jayboy

Why would you suggest that "the political opposition to ditch their incompetent and discredited leadership" rather than the current government? .Wouldn't that remove the impetus for a coup?

And be on topic rather than your standard response "what about the democrats"?

Perhaps it's because leadership change is not a possibility in the autocratic PTP.

Er,because the opposition is in opposition and the current government is in power.

Now that I've restored my post to its original content, would you care to answer the emphasised question rather than just state some inanity?

If the opposition improved its act by shaking up its discredited leadership and presenting a platform of policies that could secure a general election victory, that wouldn't necessarily "remove the impetus for a coup" because the Democrat party would no longer be a willing tool for reactionary interests and the military dinosaurs.But clearly it would be helpful because the unelected elites would no longer have a tame major political party to act as their agent.

• Here we go again. Yingluck was elected PM by the votes of the Thai people. Whether TV keyboard experts like it or not that is a fact.

Whine and complain and come up with a zillion conspiracy theories and "insider info"......or leave Thai politics to the Thai people and go for a nice lunch.

Can you please tell me which constituency Yingluck stood in and the elction results.

It may be a little difficult as she has NEVER stood in a constituency vote because she was a party list MP, actually number 1 on the list.

Therefore she was NOT ELECTED by any votes of the Thai people at all but nominated as the PM by the PTP membership committee and oddly enough the PTP is owned and paid for by her brother.

Please do a little simple research before you post drivel and try to get it right sometimes.

I'm not sure you should be giving lectures to anyone about simple research since your own understanding is so flawed.The party list aspect isn't relevant.At the last general election Yingluck headed the party which won the election.She was not nominated after the event so the country was perfectly aware of what they were voting for.The Thai people were presented with a choice of PM from Abhisit and Yingluck.They chose Yingluck by a significant margin.Got it now?

If there is one person who shouldn't be giving pompous lectures it is you. You unfortunately conveniently forget that though the PTP members were elected the PM and the cabinet are openly lying as to the process of government namely their cavorting with Thaksin your hero in exile. As for 'getting it now' you never will, so lay off the obfuscations please.

The relationship between Thaksin and the current government is I am afraid a different question, and I'm not certain why you have introduced the topic.My point however was a simple one,namely that Khun Yingluck has a clear and irrefutable democratic mandate from the Thai people.I don't necessarily expect a high level of comprehension but on this occasion it's hard to see how the subject could be simplified further.

Why would you suggest that "the political opposition to ditch their incompetent and discredited leadership" rather than the current government? .

Er,because the opposition is in opposition and the current government is in power.

Maybe the army should of done something about it one of the other 17 times they took over.

It is not the role of the army to set up an effective education system, or to install a critical press, though they have tried to enable corruption control agencies.

Maybe if they started shooting corrupt politicians instead of ejecting them from office...........at least we wouldn't see the same old faces heading back to the trough.

Well if they keep taking over and allowing corrupt and ineffectual Governments to be in place, I would question what the hell the point of them taking over is.

It would seem that both the politicians and people of Thailand are slow learners, and the cultural tendency to admire the wealthy and powerful even when they are obviously criminals is difficult to change.

Like it or not, the threat of a coup hangs over the government like a Sword of Damocles, reminding them there a legal and constitutional limits to their powers. There are better ways of doing it, but they don't exist here (for now).

But the factions that would undertake the coup, that is the reactionary army generals are themselves wealthy, corrupt and powerful criminals.Wouldn't it be rather better for the political opposition to ditch their incompetent and discredited leadership, detoxify their image and present a credible platform at the next general election for the Thai people to consider.

It's obvious that some have become very excited by events in Egypt where an elected government was ejected by the army, and fantasise that this could be replicated in a Thailand coup.Dream on.

• Here we go again. Yingluck was elected PM by the votes of the Thai people. Whether TV keyboard experts like it or not that is a fact.

Whine and complain and come up with a zillion conspiracy theories and "insider info"......or leave Thai politics to the Thai people and go for a nice lunch.

Can you please tell me which constituency Yingluck stood in and the elction results.

It may be a little difficult as she has NEVER stood in a constituency vote because she was a party list MP, actually number 1 on the list.

Therefore she was NOT ELECTED by any votes of the Thai people at all but nominated as the PM by the PTP membership committee and oddly enough the PTP is owned and paid for by her brother.

