Red-Shirt Movement 'At War With Military'

[animatic]

Many Republican / Conservative voters feel disenfranchised in the USA now.

Any party out of power feels it is not getting a fair shake,

and many of it's harder core partisans feel it was stolen from them,

because they can't come to terms with others having different ideas about the country.

CNN and liberal press stole the lection has been stated irrationally by some.

Or in Thailand terms The biased anti-Thaksin press is subverting the minds of farnags.

yada yada

Well I have had non-americans get in my faces because

I 'voted G.W. Bush into office with my other low life American friends....'

I have literally had to shout down a couple and then explain only 1/3 or less of AMERICANS

voted for Bush and we can't all be held responsible for his actions, even as much of the world wanted to.

I always thought it was irresponsible to vote for him. And considering the dodgy supreme court verdict

and later blatant abuses in Ohio, I have always thought he should not have been in office.

But I never once sanctioned violene protest to get rid of him, as much as I wish a legal impeachment

had stopped him at year one.

Feeling disenfranchised is NORMAL for part of the electorate in ANY COUNTRY.

Why make it seem like this is special here.

Secondly much of parliamentary politics works in the same fashion world wide,

and ALWAYS there are some verbally and violently opposed to who is at the controls.

Israel a perfect example of a brokered or bartered coalition at the controls.

The current leaders did NOT win a majority, nor did the win more than another party,

but they DID put together a coalition that held. And regularly election violations and

graft and courts change the demographic of the parliamentary ratios.

So again there is NOTHING UNUSUAL with the Thailand situation,

if viewed e in comparison world wide.

What we have here

is the side not getting itself together wining on and on and

what IS unusual,

one fallen leader, Thaksin, attempting to cause chaos in the hopes of getting back to power.

Remove Thaksin from the general equation and it becomes just another

rough and tumble political food fight, like many others.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Many Republican / Conservative voters feel disenfranchised in the USA now.

Any party out of power feels it is not getting a fair shake,

and many of it's harder core partisans feel it was stolen from them,

because they can't come to terms with others having different ideas about the country.

CNN and liberal press stole the lection has been stated irrationally by some.

Or in Thailand terms The biased anti-Thaksin press is subverting the minds of farnags.

yada yada

Well I have had non-americans get in my faces because

I 'voted G.W. Bush into office with my other low life American friends....'

I have literally had to shout down a couple and then explain only 1/3 or less of AMERICANS

voted for Bush and we can't all be held responsible for his actions, even as much of the world wanted to.

I always thought it was irresponsible to vote for him. And considering the dodgy supreme court verdict

and later blatant abuses in Ohio, I have always thought he should not have been in office.

But I never once sanctioned violene protest to get rid of him, as much as I wish a legal impeachment

had stopped him at year one.

Feeling disenfranchised is NORMAL for part of the electorate in ANY COUNTRY.

Why make it seem like this is special here.

Secondly much of parliamentary politics works in the same fashion world wide,

and ALWAYS there are some verbally and violently opposed to who is at the controls.

Israel a perfect example of a brokered or bartered coalition at the controls.

The current leaders did NOT win a majority, nor did the win more than another party,

but they DID put together a coalition that held. And regularly election violations and

graft and courts change the demographic of the parliamentary ratios.

So again there is NOTHING UNUSUAL with the Thailand situation,

if viewed e in comparison world wide.

What we have here

is the side not getting itself together wining on and on and

what IS unusual,

one fallen leader, Thaksin, attempting to cause chaos in the hopes of getting back to power.

Remove Thaksin from the general equation and it becomes just another

rough and tumble political food fight, like many others.

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

[daboyz1]

Many Republican / Conservative voters feel disenfranchised in the USA now.

Any party out of power feels it is not getting a fair shake,

and many of it's harder core partisans feel it was stolen from them,

because they can't come to terms with others having different ideas about the country.

CNN and liberal press stole the lection has been stated irrationally by some.

