People's Alliance For Democracy To Renew Movement

[tuftymorgan]

Thai democracy. Fish out of water

[thaigene2]

If the issues at hand are specific it would be nice to hear this in the speeches given by the PAD.

But listening to a fair bit last night there was nothing of the sort.

Somehow journalists who reported for Bangkok Post and the Nation heard it.

It's impossible to talk on one single issue for hours, they are bound to cover lots of other things as well.

In the end, all their demands were about leaving the constitution alone. They didn't ask for a coup. They didn't ask Samak to resign. They didn't ask for parlament to resign, they didn't ask Democrats to take over.

If not for Constiitution amendment, they wouldn't have any reasons to rally at all, and they didn't, for more than two years.

The PAD are demanding the resignation of Samak and the impeachment of those supporting the amendment of the constitution.

If they really want to protest on this issue, they should stick to the subject and away from inflammatory speeches on nationalism and the like. I don't see anything constructive in their stance whatsoever.

If they really want to support democracy they should put their egos aside and consider a path of mediation and constructive participation.

They should also remember that the last constitution was written under the power of a military govt. which did not come to power through democratic means.

Until Thai politics gets rid of its "winners and losers " culture things will never improve.

The PAD are no better than the rest.

When it comes to disruption of the capital city and endangering the lives of the populace, they are considerably worse.

One of the best posts so far on this debacle.

They are trying to instigate a coup - the next step will be for "SOMEONE" to instigate violence. That's why this is being planned out so carefully in front of the Thai Army HQ and the UN Building. HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS.

Again - I don't like Samak or Thaksin. But only a mental midget can't see what's going on here - or is someone who simply chooses to look the other way. And yes, I agree, PPP are trying to push through a change to the constitution that will help Thaksin - now is that so different than pushing through a Consitutuion that shuts down individual rights and freedoms as was done under the Junta?? Who other than elitists and upper-class crony guanxi-family types would like to see (or benefit) from that?? Can't the Parliament (remember PPP has ONLY a MINORITY govt) reject this if it's a whitewash??? NO BRING ON THE ARMY, Right you nut-cases?

Or did I miss something in your blind rantings prior to cmsally's post??

Edited May 26, 2008 by thaigene2

[tuftymorgan]

Democracy is not worth a brass farthing if it is being installed by bayonets" Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

All truth passes through 3 stages.

First, it is ridiculed.

Second, it is violently opposed.

Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

Arthur Schopenhauer

Taoism: shit happens

Buddhism: if shit happens, it isn't really shi%

Islam: if shit happens, it is the will of Allah

Catholicism: if shit happens, you deserve it

Judaism: why does this shit always happen to us?

Atheism: I don't believe this shi%

[nomoretalksin]

...deleted...

Again - I don't like Samak or Thaksin. But only a mental midget can't see what's going on here - or is someone who simply chooses to look the other way. And yes, I agree, PPP are trying to push through a change to the constitution that will help Thaksin - now is that so different than pushing through a Consitutuion that shuts down individual rights and freedoms as was done under the Junta?? Who other than elitists and upper-class crony guanxi-family types would like to see (or benefit) from that?? Can't the Parliament (remember PPP has ONLY a MINORITY govt) reject this if it's a whitewash??? NO BRING ON THE ARMY, Right you nut-cases?

Or did I miss something in your blind rantings prior to cmsally's post??

Thaigene2

Your unpolite & racists language doesn't please me to further talk to you (you sound to me like some of those violent, unpatient, not very well informed, frustrated pro-Thaksin fans, even you don't like him as well)

Please think first before you post

thanks mate

[tuftymorgan]

All truth passes through 3 stages.

First, it is ridiculed.

Second, it is violently opposed.

Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

Arthur Schopenhauer

[tuftymorgan]

Just thought i'd make even more BORING BORING BORING, we all know what will happen it's inevitable, istn't it. It seems a lot of you have lived in Thailand a long time and still you compete and argue. You lot are more boring than this so called political battle. Pass me the Val%$m. I'm as mad as a bag of swamp frogs in monsoon season

[nomoretalksin]

double post -deleted-

Edited May 26, 2008 by nomoretalksin

[tuftymorgan]

nomoretalksin u r a star....................

