jayboy

Also, and I'm going out on an intellectual limb here ....

Believe me having read your post carefully but with increasing disbelief there's no danger of that.

I'm glad you enjoyed reading my post carefully, a shame you missed the sarcastic mocking aspect of 'going out on an intellectual limb', i.e. there's nothing intellectual about stating we are citizens of Earth & therefor have a right to travel it. It was sarcastic because to *some* people, this is indeed a huge leap of cerebral gymnastics. Thanks for proving me right.

I read your post carefully too & there wasn't any actual points to respond to except the naked flame & so I won't.

I didn't expect a response because it was just a statement of exasperation.Certainly wasn't a flame as you and the troll Animatic suggest.

If you want a lecture on why Thailand's society is torn and divided,I could supply it but heaven knows there are plenty of other sources.The easy way of course to avoid thinking is to say it's all about Thaksin and if he would go away and stop paying the ignorant red mob, everything would be alright.

brave girl - and she's quite right with most of her statements

Really.I thought immediately of the great Betty White's comment on Sarah Palin, "That's one crazy bitch."

Also, and I'm going out on an intellectual limb here ....

Believe me having read your post carefully but with increasing disbelief there's no danger of that.

The rights and freedoms we enjoy in my country (UK) were not given to us by the ruling classes. They were taken from them.

Actually bifftastic that's not entirely true and I speak as someone who has studied British nineteenth and twentieth century history.The reality is that it was a particularly British mixture of give and take.The working class certainly battled for the franchise and a fairer share of resources, the Chartists being the most famous but with the struggle taken up by a mass movement culminating in an independent Labour Party.In the middle, upper class liberals promoted social reform and an embryonic welfare state, though actually Germany under Bismarck was the pioneer here.Most interestingly however to my mind is that the British ruling elite saw which way the wind was blowing and with a spirit of enlightened self interest shared their economic resources, economic influence and political power.They were clever enough to understand that a smaller slice of an ever increasing pie size was still a good deal.This is probably simplifying it too much but it captures the essence.You are certainly right that the working class demands were the catalyst, but one's left with the impression that the British ruling class was exceedingly canny.Despite the tactical retreat it made they still exercised huge power and influence - and still do.

The contrast with Thailand is striking where the elite seem to have no idea of enlightened self interest, ie the sacrifices which must be made to preserve part - perhaps even most - of what they hold.Unlike their British equivalents they don't seem to understand that the old rigid order is doomed and without flexibility their fate will be the Russian or French, not the British model.Odd really that Korn Chavakanij who knows all this as well as I do seems to shrink from its practical application if his Facebook musings are anything to go by.Abhisit I suspect understands very well and despite the old order and military leaning on him, I hope will be given a chance to steer the country through.

No one should rely on lawyers for anything to do with PR. I have never heard of any who knew what they were talking about. Some are honest enough to tell you they don't know but unfortunately many others will just you lead up the garden path because they are too idle to do a scrap of research and are happy just telling clients any old rubbish. If you hope to succeed with PR (or nationality), you must absolutely do all your own research. There is plenty of information available now on the Immigration website and Camerata's guide.

I agree with everything in your sensible post except for the part indicated above where you are wrong.Because you have not come across first class immigration lawyers doesn't mean they don't exist.There are in Bangkok some excellent Thai immigration lawyers, and none of them market themselves to the foreign community(with due respect to the one or two firms that are sponsors of this forum, I would steer clear of these).The ones I have in mind tend to be partners in the most well known law firms, whether foreign or Thai owned.They will bear the research and administrative burden for the PR applicant but they are not cheap.By this I mean they charge commercial legal fees.A guesstimate for the whole process from initial submission to processing approve PR status would be about Bt 150,000.If one has plenty of time to research the matter and whiz around photocopying etc you can certainly do it yourself.There is no preference as far as I know towards those who use lawyers or those who don't.But first class immigration lawyers with expertise and integrity do exist and frankly for the well off busy executive it's a no brainer to use them.But I do agree it's absolutely essential to find the right one.

Pardon me? "widely condemned" by by whom?

It is probably important to consider the damage done to the checks and balances that were damaged by Thaksin to have a real conversation on this. The not too subtle digs at the judiciary don't seem to take into account the 2001 assets concealment decision etc.

The amazing thing is yet again we have those mysterious "elites" showing up in a conversation about laws that are pretty much black and white..................

If it is news to you that EC decisions have been widely questioned, you are either being disingenuous or it is too late for you to be educated.