Or in Thailand terms The biased anti-Thaksin press is subverting the minds of farnags.

yada yada

Well I have had non-americans get in my faces because

I 'voted G.W. Bush into office with my other low life American friends....'

I have literally had to shout down a couple and then explain only 1/3 or less of AMERICANS

voted for Bush and we can't all be held responsible for his actions, even as much of the world wanted to.

I always thought it was irresponsible to vote for him. And considering the dodgy supreme court verdict

and later blatant abuses in Ohio, I have always thought he should not have been in office.

But I never once sanctioned violene protest to get rid of him, as much as I wish a legal impeachment

had stopped him at year one.

Feeling disenfranchised is NORMAL for part of the electorate in ANY COUNTRY.

Why make it seem like this is special here.

Secondly much of parliamentary politics works in the same fashion world wide,

and ALWAYS there are some verbally and violently opposed to who is at the controls.

Israel a perfect example of a brokered or bartered coalition at the controls.

The current leaders did NOT win a majority, nor did the win more than another party,

but they DID put together a coalition that held. And regularly election violations and

graft and courts change the demographic of the parliamentary ratios.

So again there is NOTHING UNUSUAL with the Thailand situation,

if viewed e in comparison world wide.

What we have here

is the side not getting itself together wining on and on and

what IS unusual,

one fallen leader, Thaksin, attempting to cause chaos in the hopes of getting back to power.

Remove Thaksin from the general equation and it becomes just another

rough and tumble political food fight, like many others.

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

No one ever voted Nixon out of office. At least he did the right thing and resigned. If he didn't resign, he would have been impeached for sure, and more than likely brought up on charges. I'm not saying the U.S. military would have attempted a coup.

As I said before it is blatantly obvious that Thaksin cares only about Thaksin. He has made that very obvious through his phone ins, his Cambodia thing etc. etc. If I was him, I'd just hang out in Dubai or wherever and keep his mouth shut. I don't understand why he has to keep mixing up trouble in Thailand. I guess I don't understand Thai politics.

[animatic]

Correct he removed himself from office by dissolving the parliament in Jan-Feb 2006.

He didn't get relected because TRT was caught cheating, and the election annulled

the Election commission did it wrong, likely to benefit TRT and for doing so went to jail

and had to be replaced, Finally when PPP was elected, he came back, with free run of the country,

but HE hadn't run for office, so he was unelected.

He was on the run from his conviction when Somchai came to power similarly to Abhisit several months later.

He removed himself from the Prime Ministers chair.

And then his party screwed up.

He has not run for election since 2006.

He has not even attempted to file his name on a ballot since 2006.

He has done nothing but try to be the puppet master.

Edited January 29, 2010 by animatic

[daboyz1]

Correct he removed himself from office by dissolving the parliament in Jan 2006.

He didn't get relected because TRT was caught cheating,

and the Election commission when to jail and had to be replaced,

Finally when PPP was elected, he came back with free run of the country,

but HE hadn't run for office, so he was unelected.

He was on the run from his conviction when Somchai came to power similarly to Abhisit several months later.

He removed himself from the Prime Ministers chair.

And then his party screwed up.

Not to keep beating a dead horse, but could you imagine after Nixon resigned, that his brother in law took over the presidency. That move by TRT/PPP was laughable.

[rixalex]

Good morning! Another day - another polarized debate...

Good morning CMF! Just wondering whether this be another day of you ignoring direct questions repeatedly asked of you?

[animatic]

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

No one ever voted Nixon out of office. At least he did the right thing and resigned. If he didn't resign, he would have been impeached for sure, and more than likely brought up on charges. I'm not saying the U.S. military would have attempted a coup.

As I said before it is blatantly obvious that Thaksin cares only about Thaksin. He has made that very obvious through his phone ins, his Cambodia thing etc. etc. If I was him, I'd just hang out in Dubai or wherever and keep his mouth shut. I don't understand why he has to keep mixing up trouble in Thailand. I guess I don't understand Thai politics.

