jayboy

He seems to be getting the publicity. He's firing up the crowds. He's pressing a few buttons. And few give a dam_n about his history. Add the group-frenzy mentality to the fiery rhetoric and there could be the makings of something we are reluctant to predict. I don't like this at all. We may not like this character, but if he strikes a chord ... well, I hate to think. Whether we like it or not, Suthep is prepared to push things as far as he can. It's heady stuff, despite our cynicism about him personally. Suthep is clearly trying to manoeuvre this situation into a new level. and that's what worries me.

sorry anything to get rid of the Thaksin clan will be welcome to me and if others are to nice to play dirty well then it needs someone like him even with his obvious dark side to stop Thailand descending slowly into a one party state. Also if it comes to it I hope the army will again stop the megalomaniac

turning Thailand into his own north Korea. Pol pot was also elected. I doubt sheep will ever agree but its only way if people here are happy to sell their votes and so naive as to believe Thaksin will do them any good. Ive lived here through many coups and bad governments but this lot is worst of any ive seen.

No argument from me. I'm only concerned about another round of violence - I just don't want to see any more deaths, especially if the alternatives have not been exhausted (although I have no idea what they might be). I saw friends and colleagues turned into cripples and alcoholics after both 1992 and 2010. Please, no more.

That is a good reason to get behind this movement it is a peaceful one and I doubt very much the Army would move in on them. If nothing else they might move in on the Police if they started using weapons against all the unarmed protestors. This is not like the last one where the protestors came armed with guns and rocket launchers and in fact used them to fire on defenders of Thailand who had not shot at them.

I agree your view this protest is most likely to be peaceful.But you have got the reasoning the wrong way round.People like the crazier type of quasi fascist (Pitak movement etc), though obviously wouldn't admit it now, could envisage nothing better than a blood stained incident.Equally the government is concerned that such an incident might occur, and will do everything to prevent it.The reason of course is that shedding blood on the streets of Bangkok is either catastrophic or very counter productive for the perpetrators.That's a rather obvious lesson of history.But having said that I don't think we are anywhere near that point even with the dubious Suthep at the helm.However whatever his faults he isn't a fool and knows that violence can have very unpredictable results.His aim is the obliteration of Thaksin and his influence.Hence I'm surmising his strategy is to keep a febrile atmosphere going to give background to a judicial intervention.Whether it will work is for discussion.

Sure the have expensive overheads, so do private schools in the UK, probably a lot more.

Just looked at the schools web page, first reaction, good, their enrollment fee is approx 50% of other inter schools,Tuition fees are also lower. Then I looked for information on the staff, this they do supply, unlike some inter schools. However their teacher seem to be mostly Philippine nationals,

Are they competent and well trained teachers, I don't know, thou I suspect they have been employed because they are cheaper then those from the UK/Australia/NZ.

By way of reference pricing, my nephew has just begun at a public school in the UK as a dayboy.Fees are Pnds 7200 per term (say Bt 360,000).By that standard Bangkok schools seem reasonably priced.

Just looked up Queen Ethelburga's in York, I think they came 15th overall in the UK educational league table.( How do the international schools compere).For a day pupil at grade 3 the fee is £2,440 per term, approx 125,000 baht, so not much different from the fees at a good international school here in Thailand,in fact lower than at some. One thing that stands out is that they do not impose an admission fee, as do all Thai international schools.

It's a reasonable school (though not one of the hiso variety) but not typical of decent UK independent schools in terms of day fees ( though its boarding fees are).In brief UK day fees are over twice the cost of elite Bangkok schools.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Sure the have expensive overheads, so do private schools in the UK, probably a lot more.

Just looked at the schools web page, first reaction, good, their enrollment fee is approx 50% of other inter schools,Tuition fees are also lower. Then I looked for information on the staff, this they do supply, unlike some inter schools. However their teacher seem to be mostly Philippine nationals,

Are they competent and well trained teachers, I don't know, thou I suspect they have been employed because they are cheaper then those from the UK/Australia/NZ.

