Thaksin And Sondhi Equally Bad: Suthep

[ballpoint]

Meanwhile Pheu Thai Party party list MP Jatuporn Promphan said the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship had resolved to appoint a new team, led by Thida Tawornset, wife of weng Tochirakarn, to be caretakers of the UDD to lead the red-shirt movement. The new UDD leaders would meet on December 1.

Once again the "pro democracy" red shirt leaders make a major decision with no grassroots input / voting. And keep it in the family too. They obviously get their idea of democracy from the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. (As well as their "lob a few bombs to stir things up" tactics).

Sombat the red leader said the reds were all top down. I believe he saw that as a problem.

Is he on the new team? Whether he is or isn't, they don't appear to be paying any heed to him. How will he be able to come out and try to tell us things are changing after this? Surely, if he really believes what he says, he'll have to resign and start a new "bottom up" movement.

[Siam Simon]

Thaksin and Sondhi equally bad: Suthep

By The Nation

"If you ask me, I say both are as evil. I speak frankly because both place their own interests above the country's interests. Both have caused so much turmoil,'' he said.

The direct quote doesn't match the headline. He didn't say they were equally bad, he said that both were evil.

While they have both instigated turmoil over the past 4 years, it doesn't acknowledge all the "evil" Thaksin had done in the 6 years prior to that.

In order to be "equally" bad, Sondhi would have had to been PM with a record of extra-judicial killings, nepotism of the highest level, ability to siphon off billions of baht from the national treasury, etc. etc. etc.

.

No, John, he never got the same opportunities. His crimes were only at the level that he reached. As for Suthep, as they say, 'He's working on it'. Maybe he'll get there, maybe he won't.

[asiawatcher]

If he keeps on like this, I might actually end up liking Suthep.

Would have to agree - time for real people to assist in the guidance of Thailand. Also surprised at Jutaporns endorsement. My my - things could really get going given half a chance.

[Xangsamhua]

If he keeps on like this, I might actually end up liking Suthep.

How could you like someone like that? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Where would Suthep be now if it weren't for Sondhi Limthongkul and the PAD?

[hammered]

If he keeps on like this, I might actually end up liking Suthep.

How could you like someone like that? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Where would Suthep be now if it weren't for Sondhi Limthongkul and the PAD?

Suthep has always been despised by Sondhi and the PAD and the feeling has been mutual. Even when the Dem government were being formed the PAD were labelling Suthep as a secret Thaksin plant along with Newin.

[GarryP]

If he keeps on like this, I might actually end up liking Suthep.

How could you like someone like that? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Where would Suthep be now if it weren't for Sondhi Limthongkul and the PAD?

Suthep has always been despised by Sondhi and the PAD and the feeling has been mutual. Even when the Dem government were being formed the PAD were labelling Suthep as a secret Thaksin plant along with Newin.

"Plant" is the operative word, with deep roots sucking the country dry.

[Thai at Heart]

How could you like someone like that? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Where would Suthep be now if it weren't for Sondhi Limthongkul and the PAD?

Suthep would be doing just fine down South still

Seems that hands and biting is something that Sondhi is more than au fait with already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sondhi_Limthongkul

Originally a strong supporter of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra

His banker, Viroj Nualkhair, became president of state-owned Krung Thai Bank and gave more than a billion baht in "debt forgiveness" to Sondhi, allowing him to emerge from bankruptcy. Sondhi became a vocal supporter of Thaksin, calling him "the best prime minister our country has ever had

He reminds me a bit like Fredo from the Godfather Part II.

[animatic]

Meanwhile Pheu Thai Party party list MP Jatuporn Promphan said the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship had resolved to appoint a new team, led by Thida Tawornset, wife of weng Tochirakarn, to be caretakers of the UDD to lead the red-shirt movement. The new UDD leaders would meet on December 1.

Once again the "pro democracy" red shirt leaders make a major decision with no grassroots input / voting. And keep it in the family too. They obviously get their idea of democracy from the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. (As well as their "lob a few bombs to stir things up" tactics).

Sombat the red leader said the reds were all top down. I believe he saw that as a problem.

When DAAD, UDD, PTP and PAD going Tits Up would solve most of the problem.

[animatic]

How could you like someone like that? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Where would Suthep be now if it weren't for Sondhi Limthongkul and the PAD?

