Abhisit Vejjajiva Elected New Prime Minister Of Thailand

[Old Man River]

Dated tomorrow, but available today, Crispin's update on the situation is below:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KE07Ae02.html

[ThNiner]

Dated tomorrow, but available today, Crispin's update on the situation is below:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KE07Ae02.html

Wow, a pretty insightful article.... Wonder how accurate it is. Anyway, things seem so convoluted now (from what I could gather from the article.)

[Thai at Heart]

Dated tomorrow, but available today, Crispin's update on the situation is below:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KE07Ae02.html

Wow, a pretty insightful article.... Wonder how accurate it is. Anyway, things seem so convoluted now (from what I could gather from the article.)

Owned by whom???

http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/aboutus.html

This is nothing more than one mans private musings about the situation

Edited May 6, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[LawnGnome]

nobody is taking him seriously, he is achieving nothing, and knives are being sharpened. He won't last.

Well, it looks like Abihisit and dbreen share more things in common then I was at first willing to admit.

[animatic]

a ) Be in Abhisit's good graces and take a smaller, but steadier, piece of the power and money pie.

b ) Or try to say SOMETHING that might weaken him enough to fall.

There are so few 'clean politicians', that SOMEONE is needed to partner up.

A good sized block held in check by a power broker is more stable than

the PTP with this SAME BLOCK run by utter dregs of a corrupt conspiracy movement.

Which is what it is reduced to.

I would rather seen Newin in a coalition helping the country while profiting

than Newin in a coalition this is naught but raping the country and nothing else.

Oh that's just hilarious! Just what I needed to brighten me up! Now you are saying that even though Abhisit did a deal to use the 22 MPs belonging to 'Newin The Banned' to get his job, it was excusable, simply because he's Abhisit and has a nice haircut. But, corruption is terrible when the other side does it.

Abhisit is as dirty as the rest of them. He colluded with Newin, a notorious Godfather and ex TRT/PPP member, who was banned from politics, to get his job! Abhisit almost kissed Newin and gave him flowers, while grovelling for his support! If there ever was as clear cut a case of doing a deal with the devil, then this is it. To put the icing on the cake, after doing a deal with this gangster, Abhisit then tells us that the reason the reds were ousted was corruption

You don't think that a man like Newin is profiting now? In your own words you admit that being in Abhisit's good graces means getting a share of the power and money pie! Any parallels with Thaksin here? Is there a difference? Anyway, AAbhisit is paying the price for his hypocrisy - nobody is taking him seriously, he is achieving nothing, and knives are being sharpened. He won't last.

Real politic in Thailand is a dirty business,

it can't get cleaned up if the cleaner types aren't in there doing something by degrees.

There is idealistic utopia, and actual getting the business done via stability,

and right now Thailand needs stability more than utioan honesty,

that NO ONE believes will happen in the near term, no matter WHO is in office.

Reality check Thailand politics is Thailand politics it only gets better in baby steps.

.

[dbrenn]

a ) Be in Abhisit's good graces and take a smaller, but steadier, piece of the power and money pie.

b ) Or try to say SOMETHING that might weaken him enough to fall.

There are so few 'clean politicians', that SOMEONE is needed to partner up.

A good sized block held in check by a power broker is more stable than

the PTP with this SAME BLOCK run by utter dregs of a corrupt conspiracy movement.

Which is what it is reduced to.

I would rather seen Newin in a coalition helping the country while profiting

than Newin in a coalition this is naught but raping the country and nothing else.

Oh that's just hilarious! Just what I needed to brighten me up! Now you are saying that even though Abhisit did a deal to use the 22 MPs belonging to 'Newin The Banned' to get his job, it was excusable, simply because he's Abhisit and has a nice haircut. But, corruption is terrible when the other side does it.

