jayboy

Almost every senior army officer or senior civil servant has a net worth that is inexplicable in terms of salary received and/or inherited wealth.

Why not concentrate on a certain family whose wealth is easily explainable - by corrupt business deals, tax evasion, and conflict of interest deals carried out while in office?

Because it is as you say easily explainable (and also not relevant to this thread).I think you mean tax avoidance (legal) not evasion (illegal) if you are referring to the Temasek deal.

Another example of the usual suspects invoking Thaksin quite irrelevantly whenever discussion strays on to ground where they are uncomfortable (ie massive corruption in military and public sector)

I'm not sure what Surayud means here.Is he calling for unity among all Thais or unity among the proto fascists like Pitak Siam? I assume the former.

In any event who cares? Surayud is yesterday's man, a charming and decent old codger certainly.However his quisling administration after the criminal coup d'état was noted for its lethargy and sheer incompetence.

How can Thai army general be a decent old codger?

What was his salary and what is his net worth.

He had a weekend home in the National Preserve for gods sake.

How low can you go?

How about nicking 1000 rai from a temple land donation to make a country club for your elite mates?

Almost every senior army officer or senior civil servant has a net worth that is inexplicable in terms of salary received and/or inherited wealth.

Everyone is quite aware that he was corrupt before he entered politics.

According to the banned reading material, corruption was not the reason for the coup.

Have you read the facts?

Sad, but the ones that have written the story had to flee Thailand and their work is banned here.

In fact, the coup was run by the super corrupt in Thailand protecting their interests.

Scoundrels that can't win an election, pay off the army & would have you jailed for even mentioning the facts.

Why would anybody support this group?

I didn't say anything about the coup. I was just pointing out how he became a billionaire before he became PM.

He continued that corruption while he was PM.

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

As usual on this forum opinion expressed on Thaksin's pre- politician wealth completely ill informed and downright wrong.By Thai standards it was legitimate and certainly not illegally earned.Monopolistic certainly and tied to political links, certainly - but not corrupt.

I have summarised the explanation given by Pasuk/Baker in their "Thaksin".

His success arose from ability to synergise politics and business.He was persistent and had a flare for risk taking.He understood that political regulation of business is the source of abnormal rates of profit.His great fortune built up over 5 years from 1990 was the result of the booming economy and the state's abysmal failure to expand landline or mobile networks.The monopoloistic concession allowed new mobile suppliers to charge high prices with enormous profit margins.TOT constructed a built in market advantage for Thaksin because it suited them in their competition with CAT.Finally the stock market pumped up by financial liberalization and world wide entusiasm for emerging markets transl;ated high profits to higher net worth.

My own view was that Thaksin's corruption related more to changing the rules of the game to suit his interestrs.This was really more apparent after he made his first fortune.

On this point alone I have a query.Can you advise which academics agreed Giles's book on the coup was wildly inaccurate?

If you are unable to do so, one must simply conclude that you disagree with his conclusions and have invented the academic support you refer to.

I had some reservations too relating to Giles's somewhat predictable assumptions on a class based interpretation of political events in Thailand.He is a Marxist and I am not.Yet there was a great deal of excellent and perceptive material in his book.

But that's my opinion and I would not make up support from "most academics" as you appear to have done.Actually as I recall Giles book was very favourably reviewed by the academic community.

Disappointingly for the champions of reaction on this forum and elsewhere, there is in fact no discernible academic support for the amart in Thailand, slightly odd even taking into account that academics almost everywhere tend to be left of centre.

Er what is this thread about? I thought it was about Surayud but suddenly it's all about Thaksin, the standard response apparently when there is any criticism of the reactionary right (though in this case rather light and friendly given Surayud's basic decency).

But actually it does matter what Surayud means.I am almost certain he means unity among all classes of Thais not just the proto fascists like Pitak Siam and similar.THe problem I suspect in this report lies not with Surayud but the slovenly journalism of The Nation.

My dear jBoy, did you read what I wrote? I was just referring to the (may I call it) fact that whenever someone you may not like is quoted you tend to interpret negatively, cast doubt on honestly, etc., etc.

The very fact that you 'wonder' if k. Surayud meant 'pitak siam' when saying 'unity amongst Thai', even if you then dismis it as 'assume not' already implies a lot of your point of view. To describe my comment as 'standard reaction on critisism of the reactionary right' is just the 'no meaning' catchphrase which is so common in certain academic circles it would seem. 'amart' and 'unelected elites' is also so meaningless after all the discussions of the last few years. Unless you want to refer to our dear criminal fugitive billionair why is not elected but skypes-in to tell how his country should be run. Of course that's not reactionair, just totally morally wrong.

