Abhisit Interviewed By Al Jazeera's Hamish Macdonald

[animatic]

Having worked with several Italians with poor english,

I believe oceano is actually Italian trying to write in English.

His orthography fits that grouping.

I think he got pig piled on a bit too much.

And got pissed off, as we all often do,

but them someone ELSE came in and dumped on him.

Sorry mate, hazards of TVF life I guess.

I do NOT think he is a troll, but he clearly doesn't understand the situation being discussed,

and that's not a crime. So asking under-informed questions also shouldn't be one.

oceano please calmly ask some more questions and we will try and fill you in.

Edited March 24, 2010 by animatic

[rixalex]

Are you sure it was Abhisit making those demands, and for those reasons? - do you have a link?

Democrat party Leader Abhisit Vejjajiva suggests the Government disband the Parliament in order to iron out the country's problems and calls for responsibility for the strife in front of the Parliament.

In response to the commanders of the Royal Thai Armed Forces recently voicing their points of view on current political situations, Mr. Abhisit views that their action echoes their frustration with the public administration of Prime Minister and Defense Minister Somchai Wongsawat, which has shown no capabilities in solving the country's problems.

Mr. Abhisit points out that the premier's resignation is not the best way out. He suggests that the Government opt in one of three proposals, including political pole shift, national government establishment, and the best solution, Parliament dissolution.

As of now, Mr. Abhisit advises the Government to show its responsibility for the deaths and injuries from the dispersal of PAD protesters.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255110170012

Thank you mca. What this proves is that Abhisit suggested once dissolution of the government to show responsibility for deaths and injuries. What it doesn't prove is that he demanded it many times because "the yellow shirt protests showed they were not suited to run teh governemnt". Fabrication and exaggeration at work as per usual.

[mca]

You're welcome.

[oceano]

I think he was likely a troll. He'd state something that was wrong, he'd be corrected, and then he'd repeat the same nonsense a few posts later.

This is the second time you insult me....what do you want from me?

You don't correct me, you say" only idiot cannot understand or oceano is a trol" you try to flame or you think you can isult anyone you want whitout aswer from who you insult.

I had state that I dont understand your opinion about england that is the biggest and famous political system, and I dont know, like the 99% of the people in the world, about that.

Your start whit the insult, easy go back 2 page to look, and I was polite, as you can read, you start and now you write again the same insult.

May you stop please?

Than the nonsense, my friend, is try to say that english political system is the same as thailand political system,

Im only a stupid try to understand, dont worry i never try again, i know more about thai policts than english language and poiltics.

But sorry, next time you want say" idiot or troll or nonsense or word like that" to me or people like me that only try to learn from you, do it in PM.

Thank you my friend for you good words i hope now you can stop or....read well...or IF( "IF" is like "if you insult me again whit no reason") you tell me again that I' m an idiot or im a troll i will answer you back whit the same language. Im sure you understand my baby english language...don't you?

Ps: thank you Animatics...but as you see i can't try.

Edited March 25, 2010 by oceano

[monkfish]

Don't worry oceano you ain't no troll they are.

They insult people on a daily basis if you do not agree with them.

Its a tactic to make you angry say some nasty and then get you kicked off the forum.

I believe the official word is Trolling

Not sure why the mods let it go but you can always report it if you think their comments are insulting in any way.

[oceano]

Don't worry oceano you ain't no troll they are.

They insult people on a daily basis if you do not agree with them.

Its a tactic to make you angry say some nasty and then get you kicked off the forum.

I believe the official word is Trolling

Not sure why the mods let it go but you can always report it if you think their comments are insulting in any way.

I reported the post here but nothings happen...is now 9 yrs i read thaivisa, i learn more english to read here than anywere else, sorry if i don't have time for go school.

I know many times is hard understand my english like many other people...ok is only one post, dont read what the problem? dont need give the idiot or troll no?

We are from many different country this don' t mean the native eglish people or people write perfect english are better than us...we are all the same in one country that is not ours...sometimes we can try to understand each others whituot look at the language.

Tank you Monkfish, goodnight.

[monkfish]

Don't let em get you down.

By the way the Thai system maybe based on the UK system but it certainly don't work the same in practice.

