Opposition Files Impeachment Motion Against Abhisit

[animatic]

The coup restored the rule of law that was non-existent under Thaksin. On paper the country was under 1997 constitution but in practice it had turned into a lawless state with, may I remind you, legally, no senate, no parliament, and interim government that overstayed its term, and if you looked beyond just the letter of the law, it was even worse.

Generals, on the other hand, established clear rules, responsibilities and timetables that they themselves followed very strictly. Finally those in power subjected themselves to the rule of law. The big picture had changed.

You could argue that generals weren't legally accountable to anyone but their own promise to the people, but, in practice that kept them in line a lot better than any constityution check and balance mechanism under Thaksin and his proxy governments.

In the big picture yes.

With certain minor exceptions this is pretty much what happened, as I observed it.

Contrary to the typical logic in these situations.

More like hitting the 're-set '

It is not the preferred way to save the nation,

but what was going down before was a slippery slope to hel_l.

Edited March 13, 2009 by animatic

[csolgosz]

Most people working in business know themself first or second hand from some massive corruption of the Thaksin clan.

I have read your posts for some time, although I am not a regular reader or contributor to these forums.

I see that you are very firmly in the 'Anti-Thaksin' camp while others are firmly in the 'Pro-Thaksin' camp. A few remain who can give an unbiased view. Every post by both sides clearly demonstrates one thing: the fate of Thailand must rest with Thaksin. I don't see a lot of alternatives popping up. I have read quite a lot about the village programs he instituted; more than that, I have been to most of these provinces and heard it directly from the mouths of the villagers themselves.

I have heard about the 'War on Drugs'. If it was used to kill innocent people, that is shameful and possibly true. The other side of the coin is that the murder and corruption around the drug industry had reached such levels that something radical had to be done. I have sat with hilltribe villagers in the North of Chiang Rai and heard their stories of the terrible times, and how greatful they are to the Thaksin government for changing their lives. I still remember the words. One woman stretching out her hand and pointing to the beautiful valleys below us and saying, "Once you had to carry your gun to walk through there because of the drug gangs. My husband was killed by them. Now you can go everywhere, the valleys are full of crops and vegetables and the people are happy together."

Maybe Thaksin was corrupt. Perhaps I should say, surely he was corrupt. Corruption is so much a part of your tradition and culture, that it is universal here. Mai pen rai = corruption. Hidden emotions and feelings = corruption. Lack of communication and lying by 'omission' = corruption. Being influenced in administration by personal considerations/ connections = corruption.

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

This thread was supposed to be about Abhisit. I have read all of the newspaper articles. The support of the PAD's damaging and illegal protests. Entering Government House and forcing the closure of the International airport would never be allowed in a Western Country, or a developed Eastern country like Japan, South Korea or Singapore, I am sure. No one was prosecuted, right? Then when the time came, all of the Newin camp etc that were being coerced to change sides were held in hotel rooms overnight without phones so they couldn't have contact with anyone until the vote against the democratically appointed government was held the next day. Corrupt? Abhisit won. If he had been honest, he would have held new elections as soon as possible. Now big handouts when the country is on its knees financially...??

Finally, I must say, I have no political agenda. The only thing I care about is the prosperity of this country in which I live. I love its poor people and their simple lives and I am disgusted with the Hi-So ('Chinese-Thai...') fakeness, shallowness and selfishness that I see around me here in Bangkok. To the writer whom I quoted, I am glad he has a strong opinion, but that brings me to my summary.

After working here for some time, I don't believe that most people in Thailand have a well-researched or independant opinion at all. I see it in my workplace. I know that opinion is spread by word of mouth and a 'collective opinion' is reached that is dominated by force of personality. In the end, all think they have ownership of that opinion and they are happy. Hence my interest in the quote at the beginning of this response. I have been to about 40 provinces in Thailand. I have trekked into their villages and slept on their bamboo or earthern floors and I have helped to bring a little wealth and happiness to their people. I wonder how many of these elite Bangkokian 'Democrats' have done so???

[ballpoint]

Most people working in business know themself first or second hand from some massive corruption of the Thaksin clan.

I have read your posts for some time, although I am not a regular reader or contributor to these forums.

I see that you are very firmly in the 'Anti-Thaksin' camp while others are firmly in the 'Pro-Thaksin' camp. A few remain who can give an unbiased view. Every post by both sides clearly demonstrates one thing: the fate of Thailand must rest with Thaksin. I don't see a lot of alternatives popping up. I have read quite a lot about the village programs he instituted; more than that, I have been to most of these provinces and heard it directly from the mouths of the villagers themselves.

I have heard about the 'War on Drugs'. If it was used to kill innocent people, that is shameful and possibly true. The other side of the coin is that the murder and corruption around the drug industry had reached such levels that something radical had to be done. I have sat with hilltribe villagers in the North of Chiang Rai and heard their stories of the terrible times, and how greatful they are to the Thaksin government for changing their lives. I still remember the words. One woman stretching out her hand and pointing to the beautiful valleys below us and saying, "Once you had to carry your gun to walk through there because of the drug gangs. My husband was killed by them. Now you can go everywhere, the valleys are full of crops and vegetables and the people are happy together."

