Orac

In a normal government, various legitimate processes can take place that can shift the balance of power, such as byelections, alliances, internal voting an so on, which can of course lead to the replacement of the PM and other representatives, and change policy. This is not what happened in Thailand - far from it. The point that I was making in my original post, the one that you are ignoring in your response, is that most, if not all, Thai politicians are blatantly corrupt, but only one side gets prosecuted for it in a deliberate move to change the government, and the prosecutions abrupty stop when that change was completed to the satisfaction of the PAD minority.

The military coup, disbanding the TRT, then expelling fom office one after the other PM who was affiliated with the TRT via mob rule or judicial pretext, left those remaining in parliament no choice other than to join whatever was left, and so Abhisit was installed as the largest remnant who was acceptable to the PAD and others in the old guard establishment.

Without all this interference, the government that the people had originally elected would most likely still be in power today.

Aren't you ignoring that while it is true that nothing was done to stop the Yellow Shirts to occupy the airports, this was the decision of Thaksin's puppet and brother in Law, not of Abhisit.

And aren't you forgetting that Samak and Somchai were kicked out of office, not be politicians, but by the Court. They were caught doing illegal things, such as vote buying in Somchai's case.

And aren't you forgetting that the prosecution of the Yellow Shirts (as well as of the Red Shirts for that matter) is in the hands of the Police, district attorney and courts, not the government anymore. I would certainly agree that the Thai Police is as corrupt as it goes, (combined with total incompetence), but again, that's not the "politicians". Unless of course, you define "politicians" to include the Police and the Courts.

So far we have not heard of any corruption of Abhisit, whereas when you look up "corruption" or "cronyism" in the dictionary Thaksin's face pops up right next to the list of members of TRT or PPP or whatever their name is right now.

I would venture to say that right now we have the least corrupt government since ... since ... well since Thaksin entered the picture.

Would you prefer his family to run the country?

You are correct here in saying that it is not the 'politicians' here that are now responsible for dealing with the corruption and cronyism of the past but herein lies the problem as unless these 'non-politicans' deal with past issues evenhandedly there will be repercusions against the current government as, if they do not intervene in some way or set clear guidelines will be seen as puppets. Any goverment should lead and not be seen to be led and Abhisit needs to make it clear that he is in command.

Another point I would like to make regarding double standards, and I know I am sailing close to the wind on this one but hope the mods let it stand, is that Thaksin is been accused (rightly in my opinion) of trying to overthrow the goverment and, in the past, one of the main reasons for the yellow protests was to stop the previous goverment from making changes to laws that would exonerate MPs from previous misdeeds, however, all this happenned a few months after the military DID overthrown the government and rewrite the constitution to give themselves more control and exonerate themselves from legal action. Since it has been made clear from both sides that the monarchy was not consulted on this beforehand surely there is a huge double standard going on here which is virtually being ignored.

Govt to launch media war countering red shirts

The government will launch a publicity campaign at home and abroad to counter the propaganda of the red shirts, PM's Office Minister Satit Wongnongtaey said on Tuesday.

"The media war will be designed to counter the smear campaign of the red shirts and explain the true situation to the international community," he said.

He said police and public prosecutors were obligated to enforce the arrest warrant for red-shirt co-leader Jakrapob Penkair who remains at large and claims to have fled abroad.

-- The Nation 2009-04-21

To use public funds for a campaign overseas could just be seen as standard advertising however to use public funds to put forward a political message in Thailand, even if it is just targetted at the international community, could prove divisive unless it has the support of all political parties.

Who really cares about the colour of the shirts, all we can see know is Bangkok is a GHOST TOWN.........Tourism is down again, another 200, 000 thai people will lose their jobs.....

Can someone explain to the THAI people that when their is violence in the street, people stop coming to Thailand and the Thai people lose their jobs....... Looks like they have NO <deleted> IDEA >>>>>>>>>

Brilliant idea - the 200,000 people who lose their jobs can replace the ones that have been arrested (I asume by arrest you don't just mean arrest them, tell them off and let them go again). Since overall there were more protesters than 200,000 it will actually increase the numbers of jobs available and thus boost the economy, not to mention the extra employment involved in providing the infrastructure and detaining all these people.

I would be fascinated to see the wording of the new law that outlaws coloured shirts - in fact if you were to make yellow shirts illegal you could pretty much empty Bangkok of locals on a Monday

A lot of us have no great regard for Thaksin, but feel that he is pretty much like every other politician in Thailand and that he should not have been removed from power illegally.