I'm sure k. Surayud meant 'unity amongst Thai' with Thai being the Thai people. That includes not only the 'proto fascists' but also the 'democracy loving ones' and even red, yellow shirts and white or red masked groups. IMHO

If you mean I point out ignorance, lack of logic and extremism.. then I must plead guilty.I may be acerbic but equally try to be accurate.

Did you read what I wrote? I was giving General Surayud, whom I rather like, the benefit of the doubt.I am almost completely sure his unity plea was to all Thais.

If you think "unlected elites" and "amart" have no meaning perhaps you should pay a little more attention to the realities of Thailand.In fact if you donr recognise oir understand these concepts, observations are likely to be meaningless.That's not a political point.Defending the amart is perfectly valid but simply absurd to maintain it doesn't exist.

Incidentally in the politest way possible may I suggest you slightly amend your posting style.I see what you are trying to aim at - a learned light and detached style but making one or two penetrating points.It works quite well for intelligent but waspish Oxbridge dons whose first language is English - not so well for those - to put it tactfully - less equipped.

I don't see the case for a new law when the existing laws are already sufficient.Really in the instance of a proposed anti coup law the same case as with the lese majeste laws.The objectives are reasonable enough but do not require separate legislation since there are already statutes on the book dealing with these offences..

Perhaps in the case of coups there should be a requirement that those involved should not be able to award themselves post facto pardons.The practical position in Thailand is that coups favoured by the amart are not punished while coup attempts unapproved are punished severely,with for example in the 1970's the unapproved coup leader General Chalard being executed.

I'm not sure what Surayud means here.Is he calling for unity among all Thais or unity among the proto fascists like Pitak Siam? I assume the former.

In any event who cares? Surayud is yesterday's man, a charming and decent old codger certainly.However his quisling administration after the criminal coup d'état was noted for its lethargy and sheer incompetence.

I take these calls to unity to be a siren cry of, please don't fight the army if they come out. We don't want to be on global television having a nationwide civil war. How the up country areas would react to a coup this time around, I don't want to say, but it won't be flowers and wais this time around.

I agree with you.Even taking into account the extreme stupidity of many of those calling for a coup, the sharper minds among the old unelected elites know it could be bloody and counter productive.Therefore their favoured method of dislodging the Yingluck Government is to mobilise the courts.But even then I'm not sure even the intelligent end of the amart has fully thought through what happens next - specifically the next general election.Meanwhile the clock is ticking and in the near future all bets will be off.Cool heads will be needed on both sides of the political divide.

... and while some wonder what was meant when the Privy Counsilar Surayud called for unity amongst Thais, it is obvious what k. Thaksin means when he says he wants Thai to reconcile

In any event who cares, just another 64 year old has-been criminal fugitive, Thaksin that is, not k. Surayud who as PM even apologized for some of the atrocities which happened under a former PM.

All this of course just to show that reconciliation when people have different memories and different ideas, is something which needs more than just a political party pushing for an amnesty bill others don't want. Reconciliation needs all sides to co-operate. IMHO

Er what is this thread about? I thought it was about Surayud but suddenly it's all about Thaksin, the standard response apparently when there is any criticism of the reactionary right (though in this case rather light and friendly given Surayud's basic decency).

But actually it does matter what Surayud means.I am almost certain he means unity among all classes of Thais not just the proto fascists like Pitak Siam and similar.THe problem I suspect in this report lies not with Surayud but the slovenly journalism of The Nation.

"So lets have another coup to get rid of this lot"

Why does "Mark" need the army to get him elected if he is so good for the country? There will be another election in the not so distant future, everyone who can vote will be able to vote for THEIR government, will they choose your beloved Mark? I doubt it.

The point of previous coups was to get governments, he'll bent on destroying Thailand OUT. Not to get the Opposition IN.

If PTP were to act like sensible boys and girls, even while flouting parliamentary democracy, then there'd be little argument other than a difference of policies.

But while PTP are acting like out of control school kids, they leave themselves open to requiring a steadying hand.

What was the result of the last coup? Democratic elections which got PTP elected.

