younghusband

YH I dont think we disagree too much in reality.

What I write here is based on converstaions with ordinary people mostly Thaksin lovers by th eway. What I get is that in terms of the PAD: what they did is wrong. In terms of the reds: what they are now doing is wrong. Give the Dems a chance as you say and part of that is they choose who they want to run things although most arent particularly up with who runs every ministry and dont seem to care too much.

The flip side which I didnt mention before, and which I agree with you on, is that there are very real and long term desires, grievances and wants. These are not connected to any feeling about PAD but have been around for as long as I can remember, which is way way before Thaksin As the country has got richer the feeling that it is time for them to do better has grown and Thaksin did tap into this. Abhisit is obviously trying to do so now too. I agree with you this is only going to grow and unless policy decisions are mad eto address the underlying issues (and even Thaksin didnt) then it will lead to social unrest.

However, that will happen whether PAD speakers nad those who attended a rally are in government or not. The reality as I see it especially upcountry is that Abhisit and his government are experiencing good will and initially at least are making an effort. It remains to be seen whether they will or maybe more relevently can continue it. In this context putting PAD speakers into mostly advisor positions isnt really going to upset the mix. The mix will however be shaken if the government fail to meet at least minimum expectations upcountry either through decision or more likely through inability caused by extrenal factors.

I also think that at times the red side overstate the unwillingness of the "elite" to give anything to the majority. My read and unlike with the poor I dont have many elite connections at all;) is that this is a silly analysis. I believe the elite are quite aware of how the poorer elements of society feel and not at all indifferent to it. They are like a conservative group in any country. They dont want to undermine their own position but they equally dont want to give it all away. Careful accomodation as with most conservative groups is probably their aim. They havent in recent politcal history had an opportunity to do this as they rapidly fell out with Thaksin. Now however, with the more accomodating Abhisit they do have the opportunity to show they are willing to take a bit of hurt and assist in a "proper accomodation". I think the problem will not be that there is a lack of will but that the timing in terms of economic issues could well undermine the whole attempt and leave the country facing a more turbulent future. I would also add that personally being well to the left of any conservative I do not personally advocate this conservative accomodation but as an analysis I would think that is exactly what is going to be attempted in Thailand and for the sake of stability it would probably be good if it worked (putting aside my personal politcal opinions for a moment).

Hammered

Thoughtful post which has the great merit of making me re-examine some of my assumptions.As you say we broadly agree.To be honest I'm not sure how much the PAD appointees upset the mass of Thais but they certainly offend me, admittedly not a very important consideration!It's just that Abhisit embodies certain liberal democratic values which must jar with some of the PAD positions which say Kasit supported.It's disingenuous to say, as Abhisit has, that the past is the past.For heavens sake some US prospective cabinet appointees fail because they employed illegal maids, as opposed to holding a country to ransom.

The other point you make is well made about the "proper accomodation".What a study of history provides, despite the screams and rants from some that Thailand is unique, is the understanding that what is going on now can be replicated in various forms by many cultures and societies over the centuries.Certainly there is the possibility of give and take, but I have argued that the Thai elite has a very limited sense of enlightened self interest, as compared with the nineteenth century British landed aristocracy (I'm thinking for example of the remarkable social reforms that accompanied the extension of the franchise and the politicisation of the working classes.)If you examine the elite's actions over the last few months there have been some acts of massive stupidity which a few moments thought would have determined set back their cause.That's why I'm not sure you are right about the flexibility on the elite side.Some elements seem to think it's a zero sum game, and that's a recipe for disaster.Meanwhile as Chang Noi recently pointed out the whole country is talking, thinking, exchanging information in a way that was inconceivable a few years ago:that has implications too.

PAD violence and thuggery despite the irrefutable evidence

Is this footage your example of "irrefutable evidence"?

Once again, it was a PAD guards responding to an ambush. As unfortunate as it may be, but you don't get postcards and kisses from those guys if you throw rocks at them.

You seem to be happy to judge the whole movement by the behaviour of its guards under attack.

