sweeneythailand

what a crock of shit her hotel was in the usa me thinks she was not there

Provinces under State Of Emergency (SOE) and Curfew:

Chonburi, Samut Prakan, Nonthaburi, Pathum Thani, Ayutthaya, Khon Kaen, Udon Thani, Chaiyaphum, Nakhon Ratchasima, Si Sa Ket, Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai, Nan, Lampang and Nakhon Sawan, Bangkok and Nonthaburi and parts of Samut Prakan, Pathum Thani, Nakhon Pathom, Ubon Ratchahani, Maha Sarakam, Roi-et, Nongbua Lumpoo, and Sakhon Nakorn, Kalasin and Ayutthaya

the people are pissed now the war will start poor against the rich not a lot a curfew will do to stop it

Sorry that was to read Countries not counties. haha

Feel much the same, don't know if it's because I grew up playing the banjo (pretty rusty now).

I will add two more.

Harsh money, banking, and investment rules and laws always stacked against foreigners, and often against Thai's as well. Aging, with family, one often needs to take care of ones savings and assets as best as possible. Very hard to do in Thailand. (land and housing is of course part of that).

Noise.

Features

Thailand's class divide

Tuesday 18 May 2010 Printable Email

Thailand is a deeply divided society. Its level of social inequality is stark even in comparison with some of its regional neighbours.

A recent survey by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) showed that the richest 20 per cent of the Thai population own 56 per cent of the country's wealth, while the bottom 60 per cent has less than 25 per cent.

This inequality is at the heart of the conflict engulfing Thailand at the moment.

Around five million Thais live below the official poverty line, which is equivalent to £23.60 per month. While the bulk of poverty-stricken Thais in the rural areas of the north and north-east, around 1.3 million of the total are the urban poor.

The past 20 years have seen an acceleration of urbanisation as rural inhabitants have migrated to the cities, such as Bangkok and Chiang Mai, as well as to the international tourist resorts of Phuket and Koh Samui, in search of jobs.

In 1980, around 70 per cent of the country's workforce was rural. Today the figure is just over 40 per cent.

However this urbanisation has not resulted in the creation of a stable working class and in turn accounts for the weak presence of an organised labour movement in the current struggles.

Figures show that out of 11 million workers in the private sector, less than 3 per cent were unionised. The labour movement is divided into as many as 10 different trade union congresses.

The private-sector unions are often only organised at a single factory level, therefore their average membership is just a couple of hundred per union, a figure well below the critical mass for effective struggle.

During 2008 and 2009, the Thai Labour Ministry registered only 133 labour disputes and six strikes across the whole country.

Around one-quarter of the entire urban Thai labour force is engaged in the so-called informal sector - in other words they have no stable employment, no contracts, no regular salaries and no social insurance protection.

The figure is even higher among the rural workforce.

Even in key sectors such as manufacturing and construction, informal workers make up 22.1 and 47.8 per cent of those engaged in these industries. In the transport and hotel industries (critically important to Thailand's tourism industry), the figures rise to 51 and 73 per cent respectively.

In total, around 65 per cent of the Thai workforce have no social insurance.

Despite Thailand itself being a low-wage economy, large numbers of migrant workers from neighbouring countries are also employed at rates substantially lower than the Thais. There are an estimated 1.6 million registered migrant workers and perhaps a million more unregistered. This depresses wage levels, makes union organisation among these vulnerable workers immensely difficult and provides convenient scapegoats for economic and social problems.

In the countryside, things are no better. Although a highly productive agricultural economy, Thailand's farmers face huge difficulties in making ends meet.

In 2003, there were 5.8 million families with agricultural land, but 1.4 million owned less than 0.8 hectares. As a result, rural families are often reliant on loans and remittances from relatives who have gone to the cities.

The rural areas have also suffered from deprivation in terms of poor infrastructure and communications, as well as unreliable access to education and health services.