You shouldn't have much complaint about that

Er so what is the point? Why have a coup if the Thai people simply re- elect the deposed government or one almost identical to it.A coup only makes sense if the coup makers can enforce policies to their liking.After the last coup an attempt was made with the rigged military backed constitution but with only mixed results.The only effective way to enforce policies would be to end parliamentary democracy altogether.

So what have these coup makers achieved?They have managed to damage and tarnish the institutions they profess to hold dear.Stupid muppets.

My point was simple. A government that goes off the rails is stopped. The people vote for a new government presumably in hope of a better future. Then the new government continues with the same policies.

2 choices - take up the general apathy which appears to characterize Thailand, or continue to try to give governments the chance to act like grown ups?

Are you in favour of out-of-control governments?

No idea what you are talking about with your half baked ideas about army interventions and bizarre references to "out of control" governments.Take it up with someone else please.

I'm not sure what Surayud means here.Is he calling for unity among all Thais or unity among the proto fascists like Pitak Siam? I assume the former.

In any event who cares? Surayud is yesterday's man, a charming and decent old codger certainly.However his quisling administration after the criminal coup d'état was noted for its lethargy and sheer incompetence.

I take these calls to unity to be a siren cry of, please don't fight the army if they come out. We don't want to be on global television having a nationwide civil war. How the up country areas would react to a coup this time around, I don't want to say, but it won't be flowers and wais this time around.

I agree with you.Even taking into account the extreme stupidity of many of those calling for a coup, the sharper minds among the old unelected elites know it could be bloody and counter productive.Therefore their favoured method of dislodging the Yingluck Government is to mobilise the courts.But even then I'm not sure even the intelligent end of the amart has fully thought through what happens next - specifically the next general election.Meanwhile the clock is ticking and in the near future all bets will be off.Cool heads will be needed on both sides of the political divide.

"So lets have another coup to get rid of this lot"

Why does "Mark" need the army to get him elected if he is so good for the country? There will be another election in the not so distant future, everyone who can vote will be able to vote for THEIR government, will they choose your beloved Mark? I doubt it.

The point of previous coups was to get governments, he'll bent on destroying Thailand OUT. Not to get the Opposition IN.

If PTP were to act like sensible boys and girls, even while flouting parliamentary democracy, then there'd be little argument other than a difference of policies.

But while PTP are acting like out of control school kids, they leave themselves open to requiring a steadying hand.

What was the result of the last coup? Democratic elections which got PTP elected.

You shouldn't have much complaint about that

Er so what is the point? Why have a coup if the Thai people simply re- elect the deposed government or one almost identical to it.A coup only makes sense if the coup makers can enforce policies to their liking.After the last coup an attempt was made with the rigged military backed constitution but with only mixed results.The only effective way to enforce policies would be to end parliamentary democracy altogether.

So what have these coup makers achieved?They have managed to damage and tarnish the institutions they profess to hold dear.Stupid muppets.

I'm not sure what Surayud means here.Is he calling for unity among all Thais or unity among the proto fascists like Pitak Siam? I assume the former.

In any event who cares? Surayud is yesterday's man, a charming and decent old codger certainly.However his quisling administration after the criminal coup d'état was noted for its lethargy and sheer incompetence.

Perhaps it is because he refuses to offer populist vote-buying policies that would prove ruinous to the country. Of course you have to be some sort of fascist to suggest that government should be responsible as well as popular, or that there is more to democracy than who gets the most votes.

That would be a somewhat more compelling argument if Abhisit and his government had not adopted Thaksin's so called populist programmes hook, line and sinker - indeed enhanced them.

As for the economic impact of these policies it is absurd to suggest they are ruinous to the country.The numbers simply don't support this.

Your 1st statement is a lie.

Your 2nd statement refers to a matter you have refused to discuss. But now, with rice scam losses approaching 1 trillion baht with little or no economic gain, you can explain why thailand needs to borrow B2.2 trillion for infrastructure development (says Yingluk).

You might also choose to comment on responsible government, and the other facets of democracy beyond populism.

Abhisit and the Democrats' populist programme on which they fought the last election was modelled on that pioneered by Thaksin and this is a matter of record.Please do not attempt to reinvent history and please do not call other forum members liars.If you disagree present your evidence and a discussion can be had.

The rice subsidy pledge is certainly flawed but it has a political objective which has to be taken into account.It is foolish to call it a scam though no doubt there are incidental elements of corruption which schemes of this sort are prone to.

