MangoKorat

Thanks for your balanced comments. I'm not going to go too far down this road as its getting off topic but - if you know martial arts well, you will also know that the most effective are those that use the power and momentum of the attacker against them. For example grabbing the punching fist when almost at full stretch, pull down, shoulder stop, roll and throw. You should know that one.

As I said earlier, it goes with the territory - this went down in a trashy city in a trashy bar, not knocking it, everything has its place. It wasn't in a Silom cocktail bar - its Pattaya, party town! You'll always get people who can't take their drink in such places and a professional bouncer should know how to deal with drunks.

No they didn't, you don't fight fire with fire. So according to you, if someone gets drunk and starts getting violent, its OK for someone who's sober, several somebody's in a lot of cases in Thailand, to deal with the problem via more violence? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Bouncers in Thailand remind me of how they used to be in the UK, they only do the job so they can get violent with foreigners and even then, I can honestly say that I've never seen one on one violence between bar drunks and bouncers - I have however, seen 5 or 6 bouncers beating the cr&% out of just one drunk.

Muay Thai is actually pretty useless against someone who can fight. Excellent against another Muay Thai fighter in a match but in other situations, not a lot of good. I had a young Thai guy, drunk, I'll admit, come at me in a Bangkok club once - leg in the air, trying to floor me with a Muay Thai kick, I grabbed his ankle, pulled him toward me and chopped him in the adams apple. He didn't get up again and I'm no hard man.

And? Isn't that what people do when they go to bars? Yes, some get unruly - even violent when drunk but that goes with the territory when you run a bar and serve alcohol. Bouncers are supposed to restrain and remove, not hospitalise.

Nope, they need to be put in a room - one on one with a foreigner of a similar age, then see how tough they are.

I'd like to think there will be change of some description but its difficult to guess what that might be. I can't see a split of the country - Thailand is very 'Bangkok Centric' so a North/South divide would very much hobble the North. The generals would never let it happen anyway - the North feeds the South. Move Forward appear to be trustworthy and I believe, should be given the benefit of the doubt on that, until they prove otherwise. Their policies threaten the very heart of the status quo - a status quo that guarantees the wealth of a few at the expense of the many. That was never going to be allowed. In the past, when things have gone to far, when the piggies trough has been in danger of being tipped over - there has been a coup. The generals came up with what Baldrick would call a 'cunning plan' - change the constitution in such a way that we don't need to have any more coups - after all, coups are damaging from an international perspective. So they could retain their position, remain sitting at the trough but appear to be far distant. Move Forward threatened the very stones that the trough sits on. They had many policies to reform the country - some aimed at the lesse majeste laws, some aimed directly at the income that fills the trough - its all connected. For example: The Alcohol Duopoly. Just two brewers exist in Thailand - Thai Bev and Bood Rawd , basically Chang and Singha. Thai Bev hold about 34% of the beer market with Boon Rawd holding 58%. There is another smaller brewer/importer that hold the other 8% but its unclear why that was allowed to happen. The law is a little complicated but basically, in order to start a brewery in Thailand, a company must be able to brew xxx zillion litres of beer per year - a hideous figure that I can't remember but its one that no start up company would ever attempt. Hence the monopoly of beer sales in Thailand and therefore the profit, belongs to just 2 families - Thai Chinese billionaire Charoen Sirivadhanabhakdi and his family own Thai Bev and Bhurit “Tae” Bhirombhakdi & family own Boon Rawd. Move Forward proposed ending this duopoly which is why I say 'Move Forward threatened the very stones that the trough sits on'. In my opinion, in terms of a threat, this is far more relevant than any proposals to change to the lesse majeste laws. It is entirely possible that the 'establishment' are using Move Forward's proposals to change the lesse majeste laws in order to make them look like anti royalists - something that would chime with a good proportion of the electorate. I believe that changes affecting wealth are the real reason they oppose Move Forward. Thai politics are both complicated and childish in the same breath, you can get totally lost trying to understand them until you just take a step back and ask why? Why are they like this? End of the day........power - and power = wealth. Not much different to many countries in reality - just a more childish and intermeshed way of going about it. However, the wealth that's at the foot of most of what goes on appears to be far more concentrated than it is in other countries. According to a highly educated Thai friend who has followed the history - wealth is held by just 5 or 6 families - of course those who do their bidding are very well compensated so it may appear to be bigger than that. To maintain that wealth, the South needs the North - no way would a split ever be allowed.