Loss of face, having lost the power and thus control...

He is a very controlling person, the CEO of the Nation as he liked to believe.

He was used to having many thousdans of people do as he said to do and no arguments.

A heady brew for anyones ego.

An over weaning a lust for power is part of it.

Power = Face, and money = power, here too. He's losing both.

So his personal honor is impinged upon.

No matter who you earned it power is power.

People don't bow and scrape the knee like they used to.

No doubt that galls him big time.

Edited January 29, 2010 by animatic

[daboyz1]

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

No one ever voted Nixon out of office. At least he did the right thing and resigned. If he didn't resign, he would have been impeached for sure, and more than likely brought up on charges. I'm not saying the U.S. military would have attempted a coup.

As I said before it is blatantly obvious that Thaksin cares only about Thaksin. He has made that very obvious through his phone ins, his Cambodia thing etc. etc. If I was him, I'd just hang out in Dubai or wherever and keep his mouth shut. I don't understand why he has to keep mixing up trouble in Thailand. I guess I don't understand Thai politics.

Lose of face having lost the pwoer and thus control...

he is a very controling person the CEO of the Nation as he liked to believe.

An over weaning a lust for power is part of it.

Power = Face, and money = power, here too. He's losing both.

So his personal honor is impinged upon.

No matter who you earned it power is power.

People don't bow and scrape the knee like they used to.

No doubt that galls him big time.

And that's his biggest problem. He cares nothing for Thailand, only his own image and getting his Baht back. He is using the red shirt folks to accomplish this, and that in my eyes makes him a very sad and selfish man.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Good morning! Another day - another polarized debate...

Good morning CMF! Just wondering whether this be another day of you ignoring direct questions repeatedly asked of you?

Now, now... calm down dear its only a debate........................ and I have made best endeavours to answer all

[animatic]

Not to keep beating a dead horse, but could you imagine after Nixon resigned, that his brother in law took over the presidency. That move by TRT/PPP was laughable.

Or tell the House of Representatives not to put Gerald Ford back in office,

but install Bebe Rebozo as head of state.

Land of the absurd.

Thankfully Spiro Agnew was already out of the loop.

Edited January 29, 2010 by animatic

[jdinasia]

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

No.... nobody did. Thaksin quit as PM and couldn't get re-elected.

Instead, Thaksin tried to pull a fast one on the majority of Thailand by calling for unwarranted elections (to try and forestall the diisbanding of TRT). Thaksin was not PM at the time of the coup. There was no parliament at the time of the coup. What there was, was a caretaker government that failed to get an election certified.

Thaksin dissolved the parliament. He couldn't get anyone elected into office through some VERY smart maneuvering by the Democrats. But in the end he can only blame himself, since his political ploy in dissolving parliament failed.

[rixalex]

Now, now... calm down dear its only a debate........................ and I have made best endeavours to answer all

Perfectly calm thanks for your concern.

As to the term "dear", i appreciate its use was intended to patronise, but it's not something i've ever heard spoken from one man to another. One of your quirks perhaps?

As to the unanswered questions, maybe you could step-up your endeavours with regards to the below:

So in fact what you are saying is not so much that there should be elections for the sake of peace, but there should be elections because of the threat of violence from certain minority quarters. Great reasoning to call an election i must say.

And what happens, if as you predict, the reds win an election when it is called and whitewash Thaksin of all criminal charges? Do you not think the yellows might also threaten violence? What would we do then? By your logic, we would call another election. Where would it end?

Back on topic and returning to the point i made and you avoided, do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right way to go? Where would it end?

You say the reds "feel" cheated and therefore they have a right to demand an election - you even join them in that call - well don't you think that if the reds got back in power (as you believe they will) and Thaksin was pardoned for his crime/s, a certain yellow group would then feel like they have been cheated - would you then join them in demanding a fresh election?