[mazeltov]

Supreme Court issues arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs

The Supreme Court Friday issued arrest warrants against 2 former Thai Rak Thai MPs after they failed to turn up to hear the verdict of the court in a defamation case filed by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

The court ordered that Suporn Atthawong and Thirachai Saenkaew be arrested and brought to the court to hear the verdict at 9 am on April 21.

The two were accused of defaming Abhisit by saying the prime minister was unusually rich.

The lower courts gave 12-month suspended jail term against Suporn and a six-month suspended jail term against Thirachai. Suporn was ordered to pay a fine of Bt20,000 while Thirachai Bt10,000.

The lower courts put the two on probation for two years.

The two appealed against the ruling and the Supreme Court was scheduled to read the verdict Friday.

The Nation

-- The Nation Published on March 19, 2010

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Supre...r-30125074.html

[MellowYellow]

Having worked with several Italians with poor english,

I believe oceano is actually Italian trying to write in English.

His orthography fits that grouping.

I think he got pig piled on a bit too much.

And got pissed off, as we all often do,

but them someone ELSE came in and dumped on him.

Sorry mate, hazards of TVF life I guess.

I do NOT think he is a troll, but he clearly doesn't understand the situation being discussed,

and that's not a crime. So asking under-informed questions also shouldn't be one.

oceano please calmly ask some more questions and we will try and fill you in.

By "try and fill you in," you of course mean "be re-educated to the correct thinking and opinions" as provided by the sole purveyors of truth, yourselves and anyone who agrees 100% with you.

Let me remind you of something, someone once said.

Because you say something does NOT make it true.

[MellowYellow]

Are you sure it was Abhisit making those demands, and for those reasons? - do you have a link?

Democrat party Leader Abhisit Vejjajiva suggests the Government disband the Parliament in order to iron out the country's problems and calls for responsibility for the strife in front of the Parliament.

In response to the commanders of the Royal Thai Armed Forces recently voicing their points of view on current political situations, Mr. Abhisit views that their action echoes their frustration with the public administration of Prime Minister and Defense Minister Somchai Wongsawat, which has shown no capabilities in solving the country's problems.

Mr. Abhisit points out that the premier's resignation is not the best way out. He suggests that the Government opt in one of three proposals, including political pole shift, national government establishment, and the best solution, Parliament dissolution.

As of now, Mr. Abhisit advises the Government to show its responsibility for the deaths and injuries from the dispersal of PAD protesters.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255110170012

Thank you mca. What this proves is that Abhisit suggested once dissolution of the government to show responsibility for deaths and injuries. What it doesn't prove is that he demanded it many times because "the yellow shirt protests showed they were not suited to run teh governemnt". Fabrication and exaggeration at work as per usual.

Thanks for taking a moment to completely deflate, and diminish anything the current PM may have said. Surely there is NO hypocrisy in the sitting government's treatment and statements regarding the current protests and the violent protests they were loudly cheerleading 18months ago.

Right, now you should probably bet back to inflating and hyperbolizing any and all statement by anyone even remotely associated with the color red.

[shawndoc]

Than the nonsense, my friend, is try to say that english political system is the same as thailand political system,

The Thai system is very simliar to the UK system, and to the system used by most Commonwealth Members.

In both the UK system and the Thai system:

- You have a constitutional monarchy where almost all over the government is managed through a Parliamentary system

- You do not vote from the Prime Minister

- You vote for an individual MPs

- The Prime Minister is then chosen by MPs

- If no party has greater than 50% of the seats, a coalition government is formed of smaller parties

So why is it nonsense to say the systems are similar? Anotherpeter explained this previously in post 66.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this system is also similar to that of your home country, Italy. As I understand the politics of Italy, the President is voted into place by MPs and the heads of regional government. The Prime Minister is then appointed by the President.

I fail to understand what it is about the process the Thai government uses to select a PM that you object to, perhaps you can help me understand?

Im only a stupid try to understand, dont worry i never try again, i know more about thai policts than english language and poiltics.

If you have a genuine interest to learn, then please see the link that I gave you when you made the inaccurate accusation that there was no public election. It provides much of the information you are seeking such as all the political parties at the time of the election, the voting system, the results and the names of people who were disqualified (which includes members of the Democrats).

If there's some other area you want to learn about, and need help finding links to explain it, I'd be glad to help provide them.

Edited March 25, 2010 by shawndoc

[mazeltov]

Are you sure it was Abhisit making those demands, and for those reasons? - do you have a link?

