Exit Poll Results Show PPP Wins

[sriracha john]

Yongyuth: Show me the proof

Last-ditch bid to clear himself of vote buying

In a last-ditch attempt to clear himself of allegations of vote buying, PPP Yongyuth Tiyapairat yesterday lobbied the EC not to hand down a ruling unless he has examined the main evidence against him. Yongyuth said he had the right to examine the video compact disc which may be used as a major piece of evidence to back up the allegation he bribed local leaders in his home province of Chiang Rai to campaign for him and PPP candidates in the general election. The PPP Deputy Leader hoped to watch the VCD yesterday, but he could not view it as the VCD was with a Special Branch Police investigator in charge of the case. The VCD is said to record the trip of 10 local leaders who came from Chiang Rai to Bangkok to meet Yongyuth on Oct 28 to discuss vote buying. Yongyuth countered by producing a chart detailing a campaign to discredit him and how evidence was fabricated to frame him. Yongyuth said the mastermind of the scheme had forked out 35 million baht to financially support the investigation into the alleged poll fraud. If the vote-buying allegation against Yongyuth is substantiated and the PPP found to be behind it, the party could be dissolved, according to the EC. A source close to Yongyuth said local people would fight for Yongyuth if he was treated unfairly. The EC has not endorsed the election wins of Yongyuth and of two PPP constituency winners in Chiang Rai, Laong Tiyapairat and Ithidej Kaewluang. "If Yongyuth, his sister (Laong Tiyapairat), and Ithidej are red-carded, we'll have to do something to demand justice. We believe Yongyuth is innocent,'' the source said.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.net/News/10Jan2008_news001.php

[Lilawadee]

[ sorry, double post so I'm removing one. ]

Edited January 10, 2008 by Lilawadee

[John K]

This is getting to a very interesting week. So far I have been asked to help several people with the estates of deceased relatives or clients, I won two lotteries that I never entered, and now a practical demonstration of why cockroaches don’t like bright light. At this rate who knows what Friday night has to offer.

[Lilawadee]

I don't get it, maybe someone can offer some insight:

Why is it illegal to pay people campaigning for you? Doesn't that happen in any country in any nation? Typically a campaign organization works with many volunteers AND some paid researchers and lobbyists, the media, etc. Some of those entities campaigning on your behalf need to be paid.. What's the issue? Certainly the democratic fabric is not affected.

Overall I agree mostly with Prakanong, who seems to offer the most balanced view of the situation, without the irrational hate & tunnel vision shown by others here.

[John K]

I don't get it, maybe someone can offer some insight:

Why is it illegal to pay people campaigning for you? Doesn't that happen in any country in any nation? Typically a campaign organization works with many volunteers AND some paid researchers and lobbyists, the media, etc. Some of those entities campaigning on your behalf need to be paid.. What's the issue? Certainly the democratic fabric is not affected.

Overall I agree mostly with Prakanong, who seems to offer the most balanced view of the situation, without the irrational hate & tunnel vision shown by others here.

I can see your new here, and apparently you are unfamiliar with the characteristics of this group. If you have time go back and check out their history and you will see things in a different light I am sure.

By the way welcome to Thai Visa.

[Lilawadee]

Thank you!!

I'm new to Thaivisa, but travelling to Thailand for decades.. now finally looking to make it more permanent so spending more time researching & reading up on life, society and politics.

I'm most definitely interested in Thai history, and how things came about, and the way things may develop in the future. For individual posters I think I'll just digest what they have to say today, and not invest too much time wondering how they came to be this way.

Anyone any insight on the Yongyuth case by the way? He paid people to campaign for him, which is different from 'buying votes' I think? Don't political parties and campaign organizations the world over have paid staff & paid freelancers on the payroll?

[Prakanong]

I don't get it, maybe someone can offer some insight:

Why is it illegal to pay people campaigning for you? Doesn't that happen in any country in any nation? Typically a campaign organization works with many volunteers AND some paid researchers and lobbyists, the media, etc. Some of those entities campaigning on your behalf need to be paid.. What's the issue? Certainly the democratic fabric is not affected.