Abhisit is as dirty as the rest of them. He colluded with Newin, a notorious Godfather and ex TRT/PPP member, who was banned from politics, to get his job! Abhisit almost kissed Newin and gave him flowers, while grovelling for his support! If there ever was as clear cut a case of doing a deal with the devil, then this is it. To put the icing on the cake, after doing a deal with this gangster, Abhisit then tells us that the reason the reds were ousted was corruption

You don't think that a man like Newin is profiting now? In your own words you admit that being in Abhisit's good graces means getting a share of the power and money pie! Any parallels with Thaksin here? Is there a difference? Anyway, AAbhisit is paying the price for his hypocrisy - nobody is taking him seriously, he is achieving nothing, and knives are being sharpened. He won't last.

Real politic in Thailand is a dirty business,

it can't get cleaned up if the cleaner types aren't in there doing something by degrees.

There is idealistic utopia, and actual getting the business done via stability,

and right now Thailand needs stability more than utioan honesty,

that NO ONE believes will happen in the near term, no matter WHO is in office.

Reality check Thailand politics is Thailand politics it only gets better in baby steps.

.

Ah I get it - now you are talking about degrees of corruption. In your world, it's OK for Abhisit to be corrupt, and suck up to an ex-TRT/PPP mafia Godfather like 'Newin the Banned' just to get installed into office in place of other corrrupt politicians that went before him!

So why does Abhisit go on about corruption being such a terrible thing, justifying kicking out the governments that went before him, and the purging of corruption justifying all this chaos? So much for Abhisit's moral high ground - he is just like the rest of them, except he wasn't elected.

One thing is clear - you don't know what you believe in

Edited May 6, 2009 by dbrenn

[animatic]

If you are not in a position to improve things you can not.

Many a 'high moralist' as accomplished NOTHING for his efforts,

while a lesser mere mortal has cleaned up things by working in a practical manner

from within an imperfect system to create the conditions for improvement in the long run.

Reality is a messy business, but we must live with it.

Edited May 7, 2009 by animatic

[LawnGnome]

If you are not in a position to improve things you can not.

Many a 'high moralist' as accomplished NOTHING for his efforts,

while a lesser mere mortal has cleaned up things by working in a practical manner

from within an imperfect system to create the conditions for improvement in the long run.

Reality is a messy business, but we must live with it.

Pragmatic people get a lot more done than idealic people.

[dbrenn]

If you are not in a position to improve things you can not.

Many a 'high moralist' as accomplished NOTHING for his efforts,

while a lesser mere mortal has cleaned up things by working in a practical manner

from within an imperfect system to create the conditions for improvement in the long run.

Reality is a messy business, but we must live with it.

Pragmatic people get a lot more done than idealic people.

What are both of you talking about? THe Dem argument, supported by so many here, began by demonising corruption at whatever cost. Now, you are reduced to rationalising that corruption is pragmatic, so long as it is Dem corruption. That's another laugh that you have given me today!

The humorous part is that you are both agreeing with me that the Dems are corrupt because Abhisit associated with a notorious Godfather to get his job, but that this is pragmatic, rather than corrupt behaviour. So, by your logic, the only thing that really now separates Abhisit from Thaksin is a nice haircut. In the begining, the Dem argument in this thread revolved around noble ideology - that corruption was inexcusable. Now, abruptly, it revolves around pragmatic politicking, where anything, even corruption, goes.

Pragmatic means getting things done. What has Abhisit done? Nothing except talk! You could at least say that Thaksin did things, good and bad. Abhisit, on the other hand, hasn't done anything except contribute to the greenhouse effect by endlessly talking about doing things. It's bad enough that nothing has been achieved. What's worse is that all this silliness in toppling an elected corrupt civilian government and replacing it with another unelected corrupt militarised government has cost Thailand its democracy and standing on the world stage. Now, Thailand is on a par with the Philippines in the basket case ratings.

Why didn't the dems just win the election to get rid of Thaksin, instead of relying on the army and the mafia to get installed? No good will come of it.