Democrat party Leader Abhisit Vejjajiva suggests the Government disband the Parliament in order to iron out the country's problems and calls for responsibility for the strife in front of the Parliament.

In response to the commanders of the Royal Thai Armed Forces recently voicing their points of view on current political situations, Mr. Abhisit views that their action echoes their frustration with the public administration of Prime Minister and Defense Minister Somchai Wongsawat, which has shown no capabilities in solving the country's problems.

Mr. Abhisit points out that the premier's resignation is not the best way out. He suggests that the Government opt in one of three proposals, including political pole shift, national government establishment, and the best solution, Parliament dissolution.

As of now, Mr. Abhisit advises the Government to show its responsibility for the deaths and injuries from the dispersal of PAD protesters.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255110170012

Thank you mca. What this proves is that Abhisit suggested once dissolution of the government to show responsibility for deaths and injuries. What it doesn't prove is that he demanded it many times because "the yellow shirt protests showed they were not suited to run teh governemnt". Fabrication and exaggeration at work as per usual.

Dispute over whether to dissolve Parliament

By The Nation Published on September 2, 2008

"During the joint sitting of the House and the Senate in Parliament on Sunday, Opposition and Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva called on Prime Minister Sama

k Sundaravej to dissolve Parliament. Sacrificing MPs would unlock the crisis and return power so voters could decide the outcome again."

http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/02/pol...cs_30082196.php

Democrats not being opportunistic by nominating Abhisit as new Thai PM

TNA 12 September 2008

Thailand's opposition Democrat Party denied being opportunistic in nominating its party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva as prime minister after the caretaker coalition government failed early Friday to appoint a new government leader due to the lack of a quorum in the House. ...

Thais are now killing each other and there are signs that more will be killed. There should be no more negotiations," Mr. Abhisit affirmed.

Asked about his response if the ruling People Power Party dissolved the House, he said

the Democrats had proposed a House dissolution from the beginning.

"How to do it depends on the situation."

http://enews.mcot.net/view.php?id=6233

Abhisit calls for House dissolution

By The Nation Published on December 3, 2008

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva on Wednesday urged for House dissolution on the ground that a snap election will allow a fresh start to form a viable government to tackle the political and economic woes. ...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingne...newsid=30090130

[clausewitz]

thanks MCa and Mazeltov,

Do you think some members have no idea at all about Abhisit and support him out of blind hatred for Thaksin, or is it just ignorance?

[bacchanal]

quote:

Are you sure it was Abhisit making those demands, and for those reasons? - do you have a link?

unquote

Abhisit Vejjajiva suggests

Abhisit Vejjajiva called on

Democrats had proposed

Abhisit Vejjajiva on Wednesday urged

So nothing about demanding dissolution or threatening to shut down the entire government if it didn't occur?

[rixalex]

So nothing about demanding dissolution or threatening to shut down the entire government if it didn't occur?

Indeed. And also nothing about him stating "the yellow shirt protests showed they were not suited to run teh governemnt" as claimed by clausewitz.

[clausewitz]

Than the nonsense, my friend, is try to say that english political system is the same as thailand political system,

The Thai system is very simliar to the UK system, and to the system used by most Commonwealth Members.

In both the UK system and the Thai system:

- You have a constitutional monarchy where almost all over the government is managed through a Parliamentary system

- You do not vote from the Prime Minister

- You vote for an individual MPs

- The Prime Minister is then chosen by MPs

- If no party has greater than 50% of the seats, a coalition government is formed of smaller parties

So why is it nonsense to say the systems are similar? Anotherpeter explained this previously in post 66.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this system is also similar to that of your home country, Italy. As I understand the politics of Italy, the President is voted into place by MPs and the heads of regional government. The Prime Minister is then appointed by the President.

I fail to understand what it is about the process the Thai government uses to select a PM that you object to, perhaps you can help me understand?

If there's some other area you want to learn about, and need help finding links to explain it, I'd be glad to help provide them.

Actually military coups and dissolving of entire elected parties by Judical activists who side with certain parties is quite different from the UK and other states. Many people hated Bush but the Surpeme court never even thgought of dissolving the entire repubican party - it would be unthinkable.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Hate-Them-Th...-P-t350324.html

What the red shirts are saying is that only electoral winners should be given the right to rule the country. Yet, governments that have been given the mandate to rule by the voting public have been rare since Thailand's 1932 revolution.