This last point is crucial. Ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra built his support on providing cheap health care to the majority of Thais. If there is one single issue that secured his electoral base it was this.

Until recently, accessible health care was available to the wealthy and to those living in cities. According to the World Health Organisation, in 2000-6 there were four physicians for every 10,000 people in Thailand, compared with 12 in the Philippines and 15 in Singapore. Even socialist Vietnam, a country with a substantially smaller GDP than Thailand, has six doctors per 10,000 people.

The doctors who do exist are also concentrated disproportionately in wealthier regions. In Bangkok there is one doctor to every 850 people, but in the mountainous Loei province there is only one for every 14,159 people.

Thaksin's first government introduced the Universal Health Care (UHC) system in 2001 to provide affordable medical treatment for all Thais.

By 2007, 63.2 million people out of the total population of 66 million had some form of health insurance coverage. Around eight million were covered as employees contributing to the social security fund, six million as government staff, state enterprise employees or retirees or family members, 1.4 million were covered by company schemes and 0.6 million under other schemes.

However, it was opening up access to health care for the remaining 48.4 million of the Thai population that transformed the landscape.

This hitherto unprotected and neglected section of Thai people were issued with cards entitling them to health care for a fee of 30 baht (around 65p) per doctor or hospital visit. This fee was then eliminated in 2007.

According to researchers, this one scheme alone enabled one million Thais to rise above the official poverty line. It ensured Thaksin's political base.

This yawning social divide is at the heart of the current crisis. It is no longer hidden but has now become an undeniable part of the conflict that has moved well beyond a campaign to reinstate Thaksin. Thailand's democratic and class struggles are now effectively intertwined.

A turbulent history...

Few countries have suffered as much from the big screen as Thailand. Patronised in Hollywood's King and I, eroticised in the soft-porn Emanuelle and portrayed as a hedonistic playground in The Beach, this beautiful and complex country has been reduced to a series of Western-imposed cliches that fit the stereotypes of submissive, duplicitous and sensuous Orientals.

Official histories in Thailand are little better, portraying virtuous, noble monarchs leading a proud and united Thai people resisting foreign domination for century after century.

This is no academic exercise in historical debate. Conservative and semi-fascist forces in Thailand today attempt to portray the Red Shirt opposition as opponents of this idealised Thai nation. Rightwingers imply that the pro-democracy demonstrators are not really Thai, not simply that their loyalties are suspect but that somehow they have betrayed their bloodline.

Dr Tul Sitthisomwong, a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Medicine, was quoted in the Thai media as saying that "speaking as a doctor, love for the country and the king was embedded only in Thais' DNA, not that of other peoples. It was a pity that many Thais had mutated and did not have the love for the king in their DNA and should not be called Thai."

Naturally the truth is a little more complex.

The modern kingdom of Thailand was internationally known as Siam until 1932. The word Thai is in derived from the term Tai, used to describe a broader ethnic group, who originated in south-western China and migrated southwards over 1,000 years ago.

Over several centuries, these Tai peoples gradually established their own principalities and statelets and fought long-running wars with neighbouring peoples, such as the Burmese, Khmer, Vietnamese and Malays, each seeking to stake a claim to contested territory.

Much of the land they settled in had once been part of a network of mixed Hindu and Buddhist states. This was a reflection of Indian cultural influence that stretched from the subcontinent through south-east Asia, reaching as far as the Indonesian island of Bali, which is still Hindu today.

These states were highly advanced, as shown by the famous Angkor Wat complex in Cambodia, originally built to honour the Hindu god Vishnu but adapted to later Buddhist influences.

Even today, the US-born Thai king Bhumibol includes among his titles Rama Maharaja - a reference to the country's Hindu influences. The Thai monarchy still uses many Sanskrit-derived terms in its honorific titles.

By the late 1700s, the ethnically Tai state of Siam had become a powerful regional force. It eventually settled its capital at Bangkok after Burmese invaders sacked its previous one at Ayutthaya.

