jayboy

I doubt whether Mandela has much detailed interest in Thai politics but nevertheless its interesting to speculate, quite apart from his recent session with Thaksin, which of the Thai groupings a statesman of his calibre, background and ideology would lend support to.Actually there's no doubt about where his sympathies would lie - which is why I suppose this incident caused such a flurry among the reactionaries on this forum and elsewhere.

What happened to reconcilliation?

I think Abhisit kicked that into touch some time ago.

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics. Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because for most of the outside and informed world Thaksin - despite all his flaws (and they are many) - represents more than anyone else the Thai majority.So despite the rants and lies and froth of the criminal corrupt feudalist elite, the world at large recognises the truth

You have a way with words, jayboy. I think some part of this world we live on also recognizes K. Thaksin is part of a criminally corrupt elite which dominated their part of the country in a paternalistic way keeping the masses down and them rich.

Of course none of this has anything to do with whether the photo is true or not

As I say I don't know whether the photo is true or not.And the woman with Thaksin is Winnie, not his current squeeze but his former wife - arch bitch and murderess.Life ain't straight forward.

If Nelson Mandela's office confirms Thakky had been there and confirmed the photo it would be believable but Mandela is a man of presence and ethics. Why would he even grant an audience to a crim like Thaksin?

Because for most of the outside and informed world Thaksin - despite all his flaws (and they are many) - represents more than anyone else the Thai majority.So despite the rants and lies and froth of the criminal corrupt feudalist elite, the world at large recognises the truth

A "disgrace" is used rather casually here, in my opinion.  Her staff had used the device in the past with success, and she recommended it.  Bad recommendation, as it turned out, but many others gave the OK on it, too. But her saying the device worked was based on her staff's experiences with it, and I am not sure how else she could have formulated an opinion. That it was pretty much useless in an airport setting, that the price was gouging, is Monday-morning quarterbacking.  

A poor recommendation, sure. But hardly something to outweigh all the good she has done in her life.

You overlook completely the point that she was on (or advised) the military committee that ordered the GT200 junk at hugely inflated prices.It's far more insidious than a "poor recommendation".It's the implication of incompetence and corruption that's damaging.She hasn't acknowledged her massive error of judgement (to be charitable) either.

However many foreigners seem bewitched by her.Most educated Thais I know are much more sceptical.

If the picture of K. Thaksin shaking hands with Mr. Mandela is fake, I assume we will hear from the representatives of Mr. Mandela, or the South African Embassy ?

I highly doubt it. They don't have to prove their innocence every single time when someone opening his/her Photoshop. Not you, nor me.

I disagree completely.South Africa has diplomatic relations with Thailand and an Embassy in Bangkok.Thaksin is a fugitive from justice.If the photo is faked then we will hear about it from the South Africans.If it is not faked we will hear nothing I suspect.

Personally, I have no idea and frankly couldn't care less.

Mandela was a courageous man, who spend many years in prison to obtain justice.

Actually he spent many years in jail for conspiring to blow people up....

and continued to spend further years in jail for advocating violence via the ANC's military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe - Spear of the Nation, which amongst other things targeted civilans...

In end, sense/reason preveiled and South Africa ended up were it is today, via agreements between Mandela and De Klerk. (who also won the noble prize for peace, along with Mandela)

But we digress...back on topic

But he won, and Mandela is a world icon and De Klerk is almost forgotten.And yes sometimes violence or the threat of violence is needed to bring a greedy and brutal elite peddling a fairytale of ethnic superiority to the negotiating table, as in...South Africa

Actually it wasn't threats of violence, there WAS violence.....and there was innocent people killed...for example...Peter Macbrides bomb in Durban at Mogoo's bar....The gentleman concerned went to jail, was released under an amnesty, became a politican and was busted for gun running....

