jayboy

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Well done. Nice to have the real respect of your peers. alt=thumbsup.gif width=25 height=19>

Hello? The Oxford Union is not a part of Oxford. It's a private debating club and the titular head changes every semester. Yes, he was elected. Good for him. Congratulations etc.

I wonder if he joined for this reason, as stated in the marketing literature of the Oxford Union;

Oxford's Premier Social Venue

Oxford University students who join become Life Members - once a member, it’s free for the rest of your life. In joining, you will save yourself the price of membership through cheap drinks, frequent social events, free entry to the Purple Turtle, passionate debates, incredible speaker meetings, internet access and library services.

It is not as if he has toiled away in a lab or done fieldwork as many of thousands students in Thailand and the UK do. It may come as a shock, but there are literally hundreds of valuable contributions made by those students in any given semester. Can we please keep this in perspective. The debating club is just that, a social club where a bunch of the students get together and talk up their fanciful notions. It's like getting elected president of a fraternity. I'm sure his family is quite proud of him, but seriously, this is hardly news.

With this post GK you reveal a level of bitterness that displays a sad lonely person with nothing better to do than complain about anything that may be remotely connected to Abhisit.

This young man has made his progress on his own merits and neither money nor name gets people elected as President of the OU, only the respect of his peers, many of whom will go on to be some of the worlds top achievers in their own right. A previous President of the Oxford Union was British Prime Minister William Gladstone, probably the greatest Prime Minister we ever had. Your attempt to discredit this young mans achievements would be the same as denigrating or trying to diminish achievements of a young man for being Editor in Chief of the Harvard Crimson for example, a position held by Franklin D Roosevelt (I would have given a comparison to Lincoln or Washington but of course neither went to University).

The only satisfying thing is knowing how much things like this must 'niggle' you and how they must drive you insane to your very core. Have a pleasant day

I am sure he is a personable and bright young man with a fine future in prospect, which would be the case even if like most Oxford undergraduates he had not bothered with joining the Union.However it is obvious that some of the gushing and ludicrous (utterly extraordinary achievement!) compliments on this forum indicate many have not the faintest idea of how the Oxford Union (or Cambridge Union - the institutions are similar) operates.Oxford is a collegiate university and most undergraduates' lives revolve around their college Junior Common Room, not the Oxford Union.The Union certainly has a distinguished history but the last 30 years has seen an eclipse of its importance as political nursery.Neither David Cameron or Ed Milliband bothered with it.In recent years a large proportion of Union officials have been foreigners.As the first Thai to achieve the position however he deserves our congratulations.

Incidentally I think there's a mistake in the Nation report which suggests 70% of Oxford students are members of the Union.I'm sure this is a huge exaggeration but stand to be corrected.Many freshmen join but don't bother attending debates.

There's another angle to consider which The Economist touches on in its latest issue.Let's assume that Yingluck is forced to step down and PTP then chooses a leader ( even a mediocre one) with no connection to the Shinawatra family.That's a victory for the PDRC isn't it? But what happens if the PTP them wins a general election? That would have the effect of boosting its power and legitimacy, the precise opposite of what the PDRC want.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

At the time of the 2006 coup, Thaksin was a caretaker PM, he had already announced that he would not seek the premiership of the next government, assuming the TRT won it which was likly. He would let some other TRT MP be the premier. and the military STILL launched the coup.

Whatever Thaksin does, the Thaksin obsessed crowd is going to insist that he is running things from behind the scenes-because he's a billionair and has a loyal following.

But when multiple billionairs support the democrats, nobody says abhisit is just a puppet of his financial backers..

The "Thaksin obsessed crow" can see things like:

Q. You sounded like you are very familiar with the policy direction?

This policy, I am the one who thinks. Like our slogan during the campaign, Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts.

and reach the obvious conclusion that he is the one dictating what PTP does, because, you know, he says so himself.

Chalerm himself insisted during the last election campaign that the party ran the campaign focusing on Thaksin, for as he said quite rightly, that was their selling point, at that time Yingluck was a complete unknown.

'If we don't focus on Thaksin and populist policies what do we have?' was his point.

Until Pheua Thai can produce leaders of charisma and vision they will continue to labour under the shadow of the Shinawats.

Mediocre politicians in search of a leader.

