65% Of Voters Ready To Sell Votes

[Tony Clifton]

Burma/Myanmar, right next door, shows a "better" version of what a real junta is and does.

No vote selling there I guess.

Edited November 5, 2007 by Tony Clifton

[hammered]

Yes SJ you are correct, the topic is drifting, so before the anchor chain gets tight let me help enlighten a few who may have lost the ability (or never had) to not bring on fights.

The people who you reefer to as pro junta or your newly invented word that still has no definition, are people who don’t look to place a preestablished label on something that does not quite fit the definition.

What I have been seeing is a group of people stuck on the word ‘junta’ that does not exactly fit the situation, but it is the closest word they can find. However rather that trying to define this new situation, they chose to label the people who refused to accept that inaccurate definition.

To summerize what happened that does not fit the definition of junta is as follows:

The Thai people including military, private citizens, politicians and more conducted a prolonged action against a corrupt man who was step by step dismantling the checks and balances required to maintain a democracy and consolidating power that was never meant to be consolidated. The intent of the action was to return Thailand to the people. That ongoing action came to a peek September 19, 2006 when some of the Thai citizens made use of military equipment and manpower to force the man out. To date every indication Thailand has been moving towards the goal of restoring the country to a condition prior to the dismantling of democracy done my the corrupt man and including a few upgrades in laws to avoid the same thing happening again in the future.

I think the definition ‘revolution’ more closely fits because it was not just the military who wanted that man out who was causing so much damage. Only the lesser educated could not see what was going on and they placed their trust in the hands of that serial liar.

Persoanlly, although always a strong critic of Mr. Thaksin and not being too distraught at the coup, I find it still impossible to rule out his return even fairly soon and possibly even in a semi-triumphant way. I am not sure the current government have built a system that would rule this out. I am not sure they even tried. I am not sure they could even if they wanted to and I am not sure that would be the right thing to do anyway as to achieve that end could see the loss of so many good things just to remove one person. Anyway those are my doubts surveying the position we find Thailand in right now and trying to look at it from a fairly neutral perspective, which is not always easy consdiering my dislike for the previous leader of the country.

I am not sure about the poorly educated point either. I persoanlly know many well eductaed people who to this day want Mr. Taksin back and I know even more who totally supported him until the day he was out when tehy suddenly decided death was too good for him. On the other hand, I know poorly eductaed and even illiterate people who support him and can explain why. I also know a lesser number of poorly educated and illterate people who do not support and never have and equally I know as many if not more poorly educated and illiterate people who voted for him or against him depending on advice without ever having much concern. I think it is alot more complicated than it often gets presented in the admittedly poor Thai news media as all middle clas against Thaksin and all poor for Thaksin. A simple look at the April 2 no vote numbers shows that there were far more no votes than are middle class people in Thailand even analysing it by area exposes far more local no votes than local middle classes exist. Persoanlly I tend to think most Thai people could see what was going on whatever their socio-economic or educational background, but how they viewed it differed. Some supported it unquestioningly, some thought for the better good to ignore a few indescetions was the right approach, some were indifferent, some abhored it, some just wanted it to disappear and some just couldnt care less about any politics.

[younghusband]

Yes SJ you are correct, the topic is drifting, so before the anchor chain gets tight let me help enlighten a few who may have lost the ability (or never had) to not bring on fights.

The people who you reefer to as pro junta or your newly invented word that still has no definition, are people who don’t look to place a preestablished label on something that does not quite fit the definition.

What I have been seeing is a group of people stuck on the word ‘junta’ that does not exactly fit the situation, but it is the closest word they can find. However rather that trying to define this new situation, they chose to label the people who refused to accept that inaccurate definition.

To summerize what happened that does not fit the definition of junta is as follows:

The Thai people including military, private citizens, politicians and more conducted a prolonged action against a corrupt man who was step by step dismantling the checks and balances required to maintain a democracy and consolidating power that was never meant to be consolidated. The intent of the action was to return Thailand to the people. That ongoing action came to a peek September 19, 2006 when some of the Thai citizens made use of military equipment and manpower to force the man out. To date every indication Thailand has been moving towards the goal of restoring the country to a condition prior to the dismantling of democracy done my the corrupt man and including a few upgrades in laws to avoid the same thing happening again in the future.

I think the definition ‘revolution’ more closely fits because it was not just the military who wanted that man out who was causing so much damage. Only the lesser educated could not see what was going on and they placed their trust in the hands of that serial liar.

OK let me get this straight.There was a mass movement of the Thai people against a corrupt and evil dictator that culminated in a peaceful revolution to save the state and restore power to the people.The revolution was effected by a few pure minded and selfless Thai citizens who by some chance had access to military equipment and miltary personnel.Since then there has been peaceful progress to the point where democracy in its pristine form(ie before the advent of the devil incarnate) can be expected shortly.At the same time some wise amendments to the constitution have been put in place to prevent such a catastrophe ever happening again.Is that about right?

Sometimes an expression of views can be beyond satire.I privately wondered in the past whether the word "juntophile" was , while being a convenient catch all description, too blunt a term for a rather complicated position.John K's classically absurd post has persuaded me that any such reservations were misplaced.He is clearly an unreconstructed juntophile.

[John K]

Well there were a few points I deliberately left out. You could view the military action as self defense seeing as Thaksin already drew first blood on unarmed peaceful protesters, but this really taking this off topic.

I think if we are to keep on this line we should do so at:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=82926&st=0

That threads last post was the day before the coup. Leave this thread to votes for sale.

[younghusband]

Well there were a few points I deliberately left out. You could view the military action as self defense seeing as Thaksin already drew first blood on unarmed peaceful protesters, but this really taking this off topic.

I think if we are to keep on this line we should do so at:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=82926&st=0

That threads last post was the day before the coup. Leave this thread to votes for sale.

I see. The junta's illegal coup was self defence in the face of Thaksin's bloody massacres of peace loving civilians.If this wasn't so dishonest and ignorant it would almost be comical.

Let me give you a piece of free advice.When you have dug yourself into as deep a hole as you have on this occasion, stop digging.

[John K]

Well there were a few points I deliberately left out. You could view the military action as self defense seeing as Thaksin already drew first blood on unarmed peaceful protesters, but this really taking this off topic.

I think if we are to keep on this line we should do so at:

<a href="http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=82926&st=0" target="_blank">http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=82926&st=0</a>

That threads last post was the day before the coup. Leave this thread to votes for sale.

I see. The junta's illegal coup was self defence in the face of Thaksin's bloody massacres of peace loving civilians.If this wasn't so dishonest and ignorant it would almost be comical.

Let me give you a piece of free advice.When you have dug yourself into as deep a hole as you have on this occasion, stop digging.

