Pm Vows Reconciliation In 8 Months

[dbrenn]

No matter what the losing side will whine and kvetch and cry foul.

But the thing is in MOST democracies they do NOT start street fighting

and threaten insurrection and underground guerrilla wars if they lose.

Most people are not best pleased with the Red Shirts act lately,

even if some people find they still have SOME support in certain neighborhoods.

Who started the street fighting? And how do you define 'most people'? On the one hand, you detest vote buying, and yet on the other you accept that the army is in control and can override the popular vote anyway. Isn't military rule just as despicable a concept as buying votes?

One thing is very clear: It was the PAD started all this colour coded street fighting, blockading and violence. They laid siege to the airport. Their actions set the precedent for this coloured shirt mess that Thailand is in now, and has given the reds an excuse to cause mayhem in equal measure. None of this would have happened if Abhisit had beaten Thaksin at the ballot box, fair and square. To say that Abhisit's installation was just another round of good old Thai politics, ignores all the chaos and bitter feelings that exist in the population to an explosive extent.

The Dems try to cook the numbers and justify Abhisit's installation as part of a democratic process, sweeping the tanks under the carpet, but they will have to account themselves to the electorate sooner or later. Even Abhisit himself is wavering and suggesting that a house dissolution is possible. That hardly sounds like a man who has a commanding mandate - in parliament, or in the country where it matters most.

[dbrenn]

No insult to your wife - blah blah blah

Your claim to not be insulting his wife is insincere and about as believable as your claim to not be a supporter of Thaksin.

I would support Abhisit if he did the right thing and got himself elected, rather than just sitting there and waiting for the inevitable to happen.

[dbrenn]

Let me put it to you this way, if Abhisit fails in bringing national reconciliation to Thailand, you will never see the type of Thailand you argue for. Abhisit is fighting uphill as it is. He does not have complete support from his own party and certainly his wishing to trash the military's constitution isn't winning him a lot of supporters there either. He may well fail, and if he does, your right to vote will become even less meaningless that it is now. He is your last chance, unless you still think Thaksin is going to ride in on a white horse.

You might be right. Thailand might be too broken to fix and further descend into an accelerating spiral of chaos. It could be that the old generals may have bitten off more than they can chew this time around, and that prolonged strife is the price that they might have to pay for their incessant meddling. Thailand could end up like Burma. The army should stay in the barracks, where it belong. They are utterly hopeless and incompetent to govern the country.

To say that Abhist is our last chance would only be a valid comment if he were seen to be making even an inch of progress, which isn't the case. More progress might be made by calling an election, releasing the tension by giving the people their (albeit flawed) democracy back again.

[animatic]

PAD started street protests, each time their were violently attacked

they then by necessity got one notch more martial.

It was not a violent street clash until the reds attacked under Samak

and caused a true street battle, that they lost. And then the SoE.

The one side that has historically been using violence to silence alternate thought was Red.

Which Is why I can not EVER find them a viable political movement to back.

Edited May 3, 2009 by animatic

[rixalex]

No insult to your wife - blah blah blah

Your claim to not be insulting his wife is insincere and about as believable as your claim to not be a supporter of Thaksin.

I would support Abhisit if he did the right thing and got himself elected,

That's just further dishonesty in my opinion. People who support and vote for the loser of an election, rarely suddenly throw their support behind the winner just because the winner has won. Yes they might be forced to accept the nation's wishes, but to actually change their support, no i don't see that happening.

One thing is for sure, if Chalerm got elected tomorrow, i certainly wouldn't be throwing my support behind him. And likewise, i'm sure all of Thaksin's faithful followers wouldn't throw their support behind Abhisit if he won either.

Dbrenn you speak as if an election is the answer to all our problems, when the truth is that the only problem it addresses is the fact that you don't like our present leader and you think that he would lose. The only thing you care about is re-instating someone sympathetic to your causes ie Thaksin.

When will you start being honest with us? Does your real opinion shame you that much?

[dbrenn]

That's just further dishonesty in my opinion. People who support and vote for the loser of an election, rarely suddenly throw their support behind the winner just because the winner has won. Yes they might be forced to accept the nation's wishes, but to actually change their support, no i don't see that happening.

One thing is for sure, if Chalerm got elected tomorrow, i certainly wouldn't be throwing my support behind him. And likewise, i'm sure all of Thaksin's faithful followers wouldn't throw their support behind Abhisit if he won either.

