OzMick

In an interesting contrast, the former Oz house speaker is facing charges over abuse of his travel allowance - mostly by misuse of Cabcharge.

This story proves what a theatre this government is putting up, having to cast actresses for their platform, who's next, Justin Bieber???

If they would get Bono or Sting, they could better move to the moon, because they would tell them the truth.

So laughable.Do you think for a moment Sting or Bono's sympathies (Sunday Bloody Sunday) would not be on the side of the redshirts murdered by the army in 2010 ? Would they change their minds after that persuasive charmer Kasit "explained" the redshirt demonstrators murdered themselves?

Scondly luvvie though she is Emma Thompson has a greater intellect and perception than either of those two gents.

Sunday Bloody Sunday was a song critical of murders that took place during a peaceful demonstration. Bono has condemned all sides responsible for the violence commited during "the troubles". It is by no means pro IRA. He would be no fan of the red stormtroopers or the army. Would probably be critical of both. Probably why he hasn't been invited. Mind you so would Emma Thompson, not sure why PT invited her.

Rubbish and being pro or anti IRA is irrelevant.It is inconceivable that Bono (or Sting) would take the side of the army shooting civilians.No human rights organisation has to date - why should they particularly given their record?

And actually the Bloody Sunday demonstration wasn't completely peaceful in the sense that it took place at a time of escalating IRA violence.Martin McGuiness has confirmed he had snipers in the area ready to pick off British soldiers.However from all I've read there was no actual IRA violence on that day.So the soldiers concerned were panicky and undisciplined - just like Thailand in 2010.

The parallels are there aren't they - escalating PTP violence, black shirt militants to 'protect' the protesters (by doing what?). But of course, it was all the army's fault, it always is, at least in the what you read.

If "totally different" is inaccurate, "inextricably linked" is even more so when describing two political groups which happened to share a political goal at one time. Despite your clutching at straws of evidence, there is ample evidence that they have quite different views on many subjects, and have acted contrary to the other's interest. Of course that makes it harder to put them in the same little labelled boxes.

BTW As I recall, there was evidence given at the time that Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri was transporting a box of ping-pong bombs which exploded, killing him. AFAIK there is no evidence of anyone other than him killed by explosive devices or rounds set/fired by the PAD.

Oh, that's all right then no one but himself was blown up by his car bomb full of ping pong balls that did hardly any damage to the car

It was only a lickle ping pong ball bomb, honest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LyCxx05xpMA

The above jpeg and video can also be viewed on the amusingly named (mysterious?!!)

http://pad.vfly.net/en/437/mysterious-jeep-cherokee-bombing-october-7-youtube/

Don't you think it just a tad curious that Abhisit would attend the funeral of a PAD Bomber?

My statement said a box of ping-pong bombs, and the picture you supplied indicates there was not a great deal of explosives involved. My point was that other than this there is no evidence that PAD were planting bombs, or that he was "transporting a bomb to the offices of Chart Thai" which was later extended to him being a "terrorist bomber" by the same writer.

Oh what a tangled web we weave

When first we practise to deceive.

Would that be inextricably?

If you are trying to keep the facts straight it's probably best not to suggest the PAD and the Democrat Party were "totally different".They were not, indeed were inextricably linked in terms of objectives and policy.After the PAD seized the prime ministers office they were visited by both Korn and Abhisit.Korn wrote that the demonstrators were "pure in their beliefs" and called their actions "the seeds of true democracy". Abhisit's foreign minister, Kasit, spoke on the PAD stage after the seizure of Suvarnabhumi Airport where he said the economic damage from the airport closure was "Thaksin's and the government's fault".Both Anand Panyarachun and Abhisit attended the funeral of a PAD terrorist Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri who had blown himself up transporting a bomb to the offices of Chat Thai.After the Democrat Party gained power it began to distance itself from the PAD.The links are beginning to strengthen again now with the Democrat Party increasingly dependent on street activity given there is little chance the Thai people will elect them to power.