By way of reference pricing, my nephew has just begun at a public school in the UK as a dayboy.Fees are Pnds 7200 per term (say Bt 360,000).By that standard Bangkok schools seem reasonably priced.

Doesn't really work does it? If you wish to engage in invective (albeit lame because just copied) like this you need to provide an example or you just look foolish.Here's a pointer.Chuwit is an entertaining politician (that's an opinion).Chuwit has been involved in immoral businesses (that too is an opinion because morality is subjective).Chuwit has owned massage parlours in Bangkok (that's a fact).Got it now? Off you go.

So how does "only a small number of people joined the protest." become an "incontestable fact"? In your opinion, that is.

To be quite honest I was thinking of Suthep's call for a strike/go slow and its poor response rather than, as I should have given the context (my mistake), the earlier protests against the blanket amnesty.I accept Khunken's contention that these were 'large enough' to do the job to bury the blanket amnesty - an objective I support.

You come down with the last shower? Yeah of course he has disconnected. I like Chuvit and the way he stands against corruption etc, but it really is hypocritical and a fox guarding the hen house scenario.

One could say the same about Suthep though he, unlike the zany Chuwit, is of course not in any way likeable.

And returning to the thread subject matter Mr Green Tea was speaking no more than the truth.

As one who prattles on about facts here's a good example of distortion. Mr Green Tea was giving his opinion and it was not the truth. Given the numbers that came on to the streets and the varied groups that saw through the amnesty bill and the government & Senate's reaction to them, it was significant enough to - at least temporarily - squash it.

Numbers in street protests are variable depending who is pronouncing on them and to call them small or large or whatever is nothing but opinion. However, like Ezzra, I won't be drinking green tea because of Suthep but because it is little more than sugared water.

Fair enough.I accept your point.Still there's no harm in many of us thinking harder about what are facts (or as near as can be defined as facts) and what are opinions.

 

 

 

 

 

Wrong. I noted a fact as well..... Events occurring right now are an ongoing proof of that...   :-)

 

 

So you are unable to distinguish between a fact and an opinion.I will keep that in mind when reading your posts.

 

 

Good idea. I always keep in mind the difference between fact and fiction when I read yours.  

 

 

Doesn't really work does it? If you wish to engage in invective (albeit lame because just copied) like this you need to provide an example or you just look foolish.Here's a pointer.Chuwit is an entertaining politician (that's an opinion).Chuwit has been involved in immoral businesses (that too is an opinion because morality is subjective).Chuwit has owned massage parlours in Bangkok (that's a fact).Got it now? Off you go

 

Still posting in the superior mindset of the insecure. Maybe that's not your intention, but it does make you look so patronizing, pretentious and unable to accept anything as your own opinion as fact.

 

You find Chuwit entertaining - your opinion. Chuwit's involvement in the massage business has been well documented - do your own research. Your judgment on the immorality of this business is down to your own personal values. 

 

Your views, based on your values, allow others to judge the contents of your posts in the context of your values.

 

You appear to like to give other posters instructions - keep on with the delusion that you're in someway important. 

Not only are you unable to understand what is subjective and what is not, you also seem unable to grasp a simple point.I was not having a debate about Chuwit.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Wrong. I noted a fact as well..... Events occurring right now are an ongoing proof of that... :-)

So you are unable to distinguish between a fact and an opinion.I will keep that in mind when reading your posts.

Good idea. I always keep in mind the difference between fact and fiction when I read yours.

Doesn't really work does it? If you wish to engage in invective (albeit lame because just copied) like this you need to provide an example or you just look foolish.Here's a pointer.Chuwit is an entertaining politician (that's an opinion).Chuwit has been involved in immoral businesses (that too is an opinion because morality is subjective).Chuwit has owned massage parlours in Bangkok (that's a fact).Got it now? Off you go.

