halloween

27 minutes ago, jayboy said:

If you insist, though from experience I'm aware you aren't really interested in examining your prejudices just regurgitating the same old stale myths.

 

Once again you come up with a dishonest prescriptive definition that makes no real sense.It is simply not the case that the demonstrations were protests against government waste and corruption.I don't deny the decent motives of some at the beginning but in the main they were just organised middle class mobs seeking to overthrow an elected government.Shame on Abhisit, Korn etc for going along with them.

 

Yes many of my friends participated in the protests.As a result I know exactly what really prompted them to attend - hatred of Thaksin, contempt for the rural Thai who supported him and determination that the status quo whereby unelected elites pull the strings should not change.Obviously these concerns were not articulated initially but became very clear in discussion.

 

It's true I don't have much respect for the mainly Sino Thai Bangkok middle class.The great anthropologist Benedict Anderson said it best:

 

Money quote:   "selfish, uncultured, consumerist, and  without any decent vision of the future of the country".

 

"So far as I know, Bangkok has yet to give birth to a great novelist, poet, playwright, philosopher, architect, or social thinker.  It is Kongkhaen, not Bangkok, that gave  birth to Apichatpong Weerasetakul who, barely in his 40s, is internationally regarded as among the very top of  world cinema directors, and this year won the Palme d’Or at Cannes. You might have expected that an artist of this calibre would be the object of immense pride by a bourgeoisie always anxious to show its international credentials.  But no, the bourgeoisie continues passively to swallow up  Hollywood junk,  repetitive Chinese martial arts junk, imported videogames and trashy soaps.   Middle class Bangkok, if one reads the advertisements,  is interested only in good food,  fashions from abroad,  expensive resorts, and shopping trips in East Asia and Europe.  It is really hard to find a beautiful public building in the Thai capital, and there is no Thai temple that can beat Wat Xian Thong in Luang Prabang.    The shameful hubbub about Preah Wihan is one way of covering up what should be obvious to anyone,  i.e. that there are no Thai-thai buildings than can compare with Cambodia’s  Angkor,  Java’s Borobudur, or Burma’s Pukan. One can suspect that Bangkok has a hidden inferiority complex in this regard.  Two minutes at Preah Wihan tells anyone with brains that this gorgeous building is Khmer not Thai, so some Thais can’t bear this, so it has to be ‘ours.’

It would be difficult to expect anything from a capital city middle class of this type.  It timidly supported the demonstrations of October 73, but turned its back on the students in 1976.  It timidly supported the early Thaksin social policies, but very soon turned against him, and now expresses itself through noisy support for the monarchy and the Yellows.   I should say that in this way the Bangkok bourgeoisie isn’t far from that of Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Jakarta: timid, selfish, uncultured, consumerist, and  without any decent vision of the future of the country."

And this how you regard the people you describe as "friends"? I wonder what they call the patronising snob they associate with.

BTW in your rant, you never got around to the basic question. If those opposing Yingluk  ' the overwhelming majority were imported thugs from the South and Sino Thai urban middle class' how do you regard those protesting in 2010, and attacking the anti-Yingluk protesters? With fond affection as fighters for democracy?

1 hour ago, tezzainthailand said:

Gutsy lady, who had a conscience.  Of course, many on this forum will complain about the cost of bringing migrants in but never complain of the BIGGER cost of going to war.  Hypocrites!

Germany was planning to go to war?

55 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

In the politest possible way please don't clutter up discussions taking place among the grown ups.There are plenty of other places you can rant and rave.

For the record I have nothing against the Sino Thai middle class which includes most of my Thai friends.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

No, really, I would like to know how you these perceive those far more violent groups if that is your view of those prepared to stand up against obvious government waste and corruption. Did your urban middle class friends join the protest, or were they supporters of electoral bribes and massive waste of government resources?

1 minute ago, jayboy said:

Interesting.Thank you.Kasit is intriguing:despite his yellow record I believe he is a reasonable man who believes in democracy and indeed he has been quite outspoken in the last year or so..Yet he seems hampered by his middle class "tribal affiliations" if I can put it that way.Thaksin authoritarianism is his excuse (arguably a good one) but he finds it very hard to see the wishes of the majority as consistent with his version of democracy.Granted there must be checks and balances and elected dictatorships must be avoided, but this is the heart of the Thai problem.He says the upper and middle class are broadly happy with the Junta (true up to a point) but then denies there is a class aspect to the current Thai divisions.He goes on to say the yellow/Suthep demonstrations contained people from all walks of life.Yes, but the overwhelming majority were imported thugs from the South and Sino Thai urban middle class.So the question is do fundamentally decent people like Kasit accept that even if the Shins are taken out of the equation, there needs to be a massive shift in political and economic emphasis in Thailand, one of the most unequal societies on Earth?

Oh dear, how's ' demonstrations contained people from all walks of life.Yes, but the overwhelming majority were imported thugs from the South and Sino Thai urban middle class' for a little demonstrated bias. Last time I heard, it wasn't a crime to be 'Sino Thai' or 'middle class' however much some people like to look down on you from their perceived class position. Tell me, how would you describe the red protesters in 2010, or those attacking the anti-Yingluk protesters in 2014?