Overall I agree mostly with Prakanong, who seems to offer the most balanced view of the situation, without the irrational hate & tunnel vision shown by others here.

I can see your new here, and apparently you are unfamiliar with the characteristics of this group. If you have time go back and check out their history and you will see things in a different light I am sure.

By the way welcome to Thai Visa.

Pot kettle black

In the thread you pointed me to it was Colypat accusing you of being new and not knowing anything about Thai history, politics and culture where you were putting forward your single disciplinary analysis of a complicated subject commanding a multi-disciplinary approach

All of a sudden you are a Asia old hand now asking others to read some history - pray tell what you have studied since Colypat's assertion and your agreement you did not have the knowledge of history, culture or politics?

Edited January 10, 2008 by Prakanong

[Plus]

Those are not just people campaigning for him, they are local government officials in Thai system that traditionally hold mush sway over the villagers and cannot be involved in canvassing votes for any party, especially if they are paid to do so.

[John K]

Thank you!!

I'm new to Thaivisa, but travelling to Thailand for decades.. now finally looking to make it more permanent so spending more time researching & reading up on life, society and politics.

I'm most definitely interested in Thai history, and how things came about, and the way things may develop in the future. For individual posters I think I'll just digest what they have to say today, and not invest too much time wondering how they came to be this way.

Anyone any insight on the Yongyuth case by the way? He paid people to campaign for him, which is different from 'buying votes' I think? Don't political parties and campaign organizations the world over have paid staff & paid freelancers on the payroll?

With this group, what is said and what is done are two different things. They essentially are the TRT that was dissolved and banned from politics for 5 years last May. There is a court case and ruling next week to put the lid on that. In fact they will not announce the name of the judge until just a day or so before to keep this group from buying or make threats to that judge. So for starters that should show you how much they care about the rule of law and disrespect for the highest body of judges in Thailand.

That is typically how they operate and so based on repeated (bad) habit, you can see why posts that appear to be bias are as they are. They are creatures of habit, and it has been seen countless times, this is just another repeat performance I am afraid. Next you should hear them cry “It’s not Fair!” I suspect we shall see that in the next 24 hours or so as the EC decision is today. After that they will set about ignoring that decision and continue with what they were doing.

[hammered]

A democrat & PPP coalition is like trying to mix oil with water.

If at all plausable, Democrats will ask for conditions that the PPP cannot agree to. Namely, deliver taxin to face the courts without any political interference.

Soundman.

Your oil and water analogy is a good one. Several years ago Thaksin made it known that he wanted to enter politics. In conversation I mentioned to a senior Demo official that perhaps the Demos should consider him. The laughter was deafening. While times change they haven't changed that much. The PPP is Thaksin's party and the only way a PPP/Demo alliance could ever happen is if the so-called invisible hand got involved.

And with the polarisation worsening day by day and demonstrations already kicking off is that not indeed a possibility.

If a social critic and Snoh are talking about the idea things must be close to bad enough already.

Edited January 10, 2008 by hammered

[John K]

I don't get it, maybe someone can offer some insight:

Why is it illegal to pay people campaigning for you? Doesn't that happen in any country in any nation? Typically a campaign organization works with many volunteers AND some paid researchers and lobbyists, the media, etc. Some of those entities campaigning on your behalf need to be paid.. What's the issue? Certainly the democratic fabric is not affected.

Overall I agree mostly with Prakanong, who seems to offer the most balanced view of the situation, without the irrational hate & tunnel vision shown by others here.

I can see your new here, and apparently you are unfamiliar with the characteristics of this group. If you have time go back and check out their history and you will see things in a different light I am sure.

By the way welcome to Thai Visa.

Pot kettle black

In the thread you pointed me to it was Colypat accusing you of being new and not knowing anything about Thai history, politics and culture where you were putting forward your single disciplinary analysis of a complicated subject commanding a multi-disciplinary approach

All of a sudden you are a Asia old hand now asking others to read some history - pray tell what you have studied since Colypat's assertion and your agreement you did not have the knowledge of history, culture or politics?

