rubl

I lean towards the notion that having a conversation with a local about football may well contribute to him remaining a poor, uneducated third world person. If you must talk sport rather than the state of the world I suggest that a meaningful discussion about nude leapfrog would provide some benefit.

I presume you mean nude leapfrog in mixed company

so no bias there then...

Absolutely not......

Nice one Chiangmaifun !!

Interesting. I wasn't sure to what dear member ChiangMaiFun was referring, and now I'm really puzzled to find someone agreeing with him. If 'bias there' refers to Dem's spokesperson that would go without saying. I mean a government spokesperson against anti-government protesters, what do you expect? If 'bias there' refers to someone or something else I think an explanation is in order. At least for me, I've said once before, sometimes I'm a bit dense and need things explained to me

if you did spend some time there and decided to exercise your democratic rights the reds speak so passionately about and hang a poster in your window in support of the yellows or the democrats or any of the opposition parties

what do you think would happen to you?:

a). you would be congratulated by the local community as being a strong minded, free thinking individual?

. you would be viewed as a rather eccentric person who's opinion is not worth consideration anyway

c). you would be invited to change your views to the local majority or suffer the consequences

d). you would be beaten within an inch of your life

e). killed by the red thugs

How do you know any of these suppositions ??

Got any evidence to support your prejudices ?

Which one is a prejudice, a) or e) ?

Laughable.

Try not to bait.

Not baiting, just wondering. It was you who described the options as prejudice. So you should be able to tell which one and why. Unless you are baiting of course

If the Billions and Billions of baht that were temporarily frozen on hundreds of of bank accounts belonging to dozens of people suspected of supporting the Red Shirts several months back (including at least a half dozen amongst the Shinawatra/Damapong Empire) is any indication, there's quite a few Reds that are "fairly hi-so."

The silence from the Gov't on this issue, after the initial announcement, is interesting.

Got any comment on the silence, lack of result ??

Numerous people and companies named as sponsors of terrorism but yet seemingly no further action.

Why would that be ?

Now there's a good question! Lots of accounts were de-frozen, including some Shinawatra accounts, but the others? Unless the information is part of the 'data gathering' for a criminal case being prepared. Like money flow to 'red-shirt guards, UDD leaders, other nice people'

if you did spend some time there and decided to exercise your democratic rights the reds speak so passionately about and hang a poster in your window in support of the yellows or the democrats or any of the opposition parties

what do you think would happen to you?:

a). you would be congratulated by the local community as being a strong minded, free thinking individual?

. you would be viewed as a rather eccentric person who's opinion is not worth consideration anyway

c). you would be invited to change your views to the local majority or suffer the consequences

d). you would be beaten within an inch of your life

e). killed by the red thugs

How do you know any of these suppositions ??

Got any evidence to support your prejudices ?

Which one is a prejudice, a) or e) ?

McCargo's assessment here seems about right:

"The Red Shirts were widely depicted in the media as 'poor farmers' animated by poverty and deprivation, and lacking formal education; they were also portrayed, especially in the Bangkok press, as a 'mob for hire' who received financial incentives to take part in demonstrations.

Many Red Shirt activists are lower middle class, self-employed traders who were economically and politically empowered during the Thaksin period (2001-06), but have since seen their social standing and their livelihoods threatened by new government policies and priorities. Most of them did not need to be paid to take part in the anti-government demonstrations, though they were often mobilized and organized by political networks in their home provinces."

http://asiancorrespondent.com/50155/thailand-one-year-later-no-compromise-in-sight/

From the same article dated 2011-03-12 I would have quoted:

"“Last year, more than 90 people were killed and hundreds wounded when pro-Thaksin demonstrators clashed with security forces. The vast majority of them were demonstrators—but among the fatalities were also soldiers and policemen, shot by black-clad men armed with automatic rifles and grenade launchers. While usually referred to as an ‘extreme’ or ‘militant’ faction of the pro-Thaksin camp, they were, in fact, security guards for the so-called Red Shirts. I saw them myself and talked to them before the mayhem began. And despite all talk about the movement having moved ‘beyond Thaksin,’ they’re still wearing T-shirts with a picture of Thaksin, or even Thaksin masks.

“Not a major gathering is held without a video-linked address to the demonstrators by Thaksin, now exile in Dubai. And when Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva in early May last year promised to hold elections ‘by November,’ the local Red Shirt leaders first agreed. But instead of declaring victory (an election was their main demand) and dispersing, they suddenly changed their minds—after a phone call from Thaksin, Western diplomats assert. He urged them to fight on, and a bloody confrontation ensued."