>>>

Let's see what exact charges the police will bring for airport shutdown. I've been asking our members here for a while now, no one seems to have any idea, only plenty of "terrorism" souts.

I got your point, the trouble is I don't know where to stick your labels. Camping out at the departure hall? Blocking the road? Wandering into the basement?

As for Government house:

"Police have already taken legal action against the nine PAD leaders for occupying Government House.

Investigation files on the case were handed to public prosecutors for consider indicting the PAD leaders for inciting unrest, commit offences with intent to change the government, break the law, racketeering."

Commit offence with intent to change the government? Break the law? What else? Plant rice on GH lawns?

"Irrefutable evidence" huh?

Quod erat demonstrandum or loosely translated, here is the proof of my argument.

He denies everything, to the point of stating there were no examples of PAD violence at all (or at least which couldn't be justified).Pointless to argue with this mentality.

The coalition government led by the Democrat party is expected to put forward the names of some People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) core members to take the posts of advisers or secretaries to various ministers at the cabinet meeting Tuesday.

Some of the likely candidates from the yellow-shirt group include Pichet Pattanachote as Public Health Minister Witthaya Kaewparadai's adviser, Samran Rodphet as Science and Technology Minister Kalaya Sophonpanich's secretary, and Praphan Khunmee as Deputy Minister of Commerce Alongkorn Ponlaboot's adviser.

Source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/13...pad-as-advisors

The problem is that ordinary people just dont care about PAD speakers advising the government. People want to see the government do something about the economy. By offering the 2000 baht to poor employees they have sent a signal to people. A rice pledge will no doubt follow if it hasnt already and maybe some agricultural debt forgiveness. If these kind of actions are happening the government could appoint Sonthi as attorney general and nobody would care beyond the small red groups.

That is politcal reality. The reds if they want to continue as a relevent organization need to work more as a watchdog on governmental corruption and excesses that hurt the people. The handouts could be criticsed on a fiscal front for example although that wouldnt fit with red ideology. To keep sniping on a purely politcal front against a government that is actually handing things out to the ordinary person will just play into government hands. That is political reality right now. Add on that people acrioss the board do seem genuinely sick of demos and the reds really need to think it through.

Hammered, I disagree.I think ordinary people are quite resentful -though not that steamed up either- that overt PAD supporters are being appointed to key positions, and your comment (hypothetical I know ) about Sonthi is just wrong in my view.Kasit's appointment is by any measure a disgrace.I think that most Thais do understand however that the priority now is the economy, and that Abhisit and team deserve a chance.So far they have made a good start.Equally I think you are right the country is sick of demos.The reds I suspect are rapidly losing momentum.However it's folly to think that the underlying resentment of many Thais -perhaps the majority -towards PAD excesses and the obvious protection the movement receieved from the establishment, is dying away.The heart of the problem is that democracy has been thwarted by vested interests, I accept not necessarily a conspiracy but different sectors acting together for varied motives.Abhisit as I say is showing a generosity of spirit absent from ideologues, and the ball in in his hands.It is obvious that the quasi fascist new politics is going nowhere on his watch.But personally I wouldn't dismiss the power behind the reds, poor and uneducated as many of them are.The low level bitterness and grievance remains.In the end they will prevail or be properly accomodated even if Thaksin is completely sidelined.Time and gravity is on their side.

Oh please, it's the footage of the aftermath of the ambush on PAD guard trucks.

They didn't plan to attack that taxi radio station, they were stopped on the other side of the road.

Even in that footage there was a helpless motorcycle driver who wasn't hit even once, though one of the guards threatened him with a machete at one point.

>>>

In the meantime the police are preparing cases against PAD for airport takeover, just as Democrat government has promised.

http://nationmultimedia.com/2009/01/14/pol...cs_30093171.php

This fellow will deny acts of PAD violence and thuggery despite the irrefutable evidence.Pointless to argue with him and his ilk.It's like arguing with Western fellow travellers in the 1950's that Stalin's death camps were other than re-education centres.