Edited May 26, 2008 by tuftymorgan

[nomoretalksin]

PAD average get-togethers

Sympatico pic + smile

http://www.nationmultimedia.com (tks for the pic)

[h90]

PAD average get-togethers

Sympatico pic + smile

http://www.nationmultimedia.com (tks for the pic)

is that logo an official PAD logo? If I send to my staff (if they don't know already)

[tuftymorgan]

[nomoretalksin]

no it's not the official PAD logo. Do they have one? (like to play with graphics)

News from MCOT (government & military channel, right?):

http://enews.mcot.net/view.php?id=4447

PM: PAD rally no reason for invoking internal security law against protesters BANGKOK, May 26 (TNA) -- Holding a rally against the government is not a reason to invoke Thailand's internal security law, Prime Minister Samak Sundaravaj said Monday.

Explaining that the ongoing rally organised by the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to demand the government scrap its plan to rewrite the constitution is not against any law, Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej said Monday he would not invoke the internal security law to deal with the activists.

Mr. Samak, who also serves as defence minister, a capacity in which he might be called to act in this

instance, denied accusations made by retired Maj-Gen. Chamlong Srimuang, a PAD core leader, that the government plans to use the law to deal with the PAD leaders.

He said the government had never considered invoking the internal security law against the demonstrators rallying near the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) building on Rajadamnoen Avenue.

Police will deal with the demonstration, said Mr. Samak, adding that the ongoing rally would definitely affect the country's image.

Nonetheless he appealed to the protesters to understand his reason for calling for a referendum. The prime minister affirmed he had called for a referendum to determine if the majority of the public wants to retain the 2007 charter, written by military-appointed law and constitutional experts, or not.

The process would take only 45 days, he said. Why couldn't they (PAD members) wait? he asked rhetorically.

"I don't want the public to blame me as a dictator, therefore, the police will have to deal with this matter,"

Mr. Samak said.

He noted that at least three envoys had told him during the Thai foreign service meeting earlier Monday that the present political troubles in Thailand would deter foreigners from investing in Thailand.

Thailand's envoys are concerned with the country's political problems, he said, especially the ongoing demonstration of the PAD, said Mr. Samak. (TNA)-E111

Unquote

[nomoretalksin]

http://enews.mcot.net/view.php?id=4438

Quote

Few Bangkokians see need for urgent charter amendment BANGKOK, May 26 (TNA) – Only 4.5 per cent of the Thai capital's residents -- about one out of every 22 persons surveyed -- believe that amending Thailand's constitution is a matter of urgency, according to a survey.

The Ramkhamhaeng Poll was conducted to seek the opinions of people in Bangkok and its environs with a random sample of 2,003 persons on "Impact of News about Charter Amendment on Public Sentiment amidst Economic Crisis."

It showed slightly over two-thirds of the respondents -- 68.8 per cent -- thought an effort to rewrite the charter was made for the personal interest rather than the common one while 14.2 per cent viewed it was made for the common interest.

Nearly all respondents felt the government should be addressing the nation's economic challenges, and that focusing on constitutional change at a time of economic crfisis is not in the national interest, but rather serving the narrow interests of politicians. It found 92.6 per cent thought what the government should solve urgently at this moment is the economic situation while only 4.5 per cent said it should amend the constitution.

In addition, nearly two-thirds -- 65.1 per cent -- disagreed with Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej's move to set aside around Bt 2 billion to hold a referendum on the charter amendment.

Asked how they feel with the current political situation, a profound majority -- 77.3 per cent -- said they are frustrated, disappointed and feeling without hope about the current situation, and 20.7 per cent have no interest in what is going on.

Simultaneously, 46.3 per cent viewed the developing conflicts on the constitutional amendment question puts the Thai politics at increasing risk of experiencing violence.

Asked which member of the cabinet could cause (the most) political difficulty, nearly two-thirds or 60.5 per cent chose Prime Minister Samak himself, 27.4 per cent identified Prime Minister's Office Minister Jakrapob Penkair, as the major troublemaker, with 8.2 per cent seeing Interior Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung, and 3.9 per cent identifying Public Health Minister Chaiya Sasomsap as providing headaches for Thailand's political body. (TNA)-E005

Political News : Last Update : 10:39:20 26 May 2008 (GMT+7:00)

Unquote

[h90]

no it's not the official PAD logo. Do they have one? (like to play with graphics)

do you have a larger version of it? I like it!

[marshbags]

SIDELINES

Street violence may shorten samak government's term

By Sopon Onkgara

The Nation

Published on May 27, 2008

It was a night that could have seen a full-blown political riot that could have launched an urban war.

Groups of half-crazed paid goons, some of them intoxicated, attacked people who rallied to protest the government's move to amend the Constitution.