Regarding Mr. Green Tea, instead of sucking up to the government by making disparaging remarks about the attendance at the rally, he should learn to keep his mouth shut..... I was in a taxi once, and the driver asked me in Thai if I like Thaksin. I told him that Thaksin was the worst thing that ever happened to Thailand. He stopped the cab, and told me to get out. Lesson? Opinions are not appreciated in Thailand.

Your comparison is invalid.He was noting an incontestable fact.You were expressing a personal and subjective opinion.

Wrong. I noted a fact as well..... Events occurring right now are an ongoing proof of that... :-)

So you are unable to distinguish between a fact and an opinion.I will keep that in mind when reading your posts.

Regarding Mr. Green Tea, instead of sucking up to the government by making disparaging remarks about the attendance at the rally, he should learn to keep his mouth shut..... I was in a taxi once, and the driver asked me in Thai if I like Thaksin. I told him that Thaksin was the worst thing that ever happened to Thailand. He stopped the cab, and told me to get out. Lesson? Opinions are not appreciated in Thailand.

Your comparison is invalid.He was noting an incontestable fact.You were expressing a personal and subjective opinion.

You come down with the last shower? Yeah of course he has disconnected. I like Chuvit and the way he stands against corruption etc, but it really is hypocritical and a fox guarding the hen house scenario.

One could say the same about Suthep though he, unlike the zany Chuwit, is of course not in any way likeable.

And returning to the thread subject matter Mr Green Tea was speaking no more than the truth.

 

Well  unlike the Red Shirt  rioters, there are no bribes being paid to the anti amnesty protesters, they came out because they believe in the cause but a great many of them have like jobs and stuff, you know what they are ? People need money and need jobs to survive in this world and since there is no rich fugitive criminal on the run paying them to protest, normal life must go on.....Do you get me ?

Translation: The strike looks like being an embarrassing failure.The ghastly Suthep has egg on his face.The Democrats, having been provided an unanticipated bonus through Thaksin's idiotic Amnesty, seem destined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My wife has ordered a new Iphone 5s through the Apple Thailand internet store.It's due to arrive shortly.She will need to change her current AIS micro sim to a nano sim.Can we just pitch up at an AIS branch and get them to do it? Any cost?

Opening proposition.No you are wrong.All the evidence supports the reality that PTP won an electoral mandate.Your suggestion PTP would not have won without vote buying is simply incorrect.Not even the opposition makes that foolish claim.The international monitoring agencies certainly didn't.

As to the "facts"

1.Agreed though have reservations whether he would have been as successful in a business environment where level playing field.Also have reservations about his judgement - tendency to overreach even meglomania.

2.No,You are wrong.There was vote buying but not "full scale" and did not affect results.

3.Can't comment on crazy bar talk.

4.Correct

5.Can you quantify "fortune" because I have seen no other evidence? You seem to think there is a logical argument.But there isn't.In fact regardless of payment for votes one way or the other the majority in the North and North East were never going to vote Democrat.That's really all I'm saying - vote buying (which I believe you hugely exaggerate) did not affect the end result.

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

If you did not see full scale vote buying you either don't live in Thailand or you never leave house, or you maybe stay at Silom road.....denying that is just ridiculous, it was outside downtown everywhere in Nord, Nordeast and a bit reduced in the South and it was not a bit in secret.

And the international monitoring agencies were discussed to dead....don't want to start that again...just google how many people did what.

Give it up, it is undefendable...The only excuse is that others do it as well, and who stops first loose but it doesn't make it any more democratic.

You seem not to grasp the point.Even setting aside the views of monitoring agencies and the official opposition (Abhisit has never made your claim), whether there was vote buying or not and to what degree, the result wasn't affected.That's all I'm saying.

If you dislike electoral democracy (and I'm assuming you don't as a former PAD propagandist) that's a different argument.I might even agree with you on some aspects (tyranny of majority etc).