Please do a little simple research before you post drivel and try to get it right sometimes.

I'm not sure you should be giving lectures to anyone about simple research since your own understanding is so flawed.The party list aspect isn't relevant.At the last general election Yingluck headed the party which won the election.She was not nominated after the event so the country was perfectly aware of what they were voting for.The Thai people were presented with a choice of PM from Abhisit and Yingluck.They chose Yingluck by a significant margin.Got it now?

This is not a surprise at all, he was always told by others what to do. Abhisit was only a puppet for the military. He never made any decisions by himself, but a PM who was an elite british academic provided something that the military junta lacked in their own men.

Perhaps this academic training has led to his downfall that he finds himself in now, taking the fall for the military's own crimes. Tough luck pretty boy. Is your British education going to save you?

This is not a surprise at all, he was always told by others what to do. Abhisit was only a puppet for the military. He never made any decisions by himself, but a PM who was an elite british academic provided something that the military junta lacked in their own men.

Perhaps this academic training has led to his downfall that he finds himself in now, taking the fall for the military's own crimes. Tough luck pretty boy. Is your British education going to save you?

If former prime minister Abhisit would be British his career would have long since terminated

No sniper in any professional Army 'takes out' his fellow countrymen with out clear instruction from the top.

Unfourtunatly Prime Minister Abhisit was at 'the top at the time' of those executions whilst orchesrating events from the Barracks of the Eleventh Infranty in Bangkok.

If Thailand was England, Thaksin would have been banned for plainly lying about his hidden assets in 2001.

And as for the reds seizure of Ratchaprasong- no western government would have tolerated that for more than a few days.

Apisit was put in an impossible situation and did the best he did- unlike the coward in Dubai or Hong kong.

What you say about Thaksin and the reds seizure of Ratchaprasong is no doubt true.But equally there would have been a very high political price to pay for Abhisit presiding over the deaths of so many people - at the very least a complete end to his political activity.So by all means reflect on " a what would have happened in the UK " scenario but do try and be honest about it.

After listening to Abhisit in a debate on the BBC, one suspects his grasp and usage of the English language is better than both yours or mine...

I can't see how you get from his parents being worrried about him, to them knowing he is guilty .. however I will concide that the English skills of the jouro who wrote this piece may be at a lower standard that that of the person he interviewed...

although there is a lot of political showboating in this piece.....If Abhibsit stands by what he has said about taking responsibility, if need be and not negotiating with the thugs in power to allow our man in dubai a free pass...well done to him, Thailand politics needs a few more like him....

If you mean the two interviews on BBC Hardtalk with Stephen Sackur and earlier with Zeinab Badawi, I thought his grasp and usage of English while very competent was less impressive than expected (and definitely not superior to mine), given his many years of education in England at elite institutions.Whether his grasp of English is better than the typical forum member, that is a matter on which I could not possibly comment.

Another interesting take on the Egypt crisis.The Arab Spring was about freedom (and capitalism) more than democracy argues Fraser Nelson in the Daily Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10159983/It-is-capitalism-not-democracy-that-the-Arab-world-needs-most.html

@jayboy: From searching the internet in 2009 it was estimated the Egyptian military budget was approx US$6 billion, that includes US$1.3 billion from US military aid, so I would not say that the US bankrolls the military. In addition the Egyptian military controls around 40% of industry & commerce, so probably not to pleased with Morsi's management of the economy.

If US Dlrs 1.3 billion isn't bankrolling,I wonder what is.

On the Egyptian crisis generally (and Western attitudes to) Simon Jenkins in The Guardian writes some good sense.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/04/mobs-egypt-les-miserables-absurd

Er no actually it doesn't show what the Egyptian people feel at all.It shows (courtesy an Israeli news outlet) what a rather excitable small group of middle class journalists in a TV studio feel.Of course Egypt is divided and the huge demonstrations on the streets show the extent of opposition to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood - and these demonstrators would of course empathise with the hyped up guys at the TV studio.But equally there are many more millions of Egyptians whose loyalties are to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - who won a general election a year ago that was generally perceived to be fair.So this game isn't over.My take? Morsi screwed up badly: he had the chance to bring Egyptians together and failed to do so.The concern is that the Egyptian majority whose sympathies lie in the MB direction will feel - we tried democracy and look what happened.Next time round - and there is always a next time round - the Islamicist movement may resort to much more unpleasant strategies.Then the middle class cry babies in the TV studio may look back on Morsi with some nostalgia.