No, you need to take the entire segment of the thread in context and not just one part as it will change the context. I also sent you there to avoid embarrassing you because I know not everyone would follow the link. It appears you did not read the part in that thread that I said it was a hobby, thus causing you embarrassment when you forced my hand. I also am wondering why you are citing that in this thread and not the same thread of the post. That can be a bit embarrassing too I guess.

[Lilawadee]

Those are not just people campaigning for him, they are local government officials in Thai system that traditionally hold mush sway over the villagers and cannot be involved in canvassing votes for any party, especially if they are paid to do so.

You mean they cannot by law? Or they cannot because you feel they cannot? I just googled it and it seems a Kamnan is an elected official, so presumably aligned with a political party or structure.

I'm hesitant to give examples outside of Thailand for fear we'll lose focus, but the concept of supporting an elected local politician to campaigning on behalf of for example a presidential candidate, then surely this local campaigner would have expenses for organizing political rallies right? So it seems plausible that the main campaign organization would transfer funds in such a case?

Of course Thai law may be different, but then I'd like to hear what the law says; this in addition to hearing personal opinions of course, I do value those as well but I'd like to see which is which. )

[quiksilva]

Maybe we supporters of democracy (well the attempt at 1 man 1 vote) in Thaiand have got it all wrong and our anaylysis is from a western liberal viewpoint.

Ian Buruma argued yesterday in the Straits Times that the Chinese model might offer alternatives for a developing country. Where a one party state uses a mixed model of state ownership and private enterprise to grow.

The people then enter into a Faustian social contract where in exchange for economic growth and increased wealth they give up certain rights and freedoms.

Seems to work in Singapore too - although foreign ownership is over 90% of the economy there are a lot of state owned strategic industries.

Vietnam is growing 10%++ per year and this is projected for the4 next decade.

It is said democracy is holding back India and its efforts at building the infrastructure.

Maybe this is what Thailand needs - a one party state that directs economic growth and wealth creation in exchange for a social contract limiting freedom.

Was Thaksin attempting this?

Which party in Thailand could deliver this - Democrats?

Its obvious the military and their technocrats can not - they have had a few goes at it now

This is the same theory that I have subscribed to for a long time now. That faustian contract analogy is very fitting though. Old square face certainly didn't seem to give two hoots about human rights, or the freedom of the press. Then consider that in the light of Singapore's stance on drug offenses and media control.

All this political mess really does tell me that Thailand simply is not ready for a democracy. But so what? The benefits of a democracy are highly overated when in "developed" democracies parties with a smaller slice of the pie continually manage to put their leaders on the seat of power.

Thaksin once said

Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress.

As much as I personally prefer the Democrats, I have serious doubts whether they could do that when the majority don't side with them. If the PPP somehow manage to squeeze into power you can bet that pig face and his buddies will almost certainly try to move the country in the same direction.

[John K]

One thing you will learn when you get to Thailand is western thinking does not match what is going on. The new constitution can be described as a significant shift west as compared to the old one. There are laws that set about punishing bad politicians that I have nicknamed “teeth.’ It is those teeth that are the basis of the majority of this thread in that the bad politicians are feeling the bite of those teeth now.

This is way too complex to explain and I suggest you start with threads that are about 1 year old to see the picture.

[hammered]

Another day. Another bunch of developments. The case against Yuth looks bad judging by his reactions. Guess the red card is inevitable and probably with enough proof. He should be allowed to see the evidence against him of course although I understand this could identify the witness, which could be very dangerous for the person to say the least.

If the Yuth case result in a disolution hearing for PPP, there should be a similar one for the bastard love child of Prachai and Somsak as one of their executives was also done for electoral dodginess. Persoanlly I am not into any more disolutions but if the process must be gone through it must be fair and transparent, and I would still like to know if a major party is disolved will 230ish by-elections be held with no new parties allowed or will a new election be held with new parties?

