Major Figures Flee Thailand

[jdinasia]

Uh, no they were not. The red shirts are lead by the red shirt leaders that you see at the rallies. The yellow shirts were led by the yellow shirt leaders that you saw at the rallies. Thaksin is behind the red shirts. Who's behind the yellow shirts? Neither of the true leaders of either movements were on the streets.

Ummmm now there's a new tin-hat conspiracy theory? Who IS the leader of the Yellow shirts. Sondhi L former friend of Thaksin started the yellow shirt movement, another former friend and political ally(of Thaksin) Chamlong Srimuang joined early on ..... but tell us rainman who is the REAL leader of the yellows? Or is this yet another strawman?

edit for clarity

Edited March 11, 2010 by jdinasia

[Netfan]

Uh, no they were not. The red shirts are lead by the red shirt leaders that you see at the rallies....

Oh, you mean like Arisiman who urged the followers to bring bottles to fill up with gasoline? Or maybe Thaksin himself, who I've seen on big screen addressing rallies? Any others you want to bring up, feel free.....

[mazeltov]

As for the rest of the post, Thaksin wasn't even here (I don't think ... but certainly not PM) when the yellows blockaded the airports. The yellows did not kick out the PPP PM (Somchai at that stage), the courts did. Not many of us support what the yellow shirts did, just as we are not supporting what the red shirts are doing. Anti-red does not equal pro-yellow. Also, anti-red does not mean anti-poor. Mostly it's just anti-Thaksin.

whatever, after the airport seizure the yellows got their man into the current cabinet and few other figures too. there wasn't also not much noise by the characters in the current government how undemocratic a coup is, when the coup was.

for me it is understandable why to protest against this government.

support this government or agitate against the red shirt just because of anti-Thaksin or hate Thaksin sentiment isn't much of a rational motivation.

don't get me wrong, i am not a red shirt or Thaksin lover i just think that the Abhisit government is unacceptable, unbearable, not decent and not legit.

[jdinasia]

As for the rest of the post, Thaksin wasn't even here (I don't think ... but certainly not PM) when the yellows blockaded the airports. The yellows did not kick out the PPP PM (Somchai at that stage), the courts did. Not many of us support what the yellow shirts did, just as we are not supporting what the red shirts are doing. Anti-red does not equal pro-yellow. Also, anti-red does not mean anti-poor. Mostly it's just anti-Thaksin.

whatever, after the airport seizure the yellows got their man into the current cabinet and few other figures too. there wasn't also not much noise by the characters in the current government how undemocratic a coup is, when the coup was.

for me it is understandable why to protest against this government.

support this government or agitate against the red shirt just because of anti-Thaksin or hate Thaksin sentiment isn't much of a rational motivation.

don't get me wrong, i am not a red shirt or Thaksin lover i just think that the Abhisit government is unacceptable, unbearable, not decent and not legit.

LOL ---

Yes absolutely it is wrong to hate Thaksin or the reds for the damage done to this country by Thaksin!

Yes Absolutely it is wrong to support a real democratic government elected by the same people that elected the last 2 governments before it. ((Parliament!))

BTW -- who were those "few others"?

[anotherpeter]

whatever, after the airport seizure the yellows got their man into the current cabinet and few other figures too. there wasn't also not much noise by the characters in the current government how undemocratic a coup is, when the coup was.

for me it is understandable why to protest against this government.

support this government or agitate against the red shirt just because of anti-Thaksin or hate Thaksin sentiment isn't much of a rational motivation.

don't get me wrong, i am not a red shirt or Thaksin lover i just think that the Abhisit government is unacceptable, unbearable, not decent and not legit.

LOL ... rational?? ... no further comment required.

[mazeltov]

whatever, after the airport seizure the yellows got their man into the current cabinet and few other figures too. there wasn't also not much noise by the characters in the current government how undemocratic a coup is, when the coup was.

for me it is understandable why to protest against this government.

support this government or agitate against the red shirt just because of anti-Thaksin or hate Thaksin sentiment isn't much of a rational motivation.

don't get me wrong, i am not a red shirt or Thaksin lover i just think that the Abhisit government is unacceptable, unbearable, not decent and not legit.