As to the prosecution of the PAD leadership for terrorism and the airport seizure, let's see.One doesn't get the impression the cases will be fast tracked as with the equally heinous offence of doing a TV cooking programme.The last I heard was that the PAD defence was that they didn't shut down the airport at all: it was the pesky AOT with their misplaced concern for "safety" and "security".Tossers.

MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra is a decent winner but he must be the most ordinary character to have won the race. Second runner-up ML Nattakorn Devakula was right - it was the Democrat Party that won the election, not its unassuming, publicity-shy candidate.

I'm not so sure about this.While the result was a good one for the Democrats, it is I believe a mistake to underestimate the personal appeal of MR Sukhumband.Over the years he has shown an independence of spirit (sceptical of fairy tales), physical courage and intellect.He may not be a slick willy politician but is that such a loss? His family is a very distinguished one and as far as I am aware he is sea green incorruptible.He has all the best attributes of the Thai patrician class, good manners and willing to listen to different points of view.I don't know for sure I suspect he has no truck for the wilder shores of PAD lunacy and their ridiculous "new (meaning old)politics", a firm supporter of parliamentary democracy and a wonderful ambassador for Bangkok in the wider world.And guess what, yet another from a top English public school (Rugby) and Oxbridge, like Abhisit and Korn.Is this a trend?

Here we have several posters who'd laugh off any suggestion of Thaksin manipulating foreign media, like WSJ or the Economist.

And will continue to do so until there is evidence the charge is other than paranoia fuelled fantasy.

name='THAIJAMES' date='2009-01-10 08:58:17' post='2457678']

They won't even accept your application if you don't have a strong chance of getting PR. The officers there are too worried about making mistakes and accepting applications from people that do not qualify.

Before they accept you they will scrutinize your paper work to the letter to make sure that it qualifies and that is complete. If it is not, they will not accept your application.

You are still allowed to provide a few documents at a later date, if they think you will be able to get these documents without problems, for example police clearance from home country or DNA tests.

For the next few months they will ask you for more documents, and if you have no problem providing these, then you are almost there.

It is down to the interview and your Thai speaking skills. However I noticed that quite a few farangs were allowed to read from a pre-written paper, Karaoke style and were actually helped by Immigration.

I noticed that most of the applicants were people that had families and brought their cute look-krung kids with them, which helped in the process. The other large part was high powered executives that were being helped by their company with paid lawyers to help them with the process.

I was one of the few single applicants doing the whole process on my own.

Overall I would say that the hard part is getting the documents ready to make an application. If you really qualify you should have most of these documents on hand already.

Go to immigration room 301 a few months early and talk to them and show them the documents that you already have. They will give you a good idea if you qualify or not and what is needed.

Once they accept your application, I think you have a very good chance of getting PR if they cannot find any subsequent mistakes or problems with your application.

This makes the very good point re PR "failures", re that they are relatively few because candidates unlikely to be successful are weeded out by Immigration at an early stage.One question I am often asked is the chances a candidate has if he meets all the requirements but only just, ie on salary/tax record.My educated guess is that there is more latitude with applications based on family reasons but don't really know.As mentioned earlier my lawyer advised me many Brits who made applications (and thus presumably complied with minimum requirements) were rejected.It's several years ago now but my impression was that this was at the Minister of Interior level, ie after Suan Plu had signed off on them.

Incidentally Thaijames, I'm assuming from your post that your own application was approved.Do you mind adsvising when? I have a mate who was in the same batch as you but hasn't heard anything yet.

Don't try to redirect the topic to PAD's alleged thuggery, the vague reference itlsef makes it hard to accept as a valid argumen

It's not an argument.The issue is your selective indignation.You have long lost your right to be relied on as commentator with balance and integrity given your record of extreme partisanship.I'm not complaining as we know where we stand with you, as we do with SRJ for example.Facts, events, views that don't accord with your very narrow vision are filtered out.If I am wrong let's see some evidence going forward.I would like to be proved in error on this.

Kindregarten brat defence, YH.