Until the divorce that is................................................................

I'm going to go back to sleep and see if this thread is still here when I wake up again - I must be imagining this - I'm sure I've seen this question before somewhere, about 25 years ago!

To be fair, I really expected serious mass demonstrations when Move Forward were denied the right to form a government with Pita at the top. However, talking to Thai people it seems they have simply given up - most just say nothing will ever change. Acceptance is in the culture - if only this had happened in France! A general strike might produce some results but so soon after covid where ordinary Thai people suffered serious financial hardship, I don't think they have either the will or the cash to tide them through the additional hardship a strike would create. It would certainly shake the generals up a bit though. I really wish they would protest en mass and refuse to accept this sham of a 'democracy' but on reflection, I can't see it happening - not in a way that would bring any results. If just a few thousand protest, they will be treated in the same way as the students were a couple of years back and they will achieve nothing. A very, very sad state of affairs - the worst I've seen it when what's gone on is examined. This gives momentum to the generals though - after getting away with this, they are probably more convinced than ever that they can do whatever they like.

Did you really have to post that photo? Its bad enough that he's all over the news again without having to look at him!

You're a long way off the mark. The people understand that in any normal democratic process, Pita would have been Prime Minister. There's been accusations about just about anyone who's looked like threatening the status quo for years. And that's what's really going on here - the piggies don't want to move away from the trough. The new constitution made sure they didn't have to - how many democracies do you know where the winning party has to seek permission to form a government? That's how the generals could promise 'no more coups' - they don't need a coup when they have a senate that only allows their friends to hold power. If the constitution is changed and either gets rid of the senate or dliutes their power - coups will return. Yes, the Thai people voted for the new constitution (supposedly) but there was virtual martial law at that time - the opposition weren't allowed to campaign - either publicly or on TV. Nobody really knew what they were voting for - if they did actually vote that way, which is highly questionable in itself. The fact is that the generals/elite families are not going to let go of power/wealth and they will continue to control the people that make them that wealth in any and all ways possible. Democracy? Just a sham, there has never been and will never be democracy in Thailand without a civil war. Anyone who does or says anything against the generals or tries to change the grossly unfair laws that keep the people down - finds themselves either accused of some crime or other and/or is locked up. People have also simply disappeared! It never fails to amaze me just how many Thai politicians have accusations levied agaist them as soon as they become a threat. The Thai version of democracy closely resembles that of another country who the government have been cosying up to - lock up/silence your rivals. Give you a clue, that country is currently at war. My girlfriend spoke volumes in just one sentence when she said, 'after the election result we had hope, real hope, now we have nothing again'. That's the general feeling amongst the population. Pita/Move Forward had the guts to stand up to 'the system' and they also showed real resolve recently when they refused to drop the policies that the people voted for in order to form a government with Pheu Thai. Hat's off to them, what they did was a real change in Thailand - its just a shame that the whole rotten system is set up in such a way that change is highly unlikely to be achieved.

Was it after 5pm?

Fantastic idea - there's not much traffic and/or or road works on highways 35 and 4 are there? A bit more traffic will go down really well ????.

Yes, even 14 million votes didn't lead to change. The only thing that could lead to real change in Thailand is civil war and I doubt there is any appetite for that amongst the long suffering 'underdog' Thai people. As long as there is a trough, the piggies will eat at it and it doesn't seem that anyone is capable of removing that trough.

Not that it makes much difference but for the sake of being correct - this girl is 13 years old.

Quite a lot of the above answers are wrong. You do not have to go to the area where the car is registered to change ownership/plates. That can be done at the buyer's local Land Transport Office. I did exactly that last year. Secondly, a couple of years ago I was told that if a car is registered in Bangkok, it does not have to have new plates, the number can stay but the owners address will change to their current address. I was told that this only applies to cars with a Bangkok registration - all others must be given a new number.