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

The legitimacy of this government is much in doubt as we have statements from themselves on it:

- Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts

- she's my clone

- skyping-in giving orders

- I'm the golf caddy

- lots of MPs dropping by for ...

- various interview indicating who is in charge.

And that's just from those involved in this government

I appreciate English isn't your first language so no cheap shots on my part.Legitimacy in this context means fairly elected and with a clear mandate.What happened thereafter is of course open for discussion.

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There is also no evidence that the PTP would have won without vote buying.

Can we agree on these facts:

1) Thaksin is smart, and specially smart with his money, right?

2) On the last elections was almost full scale vote buying, by most or all of the large parties, right?

3) Considering the population of Thailand that sums up to crazy amounts of money, right?

4) Before the election all the major parties make some serious polls, and have a general idea how the election results will be. Maybe +/- 5 or 10 %

5) Do you think Mr. Thaksin would have paid a fortune of money, if he is sure that people would vote him without payment? No because half of his voters would have sitting at home not voting anyone. While the Democrats just don't have the resources in Nord and Nordeast.

Therefor the results of the election can't be accepted. No matter if it is Thaksin or Abhisit who wins with vote buying. Vote buying is wrong no matter if the winner fits the own political opinion or not.

Opening proposition.No you are wrong.All the evidence supports the reality that PTP won an electoral mandate.Your suggestion PTP would not have won without vote buying is simply incorrect.Not even the opposition makes that foolish claim.The international monitoring agencies certainly didn't.

As to the "facts"

1.Agreed though have reservations whether he would have been as successful in a business environment where level playing field.Also have reservations about his judgement - tendency to overreach even meglomania.

2.No,You are wrong.There was vote buying but not "full scale" and did not affect results.

3.Can't comment on crazy bar talk.

4.Correct

5.Can you quantify "fortune" because I have seen no other evidence? You seem to think there is a logical argument.But there isn't.In fact regardless of payment for votes one way or the other the majority in the North and North East were never going to vote Democrat.That's really all I'm saying - vote buying (which I believe you hugely exaggerate) did not affect the end result.

Therefore you are wrong again that the election result cannot be accepted.Of course vote buying is wrong - that is a different question.But the legitimacy of the current government is not in doubt.

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Sorry - missed out a negative in the "to be clear" sentence

 

 

 

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

 

 

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

 

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

 

 

So everyone who think full scale vote buying isn't democratic is a complete dope in your eyes.

+ Thaksin can't handle money, because he spent billions on vote buying even the people would have elected him without vote buying?

 

So again: Why do you think Thaksin spent a fortune on vote buying, if he would have won a majority anyway even without?

(on the other point with the majority, I agree with you)

 

No .But I do think its dopey to believe that Thaksin's party won the election through vote buying.It's a ridiculous belief unsupported by any evidence but widely held by the nuttier elements of the opposition.To be clear it doesn't mean that vote buying didn't occur nor does it mean that its widespread use undermines democracy.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This regime was democratically elected through vote buying and does not have a majority of Thailand's population voting for them. .

Do you believe the current government does not have a democratic electoral mandate and that it owes its position to vote buying.If your answer is yes then we can simply write you off as a serious participant in the discussion.If your answer is no (and I'm assuming it is since you are presumably not a complete dope) then you need to exprtess yourself more clearly.

Incidentally few democratically elected leaders have a majority of the population (eligible adults) voting for them - certainly not Obama,Abe, Cameron, Merkel etc

Clearly there are still a few who refuse to accept Thaksin was the object of the 2006 coup, a bizarre perspective not even shared by those who launched the coup.I shall not be responding to them individually.But I would as a polite suggestion advise these people when assessing a political situation to consider all the circumstances and to attribute significance to what matters rather than to what is less important.Thus the fact that there was a caretaker administration in 2006 is not actually the most significant element.But I don't expect this will be accepted and I daresay years from now there will still be those that claim there was no coup against Thaksin just as there will always be thise who claim 9-11 was an insude job.Nutty as fruitcakes but I supose it adds to the gaiety of nations.