Personally I have never been a fan of Thaksin but there has just been an election in which PPP got the most seats under the constitutional system by a long way. Sure they indulged in vote buying and MP buying etc but on the other hand the military and bureacracy also tried to influence the outcome. Now surely is time to say except in cases where there is obvious evidence lets move on and allow the PPP to try and put together the government. If by the way, there is a video of Yuths people vote buying he should be red carded even if it means unruly demos after all the 2 Chart Thai cheats got done on video evidence and things should be fair. Even if 10 or 20 of the PPP guys go down they will still be the biggest party and that is without them picking up seats in Chart Thai cheat zones.

Lets also hope we dont end up with Banharn being inflicted on the country in some machiavellian deal. Personally I still hope for a last minute PPP-Dem arrangement. It really is wrong to try and force PPP out unless there is a huge amount of irrefutable eveidence against them. To date there doesnt seem to be more than a handful of people caught cheating who will probably be dealt with. To force them out without the huge body of irrefutable evidence will only worsen the divisions and right now we must be getting close to violent incidents. To force them out without a huge body of irrefutable evidence will also have ramifications in the international community both in investment and politcs especially if instability ensues.

[Prakanong]

I don't get it, maybe someone can offer some insight:

Why is it illegal to pay people campaigning for you? Doesn't that happen in any country in any nation? Typically a campaign organization works with many volunteers AND some paid researchers and lobbyists, the media, etc. Some of those entities campaigning on your behalf need to be paid.. What's the issue? Certainly the democratic fabric is not affected.

Overall I agree mostly with Prakanong, who seems to offer the most balanced view of the situation, without the irrational hate & tunnel vision shown by others here.

I can see your new here, and apparently you are unfamiliar with the characteristics of this group. If you have time go back and check out their history and you will see things in a different light I am sure.

By the way welcome to Thai Visa.

Pot kettle black

In the thread you pointed me to it was Colypat accusing you of being new and not knowing anything about Thai history, politics and culture where you were putting forward your single disciplinary analysis of a complicated subject commanding a multi-disciplinary approach

All of a sudden you are a Asia old hand now asking others to read some history - pray tell what you have studied since Colypat's assertion and your agreement you did not have the knowledge of history, culture or politics?

No, you need to take the entire segment of the thread in context and not just one part as it will change the context. I also sent you there to avoid embarrassing you because I know not everyone would follow the link. It appears you did not read the part in that thread that I said it was a hobby, thus causing you embarrassment when you forced my hand. I also am wondering why you are citing that in this thread and not the same thread of the post. That can be a bit embarrassing too I guess.

I can assure you 100% I am not embarrassed to say the least!

Now I do not know how you feel but I would be a tad embarrassed if I were you asking others to look at history or even pointing it they were newbies but that is just me.

I would also be embarrassed to call a personal anecdote a "Paper" and not cite a peer reviewed and respected learned medical publication where it appeared like colleagues do but then I know my colleagues are suitably qualified professionmals highly respected in their field.

Anyway - on you go and keep up the hobby its illuminating.

[Abrak]

Another day. Another bunch of developments. The case against Yuth looks bad judging by his reactions. Guess the red card is inevitable and probably with enough proof. He should be allowed to see the evidence against him of course although I understand this could identify the witness, which could be very dangerous for the person to say the least.

If the Yuth case result in a disolution hearing for PPP, there should be a similar one for the bastard love child of Prachai and Somsak as one of their executives was also done for electoral dodginess. Persoanlly I am not into any more disolutions but if the process must be gone through it must be fair and transparent, and I would still like to know if a major party is disolved will 230ish by-elections be held with no new parties allowed or will a new election be held with new parties?

Personally I have never been a fan of Thaksin but there has just been an election in which PPP got the most seats under the constitutional system by a long way. Sure they indulged in vote buying and MP buying etc but on the other hand the military and bureacracy also tried to influence the outcome. Now surely is time to say except in cases where there is obvious evidence lets move on and allow the PPP to try and put together the government. If by the way, there is a video of Yuths people vote buying he should be red carded even if it means unruly demos after all the 2 Chart Thai cheats got done on video evidence and things should be fair. Even if 10 or 20 of the PPP guys go down they will still be the biggest party and that is without them picking up seats in Chart Thai cheat zones.