Weren't they previewed the other day? Sirichok claimed that they show "nothing new". Well, they'll be new to me since I haven't seen any videos that show the armed men inside Central World (if that's what they show, which is apparently the case).

Matichon Weekly's cover this week:

Have to wait and see of course, but wouldn't surprise me the CWT clips will be similar to the photo's which were described begin of December last year.

Conclusions:

"The photographs show that were at least three groups of people inside CTW in the hours just before the fire: (1) small numbers of protesters, who may have been looting; (2) CTW security guards, who apparently fled the mall after being fired at; and (3) unseen gunmen. Whether there was more than one group of gunmen, and whether the same gunmen shot the security guards in Photos 15-28 and the protester with the slingshot in Photo 9 (if he was indeed shot), we simply do not know based on these photographs.

The photographs also show at least three different sources of apparent gunfire: (1) unseen shooter(s) inside CTW, who fired upon security guards and possibly fired at a protester; (2) unseen shooter(s) located near the northeast corner of Siam Paragon; and (3) unseen shooter(s) on the west side of Siam Paragon, possibly connected to the camouflaged man in the ski mask photographed on the Siam BTS platform.

As discussed above, the photographer was almost certainly a security guard for CTW. This raises an important question: Have the security guards from inside the mall been questioned as to what they saw at CTW before the fire? Many faces can be clearly seen. No doubt they saw more than was photographed here. Will any journalists step up and track down these witnesses?"

http://asiancorrespondent.com/43506/photos-from-may-19-an-update/

They don't want any of their doctored videos to be previewed for authenticity as they feel it's their "right" to show adulterated and faked videos unhindered.

Similar to their doctored audiotapes that they broadcast to their faithful at Red Shirt Rallies... it's all about doing so now with a national audience on television.

Disclaimer: If they're not faked/doctored/etc., then they should not have any qualms about someone previewing them.

Political one-upmanship plays a role here.

To be fair, you might add 'Disclaimer: If they're not faked/doctored/etc., then I will apologize for thinking so.

I'm glad to see that you support my viewpoint, namely that Thaksin is used as a threat to frighten the Yellow elite, it certainly works with you

Events have moved on, Thaksin is in the past, do you honestly think the present Red leaders if they win will calmly hand over power back to Thaksin?

If you think that you don't understand Thais, this is a wolf pack environment, former pack leaders never make a comeback.

Anyone with a modicum of brains know he cannot come back, but it is useful to keep the threat hanging in the air, it keeps the Democrats off balance. Makes them react even more stupidly than they would do otherwise.

Suddenly you make me feel very sorry for k. Thaksin. Used by the leaders of the UDD faction of red-shirts. Someone should also tell the PTP leaders that they are being had by those devils of UDD leaders. Shame on them

It isn't a class-war since it isn't a division along class-lines. More regional than anything else.

Denying that *is* burying ones head in the sand.

Thank you for this thoughtful analysis.It's the same in the UK where the Conservative vote is concentrated in the South while the Labour vote is strongest in the Midlands and North.Purely regional differences and no suggestion there is a class or wealth angle involved.

You're right, it is a class war. Between two classes of elite with the poor and common people thrown in as cannon fodder. Poor sods shafted as usual

corruption can not coexistent with democracy

is there any point in carrying on with this topic ?

The topic is "Thai Reds Mass In Bangkok To Mark Anniversary Of Protest". That may have less to do with corruption than democracy, although we're talking about Thailand here. So why not carry on with this topic ?

What is an inferruption?

In this case drop of receiving signal / broadcast is meant I think. May be we should also ask the U.N. for a 'no-flight' zone ?

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

So you are a reluctant red-shirt supporter only. You want to see them win not for what they can do to/for the country, but just to be able to annoys members here. well that's as good a reason as others have

I can entirely understand anterian's point.

From a farang's point of view, what one party or another could/would/should/will/won't do for the country is a matter so influenced by political maneuverings, cultural idiosyncrasies and faulty communication on all sides that I defy you to present a clear case even for why your own favorite political party should be in power next time.

That's why it's so galling to have all the smirkers constantly shoving their 'holier than thou' whiter-than-white Western influenced socio-political ideals in the faces of people who may love those ideals just as much as they do, but unlike them realize it's like standing in the middle of a field and whining about the color of grass.