Maybe Thaksin was corrupt. Perhaps I should say, surely he was corrupt. Corruption is so much a part of your tradition and culture, that it is universal here. Mai pen rai = corruption. Hidden emotions and feelings = corruption. Lack of communication and lying by 'omission' = corruption. Being influenced in administration by personal considerations/ connections = corruption.

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

This thread was supposed to be about Abhisit. I have read all of the newspaper articles. The support of the PAD's damaging and illegal protests. Entering Government House and forcing the closure of the International airport would never be allowed in a Western Country, or a developed Eastern country like Japan, South Korea or Singapore, I am sure. No one was prosecuted, right? Then when the time came, all of the Newin camp etc that were being coerced to change sides were held in hotel rooms overnight without phones so they couldn't have contact with anyone until the vote against the democratically appointed government was held the next day. Corrupt? Abhisit won. If he had been honest, he would have held new elections as soon as possible. Now big handouts when the country is on its knees financially...??

Finally, I must say, I have no political agenda. The only thing I care about is the prosperity of this country in which I live. I love its poor people and their simple lives and I am disgusted with the Hi-So ('Chinese-Thai...') fakeness, shallowness and selfishness that I see around me here in Bangkok. To the writer whom I quoted, I am glad he has a strong opinion, but that brings me to my summary.

After working here for some time, I don't believe that most people in Thailand have a well-researched or independant opinion at all. I see it in my workplace. I know that opinion is spread by word of mouth and a 'collective opinion' is reached that is dominated by force of personality. In the end, all think they have ownership of that opinion and they are happy. Hence my interest in the quote at the beginning of this response. I have been to about 40 provinces in Thailand. I have trekked into their villages and slept on their bamboo or earthern floors and I have helped to bring a little wealth and happiness to their people. I wonder how many of these elite Bangkokian 'Democrats' have done so???

Facts? The Democrats were elected for their second term in 1997, following the severe mishandling of the economy by the Banharn and Chavilit governments. They put the country back on the road to recovery, and Thaksin reaped the benefits, including being able to pay back the IMF loans early. Interestingly, for a man supposedly so popular with the people, he included the same old Banharn and Chavilit in his new government.

Yes, maybe the PAD leaders should have been prosecuted, but surely it was the responsibility of the government at the time they allegedly broke the law to do so? The fact that that government had lost the respect and support of the civil and military powers made this impossible. Any Western or developed Eastern government would have resigned and called new elections in such a situation. Eventually, with parliament in a state of disarray and the banning from politics of the PPP leadership, the leader of the second largest party legally formed a new government. This ploy of calling for new elections by the same group that refused to do so when they were in power, however tenaciously or illegally, is a particularly cynical one. Now, with Abhisit as PM, steps have been taken to bring the PAD leaders to account, however, due to the vast backlog of cases left over from previous governments it will have to take it's place in the queue.

Of course, you will find people who benefitted from Thaksin. You'll also find people who's lives were ruined by him, and many many more who he never had an effect on at all. I'm glad your hill tribe friend now leads a better life, but who is able to say that it was worth making other people's lives more miserable in order to do so? Why not talk to the family of one of the innocents murdered in that "war", or the parents of a child killed by bird flu, because it was covered up and they had no idea their chickens were unsafe?

I am by no means "Bangkok elite", I live in Buri Ram, and have done so for close to 20 years. I do have a broad knowledge of local politics here, unfortunately dominated by Newin, through being married to the Kamnan of our Tambon. I am rather surprised that you have been able to talk seriously about politics with the poor people of over 40 provinces, since all serious discussion around here, and I suspect in many other provinces, is done in the local dialect. You must be a cunning linguist indeed to be able to speak Isaan, Khmer, Tai, and all the hill tribe languages so fluently as to be able to hold a deep political conversation with them.

[LevelHead]

Yes, maybe the PAD leaders should have been prosecuted, but surely it was the responsibility of the government at the time they allegedly broke the law to do so?

Very interesting, so why is it that the ASC set up after the coup under the control of the coup leaders, was allowed to make charges against the previous prime minister so long after the event ?.

And why was the previous prime minister tried so long after supposed events........years later ?

Surely it was up to the TRT to find Mr THaksin guilty then based on your precedent ?

The PAD have no excuses, and the present government no excuses not to try them and convict them, for there is plenty of evidence of their actions on television and in the media around the world. The evidence is overwhelming.

The Democrats will lose all credibility if the fail to take action, real action, against the PAD soon.

Also you will note that the coup broke the 1997 constitution laws, the leaders could be tried for treason, but they changed the consitition to make themselves immune from prosecution. Based on this precedent why cannot therefore all charges against other people be dropped and people be given immunity ? Or is it only allowed for people with guns to get immunity for their past actions ?