The infrastructure development programme is both imaginative and necessary and has wide cross party support.I specifically recall Korn's endorsement.The controversy relates to how it should be financed and unfortunately this has been caught up in the attempts of extreme right wingers to mobilise the courts for political purposes.On the basis of the numbers I have seen the programme is doable through a mixture of self financing and additional borrowings.

Quote by Jayboy:

In other words Korn prefers to rely on the courts ( strongly influenced by the old elites) to challenge and possibly remove the government

He doesn't 'prefer' to do any such thing - pity you have to put words into his mouth.

Korn's party hasn't got the numbers to bring the government down, so how should they do it? Purple shirt militia? Another coup?

If the PTP mob try and exceed their power (and they've tried a number of times already) it is the opposition's job to try to curb that power and, given that PTP have no respect for parliamentary debates, use the checks & balances of the courts. That's what those courts are there for. In effect, the courts are a last resort not a preferred choice.

Oh I know that Thaksinistas believe that winning an election entitles them to do as they please. But not many others would view the (Thaksin idol) Lee Kwan Yu years in Singapore as being democratic.

It's dispiriting to have to respond to this kind of post but here goes.I don't know anybody with an ounce of sense that believes victory in a general election provides a government with the right to do anything it likes.

There must be all kinds of checks and balances.However in Thailand there is a history of judicial activism which is politically controlled or encouraged by unelected elites.The Democrats have benefited from this.

It is absolutely right that opposition politicians like Korn should take on the government.But the way to dislodge the ruling party is to defeat it in the next general election, not rely on tainted and politically motivated court decisions.Korn is a highly intelligent man who understands a military coup would be an appalling disaster.He should understand judicial activism couldne equally destructive and self defeating.

Finally and as an aside if Thailand could achieve Singapore's wealth and stability I doubt many Thais would quarrel having a Lee Kwan Yew at the helm.

"So lets have another coup to get rid of this lot"

Why does "Mark" need the army to get him elected if he is so good for the country? There will be another election in the not so distant future, everyone who can vote will be able to vote for THEIR government, will they choose your beloved Mark? I doubt it.

Perhaps it is because he refuses to offer populist vote-buying policies that would prove ruinous to the country. Of course you have to be some sort of fascist to suggest that government should be responsible as well as popular, or that there is more to democracy than who gets the most votes.

That would be a somewhat more compelling argument if Abhisit and his government had not adopted Thaksin's so called populist programmes hook, line and sinker - indeed enhanced them.

As for the economic impact of these policies it is absurd to suggest they are ruinous to the country.The numbers simply don't support this.

Mark,

Wonder why he never investigated those drug war deaths?

Because the unelected elites that paved his way to power were enthusiastic supporters of the war on drugs,as to be fair were most Thais.Since then opponents of Thaksin have looked to make political capital of the war on drugs.These haven't been very successful for the reasons explained above.The sheer misery caused by the drug trade in Thailand has not been a factor in their politicking.

In essence the proto fascists have become alarmed at improving links between the Yingluck government and the army.They know they can never win a general election with the toxic leadership of the Democrat Party.Increasingly reliance is being placed in the judicial system to remove the elected government, probably the constitutional Court.Difficult to rate the unelected elites chance of success here but I would suggest quite high despite the lack of unity between the various fascist splinter groups.Having said that even the criminals involved in masterminding the last coup may be aware that illegally or "legally" removing an elected government doesn't actually solve the structural problem of Thai politics and broader society.

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

The opposition is only doing its job: Korn

The Nation

Korn

BANGKOK: -- Democrat deputy leader Korn Chatikavanij speaks to The Nation's Hataikarn Treesuwan on the opposition's role in checking and balancing the government's power once the Parliament reopens on Thursday next week.

The Yingluck Shinawatra government has important bills waiting for deliberation by Parliament when it convenes next week. Which bill do you think has the highest risk?

If the Bt2-trillion loan bill is approved, the Democrats will immediately ask the Constitutional Court for a judicial review. If the court rules it is unconstitutional, I think the government will have to resign.

The controversial Bt350-billion water-management scheme also poses a risk. The Administrative Court last month suspended the mega-project pending compulsory environmental impact assessments and public hearings before work on the design and construction begins. If they continue borrowing money, I think they will violate the law and cannot stay [in power].

Do you mean the government can be

toppled by a court ruling while the Democrats can only set the ball rolling?