If "totally different" is inaccurate, "inextricably linked" is even more so when describing two political groups which happened to share a political goal at one time. Despite your clutching at straws of evidence, there is ample evidence that they have quite different views on many subjects, and have acted contrary to the other's interest. Of course that makes it harder to put them in the same little labelled boxes.

BTW As I recall, there was evidence given at the time that Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri was transporting a box of ping-pong bombs which exploded, killing him. AFAIK there is no evidence of anyone other than him killed by explosive devices or rounds set/fired by the PAD.

Oh, that's all right then no one but himself was blown up by his car bomb full of ping pong balls that did hardly any damage to the car

It was only a lickle ping pong ball bomb, honest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LyCxx05xpMA

The above jpeg and video can also be viewed on the amusingly named (mysterious?!!)

http://pad.vfly.net/en/437/mysterious-jeep-cherokee-bombing-october-7-youtube/

Don't you think it just a tad curious that Abhisit would attend the funeral of a PAD Bomber?

My statement said a box of ping-pong bombs, and the picture you supplied indicates there was not a great deal of explosives involved. My point was that other than this there is no evidence that PAD were planting bombs, or that he was "transporting a bomb to the offices of Chart Thai" which was later extended to him being a "terrorist bomber" by the same writer.

Much as I'd like to believe the man, as there will be at least 2 general elections and god knows how many different ministers in that time period, I'm afraid he has little credibility.

Of course they can't do it now, because the rice hole is sucking away all the budget.

If you are trying to keep the facts straight it's probably best not to suggest the PAD and the Democrat Party were "totally different".They were not, indeed were inextricably linked in terms of objectives and policy.After the PAD seized the prime ministers office they were visited by both Korn and Abhisit.Korn wrote that the demonstrators were "pure in their beliefs" and called their actions "the seeds of true democracy". Abhisit's foreign minister, Kasit, spoke on the PAD stage after the seizure of Suvarnabhumi Airport where he said the economic damage from the airport closure was "Thaksin's and the government's fault".Both Anand Panyarachun and Abhisit attended the funeral of a PAD terrorist Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri who had blown himself up transporting a bomb to the offices of Chat Thai.After the Democrat Party gained power it began to distance itself from the PAD.The links are beginning to strengthen again now with the Democrat Party increasingly dependent on street activity given there is little chance the Thai people will elect them to power.

If "totally different" is inaccurate, "inextricably linked" is even more so when describing two political groups which happened to share a political goal at one time. Despite your clutching at straws of evidence, there is ample evidence that they have quite different views on many subjects, and have acted contrary to the other's interest. Of course that makes it harder to put them in the same little labelled boxes.

BTW As I recall, there was evidence given at the time that Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri was transporting a box of ping-pong bombs which exploded, killing him. AFAIK there is no evidence of anyone other than him killed by explosive devices or rounds set/fired by the PAD.

Sometimes it's hard when the usual suspects are so stunningly dense.My post made it crystal clear the reference to the PAD/Democrat Party nexus was in the past tense and the relationship evolved for the worse, particularly once the Democrats achieved power.Actually I would also acknowledge at the outset there were many decent citzens that joined up with PAD for the best of motives including a revulsion at Thaksin's meglomania.The PAD leadership was however almost from the beginning a scummy and hypocritical set of individuals - fascist, racist and corrupt in some cases.Reverting to the now poor PAD/Democrat Partry relationship I have now doubt they will hook up again if it suits Abhisit's purposes given as noted earlier there is no hope of the Democrats ever winning an election under his tainted leadership.

P.S Interesting to see Chris Baker's review of Abhisit's revisionist version of the 2010 events in the other paper today.I commend it.

P.P.S I have no details of how PAD terrorist bomb makers blew themselves up, nor is it particularly relevant - though one is thankful they made mince of themselves (to borrow Billy Connolly's expression) rather trhan innocent people.