As in feudal Europe, Siam was created as a result of the absorption and unification of a number of minor states through diplomacy, invasion or alliance. Its influence extended to a number of surrounding regions, some also ethnically Tai such as the Shan States in modern Myanmar, what is today Laos, parts of south-west China, as well as to weaker non-Tai neighbours such as the Malay sultanates and Cambodia.

However, with the arrival of European powers seeking colonies in Asia, a second set of factors began to shape the emergence of modern Thailand.

Despite Thai pride that the country was never colonised, the truth is that a helpless Thai ruling class bargained away large swathes of territory in ransom to British and French imperialism.

Following Britain's consolidation of colonial rule in India and in the Malayan peninsula, Britain looked to incorporate the patchwork of small principalities and sultanates that were under the Thai throne. By the late 1890s, the British empire had annexed the Shan States to British Burma and several sultanates to British Malaya. The French were no less active, adding Cambodia, a Thai vassal state, and the Tai-speaking territories of Laos, to French Indochina.

These steps effectively put Thailand in a vice, squeezed by the British from the west and south and the French from the east.

However, neither the British nor French were keen on directly sharing borders of their possessions. Thailand's independence was guaranteed, therefore, only as a buffer state.

An avalanche of treaties, invariably broken and then renegotiated to their benefit by the colonial powers, saw 25,000 square miles of Thai-controlled territory lost to the European colonialists in the 19th century.

In 1896, an Anglo-French convention defined spheres of influence in south-east Asia, which formalised Thailand's status.

As elsewhere, the arbitrary partition of territories to satisfy the desires of outside powers meant many unresolved territorial disputes and ethnic anomalies.

In recent years, three provinces in southern Thailand, Pattani Yala and Narathiwat, the remnants of the Malay sultanate of Pattani, have been the scene of a bloody insurgency by its ethnically Malay and Muslim inhabitants against the Thai state.

Border tensions between Thailand, Laos and Cambodia likewise have their roots not in a mutually agreed negotiation of frontiers but on those imposed on both countries over a century ago.

This country's fascinating history has again become a battleground as political forces on both sides seek to mobilise the ghosts of the past as allies in the struggles of the present.

Thailand's class divide

Tuesday 18 May 2010

Thailand is a deeply divided society. Its level of social inequality is stark even in comparison with some of its regional neighbours.

A recent survey by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) showed that the richest 20 per cent of the Thai population own 56 per cent of the country's wealth, while the bottom 60 per cent has less than 25 per cent.

This inequality is at the heart of the conflict engulfing Thailand at the moment.

Around five million Thais live below the official poverty line, which is equivalent to £23.60 per month. While the bulk of poverty-stricken Thais in the rural areas of the north and north-east, around 1.3 million of the total are the urban poor.

The past 20 years have seen an acceleration of urbanisation as rural inhabitants have migrated to the cities, such as Bangkok and Chiang Mai, as well as to the international tourist resorts of Phuket and Koh Samui, in search of jobs.

In 1980, around 70 per cent of the country's workforce was rural. Today the figure is just over 40 per cent.

However this urbanisation has not resulted in the creation of a stable working class and in turn accounts for the weak presence of an organised labour movement in the current struggles.

Figures show that out of 11 million workers in the private sector, less than 3 per cent were unionised. The labour movement is divided into as many as 10 different trade union congresses.

The private-sector unions are often only organised at a single factory level, therefore their average membership is just a couple of hundred per union, a figure well below the critical mass for effective struggle.

During 2008 and 2009, the Thai Labour Ministry registered only 133 labour disputes and six strikes across the whole country.

Around one-quarter of the entire urban Thai labour force is engaged in the so-called informal sector - in other words they have no stable employment, no contracts, no regular salaries and no social insurance protection.

The figure is even higher among the rural workforce.

Even in key sectors such as manufacturing and construction, informal workers make up 22.1 and 47.8 per cent of those engaged in these industries. In the transport and hotel industries (critically important to Thailand's tourism industry), the figures rise to 51 and 73 per cent respectively.