Where did this occur? Was it Darfur, Rwanda, or some other underdeveloped country in the Third World? No. The incident occurred in the capital of the Land of Smiles, where political conflict is running high with no immediate end in sight.

Thailand is a fairly civilised country, and the rule of law is supposed to be fairly reliable, with law-enforcement officers capable of distinguishing the good guys from the bad. It was not so this time. Hundreds of police officers, including anti-riot units, stood by, quite indifferent to the actions of paid hecklers and goons who abused and threw all sorts of objects at those taking part in an anti-government rally organised by the People's Alliance for Democracy.

The police on duty, together with their senior officers, did not make any attempt to enforce law and order for reasons best known to themselves.

They might have wanted to avoid being caught in the middle of the exchange of projectiles, which included rocks and bottles among other items, while the two sides also engaged in close combat using sticks and iron bars.

It was an utterly lawless situation that arose from the march for democracy, an exercise protected by the Constitution, which government MPs are determined to abolish to help their patrons and bosses get off the legal hook.

Some 20 people suffered injuries, both serious and minor, on Sunday night. Clashes flared up several times and at different locations without serious police intervention.

It was almost comical when, with the street battle raging with growing intensity, police fired a canister of tear gas at anti-government protesters, claiming that the paid attackers were outnumbered.

The officers' obvious neglect of duty in failing to prevent violence was inexplicable. Over a year ago, the police were attacked by a paid political mob themselves. They chose to play the role of benevolent patron this time.

Those taking part in the anti-government rally seemed last night like they would be bracing for another possible street battle. Both sides knew they had to be better prepared. The role of the police will be watched.

Samak and fellow Cabinet members might have felt relieved they were able to survive the political pressure for another day. They must have commended the police on duty for looking the other way when the goons attacked the protesters.

Thailand might have to relive the bloody October, 1976 period when government forces killed students at Thammasat University. At that time, Samak was also riding on a political high.

If political trouble blows up again, this time with Samak holding the top job, it would be the second time he has been witness to political conflict that threatens to split the country due to factional rivalries and power plays.

Samak and his Cabinet were supposed to maintain law and order, while respecting the Constitution, which gives people the right to peaceful assembly without weapons. They failed to live up to this, instead viewing street protesters as enemies trying to unseat them from their Cabinet posts.

Are they feeling assured that the protesters have no way of causing a serious threat to their position and they can thus unleash police to do whatever is possible to end the street protests, the sooner the better?

A quick arrest of the five leaders of the anti-government gathering was a tempting idea to prevent a prolonged rally, which could go on for days, if not weeks, if the number of protesters grows in line with the degree of discontent towards the Samak administration.

By this time, the government's overall failure in the performance of its duties amid serious political, economic and social problems should be enough to convince Samak and his teammembers they are no longer fit to rule. Staying longer will only escalate the situation into a crisis with the public's anger running high.

By ignoring their duty to protect the rights of the protesters, or even the simple duty of keeping law and order, and instead allowing the vicious attacks by paid thugs, the government has given further reason as to why it does not deserve another day in office.

The legacy of Samak's rule will be difficult for his successors to match. His term has marked the first time that Thais have had to queue up to buy rice, in a country which has been exporting the crop to feed the world.

What's more, the current Cabinet has the largest number of members with criminal cases pending against them, with Samak leading the list. Nobody seems to have a sense of shame. Oh yes, his team will eventually go. The question is how soon it will be - in days or weeks?

Unquote.

The parts i,ve highlighted in bold make this a very disturbing start of what is probably going to escalate into an uncontrollable bloodbath, unless the police address the situation and take out the paid attackers who are intent on violence and evil on behalf of ??????????

Guess who....... and yes they are those will gain and escape from justice, should a change of the constitution take place.

marshbags

[h90]

marshbags: Also to consider that there are a lot of "pseudo-paramilitary" groups in the south standby to "protect" the country. Beside that they are known for being "hot heart", there is Chamlong ready to fight.

Chalerm and Samak on the other side....

That looks like troubles are near.

[KireB]

SIDELINES

Street violence may shorten samak government's term

By Sopon Onkgara

The Nation

Published on May 27, 2008

Thailand is a fairly civilised country, and the rule of law is supposed to be fairly reliable, with law-enforcement officers capable of distinguishing the good guys from the bad. It was not so this time. Hundreds of police officers, including anti-riot units, stood by, quite indifferent to the actions of paid hecklers and goons who abused and threw all sorts of objects at those taking part in an anti-government rally organised by the People's Alliance for Democracy.

Not the first time this happens! I have the feeling that someone's aiming for another coup, in order to restore his power and wealth.