Why do you insist on adding words such as ‘massacres’ to change the context then say I was wrong? I simply said Thaksin drew first blood, and if you care to look back you fill find news clippings and photos that clearly show and support that statement. However I doubt you will find one on massacres. If you insist in changing the context just so you can get a dig in, please continue as it reflect extremely poorly on you and others wont need bother to point that out. I actually think your last sentence in the quoted post above applies more to you than to others.

[younghusband]

Well there were a few points I deliberately left out. You could view the military action as self defense seeing as Thaksin already drew first blood on unarmed peaceful protesters, but this really taking this off topic.

I think if we are to keep on this line we should do so at:

<a href="http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=82926&st=0" target="_blank">http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=82926&st=0</a>

That threads last post was the day before the coup. Leave this thread to votes for sale.

I see. The junta's illegal coup was self defence in the face of Thaksin's bloody massacres of peace loving civilians.If this wasn't so dishonest and ignorant it would almost be comical.

Let me give you a piece of free advice.When you have dug yourself into as deep a hole as you have on this occasion, stop digging.

Why do you insist on adding words such as ‘massacres’ to change the context then say I was wrong? I simply said Thaksin drew first blood, and if you care to look back you fill find news clippings and photos that clearly show and support that statement. However I doubt you will find one on massacres. If you insist in changing the context just so you can get a dig in, please continue as it reflect extremely poorly on you and others wont need bother to point that out. I actually think your last sentence in the quoted post above applies more to you than to others.

Don't, if you don't mind me pointing out, be so pedantically literal.Of course I don't really mean, in quoting you, that Thaksin was responsible for "bloody massacres".I was exaggerating for effect as all but the cerebrally challenged would have immediately recognised.Amusingly enough however your rather panicky rejoinder simply pulls you deeper into the hole you have dug for yourself.Do you have any idea how any serious commentator would view your explanatory comment that the junta launched the coup to avenge Thaksin having drawn first blood?Not even the coup leaders would indulge in such flights of fantasy

Anyway thanks for the comic interlude.From someone else such pernicious nonsense would all be rather sinister, but from you it's just light entertainment.

[Plus]

.The true juntophile is one who has an obsessive preoccupation with demonising Thaksin to the point where...

Thaksinophob is probably a better word as junta doesn't really come to play by this definition.

You still can't present any evidence that the generals took the power for themselves and after watching them for over a year I still can't find any divergence between their actions and promises they have given on the day of the coup. Their "self interest" is still aligned with that of a country.

We saw a peaceful transition of power and there's absolutely no chance of any violence or even political turmoil if they manage to prevent PPP from winning elections (a fair goal as it was the purpose of the coup).

>>>>

Re trains - those are last year news. I thought it all ended when it was discovered that pictures leaked to newspapers were fake. I guess you have nothing else to talk about, well, go ahead, indulge yourselves.

Re. Surayud's personal fortune - a few wise investments in land holdings twenty years ago is all that was needed. I won't be surprised that our own family here will be millionaires in twenty years time, judging by the way things are growing, practically all by themselves.

Re. pre coup situation - Democrats promised to run, everything was going ok, except for one little thing - Thaksin's return. That would have been the end of peace, and PAD wouldn't have found itself isolated. Nothing but the coup could stop him. Actually even the coup can't seem to stop him.

All in all, it's undeniable that the country has been spared a major confrontation. Is it still coming? Well, if PPP hasn't so openly campaigned for Thaksin's return, the junta would have probably didn't pay it any attention. Populist policies, the so called ginnie out of the bottle, don't seem to bother the junta at all.

[blaze]

Yes SJ you are correct, the topic is drifting, so before the anchor chain gets tight let me help enlighten a few who may have lost the ability (or never had) to not bring on fights.

The people who you reefer to as pro junta or your newly invented word that still has no definition, are people who don’t look to place a preestablished label on something that does not quite fit the definition.

What I have been seeing is a group of people stuck on the word ‘junta’ that does not exactly fit the situation, but it is the closest word they can find. However rather that trying to define this new situation, they chose to label the people who refused to accept that inaccurate definition.

To summerize what happened that does not fit the definition of junta is as follows:

The Thai people including military, private citizens, politicians and more conducted a prolonged action against a corrupt man who was step by step dismantling the checks and balances required to maintain a democracy and consolidating power that was never meant to be consolidated. The intent of the action was to return Thailand to the people. That ongoing action came to a peek September 19, 2006 when some of the Thai citizens made use of military equipment and manpower to force the man out. To date every indication Thailand has been moving towards the goal of restoring the country to a condition prior to the dismantling of democracy done my the corrupt man and including a few upgrades in laws to avoid the same thing happening again in the future.

I think the definition ‘revolution’ more closely fits because it was not just the military who wanted that man out who was causing so much damage. Only the lesser educated could not see what was going on and they placed their trust in the hands of that serial liar.

Persoanlly, although always a strong critic of Mr. Thaksin and not being too distraught at the coup, I find it still impossible to rule out his return even fairly soon and possibly even in a semi-triumphant way. I am not sure the current government have built a system that would rule this out. I am not sure they even tried. I am not sure they could even if they wanted to and I am not sure that would be the right thing to do anyway as to achieve that end could see the loss of so many good things just to remove one person. Anyway those are my doubts surveying the position we find Thailand in right now and trying to look at it from a fairly neutral perspective, which is not always easy consdiering my dislike for the previous leader of the country.

I am not sure about the poorly educated point either. I persoanlly know many well eductaed people who to this day want Mr. Taksin back and I know even more who totally supported him until the day he was out when tehy suddenly decided death was too good for him. On the other hand, I know poorly eductaed and even illiterate people who support him and can explain why. I also know a lesser number of poorly educated and illterate people who do not support and never have and equally I know as many if not more poorly educated and illiterate people who voted for him or against him depending on advice without ever having much concern. I think it is alot more complicated than it often gets presented in the admittedly poor Thai news media as all middle clas against Thaksin and all poor for Thaksin. A simple look at the April 2 no vote numbers shows that there were far more no votes than are middle class people in Thailand even analysing it by area exposes far more local no votes than local middle classes exist. Persoanlly I tend to think most Thai people could see what was going on whatever their socio-economic or educational background, but how they viewed it differed. Some supported it unquestioningly, some thought for the better good to ignore a few indescetions was the right approach, some were indifferent, some abhored it, some just wanted it to disappear and some just couldnt care less about any politics.

I wonder to what extent Thaksin was Thailand's Nixon. Nixon was doomed by a rotten public persona right from day one. Never in my recollection has there been a US president more hated- at home and abroad- George W comes across as a bit goofy- but not malevolent. (his sins are blamed on the neo-cons- Nixon's were blamed on... Nixon).

At the time, the PAD rallies struck me as being more of a hate fest- not unlike the way that crowds hiss the villain in Victorian melodramas. Complete with the perverse pleasure they take in that hatred.

I also can't help but think in terms of the psychological benefits to many that followed the PAD- they loved those rallies. Working for 8000 a month- obsequious to parents, bosses, cops, -anybody with power- and here was the chance to spit in the eye of the second most powerful person in the nation- and to be applauded for doing so by peers and press. Thaksin may have been the most hated man in Bangkok- and to poke a stick in his eye must have felt real good.