Edited May 7, 2009 by dbrenn

[Plus]

Why do you jump to the conclusion that Democrats are corrupt? Just because they took Bhum Jai Thai asa coalition partner? They are not responsible for anything Newin and co has done before, and there's nothing to pin on Newin now, so far.

Of course if some scandal breaks out and Newin will use his leverage to sweep it under the carpet, then you CAN start blaming Democrats.

Being pragmatic and realistic in that situation would be weighing the total corruption outcome if they try keep Newin on the leash themselves or let him go and live under the "watchful" eye of Chalerm.

Being pragmatic and realistic means understanding that nothing can stop Newin or corruption in general, the goal is to minimize the impact.

>>>

As for nothing been done - there was 2,000 baht handout, and school kids get free books and uniforms when school starts later this month. The govt implemented the first round of stimulus measures and now it's in the hands of bureaucrats and civil servants, working through the system. The govt in the meantime is preparing the second round. April was lost on Asean summit and dealing with the reds.

Abhisit has just passed 100 day mark, btw.

[dbrenn]

Why do you jump to the conclusion that Democrats are corrupt? Just because they took Bhum Jai Thai asa coalition partner? They are not responsible for anything Newin and co has done before, and there's nothing to pin on Newin now, so far.

Of course if some scandal breaks out and Newin will use his leverage to sweep it under the carpet, then you CAN start blaming Democrats.

Being pragmatic and realistic in that situation would be weighing the total corruption outcome if they try keep Newin on the leash themselves or let him go and live under the "watchful" eye of Chalerm.

Being pragmatic and realistic means understanding that nothing can stop Newin or corruption in general, the goal is to minimize the impact.

>>>

As for nothing been done - there was 2,000 baht handout, and school kids get free books and uniforms when school starts later this month. The govt implemented the first round of stimulus measures and now it's in the hands of bureaucrats and civil servants, working through the system. The govt in the meantime is preparing the second round. April was lost on Asean summit and dealing with the reds.

Abhisit has just passed 100 day mark, btw.

Oh do me a favour! Abhisit relying on the support of 'Newin-the-Banned-but-with 22-Spare-MPs' to get his job, and grovelling to him in public for his support, giving him flowers in front of the world media?

Copying Thaksin's populist agenda - 15 years too late by handing out cash to the peasants - looks silly too. The Dems did nothing for years to help the rural poor.

Edited May 7, 2009 by LivinginKata
Flame removed

[sriracha john]

Flaming post removed...

Edited May 7, 2009 by LivinginKata
Flaming removed

[Plus]

Oh do me a favour! Abhisit relying on the support of 'Newin-the-Banned-but-with 22-Spare-MPs' to get his job, and grovelling to him in public for his support, giving him flowers in front of the world media?

What's wrong with it, exactly? Everybody knows without Newin's support he couldn't have formed a ruling coalition. Should he hide it, no photo-ops, no flowers in public? And Newin? What was his choice? He didn't want to stay with PPP. Supporting Democrats was his only option.

There was no other way for him, no other way for Abhisit, no other way for parliament to move forward.

Copying Thaksin's populist agenda - 15 years too late by handing out cash to the peasants - looks silly too. The Dems did nothing for years to help the rural poor.

15 years ago Thaksin gave a Rolls Royce to a general from Suchinda led junta, I don't remember anything about handing cash to peasants. I'm pretty sure it wasn't the practice in Chamlong's Phalang Dharma party Thaksin have joined.

Dems have been in power slightly over three years, dealing with the biggest economic crisis this country has ever seen, following rules negotiated with IMF by Thaksin's personal banker. There was no room for helping the rural poor in that deal. VAT - up, social spending down. Send you regards to Thanong Bidaya. Thaksin was Deputy PM during those negotiations, btw, he knew perfectly well what kind of deal Thailand was getting into. Now he blames the Democrats for that. How convenient.

[hammered]

Oh do me a favour! Abhisit relying on the support of 'Newin-the-Banned-but-with 22-Spare-MPs' to get his job, and grovelling to him in public for his support, giving him flowers in front of the world media?