In total, around 65 per cent of the Thai workforce have no social insurance.

Despite Thailand itself being a low-wage economy, large numbers of migrant workers from neighbouring countries are also employed at rates substantially lower than the Thais. There are an estimated 1.6 million registered migrant workers and perhaps a million more unregistered. This depresses wage levels, makes union organisation among these vulnerable workers immensely difficult and provides convenient scapegoats for economic and social problems.

In the countryside, things are no better. Although a highly productive agricultural economy, Thailand's farmers face huge difficulties in making ends meet.

In 2003, there were 5.8 million families with agricultural land, but 1.4 million owned less than 0.8 hectares. As a result, rural families are often reliant on loans and remittances from relatives who have gone to the cities.

The rural areas have also suffered from deprivation in terms of poor infrastructure and communications, as well as unreliable access to education and health services.

This last point is crucial. Ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra built his support on providing cheap health care to the majority of Thais. If there is one single issue that secured his electoral base it was this.

Until recently, accessible health care was available to the wealthy and to those living in cities. According to the World Health Organisation, in 2000-6 there were four physicians for every 10,000 people in Thailand, compared with 12 in the Philippines and 15 in Singapore. Even socialist Vietnam, a country with a substantially smaller GDP than Thailand, has six doctors per 10,000 people.

The doctors who do exist are also concentrated disproportionately in wealthier regions. In Bangkok there is one doctor to every 850 people, but in the mountainous Loei province there is only one for every 14,159 people.

Thaksin's first government introduced the Universal Health Care (UHC) system in 2001 to provide affordable medical treatment for all Thais.

By 2007, 63.2 million people out of the total population of 66 million had some form of health insurance coverage. Around eight million were covered as employees contributing to the social security fund, six million as government staff, state enterprise employees or retirees or family members, 1.4 million were covered by company schemes and 0.6 million under other schemes.

However, it was opening up access to health care for the remaining 48.4 million of the Thai population that transformed the landscape.

This hitherto unprotected and neglected section of Thai people were issued with cards entitling them to health care for a fee of 30 baht (around 65p) per doctor or hospital visit. This fee was then eliminated in 2007.

According to researchers, this one scheme alone enabled one million Thais to rise above the official poverty line. It ensured Thaksin's political base.

This yawning social divide is at the heart of the current crisis. It is no longer hidden but has now become an undeniable part of the conflict that has moved well beyond a campaign to reinstate Thaksin. Thailand's democratic and class struggles are now effectively intertwined.

A turbulent history...

Few countries have suffered as much from the big screen as Thailand. Patronised in Hollywood's King and I, eroticised in the soft-porn Emanuelle and portrayed as a hedonistic playground in The Beach, this beautiful and complex country has been reduced to a series of Western-imposed cliches that fit the stereotypes of submissive, duplicitous and sensuous Orientals.

Official histories in Thailand are little better, portraying virtuous, noble monarchs leading a proud and united Thai people resisting foreign domination for century after century.

This is no academic exercise in historical debate. Conservative and semi-fascist forces in Thailand today attempt to portray the Red Shirt opposition as opponents of this idealised Thai nation. Rightwingers imply that the pro-democracy demonstrators are not really Thai, not simply that their loyalties are suspect but that somehow they have betrayed their bloodline.

Dr Tul Sitthisomwong, a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Medicine, was quoted in the Thai media as saying that "speaking as a doctor, love for the country and the king was embedded only in Thais' DNA, not that of other peoples. It was a pity that many Thais had mutated and did not have the love for the king in their DNA and should not be called Thai."

Naturally the truth is a little more complex.

The modern kingdom of Thailand was internationally known as Siam until 1932. The word Thai is in derived from the term Tai, used to describe a broader ethnic group, who originated in south-western China and migrated southwards over 1,000 years ago.