At the same time though, for many, I think the source of the hatred was also the sheer magnitude of his personal wealth- his arrogant public persona- his irritating voice- his ugly mug, his spoiled progeny- and the fact that they (the Thais)had not had the opportunity to learn from experience that majority governments are by nature prone to accusations of being dictatorial.

The people I knew who attended the rallies had only a vague understanding of the Shin sale and its significance- couldn't have cared less about the drug wars (in fact supported them) and didn't understand why Thaksin didn't just quit and go home. They wanted - they chose- to believe that every allegation made by Sonthi L and Chamong were true. It justified their visceral contempt for the man.

Nor did they seem to understand the nature of political parties (and the rigorous 'question at your peril' discipline that goes with that)- or the nature of the checks and balances that supposedly keep democracy on a relatively even keel. As if the checks and balances (especially the senate) works much more effectively in other countries- where the power of 'interest groups' and 'lobbys' make vote buying in Thailand look like small potatoes.

It seemed to me that while many claimed to desire a fully functioning democracy- what they really wanted was a clean and pretty government- with a loveable leader at the helm- who embodied the best traits of the nation- kind of like the kind you'ld find in a child's book about a magical land where the leaders are pure of heart and deed and the followers happy and faithful-

Increasingly- and this is born out now by the press's continuing use of the term 'old power clique'- Thaksin came, like Nixon, to embody all the cause of all of Thailand's failings..,. That somehow prior to Thaksin, Thailand had been that magical fairy land. And that with his 'awk bie'ing- it would return to that pristine realm.

For some, Thaksin's gravest sin was not corruption, not even his authoritarian command of the structures of the state (the polite term is a 'micromanager')- but rather that by not stepping down when he was only one person and there were thousands in the park demanding he do so- he was seen to be fragmenting the society. And that simple fact seemed to stir up even more hatred for him. The fact that there were millions up country who did not want him to step down was almost as abstract as the fact that there was a terrible insurrection happening in the South.

There seemed to be an attitude that a khon jai dee would simply quit the job he'd been elected to do- and walk away. This displayed a total misunderstanding of the way democracy is intended to work. There were no mass protests of court decisons- no demonstrations demanding televised hearings into the Shin sale -no petitions requesting a thorough auditing of the 'populist' projects- no public shaming of polititians who had bought votes- no marches protesting police corruption- or even government corruption- just that call- Thaksin awk bie. Go away. Quit.

And then- ok- you won't quit- somebody please come take care of us and boot his ass out.

So to bring this around and back to topic- why so many Thais would sell their votes- many Thais simply don't have much faith in democracy- the poor because past experience and perhaps especially this one, has to have taught them that their taking real proportional control of the government will never be allowed- or not in the forseeable future- and the middle class- because they have never really valued democracy much - they wanted above all, good governance, and if that means taking a rain check on democracy- no problem.

Edited November 5, 2007 by blaze

[blaze]

.The true juntophile is one who has an obsessive preoccupation with demonising Thaksin to the point where...

Thaksinophob is probably a better word as junta doesn't really come to play by this definition.

had you included the rest of the YH's definition, it most certainly would come into play

You still can't present any evidence that the generals took the power for themselves and after watching them for over a year I still can't find any divergence between their actions and promises they have given on the day of the coup. Their "self interest" is still aligned with that of a country.

They didn't take power exclusively for themselves- they are romantics- visonaries if you like- they took power to realize a kingdom ruled by order, harmony and ancient hierarchical structures. Where the army would regain its glory as the defender of the realm- with all attendant benefits.

History shows (god I hate saying that) that the most dangerous political leaders are not in it for personal gain- or even personal glory- they are in it to enact their own vision of perfection (milleniumism)

But they have benefitted:

for a start: how much money has the military received this year compared to any year, factoring in inflation- of the last ten- remember that every financial transaction has 'labor costs- now what is the impact of every cash injection to any big business, on the earnings of the upper echelons- more 'responsiblities'- improved salary.

Next: every anallyst that I've read who has evaluated the new constitution concludes that it ensures that the army will, through its contol of a sufficient number of appointed senators, oversee all elected governments in the future- meaning anyone who takes on the military's economic concerns will do so with impunity.

Next: when the next 'rotten' gov't takes the helm, the people will be receptive to a coup since this one has been so relatively mild- thereby grooming the public to see military coups as a legitimate alternative to elected governments.

Last: a couple of days after the coup, one of the English papers quoted a coupster as saying that this coup would return Thailand to where it was in '32. In other words, since democracy, Thailand has been a dirty mess.

We saw a peaceful transition of power and there's absolutely no chance of any violence or even political turmoil if they manage to prevent PPP from winning elections (a fair goal as it was the purpose of the coup).

That's like saying there's no danger of turmoil when the hel_l's Angel's set up camp in your living room... as long as you just stay away from the house. And if you have any decency and love of peace, that's what youll do.

>>>>

Re trains - those are last year news. I thought it all ended when it was discovered that pictures leaked to newspapers were fake. I guess you have nothing else to talk about, well, go ahead, indulge yourselves.

Re. Surayud's personal fortune - a few wise investments in land holdings twenty years ago is all that was needed. I won't be surprised that our own family here will be millionaires in twenty years time, judging by the way things are growing, practically all by themselves.

all he has to do is come clean- voluntarily- that would certainly clear up his legacy and shouldn't requre much in the way of complex accounting-

Re. pre coup situation - Democrats promised to run, everything was going ok, except for one little thing - Thaksin's return. That would have been the end of peace, and PAD wouldn't have found itself isolated.

Why not? The major opposition party would have said, in effect, the right way to change the system is from within- like it or not- (I didn't used to- I do now) that 'co-opting' as we used to call it- works. Leaving only the most radical trots and anarchists - whoop --- time lapse.

Nothing but the coup could stop him. Actually even the coup can't seem to stop him.

Maybe the coup wasn't about stopping him at all. Maybe it was about something else- like ensuring the army has a constitutionally guaranteed place in the unfolding of events in the next few years.

Aside from his square face and squeaky voice, Thaksin was nothing more than one of many many who will jump at the opportunity to do what he did- get rich and powerful and maybe even try to leave his stamp on the nation- regardless of what he did- Thaksin's may be gone- but there's many more Thaksin's in the wings.

All in all, it's undeniable that the country has been spared a major confrontation.

through out history, confrontations are between the haves and the have nots, competing visions. Not between Thaksin Shinawatr and the PAD- Thaksin may go- and the PAD may go- but the confrontations will come- hopefully channeled through the relatively peaceful mechanisms of democracy

and the Is it still coming? Well, if PPP hasn't so openly campaigned for Thaksin's return, the junta would have probably didn't pay it any attention. Populist policies, the so called ginnie out of the bottle, don't seem to bother the junta at all.