Suthep would be doing just fine down South still

Seems that hands and biting is something that Sondhi is more than au fait with already.

http://en.wikipedia....dhi_Limthongkul

Originally a strong supporter of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra

His banker, Viroj Nualkhair, became president of state-owned Krung Thai Bank and gave more than a billion baht in "debt forgiveness" to Sondhi, allowing him to emerge from bankruptcy. Sondhi became a vocal supporter of Thaksin, calling him "the best prime minister our country has ever had

He reminds me a bit like Fredo from the Godfather Part II.

Ah, all well and good, till your 'benefactor' turns and tries to cut your nuts off.

Thaksin has left a long and bloody trail of those he used and then screwed.

[Thai at Heart]

Ah, all well and good, till your 'benefactor' turns and tries to cut your nuts off.

Thaksin has left a long and bloody trail of those he used and then screwed.

And Suthep making a statement to say "the yellows are no better than the reds" means that Fredo just got pushed in the lake. They tried that once before but apparently the engine block was too big.

The government or country doesn't need some reactionary force running around as they try to settle border disputes, constitutional problems, or basic bits of government. Sondhi had his purpose, and he achieved his short term political aims. They tried very unsuccessfully to get rid of him, but like a dirty fart he still lingers.

He didn't get his dream of a nationwide satellite import station to rival UBC. Such is the dirty game of politics in Thailand.

Now is the time to put the guard dog back in the kennel, (without him even getting any scraps from the top table)and I don't expect to hear a peep out of him of any significance for a long time. PAD is effectively finished and now for the next few months are devoted to POLITICIANS ramping up the ante to get elected. Bangkok is under SOE and I will expect the MPs to relate just the same message to their constituents to stay away from PAD rallies. Bangkok is effectively a red and yellow free zone after Suthep's statement today.

Maybe Sondhi will suddenly turn up as Jatuporn's spokesman supporting the reds sometime in the future claiming that Abhisit is commandeering the country. If they offer him enough I am sure he is available for hire.

When Suthep speaks in his stronghold, people listen. A statement like that means the southern support for the PAD is essentially finished. If the PAD doesn't put and shut up, expect some tragedy to befall someone. These guys are playing for keeps.

Back to Sondhi as an individual. I can bear to know that Thai politicians are on the average as crooked as the come with a few exceptions. He has a very significant problem, that he essentially changed sides, which puts his barely below the bottom feeders. Corruption is a nasty game, but changing sides is a big no no.

[Buchholz]

So Sondhi is finished, but Thaksin is not.

More reason why they aren't "Equally Bad"... which, again, Suthep didn't say in the first place.

[animatic]

So Sondhi is finished, but Thaksin is not.

More reason why they aren't "Equally Bad"... which, again, Suthep didn't say in the first place.

They just are not equally dangerous, a bit of a difference.

And without PAD as an sea-anchor and general pain in the rhoids, it may be easier to deal with Team Thaksin, as well as dealing with international issues.

Thai At Heart makes many good points worth agreeing with.

Changing sides is SOP here,

but HOW and WHEN you change sides

is more than a little important towards your future.

Edited November 29, 2010 by animatic

[Thai at Heart]

So Sondhi is finished, but Thaksin is not.

More reason why they aren't "Equally Bad"... which, again, Suthep didn't say in the first place.

Ah well, Thaksin is being put slowly to bed. Sondhi is a little bit more energetic and closer to home with 4sq km of land to shout about. Sorry for not responding exactly as the headline suggested, but since when did the Nation run all of the discussion. These are mutually exclusive issues as far as I am concerned.

Sondhi was given rein to get rid of Thaksin, but was never told to stand up and act like Ralf Nader. His job was to get rid of Thaksin, but the guy can't help himself and has hung around to annoy the Dems. Not the deal that was envisaged.

Rome nor Bangkok was built in a day. Thaksin as a force for his freedom in Thailand is finished, unless he relents to the power of the courts, (as was related to me by a very significant pooyai a couple of weeks ago). He broke the deal and all bets are off. He has to go to jail before he will ever be allowed to live in Thailand .