Over several centuries, these Tai peoples gradually established their own principalities and statelets and fought long-running wars with neighbouring peoples, such as the Burmese, Khmer, Vietnamese and Malays, each seeking to stake a claim to contested territory.

Much of the land they settled in had once been part of a network of mixed Hindu and Buddhist states. This was a reflection of Indian cultural influence that stretched from the subcontinent through south-east Asia, reaching as far as the Indonesian island of Bali, which is still Hindu today.

These states were highly advanced, as shown by the famous Angkor Wat complex in Cambodia, originally built to honour the Hindu god Vishnu but adapted to later Buddhist influences.

Even today, the US-born Thai king Bhumibol includes among his titles Rama Maharaja - a reference to the country's Hindu influences. The Thai monarchy still uses many Sanskrit-derived terms in its honorific titles.

By the late 1700s, the ethnically Tai state of Siam had become a powerful regional force. It eventually settled its capital at Bangkok after Burmese invaders sacked its previous one at Ayutthaya.

As in feudal Europe, Siam was created as a result of the absorption and unification of a number of minor states through diplomacy, invasion or alliance. Its influence extended to a number of surrounding regions, some also ethnically Tai such as the Shan States in modern Myanmar, what is today Laos, parts of south-west China, as well as to weaker non-Tai neighbours such as the Malay sultanates and Cambodia.

However, with the arrival of European powers seeking colonies in Asia, a second set of factors began to shape the emergence of modern Thailand.

Despite Thai pride that the country was never colonised, the truth is that a helpless Thai ruling class bargained away large swathes of territory in ransom to British and French imperialism.

Following Britain's consolidation of colonial rule in India and in the Malayan peninsula, Britain looked to incorporate the patchwork of small principalities and sultanates that were under the Thai throne. By the late 1890s, the British empire had annexed the Shan States to British Burma and several sultanates to British Malaya. The French were no less active, adding Cambodia, a Thai vassal state, and the Tai-speaking territories of Laos, to French Indochina.

These steps effectively put Thailand in a vice, squeezed by the British from the west and south and the French from the east.

However, neither the British nor French were keen on directly sharing borders of their possessions. Thailand's independence was guaranteed, therefore, only as a buffer state.

An avalanche of treaties, invariably broken and then renegotiated to their benefit by the colonial powers, saw 25,000 square miles of Thai-controlled territory lost to the European colonialists in the 19th century.

In 1896, an Anglo-French convention defined spheres of influence in south-east Asia, which formalised Thailand's status.

As elsewhere, the arbitrary partition of territories to satisfy the desires of outside powers meant many unresolved territorial disputes and ethnic anomalies.

In recent years, three provinces in southern Thailand, Pattani Yala and Narathiwat, the remnants of the Malay sultanate of Pattani, have been the scene of a bloody insurgency by its ethnically Malay and Muslim inhabitants against the Thai state.

Border tensions between Thailand, Laos and Cambodia likewise have their roots not in a mutually agreed negotiation of frontiers but on those imposed on both countries over a century ago.

This country's fascinating history has again become a battleground as political forces on both sides seek to mobilise the ghosts of the past as allies in the struggles of the present.

Nice how you assume you are the only one that knows what he is talking about. First of all Thailand is not the only place that pays for votes, it happens in the States too. My point is that 65% of the northern rurals do not support the reds as in the last election they only received 40% of the vote even with vote buying. So to say that most of the north love the reds and this illegal action they have taken is ridiculous. My gf is from Ubon and neither she nor her family support the reds or their terrorist ways.

oh yes, and since the (know called) reds won a majority in the last election, but according to an expert like you only 40% in the north, I guess you mean they won about 80% in the south ???

maybe you find some time to look at the results from the last election??

when you are talking of terrorist ways, may I remind you the yellow rally not so long ago, where the government house was stormed and devastated, which damages over 200 mill bt, and the seizure of the airports, where one of the leaders made a TV-interview declaring "it was fun to take the airport",

but this was certainly no terrorist act, since nowadays he is Foreign Minister!