For instance, even though the current Democrat-led government was put in place through a majority vote from the Lower House, it was not chosen in the 2007 elections.

The Democrats only got the chance to form a government after judiciary activists dissolved the People's Power Party and broke up the previous coalition.

The dissolution of a party is often an unusual situation. Historically, it only happens after a military dictatorship and this time around too, the People's Power Party was dissolved by judicial activism that followed the 2006 coup.

Yet, these populist policies did not bring the red-attired men and women to protest on the streets of Bangkok. They are here because they want to be heard and do not want the elite to twist the mandate they give their politicians through elections. Military coups and derived legal tools are just not acceptable to them.

The red shirts are also sending a strong message about the Thai justice system's "double standards" - a very important issue that the society should stop and listen to. The protesters want the elite to get the same treatment under law like the rest of us.

[bacchanal]

The protesters want the elite to get the same treatment under law like the rest of us.

unless the elite offender's initials are TS

[way2muchcoffee]

The red shirts are also sending a strong message about the Thai justice system's "double standards" - a very important issue that the society should stop and listen to. The protesters want the elite to get the same treatment under law like the rest of us.[/i]

Everyone so long as everyone doesn't include the likes of Thaksin, Potjoman, Arisman, Jatuporn, Jakrapob, Veera, etc. etc. etc.

[shawndoc]

Actually military coups and dissolving of entire elected parties by Judical activists who side with certain parties is quite different from the UK and other states. Many people hated Bush but the Surpeme court never even thgought of dissolving the entire repubican party - it would be unthinkable.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Hate-Them-Th...-P-t350324.html

The Constitutional Court has been around since at least 1997. The found they PPP guilty of vote buying. Are you denying they purchased votes? I believe there was even video tape of one of the heads of the PPP openly discussing it. As to dissolving the party, it is the constitutionally mandated punishment. Only those directly linked to vote buying were actually banned, the rest just switched to the PTP.

For instance, even though the current Democrat-led government was put in place through a majority vote from the Lower House, it was not chosen in the 2007 elections.

The Democrats only got the chance to form a government after judiciary activists dissolved the People's Power Party and broke up the previous coalition.

The 2007 elections failed to put any party in power. Neither party had a majority of MPs and so instead a coalition government was formed with the PPP the largest member. The dissolution of the PPP still left the new PTP and their coalition with a majority.

The court didn't cause the PTP/PPP to lose their control of the PM office. Some of the smaller members of the coalition (in particular those that are backed by Newin) decided to distance themselves from the PTP/PPP due to a combination of the PPP being convicted for vote buying and the controversy caused by the PPP's first two PMs (Forging documents to cover the fact the PM was illegally being paid to host a TV program and the poor handling of the protests that resulted in several deaths/injuries at the hands of the police). So they decided to form a new coalition with the Democrats.

The dissolution of a party is often an unusual situation. Historically, it only happens after a military dictatorship and this time around too, the People's Power Party was dissolved by judicial activism that followed the 2006 coup.

What makes enforcing the punishment as defined in the constitution "activism"? They were doing their jobs exactly as they were supposed to.

Yet, these populist policies did not bring the red-attired men and women to protest on the streets of Bangkok. They are here because they want to be heard and do not want the elite to twist the mandate they give their politicians through elections. Military coups and derived legal tools are just not acceptable to them.

The red shirts are also sending a strong message about the Thai justice system's "double standards" - a very important issue that the society should stop and listen to. The protesters want the elite to get the same treatment under law like the rest of us.[/i]

What is the double standard? You can't convict someone of corruption charges if you can show other people in the past were allowed to get away with it? Under those guidelines, there can never be reform for Thailand.

How does giving a pardon to Thaksin and dropping the other charges that await his return help achieve the goal of making the elite get the same treatment under the law? It seems to be the exact opposite of what the protesters claim they want.

And what are the double standards of the current government? I haven't heard any credible accusations that Abhesit came to power illegally, paid for votes in his district or other Democrat districts, used his power at PM to increase his wealth and that of his family, or has violated any part of the Thai constitution. Thaksin has either been convicted or faces charges for I believe all of these.

-Reason for edit, I had reversed the PPP and PTP in the original version.