Nor did his corruption- the last thing that anybody in big money here wants is an open inquiry into under the table stuff- and the military as you well know, is one of the great Thai cartels- nor his squeaky voice- nor his overseeing the trampling of human rights- so was it something else that bothered them- if so, what?

Edited November 5, 2007 by blaze

[John K]

Ok lets spin this another way as long as we a speculating. Lets assume the following parameters:

The first change is the coup never happened, followed by Thaksin declaring the same level of martial law in the south because of the violence that was going on as the PAD protesters were getting the living daylight beat out of them by Thaksin’s paid goons. Then assume Thaksin paid for all his votes in Isaan (just to keep the thread on topic mind you) and came back into power.

Knowing Thaksin personality that he goes after people who challenge him with a vengeance, where would Thailand be today and what would life be like nearly one year after the planned elections?

[younghusband]

.The true juntophile is one who has an obsessive preoccupation with demonising Thaksin to the point where...

Thaksinophob is probably a better word as junta doesn't really come to play by this definition.

You still can't present any evidence that the generals took the power for themselves and after watching them for over a year I still can't find any divergence between their actions and promises they have given on the day of the coup. Their "self interest" is still aligned with that of a country.

We saw a peaceful transition of power and there's absolutely no chance of any violence or even political turmoil if they manage to prevent PPP from winning elections (a fair goal as it was the purpose of the coup).

>>>>

Re trains - those are last year news. I thought it all ended when it was discovered that pictures leaked to newspapers were fake. I guess you have nothing else to talk about, well, go ahead, indulge yourselves.

Re. Surayud's personal fortune - a few wise investments in land holdings twenty years ago is all that was needed. I won't be surprised that our own family here will be millionaires in twenty years time, judging by the way things are growing, practically all by themselves.

Re. pre coup situation - Democrats promised to run, everything was going ok, except for one little thing - Thaksin's return. That would have been the end of peace, and PAD wouldn't have found itself isolated. Nothing but the coup could stop him. Actually even the coup can't seem to stop him.

All in all, it's undeniable that the country has been spared a major confrontation. Is it still coming? Well, if PPP hasn't so openly campaigned for Thaksin's return, the junta would have probably didn't pay it any attention. Populist policies, the so called ginnie out of the bottle, don't seem to bother the junta at all.

1.Yes in some instances Thaksinophobe, would be an appropriate moniker but there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

2.I am not so generous as you in ascribing pure patriotic motives to the coup makers.Every brutal seizure of power in any country is invariably ascribed to love of country - Hitler (don't tell me that H won power by democratic means:the truth is more complicated), Lenin,Mussolini etc.In this Thailand instance the record over the last year is actually rather poor in terms of corruption and mysterious inflation of budgets.The record on competence is of course dreadful, far worse than Thaksin's administration.

3.I am actually in agreement with you on Surayud's wealth, far less to be concerned about here than some of his opponents rant on about.He's not perfect but any reasonably clued up observer can recognise he's an honourable man.The only slight difference I would make to your comment is to suggest that the property wealth of most middle class/upper middle class families tends to be through inheriting rather than investing in land.In Surayud's case I have no idea.

4.It's a value judgement of course but I think you might be too quick to dismiss the possibility of clipping Thaksin's pre-coup wings through constitutional means.I've always felt that this aspect has been under discussed on this forum,by which I mean a serious give and take of views on the real alternatives to a military coup (as opposed to just taking up simplistic entrenched positions).

5.My visceral distaste for the PPP is probably as great as any Thaksinophobe but the trouble is that the junta cannot commit to democracy and block the PPP at the same time.It may be that it will in the event turn out that the whole rationale for the coup was incorrect, and Thaksinism in one form or another will prevail.It seems terribly hard for the Bangkok middle class, the junta, the PAD and other anti-Thaksin forces to understand that they have no right of veto in a democratic system.My hope is that Abhisit will do well enough in the forthcoming election to become a political force and detach the "decent" elements within the old TRT coalition.I know it's a long shot and in truth I'm gloomy about the future.

Edited November 6, 2007 by younghusband

[hammered]

Yes SJ you are correct, the topic is drifting, so before the anchor chain gets tight let me help enlighten a few who may have lost the ability (or never had) to not bring on fights.

The people who you reefer to as pro junta or your newly invented word that still has no definition, are people who don’t look to place a preestablished label on something that does not quite fit the definition.

What I have been seeing is a group of people stuck on the word ‘junta’ that does not exactly fit the situation, but it is the closest word they can find. However rather that trying to define this new situation, they chose to label the people who refused to accept that inaccurate definition.

To summerize what happened that does not fit the definition of junta is as follows:

The Thai people including military, private citizens, politicians and more conducted a prolonged action against a corrupt man who was step by step dismantling the checks and balances required to maintain a democracy and consolidating power that was never meant to be consolidated. The intent of the action was to return Thailand to the people. That ongoing action came to a peek September 19, 2006 when some of the Thai citizens made use of military equipment and manpower to force the man out. To date every indication Thailand has been moving towards the goal of restoring the country to a condition prior to the dismantling of democracy done my the corrupt man and including a few upgrades in laws to avoid the same thing happening again in the future.

I think the definition ‘revolution’ more closely fits because it was not just the military who wanted that man out who was causing so much damage. Only the lesser educated could not see what was going on and they placed their trust in the hands of that serial liar.

Persoanlly, although always a strong critic of Mr. Thaksin and not being too distraught at the coup, I find it still impossible to rule out his return even fairly soon and possibly even in a semi-triumphant way. I am not sure the current government have built a system that would rule this out. I am not sure they even tried. I am not sure they could even if they wanted to and I am not sure that would be the right thing to do anyway as to achieve that end could see the loss of so many good things just to remove one person. Anyway those are my doubts surveying the position we find Thailand in right now and trying to look at it from a fairly neutral perspective, which is not always easy consdiering my dislike for the previous leader of the country.

I am not sure about the poorly educated point either. I persoanlly know many well eductaed people who to this day want Mr. Taksin back and I know even more who totally supported him until the day he was out when tehy suddenly decided death was too good for him. On the other hand, I know poorly eductaed and even illiterate people who support him and can explain why. I also know a lesser number of poorly educated and illterate people who do not support and never have and equally I know as many if not more poorly educated and illiterate people who voted for him or against him depending on advice without ever having much concern. I think it is alot more complicated than it often gets presented in the admittedly poor Thai news media as all middle clas against Thaksin and all poor for Thaksin. A simple look at the April 2 no vote numbers shows that there were far more no votes than are middle class people in Thailand even analysing it by area exposes far more local no votes than local middle classes exist. Persoanlly I tend to think most Thai people could see what was going on whatever their socio-economic or educational background, but how they viewed it differed. Some supported it unquestioningly, some thought for the better good to ignore a few indescetions was the right approach, some were indifferent, some abhored it, some just wanted it to disappear and some just couldnt care less about any politics.