On the other hand, the Thaksin haters - that appears to be their only motivation - seem to feel that he is the most evil man who ever walked the earth - except maybe Adolf Hitler and George Bush - and anything it takes to get rid of him is justified including twisting the truth, lying their heads off and just flat out making stuff up to make him sound much worse than he is.

To tell the truth, I just cannot figure out why they are so obsessed with this man.

Because it is easier to focus all Thailands problems on him rather than look deeper at a system run by a group of unelected elites and shady career politicians.

I do hope that Abhisit can do something to change things as, repeating what the OP said in his original post, he does seem to be a decent guy however he does need to get his message out as Thailand needs something positive now to focus on rather that the constant 'colourful' arguments and rabid hatred of Thaksin.

With every major newspaper in the country, both Thai and English-language, strongly condemning Thaksin, the redshirt movment and the political parties that represent them, there is no way the PT can win an election anytime soon.

I think you are probably right here however, what seems to be happenning is the 'rural masses' are gradually getting more involved which will make the next few years very interesting. If there was a vote today then the current government would probably win BECAUSE of the recent troubles and therefore have the mandate it may need to carry it through the next few years without to many protests. If it doesn't though the recent events will quickly fade from the minds of those who matter (voters) and unless they do something to win some support in the northern provinces they will be storing up a huge problem for the future when Thaksin can no longer be used as an excuse.

And in what way did Thaksin ever show that he did indeed represent "democracy"?

Thaksin bought all the MP's from other parties to run his authoritarian parliament to make sure that the opposition would never have enough votes to even ask for a censure debate in the parliament. When some senates requested to question him in the parliament, he just ignored them completely. Where was the check and balance in his "democracy"?

Thaksin alwasy said that he would only help the people and the provinces that voted for his party. He turned a blind eye to the South after the Tsunamis. That's "democracy"?

He tampered with the independent investigative bodies by replacing their key figures with his relatives and cronies. That's "democarcy."

He suppressed and tried to destroy the press and any ordinary folks who dared to criticise him and his government by using the internal revenue department. That's "democracy"?

Somchai, a lawyer who ahd the evidence against one of Thaksin's company evading taxes and was about to espose it to the police, has disappeared and believed to be dead and to this day is believed to have been killed. His case had long been sidetracked during "PPP" administration. The case has only been resurrected under the current gov't. That's what you call "democracy"?

The extrajudical killings of Muslims and supposedly "drug sellers and traffickers." That's "democarcy"?

Not to mention all the pending corruption cases which cleary show us how Thaksin has abused his executive power inly to enrich himself and his cronies at the expense of the entire country. That's "democracy"?

Thank you,ThNiner,i couldn't have said it better..

I really cannot understand how some honest and intelligent people can support that guy..

I hope Khun Abhisit can work in peace for a few months,but maybe it's just a dream..

I haven't seen the OP state anywhere that Thaksin goverment was any better that the current one however it is not good enough to say that the Thai people need better than Thaksin as this would not be difficult, what they need is something MUCH better and this is where I can see that the double standards argument holds some water.

The argument that Thaksin was worse is no defence for the present government not to introduce change.

That's a couple of sad lies. The PAD only reacted with violence after some people thrown grenades at their rallies at the Govt House. And those incidents which ended up killing a few people still have not been pursued by the police to this day. The PAD never instigated the violence unlike the UDD or the red shirts. If you have evidence indicating otherwise, show it to everyone here. Don't just say it.

I think that it's fair to say that the PAD instigated mob rule. After all, they were the first group to take to the streets. Now history shows us that mob rule often escalates into violence as people become angry at having their lives and livelihoods disrupted, and we saw this happen on occasions when both the PAD and then the Reds were causing chaos. I am condemning violence on both sides, as I have already said.

The fact that the PAD ignored democratic principles and took to the streets, causing disruption, was an open invitation for the other side to counter and do exactly the same thing, which is exactly what happened.

Why didn't the PAD simply beat Thaksin at the ballot box? Then there would be concrete and irrefutable evidence that they had popular support. Why did they have to take to the streets in the first place?

Though I agree with most of what you have posted so far I would disagree that PAD ignored democratic principals when they took to the streets - in a free society people should be able to PEACEFULLY demonstrate and express there opinions.

The problem was that they overstepped the mark when the took over GH and the airport and basically disregarded the law. This escalation was then followed by the 'red' protest which was also wrong.

What I'm tired of is the ongoing statements that the TRT, TTT (thaksin, Samak, Somchai) governments were democratically elected.