I think this video tells the story about how the Egyptian people feel about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's ouster....

Note: Read the English language subtitles closely ....

Jubilation in Egyptian TV Studios following Morsi’s ouster

http://www.israelunseen.com/jubilation-in-egyptian-tv-studios-following-morsis-ouster/#.UdYVoW0o0Qs

Good try ... I have to resist laughing ... The vast majority of Egyptian citizens including Muslims and Christians - whose beliefs are secular compared to the fundamentalist - Islamist - Sharia law Morsi advocates is overwhelming ... Obviously the Egyptian Military has had enough of the radical Islamist and have shown they are ready - willing and able to support the masses ... not the extremist who support Morsi. My money is on the masses of people who revolted and threw Morsi out... they are supported by the vast majority of the people of Egypt - plus the Military ... wishful thinking otherwise...

What part do you find amusing? For my part I'm pleased Morsi was overthrown - he had a great chance and squandered it through his repressive policies and lack of determination to work for all his countrymen (and I loathe all extremists).But in terms of wishful thinking,perhaps those who underestimate his support need to reflect.In the second round of the election Morsi won just under 52% of the votes cast, and was democratically elected into power in elections which were held to be fair.It's true that Egypt has a strong secular tradition but it's ignoring reality to pretend that the majority are not susceptible to the Muslim Brotherhood or its even more extreme versions.Turkey which through Ataturk has an even stronger secular tradition is learning about the same problem.By all means argue that the recent change of government in Egypt is positive but don't pretend there aren't great dangers particularly when the broker is the bloated and corrupt army, bankrolled by the US.Some people were arguing that Iran was basically a secular state in the time of the Shah .. now what happened there?

So it's up to you.Believe that some lachrymose TV journalists "speak" for the Egyptian people or look at the facts.

Judging by the monumental amount of population resistance in the Egyptian streets protesting and throwing Morsi out ... the idea that Morsi won 'fair and square' the first time around ... well it doesn't seem to add up.

And yes I do believe that the TV news personalities in the video reflected the sentiment of the tens of millions of Egyptians protesting in the streets of Egypt - quite naturally so ... Did you read the captions ... ? Contrary to some posters -- the primary reason for rising up was the forced imposition of Sharia Law that Morsi was imposing ..

Ah so now the election was fixed - opposite to views of all international observers.

I have never argued that the coup didn't have the support of tens of millions of Egyptians, simply that's it unrealistic to ignore the larger number that is susceptible to the Muslim Brotherhood or its more extreme version.With the army in control I agree no early resurgence is likely.

I think this video tells the story about how the Egyptian people feel about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's ouster....

Note: Read the English language subtitles closely ....

Jubilation in Egyptian TV Studios following Morsi’s ouster

http://www.israelunseen.com/jubilation-in-egyptian-tv-studios-following-morsis-ouster/#.UdYVoW0o0Qs

Er no actually it doesn't show what the Egyptian people feel at all.It shows (courtesy an Israeli news outlet) what a rather excitable small group of middle class journalists in a TV studio feel.Of course Egypt is divided and the huge demonstrations on the streets show the extent of opposition to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood - and these demonstrators would of course empathise with the hyped up guys at the TV studio.But equally there are many more millions of Egyptians whose loyalties are to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - who won a general election a year ago that was generally perceived to be fair.So this game isn't over.My take? Morsi screwed up badly: he had the chance to bring Egyptians together and failed to do so.The concern is that the Egyptian majority whose sympathies lie in the MB direction will feel - we tried democracy and look what happened.Next time round - and there is always a next time round - the Islamicist movement may resort to much more unpleasant strategies.Then the middle class cry babies in the TV studio may look back on Morsi with some nostalgia.

Good try ... I have to resist laughing ... The vast majority of Egyptian citizens including Muslims and Christians - whose beliefs are secular compared to the fundamentalist - Islamist - Sharia law Morsi advocates is overwhelming ... Obviously the Egyptian Military has had enough of the radical Islamist and have shown they are ready - willing and able to support the masses ... not the extremist who support Morsi. My money is on the masses of people who revolted and threw Morsi out... they are supported by the vast majority of the people of Egypt - plus the Military ... wishful thinking otherwise...