I wonder to what extent Thaksin was Thailand's Nixon. Nixon was doomed by a rotten public persona right from day one. Never in my recollection has there been a US president more hated- at home and abroad- George W comes across as a bit goofy- but not malevolent. (his sins are blamed on the neo-cons- Nixon's were blamed on... Nixon).

At the time, the PAD rallies struck me as being more of a hate fest- not unlike the way that crowds hiss the villain in Victorian melodramas. Complete with the perverse pleasure they take in that hatred.

I also can't help but think in terms of the psychological benefits to many that followed the PAD- they loved those rallies. Working for 8000 a month- obsequious to parents, bosses, cops, -anybody with power- and here was the chance to spit in the eye of the second most powerful person in the nation- and to be applauded for doing so by peers and press. Thaksin may have been the most hated man in Bangkok- and to poke a stick in his eye must have felt real good.

At the same time though, for many, I think the source of the hatred was also the sheer magnitude of his personal wealth- his arrogant public persona- his irritating voice- his ugly mug, his spoiled progeny- and the fact that they (the Thais)had not had the opportunity to learn from experience that majority governments are by nature prone to accusations of being dictatorial.

The people I knew who attended the rallies had only a vague understanding of the Shin sale and its significance- couldn't have cared less about the drug wars (in fact supported them) and didn't understand why Thaksin didn't just quit and go home. They wanted - they chose- to believe that every allegation made by Sonthi L and Chamong were true. It justified their visceral contempt for the man.

Nor did they seem to understand the nature of political parties (and the rigorous 'question at your peril' discipline that goes with that)- or the nature of the checks and balances that supposedly keep democracy on a relatively even keel. As if the checks and balances (especially the senate) works much more effectively in other countries- where the power of 'interest groups' and 'lobbys' make vote buying in Thailand look like small potatoes.

It seemed to me that while many claimed to desire a fully functioning democracy- what they really wanted was a clean and pretty government- with a loveable leader at the helm- who embodied the best traits of the nation- kind of like the kind you'ld find in a child's book about a magical land where the leaders are pure of heart and deed and the followers happy and faithful-

Increasingly- and this is born out now by the press's continuing use of the term 'old power clique'- Thaksin came, like Nixon, to embody all the cause of all of Thailand's failings..,. That somehow prior to Thaksin, Thailand had been that magical fairy land. And that with his 'awk bie'ing- it would return to that pristine realm.

For some, Thaksin's gravest sin was not corruption, not even his authoritarian command of the structures of the state (the polite term is a 'micromanager')- but rather that by not stepping down when he was only one person and there were thousands in the park demanding he do so- he was seen to be fragmenting the society. And that simple fact seemed to stir up even more hatred for him. The fact that there were millions up country who did not want him to step down was almost as abstract as the fact that there was a terrible insurrection happening in the South.

There seemed to be an attitude that a khon jai dee would simply quit the job he'd been elected to do- and walk away. This displayed a total misunderstanding of the way democracy is intended to work. There were no mass protests of court decisons- no demonstrations demanding televised hearings into the Shin sale -no petitions requesting a thorough auditing of the 'populist' projects- no public shaming of polititians who had bought votes- no marches protesting police corruption- or even government corruption- just that call- Thaksin awk bie. Go away. Quit.

And then- ok- you won't quit- somebody please come take care of us and boot his ass out.

So to bring this around and back to topic- why so many Thais would sell their votes- many Thais simply don't have much faith in democracy- the poor because past experience and perhaps especially this one, has to have taught them that their taking real proportional control of the government will never be allowed- or not in the forseeable future- and the middle class- because they have never really valued democracy much - they wanted above all, good governance, and if that means taking a rain check on democracy- no problem.

I like the Thaksin - Nixon thing.

I think your psychological point about rally goers covers at least some grouping within those who attend any rally whethetr iot be in Thailand or elsewhere, and to some degree makes it difficult for organisers anywhere to control those who do not share an identical political agenda or maybe have none except for wanting to be wanted. the same would also apply to the PTV rallies etc in Thailand and many world wide if we want to be fair. The PAD was an alliance of diverse groups (from trade unions, NGOs and pro-democracy groups to royalist groups and even ultra nationalist and semi-facist ones - amazing how the Thaksin side later put together a similar alliance. That both sides could include such a spread of left-right is a statement on how confused Thai politics are in termas of ideology, but that is a subject for another debate) who had little shared belief beyond opposition to Thaksin anyway so the lowest common denoniminator was always goign to hold them together. Likewise the DAAD/PTV rallies were the same bulit on a hatred of Prem/return of Mr. T. We could broaden it out to many other places in the world. Maybe that is just the nature of political rallies - that to suceed (and neither PAD or DAAD did) you need immense numbers over a long period of time and to do this you need all kinds of political compromise resulting in base lowest common denominator and as many lonelies and those who oppose all forms of authority and those who also actively seek excitement or even violence as possible. Mind you I wouldnt want to condemn the use of street demos as a tactic while watching the power grab and destruction of secular society going on in Pakistan right now, not to mention the days of demos against the corrupt Georgian leader. However, it may be that we need to recognise that all tactics are flawed and never perfect. We also shouldnt miss that the easiest way for rally organisers anywhere to draw in numbers and create the atmosphere of anger/outrage needed to fuel the demos is to find a hate figure and perpetually demonise them. This becomes a lot easier when the target is a politician who many believe has done wrong. I would guess we will see this world wide for aeons to come. Effigies of Bush and Olmert are burnt on almost daily basis. To date in Thailand neither side has managed to get to this level yet.

[hammered]

.The true juntophile is one who has an obsessive preoccupation with demonising Thaksin to the point where...

Thaksinophob is probably a better word as junta doesn't really come to play by this definition.

You still can't present any evidence that the generals took the power for themselves and after watching them for over a year I still can't find any divergence between their actions and promises they have given on the day of the coup. Their "self interest" is still aligned with that of a country.

We saw a peaceful transition of power and there's absolutely no chance of any violence or even political turmoil if they manage to prevent PPP from winning elections (a fair goal as it was the purpose of the coup).

>>>>

Re trains - those are last year news. I thought it all ended when it was discovered that pictures leaked to newspapers were fake. I guess you have nothing else to talk about, well, go ahead, indulge yourselves.

Re. Surayud's personal fortune - a few wise investments in land holdings twenty years ago is all that was needed. I won't be surprised that our own family here will be millionaires in twenty years time, judging by the way things are growing, practically all by themselves.

Re. pre coup situation - Democrats promised to run, everything was going ok, except for one little thing - Thaksin's return. That would have been the end of peace, and PAD wouldn't have found itself isolated. Nothing but the coup could stop him. Actually even the coup can't seem to stop him.

All in all, it's undeniable that the country has been spared a major confrontation. Is it still coming? Well, if PPP hasn't so openly campaigned for Thaksin's return, the junta would have probably didn't pay it any attention. Populist policies, the so called ginnie out of the bottle, don't seem to bother the junta at all.