Dbrenn you speak as if an election is the answer to all our problems, when the truth is that the only problem it addresses is the fact that you don't like our present leader and you think that he would lose. The only thing you care about is re-instating someone sympathetic to your causes ie Thaksin.

When will you start being honest with us? Does your real opinion shame you that much?

You opinion is that simply because I question the method Abhisit used to snatch the top job must mean that I love Thaksin's lot. I have told you so many times already that I am in favour of democratic process. If that makes me appear to support one side in your eyes, it is simply because you are missing the point and falling into the us-and-them-Thaksin-is-the-devil trap that has been cleverly set by the PAD clique to shift focus from its true (and publicly admitted) agenda of undermining democracy. I'm not ashamed to hold the view that democracy is a good thing. Why on earth should I be? Thaksin did good work at times. Abhisit probably could too, if he had a mandate, which he doesn't. Hence, an election might be the only way to seek that mandate that he will need to be successful. Even he has admitted this.

Thai politicians are a notoriously fickle backstabbing bunch, and for you to credit them with too much loyalty tell me a lot about the idealistic way you see things. How long have you been in Thailand?

Edited May 3, 2009 by dbrenn

[rixalex]

an election might be the only way to seek that mandate that he will need to be successful. Even he has admitted this.

And i have told you many times that i agree that Abhisit needs to go to the polls. Where i disgree is in your demands that the elections should happen immediately. That's not necessary and nor is it in the best interests of the country.

How long have you been in Thailand?

As Sriracha John rightly pointed out, people can and often do write about themselves whatever helps to support their argument - it therefore serves little purpose to get into personal details when there is often no way of substaniating what anyone says.

[hammered]

Arent the majority of the MPs across all parties agreed on the charter needing ammendment? Arent the majority of MPs across allparties agreed that some form of amnesty is needed? If that is the case then it is just a matter of detail. Then when the rules are agree on an election can be held. If nobody agrees the rules there is no point in having an election as that will not be accepted. The big fix is getting the majority to agree on rules first

It is also a matter of some wanting to bring everyone together and others wanting to widen the rifts. Anyone not wanting to talk about negotiastion is clearly in the latter camp. There is no reconcilliation without compromise by all sides and that means all sides giving things up. Simple really

[dbrenn]

an election might be the only way to seek that mandate that he will need to be successful. Even he has admitted this.

And i have told you many times that i agree that Abhisit needs to go to the polls. Where i disgree is in your demands that the elections should happen immediately. That's not necessary and nor is it in the best interests of the country.

How long have you been in Thailand?

As Sriracha John rightly pointed out, people can and often do write about themselves whatever helps to support their argument - it therefore serves little purpose to get into personal details when there is often no way of substaniating what anyone says.

Ha ha - nicely sidestepped. Why do you hang out here, knowing that everything that you read is unverified, and as such may or may not be true? Ah, I get it! Only the people who like Abhisit and hate Thaksin are the ones that can be believed! By the same token, how do I know that you are not one of those new PR spin doctors on the Democrat payroll?

Looks like we agree with each other in more ways than we realised. There is a need to go to the polls, and even Abhisit is conceding that might happen sooner rather than later. Since he has got nothing done, sooner would be a good idea.

You sound like a politician

[rixalex]

Why do you hang out here, knowing that everything that you read is unverified, and as such may or may not be true?

Not everything i read - just what people say about themselves.

[justanothercybertosser]

I will never understand how some people who profess to understand Thailand and Thai election laws cannot understand that an elected MP who is selected by the majority of the other elected MP's is the PM. This is simple. It is black and white. There is no gray area in this.

I do understand that some may find fault with the way Abhisit gained control, as the election laws that allowed him to gain control were brought in by the coup, but it is Abhisit himself who wants to change this. He wants to revert back to the 1997 People's Constitution and even supports granting amnesty to the politicians that were banned!

People who argue against this simply are ignorant about the economic mess Thailand is in and the polarization that exists in its society. Here we finally have a PM seeking to rectify both and instead of support, people argue against him because he doesn't wear the right colored shirt. Ridiculous. Simply, unbelievably ridiculous.

That post seems to be more desperation and wishful thinking than anything else.

Things never are black and white. Yes, i have already stated that Abhisit's election fullfilled the letter of the law. The spirit of the law though was circumvented by both the formation of the coalition, and by his failure to call elections to get a popular mandate as well in addition to the parliamentary mandate.