What part do you find amusing? For my part I'm pleased Morsi was overthrown - he had a great chance and squandered it through his repressive policies and lack of determination to work for all his countrymen (and I loathe all extremists).But in terms of wishful thinking,perhaps those who underestimate his support need to reflect.In the second round of the election Morsi won just under 52% of the votes cast, and was democratically elected into power in elections which were held to be fair.It's true that Egypt has a strong secular tradition but it's ignoring reality to pretend that the majority are not susceptible to the Muslim Brotherhood or its even more extreme versions.Turkey which through Ataturk has an even stronger secular tradition is learning about the same problem.By all means argue that the recent change of government in Egypt is positive but don't pretend there aren't great dangers particularly when the broker is the bloated and corrupt army, bankrolled by the US.Some people were arguing that Iran was basically a secular state in the time of the Shah .. now what happened there?

So it's up to you.Believe that some lachrymose TV journalists "speak" for the Egyptian people or look at the facts.

I think this video tells the story about how the Egyptian people feel about Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's ouster....

Note: Read the English language subtitles closely ....

Jubilation in Egyptian TV Studios following Morsi’s ouster

http://www.israelunseen.com/jubilation-in-egyptian-tv-studios-following-morsis-ouster/#.UdYVoW0o0Qs

Er no actually it doesn't show what the Egyptian people feel at all.It shows (courtesy an Israeli news outlet) what a rather excitable small group of middle class journalists in a TV studio feel.Of course Egypt is divided and the huge demonstrations on the streets show the extent of opposition to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood - and these demonstrators would of course empathise with the hyped up guys at the TV studio.But equally there are many more millions of Egyptians whose loyalties are to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) - who won a general election a year ago that was generally perceived to be fair.So this game isn't over.My take? Morsi screwed up badly: he had the chance to bring Egyptians together and failed to do so.The concern is that the Egyptian majority whose sympathies lie in the MB direction will feel - we tried democracy and look what happened.Next time round - and there is always a next time round - the Islamicist movement may resort to much more unpleasant strategies.Then the middle class cry babies in the TV studio may look back on Morsi with some nostalgia.

I think they are perhaps taking a slight step back to let the red shirts implode all on their own?

Dream on.They were infiltrated by Pitak Siam and former yellow shirt proto fascists and in view of this quite sensibly decided to call it a day in Bangkok at least.But the Guy Fawkes jokers will continue in other parts of the country - I wonder when they will cotton on to the fact that their hero was executed for attempted regicide.

Solving the South China Sea impasse - I'm surprised Yingluk hasn't suggested a canal to go around it.

Now that she is the MoD with the might of Thailand's military behind her, I'm sure the recalcitrant Chinese will pay more attention to her pearls of wisdom (Mikimoto, bought in Paris).

It's extraordinary how some can introduce their obsessive hatred of the PM into topics where it is entirely irrelevant, and in this case fatuous to boot.

Returning to the topic the article contains the comment:

"The dispute over this single issue should not dismantle the entire group and its creditability - or relations with major partner China."

The reality is that its ASEAN partners know that Thailand's reflex action is to kowtow to the Chinese.It doesn't matter which party is in power and the unelected feudal,SinoThai corporate and military elites are equally submissive - partly through greed and lack of moral courage (and to be fair partly through cultural interest).Other ASEAN members stand up for their interests - notably Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines and Indonesia - when it is necessary.But Thailand is by tradition a vassal state and will never confront China.Some will point to cultural and ethnic similarities to explain this supine attitude.But this can only be partly true since Singapore for example has equally strong ties.It's also typical of a particularly Thai brand of silliness that the author of the article appears to attach more importance to issuing joint communiques after ASEAN meetings than dealing with Chinese bullying and aggression.I have no idea what were the codes of conduct negotiated by the Thai team in Brunei but you may be sure when push comes to shove the Chinese will pay scant attention to them.I don't blame the Chinese.They are entitled to be taken very seriously as a great power and as Charles de Gaulle noted the state is a cold monster, ie countries are ruthless when it comes to defending their own interests.This powerful motive explains why ASEAN are keen for the US to retain a powerful military presence in the region.Thailand of course wants to play it both ways.And on the sidelines an aggrieved Japan monitors China's rise closely - a rivalry which I predict will become much more dangerous in the next decade.