Yes. It is the Democrats' duty to scrutinise and see if the government is violating laws. However, if the court rules those two bills are unconstitutional it does not mean all projects will be terminated. They can still go ahead using the annual budget as per normal or find new financial resources. Now the fiscal 2014 budget bill is under consideration, so why not have a "Plan B" and move some projects under the Bt2-trillion bill to this budget? Why is it necessary to just wait for the Bt2-trillion loan bill?

Apparently, court rulings will be able to end all conflicts, so why do many senior Democrats still insist on taking on the 'Reveal the Truth' mobile forum? What is their ultimate goal?

We use the forum to show we are in strong opposition to the former PM Thaksin Shinawatra when it comes to politics. I think the leaked audio clip [believed to be a conversation between Thaksin and Deputy Defence Minister Yuthasak Sasiprapha] clearly shows that Thaksin is doing everything for himself. He used to accuse the Abhisit [Vejjajiva] government

of being set up in the military barracks, and now he's turning to the military to help bring him back to the country.

He is also reaching out to the group he called the "ammart" [elite], including [Privy Council President] General Prem [Tinsulanonda].

If Thaksin believes the military can pave the way for him to return home, then others might think that the military could help the Democrat Party oust this government as well?

I honestly don't think we need someone to help. Everybody has their duties and responsibilities.

I do my duty when I submit a petition to the Constitutional Court or the National Anti-Corruption Commis-sion (NACC). I am not asking for their help.

If the court and the NACC have different views, then we will respect them, but we have the right to express our disagreement. Also, if the verdict does not match the facts, it will only add more problems for the country.

Decisions made by independent agencies have been questioned as being dependent on public pressure. Are the 'Reveal the Truth' rallies aimed to mobilise protesters and create public pressure?

Absolutely not! We need to explain to the public what this government and Thaksin are doing. It will also help us stop Thaksin more easily.

Do you have any plans to join forces with other anti-government groups such as V for Thailand and Thai Spring? The key leader of Thai Spring Kaewsun Atibodhi was once part of the 'Reveal the Truth' rally as well.

No. Kaewsun was on our stage a long time ago. Everyone can join our stage. We are not involved in his group.

With only 160 seats in the House, how can the Democrat Party bring down the government?

I don't think we can. It's not a matter of voting. Even if the court rules the Bt2-trillion loan bill is unconstitutional, I don't think the government will show spirit [and resign].

Instead, they will blame others. Or they might dissolve the House, which will make an election the last resort. We are doing the job of an opposition party. If an election is called, our next step will be to win it. This is because victory will lead us to sustainable change.

Is the Democrat Party ready for an early election?

Our party will be at a disadvantage if an election is called soon. This is because we never have enough financial support compared to our rivals. Yet, we are ready to fight and are encouraging our candidates to be prepared for an election.

-- The Nation 2013-07-24

In other words Korn prefers to rely on the courts ( strongly influenced by the old elites) to challenge and possibly remove the government

There was NO RATIONALITY to Hitler's racist obsession about the Jews.

However, his extreme anti-semitism was a very useful POLITICAL tool for him.

Having a SCAPEGOAT is a classic tactic.

He could tell the "racially pure" German majority they were the master race and so special so he needed a minority group to CONTRAST with. This minority group was not only the Jews but the Jews were clearly the primary focus of his obsession and the Nazi propaganda (and holocaust). The non-minority majority LOVED to have their egos stoked that way.

Antisemitism is irrational but you are profoundly mistaken to believe that Hitler conjured it out of nowhere.It was already deeply imbedded in German society and indeed throughout most of Western Europe including the United Kingdom.

Hitler of course pursued antisemitism to a new level of madness.

I really love it when people tell me I am mistaken (profoundly so, isn't that special? ) about something I never said, never wrote, never believed, and never thought. Thank you!

There was nothing in your earlier post to suggest you were aware that antisemitism was rooted in European society or that Hitler exploited this as opposed to initiating it.If you already understood this, as you now claim to, I suggest it would have been preferable to make this clear.I then would not have had to correct your post.Your very misleading comment about " the non - minority (sic) majority loving to have their egos stroked" does however suggest you are not very familiar with the background.If you seriously wish to understand the subject I should be delighted to recommend some reading material.

There was NO RATIONALITY to Hitler's racist obsession about the Jews.

However, his extreme anti-semitism was a very useful POLITICAL tool for him.

