were warned.

Nov 23^rd - The Commerce Ministry stood firm that it had enough budget to subsidize the rice pledging plan which needs a circulating fund of Bt500 billion" Oh, so they don't need another loan now? They need to get their story right. They lied.

http://www.mcot.net/...50ba0576b00032b

http://www.thaivisa....r-rice-subsidy/

9th of Decmeber 2013 - House dissolved.

So in summary not once did they say we don'tt have the money because the banks won't lend it to us. NOT ONCE so I don;'t know where you get your quant story from. The PTP were warned more than once the scheme would run out of funding and they ignored that advice and they lied over 6 times to the public that they had the money to fund the scheme to March, 2014.

But your not a red shirt or support thaksin right!!! Next you will say there is no corruption in the rice scheme.

Djjamie, must be tedious work getting all the information. Just one question. If there are no Suthep and the PDRC, do you think the government will able to get the banks to lend the 50B Baht to pay the farmers?

Everything is on the table except military reform and that's an order.

So Ahbisit support both coups and he is a Democract and leader of the Democrat Party. What a two face and hypocrite. He just don't know when to keep his mouth shut.

Suprise (or maybe not) no one in the NLA question how we avoid debt when we have budget allocation at 2.5T B and a revenue of 2.4T B and a 3T B infrastructure project. How all this can equates to no debt. Too many yes men in NLA.

The infrastructure project is spread out over 7 years or so. Each year seems part of that included in the Nation Budget's 'investment' post.

Also the OP has this line

"National budget expenditures would fully cover all financial sources, including budget, off-budget and borrowings."

So, the aim of the Yingluck administration to move budgets outside the National Budget and possible parliamentary scrutiny is being undone. No more 'non-revolving' funds.

PS maybe related to my current Internet connection, but on the topic page I get an "Ads by Google" with "Mitt Romney in 2016? Vote now!"

Paid off over 7 years? So there is a 340 bn baht surplus going towards it each year from the budget? The budget is already in deficit, so where is the 340 bn going to come from? I did not see that in the budget yesterday, did you?

And your second post, yes its hilarious, through a Govt out and then do exactly what they were doing. I thought this was about overhaul and change and good practice, not just a power grab which anyone with half a brain new it was. I think you can already see the worm is turning and people are starting to wake up to the fact reform was never on the agenda.

There was far more information around on this, it was debated, the transport minister did a number of presentations outlining it etc

If we caught what the General spoke about balance budget by year 2017, it would not take a genius to conclude that the infrastructure loan will be an off-budget expenditure. I also heard that it will be paid by investment funds. I sincerely doubt that there are sufficient investors local and abroad who will buy off almost 3T investment funds. I dare say that much will be soft loan from perhaps China or some aspect of the infrastructure project will be privatized. For sure though it will not come from the yearly budget.

Not all debt is bad debt, sometimes it makes fiscal sense to borrow from the bank even if you could afford to pay for it at the time of purchase.

My question was serious, how will the 2.4 trillion baht scheme be financed if debt is to be avoided? I would of thought given the microscope that the issue was put under previously that this issue of funding would have been raised.

Its concerning that when previous Govt announced the plan for HSR, the TDRI were highly critical of it, saying it would need 9 mill plus passengers a year to stay afloat. Then the NCPO announce HSR and the TDRI is completely silent.

Yes, I agree with what you say, there are times when governments should borrow, perhaps to smooth net-income/expenditure mismatches, rather than be rigorous in only spending what they've actually got in-the-bank. Although if they have spare cash, which I doubt the NCPO have given the slightly-rising overall funding-requirement (which is how I interpret the CDMO figures), then perhaps tax-cuts are the answer, boosting funds available for consumers to spend. One of the justifications for the rice-scheme was after all the boost to overall consumer-spending by the better-off farmers.

I'm not sure from reading the OP, just how tight General Prayuth intends to be, he says "the proposed budget would not leave problems or debt for the country in the long run" and also that " The budget was set to be in deficit, adhering to the principles of economic sufficiency", also that " spending had to follow fiscal and monetary disciplines,", but what exactly does this mean ? We don't yet know. The extraordinary committee was given a week to study the budget and produce its report.

"He said that the country's current account is expected to be in surplus after exports improve and tourism recovers", which surely implies running a short-term deficit until exports & tourism improve, I'd say ?

PTP had planned large-scale long-term borrowing, from within the domestic savings-market IIRC, to fund their infrastructure-plans. But I never saw any serious cost/benefit analyses, or payback-details, for the various projects. Perhaps this was a consequence of not putting all the detailed proposals through Parliament for scrutiny ? That was something I did question on principle at the time, there appeared to be a curious reluctance to justify the projects, and show how they would payback and bring a net long-term benefit. If it really is a good investment, then any government (including NCOP) should be able to show the figures, to prove it !

On the HSR some important things have now changed, the previously-planned 4-line passenger-network has become a 2-line freight-project with lines from Chiang Khong & Laos to Laem Chabang Port, and it's not yet clear how much (if anything) the Chinese (who are surely the main beneficiaries) will invest towards it. The other spending on the entirely-separate SRT track-doubling projects should also be demonstrated to bring benefits, too. And details of other related-spending on rolling-stock, and the planned growth of freight on the meter-gauge network, needs to be set out more fully.

