jayboy

Absolutely a terrible, inflammatory article, apparently allowed just to get hits on this site. Where did this guy learn to put together a written argument? And why would TV give him the platform to express his ignorance? Today isn't April 1.

If ever there was a good thread to delete, (not just close) it is this one. It is a slap in the face to HUGE majority of people who come to this forum in good faith and abide by the norms that govern decent behavior, on and off of the forum. ThaiVisa has stooped to a new, appalling and embarrassing low, apparently just to up their numbers.

Agree with all of kandahar's points, but especially with the two paragraphs above.

Really don't know what was going through George's mind when he decided to post this trash. I thought Thaivisa was better than this. Apparently not.

Oh come off it.I'm already on record with my view that the article is rather feeble but it also clearly touches a nerve with some (actually quite a lot given the many responses on this thread).The Thaksin hating foreigners (I'm talking about the obsessives not the average joe who doesn't like him much) do tend to be an odd lot by and large.George was quite right to post it.What's been interesting has been the visceral anger of many, clearly suggesting in a rather mediocre piece the author has hit home on a few points.

Firstly, the so called sexpats, the dimwitted OP are referring too's, breadth of Thai political knowledge is limited to whatever pigeon English drivel some Issan hooker from whatdaphukaburi, pukes up whenever her mouth isn't full. And generally its positive regarding Taksin, as ignorant dregs and low life's in the north commonly support him. So these guys generaly tend to be the Taxsin supporters. It's the folks with a clue, the contributing members of society who have settled down here with Thai Families who see Taxsin and his red shirt thugs for the terrorists that they are.

David Waite can eat a fat pickle, and if I ever met him in person I'd tell em so..

Oh dear, it's this kind of post (and I'm not entirely sure it isn't a hoax ) that rather confirms the author's view of the Thaksin hating sexpat.

Just a bogus excuse to cover incompetence.

You simply don't know that.It could be true but one can't know at this stage.

We will know one way or the other , or at least have a clearer sense, quite shortly as the campaign progresses.

In my view it's a thoroughly feeble article, heavy handed and devoid of wit.Above all it doesn't make much sense.There is an amusing article to be written about the type of foreigner consumed with hatred of Thaksin but this one isn't it.A tease, which I'm all in favour of, has to have some basis in reality.Off the top of my head the author mixes up two distinct groups.The corpulent tattooed expatriate, Pattaya Man, doesn't generally have a great interest in Thai politics - or to be frank any interest in anything beyond feeding his appetites.The anti Thaksin obsessive on Thai Visa is a different type altogether, probably lower middle class in origin but with some kind of reasonable backgound whether as a non commissioned officer or marginal "businessman", often in the ELT area.The motivation of these people is still puzzling not because Thaksin isn't a disreputable politician but because of the sheer crazed obsession involved.

The biggest weakness in the article is the link with Purachai and his nightlife campaign.Except for one particularly off the wall individual (he thinks the aim of the current political struggle is to make the Rajdamri shopping malls safe for humanity!) I have never seen an anti Thaksin obsessive on TV make this link.I don't think it enters their calculations at all, and to be fair their objections to Thaksin are much more reasonably rooted in his meglomania and corruption.

Interesting article in the other paper this morning by former Bangkok senator,Jon Ungphakorn covering lese majeste and the related subject of the military's self regarding exploitation of these laws.He points out the amazingly progressive steps taken by King Chulalongkorn in the late nineteenth century to end anachronistic feudal practices, a trend followed by his successors including the present sovereign.But it has always been the military that has ramped up and encouraged penalties for LM so that it can be seen as protecting the supreme institution - whereas of course it is primarily working for its own political and business interests.Khun Jon argues that the current meddling and interference by the military invoking the same old dishonest excuses, is designed to influence the result of the forthcoming election.The tragedy is that this selfishness and greed is likely to have precisely the opposite effect of what is the purported intent.

*sigh* .... so the word "interesting" is now a slur, is it?

The only errors in this ridiculous discourse are your assertions that information is unavailable about alumni on university websites. That was proven to be patently false.

Get a life, instead of your incessant bickering over nothing.

Nobody is interested in your excuses.Your future behaviour with regard toslurs on Khun Yingluk will be monitored.Please concentrate on policy issues if you wish to debate on this forum.

I answered it many hours ago. I simply found it interesting.

It was only mildly interesting, at that, hence the paucity of words in my post.

You were caught out making a slur, actually just the latest you have made against Khun Yingluck.

As mentioned earlier your future comments in the election campaign will be carefully monitored.

Nobody is interested in your attempts to extricate yourself from your errors.A simple apology would have sufficed.Please follow forum rules in future.

Thank you

[quote name='Buchholz' timestamp='1305638753' post='4430368'

That's good you agree now. Just a while ago you referred to it as doesn't exist, and then you said it "requires passwords", and then you said "it's not common at all" which then digressed into "malicious" and "meaningless". Ever changing criteria that when direct evidence is put directly before you .... only thing you can do is change the criteria once again to...

