jayboy

I only see Jayboy when he is quoted now .... but didn't Prayuth actually make an apology regarding the handling of some things in the South like Tak Bai not too long ago?

And following the apology how many of the army officers responsible for that set of murders have been charged ? Answers on a postcard please. A clue is that it is the same number of army officers charged with the murder of civilians in Bangkok last year.

As to Prayuth he is a man of(possible defamation edited out) with tribal loyalties.He has been frenetic in further politicizing the army, and meddling in politics. The notorious ISOC has been particularly active during his tenure.

I am very much in favour of some members (particularly the quarrelsome type) using the ignore button. I personally don't because in principle I like to consider all view points. But for some...well, let's not go there.

Pointing out how things are and why is not cheerleading.

It is explaining observations.

Since you have ignored every question posed, the pointing out "why" part of your response is in fact absent.

The trouble is as your previous answer shows you don't really understand what the debate is about.

In Thailand Lese Majesty, if it goes too far, is considered potentially inciting riots. Most of the people adore the monarchy, and that's the issue. Insult it and the majority of people get angry and fight against those doing the insulting, so the added part is that LM is a national security risk. Is this great logic, no, but it is Thai logic.

Do you have any evidence the majority of Thai people get angry in the circumstances you describe? My impression is that most cases are brought by politicians or senior military officers interested in point scoring.

When has LM abuse incited riots?

How is LM a national security risk?

Why does Abhisit feel LM laws need reform?

If you accept the logic behind LM is defective, why don't you expess some scepticism not act as a cheerleader?

which resulted from Pracha's own conflict with his political non-Democrat rivals.

I said yesterday it was as likely a pecking order fight or old revenge from with in PTP as external. He pretty much confirms this.

And the reliability of the source you quote? Oh, I see it was Deputy PM Suthep from the Democrat Party.

The escalation of the violence was one-sided (escalated by the reds) in an attempt to prevent the current government from being in place in October 2010 to name the new army chief.

I won't comment on the first part of this sentence, but the latter in hindsight seems a laudable objective given Prayuth's appalling start.

What happened to the "ignore function" ? Did you miss me?

I get all the academic protests that the Red Shirts put forward, and I recognise their validity and their value. But do you not think that the deaths - not the protest movement itself, but the deaths - are not directly attributable by Thaksin?

No.

Of course Thaksin is largely responsible for the Redshirt movement, and must account to the Thai people for abuses.

But most the deaths were directly attributable to the Thai army which as always has rejected accountability and has refused to co-operate with any of the subsequent enquiries.Abhisit also as the civilian PM has a responsibility which I suspect may come back to haunt him.

Corruption is the significant reason Thailands Democracy is so poor. It is also the major reason Thailand poor are so poor.

Lese Majesty laws, and direct political attacks based on them can easily be avoided, don't talk badly about the monarchy. It really is very simple.

Your analysis is flawed.Corruption is not the main reason that Thailand's democracy is defective: the main reason is the lack of development of the requisite social and legal infrastructure - independent judiciary, rule of law etc.Furthermore your suggestion that Thailand's poor are poor because of corruption is simply wrong.Thailand has become richer and more corrupt at the same time - like China, Indonesia,Malaysia etc.The linkage you suggest may be there for sub Saharan Africa doesn't apply in this region.

Your comments on lese majeste are outlandish.Very few, except a few eccentrics, make attacks on the monarchy.The issue is not the monarchy but outmoded laws, which Abhisit has stated should be reformed.The other parallel issue is the obscene exploitation of these laws for political advantage.

Another example of why I used the blessed "no-see-um" function. So far the highly vaunted (by some) HRW attributes the deaths of 4 (subject to correction) people to the military. They attribute a larger number of deaths to the reds and the black shirts that worked with the reds. The largest number of deaths have not been attributed to any specific group, but all-in-all ---- ALL of the deaths can be laid at the feet of Thaksin IMHO.

I appreciate his silence.Long may it last.

However for others there is a singular piece of dishonesty in his post.The HRW report, which he rubbishes and then quotes as authority, is quite clear about which side was responsible for most of the killings - the Thai army.Don't take my word for it - read the report.But in the minds of the military cheerleaders, it's all Thaksin's fault.

On the other hand, Thailand is a democracy, and IMHO it would be impossible to find enough thais willing to support revoking the lese majeste laws to make it worth while attempting. I havn't heard any calls for change, other than the french based anti-monarchist, not that that means there havn't been any. Whether foreigners exult or not is superfluous.

Wrong in so many ways it's necessary to enumerate.

1.Democracy in Thailand is work in progress.Elections take place certainly but the infrastructure supporting democracy is missing or partly missing.