What is important, is that an extremely important Democrat MP said it in actually stronger language as to say they are "equally evil", where the Nation headline maker took pity on Sondhi and gave him the benefit of the doubt. I haven't though about a used car salesman being potentially evil, but it seems the Democrats wouldn't even buy a used car from Sondhi.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Thai at Heart

[Thai at Heart]

So Sondhi is finished, but Thaksin is not.

More reason why they aren't "Equally Bad"... which, again, Suthep didn't say in the first place.

They just are not equally dangerous, a bit of a difference.

And without PAD as an sea-anchor and general pain in the rhoids, it may be easier to deal with Team Thaksin, as well as dealing with international issues.

Thai At Heart makes many good points worth agreeing with.

Changing sides is SOP here,

but HOW and WHEN you change sides

is more than a little important towards your future.

Suthep cleaned house today. Abhisit is his man, he is the Dems man, he is the establishment man, and Sondhi will not be allowed to interfere. If the PAD announce a significant protest in the next few weeks, expect CRES to stop it.

[yellow1red1]

Thaksin and Sondhi equally bad: Suthep

By The Nation

"If you ask me, I say both are as evil. I speak frankly because both place their own interests above the country's interests. Both have caused so much turmoil,'' he said.

The direct quote doesn't match the headline. He didn't say they were equally bad, he said that both were evil.

While they have both instigated turmoil over the past 4 years, it doesn't acknowledge all the "evil" Thaksin had done in the 6 years prior to that.

In order to be "equally" bad, Sondhi would have had to been PM with a record of extra-judicial killings, nepotism of the highest level, ability to siphon off billions of baht from the national treasury, etc. etc. etc.

Vot gut to sphlit hairs? [mebbe need 2000 by the end of the year,? u can DO it!]

Aside from Suthep's OWN history, why not be glad somebody's close to the truth, for a pleasant change?.

Thaksin obviously evil, while some think National hero; some think Sondhi National hero, while obviously evil.

One is 87% evil; the other 92%, BFD!!! Who gives a ,,,?

...national treasury, etc. etc. etc

etc? add to YOUR list >

upon gaining power Thaksin forgave his *Campaign bankroller millions in debt,,, <scummy eh?

Then all men from * this man's businesses were put in key Govt. positions << dastardly wot?

This *ally, who called Thaksin '""thailand's best PM ever'""" had his accountant placed in a National banking roll << nice pay off Thaksin

From there millions in mysterious, never to be accounted for, [ hmm check the yacht club, anyone?] bad loans dropped out of Thailand's coffers < how spel corupshun?

If the very wealthy, humble public servant, Devakula had not stood up to this graft, none of the 4 years would have happened, it would STILL be business as usual.

It was NOT even Thaksin who did the call on *his friends' graft, it was Pridiyathorn, but at that point it was the bus wheels for Thaksin anyway, too many millions at stake.

You do know *who Thaksin's pally wally partner in crime was, aight? (starts with an S .... ends with an i; convicted slanderer, known terrorist)

It would surprise, yes, but not shock see T and S back in each others arms someday, pulling the strings together again, instead of whipping them at each other.

<<< That would be PURE reconciliation and ,yechhh, back to normal. <<< HAHAHA

They WOULD call it Democracy and the law would be to "swallow that hook, line, sinker".

yr nick is near purrfecto --- just swap the 2nd and 3rd consanant sounds

[yellow1red1]

So Sondhi is finished, but Thaksin is not.

More reason why they aren't "Equally Bad"... which, again, Suthep didn't say in the first place.

whoa mr full timer , 1800 + if yr gonna count beans do it ACCURATELY

Suthep

If you ask me, I say both are as evil

THAT is an equality statement

read the OP, say yr sawy and stop spinning for 1/2 a day,,,

some pple are equally AS stupid as lug nuts ,

[bristolgeoff]

if he come back too serve his sentence he still be a crook that robbed the thai people.along with his buddies

[Buchholz]

Thaksin and Sondhi equally bad: Suthep

By The Nation

"If you ask me, I say both are as evil. I speak frankly because both place their own interests above the country's interests. Both have caused so much turmoil,'' he said.

The direct quote doesn't match the headline. He didn't say they were equally bad, he said that both were evil.

While they have both instigated turmoil over the past 4 years, it doesn't acknowledge all the "evil" Thaksin had done in the 6 years prior to that.