I think the necessary points have been made very clearly by myself and other members, and the position (dishonest slurs, sexist abuse etc) will be closely monitored during the election campaign.

Are you really that unaware of how the Internet works?

It's not a question of how the internet works.It's a question of what information universities provide to outsiders.Of course a google customised search of a university site may pick up anecdotally details of prominent students and alumni.But it will not provide the kind of comprehensive database we are talking about.Therefore your original post was I am afraid not only malicious but rather ignorant of procedures.

I am not interested in rubbing your nose in it.I have a more general concern that in the election campaign Yingluck is judged on what she says not by slurs about her education, or more significantly by sexist abuse.I am very pleased mods have taken action on the latter already.Robust debate is a strength of the forum but slurs, abuse and lies shouldn't be tolerated.Surely there is enough policy content to argue about without resorting to dishonest slurs (or dare I say it, inappropriate or "funny" pictures.)

Have we ground this far enough into the ground yet?

Almost, but see below.

You have yet to come up with an example of any university where one can access student or alumnus details through the university website.Your original post was therefore not only rather malicious but rather meaningless.

I think that covers everything.

btw, it's common to find students listed on university websites. Every one of my family members is listed on their respective university website.

It's not common at all, but I'll take your word for it if you can provide an example.

Sure thing. It highlights just how much they have distanced themselves from him as more of his atrocities came to light after their 2002 award to him.

That's interesting.It's not immediately obvious how the University has distanced itself.Has it for example withdrawn the award or have you just assumed a distancing?

Incidentally I'm not quite clear what you mean by atrocities, presumbly the drug war killings.

What has the university done, in the nearly a decade since their award, to highlight his connection to the school? Or to honor him or to show any sort of association? Speech invitations? Graduation ceremony attendance? etc.

Oh I see.It has done nothing to distance itself.You just made it up and were caught out.

Sure thing. It highlights just how much they have distanced themselves from him as more of his atrocities came to light after their 2002 award to him.

That's interesting.It's not immediately obvious how the University has distanced itself.Has it for example withdrawn the award or have you just assumed a distancing?

Incidentally I'm not quite clear what you mean by atrocities, presumbly the drug war killings.

Kentucky State University isn't in the UK

Well spotted but so what?

I'm very familiar with Yale (where many decades ago I did some research) and the same applies there.One couldn't trace a graduate from the website and I suspect the same applies to all universities.There is usually a separate alumni site but even this would be subject to password/user name restrictions.In some cases there might be a list of notable alumni but Yingluck hardly belongs to that category (yet).

Thanks for posting the link on Thaksin's alma mater.I see it recognised Thaksin with a prestigious award previously awarded to the likes of Lech Walesa.

http://www.shsu.edu/~pin_www/T@S/2002/ShinAwardRel.html

Grateful for bringing this to our attention.

Funny, can't find her name on the alumni list of Kentucky State U. Nor is she mentioned as a notable alumni...............

Hmmm... she doesn't turn up anywhere on an entire search of their website... interesting

In any university I'm familiar with it would be unlikely to find the name of a graduate through a website search.Try finding someone called Abhisit Vejjajiva on the Oxford University website.

He explained that a person may not be a good public speaker, but could be a good administrator.

The PM is not an administrator. That's what the civil servants do. The ministries administer.

The PM has to speak on TV and to reporters at news conferences. The PM has to speak to foreign leaders and dignitaries. The PM has to speak to the people.

The main thing a leader has to be good at is public speaking.

A common criticism of Abhisit among Thais is that he is not a good public speaker,too flat and anodyne and sometimes overly sharp tongued.I would draw a distinction between this and private meetings where I understand he is impressive.As to foreign leaders, I would have though Abhisit makes the best impression of any Thai PM for decades.Pity he's piling on the pounds though.

As to Yingluck I think there shouldn't be a rush to judgement.I would be surprised given her background if she wasn't clever and businesslike.Debating her would be tricky for Abhisit.It would be his to lose.He is the experienced politician of course but I'm guessing his advisors (does he have any I wonder who understand these things?) would be suggesting he makes his points clearly but remain kindly (not patronising) and gentlemanly.It's a bit like the Biden/Palin debate and although the military cheerleaders are already making her out to be an airhead, I'm guessing she's not - Sarah Palin on steroids maybe.

I noticed that Yingluck's marriage was never registered. I know that this is frequently the case in wealthy Thai-Chinese families when both husband and wife have substantial pre-marital assets which they want to keep and administer separately (often these assets include part ownership of family businesses).

As a non-registered partner, would he have to abide by the rules governing the spouse of a PM?

It's frequently the case with many Thais of all ethnicity and income groups

I am sort of new to following the ongoing drama that is Thai politics. Can anyone point me to a brief history of the whole Thaksin thing? It's not often you see a guy who inspires such strong feelings for and against.