Recall all spilled milk and broken toys of the past year by the whole class to avoid admitting any wrong. "It's unfair".

Boo hoo.

Don't really understand this (apart from the petulance you often express when irritated by incontrovertible comment).Perhaps you haven't had your morning coffee yet.

First of all it's not a "defence", whether kindergarden brat or other variety.I have been very consistent in condemning this instance of red behaviour, and indeed have gone out of my way to defend Abhisit.

It's just that you would have more authority to condemn if you had even once raise your voice against the thuggery of the mob you support.Not so hard to understand.

The description of the scene is not attributed to the minister. The minister simply said what he heard, and I don't actually think he was there himself.

I see absolutely no grounds to dismiss his words as a made up lie.

Surely he would milk it for political purposes, but the woman died still believing in Abhisit and being abused for that. That much is clear.

It's the abuse that is unacceptable, not minister's account of it or attempts to paint her as a martyr of democracy.

Just why YOU cling to a weird version of a story in which none of that ever happened is truly beyond me.

Again, it's the abuse of a dying woman that is shocking, not minister's version of it.

Yes the whole incident is reprehensible, and decent people are appallled from across the political specctrum.

However if some of the outraged on this forum who are well known PAD supporters had voiced even one critical comment of the many many documented incidents of PAD thuggery, violence and intimidation, their current sense of moral outrage might have a little more force.THere's nothing wrong with having a particular political line but if this means censoring out issues, facts, events that don't conform to a particular view of the world moral outrage simply loses its meaning.

So is the general consenus...

If you meet the minimum requirements and are willing to put in the time and effort it shouldn't be a problem.

The only time it becomes an issue is if there are more than 100 for your nationality because then applicants will need to be ranked and some that meet the min requirements may not be accepted?

Is the above a fair statement???

Theres only China and India that even come close to 100, the rest are very low so it doesnt really need to be worried about

Important point often not understood.I would just add the obvious corollary that there is not the slightest compulsion for Immigration/Interior to make anywhere near the full 100 quota for each nationality.In the year I got PR I recall about 16 Brits got it.My lawyer told me many were rejected.

Its like Barack Obama and his Hawaiian Granny who expired.

Grannies are useful political props. Whilst RIP to this old lady, lets not imagine that the original stunt was other than a spinmeister-arranged photo op.

Rubbish.There's no comparison.Barack was devoted to his white grandmother who helped raise him.Most peeople were rather moved by the irony of her passing just before Obama won the presidency.Not a suggestion of grandstanding when he took time off the campaign to visit her on her deathbed.

While not the remotest bit similar all credit to Abhisit for making an effort to reach out to thge NE.Politics is partly about symbolic action anyway.I'm sure Abhisit was moved by the lady's act of kindness.Sure there was a political angle but so what.He's a politician.

Can't you work out for yourself why the Samak government managed a year while the fragile tango dancing required to manage this coalition will find it harder.

I don't think any of coalition partners are going to desert Abhisit any time soon. PPP had its chance and it was a total screw up, the country was paralised and ungovernable, there's no indication they would manage inevitable PAD protests any better or that Thaksin would finally make a breakthrough and come back as a dear leader of all Thais.

Coalition is not held together by the army but by a common understanding and so far the reds have been unconvincing.

The reds' mantra is give us elections now to see who the people want. Unfortunately for them, the ecnomic crisis demands an acting government now so it's hard to find any economists, pundits or members of the general public who agree with them.

I see what you mean.For several months some of us, certainly myself and Hammered, have been saying that the political climate in Thailand is going to be dominated by the economic storm.Any hope that Asia including China will be insulated has long evaporated.So far it must be said the impact in Thailand has been limited and the banks are in relatively good shape.But this is only the beginning.Quite fortuitously we have in the current government an economic management team that inspires confidence.This isn't the time to be politicking furiously though I think the Reds have a case.I quote in this regard a pertinent piece from New Mandala, a bit tough on Abhisit in my view but still fair comment.It's a valuable counterpoint to the lies sometimes spread on this forum.