Edited March 26, 2010 by shawndoc

[Ricardo]

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva on Wednesday urged for House dissolution on the ground that a snap election will allow a fresh start to form a viable government to tackle the political and economic woes. ...[/i]

Note the difference from now.

Abhisit was working within the system, challenging the then-government on their total failure to govern, and was attending parliamentary-meetings, instead of trying ineffectually to boycott them.

If only the shortly-to-depart PM-Somchai had taken that advice, to call an election before his party was dissolved for electoral-malfeasance, and his governing-coalition fell apart. But he preferred to play golf in Chiang Mai instead. A fine example indeed of 'true-democracy' from TRT/PPP/PTP !

Why aren't the loyal-Opposition doing their job, or even making it into work, through the street-protests ? If the Red-Shirts are feeling unrepresented, isn't that at least partly because their PTP-party within parliament, is still as useless and poorly-led now as they were then !

[jdinasia]

Thanks for taking a moment to completely deflate, and diminish anything the current PM may have said. Surely there is NO hypocrisy in the sitting government's treatment and statements regarding the current protests and the violent protests they were loudly cheerleading 18months ago.

Right, now you should probably bet back to inflating and hyperbolizing any and all statement by anyone even remotely associated with the color red.

Yet again you are equating the Democrats with the PAD (which in fact has its own political party now), for someone that tosses the "strawman argumant" phrase around so much, you sure seem to use them often!

No, there is no incongruities involved with Abhisit's statement that the government in charge on Oct 7th when the police attacked the protesters with faulty equipment at the behest of the government of the day step down. The funny part is that HAD they stepped down and dissolved parliament whatever Thaksin proxy party what would have come out of it may have in fact won enough to be the sitting government now.

The reds on here forget that the PPP KNEW they were to be disbanded and could have dissolved parliament and held yet another election and done well. They didn't. They would have to have used the PTP core group and not the PPP core group to accomplish this (knowing full well that PPP was slated to be disbanded for electoral fraud!)

[animatic]

quote:

Are you sure it was Abhisit making those demands, and for those reasons? - do you have a link?

unquote

Abhisit Vejjajiva suggests

Abhisit Vejjajiva called on

Democrats had proposed

Abhisit Vejjajiva on Wednesday urged

So nothing about demanding dissolution or threatening to shut down the entire government if it didn't occur?

Regardless of minor overlaps between some Dems and PAD at that time,

The Reds had just violently attacked PAD, with one Red killed, and that to justify

Samak's desire for an S.O.E. which the army then ignored,

because they saw it as artificially rioting SPECIFICALLY induced by PPP MPs...

Sorry Reds, your leaders have a documented history of violence instigation....

Suggesting dissolution in Sept 2008 (at that time) is not the same thing

as shutting down Bangkok multiple times demanding dissolution through threats of chaos,

and economic stagnation; as is happening today.

And yes, this Abhisit suggestion in parliament is months before the airport,

and the airport incident was AGAIN a direct result of RED VIOLENCE towards PAD.

If PTP wants to suggest dissolution in Parliament,

and Reds want to stay at Pha Fan bridge and rally then this is fair play.

Not pleasant or useful, but allowable and proper.

But when they go out to shut down traffic, block city life and harass the citizens with

non-permitted red parades, then this is rising to the level of 'Airport Takeover',

without doing it at ONLY one location. Many and random locations it seems.

Same effect though.

Same effect on the nation. Same type of denial of services to the public.

So the 'PAD did it, so can we', argument, dovetails with your

Why isn't PAD in jail yet...argument...

'We can do this since there is a double standard.'

Except you are saying PAD shouldn't have done this... and yet want to do it yourself...

cause they did... ooh ooh double standard.

Well a double standard only gets to be so

if PAD gets a free pass LATER for doing it a 2nd time, rather than your tit for tat version.

Just because Samak and Somchai were impotent, is not valid reason for Abhisit to act so weakly.

Just because it was done once, doesn't mean it should be allowed EVER again.

So similar to the why arn't Jatuporn and others in jail for Songkran yet,...

Trials take time in Thailand... everything is slow. We accept that, without liking it.

You are perfectly happy Arisman and Jatupron are free because of slow courts,

but with PAD not in jail you are apoplecticly angry...

HUGE double standard reddened campers... argument lost.