[ballpoint]

Yes, maybe the PAD leaders should have been prosecuted, but surely it was the responsibility of the government at the time they allegedly broke the law to do so?

Very interesting, so why is it that the ASC set up after the coup under the control of the coup leaders, was allowed to make charges against the previous prime minister so long after the event ?.

And why was the previous prime minister tried so long after supposed events........years later ?

Surely it was up to the TRT to find Mr THaksin guilty then based on your precedent ?

The PAD have no excuses, and the present government no excuses not to try them and convict them, for there is plenty of evidence of their actions on television and in the media around the world. The evidence is overwhelming.

The Democrats will lose all credibility if the fail to take action, real action, against the PAD soon.

Also you will note that the coup broke the 1997 constitution laws, the leaders could be tried for treason, but they changed the consitition to make themselves immune from prosecution. Based on this precedent why cannot therefore all charges against other people be dropped and people be given immunity ? Or is it only allowed for people with guns to get immunity for their past actions ?

My post said the initial responsibility for arresting the PAD leaders lay with the PPP government. If the crime was so obvious, surely it's better to catch the criminal then and there? They failed to do so and lost their chance. For that alone, they should have resigned. The present government seems to be biding by the laws of a proper democracy, by letting the prosecution work on its case and eventually bring it to trial, rather than simply going out and shooting someone as seemed to be the TRT's policy.

The difference between the cases against Thaksin, and that against the PAD are that Thaksin was the head of the government, indeed, it could well be argued that by 2006 he was the government. He was not about to convict himself, despite his crimes. The crime was obvious, but no civilian had the authority to catch the criminal then. The PAD, on the other hand, were outside the government. That government tried to have the leaders arrested and the protests dispersed, but never had the support of the police to do so. Both cases cry out for the setting up of a totally impartial judiciary. If such an institution were in place, Thaksin would never have been PM in the first place, there would have been no need for the PAD, and Thailand would be well on the way to being a true democracy.

You'll find that Thaksin also broke the laws of the 1997 constitution by concealing his assets, allowing the block voting of political alliances in the senate and meddling with the constitutional court. In such a situation, the only power in the land able to bring him to justice was the military. As the constitution was a sham by 2006, there was no way the army could have broken its laws by stepping in to rescue the country.

[h90]

Most people working in business know themself first or second hand from some massive corruption of the Thaksin clan.

I have read your posts for some time, although I am not a regular reader or contributor to these forums.

I see that you are very firmly in the 'Anti-Thaksin' camp while others are firmly in the 'Pro-Thaksin' camp. A few remain who can give an unbiased view. Every post by both sides clearly demonstrates one thing: the fate of Thailand must rest with Thaksin. I don't see a lot of alternatives popping up. I have read quite a lot about the village programs he instituted; more than that, I have been to most of these provinces and heard it directly from the mouths of the villagers themselves.

I have heard about the 'War on Drugs'. If it was used to kill innocent people, that is shameful and possibly true. The other side of the coin is that the murder and corruption around the drug industry had reached such levels that something radical had to be done. I have sat with hilltribe villagers in the North of Chiang Rai and heard their stories of the terrible times, and how greatful they are to the Thaksin government for changing their lives. I still remember the words. One woman stretching out her hand and pointing to the beautiful valleys below us and saying, "Once you had to carry your gun to walk through there because of the drug gangs. My husband was killed by them. Now you can go everywhere, the valleys are full of crops and vegetables and the people are happy together."

Maybe Thaksin was corrupt. Perhaps I should say, surely he was corrupt. Corruption is so much a part of your tradition and culture, that it is universal here. Mai pen rai = corruption. Hidden emotions and feelings = corruption. Lack of communication and lying by 'omission' = corruption. Being influenced in administration by personal considerations/ connections = corruption.

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

This thread was supposed to be about Abhisit. I have read all of the newspaper articles. The support of the PAD's damaging and illegal protests. Entering Government House and forcing the closure of the International airport would never be allowed in a Western Country, or a developed Eastern country like Japan, South Korea or Singapore, I am sure. No one was prosecuted, right? Then when the time came, all of the Newin camp etc that were being coerced to change sides were held in hotel rooms overnight without phones so they couldn't have contact with anyone until the vote against the democratically appointed government was held the next day. Corrupt? Abhisit won. If he had been honest, he would have held new elections as soon as possible. Now big handouts when the country is on its knees financially...??

Finally, I must say, I have no political agenda. The only thing I care about is the prosperity of this country in which I live. I love its poor people and their simple lives and I am disgusted with the Hi-So ('Chinese-Thai...') fakeness, shallowness and selfishness that I see around me here in Bangkok. To the writer whom I quoted, I am glad he has a strong opinion, but that brings me to my summary.

After working here for some time, I don't believe that most people in Thailand have a well-researched or independant opinion at all. I see it in my workplace. I know that opinion is spread by word of mouth and a 'collective opinion' is reached that is dominated by force of personality. In the end, all think they have ownership of that opinion and they are happy. Hence my interest in the quote at the beginning of this response. I have been to about 40 provinces in Thailand. I have trekked into their villages and slept on their bamboo or earthern floors and I have helped to bring a little wealth and happiness to their people. I wonder how many of these elite Bangkokian 'Democrats' have done so???