There you go again... completely ignoring the points i put to you.

To repeat for the third time of asking: do you really think that elections for the sake of appeasing people who threaten violence is the right solution?

If yes, would you not be concerned about the precedent it would set?

[sbk]

Keep it nice guys. Today is a new day and we can start it politely. Cheers.

[Samuian]

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

alright then let's assume he got sacked from his care taker position, he was so reluctant to leave,

even he promised it again and again!

Thailand was in a stalemate, deadlock position, because he kept drawing the country into HIS problems.

So there had to be a "surgical" intervention to get things flowing again - Thailand at no point ever was

"HIS" company, even he may have had this dream and imho even thought he got it his way already.

If the caretaker thinks and behaves as if he is the boss, then what has to happen?

Try to be rational, look back at the deadlock at the time, parties boycotted elections, many people have been

quite unhappy with things as they have been in those days!

Let's go on and forget, after all it's the past, it won't happen too soon again!

Edited January 29, 2010 by Samuian

[animatic]

Now, now... calm down dear its only a debate........................ and I have made best endeavours to answer all

...As to the term "dear", i appreciate its use was intended to patronise, but it's not something i've ever heard spoken from one man to another. One of your quirks perhaps?

....If yes, would you not be concerned about the precedent it would set?

I have heard this before, but one of the men was on stage and had tits.

[eggomaniac]

This Post gives me the Impression that the Red Shirts already control the Province of Chiang Mai!?

Message for khun boris:

Taken from 'Kuan Nam Hai Sai' by Sarnsom, Opinion Page 5, Naew Na Newspaper, 27 January, 2010

Chiang Mai in Chaos

As the court's ruling date on the case of the 76 billion baht frozen assets of Thaksin Shinawatra is drawing near, the supporters of the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship, or DAAD, have been increasingly aggressive in their movement. This is especially true to the red shirts in Chiang Mai who have turned the province into something akin to a battlefield, waging wars against their opposition without regard to the law.

They flagrantly committ violent acts in the name of their supreme boss without a care about how the majority of Chiang Mai people feel. Allow me to give you a rundown on atrocities done by the red shirts so far.

During the administration of Somchai Wongsawat, fully armed red shirts surrounded a home of a leader of a PAD affiliated group in Chiang Mai. His name is Toedsak Jiamkijwattana and he operated a radio station which opposes Thaksin regime.

The unexpected happened. Settha, Toedsak's father, was driving home when his vehicle was surrounded by the red shirts who proceeded to smash it with wooden and metal clubs. They dragged Settha out of the beat up car, stabbed and slashed him. They unleashed unspeakable malice on him before they shot him dead in the middle of the street.

The second incident involved two officials of the Constitution Court being attacked by the Rak Chiang Mai 51 group at the Chiang Mai International Airport. They were dragged and assaulted by the red shirts. Fortunately, both survived the attack with cuts and broken arms.

The police confiscated weapons from the red-shirts at their many gatherings. However, they were released on bail. They were violent at their gathering and their violence seems to know no bounds when the Rak Chiang Mai 51 group issued a threat to claim the life of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva in November 2009.

January 24, 2010, red shirts in Chiang Mai province laid siege to a vacation house of Jermsak Pinthong in Doi Saked district where he and other figures of the PAD would meet for a small discussion. Jermsak decided to leave the house but the red shirts based their violent attack on a false claim, spread through a local radio station. They surrounded the house and launched violent attacks while some people remained in the house.

During the seizure, the electricity was cut. Fireworks were used to scare people who were trapped inside in house. Guns were fired to further intimidate them. Threats of physical violence against them were made. The false claim was that the house's basement was filled with a narcotic stash and both PAD figures Jermsak Pinthong and Seri Wongmontha were in the house.

Stones and marbles were thrown at people inside. Most of them were children and women. Glasses on windowpanes were shattered. The house was being targeted while children and women shivered inside in the dark.