In order to be "equally" bad, Sondhi would have had to been PM with a record of extra-judicial killings, nepotism of the highest level, ability to siphon off billions of baht from the national treasury, etc. etc. etc.

Vot gut to sphlit hairs? [mebbe need 2000 by the end of the year,? u can DO it!]

Aside from Suthep's OWN history, why not be glad somebody's close to the truth, for a pleasant change?.

Thaksin obviously evil, while some think National hero; some think Sondhi National hero, while obviously evil.

One is 87% evil; the other 92%, BFD!!! Who gives a ,,,?

...national treasury, etc. etc. etc

etc? add to YOUR list >

upon gaining power Thaksin forgave his *Campaign bankroller millions in debt,,, <scummy eh?

Then all men from * this man's businesses were put in key Govt. positions << dastardly wot?

This *ally, who called Thaksin '""thailand's best PM ever'""" had his accountant placed in a National banking roll << nice pay off Thaksin

From there millions in mysterious, never to be accounted for, [ hmm check the yacht club, anyone?] bad loans dropped out of Thailand's coffers < how spel corupshun?

If the very wealthy, humble public servant, Devakula had not stood up to this graft, none of the 4 years would have happened, it would STILL be business as usual.

It was NOT even Thaksin who did the call on *his friends' graft, it was Pridiyathorn, but at that point it was the bus wheels for Thaksin anyway, too many millions at stake.

You do know *who Thaksin's pally wally partner in crime was, aight? (starts with an S .... ends with an i; convicted slanderer, known terrorist)

It would surprise, yes, but not shock see T and S back in each others arms someday, pulling the strings together again, instead of whipping them at each other.

<<< That would be PURE reconciliation and ,yechhh, back to normal. <<< HAHAHA

They WOULD call it Democracy and the law would be to "swallow that hook, line, sinker".

yr nick is near purrfecto --- just swap the 2nd and 3rd consanant sounds

If you could put more effort into constructing your posts so that they are readable and coherent, it would go a long way to being able to respond to them.

But if what I can glean from it (and perhaps I'm misunderstanding your ramblings) is that you don't refute that Sondhi's misdeeds (slander and comparatively low-level corruption) pale in comparison to Thaksin's horrific deeds of 2,500 people shot dead and having unequaled power over a whole nation. That he lacked the ability to issue lawful edicts at whim and that he doesn't have the deaths of other people, outside the drug wars, like Shipping Moo and human rights lawyer Somchai staining his record.

.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

So Sondhi is finished, but Thaksin is not.

More reason why they aren't "Equally Bad"... which, again, Suthep didn't say in the first place.

whoa mr full timer , 1800 + if yr gonna count beans do it ACCURATELY

Suthep

If you ask me, I say both are as evil

THAT is an equality statement

read the OP, say yr sawy and stop spinning for 1/2 a day,,,

some pple are equally AS stupid as lug nuts ,

And some people post as if they are tripping on acid, so enjoy the tracers.

If, at the end of the day, he is saying they are equally bad or equally evil, then I would say he was wrong in his assessment for the reasons I've delineated previously.

In terms of body count, the most egregious of the differences, and levels of corruption and scope of power, it's not even close.

btw, how are you progressing with sending out those 393 Personal Messages?

.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Buchholz

[Xangsamhua]

How could you like someone like that? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Where would Suthep be now if it weren't for Sondhi Limthongkul and the PAD?

Suthep would be doing just fine down South still

Seems that hands and biting is something that Sondhi is more than au fait with already.

http://en.wikipedia....dhi_Limthongkul

Originally a strong supporter of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra

His banker, Viroj Nualkhair, became president of state-owned Krung Thai Bank and gave more than a billion baht in "debt forgiveness" to Sondhi, allowing him to emerge from bankruptcy. Sondhi became a vocal supporter of Thaksin, calling him "the best prime minister our country has ever had

He reminds me a bit like Fredo from the Godfather Part II.

Whether Sondhi's a moral paragon or has leprous ethics is not central to the argument, unless we want to get bogged down in ad hominem arguments and their rejoinders. He may come across as arrogant and supercilious. which would probably repel many; he may also be politically dead in the water for one or more reasons. I don't know; however, I suggest turning coat would hardly be one of them. When we look at all the coat-turning and party-changing that takes place among Thai politicians, Sondhi's volte-face against Thaksin is hardly novel. The difference is that S. went on the road with an intense and well-publicised campaign to unseat his former pal and patron. Not that Sondhi brought about T's downfall by himself. Thaksin managed to do that quite efficiently on his own behalf with some very unwise moves.