"Here is a first-hand account of the new phase of anti-government protests in Thailand, written by anthropologist Jim Taylor of the University of Adelaide.

The pro-Democracy Red Army or Nor Por Chor (aka People’s Alliance Against Dictatorship) gathered over the past two days starting at a mass rally at Sanam Laung on 28 December with an estimated 40-50,000 people and at the main entrances to Parliament- though making sure there was a passageway clear for politicians. Abhisit, a friend of PAD (he was seen walking among the PAD protesters at Government House and giving them words of encouragement) and a proxy of the army, along with his illicitly emplaced government, many like Newin highly paid for their new loyalty, had its mandatory policy statement at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs down the road from Parliament. This was against the law- as this should have been declared in Parliament - but then the law as we have seen over the past few years can be made on the run to suit particular interests.

Demonstrators from all walks of life including a few buses from the north and the northeast reserved a special vocal resentment for Kasit. The many villagers that I talked to expressed openly a bitter disappointment and profound sadness in what they see as the biased political leanings of the highest order in society. Most traditional Red supporters in the street were too fearful according to many informants to turn up at Parliament given the media warnings of police and army intervention. Reds were also, in the main, clearly pro-Thaksin and considered the democratisation processes started by him including the empowerment of villagers in the late 1990s to have been irreversibly damaged by the turn of events in late 2006 and the fascist-inclined politics coming out of the so-called “Democrat” Party and its traditional elite supporters. Anti-Thaksin media run by Sondhi Lim and his mates especially the Manager and the English-language print media continues to give out false media and consistently lampoon Thaksin along lines of the Nazi campaign to discredit the Jews in the 1930s.

But, the Red campaign, as many rally goers told me, is much more than simply Thaksin now. The question is one of Thai democracy. Rural voters are no longer ignorant of what they can expect and should expect in resource allocation and political participation since Thaksin’s time and grasp well (even better than many Thai academics) the concepts of true democracy and social equity."

I want to know why they set the venue in Huahin. This place does not have good beach, does not have big Buddha Lord statue, does not have great Wat and has nothing special to show representatives of countries attending ASEAN Summit.

The reds until this minutes say that they don't block the Summit but they want to let these countries know that they don't accept Kasit to be Foreign Minister. He was in the PAD protests. Blocking Government House and airports are terrorists' actions.

They don't accept a terrorist in that position.

Don't be so thick-headed...

There is one reason the Summit will take place in Hua-Hin. A very powerful and a very very smart reason. The red shirt idiots will not dare protest in "his" home. Even they are not that stupid.

Brilliant move by the government, and makes them look like a better and better choice, while the reds just seem be more and more desparate. That money must really be draining away, if Thakky can only afford 30 protesters now (in front of Government House).

Abhisit has what most of our leaders have been lacking for so long. A measure of common sense.

As you know I believe the reds have a strong case and the "in the pay of Thaksin" line doesn't really work, but perhaps just forum invective.

However they cannot be allowed to disrupt the Summit, and should be dispersed forcibly if they do.They should be allocated an area distant from the hotels/conference hall where they can make all the noise they like.Although the PAD fanatics scream and rant at the thought the reality is that as to behaviour on the streets the reds have quite a responsible record, far better than the PAD thugs.Strange really since the PAD is meant to represent the educated civilised part of society while the reds are just stupid, corrupt, ignorant peasants in the pay of an exiled dictator.

Yes Hua Hin is a smart choice for the reasons you suggest.

Let me rephrase that post - Thaksin was the first one to create a popular party that developed fascist tendencies and ideology.

This is intellectually slovenly nonsense based apparently on the poster's garbled understanding of a Wiki article.I was too embarrassed on his behalf to comment at the time.Word of advice:avoid speculating on relatively complex historical comparisons which are clearly difficult for you to grasp and stick to your comical Mooonie paranioa theories.At least that's good for a laugh.The slightly sinister aspect is that he perhaps seeking to divert attention from the genuine quasi-fascist aspects of the PAD leadership.But the more likely explanation he doesn't have the faintest idea.