It is shameful to post without knowledge about Thailand:

Read about the financial mess, before you post some lies about it....There are no doubts who lead Thailand into the mess....

You haven't been to any provinces in the south, or?

[jayboy]

Most people working in business know themself first or second hand from some massive corruption of the Thaksin clan.

I have read your posts for some time, although I am not a regular reader or contributor to these forums.

I see that you are very firmly in the 'Anti-Thaksin' camp while others are firmly in the 'Pro-Thaksin' camp. A few remain who can give an unbiased view. Every post by both sides clearly demonstrates one thing: the fate of Thailand must rest with Thaksin. I don't see a lot of alternatives popping up. I have read quite a lot about the village programs he instituted; more than that, I have been to most of these provinces and heard it directly from the mouths of the villagers themselves.

I have heard about the 'War on Drugs'. If it was used to kill innocent people, that is shameful and possibly true. The other side of the coin is that the murder and corruption around the drug industry had reached such levels that something radical had to be done. I have sat with hilltribe villagers in the North of Chiang Rai and heard their stories of the terrible times, and how greatful they are to the Thaksin government for changing their lives. I still remember the words. One woman stretching out her hand and pointing to the beautiful valleys below us and saying, "Once you had to carry your gun to walk through there because of the drug gangs. My husband was killed by them. Now you can go everywhere, the valleys are full of crops and vegetables and the people are happy together."

Maybe Thaksin was corrupt. Perhaps I should say, surely he was corrupt. Corruption is so much a part of your tradition and culture, that it is universal here. Mai pen rai = corruption. Hidden emotions and feelings = corruption. Lack of communication and lying by 'omission' = corruption. Being influenced in administration by personal considerations/ connections = corruption.

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

This thread was supposed to be about Abhisit. I have read all of the newspaper articles. The support of the PAD's damaging and illegal protests. Entering Government House and forcing the closure of the International airport would never be allowed in a Western Country, or a developed Eastern country like Japan, South Korea or Singapore, I am sure. No one was prosecuted, right? Then when the time came, all of the Newin camp etc that were being coerced to change sides were held in hotel rooms overnight without phones so they couldn't have contact with anyone until the vote against the democratically appointed government was held the next day. Corrupt? Abhisit won. If he had been honest, he would have held new elections as soon as possible. Now big handouts when the country is on its knees financially...??

Finally, I must say, I have no political agenda. The only thing I care about is the prosperity of this country in which I live. I love its poor people and their simple lives and I am disgusted with the Hi-So ('Chinese-Thai...') fakeness, shallowness and selfishness that I see around me here in Bangkok. To the writer whom I quoted, I am glad he has a strong opinion, but that brings me to my summary.

After working here for some time, I don't believe that most people in Thailand have a well-researched or independant opinion at all. I see it in my workplace. I know that opinion is spread by word of mouth and a 'collective opinion' is reached that is dominated by force of personality. In the end, all think they have ownership of that opinion and they are happy. Hence my interest in the quote at the beginning of this response. I have been to about 40 provinces in Thailand. I have trekked into their villages and slept on their bamboo or earthern floors and I have helped to bring a little wealth and happiness to their people. I wonder how many of these elite Bangkokian 'Democrats' have done so???

It is shameful to post without knowledge about Thailand:

Read about the financial mess, before you post some lies about it....There are no doubts who lead Thailand into the mess....

You haven't been to any provinces in the south, or?

It's interesting how some resort to insults whenever a post is made that takes a different view.Looking back over his posting history one can see h90 is a PAD ideologue:that is his right.However he has no right to provide such a rude reply -particularly to someone new to the forum - without providing some valid counter arguments.As it happens I don't accept everything the poster says but it is a thoughtful and sensible contribution.His particular comments on the Asian financial crisis are a little broad brush, but generally accurate.

[chowder]

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

dude where did you get this fact from, you are way off. don't embarrass yourself now

[h90]

Most people working in business know themself first or second hand from some massive corruption of the Thaksin clan.

I have read your posts for some time, although I am not a regular reader or contributor to these forums.

I see that you are very firmly in the 'Anti-Thaksin' camp while others are firmly in the 'Pro-Thaksin' camp. A few remain who can give an unbiased view. Every post by both sides clearly demonstrates one thing: the fate of Thailand must rest with Thaksin. I don't see a lot of alternatives popping up. I have read quite a lot about the village programs he instituted; more than that, I have been to most of these provinces and heard it directly from the mouths of the villagers themselves.