What's wrong with it, exactly? Everybody knows without Newin's support he couldn't have formed a ruling coalition. Should he hide it, no photo-ops, no flowers in public? And Newin? What was his choice? He didn't want to stay with PPP. Supporting Democrats was his only option.

There was no other way for him, no other way for Abhisit, no other way for parliament to move forward.

Copying Thaksin's populist agenda - 15 years too late by handing out cash to the peasants - looks silly too. The Dems did nothing for years to help the rural poor.

15 years ago Thaksin gave a Rolls Royce to a general from Suchinda led junta, I don't remember anything about handing cash to peasants. I'm pretty sure it wasn't the practice in Chamlong's Phalang Dharma party Thaksin have joined.

Dems have been in power slightly over three years, dealing with the biggest economic crisis this country has ever seen, following rules negotiated with IMF by Thaksin's personal banker. There was no room for helping the rural poor in that deal. VAT - up, social spending down. Send you regards to Thanong Bidaya. Thaksin was Deputy PM during those negotiations, btw, he knew perfectly well what kind of deal Thailand was getting into. Now he blames the Democrats for that. How convenient.

Thaksin never accepts responsibility for his actions. That is usually a grave failing in a human being. For a politician however.........

[Ricardo]

Copying Thaksin's populist agenda - 15 years too late by handing out cash to the peasants - looks silly too. The Dems did nothing for years to help the rural poor.

Perhaps the Dems have learned, benefiting from Thaksin/TRT's example, that it pays to be seen to follow policies which help the poor ? Surely a good thing to be doing, with the current economic problems, I'd have thought ?

But why was this statesmanlike, when Thaksin did it, but "looks silly" now ? Surely not because it reveals, that Thaksin was not the only Thai politician, who might ever help the poor !

Dems have been in power slightly over three years

I suspect you might have meant ... three months not three years ? (The Dems came to power in December 2008)

[Plus]

No, I meant their previous stint in government. Dbrenn said they'd nothing for years, he wasn't obviously talking about present.

[Old Man River]

Dated tomorrow, but available today, Crispin's update on the situation is below:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KE07Ae02.html

Wow, a pretty insightful article.... Wonder how accurate it is. Anyway, things seem so convoluted now (from what I could gather from the article.)

Owned by whom???

http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/aboutus.html

This is nothing more than one mans private musings about the situation

One very well known man who normally has great insight. Is he right all the time? No one is, but this is the first time I have ever heard anyone describe his opinions as "musings".

So, who do you read that you think has credibility about the Thai political situation?

[Ricardo]

No, I meant their previous stint in government. Dbrenn said they'd nothing for years, he wasn't obviously talking about present.

Sorry, my mistake, I didn't think he could believe their actions several years ago were relevant to the Democrat-led coalition-government of today, led by a new younger leader.

[Thai at Heart]

Dated tomorrow, but available today, Crispin's update on the situation is below:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KE07Ae02.html

Wow, a pretty insightful article.... Wonder how accurate it is. Anyway, things seem so convoluted now (from what I could gather from the article.)

Owned by whom???

http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/aboutus.html

This is nothing more than one mans private musings about the situation

One very well known man who normally has great insight. Is he right all the time? No one is, but this is the first time I have ever heard anyone describe his opinions as "musings".

So, who do you read that you think has credibility about the Thai political situation?

All of them have their points of view, but I wouldn't say any one individual or newspaper is a completely unbiased base for understanding the current situation. I believe I have been here long enough to know which papers have a bias one way or the other politically. This goes for relevant "academics" websites too. This is not really different from how some newspapers in the world are right or left wing. Virtually all news in the world today is politicised one way or another by the politics of the various owners or controllers.

As examples, people accuse the BBC of becoming progressively left wing, I don't see it as being that bad, but I file it away in my memory. Fox News, well we all know where they are coming from. Gi Unkaporn tries to appear above it all, but it is relevant to know his politics to understand whether he is giving an unbiased or a personal opinion.