January 25, 2010, the red shirts surrounded the headquarters of Provincial Police Region 5 in Chiang Mai and staged a similar attack, including throwing fireworks at police officials.

Their intention seems to be bringing Chiang Mai and Thailand down along with their deposed boss, Thaksin. They act in the interest of one person without a regard for peace and interest of the country. Their red isn't the same with the red on the national flag. Red on the flag means nation but their red means Thaksin. They do everything to serve and please Thaksin. Their actions lately have been increasingly intolerable as they act as if the northern provinces belong to Thaksin. Those who oppose him will be harmed and killed as if Chiang Mai has become a lawless land.

Allowing the red shirts to ravage Chiang Mai, (home of Newin Chidchob's father-in-law and home to Suthep Thaugsuban's old school) and take peace, that is rightly belonged to the public, hostage is unacceptable. They should not be allowed to act as if they are above law or serve the convict who remains on the run. They have turned the top tourist town of Thailand into a war-torn province too many times.

Shouldn't certain people in high power such as Deputy PM for national security Suthep Thaugsuban or Interior Minister Chawarat Charnveerakul feel incompetent or ashamed of themselves for allowing atrocities in Chiang Mai to go on?

They shouldn't stay dully in their posts. Good people are fondly remembered by their accomplishments and what they've done for the public. Isn't it time for the security authorities, who have been appointed by His Majesty the King, to get serious about their jobs and step up their effort especially in this time when Thailand needs them the most.

-- Tan Network 2010-01-28

This is the group who espouse to be the champions of democracy.

Care to offer your comments please khun boris.

[way2muchcoffee]

We keep hearing that "half the country is is frustrated".

But they never mention that PPP got about 1/3 of the countries votes, not 1/2.

And they never mention that '1/2 of the country' is NOT frustrated bedcause Thaksin is not in power.

And they never ever talk about the frustrated poor in the other half who got screwed by Thaklsins

vindictive TRT policies of neglect for non TRT districts, or just plain negelect by PPP.

On the contrary 2/3 + or - of the country is finally getting a fairer shake now that TRT is gone.

It was much closer than that in the '1 man 1 vote' proportional vote. In the 1-man-1-vote part of the 2007 elections the Democrats gained slightly more votes than the PPP. It is rather difficult for any party to claim an overwhelming mandate with these results.

Edited January 29, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[ChiangMaiFun]

Now, now... calm down dear its only a debate........................ and I have made best endeavours to answer all

Perfectly calm thanks for your concern.

As to the term "dear", i appreciate its use was intended to patronise, but it's not something i've ever heard spoken from one man to another. One of your quirks perhaps?

Its an English advert... sorry if I caused offence - Michael Winner says ít... I said it without thinking you are not English (we have a different style of humour) - genuine mistake

[rixalex]

Its an English advert... sorry if I caused offence -

What you cause isn't offence, but a mixture of bemusement and despair.

If you don't have an answer for questions that are put your way, for goodness sake just say so, and save us the time and effort of having to repeat them. It's not so much to ask, is it?

[animatic]

I am not English

but I know who Tamsin Grieg, Penelope Keith, Rik Mayall, Adrian Edmondson, Samantha Janus

Brenda DeBanzie, Chris Barrie, Mollie Sugden, Derrick Fowlds and The Goonies are/were.

I have no idea who Michael Winner is... rather obscure reference.

Probably due fir a Oh him, huh, moment.

Edited January 29, 2010 by animatic

[rixalex]

I am not English

but I know who Tamsin Grieg, Penelope Keith, Rik Mayall, Adrian Edmondson, Samantha Janus

Brenda DeBanzie, Chris Barrie, Mollie Sugden, Derrick Fowlds and The Goonies are/were.

I have no idea who Michael Winner is... rather obscure reference.

He's a third-rate, over-weight, cigar-smoking, film director / producer - of course all of this has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread.