LOL ... rational?? ... no further comment required.

yep. as you had it admitted before ' Mostly it's just anti-Thaksin.'

so way this ongoing repetitive talk and attempts to argue. you could code some simple chat bot that writes an entry "i just don't like Thaksin" now and then and your mission is clear..

and then sometimes maybe a line like "Jawohl mein Führer!", "i love men in uniform" or "it is legal to plan to put opponents into concentration camp to protect them as long we have a law for it and we have that law. so it is legit. ner ner ner ner nehh."

i don't like Thaksin too, but the incredible imbecility of the way the grumpy old men here rant against him makes it impossible to join that choir.

[RobinHolmes]

Anyone who admits to being a Net fan has my respect. I also agree with you, but would add that 4 years ago he wasn't the man he was before he entered politics.

Yeah, this may be slightly off topic, but it ain't easy these days

Back on topic, kind of - @ RobinH - I'm also a little confused because so many Red supporters are saying it isn't about Thaksin anymore, but here you are saying he should be the PM. So which is it?

Seein' it's Joisy, gotta ask; Which exit?

All I would want to see is an election that is fair and that the winner serves the whole term without being slung out either by the yellow shirts taking over this that and the other or by military coupe.

Is Thaksin the liar and cheat they say he is?

I don't know, but I don't believe The Nation or the Bangkok post or the Judges who are doing the Judging.

The government in the UK are just as bad but we will Vote them out, there will not be a military coupe.

Now as for leaving a sinking ship........Why is it sinking? Thailand could be the next China, Taiwan or India all it needs is a stable elected government.

[rainman]

Abhisit talking about resignation tonight. Looks like the "fleeing major figures" list can be updated!

[yoshiwara]

whatever, after the airport seizure the yellows got their man into the current cabinet and few other figures too. there wasn't also not much noise by the characters in the current government how undemocratic a coup is, when the coup was.

for me it is understandable why to protest against this government.

support this government or agitate against the red shirt just because of anti-Thaksin or hate Thaksin sentiment isn't much of a rational motivation.

don't get me wrong, i am not a red shirt or Thaksin lover i just think that the Abhisit government is unacceptable, unbearable, not decent and not legit.

LOL ... rational?? ... no further comment required.

yep. as you had it admitted before ' Mostly it's just anti-Thaksin.'

so way this ongoing repetitive talk and attempts to argue. you could code some simple chat bot that writes an entry "i just don't like Thaksin" now and then and your mission is clear..

and then sometimes maybe a line like "Jawohl mein Führer!", "i love men in uniform" or "it is legal to plan to put opponents into concentration camp to protect them as long we have a law for it and we have that law. so it is legit. ner ner ner ner nehh."

i don't like Thaksin too, but the incredible imbecility of the way the grumpy old men here rant against him makes it impossible to join that choir.

A poorly disguised apologist for 'I am not a crook' Thaksin. Crude historical comparisons to support a weak position. One doubts if Thaksin and the other flyaway exiles can make much use of them. The red thugs who hit out at Bangkok locals last Songkran and might like to have another go have other things on their mind than lousy C20 European equivalance from a first year undergrad.

[anotherpeter]

whatever, after the airport seizure the yellows got their man into the current cabinet and few other figures too. there wasn't also not much noise by the characters in the current government how undemocratic a coup is, when the coup was.

for me it is understandable why to protest against this government.

support this government or agitate against the red shirt just because of anti-Thaksin or hate Thaksin sentiment isn't much of a rational motivation.

don't get me wrong, i am not a red shirt or Thaksin lover i just think that the Abhisit government is unacceptable, unbearable, not decent and not legit.