good awakening and good day, Sir

But the reds DID NOT win a majority in the last election. Have you found the time to look at the results of the last election?

they certainly did win and therefore formed the government, with mr Somsak as PM, then their party was again dissolved in a similar way to the TRT, they again formed the government with the new party and then the PM was ousted for hosting a cooking show on TV while being PM, after that one group led by Mr. Newin Chidchob broke away and formed a coalition with the minority Ddemocrats.

just as a reminder : when the TRT was dissolved, the case was pending aginst the democrat party too, and even the then Coup leader wanted both parties to be dissolved, but that was not allowed to be.

at last someone with the good sense to say what is going on in Thailand most just want to see the Thai people killing each other !!!!!!

Gotta run - but I'll be back for now I'll just say the Red Shirts may be ignorant of the niceties of democracy as much as they would be with the proper use of a full western dinner setting. However, they are well acquainted with corruption, vice and poverty. If one corrupt regime offers them something and a way out for their kids and another tramples on them, then it's no surprise they will turn on the regime that ousts that which them fed them from the leftovers of its corruption.

Thaksin got too big for his britches so the other rich elites conspired to oust him. Typical Thai gangsta politics. Maybe Thaksin deserved it maybe he didn't frankly Thailand traded one monstrous horses' ass for a collection of smaller horses' asses operating mafia style in my book. Abhisit's the front man for the Prem and everyone knows it. I could care less but there has to be a better was to reach resolution than the army shooting live rounds blindly at the red shirts encampment.

For Abhisit to reject a negotiated sol'n is within his prerogative, the West is preoccupied with its own problems. However, IMHO while I would reject the U.N. cumbersome and too much press/att'n I would recommend Singapore as the honest broker. Local and respected regional power, non-corrupt authoritarian regime and they are incredibly systematic and efficient. If the Red Shirts didn't accept that then Abhisit would probably get world sanction to take the encessary saction (read use of military force) to break-up the protests. If he goes ahead with the military w/o at least attempting to find an honest broker world opinion is giving Thailand a beating.

Just my thoughts.

right on this is good thinking i wonder how many agree with it it would be interesting to know

I can agree with the stop killing of innocent people. The bystanders, the soldiers that are given orders and are doing their jobs, and anyone else that is not involved with trying escalate the situation. The children that are their by no choice of their own, are innocent, the police should be considered innocent as so should the army. So if that's the case, it's OK to kill the non-innocent. And I agree with the monks, stop killing the innocent, and start killing only the trouble makers out there. Yesterday on the news they showed a group of men, young and old "playing" with gasoline bombs, or Molotov cocktails. Funny thing, not one "worked", they merely broke in the street, they weren't being thrown at anyone in particular, even lobbing them a few meters just to get one to ingite! Pathetic. I guess good clean innocent fun to be had by a group of men. So stop killing the innocent, and start killing the obvious ones that are not. How can you tell the difference? The non-innocent are not going home.

you are a sick man. the army is not innocent, nor are the police, the government is very sick like you. all killing is wrong thai against thai is wrong.

is it i wonder that they don't know what it is like to live under a dictatorship and democracy is for the rich only or may be they are communists. the reds are the people there are a lot more than the yellow belly's who took power by taking it not winning it. and the reds they have nothing more to lose this will be a big problem for the government who are traitors to there own people apaist should stand down he has lost it .

this is killing the king as he loves his people in the north as well as the rest of Thailand. stop the killing now. all yellows should be ashamed of them selfs, you have all gone mad with power. when will it end.

stop the bloody war now!!!!! before its to late.

Nice pics.

It's such a shame that so many posters on Thai Visa call for bloodshed.

It's very strange that these people calling for bloodshed are not banned.

