pastitche

OK, you're obviously got your mind set in a certain way let's try this:

How on earth do you translate

"It's just about image making to mislead others, to make it appear as if General Prem is for reconciliation. And those who went there were not sincere in paying respect to him."

into this

"I think what he's saying is that they won't kowtow to the elite, but here they are kowtowing to the elite".

He's saying the exact opposite - they are appearing to kowtow to the elite but it's just for show, they are not sincere about it. Of course, that doesn't fit your viewpoint or argument so you try and spin it, badly.

Maybe I should have said "they are pretending to kowtow to the elite".

Well, that's a U turn in anybodies language, thank you.

What the heck are you two talking about. Yingluck is only for show no matter what she does. And if to make it convenient for her to not do what she was elected to do they give her a helicopter with out night flying ability to dodge it.

I would have thought that it was obvious what they were talking about and it had nothing whatsoever to do with night-flying equipment

I am glad to see that the Thais are most content with her. A smashing 65% out of a hundred! It must be her effective handling of the flood efforts, her down to earth approaches when it comes to inflation, her heartwarming answers to all critical questions, her love for her family or her passionate debating skills. If we are not careful, she will turn in a Thai Eva Peron.

These polls make me doubtful Have you ever noticed it is 17 provinces and rarely any sufficient amount of people for that big of a area.

Every one is entitled to their own opinion but when I saw

"and nearly half of the respondents were of an opinion that Jatuporn Prompan should be given an opportunity to be a minister"

It pretty well told me that a lot of the people taking part in the poll were clueless as to what is happening. 17 provinces not hard to find 17 red shirt villages.

My thoughts exactly!

I bet the provinces polled for this result were all north east of Korat. from Nong Khai, to Nong Bua Lamphu and Udon Thani, to you name it all around there....

-mel.

Do you really think that or is it just that the message does not fit with your opinion. No Opinion Poll would be that absurdly silly.

"a majority of Thais voted for the Thaksin/Yingluck/Chalerm team."

No they didn't.

OK you have given up on your signature "plurality". nonsense. You can understand as well as anyone else that the party you decry (justifiably at times) is in power because it won a very large majority of seats in parliament. So why bother to keep up what seems petulance?

Because I get sick of people saying the "majority of Thais voted for PTP". It's clearly not true, especially when used to justify some of the crap that this government is doing.

OK I can sympathise with that but don't you think that every time the word majority is used, the small voice from the background saying "But that's not fair, Miss" can become tedious?

The fact is that Thailand has a parliamentary system with a list system that is a gesture towards proportional representation, making it fairer than eg the UK. I lived in Scotland when there were so few Conservative MPs they could have shared a taxi to the airport to attend Westminster but I accepted that if their opposition could not persuade sufficient voters elsewhere then that was democracy. I suspect that you already know but "landslide majorities" in parliamentary systems where more than 2 parties are involved rarely mean a majority of the voters and even more rarely a majority of the eligible electorate have voted for the winning party, so the constant complaints about percentages is a pointless exercise.

The only numbers that really mattered in Thailand's election were the numbers of MPs elected for PTP and Democrats because that was what decided the party in government.

Criticise this government all you want but I would suggest the non-argument on "majority" is never going to go anywhere.

The offended MP thought his allotted time was cut short.

I don't know how to show respect to a person in power who cuts off your mike, says he can't hear you, and when you approach turns his face away and says he can't see you either.

If they expect unquestioning obedience than a couple of nazi salutes are definitely in order, or should they prostrate themselves on the ground and touch his feet instead?

I'm not sure where you got the information that he thought his allotted time was cut short. Perhaps you can tell me.

It is perhaps an old-fashioned idea but it is the office of the Speaker which demands respect, not the individual who holds that office at any one time. If the Speaker is to be deemed unfit for that office, it is parliament's job to remove him but respect must always be paid to the office.

This MP's actions are undeniably outwith the bounds of acceptable parliamentary behaviour; whether you and others believe that the Speaker was impartial or not is totally irrelevant. Such is parliamentary convention.

Yes but you'll find the speaker of the house in th UK is impartial.

What do you know about the impartiality of the Speaker of the UK's House of Commons? He/she is selected by the House but has previous service as an MP from one political party or another; indeed it is accepted practice that in a general election that he/she will be elected unopposed. You seem to be saying that the Thai parliament is different and that the rules of debate here are not followed. Do you have evidence to substantiate this?