Obviously "inextricably linked" means something to you other than its normal meaning.

Why is it necessary for the House Speaker and his deputies to represent the country on overseas trips? As the annual budget for this exceeds B35 million, what are the benefits?

Dear Democrat party,

.... you have illegally taken over Suvarnabumi airport a couple of years ago, and the affected parties haven't gotten their rightful compensation paid yet. So how dare you speak about Human rights,

<snip for brevity>

At the risk of being boring, that was five years ago (not "a couple"), and it was the PAD (not the Democrat Party), so actually someone totally different.

Just trying to keep the facts straight.

If you are trying to keep the facts straight it's probably best not to suggest the PAD and the Democrat Party were "totally different".They were not, indeed were inextricably linked in terms of objectives and policy.After the PAD seized the prime ministers office they were visited by both Korn and Abhisit.Korn wrote that the demonstrators were "pure in their beliefs" and called their actions "the seeds of true democracy". Abhisit's foreign minister, Kasit, spoke on the PAD stage after the seizure of Suvarnabhumi Airport where he said the economic damage from the airport closure was "Thaksin's and the government's fault".Both Anand Panyarachun and Abhisit attended the funeral of a PAD terrorist Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri who had blown himself up transporting a bomb to the offices of Chat Thai.After the Democrat Party gained power it began to distance itself from the PAD.The links are beginning to strengthen again now with the Democrat Party increasingly dependent on street activity given there is little chance the Thai people will elect them to power.

If "totally different" is inaccurate, "inextricably linked" is even more so when describing two political groups which happened to share a political goal at one time. Despite your clutching at straws of evidence, there is ample evidence that they have quite different views on many subjects, and have acted contrary to the other's interest. Of course that makes it harder to put them in the same little labelled boxes.

BTW As I recall, there was evidence given at the time that Police Lt Col Methee Chatmontri was transporting a box of ping-pong bombs which exploded, killing him. AFAIK there is no evidence of anyone other than him killed by explosive devices or rounds set/fired by the PAD.

I can only presume that he couldn't be bothered to walk through to 2nd and 1st class, as neither of them do what they say on the tin either.

1st class carriages are rare animals only ever seen attached to express trains, and I use the term "express" loosely. 135 would be lucky to have a 2nd class a/c carriage, and as it returns as 136 leaving Ubon at 0700, probably only have a 2nd class (fan) chair car.

Why would the PM need to purchase an airplane that is 3X the size required and that eats fuel at an even higher rate than a new B737? Your advice is akin to telling someone who would be better off with a 2013 Subaru station wagon, to go and purchase a 2000 minibus, because the minibus initial cost would be cheaper.

What you missed was maintenance costs and fuel costs. Older planes require retrofits, and changes to major components.

If you manage your own personal finances using your logic, it would suggest that you may need the assistance of a competent financial planner.

New B737-800 how much x4 fitted to requirements, about 190 seats ok more fuel efficient, but range Kilometers ??? with the seats out to have office -bar rest rooms, and she sometimes has up to 100 vip with her.

Second hand from Thai Airways-little used at a bargain price x 2 enough for her needs, normally 250 passengers, seats out to fit as above, fitted would have enough private rooms and seating for 150.

Not that much maintenance costs more. and used 1 time a month. Also you have the long range without re-fuel, and save airport landing charges.

Your logic is buy 4 x B737s at new price, to use seldom, you need an adviser.

Not forgetting the A340s are Thai Airways ( government ) % owned/controlled.

rent them then off Thai as an alternative when needed.

Yingluk and GK should take some advice from Rolls Royce - If you have to ask how much fuel it uses, you can't afford it. (their explanation for not publishing fuel economy figures for rollers)

135 is a rapid which skips many stops. He should have tried an ordinary for the true mind-numbing experience.

But they already have their own whistle and white gloves.

Thai Airways A340s stood doing nothing -if bought at a snip could make the trip to USA no probs.