1.Yes in some instances Thaksinophobe, would be an appropriate moniker but there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

2.I am not so generous as you in ascribing pure patriotic motives to the coup makers.Every brutal seizure of power in any country is invariably ascribed to love of country - Hitler (don't tell me that H won power by democratic means:the truth is more complicated), Lenin,Mussolini etc.In this Thailand instance the record over the last year is actually rather poor in terms of corruption and mysterious inflation of budgets.The record on competence is of course dreadful, far worse than Thaksin's administration.

3.I am actually in agreement with you on Surayud's wealth, far less to be concerned about here than some of his opponents rant on about.He's not perfect but any reasonably clued up observer can recognise he's an honourable man.The only slight difference I would make to your comment is to suggest that the property wealth of most middle class/upper middle class families tends to be through inheriting rather than investing in land.In Surayud's case I have no idea.

4.It's a value judgement of course but I think you might be too quick to dismiss the possibility of clipping Thaksin's pre-coup wings through constitutional means.I've always felt that this aspect has been under discussed on this forum,by which I mean a serious give and take of views on the real alternatives to a military coup (as opposed to just taking up simplistic entrenched positions).

5.My visceral distaste for the PPP is probably as great as any Thaksinophobe but the trouble is that the junta cannot commit to democracy and block the PPP at the same time.It may be that it will in the event turn out that the whole rationale for the coup was incorrect, and Thaksinism in one form or another will prevail.It seems terribly hard for the Bangkok middle class, the junta, the PAD and other anti-Thaksin forces to understand that they have no right of veto in a democratic system.My hope is that Abhisit will do well enough in the forthcoming election to become a political force and detach the "decent" elements within the old TRT coalition.I know it's a long shot and in truth I'm gloomy about the future.

I share your gloom, but agree a strong Abhisit supported by some ex-TRT elements is probably the best scenario for stability but the chances of this may not be a strong as they once were although it is difficult to speculateon how the vote will go right now. An outright PPP win may seem unlikely but if it occurred we could see anything from acceptance to another coup or reducing it through EC action (legitimate or otherwise). The other nightmare scenario may be the PPP almost with enough to govern then doing a deal with another party followed by allegations of huge party buying. Too many bad scenarios for my liking. I honestly dont think what we get will have much to do with democracy in all honesty and if the longetivity of someone were suddenly to end things would be even more uncertasin right now.

[Plus]

there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

Those must be true juntaphiles, right? Who are they, exactly?

Your continuing use of the term speaks more about YOUR obsession with junta than about anyone else's. Concerns about generals true motives were legitimate on the morning after the coup but now, just over a month before junta's dissolution, they sound mental. Give it a rest already, they haven't done anything they didn't promise to do, and this little quest for lost trains to prove that the junta is a real monster is beyond ridiculous.

The country has moved on, you better start thinking of a next label.

>>>>

PPP is presenting itself openly pro-Thaksin, which, if they get caught, is illegal. With election coming next month getting them through the court system is impractical however, so they are allowed to run at the moment, but no one in the junta thinks they "deserve a chance". Sonthi will try to stop PPP by other means, admittedly not so kosher.

>>>>

There's no land more mythical than image of Thailand where Thaksin won last year scheduled elections and everyone accepted it. All promises of stability hinged on one single condition - Thaksin was out. If he entered the race again, the public fury would have easily encompass that of 1992 when Suchinda mad a similar move.

>>>>

For all the scaremongering, the military got only one seat on Senate selection panel, same as everyone else.

[John K]

there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

Those must be true juntaphiles, right? Who are they, exactly?

Your continuing use of the term speaks more about YOUR obsession with junta than about anyone else's. Concerns about generals true motives were legitimate on the morning after the coup but now, just over a month before junta's dissolution, they sound mental. Give it a rest already, they haven't done anything they didn't promise to do, and this little quest for lost trains to prove that the junta is a real monster is beyond ridiculous.

The country has moved on, you better start thinking of a next label.

To add to that The USA has endorsed the direction Thailand is taking moving back to democracy, so I guess that make GWB and the rest of the gang juntaphiles too. If it were a true junta, Thailand would be looking more like Burm and not like it did the day before Thaksin took office for the first time.

The bottom line is you and a few others are trying to force feed a name that does not match the situation. Not everyone is a sheep.

[younghusband]

there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

Those must be true juntaphiles, right? Who are they, exactly?

Your continuing use of the term speaks more about YOUR obsession with junta than about anyone else's. Concerns about generals true motives were legitimate on the morning after the coup but now, just over a month before junta's dissolution, they sound mental. Give it a rest already, they haven't done anything they didn't promise to do, and this little quest for lost trains to prove that the junta is a real monster is beyond ridiculous.

The country has moved on, you better start thinking of a next label.

To add to that The USA has endorsed the direction Thailand is taking moving back to democracy, so I guess that make GWB and the rest of the gang juntaphiles too. If it were a true junta, Thailand would be looking more like Burm and not like it did the day before Thaksin took office for the first time.

The bottom line is you and a few others are trying to force feed a name that does not match the situation. Not everyone is a sheep.

The word juntaphile suits some very precisely however much they protest and wriggle.Those in Thai Visa involved in political discussion knows who they are.If one saw even a modest effort at balanced comment, which while consistent with a generally anti TRT thrust, would mean conceding the junta's acts of incompetence and yes corruption from time to time, the term would quickly be made redundant.Until that time for one or two it remains absolutely on target.

[younghusband]

there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

Those must be true juntaphiles, right? Who are they, exactly?

Your continuing use of the term speaks more about YOUR obsession with junta than about anyone else's. Concerns about generals true motives were legitimate on the morning after the coup but now, just over a month before junta's dissolution, they sound mental. Give it a rest already, they haven't done anything they didn't promise to do, and this little quest for lost trains to prove that the junta is a real monster is beyond ridiculous.

The country has moved on, you better start thinking of a next label.

>>>>

PPP is presenting itself openly pro-Thaksin, which, if they get caught, is illegal. With election coming next month getting them through the court system is impractical however, so they are allowed to run at the moment, but no one in the junta thinks they "deserve a chance". Sonthi will try to stop PPP by other means, admittedly not so kosher.

>>>>

There's no land more mythical than image of Thailand where Thaksin won last year scheduled elections and everyone accepted it. All promises of stability hinged on one single condition - Thaksin was out. If he entered the race again, the public fury would have easily encompass that of 1992 when Suchinda mad a similar move.

>>>>

For all the scaremongering, the military got only one seat on Senate selection panel, same as everyone else.

I have defined juntaphile several times, most recently in my last post.Any more questions on this rather minor point?

Very few would agree with your Pollyannish view of the junta's motives and performance.It has been a shockingly incompetent, self serving and shady show.I've already agreed that the charges against Surayud are of little substance.