Just to clarify -

1) I said Ji Ungpakorn is not Thai "any more" - as in, he was, now he's not. I was not referring to his mother's farang DNA nor his education at Durham University, SOAS and wherever it was that he got his other degree in England; I was referring to Thais loving Thailand and HM The King. FYI I am a farang-born Thai-nationalised caucasian, which makes it hard for me to play the race card here!

2) I, as an inherent fascist myself (I am happy to explain this, but it's rather off-topic and very long-winded) and a vocal critic of democracy, consider "proto-fascist" to be a rather silly term; but I suppose if there was ever an opportunity to use it, then jayboy has found an appropriate one.

Of course, even though I think he's a traitor, I think that Giles does have one or two endearing qualities. Such as the conviction in his belief that social change is needed (which is why he sometimes stretches the truth/tells outright lies) and his abhorrence of the use of violence to put points across.

The problem with labelling someone a traitor under such draconian lese majeste laws as there are in Thailand, is that by definition to even get involved in discussing or defending anyone's position is a complete non-starter.

I don't think he's a traitor. I think he's entitled to his opinion and it's fine if the vast majority don't agree with him.

Hope I didn't offend anyone??????

No offence from me. But you're wrong in that Lese Majeste can be debated as can discussing individuals accused as long as you don't quote what they are alleged to have said.

Many have expressed an opinion on LM (including me - that it needs drastic amendment or scrapping) and HM the King has also spoken against it. What Ji Ungaporn has done is gone much further (not quotable here) in his writings and it is this that causes the traitor label to be used. I 'm not supporting it but I can understand why many Thais (naturalised ones too!) who have seen his work feel that way.

There is no general adverse reaction to Giles from most Thais for the simple reason that 90 % have never heard of him.Those that have heard of him will associate his name primarily with his very distinguished father.

Giles is in many ways a rather tedious lefty but he's no traitor.Those who label him as such need to rethink what's important and what's not.

I can't claim to be 'a lickspittle for the military' or a 'proto fascist' but applaud Pi Sek for his opinion on Ji Ungaporn's writings.

I know Ji (not very well though) and he is an honourable man. But not long ago some of the red shirt fascist supporters were claiming that Abhisit is not Thai because of his birthplace & dual nationality. Pi Sek is using the same argument about Ji and his running away from Lese Majeste charges to reside in the UK as well as his dislike (verging on hatred) for the monarchy here does have some justification.

Coming from a republic, I don't normally have a lot of regard for monarchies as such but living in Thailand has made me aware of the enormous respect & love that Thais have for their King. I respect that.

I don't respect arrogance which is why I'm not directly responding to the 'Proto Fascist' (the most idiotic term I've seen on Thaivisa) accuser.

Of course there's more of the usual belittling of Abhisit in case he might just be braver, cleaner & far less of an arrogant prick than DL in Dubai. He is right to have confidence in the law which doesn't need any 'allowed to be' type of interference, typical of conspiracy theorists.

Anybody's position is set out in many posts.It is is probably for others to assess how craven one is to reactionary forces in Thailand.

The redshirts who branded Abhisit as non Thai are as stupidly wrongheaded as those that label Acharn Giles as non Thai.Odd that the person you defend didn't mention the Abhisit case.

You may not like the term proto fascist or even understand what it means, but it's a perfectly fair label.

Usual reactionary trick of pinning a particular flag up which in the Thai context tends to inhibit further discussion.That's the whole point I suppose.This kind of craven lick spittle for the military cannot comprehend that Thai patriots do not have to be proto fascists crawling on the floor in the face of feudalists and generals.Acharn Giles is more of a Thai patriot than many of the old order.(He can also be a slightly silly leftist but that is another story).

I read Point 1 which concluded that Thaksin had carried out the coup to know this was just more ahistorical claptrap, and so it proved to be.

Incidentally the basic reason why Abhisit and Suthep will never go to jail is that the Thai justice system will never be allowed to make such an order.They know that perfectly well which is why Abhisit's "bring it on" claim rings hollow.I agree there's a fair argument they should not be charged with this offence, but that's another issue.