From what party did the previos Thai Speaker come?

Well for a start look at Betty Boothroyd. Former labour MP who served as a speaker under both Conservative and Labour governments. I'd say that's some impartiality right there.

And you do know who the last Thai House speaker was don't you?

And Betty Boothroyd was impartial in spite of her previous political allegiance as were her predecessors and successors, so we are in agreement on that; I responded to the implied and unsubstantiated suggestion that the Thai parliament did not adhere to this convention. Without respect for the Speaker's authority, parliamentary business could not be carried out. Unlimited time for debate is obviously impossible, there is negotiation with party managers (whips) and it is part of the Speaker's duties to enforce the time limitation. If an individual MP disagrees with that he is not entitled to challenge the Speaker's authority

In Westminster such behaviour (cf Michael Heseltine's and Ron Brown's offences of seizing the mace) would be regarded as disrespect of parliament and of the Speaker, On both occasions this was condemned by all parties and both were forced to apologise).

It seems that the workings of a parliament with an impartial Speaker of the House doesn't work too well in Thailand. A StH cutting of an MP, indicating he can't hear that MP anymore and getting a five finger salute with voice-over for additional effect.

Now imagine for a moment we'd have this sequence in parliament in one of the Western democracies. It would be funny only if it wasn't really sad.

Yes Let's imagine what would happen, it's quite simple. The MP would have been removed from the chamber . Or do you think differently?

a majority of Thais voted for the Thaksin/Yingluck/Chalerm team. Now they get all the other clowns as part of the sordid package. I don't know how it could be worse, but then again, that's what the majority voted for. Chok dee, suckers.

"a majority of Thais voted for the Thaksin/Yingluck/Chalerm team."

No they didn't.

OK you have given up on your signature "plurality". nonsense. You can understand as well as anyone else that the party you decry (justifiably at times) is in power because it won a very large majority of seats in parliament. So why bother to keep up what seems petulance?

Talk about confusing

quote from article.

"To improve its performance, especially on the economic front, several former TRT heavyweights, who have more experience than the current Cabinet members, will likely take up the crucial economic and related portfolios to shore up Prime Minister Yingluck's popularity."

So whats it going to be "To improve its performance, especially on the economic front. OR to shore up Prime Minister Yingluck's popularity.

When they arrive will Yingluck attend any meetings of the cabinet. Or continue to just smile and pose for photo ops.

The complete article shows only the phrase "according to Thaksin" without saying where that information came from. Have all TVF members lost their ability to read with comprehension?

Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right?

Well in the UK the speaker of the House

"presides over the House's debates, determining which members may speak. The Speaker is also responsible for maintaining order during debate, and may punish members who break the rules of the House."

Wiki, I know, but difficult to argue against the definition.

Yes but you'll find the speaker of the house in th UK is impartial.

What do you know about the impartiality of the Speaker of the UK's House of Commons? He/she is selected by the House but has previous service as an MP from one political party or another; indeed it is accepted practice that in a general election that he/she will be elected unopposed. You seem to be saying that the Thai parliament is different and that the rules of debate here are not followed. Do you have evidence to substantiate this?

From what party did the previos Thai Speaker come?

Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right?

Well in the UK the speaker of the House

"presides over the House's debates, determining which members may speak. The Speaker is also responsible for maintaining order during debate, and may punish members who break the rules of the House."

Wiki, I know, but difficult to argue against the definition.

Yes but you'll find the speaker of the house in th UK is impartial.

Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right?

Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right?

Can anyone point to any guidelines or rules that gives the Speaker of the House the right to prohibit a speaker from finishing their allocated time or the right to ridicule them - all without pointing to what procedure or rule they use to deny them the right?

Where did you get the idea that he had an allocated time?

Pheu Thai spokesperson calls on Democrat MP to resign for making Hitler salute during charter debate

Pheu Thai Party Deputy Spokesperson Sunisa Lertphakhawat Friday called on Democrat MP Boonyod Sukthinthai to resign for making a Hitler salute inside Parliament.

On Tuesday, Boonyod protested against the chair of the joint sitting of MPs and senators by making the "Hi-Hitler" salute in front of the chairman's bench.

Sunisa said making the Hitler salute hurt the feelings of relatives of all Nazi victims and had thus damaged the reputation of Thai Parliament.