You sidestepped two important points i brought up - the setting up of the Blue Shirts by Suthep (and Newin), which does show that Abhisit has either not the power you seem to apply to him, or that he is party to such tactics, which would run counter to his claims of "rule of the law", and with it contradicts all that he says and you post here about him. Care to elaborate on this issue?

We know very well of the economic mess, thank you, i am not ignorant. But as it seems now, for the many different political factions in this country, including some of whom are to be found in the present government, the economic problems seem to be only secondary to the socio-political ones.

[warfie]

If all of the voting had happened after the election, I would not say anything.

After the election, members took out their calculators. At this point PPP had 233 members, Democrat had 145, so if the small parties voted for Abhisit, Abhisit still could not win. That was why Khun Samak became PM.

That's the main point.

Then they knocked Khun Samak, and dissolved PPP, banned some 37 politicians.

From what I heard, politicians were instructed by the army to vote for Abhisit. It was different that when people voted for Khun Samak and Khun Somchai, no army instructed people to do so.

Let's go back to the time Thai Rak Thai had 377 members after election. Votes in Parliament of small parties and Newin group were not important. Khun Thaksin would still be PM if they had not made a coup. If they hadn't made the new Constitution Law, 111 + 37 members would still have been with us and no way Abhisit could hold power.

And now is the time for each party to take out their calculators again. Who has power now can get them easily. Not all of them but some.

"from what you heard"??? heard from who?

Source? Proof? Koo makes me wonder about the legitimacy of the Democrat government... but not in the way s/he intends... some of the statements and claims made, cause me to think s/he might be getting paid to deliberately lower the credibility of the Thaksin camp...

[Old Man River]

That post seems to be more desperation and wishful thinking than anything else.

Things never are black and white. Yes, i have already stated that Abhisit's election fullfilled the letter of the law. The spirit of the law though was circumvented by both the formation of the coalition, and by his failure to call elections to get a popular mandate as well in addition to the parliamentary mandate.

You sidestepped two important points i brought up - the setting up of the Blue Shirts by Suthep (and Newin), which does show that Abhisit has either not the power you seem to apply to him, or that he is party to such tactics, which would run counter to his claims of "rule of the law", and with it contradicts all that he says and you post here about him. Care to elaborate on this issue?

We know very well of the economic mess, thank you, i am not ignorant. But as it seems now, for the many different political factions in this country, including some of whom are to be found in the present government, the economic problems seem to be only secondary to the socio-political ones.

I skipped your important points as you call them because they didn't add to the discussion. We already know that Thailand is polarized, hence the discussion about national reconciliation. We already know that Abhisit doesn't have full support of his own party, let alone other parties in the coalition. This is not a secret. You bring these points up as if they are new. They are not.

What do you support. Are Newin and Suthep your hero's? Or, perhaps it is Thaksin, Jakropong and Jarturporn? Get off the fence. What do you support?

[sriracha john]

If all of the voting had happened after the election, I would not say anything.

After the election, members took out their calculators. At this point PPP had 233 members, Democrat had 145, so if the small parties voted for Abhisit, Abhisit still could not win. That was why Khun Samak became PM.

That's the main point.

Then they knocked Khun Samak, and dissolved PPP, banned some 37 politicians.

From what I heard, politicians were instructed by the army to vote for Abhisit. It was different that when people voted for Khun Samak and Khun Somchai, no army instructed people to do so.

Let's go back to the time Thai Rak Thai had 377 members after election. Votes in Parliament of small parties and Newin group were not important. Khun Thaksin would still be PM if they had not made a coup. If they hadn't made the new Constitution Law, 111 + 37 members would still have been with us and no way Abhisit could hold power.

And now is the time for each party to take out their calculators again. Who has power now can get them easily. Not all of them but some.

"from what you heard"??? heard from who?

Source? Proof? Koo makes me wonder about the legitimacy of the Democrat government... but not in the way s/he intends... some of the statements and claims made, cause me to think s/he might be getting paid to deliberately lower the credibility of the Thaksin camp...

An interesting perspective... and altogether quite plausible explanation for him.

[justanothercybertosser]

I skipped your important points as you call them because they didn't add to the discussion. We already know that Thailand is polarized, hence the discussion about national reconciliation. We already know that Abhisit doesn't have full support of his own party, let alone other parties in the coalition. This is not a secret. You bring these points up as if they are new. They are not.