If the ANC wanted to fight to change the system...then they should have fought the system then...ie military/police/goverment departments, instead they chose soft targets in most cases

We could also be having a similar discussion about the IRA and the UK, context is different, but the execution the same.....and the IRA where branded terrorists

With respect I'm not sure it's appropriate to lecture the ANC what targets it should have chosen.The system used brutality and violence on the majority mowing down unarmed civilians, and then covering up its crimes.The greedy and selfish elite insultingly patronised the rural majority saying they were uneducated and corrupted by populist politicians.But history wasn't on the elite's side and it was swept away along with its bizarre fairytales.That's the way it was ....in South Africa.

Mandela was a courageous man, who spend many years in prison to obtain justice.

Actually he spent many years in jail for conspiring to blow people up....

and continued to spend further years in jail for advocating violence via the ANC's military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe - Spear of the Nation, which amongst other things targeted civilans...

In end, sense/reason preveiled and South Africa ended up were it is today, via agreements between Mandela and De Klerk. (who also won the noble prize for peace, along with Mandela)

But we digress...back on topic

But he won, and Mandela is a world icon and De Klerk is almost forgotten.And yes sometimes violence or the threat of violence is needed to bring a greedy and brutal elite peddling a fairytale of ethnic superiority to the negotiating table, as in...South Africa

As someone who broadly sympathises with the Red cause the result seemed much as expected.Naturally there are those of all stripes who spin the significance, but the truth is no side - except the ridiculous New Politics Party - can complain about the result.Still the comment being mocked (about constraints on the NPT) undoubtedly has some relevance, difficult to say how much.Still I doubt whether many people, except a few like whybother, seriously believe the Bangkok position will be reflected in a General Election.

My comments above were in relation to the "Democrat strongholds" of Bangkok and the south.

IMO, for the next general election, the Democrats will perform better in most electorates and win a few more seats that the last election (but still not a majority). The PTP vote will be eroded by improved Democrat support in some areas, but particularly by the BJT in their "stronghold" areas. The PTP (PPP) didn't win the last election, and required support from the minority parties to from government. They will do worse in the next election, and currently do not have the support of most of the minor parties, which will probably continue, so the PTP will not be able to "win".

Overall, I expect the Democrats to form another coalition government. The spanner in the works is Newin's BJT.

Ok understood.Well let's see how the General Election turns out.My particular concern is that this a fair and transparent process.

If it doesn't embarrass you what I like about your position is that you don't claim omniscience and you correctly identify some wild cards.Politics in Thailand is as subject to volatility and chance as anywhere else.As Harold Macmillan once famously said when asked what was most likely to knock governments off course, "Events,dear boy,events".

It doesn't matter, red shirt apologist will soon be here to decry any loss as a victory, as red shirts are jailed, the country isn't free and so on.

It took a little while, but your call was absolutely correct.

As someone who broadly sympathises with the Red cause the result seemed much as expected.Naturally there are those of all stripes who spin the significance, but the truth is no side - except the ridiculous New Politics Party - can complain about the result.Still the comment being mocked (about constraints on the NPT) undoubtedly has some relevance, difficult to say how much.Still I doubt whether many people, except a few like whybother, seriously believe the Bangkok position will be reflected in a General Election.

Montenegro promises to act against Thaksin if he is on Interpol list

Podgorica, Montenegro: -- Montenegro has informed Thailand that it will take legal action against convicted ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra if Interpol put Thaksin on its wanted list, Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said Monday.

"Montenegro Foreign Minister (Milan Rocen) had informed me twice in his letters that the action against Khun Thaksin will depend on the Interpol" Kasit said.

Montenegro has given citizenship to Thaksin who is investing in a hotel business in Budva city of Montenegro.

-- The Nation 2010-08-30

Oh dear. Out of the frying pan into the fire. What odds you reckon that Thailand has, is or will continue to try to get Thaksin put onto an Interpol list?