I actually agree with you about the damage done by Thaksin to such checks and balances that existed.I also agree it's always helpful to have a broad context in which to debate.Otherwise it just becomes a bit "tu quoque", and I'm not lacking in guilt in this area myself.

Yeah, yeah "mysterious elites"....do you really want to have a discussion on this? Probably best to review the overwhelming evidence first.

There is no gainsaying that women are attracted by a greater or lesser degree to powerful men. My take is that many (most?) Thai ladies seek a man who will give her protection and guidance in her life and this is evident in their advertisements for a husband. The Oriental notion that age is not a paramount factor in choosing a partner supports this. I feel that the OP should ask himself whether he is affording his wife the degree of protection that she may rightly expect from him and if not so, how will this affect their relationship?

I love the comical naivety of "this is evident in their advertisements for husbands" !

How some foreigners in Thailand deceive themselves.As though most educated eligible young Thai women prefer fat old foreigners who give them "protection".What of course motivates them is poverty, to the point that even (how to put it politely) unions with unattractive middle aged foreign losers becomes an attractive proposition.As Thailand becomes more prosperous these tragicomic foreigners will need to look elsewhere.

I don't think there's any anti-Thai prejudice in the UK to speak of.I think there's a certain amount of innocent merriment at the pairing of a young Thai girl and a lardy English escort, particularly as it's fairly obvious where the vast majority of them met.

A glance at Wikipedia shows that the E.C. was formed under the 1997 Constitution, a decade before the September-2006 coup, so it cannot have been "a creation of the Junta" as you suggest. Perhaps you meant to refer to the current people on the commission, who were appointed post-coup, instead ?

The steady work of the E.C., holding individual MPs & occasionally entire party-executives to account, for cheating & corruption, has IMO been one of the positive changes in the political-process over the past several years. Of course this has led those committed democrats the Red-Shirts to protest, outside their offices, at the progress !

But cleaning-up elections is surely essential to a less-biased system ? Perhaps the E.C. deserves the support, not condemnation, of farangs wanting change ?

Yes you are right about the EC.I think that the appointing committee is mostly made up now of a (surprise surprise) a bunch of judges who as we all know of course preserve a careful non partisan position.

You misunderstand my position.I fully support the Electoral Commission but it has to be fair and seen to be fair.You do not even mention the problems associated with EC decisions in the past which have been widely condemned and not just by Thaksinites.Ignoring or playing down these problems don't make them disappear and in fact just feeds the view of many that the system is rigged in favour of the elite.But the institution needs to be supported by all albeit with a degree of scepticism given its patchy record to date.

The EC (Election Commision) a creation of the Junta? I think you might be mistaken there and fing the Assets Examination Commission to have been brought back by the Junta.

Apologies. I think you are right but as I said its provenance isn't really a matter of great concern.

Am I not entitled and deserving of my place in the sun in my declining years?

You have no entitlement at all.If you can afford it Thailand offers an attractive life for pensioners.Although I sympathise at your state pension being frozen, frankly if that is a critical factor you probably shouldn't be here at all.The Thai Government doesn't encourage low to medium income foreign pensioners to settle here, but has a remarkably tolerant visa policy for those that want to.

I of course have no idea of your personal circumstances but for UK citizens on a tight budget a move to an EC country with reciprocal arrangements makes sense.Of course some can't make that move because of family reasons, but that is a matter of personal responsibility and not something to whine about.

I certainly hope so! After all, they have certainly given plenty of information on the why's and how's of all the major decisions they have made in the past few years. I have to go back to about 2001 to find a court decision that I don't fully understand how they arrived at a decision.

I really think the EC should be funded enough to produce PSA's that are required to be broadcast on all radio and TV channels in Thailand about the duties of citizens when it comes to voting and vote buying etc. (Remember that not voting is not an option in Thailand)

The EC itself needs to be very closely scrutinised.Without taking a position here there were very credible reports of its partisanship not so much because it was a creation of the Junta but because of the dubious nature of many of its decisions. particularly the dissolution of entire parties as opposed to guilty individuals.They will be watched like hawks, but there's no alternative mechanism so they should be given a chance to redeem a very mixed reputation.Personally I'm more concerned at the potential threats from the army and the state's security apparatus including the infamous (for anyone who knows their disgusting behaviour in the 1970's) ISOC.The compromised elite hates the concept of the Thai people as a whole deciding on its political future and if past evidence is anything to go by will move heaven and earth to thwart the majority - whether by brute force (rather unlikely) or (more likely) some spurious quasi-legal way.