[scorecard]

FROM EGOMANIAC, quote:

Scorecard

So you switched it up from 'just give one example of why the elecorate could feel disgruntled'. The task was to give an example, 'banned politicians' and rixalex. Post #417 added another good example, the crooked politicians who are in power.

Don't tell me, it's now a matter of cheating; tell that to the 100's of thousands of voters who legally voted for those representatives. [Oh ya, they have no right to complain, let them eat cake?]

Now that it is cheating you are so high and mighty about, petition your great leader to repay the 10's millions he got away with from the Thai banks.

I actually believe Thaksin IS a scoundrel and deserves jail time, but then why is your idol allowed to get away 'cheating' 10 of millions. Sondhi was once Thaksin's best buddy and called Thaksin 'the best PM ever'.

They had a lover's quarrel and look where it led.

-------------

Here are some quotes from a real Thai academic, not a 30 in sitsu. Are you going to tell him his conclusion that "political demands of millions of Thais that had gone unheard for decades" never showed in 30 years of inshitsu academic research?

"""Mr Thitinan does not dispute there were negative aspects of Mr Thaksin’s populist administration, which was dogged by accusations of crony capitalism and, in its war on drugs and southern rebels, of extra-judicial killings. But he also points to Mr Thaksin’s introduction of a popular “30-baht healthcare” scheme – allowing a hospital visit for less than a dollar – and his championing of infrastructure and lending policies aimed at improving opportunities for the rural poor. These, he says, began to address the social and political demands of millions of Thais that had gone unheard for decades."""

If you were a real 'academic' you would 'consider' the Red movement might be a real and large force, not just a group of Thasin thugs. Your notion, and is only a 'notion' that the Thai electorate have no reasons and or rights to complain is abysmally out of touch with reality.

Another THING,,, if you are so 'educated', , but has anybody mentioned why the OP Title is very misleading? Before I say so, can you think of why it erroneous. think a minute...

HINT How many readers and posters to this thread think the lines will be drawn between the military and the Reds? Hint, do you really not think a big portion of military leaders have not done the math!?

It will be Reds against Yellows, not the military against the Reds. This is just another example of the underestimation of what is around the corner.

There are ways to stop the impending show down. I have talked to Reds who really like my Plan and Yellows who really like my Plan.

The thing is, there is such a culture of gang warfare, for the past 80 years, in Thai politics, a real Solution might be considered a ruining of the 'fun'.

I'll go back to the big picture:

Have Thai voters (a very large percentage of voters / all regions) been given a rough deal for many many decades? Have they been manipulated, controlled, lied to, intimidated, promised the world and nothing has ever resulted, for many decades, mainly by incapable leeches and thugs who have no morals and have been able to buy control and power (the very worst examples of money politics) YES, ABSOLUTELY YES!

Is there right now a totally 'clean' party? NO! And obviously some have more 'baggage' than others.

Will it ever change? YES, OF COURSE! How? Like in basically all democracies when the middle classes and poor rise up and demand change, either though dialogue and pressure or by violence, and I'm sure nobody wants to change in Thailand by violence.

But don't forget the other side of the coin, will the people who now have ruthless control of the country and it's wealth ever willingly give up the 'free money' bonanza? NO. In fact they will fight pretty hard and nasty to protect their gravy train for as long as possible.

The picture will change when the middle classes and poor stand up demand change and demand full democracy.

But part of the problem is that many middle class and poor people have no hesitation to join the ranks of the leeches and thugs if given half a chance to do so.

The claim 'the voters have been cheated comes up'. That's true and somewhere in that discussion there's the concept of rights and duties:

- - - Voters who discover that their 'elected representative' has been stealing the public funds allocated to repairing the local roads, upgrade the local school, hospital etc. have every right to say 'they have been cheated'. They can also vote for somebody else or not vote as a protest but they don't do that.