6 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Last week we had a whip-round for the lads to go. Three close villages sent 3 guys each in two pick-ups. I have spoken to one of them about 30 minutes ago. There were no weapons of any sort in the pick-ups. They were stopped three times on their way to BKK. On each occasion they, and the pick-up, were searched. Their fear was weapons being planted when they were ushered away from their vehicle. But they were OK in this regard.

 

One of the guys from the other village was at the 'red-shirt' gathering in BKK. He did not see, or know of, any supporters carrying weapons.

 

One of the problems the red-shirts were always aware of was infiltrators. The supporters tended to keep into groups of people they knew.

Well that was a waste of money wasn't it. How did they feel, standing around looking stupid, in support of their great leader who lied to them again and took a hike. Oh, that's right, she was looking out for their welfare because those armed security forces might have shot them just for being there.

BTW if the "protesters" coming to BKK in 2010 had been disarmed on their way, quite a few people might still be alive. They could have taken their bottles they were urged to bring as well.

23 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

 

BTW did you get a chance to view the Aljazerra piece?  it's very well balanced and was great to hear three obviously intelligent Thai commentators. Not that I agree with all of it but, nonetheless, well rounded I thought.

Not bad, but the front man seems to ave missed the point, she is being charged with negligence in the management of the WHOLE policy, not just the corruption aspect. The commentator in UK also claimed the G2G companies were representing China which has proven to be false.

There also seemed to overstating of the difficulty of her escape. Once outside the compound by whatever means, she could be driven in a limo straight to connecting aircraft. I don't see any claim that she actually passed border control.

Added: a few problems with the pop-ups too.  Neither she nor or brother will be convicted in absense, both had their day in court. Also TS faces many more than 2 years if he returns, the KTB case for starters.

1 hour ago, binjalin said:

Hyperbole and gibberish mixed with false news. "Propensity of her supporters to show up armed" is fake news, and you know it, but you seek to tar the millions with the sins of a small minority as usual. You are so full of hate I can smell it from here. Why not tone down the BS please?  or are you suggesting these villagers took AK47s with them?  No?  You know very well that the vast, vast majority of Yingluck supporters are normal, peace loving folk yet you stoke the divide with misinformation.

When dealing with red supporters the RTA has learned a lot since 2010 when they initially confronted them in riot control gear and finding out their opponents were much more heavily armed. I believe they lost 4 or 5 killed that night, including a colonel.

Fake news? "Propensity to" is not a claim they were armed, just something to be prepared for.

Just now, LannaGuy said:

 

You are rude Halloween and there is no need for it. You treat alternative opinion as if we are stupid, 'Shin fans' or whatever. You can make some sound points but they are dismissed by your overbearing style IMHO. None of us 100% right and we all have bias but we can debate with grace.  

Well I'm not allowed to say that under forum rules, but if we share an opinion, I'd have to agree.

1 minute ago, LannaGuy said:

You are rude, dismissive and aggressive to anyone who does not hold your point of view.

In your opinion. Do I misquote you, misrepresent what you write, or tell obvious lies about what you have posted? If I ever do, castigate me and I will apologise, something apparently too difficult for said troll.

8 hours ago, Becker said:

How about addressing the point I made instead of your usual boring deflections?

I know - too much to ask for.

Your point was that protest was allowed under Yingluk but not the junta. Protesters under the junta may be arrested, protesters under Yingluk were regularly shot at, bombed, injured and killed by her supporters while the BIB refused to intervene. Stray rounds killed at least 6 not even involved with the protest.

Hooray for red democracy!

8 hours ago, baboon said:

That's just out and out bloody rude. Rude and a very cheap shot at a Dutch poster.

I don't get along with robblok a good deal of the time, but I hope I would not stoop that low.

A dutch poster who misrepresents what is written either doesn't understand the language or is trolling for response. Do you believe "I tend to the supposition" means that I believes "most definitely" or "must have" occurred? If so I can only suggest a course in remedial English yourself.

8 hours ago, calexapic said:

Hey I'm no sycophant. Particularly when it comes to the lesser of 2 evils. I just can't see how Prayut can come out of this looking good. 

 

So she paid her way out, through an underling who no one could blame for taking a bribe? He can't keep his ranks in order or maybe cannot afford to? Face lost. But he isn't going to prosecute the one suspected of helping her flee? Stinks 

 

Or she was aided by the regime, from the top, as they knew jailing her would mean a resurgence of the Shin support, which they can ill afford. Masked as a getaway without their knowledge, well they still look a bit shit. Face lost.

 

Or she got away pure and simple, they are incompetent. Face decimated.

 

Any which way the junta look like clowns. Where she is and how she got there is irrelevant.

 

As an add on, as some other wise soul said... it matters not what we think. Junta and shins alike don't care about our thoughts or opinions. They will continue to do as they please. Unfortunately at the expense of the Thai people they assume to serve.

 

 

Never intended to suggest you were, but as you can see by the responses that followed, the prediction was quite accurate.

Do you know of any Thai ranks that could be trusted when someone offers them, say, a million baht? At best they would have 2 or 3 on each gate of a large compound, and with no definite time attached to her exit, they have plausible deniability.