Mediocre as they may be the parties associated with Thaksin retain the confidence of the Thai people having won the last few general elections.Most unbiased opinion recognises the PTP will probably also win the next one - if allowed to run.

So if this is mediocrity I'm sure honest members of the Democrat Party would like to know the formula.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Jayboy, you have followed the Thai political scene long enough that you are aware that the ruling group dictate how the populist monies are spread around, they also control the entire farm product purchases, supply of needed farm supplies (most are imported) and they have virtually monoplies on the supply chain to the consumer. They can overlook the enforcement the tax collection on various imports, refund of vat, real or imagined, inspection of dumps, after hour clubs, transport companies, the RTP, etc.

Meaningful reform would take these and many other avenues for theft/corruption out of the political arena, without complete oversite by watchdog groups. Both groups would be open to internal audit by the various legal organizations, with severe consquences, if illegal acts are found. These pentalities would include forfiture of all assits, manditory jail terms of at least 5 years, ban from politics for life. with like penality for the private sector individuals/companies who made the proven charges possible

Now there you have a clear answer, maybe not agreeable to you or the corrupt politicans and their cronies, but a answer.

Sorry this just won't do.

You refer to a ruling group spreading populist money around.It could equally be described as a government that by international standards has won a general election, and is fulfilling its programme.The same could be said of democratically elected governments in for example Japan, UK and Germany.There is nothing wrong with populist programmes - the NHS in the UK is a populist programme.If there is corruption involved it should obviously be dealt with under the law.

The interests involved in agriculture are corporates like CP strongly opposed to the government so your comment doesn't make sense.Obviously it would be excellent if corruption was reduced or eradicated, but this doesn't affect the election process.

So your "answer" is irrelevant and inadequate, and the question is unresolved.

There are other millions who want her to stay. So who are you to made such a statement. That is why they have elections, in case you forgot.

Actually is it you that seem to forget. Last election YL was below half of the majority of those who voted. It would have been even less if they voted at all in the south which was blocked. She lost her majority. So get your facts straight.

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Were the real results ever released for the flawed election? There were some guesses and some leaks but no results.

If what you say is true it would be really easy to get rid of the Prime Minister, just allow an election.

Election is meaningless without reform which would benefit everyone including foreigners who want to see changes in the system. Help to bring foreign investment and development. Without involvement of foreigners thai economy will never improve. But when foreigners are scammed by local Thais, there is no law to protect them. YL government did nothing to help us. She is puppet of thakshin without experience in politics, hence should be removed

What specific reforms are needed to make elections meaningful? There has never been a clear answer to this question.

Equally and fair justice for everyone. Win confidence of foreigners and law to protect their rights. Law to punish scammers. Many of them ate PTP supporters.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Just babble.No clear answer provided.

There are other millions who want her to stay. So who are you to made such a statement. That is why they have elections, in case you forgot.

Actually is it you that seem to forget. Last election YL was below half of the majority of those who voted. It would have been even less if they voted at all in the south which was blocked. She lost her majority. So get your facts straight.

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Were the real results ever released for the flawed election? There were some guesses and some leaks but no results.

If what you say is true it would be really easy to get rid of the Prime Minister, just allow an election.

Election is meaningless without reform which would benefit everyone including foreigners who want to see changes in the system. Help to bring foreign investment and development. Without involvement of foreigners thai economy will never improve. But when foreigners are scammed by local Thais, there is no law to protect them. YL government did nothing to help us. She is puppet of thakshin without experience in politics, hence should be removed

What specific reforms are needed to make elections meaningful? There has never been a clear answer to this question.

Perhaps it's just a concidence that someone, also named (Pauline) Pornpimol Kanchanalak like this article's author, faced criminal charges in the US.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1277609.html

Look at the message jayboy.

The message of the article, if that's what you mean, is just the usual reactionary trash typical of the semi educated Sino Thai plutocracy.Thus not worthy of serious consideration.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Sociopaths are unable to accept responsibility for anything. Others are always blamed by these people. I am sorry but Thaksin is mentally ill and the cause of all the problems here in Thailand. The guy is a monster and should be removed from all influence if he cannot remove himself. What ruddy arrogance to demand that others respect the law when he has done everything he can for so many years to flout it. Not only Thai law, but international law too. I'm fed up of this man who ruins so many lives and I am fed up of those sycophants here who support him.