Lets also hope we dont end up with Banharn being inflicted on the country in some machiavellian deal. Personally I still hope for a last minute PPP-Dem arrangement. It really is wrong to try and force PPP out unless there is a huge amount of irrefutable eveidence against them. To date there doesnt seem to be more than a handful of people caught cheating who will probably be dealt with. To force them out without the huge body of irrefutable evidence will only worsen the divisions and right now we must be getting close to violent incidents. To force them out without a huge body of irrefutable evidence will also have ramifications in the international community both in investment and politcs especially if instability ensues.

Excellent post - on the general gist I couldnt agree more.

I tend to disagree though about Banharn. I do see Banharn as possibly a compromise candidate to lead a national coalition of all the major parties (Democrats included). I realise he is an unsavoury character but no more so than Samak imho.

I think we can all agree that a government of any sort would be better than the current political impasse.

And just to reiterate what does happen in the event that PPP is banned?

[Prakanong]

Maybe we supporters of democracy (well the attempt at 1 man 1 vote) in Thaiand have got it all wrong and our anaylysis is from a western liberal viewpoint.

Ian Buruma argued yesterday in the Straits Times that the Chinese model might offer alternatives for a developing country. Where a one party state uses a mixed model of state ownership and private enterprise to grow.

The people then enter into a Faustian social contract where in exchange for economic growth and increased wealth they give up certain rights and freedoms.

Seems to work in Singapore too - although foreign ownership is over 90% of the economy there are a lot of state owned strategic industries.

Vietnam is growing 10%++ per year and this is projected for the4 next decade.

It is said democracy is holding back India and its efforts at building the infrastructure.

Maybe this is what Thailand needs - a one party state that directs economic growth and wealth creation in exchange for a social contract limiting freedom.

Was Thaksin attempting this?

Which party in Thailand could deliver this - Democrats?

Its obvious the military and their technocrats can not - they have had a few goes at it now

This is the same theory that I have subscribed to for a long time now. That faustian contract analogy is very fitting though. Old square face certainly didn't seem to give two hoots about human rights, or the freedom of the press. Then consider that in the light of Singapore's stance on drug offenses and media control.

All this political mess really does tell me that Thailand simply is not ready for a democracy. But so what? The benefits of a democracy are highly overated when in "developed" democracies parties with a smaller slice of the pie continually manage to put their leaders on the seat of power.

Thaksin once said

Democracy is a good and beautiful thing, but it's not the ultimate goal as far as administering the country is concerned," he said. "Democracy is just a tool, not our goal. The goal is to give people a good lifestyle, happiness and national progress.

As much as I personally prefer the Democrats, I have serious doubts whether they could do that when the majority don't side with them. If the PPP somehow manage to squeeze into power you can bet that pig face and his buddies will almost certainly try to move the country in the same direction.

It is an interesting notion and one that those of us taught in the western liberal economic tradition may find hard to get our heads around.

The "Asian Values debate was generally seen to be won by Amartya Sen over MM Harry Lee but then we have the economic development of China and maybe even Vietnam as models evidencing a new growth model.

Maybe Thaksins constituency in the north and north east were voting tionally for their self interest and entering into this Faustian contract?

TRT might have been the only party with a width and depth to begin to do this - I doubt we will see another one anytime soon.

This period of Thai history might have to be seen in a different lense over a longer period sometime in the future to gain any real perspective though - many of the discussions here are nitpicking over the operational rather than the long erm strategic.

<snip>

Edited January 10, 2008 by Totster

[slimdog]

One thing you will learn when you get to Thailand is western thinking does not match what is going on. The new constitution can be described as a significant shift west as compared to the old one. There are laws that set about punishing bad politicians that I have nicknamed “teeth.’ It is those teeth that are the basis of the majority of this thread in that the bad politicians are feeling the bite of those teeth now.

This is way too complex to explain and I suggest you start with threads that are about 1 year old to see the picture.