You consistently fail to get the message that any attempt to ban Thaksin/TRT by a kangaroo court after an illegal coup has the moral authority of a soi dog.PPP may be an unsavoury bunch but neither Sondhi or his sidekicks has any right to ban them.Like it or not they represent a large body of Thai opinion.I agree he probably will give it a dam good go - because otherwise it will become evident that apart from being a criminal enterprise the coup was just a collossal and pointless distraction.

You may not like it but Thaksin had and retains the support of many millions of Thais.The junta and their backers don't have the right to banish him from Thai politics forever.You talk about "public fury" but you haven't seen the start of it.I agree it's latent but its direction I suspect would surprise people of your opinion.

[blaze]

there are others who are oddly excited by dominant men in uniform.

Those must be true juntaphiles, right? Who are they, exactly?

Your continuing use of the term speaks more about YOUR obsession with junta than about anyone else's. Concerns about generals true motives were legitimate on the morning after the coup but now, just over a month before junta's dissolution, they sound mental. Give it a rest already, they haven't done anything they didn't promise to do, and this little quest for lost trains to prove that the junta is a real monster is beyond ridiculous.

The country has moved on, you better start thinking of a next label.

To add to that The USA has endorsed the direction Thailand is taking moving back to democracy, so I guess that make GWB and the rest of the gang juntaphiles too. If it were a true junta, Thailand would be looking more like Burm and not like it did the day before Thaksin took office for the first time.

The bottom line is you and a few others are trying to force feed a name that does not match the situation. Not everyone is a sheep.

Not to belabor the point- but please check the dictionary definition of Junta. This is a junta. It may not have some of the charcteristics of a Burmese or Latin American (where the term originated) junta- but it's a junta.

Until today, for the last six months, the army has been rounding up young men in the south and placing them in concentration camps. They are given a choice of going to court- (though according to interviews, the authorities informed them that if they go to court they WILL be found guilty of being insurrectionsts- or of going to the camps. They have been banned from returning to their villages. This is a transgression of human rights codes- including international codes which Thailand has signed on to.

Perhaps one could say that one of the marks of true juntaphile is one who would try to justify or excuse these measures.

Edited November 6, 2007 by blaze

[Maestro]

I saw this today:

Come to think of it, in Thailand an electronic voting machine dispensing cash would save a lot of work for so-called campaigning.

--

Maestro

[parryhandy]

live in issan, wife asked me for her id card today (i keep it in my wallet).What do you neeed that for i asked? Papa go see man , get money for election next month!!Wifes family is huge, this place will never change........

[John K]

Without bringing the south in this, I seem to recall Thaksin started this with his iron fist policy. So perhaps what is going on is just a continuation of that but that being way off topic and is food for another thread.

On the other note (juntaphile) I was hoping this childish name calling would have come to an end by now as it goes after the poster and not the post. As I seem to recall that may qualify as a flame although well camouflaged as it attacks many posters at once.

[Mosha]

I saw this today:

Come to think of it, in Thailand an electronic voting machine dispensing cash would save a lot of work for so-called campaigning.

--

Maestro

I reckon that just about sums it up.

BTW wifey's constitution booklet is still in perfect condition. Never been opened, offers please.

[blaze]

Without bringing the south in this, I seem to recall Thaksin started this with his iron fist policy. So perhaps what is going on is just a continuation of that but that being way off topic and is food for another thread.

On the other note (juntaphile) I was hoping this childish name calling would have come to an end by now as it goes after the poster and not the post. As I seem to recall that may qualify as a flame although well camouflaged as it attacks many posters at once.

You asked for a defiinition of juntaphile- I have tried to provide as accurate a definition as I can. Complete with an example- if you don't fit the example, I'd say you are not a juntaphile.

I gather you also object to the term 'junta'- would you prefer that we referred to them as the 'democratically elected government of Thailand' ?

I have faith in democracy- call me a democrophile. Many would think that's naive- but I don't care- I'll wear the term with pride.

Others don't share that faith and some of them would put their faith in a military government- including one that takes power by force. (which is a junta)- particularly when looking at developing countries.

In the murky politics that are about to (it seems anyway) engulf this place, there will be many- not foreigners nescessarily- but Thais- who will look back at the relative stability of this year and proclaim that the best form of government is a junta. And I doubt they will be ashamed to be called 'juntaphiles'.

Edited November 6, 2007 by blaze

[younghusband]

Without bringing the south in this, I seem to recall Thaksin started this with his iron fist policy. So perhaps what is going on is just a continuation of that but that being way off topic and is food for another thread.

On the other note (juntaphile) I was hoping this childish name calling would have come to an end by now as it goes after the poster and not the post. As I seem to recall that may qualify as a flame although well camouflaged as it attacks many posters at once.

Clearly you are uncomfortable with juntaphiliac tendencies being identified and discussed.It's very far from name calling as you suggest although I see it would be convenient for you to dismiss it as a provocation.Give it a rest because it's not that significant.It's just a label designed to identify a set of characteristics in the same way one would label a socialist, a conservative,a libertarian or a communist.I would be impressed if instead of your squeals of inarticulate outrage, you actually addressed the issues raised and put some reasoned arguments forward.Specifically, why are the juntophiliacs so reluctant to concede the many mistakes (I am deliberately using unloaded language) made by the junta which seized power last year?

[John K]

What I am saying is give it a break, it does not match the reality of today. Your describing what may be going on in Burm and perhaps Pakistan (but that one is too soon to call just yet) . Nothing has even suggested from the word go in September last year that this was self serving only to the generals. That certainly meets one of the key reason a junta would conduct a coup. Everything that has happened made sense. All that has been going on has been the returning of Thailand to the people and get it back from Thaksin. The news clipping below from another thread may refresh a few memories. From thread http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=84332

Sep 20, 8:18 AM EDT

Thai king endorses coup leader as head of governing council

BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) -- Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulyadej on Wednesday endorsed a coup leader to head the new governing council, according to a televised announcement.

"In order to create peace in the country, the king appoints Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin as head of the council of administrative reform," according to the announcement on state-run television.

"All people should remain peaceful and civil servants should listen to order from Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin from now on."

The king's endorsement is widely seen as giving legitimacy to the new Council of Administrative Reform.

Sondhi led a takeover overnight without firing a shot, sending soldiers and tanks to guard major intersections and surround government buildings while the popularly elected Thaksin, accused of corruption and undermining democratic institutions, was abroad.

I would take care as to who the word juntaphile may apply to based on your parameters and let it rest.

There were lots of people early on waiting for the other shoe to drop and waiting for the junta to act like a junta and start to become self serving. THAT NEVER HAPPENED!!!

As I said I would not even attach that name junta. If you step way back and take a wide look, you may see that Sonthi is a true Thai patriot and did things that were necessary to rescue the kingdom. I seem to remember Someone had to drive until a new driver was found. Now they have a temp until the elections. The vote buying thing will be a big ussue.