All just IMHO, of course.

I give you the benefit of doubt whether you around in March last year when there were 2 days of heated debate in Parliment on the infrastructure project. Charts, power-point presentation were all employed and it was a lively debate which was air live and reported in the mass media.

that has to be the biggest cop-out I've seen in a long time.

Yes - it is a question that the anti-democrats will always evade as answering it would mean that they would have to start thinking of the real issues and not their pet-hates against Thaksin. Fact is they do not care 2 bob about democracy in Thailand and will happily accept dictatorship indefinitely - as long as their own status as privileged farangs living the good life in Thailand will not be affected.

Well these anti-democratic have slightly more than a year to live life under dictatorship as even the good General has the wisdom to return democracy back to the people next year. Look even the General acknowledge that democracy is still the best system and global acceptance.

PTP/redshirt/Shin regime supporters should be the last ones to complain about this situation.

It was, after all, the crooked, corrupt, craven, criminal mob of scammers who they so faithfully follow who got Thailand into this mess.

Hopefully this entire debacle will be the benchmark when we talk about low points in Thai political history in years to come, compliments of the Shinawatras.

Funny the low point started on the first day the government took office in 2011 when plans were on Line culminating to the appointment tomorrow.

Hard enough to predict the Baht movement next one week less 10 years.

I can't see the difference between the idioscrantic manner of how the NACC and the judiciary handle all the political cases and amnesty. The cases are serious but offenders especially the key perpetrators are still free and some even haven't stopped their activities. It is almost an amnesty by default. People are against amnesty saying we should not allow crimes to go unpunished. Well, most of these high profile activists and politicians are free running around and no crime has been punished.

Independent agencies, such as the NACC, can indict. It is up to the appropriate courts to convict. With the appeals process and bail given, it only seems like they are being let off, but Sondhi Lim's recent case shows it isn't always the case.

I will leave out Sondhi conviction as it is blue collar and not a political crime and happened way before the start of the political crisis. I can only conclude that the political cases are so intertwined with others behind the scene establishment players that ensure there will be no conviction. Even Taksin was given an early warning and he duly stayed away. All said, don't expect any conviction of the principal players but the pawns that were on the streets are those who are convicted and imprisoned. We need amnesty to free them as the principal players already have their amnesty by default.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

You assume and continue from those assumptions.

The NCPO has provided details on how NRC / CDC are to be set up. Those commissions will work with Thai of all social strata, education and regions, use input from all to come to meaningful reforms and a new / renewed constitution.

It is clear from your post you do not believe in any of that. Well, that's fine, but just shows your opinion (or what seemingly is your opinion).

BTW the chaos came from the blanket amnesty bill absolving Thaksin and Ms. Yingluck of all 'political' crimes and so. It even included Abhisit/Suthep much to the disappointment of red-shirts who saw one of their UDD leader voting in favour together with almost two dozen other red-shirt Pheu Thai party list MPs (and Dr. weng, Nattawut only abstaining). Something to be forgotten and buried together with distracting into "our government is being obstructed". Chaos with cowardly night attacks, gunshots and grenades against anti-government protesters. And you accuse them of the chaos as if they willingly sat there to be shot at only to create chaos by dying?

It would seem foreign posters have more problems accepting reality than the Thai.

It would seem foreign posters have more problems accepting reality than the Thai.

As you so readily demonstrate, rubl. Even The Nation is publishing articles indicating that the honeymoon is over and the blinkers are off.

Oh yes, And my dog has clogs on....................everyone is thinking the same as you, hoping-the honeymoon is over??

You seem so wrapped up in your quisling ignorance

that you have overlooked the lessons of Thai history.Check up in a year's time whether the honeymoon is still quite so passionate.

And you ??? using Suthep/army as scapegoats, your the one with your other splinter group members that are only going on military past,

get up to date we learn from history but unlike you we do not all want to get bogged down. I will never forget the Thaksin era only not to have the Family back. The army on reflection we had this or civil war that Thaksin wanted to then blame everyone for a sad failed government.

I'm afraid I don't understand this gibberish.If you can clarify your views in a more coherent manner I will attempt a response - though I suspect just another simple minded rant.

Do not try to put others down claiming that their posts do not make sense.

The amnesty was no good -full stop do not use it to let off others, you are crazy to have people believe it was for all, GET REAL. PTPs agenda through Thaksin for over 2 years was to let him off the hook. did that make sense ???

You and your splinter group on here are a sad bunch using everything you can to side track the culprit of all the chaos-Thaksin.

Can't blame that sometimes we just don't understand you.

You against amnesty yet you say nothing about the military granting themself amnesty.

You said previous government was undemocratic, yet you seem agreeable with the coup which is undemocratic.

Then you rant about PT abusing their majority and now what we have is exactly that, a majority in the NLA with no voice but just a rubber stamp law makers.