I wonder why ?

is it i wonder that they don't know what it is like to live under a dictatorship and democracy is for the rich only or may be they are communists. the reds are the people there are a lot more than the yellow belly's who took power by taking it not winning it. and the reds they have nothing more to lose this will be a big problem for the government who are traitors to there own people apaist should stand down he has lost it .

this is killing the king as he loves his people in the north as well as the rest of Thailand. stop the killing now. all yellows should be ashamed of them selfs, you have all gone mad with power. when will it end.

stop the bloody war now!!!!! before its to late.

It is just illogical thinking to guess that the reds will just simply go home now and it will be fine.

Too many people have been assassinated by orders of the Thai Elite.

The people on all sides have either seen it or will see it as the media stuff we see trickles out to the Thai population.

They will see the few of Thai army snipers shooting down unarmed Thai civilians.

They will see over and over the few of the Thai General being shot in the head by another of the regime's assassins.

NO NO NO--the fight is not over.

This fight is going to go on and on and on.

All the reds lack now is the understanding of what must be done now.

They must answer violence with violence.

They must follow assassinations with assassinations of those on the other side.

If need be, they must take to asking for help from outside.

They must tell their young in the military to come fight wearing black.

I do not think it will take 5 years or 3.

This fight will end in a bloody French like revolution unless the idiots on the elite side wise up.

There is NO chance of that so the Battle of Bangkok has likely begun.

Banks will be attacked and burned down.

The airport will be wrecked and closed down.

This place will end up looking like Beirut after its war.

War is hel_l and Bangkok is now where Satin is partying.

so long as the army keeps it together, which i think it will, there will be no civil war; maybe a prolonged terrostist campaign of bombings like that which we've had the last 2 months, this will only strengthen opposition of the general populase and isolate the reds futher. just a shame these greedy fools a prepared to wreck their own countrys ecconomy for no good reason. well industry will likely continue, but tourism will be dessimated, farmers would continue to be poor no matter what system of government was in place, suficiency farming and dhama would be a more likely to lead to happiness

when all the elite lose there heads on madam giloteen

A 10 year old boy shot dead today.

The Thai Armies have Cross too many lines to go back.

The Thai Government has now become a Rouge Nation.

The Chinese Government in their worst day never Opened Fire on a Crowd of Protestors.

Sure they beat people to death with Clubs, but never have they SHOT 10 Year Old Children and Elderly WOmen.

The Thai Government has become a Rouge Nation.

Rouge, you mean, like "Red" in french?

yeh some cant spell so what... apiceoshit! thats what he is is, a puppet for the new world order, and cant be deposed. shoot the government all of them, murdering bastards, shooting your own like dogs. this will end up a full scale war. reds will start killing too. many more will come and bring guns and bombs. there are millions of them out there. this is but a few.

Am utterly appalled at the reds. They had such sympathy a month and a half ago, now they are just a bunch of criminals working for their master Thaksin to the detriment of the entire nation. Disgusting.

OK. However, I can't understand any civilized person having any sympathy for them at all after Pattaya Asean and Black Songkran.

are

democracy is what the fight is all about. freedom of the people to vote and elect a government of their choice,this and not the choice of the Armed Forces in Thailand.in this civil war the only losers are the Thais themselves. the Reds are this fighting for their lives because of the repression they are suffering under the rich and powerful this has been going on for hundreds of years and now they will not give up. The Prime Minister will have to resign and face the charges of the people. This is the work of the New World order and the Bushes and the Blair's Rothschild's and Rockefeller's of this world are destroying democracy. Is it is going to end I think not -- I wish it would . The UK now has a new government Thailand needs one to. don't blame the people who want change. twice the government that was elected have been deposed. back the reds

Am utterly appalled at the reds. They had such sympathy a month and a half ago, now they are just a bunch of criminals working for their master Thaksin to the detriment of the entire nation. Disgusting.