Apart from what was going on in the south, Sonthi was working under Thaksin’s instruction before the coup. Now he has to clean up the mess Thaksin started so I can’t put any fault on his efforts. I can honestly say he is doing what he feels is right in a difficult situation with a bunch of animals.

[younghusband]

What I am saying is give it a break, it does not match the reality of today. Your describing what may be going on in Burm and perhaps Pakistan (but that one is too soon to call just yet) . Nothing has even suggested from the word go in September last year that this was self serving only to the generals. That certainly meets one of the key reason a junta would conduct a coup. Everything that has happened made sense. All that has been going on has been the returning of Thailand to the people and get it back from Thaksin. The news clipping below from another thread may refresh a few memories. From thread http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=84332

Sep 20, 8:18 AM EDT

Thai king endorses coup leader as head of governing council

BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) -- Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulyadej on Wednesday endorsed a coup leader to head the new governing council, according to a televised announcement.

"In order to create peace in the country, the king appoints Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin as head of the council of administrative reform," according to the announcement on state-run television.

"All people should remain peaceful and civil servants should listen to order from Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin from now on."

The king's endorsement is widely seen as giving legitimacy to the new Council of Administrative Reform.

Sondhi led a takeover overnight without firing a shot, sending soldiers and tanks to guard major intersections and surround government buildings while the popularly elected Thaksin, accused of corruption and undermining democratic institutions, was abroad.

I would take care as to who the word juntaphile may apply to based on your parameters and let it rest.

There were lots of people early on waiting for the other shoe to drop and waiting for the junta to act like a junta and start to become self serving. THAT NEVER HAPPENED!!!

As I said I would not even attach that name junta. If you step way back and take a wide look, you may see that Sonthi is a true Thai patriot and did things that were necessary to rescue the kingdom. I seem to remember Someone had to drive until a new driver was found. Now they have a temp until the elections. The vote buying thing will be a big ussue.

Apart from what was going on in the south, Sonthi was working under Thaksin’s instruction before the coup. Now he has to clean up the mess Thaksin started so I can’t put any fault on his efforts. I can honestly say he is doing what he feels is right in a difficult situation with a bunch of animals.

In your own words you have made the case for your juntaphilia more compellingly than I ever could.Since the coup all indicators have deteriorated - security, economic, corruption, governance,financial market, international reputation...the list goes on.In many countries your hero Sondhi would face criminal charges and a long period behind bars.And yet not even a small concession from you that things have gone wrong.

[John K]

What I am saying is give it a break, it does not match the reality of today. Your describing what may be going on in Burm and perhaps Pakistan (but that one is too soon to call just yet) . Nothing has even suggested from the word go in September last year that this was self serving only to the generals. That certainly meets one of the key reason a junta would conduct a coup. Everything that has happened made sense. All that has been going on has been the returning of Thailand to the people and get it back from Thaksin. The news clipping below from another thread may refresh a few memories. From thread http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=84332

Sep 20, 8:18 AM EDT

Thai king endorses coup leader as head of governing council

BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) -- Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulyadej on Wednesday endorsed a coup leader to head the new governing council, according to a televised announcement.

"In order to create peace in the country, the king appoints Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin as head of the council of administrative reform," according to the announcement on state-run television.

"All people should remain peaceful and civil servants should listen to order from Gen. Sondhi Boonyaratkalin from now on."

The king's endorsement is widely seen as giving legitimacy to the new Council of Administrative Reform.

Sondhi led a takeover overnight without firing a shot, sending soldiers and tanks to guard major intersections and surround government buildings while the popularly elected Thaksin, accused of corruption and undermining democratic institutions, was abroad.

I would take care as to who the word juntaphile may apply to based on your parameters and let it rest.

There were lots of people early on waiting for the other shoe to drop and waiting for the junta to act like a junta and start to become self serving. THAT NEVER HAPPENED!!!

As I said I would not even attach that name junta. If you step way back and take a wide look, you may see that Sonthi is a true Thai patriot and did things that were necessary to rescue the kingdom. I seem to remember Someone had to drive until a new driver was found. Now they have a temp until the elections. The vote buying thing will be a big ussue.

Apart from what was going on in the south, Sonthi was working under Thaksin’s instruction before the coup. Now he has to clean up the mess Thaksin started so I can’t put any fault on his efforts. I can honestly say he is doing what he feels is right in a difficult situation with a bunch of animals.

In your own words you have made the case for your juntaphilia more compellingly than I ever could.Since the coup all indicators have deteriorated - security, economic, corruption, governance,financial market, international reputation...the list goes on.In many countries your hero Sondhi would face criminal charges and a long period behind bars.And yet not even a small concession from you that things have gone wrong.

Many of the things you cite I predicted to happen before the coup when (future tense at that time) Thaksin finally goes. Meaning if he just dropped dead because of a heart attack while in office the out come would be the same because he pushed Thailand to a level it never seen before. You are welcome to go back and look at my posts from before the coup.

It is hard to assign blame to Sonthi when it comes to the lack of matched business skills and or the ability to think things out. Few Thais match Thaksin business skills and that includes the other Thais who are picking up the pieces trying to get Thailand back on the map. You apparently are placing all the blame on Sonthi when many of the decisions came from others.

Sonthi was very focused on anticipating and countering Thaksin’s moves and not so much in government decisions as you would have others believe. Many of the things Sonthi wanted were shot down such as a state of emergency around the first of June. You blame is misplaced younghusband.

[Plus]

Very few would agree with your Pollyannish view of the junta's motives and performance.It has been a shockingly incompetent, self serving and shady show.

They've managed to write a new constitution and organize election in a promised timeframe. They didn't govern the country and they've got nothing for themselves.

You consistently fail to get the message that any attempt to ban Thaksin/TRT by a kangaroo court after an illegal coup has the moral authority of a soi dog.

That court was comprised of the country's top judges and they gave compelling reasons behind their judgemen, there was nothing left to argue for the defence. I don't understand how you can continue throwing labels like 'kangaroo' around. You don't make any sense.

You may not like it but Thaksin had and retains the support of many millions of Thais.The junta and their backers don't have the right to banish him from Thai politics forever.

He was banned by the court after months and months of testimonies and not once the defendants complained of being treated unfairly. As for support of millions - we had this argument in the PAD days - popularity is not above the law. That is not a democracy, it's a jungle.

After Shin sale it was clear that Thaksin had a hand in running his company and so should have been put on trial and subsequently banned, but the courts refused to judge on that and people took to the streets and demanded his exit. In those days he was at least legally innocent.

Now he has been banned for election fraud, and you still say that the law doesn't matter if enough people love him.

This argument is a recycled trash. I hope I misunderstood you.

[hammered]

Any chance of ending the row where nobody will agree with each other and moving onto the substantive topics again. Now would be a good time as the election starts to move into full swing and with it no doubt a move to buying voters as the buying of prospective MPs comes to an end.