4 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

halloween, let's have some proof that she bribed her way out then  ? Or is in typical Junta fashion only the other side required to provide evidence ?

 

Logic tells us, someone (or actually quite a few people) had to turn a blind eye. Either way, if we believe Prawit, it will make the Junta look utterly incompetent. If he lies, it will make the Junta look bad for lying. Either way, the saving face seems to be applicable to Yingluck not the Junta. 

ESL right? Get someone who speaks the language to explain to you what " I tend to the supposition " means.

While you're at it they could explain your error with " Theoretical situation in my book means endorsement for the alternative.. "

Just now, sjaak327 said:

Of course it is gross incompetence. This is not some dodgy drug dealer, but the ex. PM of Thailand in a high profile case. According to the authorities was monitiored 24/7 and she was able to sneak out just by bribing a few people. Pigs fly.

You deny any incompetence or negligence in a case involving B500 billion with ample evidence of both, and now claim the same in an unknown scenario? Do you realise your own hypocrisy?

1 minute ago, baboon said:

Whichever one the junta police overseer is. I'm not fussy.

Isn't it lucky then that others are, actually requiring evidence before bringing charges.

1 minute ago, baboon said:

The junta Police overseer should be charged with criminal negligence as she was able to escape her guard detail and leave the country. The buck stops with him.

So would that be the day shift supervisor, the night shift supervisor, or the supervisor of both who was nowhere near the house when she left?

2 minutes ago, calexapic said:

I'm not convinced there wwre orders either... i think the rumours are true. They are as incompetent as they sound.

At the risk of causing mass discontent in the sycophant ranks, and of being misrepresented again, I tend to the supposition that those with almost unlimited cash can prey on human weakness to get what they want. Or as originally stated, filthy rich criminal bribes her way out.

This of course leads to the erroneous self serving claim that individual weakness is actually incompetence of the organisation as a whole. This is still a free country in which to travel, once past any security at her gate she would have little trouble getting out.

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

You seem to be amused by a rather common method of funding of political party or organization. What is amusing though is your weak effort to confuse funding with democracy. Failed miserably. 

What's "rather common" about a criminal fugitive billionaire paying MPs to join his party, being allowed access to cabinet meetings, and being allowed to dictate policy to his appointed ministers? In which democracy is that legal, let alone common?

Where else does a political party have its own gang of propagandists and agitators, with a militia of thugs to stifle dissent? Where else are a group facing serious criminal charges including inciting terrorism and arson appointed as party list MPs so they can avoid prosecution?

2 hours ago, Becker said:

I think you'll find that very, very few people today believe that YL escaped without the junta's consent. Sorry if that interferes with your green/yellow agenda.

Request to mods: could you please arrange a poll on the subject?

Many years ago everybody believed the earth was flat. Most of the people alive today believe in god(s). That doesn't make either supposition true.

OTOH many people people believe the Shinawatras a lying conniving thieves and have much supporting evidence. Many more will admit Thailand's so-called democracy was nothing but a farce to conceal a criminal conspiracy. Others will deny both.

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

So you deny claiming that she bribed her way out ?

 

It's in black and white for crying out loud.

Go away, sober up or learn to read. I said one claim sounds better than another without endorsing either and saying nothing "most definitely".

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

Post #230:

 

A theoretical situation endorsed by the reds because it suits their agenda; it sounds so much better than the filthy rich criminal bribed her way out.

And where is the claim she "most definitely" bribed her way out. You are seeing what you want to see, not what is written.

3 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Then why the reference, the claim that people were allowed to protest is correct, no need to try and add any doubts.  People are currently not allowed to protest, those are facts, no need to comment any further. 

So the answer is you have comprehension challenges. They were allowed to protest if being attacked by red shirts didn't scare them off, and they were attacked on a regular basis.

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

What false claim ? That the junta aided her in her escape ? Provide evidence to the contrary please. No way she could have sneaked out without someone turning a blind eye.

You wrote " Now as Halloween seems to claim, she most definitely bribed her way out, ....."

Show me where or admit that was a lie.

Just now, sjaak327 said:

5555 weak very weak. You were the one talking about evidence, so where is the evidence the YL government was responsible for the things you mentioned. 

 

The poster you responded to is right, during YL's tenure, people were allowed to protest. Those are facts, that cannot possibly be denied. 

Can you not read? Where was the claim that Yingluk government was responsible?

Is it really necessary to misrepresent what others have posted?

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

So you think she managed to sneak out without the Junta knowing ? My oh my, didn't they claim they had her under surveilance  24/7. Which is it, if we have to believe Prawit, they had nothing to do with her disappearance. If that is the case, they are utterly incompetent. But there is of course ample evidence to establish that already. Now what about that evidence that dear Yingluck was negligent, still dying to see relevant evidence. And no, not attending a few meetings here or there, does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was negligent. 

 

Don't blame me, I did not invent this show case, the junta did...

 

In any case, she appears to be gone, so a big screw you to the Junta, I for one applaud that.

A fine demonstration of the alleged hypocrisy. Thank you.

No denial of your false claim?