So John K, can you please explain to an ill-informed poster (Me), why the New Constitution reverted back to the 1991 method of holding an election even though it was judged in the 1996 national consensus to be the main reason for the prevalance of vote buying

[slimdog]

Those are not just people campaigning for him, they are local government officials in Thai system that traditionally hold mush sway over the villagers and cannot be involved in canvassing votes for any party, especially if they are paid to do so.

You mean they cannot by law? Or they cannot because you feel they cannot? I just googled it and it seems a Kamnan is an elected official, so presumably aligned with a political party or structure.

I'm hesitant to give examples outside of Thailand for fear we'll lose focus, but the concept of supporting an elected local politician to campaigning on behalf of for example a presidential candidate, then surely this local campaigner would have expenses for organizing political rallies right? So it seems plausible that the main campaign organization would transfer funds in such a case?

Of course Thai law may be different, but then I'd like to hear what the law says; this in addition to hearing personal opinions of course, I do value those as well but I'd like to see which is which. )

Hi Lilawadee

What Plus means is that they cannot by law..

In Particular the Organic Act on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives and Iinstallation of Senators B.E. 2550

What has changed, is a recently passed law regarding Kamnan's and Poo Yai baan, who whilst still elected, are now elected until the age of 60, subject to periodic assessments. What this means is that since the enactment in October 2007, they are now re-classified as Permanent employee's of the Interior Ministry, or State Officials, and as such are barred from showing any bias towards any Political Party.

[hammered]

Those are not just people campaigning for him, they are local government officials in Thai system that traditionally hold mush sway over the villagers and cannot be involved in canvassing votes for any party, especially if they are paid to do so.

You mean they cannot by law? Or they cannot because you feel they cannot? I just googled it and it seems a Kamnan is an elected official, so presumably aligned with a political party or structure.

I'm hesitant to give examples outside of Thailand for fear we'll lose focus, but the concept of supporting an elected local politician to campaigning on behalf of for example a presidential candidate, then surely this local campaigner would have expenses for organizing political rallies right? So it seems plausible that the main campaign organization would transfer funds in such a case?

Of course Thai law may be different, but then I'd like to hear what the law says; this in addition to hearing personal opinions of course, I do value those as well but I'd like to see which is which. )

Hi Lilawadee

What Plus means is that they cannot by law..

In Particular the Organic Act on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives and Iinstallation of Senators B.E. 2550

What has changed, is a recently passed law regarding Kamnan's and Poo Yai baan, who whilst still elected, are now elected until the age of 60, subject to periodic assessments. What this means is that since the enactment in October 2007, they are now re-classified as Permanent employee's of the Interior Ministry, or State Officials, and as such are barred from showing any bias towards any Political Party.

No bias of course except in favour of whoever controls the ministry of interior

[Plus]

Maybe this is what Thailand needs - a one party state that directs economic growth and wealth creation in exchange for a social contract limiting freedom.

...

Its obvious the military and their technocrats can not - they have had a few goes at it now

Thailand had this system for many years, it just they also let politicial parties to play musical chairs and pretend that they somehow matter. Until Thaksin came in politicians didn't even try to meddle with policies set by technocrats.

That worked well for many many years, years when Thailand saw unprecented growth.

Thaksin represented big businesses that wanted to influence bureaucrat policymaking instead. For that they needed to be in the government, and for that they needed votes, and for that they needed to give something to the voters, for that they needed the "social contract".

It worked well for a while, until the rest of the population realised they were taken for a ride. Thaksin wasn't prepared to meet their demands, demands that he promised to address initially.

In the beginning his current opponents were very enthusiastic about his "think new act new" approach and his "I don't need the receits to punish corrupt ministers" promise. It didn't happen, on the contrary Thakins magnified all the faults his opponents wanted to be corrected. In the end he is seen as a self-serving prick They can't trust him with the country anymore.

People who had their demands met have a different view, of course.