I have read that it will officially be launched in Thailand next Friday. So that day it should be available online in the Thailand Apple Store as well as authorized Apple sellers like PowerBuy, iStudio, etc.

The new iPad with retina display is already available at the Apple on-line store for Thailand. Shipment within 24 hours.

Prices between THB 14,900.00 and THB 29,400.00

Dont think that these are the latest models.As another member points out Ipad Air expected to be advertised on site shortly.

Is Jatuporn sporting a lumberjack shirt to reassure the uneducated that he has rushed into the meeting straight from threshing his rice field, or is it just another PR exercise from the polished turd brigade?

The usual sneering post, a dig at Thailand's rural majority and devoid of substance.

But actually Jatuporn is right.The protestors do wish to topple the government whether by a miilitary coup or some type of judicial intervention.

It goes without saying the obvious course of toppling an unpopular government by voting it out does not occur to them.Why not? Answers on a post card please.

Kong Rithdee (one of the few BP staffers who seems quite balanced) in the other paper this morning, though contemptuous of Thaksin and his meglomania, correctly points out that the protests against him/umbrella amnesty would be much more compelling without the coup agenda so obviously present.

Not sure what really happened but in my opinion, it was either to do the 180 degree turn or face a coup.

Noting the way in which Mr T and the Army Chief had engaged in discussions over recent months, and the very clear signal that the General recently gave that he would have to direct his troops to step in if violence erupted, I think Mr T had to accept the inevitable, to withdraw that piece of sh1t bill or face the downfall of his government ... which, by the way, would still seem to be inevitable...!

There is no way the army can intervene in this process and be seen helping to remove this government.... and they know it. Removing another democratically elected government will have repercussions (ask Abhisit..no government did any business with him) and bloodshed on a scale we could not comprehend.

It's been 20+ years since the army has removed a democratically elected government, isn't it?

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

No, seven years.

What is perhaps still surprising is that there are some who are still in denial of this fact.Don't bother to reply:the details of the caretaker government at the time are a matter of record and we have had the half baked "explanations" several times already.But the purpose of the coup was to remove Thaksin.Even the coupmakers don't deny that.Nor do the Democrats.Nor does the media commentariat.In fact it's probably only the Thai Visa usual suspects who so frequently come out with this tired old lie.I have no respect for this kind of dishonesty.I have much more respect, though disagreeing, with those who argue the coup was a necessary evil.At least they have some kind of intellectual and moral integrity.

On the contrary, it's very mainstream..notwithstanding what you might have read in a Moody's report. There will be no soft landing here if these policies are retained and WHEN QE ends, major downside for the markets and the Baht ( which in the longer term might be a good thing but initially quite painful...for everyone).

Forbes reckons that the Thai bubble will burst once China's does.....and when interest rates rise globally. So that's going to happen eh? What about the West's addiction and dependence to QE. That's going to end soon too , is it?

It's not a Forbes editorial view but one of a particular person who specialises in predicting bubbles.He sees bubbles in several places including Malaysia.It's interesting enough but it's not mainstream thinking and certainly not the view of major credit agencies.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

It's not just Moodys but the overwhelming consensus on the Thai economy.Doesn't of course make it infallible and in any case all agree there are some tricky challenges - including the international factors that Thailand cannot influence - such as the the impact of the US ending QE which you rightly mention.But Thailand is much better placed than most countries and the Baht is fairly valued.I know nothing about your politics but many on this forum are hoping for an economic disaster as a way of discrediting the current government.If the Democrats were power and the economiuc indicators/decision making were the same I suspect they wouldn't be so vocal.What seems to be evident that many seem not to understand there is a huge amount of unanimity between the political parties on economic and financial management.In particular the excellent upper level bureaucrats provide continuity and keep rogue politicians at bay.No doubt some will continue to predict cataclysmic economic disaster for Thailand but the evidence doesn't back them.