Therefore, the further away they are from the relevant protagonists would be pretty surefire way of giving them more credibility in my eyes. Being in the employ of manager group, probably wouldn't be conducive to significant editorial freedom or opinion in this situation, wouldn't you agree?

I wouldn't expect a clear view of the situation from Asia Times any more that I would expect an unbiased opinion from ASTV or DTV. I don't have to agree with whatever I read, and often the Western press gets it wrong about understanding Thailand IMHO. Independence is an important factor in journalism, and unfortunately, most of the Thai press or TV is slanted one way or another.

Edited May 9, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[Koo82]

Why didn't the dems just win the election to get rid of Thaksin, instead of relying on the army and the mafia to get installed? No good will come of it.

Well said.

If they ever won an election after each one of us went voting, we would not go out wearing red to protest.

They only got there after a coup, party dissolved twice and banning almost 150 politicians of their competitor.

When our MPs got votes from people, they said our MPs got votes from uneducated vote selling rural Thais. But when some of these MPs raised their hands for Abhisit in Parliament House, they didn't say so.

[dbrenn]

Why didn't the dems just win the election to get rid of Thaksin, instead of relying on the army and the mafia to get installed? No good will come of it.

Well said.

If they ever won an election after each one of us went voting, we would not go out wearing red to protest.

They only got there after a coup, party dissolved twice and banning almost 150 politicians of their competitor.

When our MPs got votes from people, they said our MPs got votes from uneducated vote selling rural Thais. But when some of these MPs raised their hands for Abhisit in Parliament House, they didn't say so.

Bare faced hypocrisy - that what the Dems represent. They collude with the army and the mafia, ban the opposition, while cynically siding with any banned opposition members who will help them make up a quorum. Then they tell us that they are against corruption! Yeah, right. And there are still people here who see only black and white, that the yellow lot are a solution to the problem, rather than its cause. You gotta hand it to the yellow propaganda machine - they have a lot of people blindly following their every word.

What a price Thailand has paid for this powerless charade that calls itself a government. How many years, if at all, will it take the country to get back on track and focus on the real problems, like soaring unemployment and an imploding economy, instead of all this stupid infighting and paranoia? All Abhisit's lot had to do was win an election, not too much to ask, but they knew they didn't have the support so they cheated their way into power by using the army and mafia, calling their fellow citizens 'uneducated' by way of an excuse.

Now he has the job, all Abhisit can promise us is reconciliation from the very problem that his lot caused by so greedily tearing down Thailand's democracy, so that they could stick their own noses in the trough.

Edited May 9, 2009 by dbrenn

[grandpops]

Copying Thaksin's populist agenda - 15 years too late by handing out cash to the peasants - looks silly too. The Dems did nothing for years to help the rural poor.

Perhaps the Dems have learned, benefiting from Thaksin/TRT's example, that it pays to be seen to follow policies which help the poor ? Surely a good thing to be doing, with the current economic problems, I'd have thought ?

But why was this statesmanlike, when Thaksin did it, but "looks silly" now ? Surely not because it reveals, that Thaksin was not the only Thai politician, who might ever help the poor !

Dems have been in power slightly over three years

I suspect you might have meant ... three months not three years ? (The Dems came to power in December 2008)

Freudian slip perhaps.

As the Democrats, Army, PAD are inseperable, the Dems have been in power since the 2006 coup.

Incredibly Al Jazeera were reporting on the suppression of free speach and journalism in Thailand only yesterday. Selectively shutting down TV stations whilst setting up propaganda units to try and convince the majority of the population (the same majority they have been lambasting as too stupid to vote for the past three years) that this corrupt gerry mandered government/junta is the way forward for Thailand.

Too stupid to vote, but not too stupid to throw 2,000 baht per head at and bombard with anti Thaksin BS.