[younghusband]

One thing you will learn when you get to Thailand is western thinking does not match what is going on. The new constitution can be described as a significant shift west as compared to the old one. There are laws that set about punishing bad politicians that I have nicknamed “teeth.’ It is those teeth that are the basis of the majority of this thread in that the bad politicians are feeling the bite of those teeth now.

This is way too complex to explain and I suggest you start with threads that are about 1 year old to see the picture.

So John K, can you please explain to an ill-informed poster (Me), why the New Constitution reverted back to the 1991 method of holding an election even though it was judged in the 1996 national consensus to be the main reason for the prevalance of vote buying

This might be the moment to remind so called newcomers (I don't mean to be patronising for there is nothing more nauseating than self proclaimed "old hands" lecturing those, often with a greater level of genuine intellectual curiosity) that there is no substitute for research through reading on Thai society and politics, supplemented by discussion with knowledgeable people, whether Thais or foreigners.In terms of the period to be researched, obviously as far back as possible.However realistically I would suggest begginning with the 1932 revolution which overthrew the absolute monarchy, or if pressed for time with the events of 1973.This is not just for knowledge for its own sake, though that is certainly a good thing, but because current days events are almost incomprehensible without informed historical context.This is not a phenonomen restricted to Thailand, but would apply equally to any complex society.However even backed by context and knowledge, there is still the need for hard thinking and reflection.

Though political discussion on Thai Visa can be frustrating, it has its strengths as well.It gives an opportunity to test out thoughts and ideas in a way that other sites, perhaps more sophisticated in terms of intellectual rigour and with less restrictive ground rules, do not.What is absurd however to think that Thai Visa can even begin to supply a rounded understanding of current political events.At the same time it's an entertaining and useful element in comprehension, and if I may say so moderated with a sensible and light hand.

So back to the poster's tongue in cheek query, I suspect you already know the answer to the question posed.

[John K]

A very interesting thing I learned today, but apparently the 52 storey building that burned yesterday is owned by non other than Pojaman Shinawatra and the fire was nothing more than a good old fashion Thai style message to her. I need someone to verify this but I do trust my source.

[hammered]

according to Nation - it looks like Samak will back off from PM-ship

and that Banharn will become PM instead !

Pojaman tests the water for Thaksin

Published on January 9, 2008

Her first order of business, according to one political observer, is to discourage Samak Sundaravej, the leader of the People Power Party, from taking over as prime minister because a Samak premiership would further deepen political divisions.

Ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra has already talked it over with Chart Thai leader Banharn Silapa-archa over the phone. It appears there is a possibility of People Power agreeing to take a step backwards to let Banharn assume the premiership in order to cool the political temperature.....

Between 2001 and 2006, while Thaksin was holding power, Pojaman played a key behind-the-scenes role in all major political decisions of her husband. She had the final screening of the Cabinet list and most other major appointments.

"The negotiations between the People Power Party and other political allies has been completed. Pojaman will play a major role in deciding the Cabinet line-up," one political source said....

A high-ranking source from the Democrats said Pojaman's return had been well planned.

She has come back in order to boost the confidence of People Power members and those still hesitant over whether to join the government so that everybody gets the message that there is nothing to stop People Power from forming the government, said the source....

Now, if Thaksin is bashed all around as corrupt - then get ready for Banharn !

While having very little time for Samak it does have to be said that he stood at the helm of the PPP and is the official leader of the PPP which is the largest party after the election by a long way as such he should be nominated as PM.

Your final comment on Banharn is true. Good God Thailand will have the leader of the ultimate whore party as its next PM. Things certainly dont get any better. With at leats one of the PPP supporting blogs previously attacking Banharn as the PPP PM having since changed its tune, it may just be that this deal made in hel_l will happen. The only thing that may stop it is if the PPP dont trust giving the power to disolve parlaiment to an outsider. Surely Surapong would be a better choice for a PPP PM than the previously failed ex-PM Banharn if they really cant stomch giving to their own leader!

[John K]

One thing you will learn when you get to Thailand is western thinking does not match what is going on. The new constitution can be described as a significant shift west as compared to the old one. There are laws that set about punishing bad politicians that I have nicknamed “teeth.’ It is those teeth that are the basis of the majority of this thread in that the bad politicians are feeling the bite of those teeth now.