Google ... wiki .... the TVF search function ... every major press outlet .... ummmmm anyone in Thailand ... many people in the UK, HK, UAE, Congo, Montenegro ...... the list is literally almost endless

I asked this fellow the same question and he refused to answer.He has given you a useless blathering reply.I would recommend the volume on Thaksin by the husband and wife team Pasuk/ Baker which is available at most Bangkok bookstores.

He may have cheered on the reds, but I have it on good authority that 'Instant Karma' 'How Do You Sleep?' and 'Gimme Some Truth' were actually criticisms of Thaksin. John showed remarkable prescience for his time.

I think you may be on to something.Though it's hard to see how "Happiness is a warm gun" might fit in.

Seriously, it's amusing to see how some of the Gaysorn Plaza set think that someone like Lennon would have been on the wrong side of a working class movement.Look at the left wing and liberal press round the world.There is unanimous support for the Redshirt movement and contempt for the feudal/military/Sino-Thai business elite.Do they think Lennon would support their quasi fascist tripe? Muddled though Lennon may have been I suspect he knew a corrupt greedy privileged elite when he saw one.

As to your last sentence, i appreciate that you don't (that's not to say i don't understand why some people have reason to click on the ignore button), but i maintain that stating something as fact, and then refusing to back up those facts, on the basis of taking a dislike to the questioner, comes over as being just a little churlish and pouty.

Again it's not really a matter of taking a dislike to a questioner.It's a matter of whether it's worth the time and effort of providing proof to someone who is ill intentioned (and I have been warned by unimpeachable sources that some of these right wing military cheerleaders are very hostile to me indeed) or is unwilling to give and take in discussion.Another thing is that quite often there is no "proof" or "link" to provide, as though the web was an oracle with all the answers.I read most of the literature on the Thai political scene and only a small percentage is available to "link".One could I suppose preface every statement with "in my opinion", but why should one pander to the Wikopedia mentality?

I accept your comments are made in a constructive way, and I will consider in future more carefully whether I'm appearing churlish or pouty.

Regarding John Lennon, I remember he wrote a song called ' Give Peace A Chance' and 'Imagine', I don't think he was on the side of violence at all.

As for the switch of Sanoh and his sons- this is a man who vehemently oposed the 1996 'green' constitution for imposing checks and balances on politicians- and Yoko Ono supports him!

Can you see John Lennon siding with the likes of Jutaporn, Arisman, Nuttawut, or - Thaksin.

Associating his legacy with the Thaksin's disciples is a complete insult to his legacy.

Two probably unpopular points but I think probably undeniable - with some reflection

1.John Lennon would have been a strong supporter of the redshirt movement, not of old fashioned feudal/military interests.

2.John Lennon was an airhead, hopeless overrated as a "thinker", self centred and intellectually incoherent - great rock and roll voice though.

I assume a slight mishap, but interesting to see the suggestion that a red-shirt supporter could be overrated, self-centered and intellectual incoherent.

Why not? Thaksin falls into this category.

Regarding John Lennon, I remember he wrote a song called ' Give Peace A Chance' and 'Imagine', I don't think he was on the side of violence at all.

As for the switch of Sanoh and his sons- this is a man who vehemently oposed the 1996 'green' constitution for imposing checks and balances on politicians- and Yoko Ono supports him!

Can you see John Lennon siding with the likes of Jutaporn, Arisman, Nuttawut, or - Thaksin.

Associating his legacy with the Thaksin's disciples is a complete insult to his legacy.

Two probably unpopular points but I think probably undeniable - with some reflection

1.John Lennon would have been a strong supporter of the redshirt movement, not of old fashioned feudal/military interests.

2.John Lennon was an airhead, hopeless overrated as a "thinker", self centred and intellectually incoherent - great rock and roll voice though.

Grandma Udom may not be so lucky to escape with her life in the next one. She also doesn't qualify for your label, "dogshit"

Grandma Udom and the infamous refrigerator that saved her and her husband's life when a Drug War commando unit mistakenly attacked their house

Grandma Udom and her fridge was news to me but a google search reveals the matter has been discussed at obsessive length at the time.There is something oddly familiar about the style and tone - can't quite put my finger on it.

Her main concern was the compensation for the fridge.I hope it was replaced.

It's becoming increasingly clear that the repressive nature of the Thai establishment is becoming much better understood throughout the world, particularly its attempts at censorship and restriction of freedom of political expression.This includes but is not limited to the discredited and anachronistic lese majeste laws.It's no good pointing to countries in the region with worse records like China and Burma.Thailand is judged by higher standards.

Easy to state things like he is an idiot, when you've never even had a conversation with him.

I did not say he was an idiot or moron, nor did I imply it.

It is not necessary to meet someone to form an impression of him.