2.The lese majeste laws, and more particularly their abuse is a significant part of why Thailand's democracy is deficient

3.What Thais now believe on this subject is a matter of much speculation.However since it is illegal for them to talk openly, your assumption must be treated with a degree of scepticism.

4.Apart from left wing ideologues, I am not aware that any serious politician/organisation has called for abolition, simply much needed reform

5.It is the stated policy of the current government headed by PM Abhisit to reform the law, and curb its exploitation.

6.If you are not aware for calls for change, you cannot have been listening very hard (although it's fair to say it's probable most Thais have less interest in the subject than the extremists on both sides).

7.The enthusiasm with which some transient foreigners embrace absurd and repressive laws is not an inspiring spectacle.

My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital.

Genuinely sorry to hear this.But precisely who ordered her out of bed, the redshirts or the hospital administration?

She was pregnant with our first son - when 5 red shirts entered the ward and whilst waving their sharpened sticks around - ordered ALL of the patients out of bed - in that ward as they thought the army were "hiding guns on the ward" of course none were found and no soldiers had entered the hospital. BUT what did happen was my wife gave birht 3 months early and our son was 890 gramms at birth. He was in an incubator for 4 months - then caught pneumonia. You see some of us have first hand experience of red shirt attrocities.

I am genuinely very sorry to hear that and despite our differences I hope you accept that's meant sincerely.I also understand your position better with this context.

Many on this forum are grateful to the military for keeping people safe during the red shirt terrorism last year

The families of tens of unarmed dead civilians may take a rather different view.

My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital.

Genuinely sorry to hear this.But precisely who ordered her out of bed, the redshirts or the hospital administration?

While you may not see criticisms of military expenditures in my posting, you'll also not see advocacy of military expenditures as well, hence more indication of balance.

In that vein, while we certainly see plenty of criticisms in your own posts, I don't recall any posts voicing advocacy, hence an indication of imbalance on your part if one is to take your insinuations.

I have never seen any criticism from you on any aspect of the Thai military at all (and I'm referring to the top brass here not the ordinary soldiers) - its brutality, its lies, its incompetence, its murderous activities, its involvement in the drugs and sex trades, its criminal coup d'etats, its hatred of democracy, its multiple business interests etc etc.

Frankly its corrupt and inappropriate procurement policy is almost the least of its crimes.However if it is to be discussed it should be done ideally in a more sophisticated way than is evident on this thread.That is why I posted the Asia Times link.

I

what a great article Frodo, thanks for posting that......

It is a good article though Bertil's expertise is really in Burma, and a number of strands are left in the air.

It's ironic that it contains parts that the military cheerleaders would object to if I posted under my name:

"On one side, the traditional elite consisting of the old Sino-Thai plutocracy that for years have enjoyed a symbiotic and mutually beneficial relationship with the military, bureaucracy and monarchy — and the new nouveau-riche elite that began to emerge during the Vietnam War era, when the economy took off and culminated in the boom of the 1980s"

My own view is that what's happening in Thailand is not a class war, but there are elements of one.The term "class war" is actually really inadequate as it suggests some Marxist agenda.I think it's much more like the rise of the British Labour party.This is not necessarily what the Thaksin leadership wanted at all but the Thai majority has been catalysed, and as Khun Pleum twittered the other day it is no longer bewitched by the elite.

Again the study of history repays dividends, not a popular idea with some on this forum who haven't even familiarised themselves with Thai history in the last few decades.Nevertheless if one looks at almost any social movement or revolution, it almost always changes shape or is even hijacked by other forces.A fascinating example of this was the Singaporean anti-colonial movement dominated by communists, and "hi jacked" by Lee Kwan Yew.The French Revolution is another classic example of how a political movement shape shifts.And of course most revolutions famously end by eating their own children.

So you are saying that a 0.3% increase by Thailand is "substantial" in comparison to the

2.0% increase for Indonesia (over 6 times the increase of Thailand)

1.9% increase for Cambodia (over 6 times the increase of Thailand)

0.9% increase for Singapore (3 times the increase of Thailand)

0.6% increase for Brunei (2 times the increase of Thailand)

I suppose going from 89th to 85th on the world-wide rankings is also deemed "substantial", yes?

With respect your credibility is limited on matters relating to the Thai military because there is never any criticism of the the greed, corruption, incompetence and political interference.More balance (actually any balance at all) would result in more serious attention.