Either way, there will be an election coming. That's the venue to show numbers of supporters, and the lead-up to elections is the time and venue to have spirited debates about real issues.

Quite so.Let's hope that the elections will be conducted fairly without interference or attempted interference by any of the state's agencies.The record in previous elections was very poor on this point.

I hope that the elections are fair too! That includes the EC watching closely and doing their job. That includes the courts doing their job etc. The history that is most questionable isn't state interference it is parties participating in wide-spread massive elctoral fraud.

I don't disagree though which is the greatest concern is a matter for debate among reasonable people.I'm not sure why you single out the courts.To the extent they will be involved I'm sure they will perform with the same degree of independence, lack of corruption and absence of partisanship for which they have been famed far and wide for so long.

Either way, there will be an election coming. That's the venue to show numbers of supporters, and the lead-up to elections is the time and venue to have spirited debates about real issues.

Quite so.Let's hope that the elections will be conducted fairly without interference or attempted interference by any of the state's agencies.The record in previous elections was very poor on this point.

virtual traveller --- "In a true democracy" ....

In a true democracy people go through a legal process that includes having charges filed, getting arrested, having a bail hearing, having a ( ) trial, and dealing with the results.

Something absolutely fundamental missing here.Brackets provided for convenience.Without it any number of third rate repressive banana republics would comply with criteria.

I'm not hyper sensitive about being looked down on by elite types in their home culture as you imply, nor am i inclined to grovel to all but the prettiest of girls - i simply object to pompous know-it-alls.

Fair enough."Pompous know-it-all" is marginally preferable to "fake pompous wriggling on a stick.'

Never mind Thaksin's motivation, it is his actions which have seen him convicted as a criminal and no amount of fake pompous wriggling on a stick can divert attention from the primary commitment of red apologists to defend Thaksin. Sorry that some reds on the forum do not appear to understand the term class. This is what happens when you have studied at a so-so university.

"Fake pompous wriggling on a stick".Love it!

I'm not familiar with Soso University.Is it in Japan? Don't understand your comment on "class" I'm afraid.

Are you perhaps saying that most red activists support Thakin? I think you may be on to something here.Jolly well observed and well done for telling us all about it.

The critical factor is that the majority can no longer be patronised and ignored.

That's quite a statement coming from the most patronising person on this forum.

Yes there's a certain irony that someone so clearly from an elite background can be so hard on a dominant elite.So far I haven't lost any sleep over this troubling dilemma.

I wasn't accusing you of being from an "elite" background, just of being patronising in the tone of a lot of your posts, but it's interesting that you seem to feel the two go hand in hand.

Interesting that you think in terms of "accusing" someone for being of an elite background, as though it was an undesirable stigma.Strange also how so often those who are hyper sensitive about being looked down on by elite types in their home culture tend to grovel before their Thai equivalents.

The critical factor is that the majority can no longer be patronised and ignored.

That's quite a statement coming from the most patronising person on this forum.

Yes there's a certain irony that someone so clearly from an elite background can be so hard on a dominant elite.So far I haven't lost any sleep over this troubling dilemma.

You are quite right.Another example is the retroactive pardon the junta gave the criminals who launched the last military coup.In many countries they would have been shot or given long gaol terms.

In many countries a Thaksin figure would be in jail. In many countries a Thaksin figure could never have been PM. In many other countries a Thaksin figure would be executed.

Agreed and Thailand is striving hard to achieve a jail term for him.Not sure about being shot however.Which countries do you have in mind, China perhaps - that dream of sea green incorruptibility? In most countries the leaders of the yellow mob that closed down the country through occupying the airport would also be in jail.And for those doubters who bleat about double standards I have it on very good authority that charges will be pressed very soon (chat naa torn bay bay) against these creeps.I'm tired of those cynics that complain about the yellow thug leadership being protected by elite interests.Does anyone really suppose the system operates double standards? I'm sure it doesn't and there's a multi million government financed publicity campaign to prove it.What is more I have discussed this matter with my friend General Suchinda at the Bangkok Club and he agree with me.

However for the treason committed by those involved in the coup there's no doubt at all (oh wait I forgot they pardoned themselves).

Actually, the end of the book does correspond with Thaksin while he was in power. Again back to my original point while he was in power he did roll with the so-called "elites". Didn't his wife get a royal title? He changed the rules and helped himself to this country's riches just like any "elite".

Yes as an analogy of Thaksin's time in power I see what you mean.I didn't know Thaksin could award royal titles though.