A mentally ill sociopathic monster who is the sole cause of all the problems in Thailand.There are two interpretations of this statement.The first is that it is true, and thus all steps necessary to remove him should be taken.The second that it is a hysterical, buffoonish and ignorant rant ignoring the complex political and social issues that have brought the country to its present pass.I have my own views on the applicable interpretation but others must make up their own minds.

I base my personal assessment of Thaksin as a sociopath from my wide experience of working with mental health issues as well as having a sociopath in the family. I have been fascinated by the similarity in behaviours between Thaksin and other sociopaths such as Lance Armstrong, Berlusconi & idi Amin to name just three. It is not only the lies repeated ad nauseum but the manipulation that goes with them. If you search the internet for the traits of a sociopath, you may come to the same conclusion as I have.

I have no interest in your nonsensical theories culled mindlessly from the internet.Thaksin like many politicians is self regarding and ruthless but the comparison is with other Thai power players.Of your ludicrous examples only Berlusconi warrants serious consideration - and in any event that example is rather stale having been in circulation at least a decade.

In any event Thaksin's state of mind is irrelevant to your original proposition namely that he is responsible for Thailand's current difficulties.As previously noted the witless proponents of this argument are oblivious to the complex patterns at work in Thailand.They could overcome their pitiful ignorance by some hard study and reading - but this of course they will never do.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Thaksin IS the root problem here despite repeated protestations by his boot lickers to the contrary.

He will never truly leave politics, he will always try to have some puppet under his control that will do his bidding. Anyone found to be doing the bidding of a fugitive ( in the same way PT have not to mention TRT, CTP, BJT and whatever other Thaksin proxy parties there have been ) should be put in jail, stripped of assets and banned from politics for life. Politics should be for the people, by the people and done by people who are here and not fugitives on the run with huge sums of money on a power trip....

So anyone who questions whether Thaksin is the root cause of Thailand's problems is a "bootlicker".Somehow I'm surmising your grasp of the fundamentals is not very profound

Since Abhisit, Korn and many other educated opponents of Thaksin have accepted that Thailand's political problems are entrenched and predate the rise of Thaksin, does that place them in the bootlicking category as well?

Many, perhaps most, folks with long-term knowledge of all of this would agree.

That doesn't mean that the paymaster is innocent, far far from it.

Human rights atrocities can never ever be glossed over by 'past precedent'.

Now you go on with 'he's never been charged.....'.

I don't think any sensible person would claim Thaksin is an innocent.

Nor is his human rights record a good one.The fact he has not been charged is nothing to do with "past precedent".It has everything to do with the fact that those who want to destroy him were enthusiastic followers of his drugs war/Southern policies, and in many cases their endorsement is on record.

Anyway my main point is really non controversial, namely that despite his errors Thaksin was not the cause of Thailand's problems - though he has astutely exploited them.

A mentally ill sociopathic monster who is the sole cause of all the problems in Thailand.There are two interpretations of this statement.The first is that it is true, and thus all steps necessary to remove him should be taken.The second that it is a hysterical, buffoonish and ignorant rant ignoring the complex political and social issues that have brought the country to its present pass.I have my own views on the applicable interpretation but others must make up their own minds.

I base my personal assessment of Thaksin as a sociopath from my wide experience of working with mental health issues as well as having a sociopath in the family. I have been fascinated by the similarity in behaviours between Thaksin and other sociopaths such as Lance Armstrong, Berlusconi & idi Amin to name just three. It is not only the lies repeated ad nauseum but the manipulation that goes with them. If you search the internet for the traits of a sociopath, you may come to the same conclusion as I have.

Many politicians are unpleasantly self centred but that isn't the point.You suggested Thaksin was the cause of all Thailand's problems,a ludicrous statement which could only be made by someone either blinded by factionalism or wholly ignorant of the complex background to the current situation.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

He is a convicted criminal on the run, absolute fact. He is also wanted for additional charges, fact. The country is in a terrible mess, of course a fact.

Can you please summarize for me why he should not be viewed in a very bad light, and for the ignorant people like me try and explain a little of the background and complex issues that I don't understand that would change my mind about him.

It seems that haters of Thaksin very often state clear facts and have a firm grasp of the situation, and yet supporters are always vague claiming everyone else is ignorant of the "subtleties" of the situation that shed a very different light on this man.