LOL ... rational?? ... no further comment required.

yep. as you had it admitted before ' Mostly it's just anti-Thaksin.'

so way this ongoing repetitive talk and attempts to argue. you could code some simple chat bot that writes an entry "i just don't like Thaksin" now and then and your mission is clear..

and then sometimes maybe a line like "Jawohl mein Führer!", "i love men in uniform" or "it is legal to plan to put opponents into concentration camp to protect them as long we have a law for it and we have that law. so it is legit. ner ner ner ner nehh."

i don't like Thaksin too, but the incredible imbecility of the way the grumpy old men here rant against him makes it impossible to join that choir.

If you don't like Thaksin, how do you support the reds as they currently stand? Their stated aim of the reds leaders is to bring back Thaksin and get his money back. They try to say they are about the poor and democracy, but putting Thaksin in there makes a laughing stock of that idea.

Most of my "repetitive talk" is correcting incorrect statements, because there is a clear misunderstanding about some of the facts in the last 5 years:

- Thaksin was not the elected leader of Thailand when the coup happened - he was the caretaker PM and was not organizing new elections as should have in that position.

- The Democrats and Abhisit are legitimate - they were were elected as MPs in the 2007 election, they formed a coalition with smaller parties to form government after the PPP was banned for electoral fraud.

If the 2007 elections were OK for the PPP to form a coalition government, why isn't it OK for the Democrats to form a coalition government.

There's not too much in the way of ranting (like bringing Hitler into it, as you did) ... just stating facts (as I understand them) and not getting to many corrections. If you have any corrections with some explanations then I am all too happy to consider them.

Also, if you can explain to me why I should support the reds and get Thaksin back here with his money, then I would be happy to hear your reasons for that too. But no one has even tried to do that yet, so I can't really take much notice of their one line statements with "Abhisit/Democrats are illegitimate", can I?

[shawndoc]

What would be the reason for the coup? What does the military want that they aren't currently getting?

[chrislarsson]

Thaksin was thrown out of power by a military coup. However you try to obfuscate it, it is still a fact.

The last election held in Dec 2007 was won by PPP. The first PM got thrown out of power by the Constitutional Court due to appearing in a cooking show. Later the entire party was thrown out, also from a ruling by the same court. Without those rulings Abhisit would hardly be the PM today, and those rulings would hardly have had the same outcome without the yellow's blockade of the government and the airports.

A PM is democratically elected when he wins an election. Not when a court is throwing out the party in power, while the opposition is holding the entire country in hostage.

There you have your TRUTH for this weekend...

Thaksin was the Caretaker PM when the coup happened. While being the Caretaker PM he was supposed to organise new elections, but he failed for the 6 months that he was Caretaker PM.

The justification for the coup has never been about the failure to hold new elections. By the way, it was the opposition who prevented the new elections to take place.

Samak got dumped because the courts found he was working for a company while being PM. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samak_Sundaravej#Court_decision)

He got thrown out of power because he received money for appearing in a cooking show, not for appearing in it.

The PM is chosen by the elected MPs (usually along party lines), not by the people. After the PPP was banned and the PPP MPs moved to the smaller parties, the Democrats formed a coalition with the smaller parties, and the majority of elected MPs chose Abhisit as PM.

That doesn't change the fact that it was court rulings that made Abhisit the PM, and not elections.

In any case, the next election is scheduled for 2011. Thailand should let a third party (e.g the EU) monitor the election to determine whether it is free and fair or not, to avoid letting demonstrators or courts determine the outcome

I'd like to also comment on the rubbish which has been written many many times about samak (with respect for the dead).

The rationale underneath the written law is in fact quite simple. A person who accepts the job of PM should spend all of their actual time / their thinking, etc., on running the country. In other words they should not see the PM job as a part-time job.

Surely nobody (who has a brain) can ever argue with this as an appropriate law or regulation!

That's just ridiculous. For instance, Obama has already appeared on many of the comedy talk shows in America, such as the shows with Jon Stewart, Jay Leno, David Letterman, etc. Just a few weeks ago he turned up as a commentator in a basket ball game. I could just keep going...

[rainman]

What would be the reason for the coup? What does the military want that they aren't currently getting?