What do you support. Are Newin and Suthep your hero's? Or, perhaps it is Thaksin, Jakropong and Jarturporn? Get off the fence. What do you support?

That is semantics now, still side stepping the issues. I do not bring these points up as if they would be new, but because i have not seen any sufficient answer on such important issues such as the Blue Shirts by Abhisit, and only blatant lies by Suthep. Also you here have not answered on this question.

What i support? Simple.

I support a government that has a popular mandate, that means through elections, whichever party may win. I do not care which party that may be in the end, because for me the upholding of the democratic process and system is more important than personalities. I also would demand to have all executive members of banned parties who have not directly violated the election laws themselves to be allowed to stand for elections (note - not an amnesty, but a direct reversal of completely unjust laws, and an immediate return to the '97 constitution, including the immediate dismantling of ISOC, no committes, no delaying tactics).

As a first act of this new government (which i would then call the first legal government since the 2006 coup), i would wish that a blanket amnesty is issued for all related to the political turmoil of the last three years, and all related crimes, even murder. I would hope that all may have learned what happens when political differences are fought out on the streets, so that we may escape the deadly circle we have moved in for the past three years.

Could you have now the decency to answer my question, please, after i answered yours: what about the Blue Shirts?

Edited May 3, 2009 by justanothercybertosser

[rixalex]

I'm not ashamed to hold the view that democracy is a good thing. Why on earth should I be?

If you were fighting for democracy without any agenda i would agree. You are plainly not and it's that that you should be ashamed of.

Ever since Thaksin has been in self-imposed exile, all we hear about from him and his followers is how much democracy means to them. So why did it mean so little to Thaksin when he was in power?

Where were you dbrenn when Thaksin was interfering with all the checks and balances required for democracy to function? Where were you when Thaksin was intimidating people and throwing out lawsuits left, right and centre to anyone who spoke out against him? Where were you when Thaksin said that democracy wasn't his main aim?

[Old Man River]

Could you have now the decency to answer my question, please, after i answered yours: what about the Blue Shirts?

That is the million dollar question, isn't it? I really don't know anymore than what has been reported in the media. Below is one article that makes a great deal of accusations, many of which I don't buy, but then, who knows. This is such a fluid situation that anything is possible.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/05/01...cs_30101785.php

[justanothercybertosser]

Could you have now the decency to answer my question, please, after i answered yours: what about the Blue Shirts?

That is the million dollar question, isn't it? I really don't know anymore than what has been reported in the media. Below is one article that makes a great deal of accusations, many of which I don't buy, but then, who knows. This is such a fluid situation that anything is possible.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/05/01...cs_30101785.php

I know the article. It is incomplete.

The person responsible for internal security is Suthep, and therefore the only one who could possibly order the military to work with the Blue Shirts in Pattaya. This collaboration between military and Blue Shirts has been proven. Suthep called the Blue Shirts "volonteers from Chonburi province", which is a blatant lie.

Newin's involvement has been proven.

Suthep and Abhisit have been more than evasive when asked about the Blue Shirts.

The big question is, where does that leave us now? Have things deteriorated so badly?

How can we trust Abhsit when he talks confidently about reconciliation, while his right hand man is playing very nasty and ugly games outside any legal framework, and does not need to leave his post?

The Blue Shirt incident leaves only two possibilities:

1) Abhisit is not in any position of power

2) He is party of those games, and therefore not what he pretends to be

Both options are very troubling.

[DaleBlue]

If the charter is ammend, it could released 210 banned pro-red politician to run for MP. Even if only half of these banned MP protentisl wins a seat, it could flip the power balance to Thaksin favour.

If Mark is smart (I am sure he is), he will call a snap election before the constitution is ameded. To keep the 210 pro-Thaksin out. With the current constitution, Mark have a upper hand.

[justanothercybertosser]

If the charter is ammend, it could released 210 banned pro-red politician to run for MP. Even if only half of these banned MP protentisl wins a seat, it could flip the power balance to Thaksin favour.

If Mark is smart (I am sure he is), he will call a snap election before the constitution is ameded. To keep the 210 pro-Thaksin out. With the current constitution, Mark have a upper hand.