"there's a fair argument they should not be charged with this offence", but we'll ignore that and say that if they get off it was because of the evil amart.

That's unfair.I am sceptical that Abhisit and Suthep should be charged with criminal offences in respect of 2010, not least because this has the fingerprints of partisan politics all over it.I do believe however they need to provide detailed explanations, ideally in a credible public enquiry (along with all others involved, yes including Thaksin).But, going back to the current investigation, the risk of jail is zero.That's why Abhisit's bravado on this issue is all wind.There's no bravery when there's no risk.You can laugh it off with "evil amart" cracks if you like but the reality is that jailtime for these two isn't going to happen.

Reports are saying Rudd has been returned to the PM job.

May call an election in August.

General election now confirmed for September.When in a parliamentary system the leadership changes without recourse to the people it's necessary to obtain a popular mandate quickly - something that some grappling with the parliamentary system in Thailand had difficulty grasping.

Amazing Thailand can call itself "modern" when things like this are still happening.

It's no wonder Thailand receives the second worse rating possible on the Press Freedom Index: "Difficult situation". Level 1 being the best, 6 being the worst, Thailand is ranks at level 5.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

- George Washington

This kind of incident, though in my view an illjudged reaction by the PM and her advisors, is not the reason why Thailand scores so shockingly badly on press freedom.

And what is . . . ?

Take a wild guess, Guy Fawkes (as if you didn't know)...or check an international press monitor such as Reporters Without Borders.Failing that just use your common sense and powers of observation.

Or even (not very likely I concede) quit playing agent provocateur.

Amazing Thailand can call itself "modern" when things like this are still happening.

It's no wonder Thailand receives the second worse rating possible on the Press Freedom Index: "Difficult situation". Level 1 being the best, 6 being the worst, Thailand is ranks at level 5.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

- George Washington

This kind of incident, though in my view an illjudged reaction by the PM and her advisors, is not the reason why Thailand scores so shockingly badly on press freedom.

And ofcourse all the upset and selfrightious posters here will stop buying and eating seafood??

Or not?

You ask the question and perhaps there is no particular issue within Thailand.But I assure you unless the Thai Government and seafood industry manage this problem intelligently there is a very real threat of an overseas boycott.It wouldn't kill the industry, not least because the supply chain is very complicated and it's very difficult to identify exactly what product is "Thai".But the public relations problem could be huge and there is every incentive for the Thais to clamp down hard on illegal and criminal behaviour within the industry.

I'm very disappointed that decorative vegetable carving has not been included, truly a unique Thai gift to world civilisation.

I don't see how you can be so sure.Anecdotally all the evidence points the other way.He seems incapable of winning a national election, so what other routes to power does he have? Now how exactly did he come to power last time round?

How do you judge that he is incapable of winning a national election; because he lost the last where expected supporters were urged to NO vote? Perhaps we allow him another without that scenario, without accusations of being a murderer, and where his opponent is an inarticulate incompetent trying to explain the loss of billions of baht and various other SNAFU.

I'm not quite sure what point you are making.If Abhisit is the right man for the job in the view of his party he should lead it at the next general election, and if what you believe is true, he and the Democrats will win.As to Yingluck if what you obviously believe is also believed by the Thai people then she and the PTP will lose.

The real debate in Thai politics is in my view about something rather different - ie whether the less well off mainly rural majority should be able to take the major political role.Hence the various street movements which test the waters from time to time.

I find it amusing that the only people calling for Abhisit's removal are his opponents. If he was such a liability, would they bother.

I think Abhisit is smart and articulate. I think that if he were a more skilled leader and had the power to implement his policies Thailand would be better for it. But I also think he is a liability for the Democrats now. Fair or not, he gets so much crap thrown at him that some of it has to stick, at least in the minds of many Thais who don't exactly have access to a free, thorough, impartial media environment. I believe that the Democrats would be much more able to control the debate, and would do better at the ballot box, if they had a new leadership team in place.

The Thaksin team are obsessed with Abhisit. Does Abhisit support the removal of Yingluck outside the parliamentary system? No. But if they can tar him with that brush they will do so.

I don't see how you can be so sure.Anecdotally all the evidence points the other way.He seems incapable of winning a national election, so what other routes to power does he have? Now how exactly did he come to power last time round?