I have heard about the 'War on Drugs'. If it was used to kill innocent people, that is shameful and possibly true. The other side of the coin is that the murder and corruption around the drug industry had reached such levels that something radical had to be done. I have sat with hilltribe villagers in the North of Chiang Rai and heard their stories of the terrible times, and how greatful they are to the Thaksin government for changing their lives. I still remember the words. One woman stretching out her hand and pointing to the beautiful valleys below us and saying, "Once you had to carry your gun to walk through there because of the drug gangs. My husband was killed by them. Now you can go everywhere, the valleys are full of crops and vegetables and the people are happy together."

Maybe Thaksin was corrupt. Perhaps I should say, surely he was corrupt. Corruption is so much a part of your tradition and culture, that it is universal here. Mai pen rai = corruption. Hidden emotions and feelings = corruption. Lack of communication and lying by 'omission' = corruption. Being influenced in administration by personal considerations/ connections = corruption.

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

This thread was supposed to be about Abhisit. I have read all of the newspaper articles. The support of the PAD's damaging and illegal protests. Entering Government House and forcing the closure of the International airport would never be allowed in a Western Country, or a developed Eastern country like Japan, South Korea or Singapore, I am sure. No one was prosecuted, right? Then when the time came, all of the Newin camp etc that were being coerced to change sides were held in hotel rooms overnight without phones so they couldn't have contact with anyone until the vote against the democratically appointed government was held the next day. Corrupt? Abhisit won. If he had been honest, he would have held new elections as soon as possible. Now big handouts when the country is on its knees financially...??

Finally, I must say, I have no political agenda. The only thing I care about is the prosperity of this country in which I live. I love its poor people and their simple lives and I am disgusted with the Hi-So ('Chinese-Thai...') fakeness, shallowness and selfishness that I see around me here in Bangkok. To the writer whom I quoted, I am glad he has a strong opinion, but that brings me to my summary.

After working here for some time, I don't believe that most people in Thailand have a well-researched or independant opinion at all. I see it in my workplace. I know that opinion is spread by word of mouth and a 'collective opinion' is reached that is dominated by force of personality. In the end, all think they have ownership of that opinion and they are happy. Hence my interest in the quote at the beginning of this response. I have been to about 40 provinces in Thailand. I have trekked into their villages and slept on their bamboo or earthern floors and I have helped to bring a little wealth and happiness to their people. I wonder how many of these elite Bangkokian 'Democrats' have done so???

It is shameful to post without knowledge about Thailand:

Read about the financial mess, before you post some lies about it....There are no doubts who lead Thailand into the mess....

You haven't been to any provinces in the south, or?

It's interesting how some resort to insults whenever a post is made that takes a different view.Looking back over his posting history one can see h90 is a PAD ideologue:that is his right.However he has no right to provide such a rude reply -particularly to someone new to the forum - without providing some valid counter arguments.As it happens I don't accept everything the poster says but it is a thoughtful and sensible contribution.His particular comments on the Asian financial crisis are a little broad brush, but generally accurate.

To tell that the democrats caused the economic mess is not a different view. It is a lie, take any Thailand guide or Wikipedia and look at the dates. Everybody who claims to know something about Thailand knows that the Democrats came into power AFTER the economic crises which was caused by a government which includes Thaksin. Every two days a "new" member comes and post exactly the same propaganda lies following Goebbels "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

[jumnien]

As the "Democrats" occupation of Bangkok, and indeed Thailand, began with the tanks rolling into the capital on Sept. 19, 2006, I think it is safe to say that the wheels have fallen off the Thai economy under their domination. Hopefully, Abhisit will seek refuge in Britain and spare Thailand any more of this farce.

[ballpoint]

As the "Democrats" occupation of Bangkok, and indeed Thailand, began with the tanks rolling into the capital on Sept. 19, 2006, I think it is safe to say that the wheels have fallen off the Thai economy under their domination. Hopefully, Abhisit will seek refuge in Britain and spare Thailand any more of this farce.

The only farce here is the farcical claims of the anti Abhisit brigade who will tell any number of lies to try and justify their twisted agenda.

[Koo82]

In the recent voting, Abhisit party has only 165 and Peua Thai has over 180. The party having less should have let the party having more to lead. Ask him if he's proud of getting the PM this way. They became government twice by the same game of politicians switching voice. They never won with big gap after a big election when every Thai votes. The latest time Khun T won when TRT had 360 or so and Democrat had 90 or so. If coalition parties voted for TRT, it is no question because TRT had more after the big election.

After the popular election, majority of Thais including me voted for People's Power Party. If the PM from this party is down, another PM must come from this party otherwise, call for a new election.

After those red meetings and after we have DStation, we know many news we never knew before and I can say Democrat will lose in the next popular election when every of us goes vote.

[animatic]

Facts: It was the Democrat Government that got Thailand into a financial mess in 1997 and Thaksin that led Thailand out, repaying the debt to IMF in 2003. As a result of the actions of his government, Thailand repaid 520 billion baht to the IMF two years ahead of schedule. By changing economic strategies particularly relating to the balance of trade, Thailand had also accrued USD15 in foreign bank deposits and another USD38 billion in foreign reserves, by 2003. But Abhisit says he was corrupt. And Abhisit is an honourable man... (fr. Shakespeare)

dude where did you get this fact from, you are way off. don't embarrass yourself now

Ditto.