So, please enlighten me, I genuinely want to hear what I don't understand.

There's no reason why Thaksin should not be viewed in a bad light.He isn't a very admirable person.Nor are most other prominent Thai politicians.

I am afraid I haven't noticed that the "haters of Thaksin" have a clear grap of the facts.Indeed they often seem incoherent.In any event they are very diverse and include high level operators terrified of losing influence given Thaksin's electoral muscle, their mainly Sino Thai middle class "useful idiot" acolytes and of course the thuggish element like Suthep together with his Southern ruffians.

I am at a loss to advise you on remedying your complete ignorance (by your own admission).There are some excellent publications, blogs, articles which would help you.Oddly enough the one thing ignoramuses never want to do is a little research.Unfortunately internet forums like this are not a very useful way of advancing knowledge.

Thaksin IS the root problem here despite repeated protestations by his boot lickers to the contrary.

He will never truly leave politics, he will always try to have some puppet under his control that will do his bidding. Anyone found to be doing the bidding of a fugitive ( in the same way PT have not to mention TRT, CTP, BJT and whatever other Thaksin proxy parties there have been ) should be put in jail, stripped of assets and banned from politics for life. Politics should be for the people, by the people and done by people who are here and not fugitives on the run with huge sums of money on a power trip....

So anyone who questions whether Thaksin is the root cause of Thailand's problems is a "bootlicker".Somehow I'm surmising your grasp of the fundamentals is not very profound

Since Abhisit, Korn and many other educated opponents of Thaksin have accepted that Thailand's political problems are entrenched and predate the rise of Thaksin, does that place them in the bootlicking category as well?

Sociopaths are unable to accept responsibility for anything. Others are always blamed by these people. I am sorry but Thaksin is mentally ill and the cause of all the problems here in Thailand. The guy is a monster and should be removed from all influence if he cannot remove himself. What ruddy arrogance to demand that others respect the law when he has done everything he can for so many years to flout it. Not only Thai law, but international law too. I'm fed up of this man who ruins so many lives and I am fed up of those sycophants here who support him.

A mentally ill sociopathic monster who is the sole cause of all the problems in Thailand.There are two interpretations of this statement.The first is that it is true, and thus all steps necessary to remove him should be taken.The second that it is a hysterical, buffoonish and ignorant rant ignoring the complex political and social issues that have brought the country to its present pass.I have my own views on the applicable interpretation but others must make up their own minds.

I base my personal assessment of Thaksin as a sociopath from my wide experience of working with mental health issues as well as having a sociopath in the family. I have been fascinated by the similarity in behaviours between Thaksin and other sociopaths such as Lance Armstrong, Berlusconi & idi Amin to name just three. It is not only the lies repeated ad nauseum but the manipulation that goes with them. If you search the internet for the traits of a sociopath, you may come to the same conclusion as I have.

Many politicians are unpleasantly self centred but that isn't the point.You suggested Thaksin was the cause of all Thailand's problems,a ludicrous statement which could only be made by someone either blinded by factionalism or wholly ignorant of the complex background to the current situation.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

These guys have a wonderful example of what can happen when you put all your faith in one man one vote and hope that law and order will somehow look after itself. The German general election of 1936 was ostensibly fully democratic respecting everyone's votes and produced a result that had a profound effect on the world.

Perhaps these Social Democrats should stick to battling the Greens.

Another ignorant post from someone who clearly has never read any serious German history.Even a nodding acquaintance with the historical background would have informed him that the 1936 plebiscite was not "ostensibly fully democratic".But for these people it's simply not an option to take some time to educate themselves.They only regurgitate what feather brains on the internet state as a "known fact", namely the Nazis achieved power through one man one vote.

I have read about that period of German history. You missed the sarcasm in the "ostensibly fully democratic". Thai elections are also "ostensibly democratic" but the reality is far from that. Look at the recent Senate elections where many Northern and Northeastern provinces had only red shirt sponsored candidates running as everyone else was intimidated or was no one else genuinely interested in running in those provinces? That is one man one vote in the National Socialist and Communist systems where all other parties are either prohibited or crushed. In fact other parties were banned after the 1936 German elections.