They would rather remove their puppet (Abhisit) and bring themselves back into power than see Thaksin making a comeback.

[cdnvic]

Unattributed article and replies to it removed.

[Chaimai]

What would be the reason for the coup? What does the military want that they aren't currently getting?

They would rather remove their puppet (Abhisit) and bring themselves back into power than see Thaksin making a comeback.

And the reason for that, would be.......... what precisely ?

[tonywebster]

Uh, no they were not. The red shirts are lead by the red shirt leaders that you see at the rallies. The yellow shirts were led by the yellow shirt leaders that you saw at the rallies. Thaksin is behind the red shirts. Who's behind the yellow shirts? Neither of the true leaders of either movements were on the streets.

Ummmm now there's a new tin-hat conspiracy theory? Who IS the leader of the Yellow shirts. Sondhi L former friend of Thaksin started the yellow shirt movement, another former friend and political ally(of Thaksin) Chamlong Srimuang joined early on ..... but tell us rainman who is the REAL leader of the yellows? Or is this yet another strawman?

edit for clarity

Where are the PAD during all this, I wonder if their backer has stopped backing them, well no real need to keep backing them as they did their job, they got the dems into the hot seat and have now been cast aside, even their proxy leader sondhi has been handed jail terms (he has not served one day mind) and a new warrant is being issued for him for lesse majeste.

be careful who you work for, when they have used you they will feed you to the dogs, and it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

[animatic]

So once this is all sorted out and if the instigators are indicted for treason, as they rightfully should be, I suppose I would rather be out of the country as well.

What about the instigators that initiated the military coup of the democratically elected prime minister? Should they "rightfully" be indicted? Should the PAD leaders who shut down the airport last year be indicted? Or is that not ok with you and why?

The coup leaders protected themselves from indictment (but there is a possiblity of that being overturned I would think. The PAD leaders have been indicted and the cases are ongoing.

I would think you would know this before posting

edit --- Thaksin wasn't the democratically elected ANYTHING at the time of the coup. (which is another hing you should probably know before posting in a political topic)

You sir are just flat out wrong and are trying to rewrite history. TRT won the election in a landslide taking every province except for Bangkok and one in the south. Pattani maybe. But even in BKK a significant number of people voted TRT.

Sorry this is as you say FLAT WRONG.

"Taking every province but Pattani" What an absurd statement to make.

Surat Thani for example voted nay on both iterations of TRT and was punished for it.

Pattani and all the other deep southern areas were solidly anti-Thaksin, especially in 2005.

Do you really thing after Tak Bai ANYONE down south voted for Thaksin?

Why was it thought TRT needed to cheat in 2006 to get 20% of the vote

so they could win in UNOPPOSED elections? Because they kknew that

they were barely winning mot constituencies even in 2005, just getting larger minorities.

And this even as TRT 2005 was a coalition party made up of several smaller parties,

all at that time calling them selves "FACTIONS of TRT"

when it reality they were prepaid smaller parties doing whatthey ALWAYS did,

selling their power block to the highest bidder in this case with a name change

for the time being as part of the deal.

If you imagine Sanoh and Banharn were real TRT members,

and not short term hired mercenaries, you don't know Thai politics at all well.

Who else besides the bully boi Chalerm has gone walkabout.

Has Generalisimo Chavalit of the Peoples Army gone yet.

Panllop and Sea Dueng must be subrosa at the moment waiting to move

some more pieces of the puzzle, likely these are the instigators of what we might see this weekend.

How does a small band of 'warriors' cause a coup to happen in a country where almost no one sees a need for one?

Edited March 12, 2010 by animatic

[sjaak327]

Thaksin was thrown out of power by a military coup. However you try to obfuscate it, it is still a fact.

The last election held in Dec 2007 was won by PPP. The first PM got thrown out of power by the Constitutional Court due to appearing in a cooking show. Later the entire party was thrown out, also from a ruling by the same court. Without those rulings Abhisit would hardly be the PM today, and those rulings would hardly have had the same outcome without the yellow's blockade of the government and the airports.