But Thaksin needs FAST change, or he is in the wilderness for good.

So let's manipulate the gullible people NOW, and to hel_l with the rest of the country.

Abhisit on thje other hand has been well spoken evenhanded and firm,

but considerate of ALL players in this too passionate play.

And looks oh so much more the leader of a nation

than those trying to topple him for their own motives.

Edited March 26, 2010 by animatic

[MellowYellow]

Yet again you are equating the Democrats with the PAD (which in fact has its own political party now), for someone that tosses the "strawman argumant" phrase around so much, you sure seem to use them often!

To start with, PAD and DEMs were at a minimum, very closely aligned prior to the Dems seizing power.

I think a reasonable person could admit that PAD actions (however you or I might like to characterize their nature) played a non-negligible role in Dems coming to power.

So I do not think it is a strawman to refer to them in roughly the same frame, esp wrt events of >18 months ago.

But, I will make a deal with you. You get your crew of government supporters to stop instantly labeling anyone who disagrees as Thaksinites or Thaksin apologists and I'll stop referring to the PAD and Dems as exactly the same animal.

No, there is no incongruities involved with Abhisit's statement that the government in charge on Oct 7th when the police attacked the protesters with faulty equipment at the behest of the government of the day step down. The funny part is that HAD they stepped down and dissolved parliament whatever Thaksin proxy party what would have come out of it may have in fact won enough to be the sitting government now.

Come on. Seriously. Using a reasonable person standard, there is a significant appearance of hypocrisy wrt Abhisit's calling for disolution >18mos ago and now insta dismissing counter calls for the same thing now.

Whether or not PPP would have been smarter to do it then is irrelevant to the discusion.

You can't constantly dismiss all appearance of impropriety on one side and hyperbolize the appearances on the other side and maintain a pretense of not being completely biased. Explaining away every action/statement of one side and denigrating every single one of the opposition goes down the same track.

In the animatic post below yours the bias and skew is just jumping out. Read it a few times. It is hard to converse with or take serious such religious fervor that is so biased.

Seriously, can you actually blame the reds for the PAD riots, building and airport seizures? Howabout blaming the PAD for once, just once. Howabout not newspeaking every single reference to them as the "passionate peaceful crusaders of justice" whilst decrying the red mob as an uneducated brainwashed rabble. Is it not possible the truth lies somewhere in between for BOTH colored mobs? I think the truth lies closer to the red rabble, you guys think the truth lies closer to the yellow rabble and the government which sprang forth, in part, from it's efforts. Whatever side you favor, it's flies in the face of reality to say the yellow mob was peaceful and not responsible for their siezures of airports and buildings and the violence which ensued. Especially at the same time saying the reds are evily brainwashed violent machines.

The absolute onesidedness of the arguments doesn't even pass the smell test.

The reds on here forget that the PPP KNEW they were to be disbanded and could have dissolved parliament and held yet another election and done well. They didn't. They would have to have used the PTP core group and not the PPP core group to accomplish this (knowing full well that PPP was slated to be disbanded for electoral fraud!)

Your scenario is quite possible but never became reality. I, for one, have never accused TRT/PPP/PTP or whatever they want to call themselves of being the shrewdest political operators. That said, it's irrelevant.

Supplement For those who wish to throw any more labels at me.

I have never been a Thaksin apologist/supporter/lover/etc. I have for the last 18mos been a severe critic of the current government because, imo, their path to power is highly highly dubious.

I have <100 posts on this site. It should be easy to look thru them and find no Thaksination.

NOTE: "jdinasia" does not appear in the quote box because I keep getting a weird error message about exceeding allowable number of quote boxes.

[shawndoc]

I don't see how you can blame the red shirts for the airport takeover. The PAD led a march to the airport to "welcome" the PM, the police let them through and the airport panicked and closed the airport allowing the PAD to take over the whole place.

I realize there were a few bits of Yellow vs taxi violence, and the taxi drivers tend to side with the red shirts. But that was after the march to the airport had already taken place, and the violence might have just been taxi drivers pissed off at the PAD for screwing up their source of income rather than anything more politically motivated. And if it was politically motivated, I doubt it was organized by anyone of any power in the red shirt organization.

[thaihome]

I have never been a Thaksin apologist/supporter/lover/etc. I have for the last 18mos been a severe critic of the current government because, imo, their path to power is highly highly dubious.