This will still not be seen as a popular mandate by his opponents. Out of the 210 banned only very few did actually break the laws leading to their ban. This is not about "getting the upper hand" - but finding a way to bring Thailand back on track, and reverse this descend that might end up in a civil war.

[sriracha john]

If the charter is ammend, it could released 210 banned pro-red politician to run for MP. Even if only half of these banned MP protentisl wins a seat, it could flip the power balance to Thaksin favour.

If Mark is smart (I am sure he is), he will call a snap election before the constitution is ameded. To keep the 210 pro-Thaksin out. With the current constitution, Mark have a upper hand.

This will still not be seen as a popular mandate by his opponents. Out of the 210 banned only very few did actually break the laws leading to their ban. This is not about "getting the upper hand" - but finding a way to bring Thailand back on track, and reverse this descend that might end up in a civil war.

It's known as a conspiracy... the same sort of laws that have done much to bring down organized crime syndicates around

the world.

It's impossible to believe that dissolved party executives didn't have complicit knowledge of the actions of the party executives that were actually caught committing bribery and other electoral frauds for the benefit of the party. For example, are we really supposed to believe that the likes of Samak and Noppadope had no prior knowledge of Yongyuth's actions for the benefit of the PPP? Or that Thaksin's sister, and TRT MP and TRT party executive, Yaowapa was kept completely in the dark regarding the fraudulent actions of other TRT party executives? Puhhhhlease.... pull my other leg.

The new laws are admittedly tough... but they need to be... if the endless cycle of criminally-tainted elections is ever to be broken or at least lessened. There are a lot of mafia types that are imprisoned and crime syndicates that have been significantly weakened since the initiation of the application of these laws against them.

Keep the laws just the way they are.

Edited May 4, 2009 by sriracha john

[dbrenn]

It's impossible to believe that dissolved party executives didn't have complicit knowledge of the actions of the party executives that were actually caught committing bribery and other electoral frauds for the benefit of the party....

And it's impossible to believe that a man like Newin, once a key member of TRT/PPP, didn't have complicit knowledge of all those misdeeds either. Where is Newin now? In Abhisit's coalition. Has he been held accountable? Of course not. It's just a coincidence that the only people who are held accountable for corruption, all 210 of them, are on just one side of the political fence, and that alll the ones on the other side are squeaky clean.

Face it, corruption is rampant at every section of Thai society, and the politicians top the list. The double stadard applied by the yellows in their cynical quest to dilute the popular vote has infuriated a large chunk of the population. The Dems rationalising that only the reds are corrupt is a lie, not to mention an exercise in futility. They all line their pockets when they think nobody is looking.

Edited May 4, 2009 by dbrenn

[animatic]

Actually Newin is not in ANY COALITION, he is not even in office.

His Buri Ram friends are and legally.

Obviously power is not exclusively in the hands of MP's.

Gee was it ever really... nope.

Is it ever really in any country... nope.

The tough election laws are similar to USA's RICO laws

that bring down individuals in a group and the group, for doing crimes as a unit.

PPP might get a bit of a pass since there was a bit more ackowlegment of the laws

during that election, though not enough taking them seriously to save their fuzzy butts...

But TRT certainly knew stem to stern what was going on and those people worked as

a lockstep team for Thaksin's machine. They then set up a 'War Room' in the Shinawatra building

to win back their lost power. it is certainly a conspiracy to control Thailand controled by Thaklsin and family.

Now one can argue the army is another,

but why is Thaksin's kleptocracy getting a pass after breaking the laws?

Only because they are fomenting insurrection and potential civil war as a weapon to win back power.

This can not be condoned. But these people will not reconcile to less than their whole return to power.IS reconciliation even possible. not with Thaksin on the loose and a source of funds.

Even LESS likely if he gets his 2.2bil$ back. Maybe the Damapot olan can get some back

if they discretely, but STRINGLY get the word that Thaksin's clan and his minions are NOT EVER

part of that package. Depends on their actions and contrition shown publicly.

The laws are not the real problem here,

but the attitude that they can be BYPASSED with enough clout.

A very Team Thaksin attitude.

Edited May 4, 2009 by animatic

[sbk]

Where is Newin now? In Abhisit's coalition.

Newin holds an official position? He was elected as a MP?

[dbrenn]

Looks like another chapter in the saga may be about to commence:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/1611...itution-changes

Wonder what they'll do this time? Burn down the airport? So much for reconciliation.