- - - Voters who have been cheated also have the right to demand that the laws and regulations be changed to that it's much more difficult to buy votes and more difficult for 'elected representatives' to get their sticky fingers into budget money and to demand that punishments are much stronger, and to demand changes in electoral and associates laws which makes it impossible for one person or one group, to gain uncontrollable power.

- - - Voters also need to look at themselves and realize that accepting money or handouts in exchange for votes is also part of the problem. Duties and responsibilities. In fact in many countries many laws which punish both parties to various crimes.

Somewhere in this thread I have been accused of "[Oh ya, they have no right to complain, let them eat cake?]. I didn't say that or anything remotely like that, in fact my own personal values are the opposite.

You seem to be suggesting that I am a fan of Sondhi. Well that's also completely not true, and I certainly wouldn't want to see him in the PM seat.

Many people who contribute to these threads seem to have a black or white mentality. Because someone is anti thaksin doesn't necessarily mean they fully embrace or like the other 'players'.

However, please don't tell me that the red shirts/udd are a serious 'Democracy Movement'. They are not, in fact they are nothing at all like a genuine sincere democracy movement.

- When have jatuporn, arisman and the other udd/red shirt leaders ever given a speech / a seminar / whatever to push the concepts of real quality democracy? NEVER.

- How many outrageous fictional claims has jatuporn made in parliament? Where's his credibility?

- Have they ever demanded change to the constitution to make the punishment for vote buying even more severe, and when have they demanded changes to the constitution to ensure one man cannot get total control? NO. In fact they are fighting for the return to a constitution which (deliberately) lets vote buying politicians off the hook and makes it easy to intimidate the Electoral Commission, the judiciary, etc.

- They now embrace sae daeng as part of their leadership. Would a genuine democracy movement want a person like this as a leader? Today he threatened to assassinate judges who find thaksin guilty, his statements and his image cannot possibly help to make them look like a genuine democracy movement, in fact it does great damage to their image.

- They ask for a pardon for a very corrupt man who had no hesitation to murder 2,500 fellow Thais, and who massively abused his power, had large changes to laws rushed through parliament which provided massive benefits to his own family, a man who made many public statements that democracy was not important for Thailand / democracy is not my aim, etc. Is the red shirts were a genuine democracy movement why on earth would they want to align themselves with this man.

In fact they should be using him as an example of what must be changed.

- They use extreme violence - note the post one day back on this same thread about the serious violence perpetrated by the Chiang Mai red shirts. They beat up and intimidate people who try to speak out. They beat up monks at prayer and more. One of the founding principles of democracy is freedom of speech. How does the CM red shirt group rate on freedom of speech? 0/10.

- They talk about double standards. And obviously there are double standards all over the picture regardless of what party / which politicians etc etc you choose to analyze. They jump on Gen Surayud about his land in khao yai, fair enough, but they have never mentioned a massive act of corruption, basically theft of temple land, breaking of important laws to protect the Buddhist faith, involving thaksin and his cronies. Sorry but a genuine democracy movement cannot have it both ways.

You quote an academic:

"""Mr Thitinan does not dispute there were negative aspects of Mr Thaksin’s populist administration, which was dogged by accusations of crony capitalism and, in its war on drugs and southern rebels, of extra-judicial killings. But he also points to Mr Thaksin’s introduction of a popular “30-baht health care” scheme – allowing a hospital visit for less than a dollar – and his championing of infrastructure and lending policies aimed at improving opportunities for the rural poor. .....

- I will quickly agree that the concept of a 30Baht health scheme is excellent. But please also note that the scheme was massively underfunded and under resources from the start and in the thaksin era nothing was done to increase its funding etc. If it was his genuine desire to see this work well, why didn't he fix the funding and the resources issues?

Personally I see the lack of quality health care for all (in some cases zero access to health care) as one of the biggest faults of capitalism (and please don't assume I'm a communist, that's not what I'm saying). I would like to see every person on this planet have access to best international practice medicine free. But I'm not holding my breath.