In fact although comparison with other regional counties has limited usefulness (needs context and commentary), there is a case to be made given underexpenditure in the 1980's.The trouble is given the attributes of Thai generals much is of dubious value, including the half absurd half sinister suggestion to implement Prem's senile thoughts on "fortifying" the North East.Anyway although a year old, in contrast to some of the simplistic comparisons made in this thread, a useful overview follows.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/LB26Ae01.html

Sorry Hanuman --- I make sure to condemn the actions of the PAD guards I then compare and contrast relatively similar actions --- the hijacking of busses by political extremists. I know that it sticks in the craw of many redshirt/Thaksin supporters that the case just can't be made for the PAD being as violent or destructive as the reds -- even when the beginning actions are quite similar!

It's a rather unsophisticated analysis.Both redshirts and PAD had their thuggish elements, although it must be said the latter's sympathisers denied this despite the overwhelming evidence until quite recently.Don't forget that the PAD, until like a pitbull terrier that has served it's purpose was safely collared again, served the interests of the ruling elite.That elite presided over the murder of unarmed civilians as clearly attested by the recent HRW report.

I think some foreigners, whose lives are perhaps rather restricted , do need to understand that for many Thais this is a life and death struggle.Violence is abhorrent and steps on all sides need to be taken to limit it.However until the greedy and cruel Thai ruling elite adopt Gandhi's philosophy intact there will always be resistance.Gandhi's philosophy worked in India because with all their faults the British were.... well, British.It wouldn't have worked if the occupying power had been Russia, Germany or China.

Jatuporn is in jail. The fact that he was given so much slack for so long, and the fact that he wasn't impeached speaks volumes about just how far "free speech" is tolerated in Thailand.

Freedom of speech isn't tolerated in Thailand that far.What surprises me is that some foreigners apparently relish the prospect of laws, themselves in need of updating, being abused and exploited for political purposes.The argument goes I suppose the law is the law, and must be respected.That's true but when a law is wicked and absurd, such as the example of South African apartheid, it is unseemly for foreigners to exult in its implementation.

The whole world became richer under his leadership. There was a world economic boom.....

Well this line alone is a classic of misconception and misdirection. So you imagine Thaksin was leader of the world? ROTFLOL Only in his mind boyo, only in his mind.

Better stated, MUCH better stated as:

Thaksin, while PM of Thailand, benefited greatly from a world wide economic boom, and the recovery from the Asian Tiger Crash of '97, that he assisted in creating as Deputy PM to Chavalit.

Thaksin of course took full credit for the world economic boom ever since, as reason to prove his economic credentials, via the since roundly discredited Thaksinomics which only looked good because the world looked good at that time. When the going got tough Thaksinomics fell down like a damp bar rag.

Look again at your post animatic.You have somehow attributed whybother's comment to me.I realise it's not deliberate

The whole world became richer under his leadership. There was a world economic boom.

Thaksin avoided paying billions of baht in tax on the sale of his company to Singapore by changing laws to suit himself. The Thai people were worse of because of that.

He gave poor people loans and handed out cash. That was fine for a while, but it just got people into more debt.

So you're OK with innocent people being killed, as long as a few drug dealers die too?

A few misconceptions here.

As the Thai economy, bigots on other side have to accept that the Thai economy has been well managed and has been performing well.Partly this has reflected world conditions but also good stewardship from Thaksin through to Abhisit, also generally good governance at the Bank of Thailand.The only exception was the junta regime following the criminal coup where administration was incompetent across all sectors.

There were some tax irregularities in the Temasek deal but no clear conclusion.The big lie (or ignorant bar talk in some cases) being peddled here (in respect of the major part of the sale profit by far) is that Thaksin changed the law and evaded billions which should have been paid in capital gains tax.Wrong.There's no Thai tax on disposal of listed equity, and this rule long predates Thaksin.Politically inept perhaps then on Thaksin's part but not illegal.The objection by the Sino-Thai business establishment and their yellow shirt hangers on was based mostly on hysterical nationalism and fear of foreign efficiency.

Helping poor people is a mistake? No evidence that this impacted on rural debt issues, and in any case has been continued on a greater scale by Thaksin's successors.

The drugs war was Thaksin's major crime but had huge popular support, and overt encouragement from the top of the establishment.There has never been even a suggestion that Thaksin should be charged.Only the very very naive have a problem in understanding why this is the case.Instead he was charged with relatively piffling items by an elite determined to "get him" somehow.Some foreign Thaksin haters - very few clued up Thais - get left out on a limb here.They think that the drugs war can be be politicised as a weapon to beat Thaksin, without realising what that would mean in practice by way of dragging other very highly placed people.Needless to say they couldn't care less about the misery the drugs trade had brought to so many ordinary Thais, and why successive governments have made curb of the trade a policy priority.

Malaysian Deputy Foreign Minister Denies Blaming Thailand for Clashes

Deputy Foreign Minister of Malaysia has rejected a news report claiming that the nation condemned Thailand over the long-standing border clash with Cambodia, saying his remark was abusively interpreted by the media.