I don't think anyone will want to risk Interpol refusing to put him on the list because they deem the charges "politically motivated". In fact, if that happens wouldn't it be a case that it could help Thaksin try to get asylum in a lot more countries around the world?

Kasit risks having a lot of egg on his face if he screws this one up.

How can that absurd little toad screw up any more than he already has? It's a disgrace that he is FM at all.

To those of you that think this wouldnt happen in another country, think again. There are maverick MPs the world over who visit all kinds of convicted criminals let alone unconvicted ones. There are MPs who take up cases of foreigners held in jails too.

What went on between Sirichoke and Bout is mildly interesting relative to the rest of the case but that he actually visited is irrelevent.

Get real.Sirichoke is a close aide of Abhisit.You can't blow away the political significance of that so easily.

Looks like the coloured shirt brigades are history; so much for the claim that the Red shirts were representative of the urban poor.

I suppose it's possible that the 60% who didn't bother to vote are all Reds, but they were just too drunk/drugged/lazy to vote. Wait, it was raining! Maybe they were too poor to afford an umbrella.

What a perceptive and intelligent insight.I am sure we will be turning to you for guidance since you so clearly have a grasp of the complexities of the current political scene.However as a polite suggestion to reflect your knowledge,comprehension and intellect perhaps you should consider a different nom de plume.Unfortunately OzMick gives the impression of an ignorant Irish Australian boor, and clearly this is nothing like you at all.

Before the election Dems were aiming at 40 and PTP at 20. The Dems will be quite happy and the PTP quite disappointed at this.

While the news media has been manouvered away to who killed the 90 people and all of the hospital invasion, red intimidation, police failure to enforce law and red violence has moved away from the front pages, it wont be forgotten in a long time. That also explains the NPP disaster as those remembering the violence arent going to split the anti-red vote and let the PTP in. Realpolitik.

The lwo turn out also shows a lot of people are bored by the whole lot of polticial shenigans and in a democracy contrary to fed lines not voting is a perfectly valid statement albeit one unrecognized in any current electoral system.

That's a quite fair summary though I would probably describe it more or less the expexted result, but I don't quibble with your description.Where I disagree is your take on the NPP. ie disaster just because of tactical voting.The rejection of NPP is at least as much I suggest a "refudiation" ,as Sarah Palin, would say of its policies and leadership.

Meanwhile in the suburbs many thousands of Thais vote for the party associated by the Government with "terrorists".Behind the Democrats' contentment with the result, this must be the source of some unease.

I have much respect for that lady. She has distinguished herself as intelligent, wise, and humanitarian for years.

That defence lawyer was a joke.

Clearly you have not been keeping up with Khunying Pornthip's disgrace on the GT200 issue.

Clearly I haven't. And I don't care. I saw what she did after the tsunami, and I have read and watched documentaries about her work....she has done more than enough good.

Would you care to enlighten us about her "disgrace"?

If you don't care why on earth should I bother telling you.

For anyone else just google Pornthip and GT200.She oonce deserved respect but on the GT 200 she has proved not only incompetent but probably even worse (she was on the military committee that ordered the GT200 bomb finder at extraordinarily inflated prices from the UK scam merchants who manafactured it).

I have much respect for that lady. She has distinguished herself as intelligent, wise, and humanitarian for years.

That defence lawyer was a joke.

Clearly you have not been keeping up with Khunying Pornthip's disgrace on the GT200 issue.

Things might look on the surface like they are changing fast but i would question whether they truly are. For all the political upheaval of late; for all the talk of the poor being given a vioce, systems and structures that perpetuate inequality, injustice and lack of accountability remain firmly in place.

That's a reasonable and intelligent response:you may indeed be right.I hold to a rather different viewpoint however, namely that it looks on the surface as if the old order is entrenched but that underneath there is a rapid and potentially explosive amount of change occurring.It's precisely this kind of issue that historians and academics pore over.I have never incidentally believed that the current battle is really or at least primarily about poverty.It's when economic prosperity lifts the lumpen peasantry out of the work to eat grindstone that political change happens.Thailand is a much more prosperous country now but the political structure has yet to adapt to the changed circumstances, which can be summarised as the death rattle of the deferential culture.