The thing is not whether you'd like S. to marry your daughter or manage your business affairs, but whether his analysis of Thai politics and economics (and he spends a lot of air time talking about the latter) is insightful or not. Expats may take offence at Sondhi's renegadery, but I don't know that Thai politicians do or other Thais in the political discourse community for that matter. They object either to his analysis, which is perfectly OK in political discourse, or to his role in destroying Thaksin's credibility. He is quite open about his past relationship with T. and the reasons for the falling-out. He's never tied to hide it, so why do we wheel it out now?

[random]

[Thai at Heart]

Whether Sondhi's a moral paragon or has leprous ethics is not central to the argument, unless we want to get bogged down in ad hominem arguments and their rejoinders. He may come across as arrogant and supercilious. which would probably repel many; he may also be politically dead in the water for one or more reasons. I don't know; however, I suggest turning coat would hardly be one of them. When we look at all the coat-turning and party-changing that takes place among Thai politicians, Sondhi's volte-face against Thaksin is hardly novel. The difference is that S. went on the road with an intense and well-publicised campaign to unseat his former pal and patron. Not that Sondhi brought about T's downfall by himself. Thaksin managed to do that quite efficiently on his own behalf with some very unwise moves.

The thing is not whether you'd like S. to marry your daughter or manage your business affairs, but whether his analysis of Thai politics and economics (and he spends a lot of air time talking about the latter) is insightful or not. Expats may take offence at Sondhi's renegadery, but I don't know that Thai politicians do or other Thais in the political discourse community for that matter. They object either to his analysis, which is perfectly OK in political discourse, or to his role in destroying Thaksin's credibility. He is quite open about his past relationship with T. and the reasons for the falling-out. He's never tied to hide it, so why do we wheel it out now?

The answer I provided was pertaining particularly about Suthep biting Sondhi's hand as though Suthep owes Sondhi something. Sondhi has made a fine public effort of biting hands that fed him, and now he is rallying against the Dems and Abhisit.

Alliances in politics in this country are relatively flexible, but this comes down now to Sondhi publically going against the Dems after lauding them to the heavens only a year or two ago. People expect their politicans to be a little expedient, but Sondhi has never been brave enough to step into that ring. The Dems provided support to his escapades in various ways, and now he spends his time biting back at the Dems! As far as politicians in this country is concerned, they should have worked out by now that they should stay as far away from him as possible.

The man has been proven to not only create expedient friendships for the sake of his own pocket, but now he is being shown to have absolutely zero loyalty to anyone. He started off as a man that apparently loved Thaksin because it made him wealthier, and now he apparently has found principles? Would you believe it in the West? So I am definitely not going to believe it in Thailand. He demands to be listened to, but his voice has been granted by the favour of the very people he is now criticising. A very dangerous ally to have in any politics I would suggest.

He will very rapidly find out that it is better to have a few bad friends than to have none.

[Xangsamhua]

Whether Sondhi's a moral paragon or has leprous ethics is not central to the argument, unless we want to get bogged down in ad hominem arguments and their rejoinders. He may come across as arrogant and supercilious. which would probably repel many; he may also be politically dead in the water for one or more reasons. I don't know; however, I suggest turning coat would hardly be one of them. When we look at all the coat-turning and party-changing that takes place among Thai politicians, Sondhi's volte-face against Thaksin is hardly novel. The difference is that S. went on the road with an intense and well-publicised campaign to unseat his former pal and patron. Not that Sondhi brought about T's downfall by himself. Thaksin managed to do that quite efficiently on his own behalf with some very unwise moves.

The thing is not whether you'd like S. to marry your daughter or manage your business affairs, but whether his analysis of Thai politics and economics (and he spends a lot of air time talking about the latter) is insightful or not. Expats may take offence at Sondhi's renegadery, but I don't know that Thai politicians do or other Thais in the political discourse community for that matter. They object either to his analysis, which is perfectly OK in political discourse, or to his role in destroying Thaksin's credibility. He is quite open about his past relationship with T. and the reasons for the falling-out. He's never tied to hide it, so why do we wheel it out now?