This is way too complex to explain and I suggest you start with threads that are about 1 year old to see the picture.

So John K, can you please explain to an ill-informed poster (Me), why the New Constitution reverted back to the 1991 method of holding an election even though it was judged in the 1996 national consensus to be the main reason for the prevalance of vote buying

That was not the context I was trying to relay, the teeth are what I was talking about with significant penalties for bad boy politicians.

[slimdog]

A very interesting thing I learned today, but apparently the 52 storey building that burned yesterday is owned by non other than Pojaman Shinawatra and the fire was nothing more than a good old fashion Thai style message to her. I need someone to verify this but I do trust my source.

Minor damage at Cyber World

A fire yesterday morning at Cyber World Tower on Ratchadaphisek Road is expected to slightly delay its opening but physical damage was marginal, according to the owners.

The damage and cause are currently being investigated by the Office of Police Forensic Science and civil engineers from the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), said an executive with T.C.C. Land Development Co, a subsidiary of T.C.C. Land controlled by tycoon Chadhroen Sirivadhanabhakdi.

source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/Business/10Jan2008_bus18.php

[younghusband]

A very interesting thing I learned today, but apparently the 52 storey building that burned yesterday is owned by non other than Pojaman Shinawatra and the fire was nothing more than a good old fashion Thai style message to her. I need someone to verify this but I do trust my source.

I wonder whether your trusted source is resposible for the bulk of your information.It would seem possible given your record.

The claim is of course complete nonsense.Cyber Tower Building is owned by TCC Land which is controlled by Charoen Sirivadhanbhakdi.I don't understand incidentally your reference to arson on approving terms as "a good old fashion Thai style mesage".There is no such tradition here.There is a tradition here of buildings mysteriously going up in flames at the end of the financial year when a useful inflow of insurance proceeds might be needed.But given Charoen is the owner (and perhaps of the relevant insurance company as well) that explanation doesn't seem likely.

[John K]

A very interesting thing I learned today, but apparently the 52 storey building that burned yesterday is owned by non other than Pojaman Shinawatra and the fire was nothing more than a good old fashion Thai style message to her. I need someone to verify this but I do trust my source.

Minor damage at Cyber World

A fire yesterday morning at Cyber World Tower on Ratchadaphisek Road is expected to slightly delay its opening but physical damage was marginal, according to the owners.

The damage and cause are currently being investigated by the Office of Police Forensic Science and civil engineers from the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), said an executive with T.C.C. Land Development Co, a subsidiary of T.C.C. Land controlled by tycoon Chadhroen Sirivadhanabhakdi.

source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/Business/10Jan2008_bus18.php

My contact interfaces with the Hiso Thais on a daily basis. He also associates with some people who had a death in the family last week. He hears a lot of things that never hit the papers. I am only saying what he told me this morning. Your post says controlled by and not owned, so is he just the property manager?

Edited January 10, 2008 by John K

[hammered]

A very interesting thing I learned today, but apparently the 52 storey building that burned yesterday is owned by non other than Pojaman Shinawatra and the fire was nothing more than a good old fashion Thai style message to her. I need someone to verify this but I do trust my source.

Minor damage at Cyber World

A fire yesterday morning at Cyber World Tower on Ratchadaphisek Road is expected to slightly delay its opening but physical damage was marginal, according to the owners.

The damage and cause are currently being investigated by the Office of Police Forensic Science and civil engineers from the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), said an executive with T.C.C. Land Development Co, a subsidiary of T.C.C. Land controlled by tycoon Chadhroen Sirivadhanabhakdi.

source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/Business/10Jan2008_bus18.php

My contact interfaces with the Hiso Thais on a daily basis. He also associates with some people who had a death in the family last week. He hears a lot of things that never hit the papers. I am only saying what he told me this morning. Your post says controlled by and not owned, so is he just the property manager?

John ask your contact about Chadhroen Sirivadhanabhakdi (sp). I persoanlly doubt he would be working as a mere property manager.