A PM is democratically elected when he wins an election. Not when a court is throwing out the party in power, while the opposition is holding the entire country in hostage.

There you have your TRUTH for this weekend...

Thaksin was the Caretaker PM when the coup happened. While being the Caretaker PM he was supposed to organise new elections, but he failed for the 6 months that he was Caretaker PM.

Samak got dumped because the courts found he was working for a company while being PM. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samak_Sundaravej#Court_decision)

The rulings would have had the same outcomes. The reasons for the decisions are well documented. They may have taken a bit longer without the protests.

The PM is chosen by the elected MPs (usually along party lines), not by the people. After the PPP was banned and the PPP MPs moved to the smaller parties, the Democrats formed a coalition with the smaller parties, and the majority of elected MPs chose Abhisit as PM.

Why were those elections needed I wonder, nothing to do with the democrats boycotting the elections ? If you can't win normally you sabotage it, very undemocratic in any case. When was the last time the democrats actually won an election ?

Edit: I seem to remember that he did manage to plan for new elections, about a month before those elections the militairy decided to prevent these elections, for obvious reasons.

Edited March 12, 2010 by sjaak327

[johncat1]

This is Thailand and I think members should exercise a little discretion in their posts about the political situation here. Because as farangs we are not welcome here, only our money is.

Don't forget BIG BROTHER is watching the Internet too and outspoken members may run into a few problems when trying to extend their visa.

" If you don't like the heat get out of the kitchen " This is their troubled country not yours

[Wolfie]

Chalerm returns from Singapore Thursday night

Pheu Thai Party MP Chalerm Yoobamrung returned from Singapore Thursday night.

He arrived at the Suvarnabhumi International Airport on the Air Asia Flight FD3506 at 10:40 pm.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Chale...t-30124514.html

[animatic]

I see a change in avatar, Wolfie.

For the weekend?

[Wolfie]

For how ever long it takes, thanks for noticing

[animatic]

Good on you mate.

Here's wishing for :

Long term peace and prosperity for ALL Thais in all corners of the country.

Maybe Chalerm hasn't as thick a face as he likes to put on?

Visiting a friends sick mother in Singapore...

right up there with; 'The dog ate my homework.'

Sounds like a face saving excuse after getting word of

what people think of him taking off JUST at this time.

Edited March 12, 2010 by animatic

[bkkjames]

Chalerm returns from Singapore Thursday night

Pheu Thai Party MP Chalerm Yoobamrung returned from Singapore Thursday night.

He arrived at the Suvarnabhumi International Airport on the Air Asia Flight FD3506 at 10:40 pm.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Chale...t-30124514.html

Air Asia - didn't strike me a no frills kind of flyer.

[Publicus]

This is Thailand and I think members should exercise a little discretion in their posts about the political situation here. Because as farangs we are not welcome here, only our money is.

Don't forget BIG BROTHER is watching the Internet too and outspoken members may run into a few problems when trying to extend their visa.

" If you don't like the heat get out of the kitchen " This is their troubled country not yours

So how is 'BIG BROTHER' to know who Publicus is, or who any one of us is come visa time? Or at any time?

I haven't any doubt the government reads TVF religiously and that the Reds read it, but how is anyone to know who I am, or who any forumist is who makes posts?

The quote "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen," by Pres Harry Truman, is incongruent to the point of the post. We're always here in the TVF kitchen cooking hot and spicy Thai food and having yet another food fight. This is what the forum is for and why it exists.

If you're trying to scare anybody you've failed miserably and have only drawn attention to yourself.

[otherstuff1957]

You sir are just flat out wrong and are trying to rewrite history. TRT won the election in a landslide taking every province except for Bangkok and one in the south. Pattani maybe. But even in BKK a significant number of people voted TRT.

Every province except for Bangkok and one in the south??

Here are the 2005 Election Results:

House of Representatives - Feb. 8, 2005.