The problem with you finding the Democrats path to power “dubious” is it flies in the face of facts.

Could you please lay out the facts on why you think it was dubious? Please include why you don’t think the governments of Samak and Somchai were not dubious since they came to the PM office in exactly the same way.

I would think you would look at how a government functions and what they have accomplished (or not) and criticize that rather then harping on an over year old parliamentary maneuver that was completely legal.

TH

[rixalex]

Come on. Seriously. Using a reasonable person standard, there is a significant appearance of hypocrisy wrt Abhisit's calling for disolution >18mos ago and now insta dismissing counter calls for the same thing now.

Yes there would be hypocrisy were the situation now the same as it was 18 months ago. It is not.

Added to which, he never demanded dissolution, nor did he make threats should it not happen. He merely agreed when asked that it might be one solution. It's not the same course of action that the reds are now set on. Surely you can see that?

[jdinasia]

To start with, PAD and DEMs were at a minimum, very closely aligned prior to the Dems seizing power.

I think a reasonable person could admit that PAD actions (however you or I might like to characterize their nature) played a non-negligible role in Dems coming to power.

So I do not think it is a strawman to refer to them in roughly the same frame, esp wrt events of >18 months ago.

But, I will make a deal with you. You get your crew of government supporters to stop instantly labeling anyone who disagrees as Thaksinites or Thaksin apologists and I'll stop referring to the PAD and Dems as exactly the same animal.

Come on. Seriously. Using a reasonable person standard, there is a significant appearance of hypocrisy wrt Abhisit's calling for disolution >18mos ago and now insta dismissing counter calls for the same thing now.

Whether or not PPP would have been smarter to do it then is irrelevant to the discusion.

You can't constantly dismiss all appearance of impropriety on one side and hyperbolize the appearances on the other side and maintain a pretense of not being completely biased. Explaining away every action/statement of one side and denigrating every single one of the opposition goes down the same track.

In the animatic post below yours the bias and skew is just jumping out. Read it a few times. It is hard to converse with or take serious such religious fervor that is so biased.

Seriously, can you actually blame the reds for the PAD riots, building and airport seizures? Howabout blaming the PAD for once, just once. Howabout not newspeaking every single reference to them as the "passionate peaceful crusaders of justice" whilst decrying the red mob as an uneducated brainwashed rabble. Is it not possible the truth lies somewhere in between for BOTH colored mobs? I think the truth lies closer to the red rabble, you guys think the truth lies closer to the yellow rabble and the government which sprang forth, in part, from it's efforts. Whatever side you favor, it's flies in the face of reality to say the yellow mob was peaceful and not responsible for their siezures of airports and buildings and the violence which ensued. Especially at the same time saying the reds are evily brainwashed violent machines.

The absolute onesidedness of the arguments doesn't even pass the smell test.

Your scenario is quite possible but never became reality. I, for one, have never accused TRT/PPP/PTP or whatever they want to call themselves of being the shrewdest political operators. That said, it's irrelevant.

Supplement For those who wish to throw any more labels at me.

I have never been a Thaksin apologist/supporter/lover/etc. I have for the last 18mos been a severe critic of the current government because, imo, their path to power is highly highly dubious.

I have <100 posts on this site. It should be easy to look thru them and find no Thaksination.

NOTE: "jdinasia" does not appear in the quote box because I keep getting a weird error message about exceeding allowable number of quote boxes

Hmmm you still attempt to cast the Dems and the PAD as the same animal and that just flies in the face of both truth AND in the face of reason. You state that in fact they are not the same but ask for a concession that not only is not mine to give but would also be dishonest.

The PAD actually did play a negligible role in how the Dems came to be the current government, unless you are stating for the record that the PAD preventing the PPP from whitewashing Thaksin in 2007 and 2008 is the reason that the Dems are the current government.

Next: your statement that the Dems have "siezed power" is another fallacious argument that flies in the face of reason and reality. The current government didn't "sieze" anything. They were voted into office by the members of parliament.

Next: Abhisit agreeing with and suggesting house dissolution back then to adress the issues of how badly the PPP governments dealt with street protests vs. PTP's silliness and the reds actions today. Not the same animal or fruit. No hypocrisy at all.