The airport shut down was a terrorist act.It's not a matter of just faulty perception.

It IS a matter of perception, and it's Kosit's job to explain the issue to foreign diplomats and win their support.

You don't seem to have much grasp of political realities....All this will require compromise on every side.

The reality is that compromise on Thaksin is not possible, there are only TWO sides to this conflict and there's no middle ground between them that could serve as a platform for compromise.

Right now Democrats are on top, they "won", and they need to win acceptance of their opponents by doing what they are supposed to do - governing the country, not by compromising with Thaksin.

So, the ideal scenario is for Abhisit to deliver the goods so that Thaksin fans would say "He's not so bad after all, we'll leave him alone".

Less than ideal scenario would be for him to hold elections and win, and force Thaksin fans to shut up because Abhisit's got the real majority behind him.

The reality that escapes you, however, is that Thaksin won't be stopped by silly things like election losses, he'll find a million reasons for his reds to go on. Right now they lost parliamentary battle fair and square yet they still claim that the government is illegitimate, and nothing will ever change their position, only if Thaksin finally gives up or his fans start to like Abhisit, as per scenario one.

I repeat again - compromise with Thaksin is not possible, not unless he submits himself to the courts, ie gives up. His asset seizure trial starts in three monhts, btw.

If you want to persuade foreigners the outrages at the airports were somehow justified, you don't use someone whose reputation has been contaminated through his participation in and support for that criminal act.It's not too hard to understand.

------

Either of the two scenarios you detail is acceptable.

The reds do however have a powerful case as every independent observer would attest.My own view is that they are entitled to campaign but should do so peacefully.I think the national mood is to give Abhisit a chance, notwithstanding his path to power was somewhat dubious.He needs a direct mandate from the Thai people.

If Thaksin doesn't accept the results of a fair election, he and his supporters don't deserve any sympathy.But all the evidence is surely that they are prepared to accept a freely given democratic verdict (because they think they will win).Remember it was the forces represented by the coup makers that sought to distort the democratic wishes of the Thai people.The fairness of the next election needs to be rigorously monitored given the shockingly bad record of the military among others in seeking to influnce the result.

You say compromise with Thaksin is impossible (I assume you speak only for yourself: if I am wrong lets hear more about these constituencies who say compromise is impossible).That's what they said before the Hitler-Stalin pact.Who really knows in say three years from now.Many of Thaksin's reforms now have almost universal support so you could say compromise has already begun.

I mentioned it earlier - Kosit's first job is to overcome the perception that airport shutdown was a terrorist act.

Foreign Minister doesn't mean a minister to please foreigners. If they, or whoever else, have their own perception of what happened, Thailand doesn't need to comply.

If you, or anyone else, want to believe that Thailand finally has a neutral government acceptable to all parties - you are deluding yourself.

There has never been a "third way" or a "silent majority" and this non-existent force most certainly hasn't won anything.

PAD and Democrats have a lot of common ground, THEY won, live with it.

And it is their job to win recognition of the public, they don't need to pretend to be someone else.

The airport shut down was a terrorist act.It's not a matter of just faulty perception.The leadership of the PAD should face criminal charges and perhaps they will.

Of course the responsibility of the Foreign Minister is to serve Thailand's interests, not to please foreigners.At the same time it is almost an act of insanity to place a man with such a disgraceful record as Thailand's contact point.Not quite as brain dead as appointing Tony Blair as i/c the Middle East peace process but getting close to it.I doubt whether Kasit will last long in the job.

I thought Khun Abhisit said he was Prime Minister in the interests of all Thais not just a faction.Your mean spiritedness isn't shared by him.Yes some Democrats share the PAD philosophy but one shouldn't overlook that many latterly rejected the movement's extremism and quasi-fascist tendencies.