Why would the PM need to purchase an airplane that is 3X the size required and that eats fuel at an even higher rate than a new B737? Your advice is akin to telling someone who would be better off with a 2013 Subaru station wagon, to go and purchase a 2000 minibus, because the minibus initial cost would be cheaper.

What you missed was maintenance costs and fuel costs. Older planes require retrofits, and changes to major components.

If you manage your own personal finances using your logic, it would suggest that you may need the assistance of a competent financial planner.

What you missed was the obvious solution - less travel equals less cost, and then buying a plane has no justification at all.

The person who doctored the photo making it in a disgusting comment, would that not be slander? i think yes, she should loose her job and face the fullest extent of the law, how would you like it if some one did that to your wife, sister, mother???

My "wife, sister, mother" is not pretending to be the PM of this country, and doing it badly. It was a joke, and required the mental leap of the reader to make it, though that obviously wasn't difficult. Few of the interpretations of the insinuation border anywhere near disgusting, and if that is the worst that is said about a political figure, she could consider herself lucky.

Get a grip, and try to remember some of the jokes made about PMs and Premiers in your own country.

As the OP refers to young soldiers, I assume they are referring to conscripts completing their service. As well as basic infantry weapons handling, these conscripts will have picked up a range of skills, and many will be competent truck drivers, but I doubt that any get to drive a tank.

BTW it is not unusual to find conscripts/recruits who are illiterate and who will spend most of their service rectifying that.

Wrong."Slut" is too strong agreed, but it can mean something like eagerly flirtatious.It's usually mentioned in fun or in a self mocking way.

This is one of those Thai stories that to use a cliche is Kafkaesque.Nobody comes off well whether it Yingluck, Tarit or the Democratic spokeswoman - though the latter is particularly contemptible in my view for her sheer vulgarity and bad manners.

After the US president's visit, doesn't your description seem accurate? But how do we get from 'fun or in a self mocking way' to 'particularly contemptible in my view for her sheer vulgarity and bad manners'?

Because there is a huge difference between ribbing among friends and making a malicious posting on Facebook.It's a question of class - which some will immediately understand and some never will,

Yes, we colonials are much less class conscious. Do you still tug the forelock?

85 MPs didn't bother to vote, and I assume were absent. As a quarter (125) don't have constituencies to handle, the absence rate seems high for an important bill.

Not raising the fare as a populist policy would cost B190 million. Compared to the annual losses of the rice scam, that would be at least 1000 times cheaper and probably affect more of the population.

OTOH how does a pollie make a sly buck out of it?

BTW the fastest way to improve services might well be some new rolling stock - but I doubt that has occurred to the Minister.

I did not read where the customers complained about the age of the cars. I read that their were dirty toilets, rude customer service, and smoking being allowed. All personnel problems. A new train, with the same employees, wouldn't solve this much, would it? Get some new managers to make sure the employees do their jobs.

Those were the complaints referred to by the Minister, who might just be selective in his referral. I'm fairly sure none of those mentioned were observed on the PM's special train trip, what there was of it. Perhaps she'd like to try Hat Yai to Surat Thani, 3rd class only, all stops, next time and find out what real Thai rail passengers endure.

As a regular user of rail services, I am complaining about worn out and obsolete rolling stock (which includes the locomotives), far older than that in Malaysia and Oz where I also use trains.

"The Cabinet did not always grant such spending requests, he added."

Wrong."Slut" is too strong agreed, but it can mean something like eagerly flirtatious.It's usually mentioned in fun or in a self mocking way.

This is one of those Thai stories that to use a cliche is Kafkaesque.Nobody comes off well whether it Yingluck, Tarit or the Democratic spokeswoman - though the latter is particularly contemptible in my view for her sheer vulgarity and bad manners.

After the US president's visit, doesn't your description seem accurate? But how do we get from 'fun or in a self mocking way' to 'particularly contemptible in my view for her sheer vulgarity and bad manners'?