Vote%

Seats

Thai Love Thais Party -

Phak Thai Rak Thai (TRT)

60.47%

377

Democrat Party -

Phak Prachatipat (PP)

18.08%

96

Thai Nation Party -

Phak Chart Thai (PCT)

11.37%

25

Mahachon Party (MP)

8.26%

2

But maybe you're talking about the 2006 election, which was boycotted by most of the parties except for TRT:

House of Representatives - Apr. 2 and Apr. 23, 2006

(Partial results)

Vote%

Seats

Thai Love Thais Party -

Phak Thai Rak Thai (TRT)

61.1%

298

Other parties

1.1%

--

No vote

37.9%

--

Vacant

--

40

Proportional Representation

--

100

Or the 2007 Elections with PPP standing in for TRT:

House of Representatives - Dec. 23, 2007

Const.

Vote%

Const.

Seats

Prop.

Vote%

Prop.

Seats

Total

Seats

People’s Power Party

36.63%

198%

39.60%

34

232

Democratic Party

30.30%

132

39.63%

33

165

Thai Nation Party

8.87%

33

4.35%

4

37

For the Motherland

9.19%

18

5.57%

7

25

Thais United National Development Party

4.73%

8

2.67%

1

9

Neutral Democratic Party

5.36%

7

1.49%

--

7

Royalist People’s Party

2.27%

4

2.11%

1

5

or the 2009 by-elections:

Let's try to keep the disinformation to a minimum here. Statements like the OP are simply an insult to everyone's intelligence.

[leogerritsen]

the leaders are not running away because they are afraid. this way when something out of the ordinary happens they can claim they did not start this because they were not there

Let the paid workers possibly sacrifice themselves, while their so-called leaders flee like rats. Cowards one and all, if they believed in themselves and were sincere about wanting only peaceful protests, they wouldn't be running. Bunch of liars and thieves.

[RobinHolmes]

You sir are just flat out wrong and are trying to rewrite history. TRT won the election in a landslide taking every province except for Bangkok and one in the south. Pattani maybe. But even in BKK a significant number of people voted TRT.

Every province except for Bangkok and one in the south??

Here are the 2005 Election Results:

House of Representatives - Feb. 8, 2005.

Vote%

Seats

Thai Love Thais Party -

Phak Thai Rak Thai (TRT)

60.47%

377

Democrat Party -

Phak Prachatipat (PP)

18.08%

96

Thai Nation Party -

Phak Chart Thai (PCT)

11.37%

25

Mahachon Party (MP)

8.26%

2

But maybe you're talking about the 2006 election, which was boycotted by most of the parties except for TRT:

House of Representatives - Apr. 2 and Apr. 23, 2006

(Partial results)

Vote%

Seats

Thai Love Thais Party -

Phak Thai Rak Thai (TRT)

61.1%

298

Other parties

1.1%

--

No vote

37.9%

--

Vacant

--

40

Proportional Representation

--

100

Or the 2007 Elections with PPP standing in for TRT:

House of Representatives - Dec. 23, 2007

Const.

Vote%

Const.

Seats

Prop.

Vote%

Prop.

Seats

Total

Seats

People's Power Party

36.63%

198%

39.60%

34

232

Democratic Party

30.30%

132

39.63%

33

165

Thai Nation Party

8.87%

33

4.35%

4

37

For the Motherland

9.19%

18

5.57%

7

25

Thais United National Development Party

4.73%

8

2.67%

1

9

Neutral Democratic Party

5.36%

7

1.49%

--

7

Royalist People's Party

2.27%

4

2.11%

1

5

or the 2009 by-elections:

Let's try to keep the disinformation to a minimum here. Statements like the OP are simply an insult to everyone's intelligence.

I'm pleased to see that someone is interested in FACTS and not just what they read in the BKK post and The Nation.

[RobinHolmes]

Yes I cut and pasted this from a website. This is the sort of thing we read in the UK about Thailand - yes it is old news. It is how a journalist sees things and perhaps they have a better insight than ordinary folk. It also summarizes my views too.