-- The Nation 2012-05-04

I think the gesture was inappropriate and the MP should apologise. With the way some MP's and even government members behave, asking anyone who does so to resign, would probably lead to a premature general election for lack of quorum to govern

Edit: add: 2012-03-27 "Bangkok's Hitler chic"

http://www.thaivisa.... thailand nazi

It appears to be a Thai political response to all misdemeanours to call for resignation, impeachment, ritual suicide or sacrifice the firstborn child. However for the parliament to have credibility this fellow must be disciplined, not by his party but by the House.

He was simply saluting an acknowledgement to Herr Thaksin and his National Socialist Movement. As the ruling party have already used lessons from Mein Kampf and appear to have mastered the mass psychology of fascism, the gesture appears appropriate to me. Well done that man.

Please please do elaborate.

I'm a Brit when someone uses Hilter's name like this guy did I do not find it offensive in the least.

This guy wasn't being allowed to have his say.

Hitler is the best know Dictator who ever lived so this guy used his name knowing it would get that point across in no uncertain manner.

He definitely suffers from lack of anger management. He was like a little hobbit waiting to explode

It had absolutely nothing to do with what the Nazi's did or how many millions American settlers killed.

If you are a Brit you will be well aware that The Speaker of the House of Commons must be respected and behaviour of this kind would have seen the serjeant-at-arms immediately summoned to remove the Honourable Member from the House

Yes it seems that the speaker would not let the MP complete his argument, and was ignoring his request to speak. In frustration the MP moved to another seat closer to the front so he could be heard - and even though he was speaking loudly and clearly, the speaker ignored it and repeatedly said "I cant hear you".

After this went on for some time, the MP was clearly extremely frustrated and made the salute (which by the way originated in the Roman army) - and called "Heil Hitler" three times, mocking the tactics of the government in preventing him from being heard.

HE is not a Nazi - but he obviously feels that he was being treated unfairly by the speaker.

I am sure that you believe sincerely what you say, but this was not a television political production. It was a parliamentary debate where the Speaker is entitled to call an end to the proceedings. Filibuster is an American term with its connotations of talking a subject out of time. That is why it is unacceptable as a political tactic.

Respect for the Speaker is paramount in parliamentary democracies and this MP should be condemned unreservedly for his behaviour.

Clearly he is being blocked from finishing his statement,

which appears to be a overstepping of power by the totally partisan House Speaker.

His anger is justified, his reaction escalates and finally reaches a tipping point.

The leadership could have handled this much differently, but didn't, and provoked him serially.

I don't approve of his final actions, but I can understand his frustration.

Leadership has a brief to let as little counter government info reach

the public ears as they can manage to stifle in Parliament or anywhere.

Reminds me of Thaksins "NO!": signs he'd hold up to stop a reported

from asking questions he doesn't like.

Of course considering who the boss is, this doesn't surprise.

If you remove the bias from your thoughts you might appreciate the rule of the Speaker in parliamentary debate. You aver that the Speaker is totally partisan and oversteps his power - how do you justify that statement? Apparently you know the rules of parliamentary debate in the Thai parliament and the role of the Speaker, so please tell us.

My understanding is that the Speaker is empowered to terminate debate. Do you know different?

"Much ado about nothing"! Sorry but this is just a 'non-story'.

The guy was trying to make his point during a debate; was being stopped by the Speaker; got frustrated; got his mic cut off; got even more frustrated at not being able to complete was he was trying so say; and, in complete exasperation, punctuated his attempt to speak by resorting to the Hitler jibe in disgust.

OK so an MP, anywhere, should act with more restraint and he shouldn't have made the reference. Personally, I have some sympathy with the guy (although none at all at resorting to a 'Heil Hitler' jibe) - it at least shows, particularly for a Thai, that he had some passion and conviction in the heat of debate. Perhaps Parliament could use a few more like him, albeit with a little more circumspection before making offensive gestures such as this.

So, bring it on guys - pillory me for apparently 'sympathising' or 'condoning' a 'Heil Hitler' salute! Let me make it chrystal clear. though, I DO NEITHER - I am vehemently anti-fascist so don't try and tar me with that brush. Sometimes newspapers, and people, try to look for something to justify inappropriate or misplaced comment.

Many Asian Parliaments are known for their extended fist fights,

and even rumbles between parties, this is mild in comparison.

There are rules governing parliamentary behaviour in order to avoid Animatic's scenario. These rules include that decision (who is not aligned to a particular political party no matter his previous affiliation) must be respected and, although that may go against an individual MP's wishes, that MP is not entitled to insult the Speaker. This MP was completely wrong in his behaviour.