So you also believe elections in Thailand are undemocratic or are you are suggesting the current government is emulating the anti democratic measures of the Nazis? In the fruitcake world some inhabit anything goes I suppose and the facts are to be ignored or manipulated.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Interesting how the intellectually challenged resort to calling anyone with a different view a 'fruitcake" or dismiss their views as ignorant.

Go on read Mr. Kershaw's book again, or even different authors and do some research.

Pray tell us, what is you qualifications in history. political science or any related academic field that gives you the impression you can so arrogantly and rudely dismiss the comments of others?

Enlighten us - tell us how you think Hilter came to power?

I have been accused of many things but not yet " intellectually challenged".Sir Ian Kershaw is as respected an authority as any other on the Nazi rise to power.Suggest you familiarise yourself with the background before making more of an idiot of yourself.Sadly however the one thing these people will never do is buckle down to serious research.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

These guys have a wonderful example of what can happen when you put all your faith in one man one vote and hope that law and order will somehow look after itself. The German general election of 1936 was ostensibly fully democratic respecting everyone's votes and produced a result that had a profound effect on the world.

Perhaps these Social Democrats should stick to battling the Greens.

Another ignorant post from someone who clearly has never read any serious German history.Even a nodding acquaintance with the historical background would have informed him that the 1936 plebiscite was not "ostensibly fully democratic".But for these people it's simply not an option to take some time to educate themselves.They only regurgitate what feather brains on the internet state as a "known fact", namely the Nazis achieved power through one man one vote.

I have read about that period of German history. You missed the sarcasm in the "ostensibly fully democratic". Thai elections are also "ostensibly democratic" but the reality is far from that. Look at the recent Senate elections where many Northern and Northeastern provinces had only red shirt sponsored candidates running as everyone else was intimidated or was no one else genuinely interested in running in those provinces? That is one man one vote in the National Socialist and Communist systems where all other parties are either prohibited or crushed. In fact other parties were banned after the 1936 German elections.

So you also believe elections in Thailand are undemocratic or are you are suggesting the current government is emulating the anti democratic measures of the Nazis? In the fruitcake world some inhabit anything goes I suppose and the facts are to be ignored or manipulated.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

These guys have a wonderful example of what can happen when you put all your faith in one man one vote and hope that law and order will somehow look after itself. The German general election of 1936 was ostensibly fully democratic respecting everyone's votes and produced a result that had a profound effect on the world.

Perhaps these Social Democrats should stick to battling the Greens.

Another ignorant post from someone who clearly has never read any serious German history.Even a nodding acquaintance with the historical background would have informed him that the 1936 plebiscite was not "ostensibly fully democratic".But for these people it's simply not an option to take some time to educate themselves.They only regurgitate what feather brains on the internet state as a "known fact", namely the Nazis achieved power through one man one vote.

Another farang who don't understand Thai people.Thai people don't want or need any election. Election is a farang culture, not applicable or suitable for Thailand.Unlike farang, Thai people respect and listen to our elder.

Obviously mindless trash but I am wondering whether I am missing the mischievous intent.Very frequently on this forum when political issues are discussed it's hard to know what is seriously intended and what is parody.In the case of the moronic nature of the above post the stupidity,ignorance, lack of perception is raised to such a level that I am tempted to believe someone is having a laugh.In which case I must apologise for failing to grasp the joke more quickly.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Thaksin can't bear the thought of Yingluck resigning because he has no one to replace her with. Surapong or Yaowapa on the campaign trail kissing babies will only result in infants traumatised for life.

Yingluck has limited intellectual ability but that doesn't matter upcountry.Just look pretty and smile is all that is required.

We all have limited intellectual ability because none of us are super beings.However there's no evidence at all that Yingluck is other than a smart woman, and what is more with the charm and poise that many of her critics lack.You have of course made the same mistake as many in confusing intellect with education.Her university is of course less starry than that of Abhisit but that's a different matter.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Sorry.Cancelled my post - excessively off topic.

What was happening over at the RBSC during the Thai alliance with Japan and occupation by Japan during WWII?

The British, who had dominated the club since it was founded, and other allied nationals were interned by the Japanese and Mom Ratchada Pisek took over as the first Thai chairman. Ratchada moved that the memberships of the allied nationals should be permanently revoked and the motion was carried, despite a vociferous minority who argued they should be only temporarily suspended. After the war the internees were released and insisted that the cancellation of their memberships was unconstitutional. They won the motion and returned to the club. Ratchada was ousted as chairman and the British contingent managed to reclaim the chairmanship continuously until 1960 when the second Thai chairman was elected by the general committee. Since then the club has been dominated by Thais and there has never been another foreign chairman.