The entire mainstream media of the world see it like this. Can't be long now before he goes and its a shame really. I wanted this guy to beat Thaksin in the last two elections, I really wanted Abhisit to come to power with a majority of the vote. In that situation he could have become popular and successful.

[dbrenn]

Freudian slip perhaps.

As the Democrats, Army, PAD are inseperable, the Dems have been in power since the 2006 coup.

Incredibly Al Jazeera were reporting on the suppression of free speach and journalism in Thailand only yesterday. Selectively shutting down TV stations whilst setting up propaganda units to try and convince the majority of the population (the same majority they have been lambasting as too stupid to vote for the past three years) that this corrupt gerry mandered government/junta is the way forward for Thailand.

Too stupid to vote, but not too stupid to throw 2,000 baht per head at and bombard with anti Thaksin BS.

The entire mainstream media of the world see it like this. Can't be long now before he goes and its a shame really. I wanted this guy to beat Thaksin in the last two elections, I really wanted Abhisit to come to power with a majority of the vote. In that situation he could have become popular and successful.

Shutting down opposition media is just another example of Dem/PAD/military hypocrisy. It's almost as if they think that their fellow citizens. and the outside world, have forgotten that the reason for that PAD taking to the streets in the first place was media interference by Thaksin's lot!

Just like you, at the time Thaksin was at his worst, I wanted him to get voted out. Voting being the operative word here. Instead of biding their time and waiting for democracy to run its course, Abhisit has proven that he and his sinister clique are corrupt hypocrites of almost Orwellian proportions. The only difference between tham and Thaksin is that they took and held power by force.

Whatever you say about Thaksin, he was put there by the people, and should have been removed by the people too. Now, all we have is mob rule - Thailand is styling itself on the Philippines.

Edited May 10, 2009 by dbrenn

[LawnGnome]

Freudian slip perhaps.

As the Democrats, Army, PAD are inseperable, the Dems have been in power since the 2006 coup.

Incredibly Al Jazeera were reporting on the suppression of free speach and journalism in Thailand only yesterday. Selectively shutting down TV stations whilst setting up propaganda units to try and convince the majority of the population (the same majority they have been lambasting as too stupid to vote for the past three years) that this corrupt gerry mandered government/junta is the way forward for Thailand.

Too stupid to vote, but not too stupid to throw 2,000 baht per head at and bombard with anti Thaksin BS.

The entire mainstream media of the world see it like this. Can't be long now before he goes and its a shame really. I wanted this guy to beat Thaksin in the last two elections, I really wanted Abhisit to come to power with a majority of the vote. In that situation he could have become popular and successful.

Shutting down opposition media is just another example of Dem/PAD/military hypocrisy. It;s almost as if they think that their fellow citizen,s and the outside world, have forgotten that the reason for that PAD taking to the streets in the first place was media interference by Thaksin's lot!

Just like you, at the time Thaksin was at his worst, I wanted him to get voted out. Voting being the operative word here. Instead of biding their time and waiting for democracy to run its course, Abhisit has proven that he and his sinister clique are corrupt hypocrites of almost Orwellian proportions. The only difference between tham and Thaksin is that they took and held power by force.

Whatever you say about Thaksin, he was put there by the people, and should have been removed by the people too.

Ill let Animatic pick apart the distorted logic of your post, as he does it much better than I. Safe to say, the idea of comparing the shutting down of Dstation, a station that was actively promoting insurrection and violence among its minions (not followers, minions), is justifiable in every way. The only people complaining are the ones who set the buses on fire and parked an NGV truck next to an apartment complex. Guess what, nobody cares what the reds say anymore. Any credibility they had was lost when they started burning buses.

[dbrenn]

Freudian slip perhaps.

As the Democrats, Army, PAD are inseperable, the Dems have been in power since the 2006 coup.

Incredibly Al Jazeera were reporting on the suppression of free speach and journalism in Thailand only yesterday. Selectively shutting down TV stations whilst setting up propaganda units to try and convince the majority of the population (the same majority they have been lambasting as too stupid to vote for the past three years) that this corrupt gerry mandered government/junta is the way forward for Thailand.