They were not democatically elected, they came to power through massise rampant vote buying. And there's lots of evidence.

vote buying, whether direct or indirect, exists worldwide. always has, always will be. you think people in western countries vote for someone if there wasn't some sort of economic incentive to do so?

think of all the "let's vote for change" americans that chose obama. if you don't think vote buying was involved (i.e., massive campaigning, advertising, etc. promising a better economy, more jobs, monetary bailouts, etc. in return) isn't vote buying you're fooling yourself.

Wrong again. One is vote buying which is illegal , the other is called pork barreling which is not illegal.

Since pork barreling seems to mean "I will vote for you if you give me something in return" there seems to be a very fine line between the two.

The principal seems to be the linking of airline systems with immigration systems so whilst the Thai immigration system is not linked in there should not be a problem - all airline transactions can be done using a uk passport but thai passports can be presented to Thai immigration who sit outside the system on arrival/departure.

Thjough not relevant to this forum I would be more interested in how travel between countries that both have integrated systems ie. us to uk, would happen as all parties would be tied into the same system.

Surely your wife should book the ticket using her UK passport and check in with the airline using it then present her Thai passport to immigration on the way out.

maybe that would be the answer, do airlines look for visas when flying out of thailand?

anybody know when this system comes into operation?

Not sure why there would be a visa if she has dual nationality???

What I'm tired of is the ongoing statements that the TRT, TTT (thaksin, Samak, Somchai) governments were democratically elected.

They were not democatically elected, they came to power through massise rampant vote buying. And there's lots of evidence.

vote buying, whether direct or indirect, exists worldwide. always has, always will be. you think people in western countries vote for someone if there wasn't some sort of economic incentive to do so?

think of all the "let's vote for change" americans that chose obama. if you don't think vote buying was involved (i.e., massive campaigning, advertising, etc. promising a better economy, more jobs, monetary bailouts, etc. in return) isn't vote buying you're fooling yourself.

Very good point which many people seem to miss when claiming votes were bought.

Essentially every vote is 'bought', whether it be with promise of a cash "bung" now, or the promise of Tax breaks, putting money towards your health care, or into your schools....

Why would you vote for a party which was going to give you nothing in return?

I've argued several times that i don't see the problem with vote buying, it's your vote, and if you think that getting cash now from a party is worth it then so be it.

Absolutely true. All politicians the world over buy votes in one way or another. By way of example, look at how much the Americans just spent on marketing their politicians to the general public. At the end of the day. it's your vote to do what you like with.

Also look at the subsidies that are paid to farmers in US and EU because they are powerful voting lobbies. These have come about because those working in agriculture tend to be very poorly paid and incomes can flucuate wildly. Looking at figures only 0.6% of working population in US are in Farming, fisheries and forestry and 1.4% in agriculture in the UK. Thailand has 42.6% working in agriculture (figures from cia factbook and are a few years old but the principle is there). It is one of the main tasks of any government to look after the poorest in society, especially when there is a large accumulation of wealth at the top. I think Thailand has a very long way to go to deal with this disparity and the the poorer elements are now developing into a strong lobbying group that didn't exist before. There seems very little difference to me between vote buying (illegal) and redistribution of wealth (worthy aim) apart from one being done before voting and the other after power has been gained - if the poor were promised money AFTER power had been gain how would it be viewed???

Internet records to be stored for a year

The “e-borders” system will log passenger information according to the data provided by the airline, which in most cases will be from the non-British passport used for the outbound journey. As a result, a dual national – even if readmitted to Britain by an immigration officer on showing a British passport – could be registered as an alien with no more rights than any other tourist, and limited to six months in the country.

On a subsequent trip, such a person attempting to return to Britain could be recorded as having broken immigration law. An airline, under the “e-borders” system, would be denied permission to carry the passenger home. Even if a British passport were presented, it would have to be verified by the nearest consulate or by the Passport Agency in the UK.

Australians, Americans, New Zealanders, Canadians and South Africans who have adopted British nationality are among those likely to be affected. There are more than half a million people born in these countries in the UK.

Airlines are concerned about the “e-borders” system. “It was not designed for dual nationals,” an industry source said. “This really will create a challenge for the authorities. As things stand [people] will not be able to leave Britain on one passport and come back on another.”

A UK Border Agency spokesman said: “With dual passports, you need to use the passport you bought the ticket with; that is the passport that is registered with Advance Passenger Information. If you don’t use that passport, then you will not be able to travel.”

my understanding is that if say, my wife(thai with both a uk passport and a thai passport) leaves thailand to travel to the uk, normally she would book the ticket under her thai passport, leave thailand on her thai passport and enter the uk on her uk passport. but seeing as the ticket, and the advance passenger info. is under the thai passport then that would cause a problem when she tries to enter the uk by showing her uk passport.

the same problem would occur when returning to thailand.

to travel on her thai passport, and enter the uk on that passport would necessitate getting a visa for the uk.

am i the one who is missing something here?