So Thaksin could face 6 + years on other cases which will be brought against him once he returns. Looks like these cases can be brought against him wheather reds win the next election or not, unless they dismantle the entire judicary, which i dont think would be allowed to happen. Guessing the man on the run who ain't chicken wont be back anytime soon.

Last time they were in power, they were trying to amend the constitution to make what Thaksin did legal retroactively. They failed, in part due to the PAD protests. If/when they get in power again, I assume they'll try to make simliar changes. Also the party in power can pressure prosecutors to drop charges.

You are quite right.Another example is the retroactive pardon the junta gave the criminals who launched the last military coup.In many countries they would have been shot or given long gaol terms.

In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

How can Thaksin be Napoleon? He was driven from the farm in disgrace like Farmer Jones and like Farmer Jones has every problem blamed on him.Napoleon is surely more apposite to an old general who lives the good life but tells the poor animals that they should be satisfied with their lot, and subscribe to a state ordained philosophy that a tiny amount is more than enough to satisfy the soul (if not bodily requirements).Of course he has a gang of porkers (khaki and yellow in colour) to enforce and intimidate.

My analogy was that in trying to get rid of the old system Thaksin himself created a new one which was same as the old. He changed the laws to suit himself just like in the book (from two legs bad, four legs good to four legs good two legs better). The horse who did the heavy lifting for him worked himself to death while some of the smarter animals who questioned him quickly became viewed as his enemies. Finally just like at the end of the book when Napoleon looked himself in the mirror and saw that he was becoming human, Thaksin himself becomes the very "elite" he so called despises- look how many of his cronies benefited immensely from his administration.

I see what you're saying but it doesn't really stand because Napoleon (Thaksin) is disgraced and no longer on the farm. The old two legged elites are firmly back in control.

As I recall, the book doesn't end the way you suggest but far more poignantly with the common animals looking from pig to man, and from man to pig but no longer able to tell the difference.I leave it to others to suggest who in the Thai context are the "men" and who are the "pigs".

They're basically a shrinking group of antagonizers who are paid/cajoled/pressured to campaign for one man and his family. Their ineffective campaign has very little to do with democracy or the rights of the downtrodden, and a whole lot to do with money. ....oh, and the seizure of power through threats and intimidation.

And so in a few ill chosen words you join the ranks of those - extremists all - that nobody serious pays any attention to.Even Thaksin's most powerful political enemies don't talk in such an ill informed way, not least because they know that the red movement represents a powerful social force that can't be ignored.

Certainly the Bangkok neighbourhood attacked by Red goons armed with baseball bats last year would no doubt tip their hats to the reds as a 'social force'. For the red apologists to paint the corrupt Thaksin as an enemy of 'elites' is disengenuous at best. What Thaksin wants (and wanted) was to put in his own elite. Since he has little support in the industrial centre the class forces supporting him remain subsidiary and condemn him to a continuing marginal presence. He came in on the wave of an economic crisis. The current crisis is abating. That is why he is screwed. Schoolboy reds prattling on about 'new politics' doesn't change reality one iota.

Whistling in the dark I'm afraid.Talk of schoolboy reds prattling really underlines the intellectual impoverishment of your position..It's fortunate that the current political leadership is wiser than those who think (a) it's a zero sum game ( it's all about one man.They know that the reds represent a potent social force and are struggling to win at least a part of it over.

As to Thaksin you may well be right about his motivation, but that's not really the point.The critical factor is that the majority can no longer be patronised and ignored.In essence the new politics that upsets you so much flows from this undeniable reality.Incidentally I suspect you are wrong in assuming little support for Thaksin (or at the parties associated with him) in the industrial areas.You talk about class forces without explanation. so I won't comment on that aspect.

In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

How can Thaksin be Napoleon? He was driven from the farm in disgrace like Farmer Jones and like Farmer Jones has every problem blamed on him.Napoleon is surely more apposite to an old general who lives the good life but tells the poor animals that they should be satisfied with their lot, and subscribe to a state ordained philosophy that a tiny amount is more than enough to satisfy the soul (if not bodily requirements).Of course he has a gang of porkers (khaki and yellow in colour) to enforce and intimidate.

They're basically a shrinking group of antagonizers who are paid/cajoled/pressured to campaign for one man and his family. Their ineffective campaign has very little to do with democracy or the rights of the downtrodden, and a whole lot to do with money. ....oh, and the seizure of power through threats and intimidation.

And so in a few ill chosen words you join the ranks of those - extremists all - that nobody serious pays any attention to.Even Thaksin's most powerful political enemies don't talk in such an ill informed way, not least because they know that the red movement represents a powerful social force that can't be ignored.