Too stupid to vote, but not too stupid to throw 2,000 baht per head at and bombard with anti Thaksin BS.

The entire mainstream media of the world see it like this. Can't be long now before he goes and its a shame really. I wanted this guy to beat Thaksin in the last two elections, I really wanted Abhisit to come to power with a majority of the vote. In that situation he could have become popular and successful.

Shutting down opposition media is just another example of Dem/PAD/military hypocrisy. It;s almost as if they think that their fellow citizen,s and the outside world, have forgotten that the reason for that PAD taking to the streets in the first place was media interference by Thaksin's lot!

Just like you, at the time Thaksin was at his worst, I wanted him to get voted out. Voting being the operative word here. Instead of biding their time and waiting for democracy to run its course, Abhisit has proven that he and his sinister clique are corrupt hypocrites of almost Orwellian proportions. The only difference between tham and Thaksin is that they took and held power by force.

Whatever you say about Thaksin, he was put there by the people, and should have been removed by the people too.

Ill let Animatic pick apart the distorted logic of your post, as he does it much better than I. Safe to say, the idea of comparing the shutting down of Dstation, a station that was actively promoting insurrection and violence among its minions (not followers, minions), is justifiable in every way. The only people complaining are the ones who set the buses on fire and parked an NGV truck next to an apartment complex. Guess what, nobody cares what the reds say anymore. Any credibility they had was lost when they started burning buses.

Why do you want to wait for Animatic? Firstly, he vilified corruption in any form and positioned Abhisit as some kind of White Knight - sent from above to rid Thailand of this scourge that was Thaksin. Then, Animatic did an abrupt u-turn and started to agree with me that all politicians are corrupt, when I explained to him how Abhisit relied on ex-TRT/PPP Godfather 'Newin the Banned' to get installed into his job. Then, Animatic tried to pull yet another u-turn by deciding that it's alright for Abhisit to be corrupt, and that there are some abitrary 'degrees' by which he measures corruption, and whether it is acceptale or not. I had a laugh reading his efforts to cover his trail of inconsistencies with a smokescreen of weirdness, but in the end there was nothing more to I could say to him really. And if you call that distorted logic, then I can't comment on what system of values and logic structure you live by either.

Read the news - all of it. Both sides used violent tactics, perpetrated by a minority of thugs. One guy here said that some local thugs near where he lived had been hired by both the red and yellow sides. Quite believable in Thailand. Anyway, it's not fair to say that these few thugs represent the mainstream thinking, and their actions didn't seem to justify shutting down yellow leaning media that was just as guilty in its sensationalist propaganda war cries, so why DStation?

Edited May 10, 2009 by dbrenn

[LawnGnome]

Freudian slip perhaps.

As the Democrats, Army, PAD are inseperable, the Dems have been in power since the 2006 coup.

Incredibly Al Jazeera were reporting on the suppression of free speach and journalism in Thailand only yesterday. Selectively shutting down TV stations whilst setting up propaganda units to try and convince the majority of the population (the same majority they have been lambasting as too stupid to vote for the past three years) that this corrupt gerry mandered government/junta is the way forward for Thailand.

Too stupid to vote, but not too stupid to throw 2,000 baht per head at and bombard with anti Thaksin BS.

The entire mainstream media of the world see it like this. Can't be long now before he goes and its a shame really. I wanted this guy to beat Thaksin in the last two elections, I really wanted Abhisit to come to power with a majority of the vote. In that situation he could have become popular and successful.

Shutting down opposition media is just another example of Dem/PAD/military hypocrisy. It;s almost as if they think that their fellow citizen,s and the outside world, have forgotten that the reason for that PAD taking to the streets in the first place was media interference by Thaksin's lot!