Having a SCAPEGOAT is a classic tactic.

He could tell the "racially pure" German majority they were the master race and so special so he needed a minority group to CONTRAST with. This minority group was not only the Jews but the Jews were clearly the primary focus of his obsession and the Nazi propaganda (and holocaust). The non-minority majority LOVED to have their egos stoked that way.

Antisemitism is irrational but you are profoundly mistaken to believe that Hitler conjured it out of nowhere.It was already deeply imbedded in German society and indeed throughout most of Western Europe including the United Kingdom.

Hitler of course pursued antisemitism to a new level of madness.

Could it be that the army isn't the only ones that don't understand that the people are boss?

It would seem that those who infest inhabit parliament building don't understand either.

Politicians are far from perfect but they are chosen by the people and can be booted out by the people.The military in all its criminality, corruption and incompetence can never be voted out.

I was about to have breakfast but seeing Blair's picture means I'll wait. I'd like to keep the food down.

Churchill was the best. He knew when to hand it over.

There is nobody I respect more than Churchill but you are completely wrong.He did not know when to hand it over.His heir apparent Anthony Eden, intelligent, charming and handsome, was kept waiting far too long.When he finally took over Churchill was sadly past it.Eden, frustrated at the excessive wait was a poor PM - culminating in the Suez debacle.

Thainess example promoted by a high member of the Thai justice system. Simply amazing Thailand, just hate to see her in court with a Farang case that does not suit her.

Unlike in, to pick a country at random, Britain, where it's totally unknown for a senior government minister to scream at police who block his way, saying 'Know your <deleted> place, you pleb'. That would never happen, would it - high-status people throwing their weight around is clearly a uniquely Thai kind of social pathology.

Unfortunately for your argument the British example you cite has been demonstrated to be a pack of lies by the police.Several police officers have been questioned and charged.

As to The thread subject matter nobody says this kind of behaviour is unique, simply very commonly observed in Thailand

A Thai being criticized by their perceived inferiors. The petty, childish, embarrassing reaction is never a pretty sight. Though it does highlight their true nature for those foreigners who may not be aware of Thai culture and society.

The reaction would be the same for almost any Thai that is criticized by someone they see as lower than them. (remember that you are lower than all of them)

Lucky she didn't have a samurai sword in the boot.

This post and that of EyesWideOpen say it all. I have to smile when I hear first time tourists say how quiet and respectful Thais are then look disbelieving when you warn of the temper bubbling away underneath and very little can be need to spark it off.

I'm sure the Thais speak highly of me too.

It was a very perceptive post and all the more compelling for being concise.The rage and hysteria many privileged Thais feel when challenged by those lower down on the status ladder explains much of the country's recent political experience.

Protestors in Thailand call on the army to undertake a coup.Obviously comments on the forum should primarily focus on local events.Nevertheless there are similar essentially middle class/old establishment versus democracy in other parts of the world, notably Egypt and Turkey.Any educated intelligent person would wish from time to time to compare and contrast.The similarities between say Thailand and Egypt are fascinating, as are the differences.To compare and contrast is certainly not muddying the waters.

While we compare and contrast, perhaps we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that a democratically elected government has proven itself incapable of governing according to parliamentary democracy.

The mad rush to change laws to allow them complete freedom to 'legally' govern against thailand's best interests is perhaps the most blatant example.

You seem obsessed with the people who aren't in power.

What was the result of the last coup? A greedy despot was removed from power, the military presided over a popular 'cooling down' period, then democratic government was restored. Shame the Thai obsession with repeating its mistakes, means that the chance afforded them by the military has been thrown away - again

I am struggling to understand how these comments are in any way a response to the points made in my post.

As for your remarks about Thailand, it must be galling for those holding these views that the Thai people seem to regard them of little account.

I'm not in a position to understand the reasons why you didn't understand what I intended to be a clear representation of what a Thai coup actually means - a cooling down period.

Your comment about non-Thais feeling galled, should perhaps err more on the side of despair.

The fact is, we wouldn't be having this discussion if the present Government was governing for Thailand and its people, rather than carrying on where the criminal, cowardly, former PM, hiding in a life of luxury, left off.

No doubt we'll come back to the fact that they were democratically elected, which will illicit the same response from me of - democratic elections is not the same as democracy.

Well intentioned people believe siding with the military protects freedom.History teaches bitter lessons.Ride the tiger.End up inside.