[dbrenn]

Actually Newin is not in ANY COALITION, he is not even in office.

His Buri Ram friends are and legally.

Newin controls the 'Friends of Newin" group of MPs. Recall the day when Newin was photographed giving flowers to Abhisit just after he had told Thaksin that it 'was all over' on the phone, shifting his people over to Abhisit's side and paving the way for Abhisit's installation once it seemed like Thaksin was a dead duck. It's reasonable to wonder how Abhisit can look at himself in the mirror, knowing that his supporters were sullied by tenure in the TRT/PPP, and were therefore involved in all these corrupt practices that he claims to have no part in.

What is our 'Mr. Clean' Abhisit doing associating with Newin and his clique? By the yellow's own logic of zero tolerance on corruption, that would be as if Barrack Obama had relied on the support of the likes of Al Copone to get into office .

Oops - I forgot the obvious: Newin controls 22 MPs that Abhisit needed to get onside so that he could claim the job of PM. So much for the moral high ground that the Dems keep harping on about.

Face the facts - the Dems are as tainted as the rest of them. They relied on the support of corrupt old generals and corrupt Godfathers like Newin to get into office. They can't expect people to now believe their promises of clean politics and reconciliation, just because they put a nice looking clean cut facade like Abhisit in front of their crooked old guard masters. People aren't stupid enough to buy that anymore.

Edited May 4, 2009 by dbrenn

[animatic]

Actually Newin is not in ANY COALITION, he is not even in office.

His Buri Ram friends are and legally.

Newin controls the 'Friends of Newin" group of MPs. Recall the day when Newin was photographed giving flowers to Abhisit just after he had told Thaksin that it 'was all over' on the phone, shifting his people over to Abhisit's side and paving the way for Abhisit's installation once it seemed like Thaksin was a dead duck. It's reasonable to wonder how Abhisit can look at himself in the mirror, knowing that his supporters were sullied by tenure in the TRT/PPP, and were therefore involved in all these corrupt practices that he claims to have no part in.

What is our 'Mr. Clean' Abhisit doing associating with Newin and his clique? By the yellow's own logic of zero tolerance on corruption, that would be as if Barrack Obama had relied on the support of the likes of Al Copone to get into office .

Oops - I forgot the obvious: Newin controls 22 MPs that Abhisit needed to get onside so that he could claim the job of PM. So much for the moral high ground that the Dems keep harping on about.

Face the facts - the Dems are as tainted as the rest of them. They relied on the support of corrupt old generals and former members of corrupt organisations like Newin to get into office. They can't expect people to now believe their promises of reconciliation, just because they put a nice looking clean cut facade like Abhisit in front of their crooked old guard masters.

You seem to always try and quote me out of context.

Actually Newin is not in ANY COALITION, he is not even in office.

His Buri Ram friends are and legally.

Obviously power is not exclusively in the hands of MP's.

Gee was it ever really... nope.

Is it ever really in any country... nope.

Politics is NOT a clean business. That's a fact everywhere.

We should go for the least objectionable players,

doing the most good, vs the most objectionable players

doing the most to enrich themselves and the least for the people.

The old Dems are not the new Dems,

same as the individual parts of other parties co-opted into TRT were not TRT.

TRT was a new breed of malevolence and used new rules.

PTP is only a shadow of it's step child PPP, this not the same,

even as it aspires to be.

10 years on, many of the players change, ten years on,

it's a different ballgame on a different playing field.

The old insults are out of time and out of place.

[dbrenn]

Actually Newin is not in ANY COALITION, he is not even in office.

His Buri Ram friends are and legally.

Newin controls the 'Friends of Newin" group of MPs. Recall the day when Newin was photographed giving flowers to Abhisit just after he had told Thaksin that it 'was all over' on the phone, shifting his people over to Abhisit's side and paving the way for Abhisit's installation once it seemed like Thaksin was a dead duck. It's reasonable to wonder how Abhisit can look at himself in the mirror, knowing that his supporters were sullied by tenure in the TRT/PPP, and were therefore involved in all these corrupt practices that he claims to have no part in.

What is our 'Mr. Clean' Abhisit doing associating with Newin and his clique? By the yellow's own logic of zero tolerance on corruption, that would be as if Barrack Obama had relied on the support of the likes of Al Copone to get into office .

Oops - I forgot the obvious: Newin controls 22 MPs that Abhisit needed to get onside so that he could claim the job of PM. So much for the moral high ground that the Dems keep harping on about.