OK. However, I can't understand any civilized person having any sympathy for them at all after Pattaya Asean and Black Songkran.

are

democracy is what the fight is all about freedom of the people to vote and elect a government of their choice and not the choice of the Armed Forces in Thailand this civil war the only losers are the Thais themselves the Reds fighting for their lives because of the repression they are suffering under the rich and powerful this has been going on for hundreds of years and now they will not give up. The Prime Minister will have to resign in the face charges of the people. This is the work of the New World order and the Bushes and the Blair's Rothschild's and Rockefeller's of this world are destroying democracy. Is it is going to end I think not -- I wish it would . The UK now has a new government Thailand needs one to. don't blame the people who want change is twice the government that was elected have been deposed.

If a Thai woman is not working be prepared to cough up 20,000 baht a month....

This answers my query I have had for some time.

You chat to Thai women on the net and she asks, " Will you support me?"

Now I know how much dough she really wants.

she may have 10 others on the same hook. i have met a few who do the net thing, after work in the bar they go to the internet shop, to talk to there boyfreinds. and get sent money every month from lots of unsuspecting guys. and meet them when they get to thailand. they go home and another one arrives take heed.

well if you love each other what the hel_l just be shure not to get taken for a house car bike bank in her name then your fine rent a house its cheep car bike in your name 20,000 pm is a good wage for thailand and she will look after your every need

lots of bs and crap but what is it and will it work mms miracle mineral supplement is another one very good at killing all bugs in water good for mosquitoes worms ect Chlorine dioxide is all it is 3 drops to a LT water and then its clean. very old way but works for malaria and clames to do much more..

girls like bald heads but thats if they know you if you look like a monk they are put off girls dont tuch monks

well he got what he got should have been more he is a crook and he should be doing his time in thailand 50 years he should have got no 20 months 

Karma's a bitch ain't it?  a year for every mill he took 50 years

Tuesday, March 09, 2010, 09:30

Share

Dealer jailed after £1.75m drugs find

A drug dealer has been sentenced after police found £1.75m worth of amphetamines in his car.

Officers stopped Scott Horvath's Peugeot 308 on the M1 northbound, near junction 22 near Markfield, in August.

The vehicle was found to contain £5,000 cash and 140kg of high purity amphetamines. Horvath, 41, was sentenced to three years and four months in prison for possession, with intent to supply amphetamine and 18 months for money laundering offences on Thursday. The sentences will run concurrently.

A confiscation order was also approved for cash he was in possession of at the time. Horvath, formerly of Hedgerow Close, Barrow-upon-Humber, was arrested, charged and pleaded guilty to possession with intent to supply and acquiring and using criminal property under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

Does he really expect anyone to take him seriously when he commits the infamous Hitler comparison debate flaw?

Think for a minute.... Think of Thailand's future, the entrenched hatred that seems to be building and which is in need of RELIEF, not stimulus.

What good is bringing back Thaksin and arresting him gonna do for reconciling the hatred between the 2 groups?

all the thai power mungers are the same all on the take they are all robbing bugers thaksin as well thats normal in thailand but thaksin did try to help the poor and his countery i have not seen any one else help the poor only the rich the rich dont want thaksin as he wants to tax them to help the poor. the underdog will win as they have nothing to lose only life and the rich have all there shit to pay for and there servents who they pay so littel for averige 3000 per month if they are lucky .i have seen a rich thai pay 1500 and food thats a pound a day thats a crime would not work in the uk

democratically elected administration in thailand not ' when the elected party was in power they made it impossibul and kicked them out and took over. the bull--sh--it you see and hear is so <deleted>--ed up its un real the reds are wanting the chance to vote again thats all and if they win again will the same thing happen dont like the party thats elected kick them out and take over again this is all to much .

i for one want to get my family out of thailand but cant get in to bkk to get visas

this is the same as meny wars have started civil war in thailand oh no.

rich against poor red against yellow so what has happened to the king not a word have i hered about him.

war is on now keep away

we all now have seen the taxman on co2 we breath oxygen and breath out co2 the trees breath co2 and breath oxygen out so how is there to much co2 grow more trees climate fixed