Malaysian Deputy Foreign Minister Richard Riot Jaem denied that he lashed out at Thailand over the armed confrontation at the Thai-Cambodian border.

News reports earlier claimed that the deputy foreign minister blamed Thailand for the renewed clashes at the Thai-Cambodia border.

Richard insisted his interview was misled by a reporter who interviewed him on Tuesday in Kuala Lumpur after he finished a meeting about terrorism and teenagers.

He asserted that he was asked two times if he would scold Thailand, and that his answer was 'no'.

The deputy foreign minister went on to say he has informed the Thai Foreign Affairs Ministry that his interview was inaccurate.

Whoopsies.... how many earlier post retractions will be similarly made since this clarification??

None so far in the 5 hours it's been up.

.

Why should anyone retract? Clearly you are not familiar with diplomatic cover up of which this is a classic example.Thailand and Malaysia are fellow ASEAN member and I have no doubt there was pressure on the Deputy FM to soften the blow.But the point has been made, and correctly too.

Not sure if politically motivated?

My bet is on an inside job, the usual dirty tactics that are employed when you need public sympathy, something like a car bomb, or an attempted assasination, and claim the other side is out to hurt you. Not like we haven't seen that before on numerous occasions....

I wonder whether you would have come so quickly to this conclusion if the politician shot had not been PTP.

You, of course, are welcome to your opinion and to express it here. That means you get to accept the fact that other people will have opinions as well. Including opinions that you might not be who you claim to be. When other posters disappear and a new poster arrives with similar styles of writing etc ... some people will assume (like I do) that an IP check would show the new poster to be a longer term member with a new screenname (which is against the rules for TVF). You might be all that you claim to be, and time will tell

Purely hypothetically then if one knew that a banned member (with whom purely hypothetically) one had been a designated friend and who was was notorious for hunting down re-emerged banned members, had himself re-emerged with a new screen name, what should one's attitude be as an upright member of TVF? It's difficult isn't it, torn by the tendency not to want to grass, but at the same time being appalled by the hypocrisy.Any thoughts? Sorry for the diversion from the main topic.

You talked about "policy content difference". Is returning Thaksin not policy content?

If "ideologically in Thailand it's hard to see much policy content difference between the parties", does that mean the that the red shirts are part of the "crazed hysteria and ersatz nationalism of the feudalists, military and assorted hangers on."

You can't have it both ways.

I honestly don't understand what you are talking about.

The Democrats may be the favoured party of the elite, but it is much more than that with some first class key people.It's certainly not organically part of the corrupt feudal military establishment.

Stop beating around the bush, Jayboy. Just writing 'ideologically hard to see policy content difference' is already the start of obfuscation, unless you mean all parties have the best in mind for ALL Thai people.

Still there are content and execution differences. PTP has one brain, the Dem's many. The Dem's are slower in implementation, the PTP over hasty. The Dem's have part of the traditional elite behind them, the PTP the other part. Both parties have corruption problems, although PTP in it's older guise of TRT/PPP seems to excel. The two PM's with PPP had main agenda point 'bring back Thaksin', the current PM 'bring forward the country'. The PTP has again main agenda point 'bring back Thaksin', the Dem's again 'bring forward the country'. Well, what do you know, by know I even listed some of those 'ideological differences' which some found hard to see

Amazing.You have not listed one genuine policy difference (but see Thaksin comment below) let alone ideological difference.You have fleetingly mentioned execution differences and though not even the point under discussion,is itself questionable.

"Bring forward the country" is not a policy:it's a tired election slogan which any party might use.I suppose it could be argued that "bring back Thaksin is a policy".But in my view it isn't really.Let's say hypothetically he was back and in power or in a position of influence, the question is what policies would be introduced? I suggest in terms of economic, financial and social policies they wouldn't be that different from those of the current government.

Incidentally referring back to earlier posts in this thread, in most democracies where no overall majority after an election the party with the largest number of seats has first turn in trying to form a government.Anyone know what the convention is in Thailand, by which I mean the legal or constitutional position.?

You talked about "policy content difference". Is returning Thaksin not policy content?

If "ideologically in Thailand it's hard to see much policy content difference between the parties", does that mean the that the red shirts are part of the "crazed hysteria and ersatz nationalism of the feudalists, military and assorted hangers on."

You can't have it both ways.

I honestly don't understand what you are talking about.

The Democrats may be the favoured party of the elite, but it is much more than that with some first class key people.It's certainly not organically part of the corrupt feudal military establishment.

Which so neatly encapsulates PTP, and the Red Shirt legions.

Explain further please, otherwise it's just meaningless.