The British Club on Silom Road was taken over as the Japanese military HQ. A released member went to the club to see what was going on and was confronted by a Japanese officer with drawn sword on the stairs but fortunately they managed to sort things out amicably. Since the club had mortgaged the property before the war to Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank which was taken over temporarily by German bankers, the title deeds survived intact and were redeemed from the bank after the war. Most of the club's records, however, were unfortunately destroyed by the Japanese.

To be fair, and I accept you are not suggesting otherwise, I don't think there would have been any objection in 1960 on the part of British members to the Thai membership taking over the key positions.One of the rather attractive aspects of the British expatriate community in the old days was a relative absence of the racism that could be found in Malaysia and India.Part of this lay in the different character of the British community then which if not exactly upper class was devoid of the lower middle class prejudices and was able to recognise gentlemanly characteristics in the Thais they came across in business and in social life.Many of their Thai friends if they had not attended decent English public schools and Oxbridge had the natural grace, charm and good manners that is associated with the Thai upper class.Perhaps less significantly many (I suspect a majority) of the British residents had a Thai girl or boy tucked away which provided a natural sympathy for Thais ways and customs.

The British presence in Thailand was simply an extension of their colonial presence in the rest of Asia. Trading companies and banks like Hong Kong and Shanghai and The Chartered Bank (now Stanchart) opened branches in Thailand to complete their regional networks. Nothing of consequence was manufacturered in Asia, so European exports of industrial and consumer goods were very important. In reverse there were Thai commodities to be exported like teak and rice, not to mention British shipping companies etc. As the colonial presence in the rest of Asia declined, so did the British commercial presence in Thailand. Previously the British were the dominate group in the club's membership but by 1960 the Thai membership had probably overtaken the European membership leading to the election of a Thai chairman.

Originally there were very few Thai members who were all of a noble disposition who regarded it as a British style club that they were happy to join as a privileged minority but had no interest in trying to run. They were probably even more keen than the British to keep it exclusive which in the pre-war days certainly meant keeping out the Chinese, except as club servants. In the old club photographs you certainly don't see any Chinese features amongst the members. This obviously changed sometime after the Second World War and perhaps by the early 60s.

Realistically the British and other foreigners had no choice but to accept the Thai nobility into the club was on royal land and obviously had no problem with the manners and English language skills of the noble Thai members. In the end it was simply a game of numbers as the European membership declined relative to the Thai membership. I don't really think playing around with Thai boys or girls made that much difference to the British perception of the culture. This was commonplace in most of the colonies too but didn't necessarily encourage greater respect for their cultures.

There was a difference between the relations (ie they were generally better) between the British and the Thais compared say with the position in Malaysia or (earlier on) Burma.My reference to the usefulness of concubines was facetious but it does contain a grain of truth.The change in the proportion of Thais and foreigners in the Club was certainly due to the factors you mention but also because of the decline of long term expatriate postings.The Chinese aspect is interesting and I suspect that there was more admixture than often maintained.Of course there was a social gap between the relatively recent arrivals from Southern China and the long established grandees.That's a distinction that still exists though less obviously.

Oh dear - very off topic

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Alas, Pheu Thai is not the only one fantasizing about conspiracy theories. The UDD has turned them into a cottage industry. UDD radio thrives on them. And Pheu Thai/UDD supporters thrive on them as well. The whole point of the conspiracy theories of Pheu Thai and the UDD and their supporters is that they underscore their true aim - and that is to somehow discredit the judgments and authority of the judicial agencies, and in so doing, manage to undermine the very legitimacy and authority of the rule of law itself. That's their aim. And they have somehow convinced themselves that's democracy.

So Scamper, in your view, the judiciary and courts are NOT corrupt at ALL? Comment?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Nah, in the yellow paradigm, all of Thailand is a sea of corruption. Except the judiciary, through some fortunate happenstance.

Though there is financial corruption in the judiciary, it is not the main problem at present.See the useful analsysis below:

http://www.fairobserver.com/article/thailand-democracy-endangered-juristocracy-69712