Thaksin took a loan from Singapore to payback IMF early.

Incurring more debt longer term, but lower pay outs

and bragging rights to kissing off a big entity IMF,

and

pertinently immediately LESS SCRUTINY of Thaksin's financial dealings as PM.

We know how THAT reduction of checks and balances turned out.

Of course Thailand was an original signatory and founder of the IMF

and contributes to this day it's 'GDP based percentage share of pooled aid funds',

loaned when needed by all members to each other in times of distress.

Such a horrible thing the IMF; countries helping other countries in distress. Despicable!

Thaksin benefited for the ASIAN recovery regionally, and took credit for the the success of

hard decisions made by the Dems after the Asian Tiger abruptly faded away at lightning speed.

He had an easy ride of it and made the most of it's PR value.

But that never meant he was some international economic savant saving Thailand.

Edited March 15, 2009 by animatic

[animatic]

In the recent voting, Abhisit party has only 165 and Peua Thai has over 180. The party having less should have let the party having more to lead. Ask him if he's proud of getting the PM this way. They became government twice by the same game of politicians switching voice. They never won with big gap after a big election when every Thai votes. The latest time Khun T won when TRT had 360 or so and Democrat had 90 or so. If coalition parties voted for TRT, it is no question because TRT had more after the big election.

After the popular election, majority of Thais including me voted for People's Power Party. If the PM from this party is down, another PM must come from this party otherwise, call for a new election.

After those red meetings and after we have DStation, we know many news we never knew before and I can say Democrat will lose in the next popular election when every of us goes vote.

Pride has nothing to do with this.

For the umpteenth time.

They needed 220 votes to form a government.

Peua Thai could not get this many no matter what they tried.

Because the remnants of the TRT PPP coalition fell apart.

The Dems DID get 220+ votes of properly elected MP's and formed a government.

Maybe not so proud to be with Newin, but the alternative is Chalerm

and/or the 3rd string trainees of TRT & PPP;

Disorganized as just a party

and not enough friends to form a government.

Enough reasons to NOT let them form one,

but then there was no need to be prevented

from doing what THEY COULD NOT DO.

I rarely note you whining on about Newin,

when if any one player sounded the death knell of your political desires it was him.

Yet all the bile is directed at Abhisit. All he did was accept Newing into his coalition.

I do see the Pheu Thai going after Chai Chidchob for not staying on their team.

More ineffectual ranting and impeachment blather.

Edited March 15, 2009 by animatic

[Koo82]

I am rather surprised that you have been able to talk seriously about politics with the poor people of over 40 provinces, since all serious discussion around here, and I suspect in many other provinces, is done in the local dialect. You must be a cunning linguist indeed to be able to speak Isaan, Khmer, Tai, and all the hill tribe languages so fluently as to be able to hold a deep political conversation with them.

Classic!

If you have different view with them and say you're a non-Thai, you're questioned. If you say you are a Thai, they say you are fake.

[ballpoint]

I am rather surprised that you have been able to talk seriously about politics with the poor people of over 40 provinces, since all serious discussion around here, and I suspect in many other provinces, is done in the local dialect. You must be a cunning linguist indeed to be able to speak Isaan, Khmer, Tai, and all the hill tribe languages so fluently as to be able to hold a deep political conversation with them.

Classic!

If you have different view with them and say you're a non-Thai, you're questioned. If you say you are a Thai, they say you are fake.

You can come around here (my district in Buri Ram) and start asking the farmers questions about politics in any language you like, and you won't get very far. But sit around with them, passing the bottles of lao khao around, listening to their discussions in Khmer, and you'll get a very good understanding of what they think. I'd imagine it would be similar in other provinces with their own "first" languages.

While on this topic, this past weekend, for the first time ever, the conversation was "the yellow shirts are for HM the King, the red shirts are for Thaksin, who wants to be king", and there was general agreement that this is the case. There have been rumours that the people were told this in the past, but this was the first time that I have heard them say it themselves. Shoot me down if you like, it won't change what I heard, and remember, Buri Ram is the heart of Newin country. It looks like he is doing a bit of propaganda spreading. If this catches on, Thaksin will be ripped to shreds if he ever steps foot in Buri Ram again.

[Richard W]

Exactly why haven't the drug war deaths and Tak Bai crimes been invoked?

The drug war still seems to have massive popular support.

General brutality at Tak Bai probably has general support, and was it not done by 'our boys'? Is there evidence that the deaths were deliberate, and, would most Thais care if they were?

[Koo82]

The reds are not fighting for only Khun Thaksin.

There are 3 kinds of political parties: one is to serve the rich, one is for the poor and the 3rd one changes their supports to which every party who is winning. Political games are benefit games. Who give benefits to us, they win. A party wants to be government because they want to earn, not only to serve public.

Politicians can change their minds. No reason to fight for one particular politician.