You offer 'what they can do for the country' as the antithesis for more facetious reasons behind choosing a party to back (not that most of us can - in the real/practical sense - back any of these parties at all). I wouldn't leave out the possibility of people voting or forwarding the cause of other parties out of nothing at all apart from individual self interest. That's how most people vote in the West, so probably here too.

So whilst I applaud and admire your relatively bright outlook on human nature in general, might I be so bold as to suggest that the myriad views expressed here by the good, bad and downright ugly, by minds calm and fiery, by the scholarly and the life-experienced, would be largely absent were it not for the fact that we have all turned our attentions to this country and subsequently its internal affairs purely as a result of enriching our own individual lives in one way or another by being here.

Did you actually read my last sentence, the part that went like "well that's as good a reason as others have" ?

BTW grass is green, I know I'm from the Netherlands, we've got lots of the stuff

(see also:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/If_grass_is_green_because_the_blades_reflect_green_light_what_colour_is_grass_by_nature

and

http://blog.artificial-grass.com/2010/08/grass-colour-is-more-important-than-you.html )

begin removed ...

personally I feel that Thaksin has become increasingly sidelined by events, he is more a bogeyman that the yellow elite threaten us with.

To read such a remark after the latest 'red-shirt' protest with guests of honour UDD leaders saw our saint and saviour Thaksin declare

""When you are ready for me to come back and serve you, I'll be ready," Thaksin told the crowd by video link from an undisclosed location overseas.

"Please help the Puea Thai (opposition party) win a landslide victory and then I'll solve problems and fix the economy and bring prosperity in six months," he said."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gGI1ON2HVrrMxrKPKqyX0qJrpr5Q?docId=CNG.a02012aae39ef7633415c33c7bb96572.7f1

From the OP:

An EC meeting is to be held later on Tuesday, to discuss the three organic law drafts to govern a new general election due to take place. Should the consideration of the draft bills is delayed, EC can resort to Section 7 in the Constitution and issue its announcements instead.

I think it would be best if all these 'minor' details are sorted out as soon as possible. If the EC relies on something generic there are bound to be complaints, court cases, request to committees to investigate, etc., etc.

On the other hand if things can't be sorted out in a short time, no choice. At this moment in time new elections are more important than minor details in Election Law.

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

I don't mind there being a clear winner, but the opposition must have enough power to censure the government (yes even if the opposition is PTP, like I expect it will be). My feelings are (note, this is not backed up by fact) that coalitions tend to be even more corrupt than a single winner with a strong opposition.

I have to check, but I don't think in my country of birth The Netherlands we ever had a political party gaining a majority. Always coalitions and it works well, we even had left-right cabinets leaving out the middle. Mind you, you may be right about how it might not work that well in Thailand. Under (Thai) circumstances the current Thai government doesn't do too bad though.

To add to Pi Sek's post ----

Buriram -- went PPP last election ... will go BJT this election. Nakhonrachasima --- mixed. SiSaket will follow Sanoh's lead. Chiang Mai?--- not so sure. Mostly red but with strong enclaves of pro-Dems. I just don't know where the constituency lines fall well enough to guess if ANY constituencies will go to the Dems or BJT. Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP.

I think the Dems will pick up some seats in the upcoming elections but not enough to get a majority. I expect that they will form the next government through a coalition just like this government. I also think no matter how clean the elections are, that the Reds will accept nothing less than getting Thaksin back and that just won't happen.

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

A person of my own heart. I know what you mean. The attacks on any member who dares to express even the slightest pro-Red sentiment are swift and unrelenting.

Up the Res!

To many members the Reds have no redeeming features, they are simply brainless hooligans paid for by Thaksin. This is such an over simplification of reality that it is laughable. This is not really Red versus Yellows, it is the people versus the Amartya.

For those unfamiliar with this term it means the elite, it comes from an Indian word that means Immortals. Governments come and go but the Amartya stay in charge. This is what the Reds oppose, and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same.

This is a grassroots movement, a rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top, it is not a true political movement which is why it is so difficult to characterise, but it has one common theme, people want to control their lives, they want their vote to have meaning, not be thwarted every time by the army.

This was a grassroot movement till it got hijacked by k. Thaksin c.s. Maybe not Amartaya in the traditional sense, but elite none the less.