[hammered]

If the issues at hand are specific it would be nice to hear this in the speeches given by the PAD.

But listening to a fair bit last night there was nothing of the sort.

Somehow journalists who reported for Bangkok Post and the Nation heard it.

It's impossible to talk on one single issue for hours, they are bound to cover lots of other things as well.

In the end, all their demands were about leaving the constitution alone. They didn't ask for a coup. They didn't ask Samak to resign. They didn't ask for parlament to resign, they didn't ask Democrats to take over.

If not for Constiitution amendment, they wouldn't have any reasons to rally at all, and they didn't, for more than two years.

The PAD are demanding the resignation of Samak and the impeachment of those supporting the amendment of the constitution.

If they really want to protest on this issue, they should stick to the subject and away from inflammatory speeches on nationalism and the like. I don't see anything constructive in their stance whatsoever.

If they really want to support democracy they should put their egos aside and consider a path of mediation and constructive participation.

They should also remember that the last constitution was written under the power of a military govt. which did not come to power through democratic means.

Until Thai politics gets rid of its "winners and losers " culture things will never improve.

The PAD are no better than the rest.

When it comes to disruption of the capital city and endangering the lives of the populace, they are considerably worse.

One of the best posts so far on this debacle.

They are trying to instigate a coup - the next step will be for "SOMEONE" to instigate violence. That's why this is being planned out so carefully in front of the Thai Army HQ and the UN Building. HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS.

Again - I don't like Samak or Thaksin. But only a mental midget can't see what's going on here - or is someone who simply chooses to look the other way. And yes, I agree, PPP are trying to push through a change to the constitution that will help Thaksin - now is that so different than pushing through a Consitutuion that shuts down individual rights and freedoms as was done under the Junta?? Who other than elitists and upper-class crony guanxi-family types would like to see (or benefit) from that?? Can't the Parliament (remember PPP has ONLY a MINORITY govt) reject this if it's a whitewash??? NO BRING ON THE ARMY, Right you nut-cases?

Or did I miss something in your blind rantings prior to cmsally's post??

Interesting point. The passage of a constitution requires a majority vote by the combined lower and upper houses if I remember correctly. Considering the PPP controls about 230 MPs do they really have enough senators in their pocket to be sure and can they count on the Banharnistas and other politcos of opportunity?

Then again that all seem happy to crank up the rhetoric and play this out in the public domain as opposed to parliamentary one shows that all know there is an inevitable nasty clash coming and it is just a matter of who will pull it off and come out on top.

[Bryan in Isaan]

....

The parts i,ve highlighted in bold make this a very disturbing start of what is probably going to escalate into an uncontrollable bloodbath, unless the police address the situation and take out the paid attackers who are intent on violence and evil on behalf of ??????????

Guess who....... and yes they are those will gain and escape from justice, should a change of the constitution take place.

marshbags

Same sh#t, different day. Why is it that anyone who has ever supported Thaksin, Samak, or the TRT is always a drunken, violent PAID bum, according to the Bangkok newspapers?

[h90]

....

The parts i,ve highlighted in bold make this a very disturbing start of what is probably going to escalate into an uncontrollable bloodbath, unless the police address the situation and take out the paid attackers who are intent on violence and evil on behalf of ??????????

Guess who....... and yes they are those will gain and escape from justice, should a change of the constitution take place.

marshbags

Same sh#t, different day. Why is it that anyone who has ever supported Thaksin, Samak, or the TRT is always a drunken, violent PAID bum, according to the Bangkok newspapers?

Because they are...see the pictures.....who else would support such evil guys?

[h90]

Number of protesters drop to 300 at 7 am

The demonstration at the Makkhawan Bridge continued Tuesday morning with about 300 protesters remaining there at 7 am.

Policemen guarding the areas were replaced by the new shift at 8 am and the Dharma Army of Chamlong Srimuang served vegetarian breakfast to the protesters at 9 am.

The Nation

300 out of 15.000.000 Bangkok people

[cmsally]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

[Siripon]

Number of protesters drop to 300 at 7 am

The demonstration at the Makkhawan Bridge continued Tuesday morning with about 300 protesters remaining there at 7 am.

Policemen guarding the areas were replaced by the new shift at 8 am and the Dharma Army of Chamlong Srimuang served vegetarian breakfast to the protesters at 9 am.

The Nation

300 out of 15.000.000 Bangkok people

Nearly all the PAD people are working people so they appear in the evenings or weekends .It was amusing to see Suchart Nakbangsai walk out of the press conference last night. The thugs working for UDD sure have no patience when it comes to questions.