The rich has been rich for 70 years if not 700 years and the poor are still poor. We did not pay attention to politics in the past. Reason: who ever was PM, things were still the same. One day a man named Thaksin came and made a difference.

He did not lose an election. He was down because of a coup. He said if Thailand is good after he's gone, he will be happy. But Thailand did not go ahead when the Army was government. Those rich are still rich.

Then election time came. Their side won and they had Khun Samak as PM. This man was down because of the funniest reason in this century: cooking.

Then another man from the party who does good things for them, the poor, became PM. This man never has a chance to sit in his office. He has gone again. PAD thought they did their duty. In fact, Khun Somchai did not go down because of PAD.

We know if we don't have a true democracy, anyone coming up from the red side will be down for whatever reason and anyone from the yellow side will serve the rich only.

However we still did not come out from home.

Until the PAD killed people, made messes in so many occasions, and finally camped in 2 airports in Bangkok, and they are still out there until today,

Until some reds were caught for throwing stones and eggs and were charged as fast,

Until we know that those who slept in Government House for months are still setting up concerts here and there and traveling to USA,

Until we know that they only had invitation letters calling them to meet police and they bargained they will meet police 25 days later, and no one dares to deny that,

Until we know that someone's wife bought a land on the top of a mountain is ok and someone else's wife bought a land with no fault and husband must go to jail 2 years,

Until the whole system is changed after the coup 2006 and one side can do whatever and one side cannot,

Then we know we must fight for our own lives. We don't fight for a party or a person.

If we still cannot cut those behind Abhisit, we still fight.

If Khun Thaksin changes his mind and does what Abhisit is doing now, we will throw him out. We will not stick to one person. People can change.

[mc2]

well said, Koo82.

unfortunately it is like in the bible when jesus was advised not to cast pearls before swine.

[Plus]

Maybe. She lost me when she implied that Samak was doing everything for the poor. Samak????

Like those Newin boys in Buriram, she is a victim of propaganda, she obviously can't handle the Truth (Today), got swept off her feet.

As for Ballpoint's sotry - perfect argument that Isanese either A. Shouldn't be allowed to vote, as they obviously can't think for themselves, or B. Top politics should be cleared of self-serving crooks for good, so that no one tries to take advantage of the poor who'd trust anyone who's good to them at the moment.

It is a testament to the notion that poor folks CAN be manipulated at will and swing form one side of political divide to another in a matter of months, given proper stimulaiton.

The picture of hard working guys relaxing with lao kao at the end of the day and talking politics might look idillic, agreed, but what should worry people is that the direction of their talk is set someplace else, behind high walls and goon looking security guards in cheap sunglasses, and I bet they don't sip lao kao when they decide what the villagers should think from now on. That's what should be worrying, not "Oh, they are so cute" idealistic nonsense. There's nothing cute about making Newin the most powerful deal breaker in Thai politics, no matter how cute it looks on surface.

[Journalist]

As for Ballpoint's story - perfect argument that Isaanese either A) Shouldn't be allowed to vote, as they obviously can't think for themselves, or . Top politics should be cleared of self-serving crooks for good, so that no one tries to take advantage of the poor who'd trust anyone who's good to them at the moment.

How about if Isaan voters were given by parties representing the urban intelligensia various pretty things for their vote - not cash- but beads, shiny metal buttons, hand mirrors, inexpensive necklaces, silk ribbons, strong liquor, ...and for village headmen, guns with the secret of 'man's red fire'

Would that consititute buying their vote - as its not cash.

[Plus]

No matter how much I enjoyed your proposition (made in good faith, I hope), I can't help but note that there are no parties representing urban intelligentsia in Thailand. Democrats might qualify on the national level, but locally people still vote for their local pooyais - Newin is a case in point. He just drives a stake into naive idea that TRT politically awakened the poor who now demand policies and accountability.

It's still same old same old, just as it was ten-fifteen years ago.

And for die hard reds - why is it that the most powerful politicians who "care" base their support in the poorest communities? Chidchobs had ruled Buriram since the fall of Angkor empire, it seems, now they are at the peak of their power, but Buriram is still a shithole. How long the reds are going to blame urban intelligentsia and the elites for Isan poverty?

[jayboy]

urban intelligentsia in Thailand

There's a joke here somewhere along the lines of titles the world's shortest books

• The Code of Ethics for Lawyers
  
• The Australian Book of Foreplay
  
• The Book of Motivated Postal Workers
  
• Americans' Guide to Etiquette
  
• The World Guide to Good American Beer
  
• Royal Family's Guide to Good Marriages
  
• Safe Places to Travel in the USA
  
• Bill Clinton: A Portrait of Integrity
  
• Jerry Garcia's Guide to Beating Drug Addiction
  
• Contraception by Pope John Paul II
  
• Cooking Gourmet Dishes With Tofu
  
• The Complete Guide to Catholic Sex
  
• The Wit and Wisdom of Dan Quayle.
  