As the events last night show k. Thaksin will do and solve all and make you rich as well, in six months no less. Out of the goodness of his heart, no strings attached. Maybe a skeptic like me may wonder why the glorious information on solving problems cannot be divulged at this moment. Why does k. Thaksin need to be back first? Out of his love for the Thai people and democracy and maybe the THB47B which was confiscated. By Jove, a true grassroot person this k. Thaksin.

""Please help the Puea Thai (opposition party) win a landslide victory and then I'll solve problems and fix the economy and bring prosperity in six months," he said."

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

A person of my own heart. I know what you mean. The attacks on any member who dares to express even the slightest pro-Red sentiment are swift and unrelenting.

Up the Res!

Maybe you confuse an attack on the contents of a post with argumentum ad hominem. The last to be avoided, doesn't help a discussion. Luckily most discussions here are on contents, even though sometimes very frank in tone

Quite a good turnout with the police estimating 30,000 so probably somewhat more than that. If they can still rally that many numbers in an area miles away from their heartland the upcoming election is going to be a tight one.

You still believe there's going to be an election?

YES, as I told you before. IMHO, just like you predicted a coup anytime now awhile ago.

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

So you are a reluctant red-shirt supporter only. You want to see them win not for what they can do to/for the country, but just to be able to annoys members here. well that's as good a reason as others have

Quote from Nation

"An intelligence official from an internal security unit, who wanted to remain anonymous, said Arisman and Suporn Attawong - another suspect wanted on terrorism charges -had stayed at Grand Diamond City in Poi Pet for two days. The wanted Thais were protected by four security guards of Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen. So no one dared to touch them."

Hahahaha , so much for Thai internal security when Hun Sens thugs come to another country to protect his Fellow Thai Thugs.

Never been there, but isn't Poi Pet in Battambang province in North Western Cambodia?

I just thought I would make a point about importance . You assume a lot yet you don't know me . 1, I do not drink 2 I do not need to be back slapping myself & feeling all important ,especially in a third world country where a drink can get most on side .

The Reds will win the election ,just as they have the last 3 or 4 .

There is no stopping the people & nor should there be . They was robbed of what they voted for & have lived under junta government by proxy .

Some would say this guy is not a terrorist but a freedom fighter .

The reds never won an election for the simple reason that the reds never stood as a political party and put forward candidates. Even for the coming election the reds will not stand as party. Some leaders of the UDD faction of the reds will be allowed to join the PTP and stand as candidate for the PTP. All after consultation of PTP members in a democratic way of course.

Where people say don't use the label 'terrorist', others may say don't use the label 'freedom fighter'. Labels may be easy but too general. In case of Thailand most terrorists / freedomfighters seem to be down South. The others are protesters who want democracy, or something or another

.

The prospect of an election did nothing to dull their fervor to demonstrate, and many said they would keep protesting in the streets whenever their leaders call for it.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2058592,00.html#ixzz1GR2SYlU7

"The prospect of an election did nothing to dull their fervor to demonstrate, and many said they would keep protesting in the streets whenever their leaders call for it. Several Red Shirt leaders have said they will contest the election under the Puea Thai banner, and the protests are starting to serve as a campaigning tool."

Isn't campaigning at this moment illegal according to the Election Law? Can PTP MP candidates be present at a protest which promotes the PTP? What are the rules to be followed?

interesting reading, but posted over 5 years ago and not a word in it about murdered Somchai.

many more murdered since then by the government officials, not many of those murders were admitted, mostly it's the old style denial

More yes, many more, don't know. IMHO the numbers have decreased significantly over the last few years. Remember k. Somchai 'disappeared' March 2004, Krue Sae Mosque Incident April 2004, Tak Bai October 2004, War on Drugs 2003 - 2004.

I see you conveniently choose to omit April/may last year from your post where the current government oversaw mass murder on the streets of Bangkok committed by the Thai army

You conveniently forget that the government did not 'oversee mass murder committed by the Thai army'. When the Army started to disperse protesters on April 10th they found themselves in a situation where it was necessary to 'exchange gunfire' with unarmed protesters who also just happened to like to lob grenades on anyone non-red-shirt. Till the final clean-up the death toll was 91 including 10 - 15 police / army / innocent bystanders, apart from the red-shirts. Regrettable? Yes. Mass-murder? No. Maybe look at recent events in Libya for a better example.

We had this discussion before, we did not agree then, we will not agree now.