It was done as sarcasm... The leader didnt understand......... The man was quoting as sarcasm HE WAS NOT PROMOTING HITLER..

Even though it is a BAD gig to do this he was not in the promotion role.......... He is Blue/ democrat party and was not promoting the man with a funny moustash!!..

He was saying YOU DO WHAT YOU WANT JUST LIKE HITLER... he was not impressed with what was happening......HE supports the Blue!

Please dont flame the guy for doing this..ask your girlfriend!!

You can ask your girlfriend if you like but this is unacceptable behaviour within a parliamentary chamber.

Surely all he is doing is comparing the speakers behaviour to that of a dictatorship. He is not "glorifying" or "praising" Hitler, just making a protest a protest about the speaker!

The ability of newspapers and journalists to make something out of nothing never ceases to amaze me. Thailand is a country that wasnt really actively involved in WW2, at least not the German part of it. I doubt it has any significant Jewish population to offend and in any event the accusation was aimed at an individual so clearly no one but that individual could take offence. He could just as easily have done a Russian or Burmese salute to make the same point and no one would be saying anything!!

Journalists - please focus on the political issues that actually affect people and stop bothering with the antics of a few flamboyant politicians - it seems the world is obsessed with the personal and public behaviour of people rather than on whether they do a good job or not. We have the same problem in UK with hysterical people screaming everytime a footballer or pop star does something in his/her private life which has no direct connection with their job! it is the same when a politician has an affair or engages in some kinky sexual activity - if it is not illegal what concern should it be to anyone how they enjoy themselves.

I agree with you to certain extent about the cult of celebrity and the media's pandering to that disease but no politician in the UK has ever had an affair or engaged in kinky sexual activity in the House of Commons. Behaviour in parliament is subject to strict rules In the UK this MP would have been expelled from the House for contempt, and in all likelihood suspended unti he apologised; no MP is allowed to disrespect the Speaker in this manner.

I very rarely drink, only on special occasions

This is why you get the "horrendous hangovers", it's like playing badminton once or twice a year. One can hardly walk or sit for a couple of days.

Or even better, borrow the custom of drinking only when the flowers boom.

Do you mean flowers explode? In that case I would be completely TT.

Only thing that would help you through the day is alcohol, speaking from decades of experience. Tomorrow is a new day, just endure it.

If you don't want a hangover, don't get sober....

Posted Yesterday

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said during her trip to the restive South yesterday the government would integrate all strategic plans to restore peace

Motorcycle bomb kills 2, wounds 6 soldiers in Thai south

Two Thai military rangers were killed and six were wounded on Tuesday when a bomb planted in a motorcycle exploded in the southern province of Pattani, a police officer said.

At least 5,000 people have been killed in southern Thailand since 2004 in violence attributed to Muslim separatists.

Police told Reuters that the soldiers from a ranger unit were travelling in a pickup truck, heading to an outpost when a bomb of up to 10kg was remotely detonated on a road near a military camp.

Continues:

http://www.straitsti...ory_794336.html

Reuters - May 1, 2012

What you trying to say buchholz, go on spit it out.

He's trying to say that, in a conflict that has been going on since 2004, PM Yingluck visited, made overtures and a terrorist attack subsequently occurred, so it was obviously her having been there that was the cause.

The fact that terrorists plan most attacks well in advance is of course irrelevant.

Hope they have to do 90 day reporting in Aussie.

On a serioous note, the Aussies must be desperate, there are NO standards in this country. Thousands will die in Australia from collapsing buildings, bad electrical installation etc.

Have thousands died in Thailand from collapsing buildings, bad electrical installation etc?

Surely there would be supervision by Australian architects, builders......

Hmm ,posts 4,6 and ,7 short sweet and very much to the point, nice to see there is at least 3 TV posters who live in "the real world"

So those of us who disagree and are not embittered are not in your real world?

I know it spoils the fun but what is the definition of a drought disaster zone?

13 posts on this so far and nothing of any worth.

Burberry and boats.

Is the problem too much retention of water in the dams or the fact that there has been so little rainfall?

Our/your "guess"is as good as The Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Department guess,i would think!!

Yes it's a guess - I don't know any more than you do. So where are last year's water management experts?

Flippancy is virtually all that has been posted. Maybe this thread should be moved to the Pub Forum