- There are others who would suggest that the loans etc., for the poor that thaksin generated did nothing more than increase their indebtedness and drive many of them into the hands of loan sharks.

- He aligned himself to taxi drivers groups and promised them free cars,free houses (all from tax payers funds) if they supported him. Is this how a quality democracy works? Equal access to opportunity for every citizen? NO!

If thaksin was so genuinely concerned about the plight of the poor and wanted to make real and fast change to their situation he should have espoused and convinced all of society to embrace more egalitarian values, and he should have proposed and fought for laws and macro level overriding policy directives which ensured that all further laws, and activities of the bureaucracy, were based around / totally aligned to equality in every possible way: education, health, sharing of the wealth, equal justice, freedom of speech, etc etc.

He didn't!

Edited January 29, 2010 by scorecard

[ChiangMaiFun]

Its an English advert... sorry if I caused offence -

What you cause isn't offence, but a mixture of bemusement and despair.

If you don't have an answer for questions that are put your way, for goodness sake just say so, and save us the time and effort of having to repeat them. It's not so much to ask, is it?

How ungenerous, how impolite and how typical... I offer an apology and you're off again - I was apologizing not for my views but for an English Joke (which any Englishman would 'get') but I forgot you, Sir, are not an Englishman nor - it appears - a gentleman.

Now back to the thread...I have made it clear many times what my views are and what my hopes are for Thai politics - you are not dyslectic are you?

I know all this will be wasted on such a superior one such as yourself - of course you Know all the answers - it must be very refreshing and comforting to be right all the time... hey, ho

[animatic]

"It is quite certain that in seeing the people who treat us so well despite their own misfortune,

we are more obliged than ever to work hard for their happiness".*

* Marie Antoinette DID say this.

She did not say 'Let them eat cake' or any equivalent,

as Rousseau wrote this in early 1766, when Marie Antoinette was only 10 years old,

still living in her native Austria and not yet married to King Louis XVI.

"Qu'ils mangent de la brioche," which essentially means "let them eat a type of egg-based bread"

Yet it has entered the vernacular as an insult to those deemed pretentious of snobby.

Or deflate the obvious use of intelligence to over power and adversary in debate.

Actually there was a simple water flour based bread similar to sailors hardtack or Wasa bread.

And this would have been more the item to speak of, IF she had said anything similar.

It would have been easy and cheap to make, and use the dregs of the weather damaged wheat harvest.

The country had been hammered by extraordinarily bad weather, and stocks were severely diminished.

Of course the starving in the street thought to blame those in power for not having the forethought to

over rule the weather, or at least think far enough ahead.

Brioche is a lovely bread and most delicious....most would be overjoyed to get it instead.

This phrase was most likely actually spoken by Marie-Therese, wife of France's Louis XIV,

100 years before Marie Antoinette.

But it is still used as a flame to deflate alleged pomposity or just those we disagree with.

And so it goes.

I wonder if it works on the hypersensitive and roiling minds here... doubtful.

Edited January 29, 2010 by animatic

[rixalex]

- of course you Know all the answers -

You'd know the irony of saying that if you'd been paying any attention at all. You obviously haven't. Every one of my last half dozen posts or so to you have simply been asking for specific answers to very specific questions. They should be easily identifiable to anyone with a half-decent grasp of the English language. If you are having trouble spotting them, a little tip is that they are the sentences that end with this funny-looking squiggly mark: "?".

Until you get the hang of this asking a question, giving an answer lark, i don't see where we can go from here, except round in more increasingly acrimonious circles.

[Ricardo]

No one ever voted Thaksin out of office... that's the problem

Correct, he resigned the government to avoid awkward questions in Parliament, and then got caught trying to rig the election to get back into power again. Doncha just love democracy and justice !

[animatic]

I rarely have observed anyone voted OUT of office, just many hundreds not voted back into office.

The main prerequisit for being voted into office is to actually file a candidacy and run,

but lacking that, oh, and some money to tell people what you hope to do, you are not elected.