Surely your wife should book the ticket using her UK passport and check in with the airline using it then present her Thai passport to immigration on the way out.

The problem here would be if Thai immigration are also linked into the airline systems and adopt a system similar to the UK/US ones.

New video op for Al Gore to discuss how Songkran is dehydrating the planet......and were were all worried about rising bl**dy sea levels!......get the antiglobalization protesters on this one..... URGENT!

What a ridiculous post - surely everyone now realises it is Thaksins fault

I was near the bridge today and nothing was going on. In Nongkhai things always happen 50 years later...... Even the "coup" came to Nongkhai a few days later. The 2. day there finally was more police in town (on bicycle since their budget is low....) and the 3. day the marine police were at the bridge. No, in Nongkhai it is always quiet. And in my little village 4 km from the city there was even no songkran...... That's why I like it here.

I was out with the family for 2 days in the pickup for Songkran and thought we managed to cover every village in the area! Looks like we missed one.

If you let me know where you are I can ensure you a good soaking next year

With the numbers of ex special forces soldiers in Thailand, particularly Pattaya, he probably didn't have to look very far!

If you want reasonable replies I suggest you try a less inflamatory title.

I see nothing inflammatory in that at all. Please explain your comments

I agree. Sit down, take a valium before you make another response

Don't worry - I am well chilled out at the moment

All I am saying is that there is no evidence to back up the OPs claim that there is rioting in Nong Khai - all I can find on the internet are a couple of reports that protesters had blocked the friendship bridge (there is another post already about this). IMHO the term rioting is a bit over the top.

OK, maybe I am wrong here, but the title is not posed as a question but as a statement then requests evidence to back it up. The term rioting is used as opposed to protesting or even gathering which are far more neutral terms that would fit better with the OPs request - by requesting non-political and factual evidence the less emotive terms would be more relevant.

I opened the thread expecting to find details of rioting in Nong Khai, where I visit 2-3 times a week, as this is what is explicitly stated in the title however there is nothing to back this up and, judging from the lack of responses since the original post was made, is a major exageration of the facts. There has been enough damage done to Thailand over the last few months without any extra fuel being added to the flames.

I am not sure how closely related the 'village culture' we have in our village is in comparison to the rest of thailand but there certainly is a big requirement to drink if the is an excuse. I was woken this morning by what sounded like gunshots and my wife explained it was becuase a man had died in the night a few doors down (apparently he was old and had been ill for some time so it was no surprise). All evening people have been heading down to his house and my wife tells me it is 'traditional' that everyone will drink and play cards and 'roulelle' all night and all day tomorrow now.

Having a new baby has given us the excuse to get out of going but so far 3 people have called round to see where we are.

My understanding was it was a broad based coalition of supporters of chickens everywhere. Unfortunately due to 24 hr rolling news and the need for immediate opinions of TV pundits there will clearly be a need to pidgeon-hole and stereotype by place of origin, level of education, amount of hair and waistsize so as to trivialise the whole issue.

My wife kept chickens once (though she assures me she never worked in KFC despite many of her friends doing so) and therefore I feel confident I am an expert on chicken culture and all things chicken.

You are way ahead of the game here - I am still waiting for shirt selection to be sorted out.

If you want reasonable replies I suggest you try a less inflamatory title.

At least he didn't ask whether the bars would have to close early.

I don't care about the bars, but I do care about the ongoing changes to the vistors visa requirements! The old rule was a waste of time, and a pain in the arse. New rules are fine as I always fly in.

If you are in my situation with a Thai wife and son who frequently travel with me in and out of Thailand, any military rule and possible changes to who can enter and leave is a very serious concern.

Why don't you get an O visa if you have a Thai wife?

After reading all the above crap, it would seem you have all passed the test necessary to become "Redshirts".

I expect to see you all departing on the Bangkok bound bus within the next hour!

Shame on you for suggesting we farangs join the protests. Please can you go and find people for your little bangkok event elsewhere as we have more important things to do here fighting the evil KFC empire run by the shadowy figure Colonel Sanders.

ps. How much are you paying - I could be turned

Anyone have an update on the situation at the Friendship bridge???

I'm seeing gunfire on TV now....around Victory I have Star Channel 6 TPBS

Just watching the same and at least one of the soldiers was not firing into the air though for some reason they seem to be reluctant to show what is being shot at.