On another note, Jakrapob's speech about patronage had me laughing, there can be no greater advocate of the patronage system than Thaksin, just look at the Foreign minister, the House Speaker, Jakrapob for starters. Now I wonder why they got their posts.

[Meerkat]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

Yup, that's pretty-much how I see it as well. Perhaps with a system of better checks and balances though to safeguard against ministerial abuses of power.

Usually when pointing this out though, the coup apologists like to say that the 2006 constitution was voted in by the people. My take on that is that the main reason it did get in was because it was the quickest way of getting rid of the junta - indeed at the time some commentators were urging even those who were ideologically opposed the coup to vote for it for that very reason.

Edited May 27, 2008 by Meerkat

[h90]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

But these things are not the things which are discussed. The only thing they have a problem with is that they may get dissolved.

Strange that parties which are in doubt if they were legal elected can change the constitution. Actually the constitution should be harder against vote buying and not almost legalize it.

[h90]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

Yup, that's pretty-much how I see it as well. Perhaps with a system of better checks and balances though to safeguard against ministerial abuses of power.

Usually when pointing this out though, the coup apologists like to say that the 2006 constitution was voted in by the people. My take on that is that the main reason it did get in was because it was the quickest way of getting rid of the junta - indeed at the time some commentators were urging even those who were ideologically opposed the coup to vote for it for that very reason.

But you noticed that it wasn't the junta who made the new constitution? But what is right...whatever constitution most people have no idea what is inside (including myself)

[Siripon]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

The middle class welcomed the coup because Thaksin had rendered all the checks and balances impotent in the 1997 constitution. The writers hadn't forseen someone of Thaksin's wealth combined with ambition coming along. The politicians needed to have their powers clipped. And now they want that back, but reforms of the constitution should be for the benefit of the Thai people as a whole, not only for politicians or to let one man escape the courts.

[Plus]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

1997 Constitution was was indeed hailed as the most progressive when it was first adopted, ten years ago but by 2006 it failed hopelessly on several important points - not only checks and balances on runaway PM's power, but on people participation, too.

Still, it was scrapped to justify the coup, not becuase it wasn't working or it was too democratic. The new, 2007 (not 2006 as you said), constitution gives MORE power to the people and makes politicians MORE accountable that 1997 version could ever have.

It has some contentious points, too, but nothing really urgent. PPP wants to let MPs work for the government and not for legislative branch as they were elected to - MPs want their hands on the money.

Undeniably the main consitutional problem for PPP is losing court battles for electoral fraud. When you can't argue the case - argue the law. If they can't amend constitution in time, they'll be found guilty.

[h90]

Firstly the 1997 constitution was widely hailed as being the most progressive ever in terms of democratic reform.

Then why no protests when it was abrogated by the military?

I believe the 2006 constitution includes powers for the National Security Council, which would I guess be synonymous with the military.

Putting yourselves in the shoes of someone who truly stands for democracy, the most logical position would be to support the reinstitution of the 1997 version and the condemnation of the 2006 version.

Surely the 2006 constitution was a step backwards for Thailand regarding the passage towards democracy.

The middle class welcomed the coup because Thaksin had rendered all the checks and balances impotent in the 1997 constitution. The writers hadn't forseen someone of Thaksin's wealth combined with ambition coming along. The politicians needed to have their powers clipped. And now they want that back, but reforms of the constitution should be for the benefit of the Thai people as a whole, not only for politicians or to let one man escape the courts.

"Benefit politicians" are the wrong words, should be more "let criminals unpunished escape". And it is not a reform, it is simply cutting out the parts which are dangerous for them. Not only the middle class welcomed the coup, basically all of the southern people from poor to rich.

[Meerkat]

But you noticed that it wasn't the junta who made the new constitution?

They didn't? The junta appointed 2,000 people onto the National People's Assembly which then voted itself to pick 200 drafting candidates. The junta then picked 100 of those 200 to be Royally appointed to the Assembly, plus the Assembly head. Of those 100, 25 were chosen (by the Assembly itself) to form the drafting committee, along with another 10 hand-picked by the junta. I'm not sure quite how much more influence over the constitution the junta could have had!

It was for this reason of course that the constitution granted amnesty to the junta for committing treason/rebellion/whatever you'd like to call it. Ironically this "looking after your own" is exactly the same (and just as despicable IMO) as what the PPP are now trying to do. I believe the PAD were a tad quieter on that issue at the time though...