• Consumer Marketing Ethics
  
• Al Gore: The Wild Years
  
• America's Most Popular Lawyers
  
• Career Opportunities for History Majors
  
• Detroit - A Travel Guide
  
• Dr. Kevorkian's Collection of Motivational Speeches
  
• Easy UNIX
  
• Everything Men Know about Women
  
• George Foreman's Big Book of Baby Names
  
• Mike Tyson's Guide to Dating Etiquette
  
• The Amish Phone Book
  
• Great Women Drivers Of Today
  

[Journalist]

^Its true. Buriram is the armpit of Thailand.

There's a bar I have been to in the Asoke area where the employees dress in school uniforms. They were all Buriram folk working there. Probably constitutes quite a good job by the standards of that thriving northeast metropolis.

[Plus]

You know ALL employees there?

I also always wondered - what's the deal with two little rooms on both sides of the glass floor stage upstairs?

[Journalist]

^I think thats where Newin keeps his collection of Kruger Rands.

[animatic]

As for Ballpoint's story - perfect argument that Isaanese either A) Shouldn't be allowed to vote, as they obviously can't think for themselves, or . Top politics should be cleared of self-serving crooks for good, so that no one tries to take advantage of the poor who'd trust anyone who's good to them at the moment.

How about if Isaan voters were given by parties representing the urban intelligensia various pretty things for their vote - not cash- but beads, shiny metal buttons, hand mirrors, inexpensive necklaces, silk ribbons, strong liquor, ...and for village headmen, guns with the secret of 'man's red fire'

Would that consititute buying their vote - as its not cash.

So that would be the founding of New York, right?

Got any wampum kimo sabe?

[ballpoint]

The reds are not fighting for only Khun Thaksin.

There are 3 kinds of political parties: one is to serve the rich, one is for the poor and the 3rd one changes their supports to which every party who is winning. Political games are benefit games. Who give benefits to us, they win. A party wants to be government because they want to earn, not only to serve public.

Politicians can change their minds. No reason to fight for one particular politician.

The rich has been rich for 70 years if not 700 years and the poor are still poor. We did not pay attention to politics in the past. Reason: who ever was PM, things were still the same. One day a man named Thaksin came and made a difference.

He did not lose an election. He was down because of a coup. He said if Thailand is good after he's gone, he will be happy. But Thailand did not go ahead when the Army was government. Those rich are still rich.

Then election time came. Their side won and they had Khun Samak as PM. This man was down because of the funniest reason in this century: cooking.

Then another man from the party who does good things for them, the poor, became PM. This man never has a chance to sit in his office. He has gone again. PAD thought they did their duty. In fact, Khun Somchai did not go down because of PAD.

We know if we don't have a true democracy, anyone coming up from the red side will be down for whatever reason and anyone from the yellow side will serve the rich only.

However we still did not come out from home.

Until the PAD killed people, made messes in so many occasions, and finally camped in 2 airports in Bangkok, and they are still out there until today,

Until some reds were caught for throwing stones and eggs and were charged as fast,

Until we know that those who slept in Government House for months are still setting up concerts here and there and traveling to USA,

Until we know that they only had invitation letters calling them to meet police and they bargained they will meet police 25 days later, and no one dares to deny that,

Until we know that someone's wife bought a land on the top of a mountain is ok and someone else's wife bought a land with no fault and husband must go to jail 2 years,

Until the whole system is changed after the coup 2006 and one side can do whatever and one side cannot,

Then we know we must fight for our own lives. We don't fight for a party or a person.

If we still cannot cut those behind Abhisit, we still fight.

If Khun Thaksin changes his mind and does what Abhisit is doing now, we will throw him out. We will not stick to one person. People can change.

Don't you see, it's not what you think the reds or yellows are for, or what I think the reds or yellows are for, that will determine the future of the country, it's what the majority of the people in the provinces think they're for. In the TRT days, Thaksin had the support of the traditionally voted for blocs in the Northeast. Now, he's lost Newin, and all those who mindlessly do and believe as Newin says. It now appears that someone is telling those people the one thing that is guaranteed to get them riled, that Thaksin is anti monarchy. Again, it doesn't matter a fetid dingo's kidney if me and you and a dog named Boo know it not to be true, it's what they believe that matters, and they are starting to believe it, because Newin says it's so. If this propaganda spreads, your precious red shirts will be limited to a few people from Bangkok, and they'll be fighting a lot of angry Isaan farmers. And all of you who argue that democracy is just a matter of one person, one vote, might be forced to consider a change in thinking when the shoe is on the other foot (or totally off the foot and thrown at Thaksin).

[Koo82]

I know what we must fight for, but I cannot stop loving Khun Thaksin. His mind is number one. He knows things what many cannot think of. He did a lot for Thailand. What he has done is proved he can't be bad.

I will join the red meetings. If we win and bring back justice, Khun Thaksin will be here to live with us and will be our Prime Minister. He is still our Prime Minister because the coup is not right. The 2540 Constitution Law does not approve a coup.

[animatic]

The tipping point seems to have been reached,

and like lemmings the sea beckons.