Sitting in deck chairs, eating snacks and clapping along to live music, Thailand's new revolutionaries look like nothing so much as picnickers at a free concert. Judging by the crowd, it is easy-listening for all ages.

It's packed at the front of the stage, on the prime minister's muddy lawn, but there are huge video screens for everyone else.

Enough hot food and iced water for thousands of people has been supplied - free of charge - 24 hours a day for the past eight days and counting.

This is an epic love-in to end democracy. The problem for the middle-class protesters camped out at Government House in Bangkok - and for their leaders, and their leaders' backers, who are throwing this enormous free party - is that the poor who dominate the electorate keep choosing the wrong government.

Perhaps if the well-heeled protesters succeed in overthrowing the seven- month-old administration of Samak Sundaravej this will be called the Yellow Revolution, because they wear the color of Thailand's revered monarch to show their devotion to him. Or perhaps the Golf Revolution, because the thugs who patrol the protests are armed with golf clubs.

The battle lines are familiar from other emerging democracies. The turmoil earlier this year in Turkey was comparable. Wealthy city folk, conservative military and bureaucratic and legal establishment have trouble accepting the people's choice.

"They tend to be richer and regard themselves as more enlightened and Western-leaning than

the other side," says an observer of the Turkish scene. "But many see no paradox in their reluctance to accept the legitimacy of a general election result."

At root, Thai political analysts say, the metropolitan elite is threatened by the electorally popular Thaksin Shinawatra, who was overthrown as prime minister in a coup in 2006.

His protege, Samak Sundaravej, was elected by a clear margin as soon as the people were given another chance to vote at the end of last year.

"This is the problem area," explained a businessman at the demonstration, indicating northern Thailand on a map he had drawn in my notebook. The region is populous, agricultural and relatively underdeveloped.

They vote consistently for Thaksin and his allies, probably because of the cheap health care and improved living standards his policies delivered.

"They have a low education, they are farmers, they don't understand. You give them 10 (HK$139) and they will vote for you," the businessman claimed. "They are dogs. We kick them."

The answer offered by the protesters - who call themselves the People's Alliance for Democracy - is "the new politics."

Under the new politics only 30 percent of parliament would be elected. The rest would be appointed by the army and bureaucracy, controlled by the traditional social elite.

For Thailand's emerging democracy it is a disaster. "Normally Thai democracy is usurped by the army," according to Dr Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a Thai political scientist. "This time it is being threatened by a civilian movement which is even more right wing."

It is also a blow to the region. Of the 10 members of ASEAN - the club of South East Asian nations - only five, including Thailand, claim to be democracies.

Anyone gambling on Thailand's immediate future would be wise to guess that the government will shortly fall.

With its powerful allies in the army and the royal palace, the PAD looks untouchable. Even the local media, although it felt obliged to condemn the illegal occupation of Government House, has a soft spot for the PAD.

First the beleaguered prime minister turned to the courts. An order was duly issued, ordering them to end their occupation of the prime minister's front lawn, then inexplicably revoked.

"The occupation of Government House calls into question not only the viability of democracy in Thailand, but also the political neutrality of the court system," credit ratings agency Moody's noted.

Next, Samak called on the police to control the protests. They failed. Finally, on Tuesday, he declared a state of emergency and called in the army. The army chief, General Anupong Paojinda, while promising not to stage a coup, says he will not evict the protesters occupying the seat of government.

Samak, it appears, has been deserted by the powers that be. But if he has nowhere left to turn, neither does Thailand. Not for as long as its people are denied the governments they choose.

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH

[bangon04]

Chalerm returns from Singapore Thursday night

Pheu Thai Party MP Chalerm Yoobamrung returned from Singapore Thursday night.

He arrived at the Suvarnabhumi International Airport on the Air Asia Flight FD3506 at 10:40 pm.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Chale...t-30124514.html

Air Asia - didn't strike me a no frills kind of flyer.

Probably couldn't swing a free first class seat on THAI....