Yes I think one needs to.Most of us would agree that the Thai security forces need more training to deal with instances of civil disorder.That's not I think seriously disputed.The other issue however is the complete lack of accountability when things do go wrong.

This lack of accountability is endemic here in Thailand. It seems nobody is ever guilty of anything. Nobody is ever mistaken. Nobody is responsible.

Quite so. And for the most part it is simply accepted this way.

Traditionally yes but things are changing fast.The current censorship can't control what many perhaps the majority of Thai people are saying.What was unthinkable a decade ago is now common currency.The old patterns of unthinking deference are breaking up visibly.Prestige based on inherited privilege is ebbing away.The existing elite can still manage the situation if astute and far thinking (rather like the traditional English upper class) but inevitably there will be a decline in political influence.The reality however is that in Thailand the elite has been greedy, stupid, and brutal so the signs are not promising.

Where I disagree is that I think a more professional approach could have cleared the area without deaths or even serious injury.

Professional approaches require professionally-trained people. Need one say more?

Yes I think one needs to.Most of us would agree that the Thai security forces need more training to deal with instances of civil disorder.That's not I think seriously disputed.The other issue however is the complete lack of accountability when things do go wrong.

Everyone's a wannabe Herashio these days. Crime busting lark all looks so easy. Some people seem to think it really is.

The fact remains that if the murder of civilians on this scale (with the security forces involved) had occurred in Tokyo,London,Washington or Paris the investigation would be well under way and would have credibility.

Here nobody in power gives a toss.They were only rough peasants after all.

Perhaps. But you also know that the kind of demonstration that the redshirts engaged in, armed and n defiance of the law, would have been dispersed within a day or two. The dispersal would have been completed by police forces trained to do this. There would have been injuries, and possibly deaths. And had the demonstrators used their weapons on the police forces there most certainly would have been many deaths amongst the protesters. And yes, these deaths would have been thoroughly investigated.

I partly agree with you.Where I disagree is that I think a more professional approach could have cleared the area without deaths or even serious injury.The problem you correctly identify was to allow the situation to fester and become too prolonged.Once again the precedent was set by the yellow demonstrations.Be that as it may the fact remains that the deaths of unarmed civilians will never be properly investigated in Thailand when the security forces are involved.In other countries this would carry a political price.In Thailand it still might but one doubts it somehow.

I agree Robert A. is intelligent, good debater as in scoring points, rather than properly founded explanations. Dangerous man in my eyes.

I think that's a very fair summary.The feedback I get from this thread is the fury and rage when defenders of the status quo (the corrupt feudal/military/corporate establishment and their lower middle class urban Sino-Thai hangers on) are presented with arguments/facts that contradict their fixed ideas.It's quite frightening when one comes across it among elite Thais, less so of course with foreigners on this forum.

Wriggle all you like but RWB is quite clear.The army did not respect rules of engagement.Civilian non-combatants and journalists were placed in mortal danger by the army.The murder of journalists remains uninvestigated and censorship of news/websites remains intolerable.Difficult to see much ambiguity here.

Rubbish. The only people placed in "mortal danger" were those who went to, or were already at, the barricades. No amount of spinning by you, Amsterdam, Dr's Thaksin, Goebbels or Crippen, Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all, can change the fact that the army did not rampage around Bangkok, blasting away at anything that moved, especially members of the press. The army tried to contain the protest site by surrounding it. It came under attack from those who moved out to the barricades and those who came in from the outside. Anyone "trapped' inside only had to move inwards to the central (no pun intended) protest site and sit peacefully. Anyone attacking from the outside was free to leave whenever they wanted to. The selection I posted showed the lie to Amsterdam's statements of the government targetting journalists, and Thaksin not being involved, other than moral support. I made no comment on censorship, "civilian non-combatants" or rules of engagement, and I'm not going to on this thread. As has been pointed out, the herrings you have been introducing here are an appropriate colour, and you'll just have to make do with eating them rather than rely on me feeding you any further.