You don't seem to have much grasp of political realities. By trumpeting "They won, live with it", you simply demonstrate your fanatacism and naivety in equal measures.If the Dems intend to consolidate power they will need to win over vast swathes of Thai population who are broadly in the Thaksin camp.I know you want to destroy representative democracy with your lunatic new politics, but there's no sign anyone has much enthusiasm for that.Abhisit knows he will have to obtain mandate from the Thai people in a general election.All this will require compromise on every side.

"We will write to all nine Asean ambassadors to ask them to convey our message that the red-shirts will not allow Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya to host the ASEAN meeting," core pro-Thaksin leader Jatuporn Prompan told AFP.

"We will not allow the terrorist Kasit to host the summit. We will mobilise hundreds of thousands to rally to show that the majority of Thai people do not accept him," said Jatuporn, who is also an opposition lawmaker.

- AFP / 2009-01-06

I wouldn't quite put it this way but for all but the most fanatical PAD believers, Jatuporn has a valid point.Kasit's position as FM is a disgrace given his behaviour in active support for terrorism.It's the common talk among diplomatic staff in Bangkok and I suspect his tenure of the post won't be that long.A pity really for from what I understand he was a diligent and admirable diplomat.Another slightly sad aspect is that a proper apology to the TRhai people would, as far as I am concerned, would clear the decks.This isn't the time to hold grudges.

I see Abhisit the phoney's nephew is also a toff at Eton.

What a fantastic message that sends out...

Wonder if he will get a vote,...at least he will be able to learn all about the ignorant and uneducated rural thai poor.

As I have often mentioned it's almost impossible to underestimate the chippy class sensitivity of the English lower middle classes.As though being an Etonian was some sort of crime.

If I'm not mistaken Abhisit's nephew won a King's Scholarship a couple of years ago to Eton from his Bangkok school, a fantastic achievement since it is a highly demanding and rigorous exam.I would have thought all those who have Thailand's interests at heart should be very proud of him.

Ex Thaksin spokman / ex-Foreign Minister also won a King's Scholarship to study law in Oxford. Should we be proud of Noppadon Pattama too?

You betray your ignorance.King's Scholars at Eton are named after the founder, Henry VI of England.The name has nothing to do with Thailand's system of King's Scholarships.

I see Abhisit the phoney's nephew is also a toff at Eton.

What a fantastic message that sends out...

Wonder if he will get a vote,...at least he will be able to learn all about the ignorant and uneducated rural thai poor.

As I have often mentioned it's almost impossible to underestimate the chippy class sensitivity of the English lower middle classes.As though being an Etonian was some sort of crime.

If I'm not mistaken Abhisit's nephew won a King's Scholarship a couple of years ago to Eton from his Bangkok school, a fantastic achievement since it is a highly demanding and rigorous exam.I would have thought all those who have Thailand's interests at heart should be very proud of him.

PAD has confronted many government ministers in the South, not once any incident of throwing eggs or anything at them was reported.

And then there's the image of Chuan - he's not Samak or Chalerm who most of the time just ask to be abused back.

You guys argue lack of democracy when here we have lack of civility.

Lack of civility is the issue, and it's not really a partisan one.What's needed in Thailand is a more generous spirit and not the assumption one's opponents are sat pralaat.Abhisit is setting a very good example, and actually it's in tune with the best of Thai culture.Bangkok Pundit makes a good pont.

"The same thing happened to PPP MPs and Ministers who visited the South. They were harassed at the airport on arrival and protesters besieged their hotel or whatever venue they were at for their meeting. Sensibly, in one instance, Abhisit criticised the yellow shirts that were doing this and so should Puea Thai MPs criticise anyone who harasses and impedes Democrat MPs and Ministers from doing their job (this should be applied more strictly to Ministers than out of district MPs). MPs are elected to perform duties and people can protest against them, but this is not a protest, it is harassment. Idiots come in all shapes and sizes and shirt colors."

Oh they are SOOO democratic, those reds.

So peaceful, so civilised, true hope of democracy in Thailand.

Chuan and Abhisit should continue with what they are doing, in the long run red idiots and PTP are the biggest danger to themselves.