Face the facts - the Dems are as tainted as the rest of them. They relied on the support of corrupt old generals and former members of corrupt organisations like Newin to get into office. They can't expect people to now believe their promises of reconciliation, just because they put a nice looking clean cut facade like Abhisit in front of their crooked old guard masters.

You seem to always try and quote me out of context.

Actually Newin is not in ANY COALITION, he is not even in office.

His Buri Ram friends are and legally.

Obviously power is not exclusively in the hands of MP's.

Gee was it ever really... nope.

Is it ever really in any country... nope.

Politics is NOT a clean business. That's a fact everywhere.

We should go for the least objectionable players,

doing the most good, vs the most objectionable players

doing the most to enrich themselves and the least for the people.

The old Dems are not the new Dems,

same as the individual parts of other parties co-opted into TRT were not TRT.

TRT was a new breed of malevolence and used new rules.

PTP is only a shadow of it's step child PPP, this not the same,

even as it aspires to be.

10 years on, many of the players change, ten years on,

it's a different ballgame on a different playing field.

The old insults are out of time and out of place.

Oh get real! Now you are saying that Newin is a rehabilitated Godfather and should be forgiven just because he has switched sides. Whom else should we forgive and rehabilitate, and by what set of moral guidelines? How ridiculous.

[justanothercybertosser]

It's known as a conspiracy... the same sort of laws that have done much to bring down organized crime syndicates around

the world.

It's impossible to believe that dissolved party executives didn't have complicit knowledge of the actions of the party executives that were actually caught committing bribery and other electoral frauds for the benefit of the party. For example, are we really supposed to believe that the likes of Samak and Noppadope had no prior knowledge of Yongyuth's actions for the benefit of the PPP? Or that Thaksin's sister, and TRT MP and TRT party executive, Yaowapa was kept completely in the dark regarding the fraudulent actions of other TRT party executives? Puhhhhlease.... pull my other leg.

The new laws are admittedly tough... but they need to be... if the endless cycle of criminally-tainted elections is ever to be broken or at least lessened. There are a lot of mafia types that are imprisoned and crime syndicates that have been significantly weakened since the initiation of the application of these laws against them.

Keep the laws just the way they are.

The mafia type politicians in Thailand though can still operate with the existence of those laws, such as Newin, who regardless of his 5 year ban can still control enough MP's to be a very important power broker now in the Democrat led coalition, can even be filmed and photographed in a hug with Abhisit.

Really affected are the many politicians who have done nothing wrong, and do not have the money or pull to send their own representatives instead. Those are the vast majority of the banned politicians.

[hammered]

Could you have now the decency to answer my question, please, after i answered yours: what about the Blue Shirts?

That is the million dollar question, isn't it? I really don't know anymore than what has been reported in the media. Below is one article that makes a great deal of accusations, many of which I don't buy, but then, who knows. This is such a fluid situation that anything is possible.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/05/01...cs_30101785.php

I know the article. It is incomplete.

The person responsible for internal security is Suthep, and therefore the only one who could possibly order the military to work with the Blue Shirts in Pattaya. This collaboration between military and Blue Shirts has been proven. Suthep called the Blue Shirts "volonteers from Chonburi province", which is a blatant lie.

Newin's involvement has been proven.

Suthep and Abhisit have been more than evasive when asked about the Blue Shirts.

The big question is, where does that leave us now? Have things deteriorated so badly?

How can we trust Abhsit when he talks confidently about reconciliation, while his right hand man is playing very nasty and ugly games outside any legal framework, and does not need to leave his post?

The Blue Shirt incident leaves only two possibilities:

1) Abhisit is not in any position of power

2) He is party of those games, and therefore not what he pretends to be

Both options are very troubling.

While the blue sghirt thing is troubling we cant copmpletely ignore what was a pre-planned violent act by the red shirts (when Thaksin pulled his family out every analyst worht their salt knew what was coming) and lay the blame on the other side totally. The red shave been palying a game outside the legal framework too, as did the yellows. By the way your call for a compelte amnesty of all crimes is a red demand. Be careful not to get too close to one sides propoganda.

Anyway negotiations are needed and excuses to avvoid them are not. the relaity is that has to be done through parliament. The other alternative is not good. All sides have parliamentary forces and extra parliamentary ones. The use of the former is better.