Just like you, at the time Thaksin was at his worst, I wanted him to get voted out. Voting being the operative word here. Instead of biding their time and waiting for democracy to run its course, Abhisit has proven that he and his sinister clique are corrupt hypocrites of almost Orwellian proportions. The only difference between tham and Thaksin is that they took and held power by force.

Whatever you say about Thaksin, he was put there by the people, and should have been removed by the people too.

Ill let Animatic pick apart the distorted logic of your post, as he does it much better than I. Safe to say, the idea of comparing the shutting down of Dstation, a station that was actively promoting insurrection and violence among its minions (not followers, minions), is justifiable in every way. The only people complaining are the ones who set the buses on fire and parked an NGV truck next to an apartment complex. Guess what, nobody cares what the reds say anymore. Any credibility they had was lost when they started burning buses.

Why do you want to wait for Animatic? Firstly, he vilified corruption in any form and positioned Abhisit as some kind of White Knight - sent from above to rid Thailand os this scourge that was Thaksin. Then, Animatic did an abrupt u-turn and started to agree with me that all politicians are corrupt, when I explained to him how Abhisit relied on ex-TRT/PPP Godfather 'Newin the Banned' to get installed into his job. Then, Animatic tried to pull yet another u-turn by deciding that it's alright for Abhisit to be corrupt, an that there are some abitrary 'degrees' by which he measures corruption, and whether it is acceptale or not. I had a laugh reading his efforts to cover his trail of inconsistencies with a smokescreen of weirdness, but in the end there was nothing more to I could say to him really. And if you call that distorted logic, then I can't comment on what system of values and logic structure you live by either.

Read the news - all of it. Both sides used violent tactics, perpetrated by a minority of thugs. One guy here said that some local thugs near where he lived had been hired by both the red and yellow sides. Quite believable in Thailand. Anyway, it's not fair to say that these few thugs represent the mainstream thinking, and their actions didn't seem to justify shutting down yellow leaning media that was just as guilty in its sensationalist propaganda war cries, so why DStation?

Welcome to my ignore list DB. Don't worry, you are in fine company, and should enjoy yourself. Feel free to try the whine bar.

[dbrenn]

Welcome to my ignore list DB. Don't worry, you are in fine company, and should enjoy yourself. Feel free to try the whine bar.

Great logic! It saves having to think of a valid reply.

You're a funny man. I Like you

[Plus]

Re Newin's corruption and Democrats - we discussed this already, it was mostly about pragmatism.

Basically, you can accuse Democrats of corruption when they start sweeping Newin charges under the carpet. He is under investigation in some cases already, show us Democrat interference if you want to prove they embrace corruption.

I get a feeling that Dbrenn picks up the same topic in several threads without ever finishing it, or even acknowledging that it has been discussed elsewhere.

[dbrenn]

Re Newin's corruption and Democrats - we discussed this already, it was mostly about pragmatism.

Basically, you can accuse Democrats of corruption when they start sweeping Newin charges under the carpet. He is under investigation in some cases already, show us Democrat interference if you want to prove they embrace corruption.

I get a feeling that Dbrenn picks up the same topic in several threads without ever finishing it, or even acknowledging that it has been discussed elsewhere.

Pragmatism? That's an even better one!! Thaksin is corrupt, plain and simple, But, when Abhisit's lot employ the services of a notoriously corrupt Godfather ex-TRT/PPP crony , it's called pragmatism!!! Even though he is charged, obviously corrupt, and banned, and has not cleared his name, they still selectively cuddle up to Newin because he has 22 MP's under his wing. And how is it that he has 22 MP's under his wing? Ask yourself - did a guy like Newin join the Dems out of the kindness of his heart?

Tell you what. Let's redefine other words. I will begin:

1) RED: Censorship. YELLOW: Winning an argument with a political opponent by allowing only the truth to be broadcast

2) RED: Violence. YELLOW: Persuasion by M16

I could go on. Come on, give me another laugh. Pragmatism, indeed. Desperation, more like

[LawnGnome]

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool then to open you mouth and remove all doubt."

- Mark Twain