What a load of piffle.Citizens of every country have been throwing eggs at politicians for centuries.This kind of mock outrage would be slightly more convincing if you condemned -just once- the thuggery, intimidation and violence we experienced with the PAD mob.

The airport authorities closed the installation for safety reasons.You seem to be arguing this leaves PAD off the hook.I've heard this line before and find it strangely childish.On this kind of logic Britain was responsible for WW2 because it declared war on Germany.

The arguments should be thrashed out in court and the PAD leadership should in my view be denied bail given the seriousness of the charges.Again reality check required.Do you seriously suppose that if a similar band of creeps tried this stunt in a major country, they would not be behind bars? Do you seriously think that if the Tokyo airport authorities were compelled to close Narita for similar safety reasons, the responsible terrorists would be off the hook? But then, as we're always being told, the normal rules don't apply in Thailand.

Bla bla bla, terrorists, bla bla bla.

What charges?

At least on the first day they haven't done anything overtly illegal. They were just there, in public areas. They might have done something during the week they stayed there but I don't know exactly what and no one would tell.

They didn't block the runway, for example, as those British protesters. They didn't break into the control tower, I'm not even sure they went pass manned immigration checkpoints.

You give a new dimension to obtuse so far as the airport seizure is concerned.Just ask yourself the question whether the PAD leadership would be in deep deep trouble probably involving jail sentences over this stunt if in any other country.I've asked this several times, never got a coherent response.And you're still babbling on about the PAD mob not blocking the runways etc.It's almost comical if not deeply depressing.

- - - -

On the establishment you were always prattling on about the people that matter until a few months ago (perhaps it didn't quite accord with your view that there was no systematic plan to defang Thaksin).Anyway those are the people I mean.

First Thaksin wasn't the elite because of his poor background, now that was proven to be rubbish and he isn't the elite because he is not Bangkokian, even more laughable charge.

Bangkok is awash with people from provinces who made it big, including descendants of Chinese immigrants.

The fact is Thaksin was as "elite" as they come.

>>>>

I specifically asked for possible charges against PAD, all we get in reply is "terrorism".

Let me clarify it a bit - did they break into the control tower? Did they break into any secure areas? Did they use force against airport security during this "takeover"?

What exactly do you want them to be charged with? They blocked the road, true, there were present in public areas of the terminal, but that's not even trespassing.

It seems you need to do some homework on the meaning of establishment, although I suspect you know as well as I do.I'm not making a weighty point here but it's worth pointing oit much of the antagonism towards Thaksin (often justified I agree) was compounded by snobbery.

--------

The airport authorities closed the installation for safety reasons.You seem to be arguing this leaves PAD off the hook.I've heard this line before and find it strangely childish.On this kind of logic Britain was responsible for WW2 because it declared war on Germany.

The arguments should be thrashed out in court and the PAD leadership should in my view be denied bail given the seriousness of the charges.Again reality check required.Do you seriously suppose that if a similar band of creeps tried this stunt in a major country, they would not be behind bars? Do you seriously think that if the Tokyo airport authorities were compelled to close Narita for similar safety reasons, the responsible terrorists would be off the hook? But then, as we're always being told, the normal rules don't apply in Thailand.

I agree with them, it is indeed a fascinating story which I would recommend reading, somewhat adjusted in later re-telling by himself, but starting with his great-grandfather who as a Chinese migrant a hundred years earlier became a 'tax farmer' for the Siamese government. Which makes him pretty much establishment.

You underestimate the extent to which Thaksin was an outsider to the Bangkok elite.Certainly he was from an established Chiengmai family but he was never "establishment", too vulgar, coarse and ambitious.British counterpart - though it doesn't quite work- might be Michael Heseltine, the sort of man a Tory grandee sniffily remarked who "brought his own furniture"

Good point. So you'd say that the establishment is, by definition, solely Bangkok ?

If you don't understand what the establishment means in this context, I'm not sure how best to respond.The Bangok aspect isn't particularly important but as with most countries the capital is where power bases are generally found.