Okay with this fatuous and inaccurate post you have completely lost it now.I assume you are are a foreigner not a Thai, but your rage and incoherent response simply confirms the refusal of many to contemplate a different narrative, or at least that their narrative might be corrected in some way.

Everyone's a wannabe Herashio these days. Crime busting lark all looks so easy. Some people seem to think it really is.

The fact remains that if the murder of civilians on this scale (with the security forces involved) had occurred in Tokyo,London,Washington or Paris the investigation would be well under way and would have credibility.

Here nobody in power gives a toss.They were only rough peasants after all.

Actually Reporters without borders sees things a little differently from your selective quote, but their position doesn't really fit in with your argument I'm afraid.Still never mind they are probably in Thaksin's pay.

http://en.rsf.org/th...2010,37905.html

Money quote

"Reporters Without Borders decided to let the victims and witnesses of the violations speak for themselves. Some of their accounts clearly show that Thai soldiers put civilian non-combatants, including journalists, in mortal danger and respected no rule of engagement. Similarly, armed activists within the Red Shorts were guilty of unacceptable acts of violence against the press.

Among its recommendations, Reporters Without Borders urges the authorities to publish the final reports on the deaths of journalists Hiroyuki Muramoto and Fabio Polenghi as soon as possible. Opposing the continuation of the state of emergency, the organisation also calls on the government to stop censoring media, especially news websites that are being blocked."

My "selective quote" is the opening paragraph from their condemnation statement, not an obscure side piece tucked away in its body. Neither it, nor your selection, accuse the government of deliberately targetting journalists, although both imply that the reds were doing so. A couple of times the link also makes it clear what RSF thinks the protests were all about:

" the Bangkok district occupied by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s supporters"

" last night’s army assault on deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s “Red Shirt” supporters in Bangkok"

Wriggle all you like but RWB is quite clear.The army did not respect rules of engagement.Civilian non-combatants and journalists were placed in mortal danger by the army.The murder of journalists remains uninvestigated and censorship of news/websites remains intolerable.Difficult to see much ambiguity here.

For the fellow who wants me to respond to all Amsterdam's points tough luck.I hold no brief for Amsterdam simply noting that as an intellect and debater he trumps his admittedly feeble opposition.I wouldn't want to go on holiday with him but that's hardly the point.

Interestingly, Reporters sans frontiers saw things a little differently from the esteemed Amsterdam...

"Reporters Without Borders condemns the violence against journalists by Red Shirt demonstrators and the government’s continual violation of the right to information. Thailand has rarely experienced the level of violence that was reached today, just hours after the army staged its assault on the Bangkok district occupied by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s supporters."

http://en.rsf.org/a-second-journalist-killed-in-19-05-2010,37509.html

Actually Reporters without borders sees things a little differently from your selective quote, but their position doesn't really fit in with your argument I'm afraid.Still never mind they are probably in Thaksin's pay.

http://en.rsf.org/thailand-report-on-violence-against-media-08-07-2010,37905.html

Money quote

"Reporters Without Borders decided to let the victims and witnesses of the violations speak for themselves. Some of their accounts clearly show that Thai soldiers put civilian non-combatants, including journalists, in mortal danger and respected no rule of engagement. Similarly, armed activists within the Red Shorts were guilty of unacceptable acts of violence against the press.

Among its recommendations, Reporters Without Borders urges the authorities to publish the final reports on the deaths of journalists Hiroyuki Muramoto and Fabio Polenghi as soon as possible. Opposing the continuation of the state of emergency, the organisation also calls on the government to stop censoring media, especially news websites that are being blocked."