Next: PAD vs the Reds. Yes I can easily say that the PAD was not always perfectly non-violent. I can also say that they are not even close to being the thugs that the reds are. Examples: The night before Samak's SoE decree the reds get liqoured up and attack the PAD at government house. One dead red. next: Sae daeng threatens grenade attacks at Government house while the PAD is there. Result: grenade attacks start almost immediately and continue. (We'll leave out the October march on Parliament and the police use of force since that is attributable to the PPP government and not the Reds) Next: The airports and the shootings from the PAD truck-- the PAD after almost nightly grenade attacks step it up and head to the airports. The same group of people that had received almost nightly grenade attacks start having taxi drivers throwing things at them. They react and start shooting. I have openly called for the shooters to be prosecuted even though I think they will get off on self defense. The PAD arrives at the airport and the AOT (not the PAD) shuts the airport. Grenade attacks against the PAD continue. Sae Daeng keeps speaking about the grenades. Yes the PAD did some wrong things while at the airport including rushing the police line and damaging the vehicles etc. What they didn't do was commit wanton violence. The PPP is disbanded for massive electoral fraud and basically the PAD disappears. The reds --- in no particular order attack the PAD and set the stage for Samak's SoE. Threaten grenade attacks that then happen. --- skipping ahead some in time now ---- Songkran -- terrorize a city, burn busses, threaten an apartment block with a fuel tanker. Chiang Mai, pull a man from his car and savagely beat him before killing him. Terrorize some women and children in a house, threaten to take over the police HQ. Sae daeng again startes threatening grenade attacks --- and they happen. K Thong calls for violence on the streets. Arisman tells people to bring empty bottles to BKK and that they will get filled with gas to burn the city down.

So yes, the PAD is guilty of some violence. That violence howver is nowhere near the scale of the violence perpetrated by the reds. Yes the PAD is guilty of acts of civil disobedience including occupying Government house, where they remained while they had an injunction preventing them from being removed by force. Yes they marched to Swampy where they were allowed onto the grounds and where the AOT closed the airport.

I think this should fully refute your arguments trying to paint the PAD with the same broad brush as the Reds.

Now to say that you are NOT a Thaksin apologist .... looking through your posts you certainly have never addressed the issues created by Thaksin and the reds and have only cried about the PAD or how the reds are portrayed. Where I am from they have a saying "If it walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, and 3 or more people say it is a duck; the chances are that it is in fact, a duck"

[animatic]

Religious ferver... ??

you are a card.

Reality check, you as skewed as anyone here,

you just try to hide it a bit. No sale.

PS.

JD already gave a detailed response, so no sense in being redundant.

Edited March 26, 2010 by animatic

[yoshiwara]

Supplement For those who wish to throw any more labels at me.

I have never been a Thaksin apologist/supporter/lover/etc. I have for the last 18mos been a severe critic of the current government because, imo, their path to power is highly highly dubious.

I have <100 posts on this site. It should be easy to look thru them and find no Thaksination.

If it quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

It would appear that some forum Thaksin apologists are going to great trouble to deny what they are.

Unfortunately the camouflage is a little thin.

Want to deny it? For starters talk us through the red violence last Songkran.

Quack away.

Edited March 26, 2010 by yoshiwara

[animatic]

It's called False Flag, or the Concern Troll.

Uses the Yellow name and to be

critical of the government for a different appearing reason,

and not openly pro-Thaksin, even to the point of denying it,

but that is in effect doing the same dirty work.

His arguments only help one side in this, the 'bring down the Abhisit government' side.

And that argument only helps Thaksins causes.

By using a false front to draw in different middle groun people,

it canpull the middle ground to one side or another.

In this case to the side that helps Thaksin come back to control the country.

Concern troll

A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed

to the one that the user's sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web forums devoted

to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals,

but with professed "concerns".

The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.

An example of this occurred in 2006 when Tad Furtado, a top staffer for then-Congressman Charles Bass (R-NH),

was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass's opponent, Democrat Paul Hodes,

on several liberal New Hampshire blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH". "IndyNH"

expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes,

because Bass was unbeatable.

Although the term "concern troll" originated in discussions of online behavior,

it now sees increasing use to describe similar behaviors that take place offline.

QUACK, duck duck duck duck goose!

If it's so, well just more of the PR pigpile, if not,

well just another that doesn't see the forest for the trees.

Edited March 26, 2010 by animatic