The answer I provided was pertaining particularly about Suthep biting Sondhi's hand as though Suthep owes Sondhi something. Sondhi has made a fine public effort of biting hands that fed him, and now he is rallying against the Dems and Abhisit.

Alliances in politics in this country are relatively flexible, but this comes down now to Sondhi publically going against the Dems after lauding them to the heavens only a year or two ago. People expect their politicans to be a little expedient, but Sondhi has never been brave enough to step into that ring. The Dems provided support to his escapades in various ways, and now he spends his time biting back at the Dems! As far as politicians in this country is concerned, they should have worked out by now that they should stay as far away from him as possible.

The man has been proven to not only create expedient friendships for the sake of his own pocket, but now he is being shown to have absolutely zero loyalty to anyone. He started off as a man that apparently loved Thaksin because it made him wealthier, and now he apparently has found principles? Would you believe it in the West? So I am definitely not going to believe it in Thailand. He demands to be listened to, but his voice has been granted by the favour of the very people he is now criticising. A very dangerous ally to have in any politics I would suggest.

He will very rapidly find out that it is better to have a few bad friends than to have none.

Very interesting observations. He certainly presents himself as one who's had a "road to Damascus" experience as a result of getting down and dirty with Thaksin.

Whether Sondhi has discovered principles or not, however, is a moot point. My question is still whether, principles or otherwise, his analysis is valid, and I would be skeptical that Suthep (of all people) has turned against him because of his lack of principles and loyalty. It may be much more to do with the fact that he exposes the naked expediency of the Democrats (especially Suthep's faction) and is seen by the Democrat heavies as a loose cannon that needs to be restrained.

I don't really know enough to agree or disagree with you, but it'll be very interesting to see how things pan out over the next few months. TBH I'm not all that passionate about Thai politics (except when they start shooting and burning), but I enjoyed Sondhi's public presentations in 2005-6, despite some of his bizarre claims (e.g. invoking Lombroso's physiognomically-based methods of identifying criminality, which he mischievously applied almost convincingly to Newin Chidchop). Mrs Xangsamhua has great faith in him, however.

Thanks for your thoughts.

[Thai at Heart]

Whether Sondhi's a moral paragon or has leprous ethics is not central to the argument, unless we want to get bogged down in ad hominem arguments and their rejoinders. He may come across as arrogant and supercilious. which would probably repel many; he may also be politically dead in the water for one or more reasons. I don't know; however, I suggest turning coat would hardly be one of them. When we look at all the coat-turning and party-changing that takes place among Thai politicians, Sondhi's volte-face against Thaksin is hardly novel. The difference is that S. went on the road with an intense and well-publicised campaign to unseat his former pal and patron. Not that Sondhi brought about T's downfall by himself. Thaksin managed to do that quite efficiently on his own behalf with some very unwise moves.

The thing is not whether you'd like S. to marry your daughter or manage your business affairs, but whether his analysis of Thai politics and economics (and he spends a lot of air time talking about the latter) is insightful or not. Expats may take offence at Sondhi's renegadery, but I don't know that Thai politicians do or other Thais in the political discourse community for that matter. They object either to his analysis, which is perfectly OK in political discourse, or to his role in destroying Thaksin's credibility. He is quite open about his past relationship with T. and the reasons for the falling-out. He's never tied to hide it, so why do we wheel it out now?

The answer I provided was pertaining particularly about Suthep biting Sondhi's hand as though Suthep owes Sondhi something. Sondhi has made a fine public effort of biting hands that fed him, and now he is rallying against the Dems and Abhisit.

Alliances in politics in this country are relatively flexible, but this comes down now to Sondhi publically going against the Dems after lauding them to the heavens only a year or two ago. People expect their politicans to be a little expedient, but Sondhi has never been brave enough to step into that ring. The Dems provided support to his escapades in various ways, and now he spends his time biting back at the Dems! As far as politicians in this country is concerned, they should have worked out by now that they should stay as far away from him as possible.

The man has been proven to not only create expedient friendships for the sake of his own pocket, but now he is being shown to have absolutely zero loyalty to anyone. He started off as a man that apparently loved Thaksin because it made him wealthier, and now he apparently has found principles? Would you believe it in the West? So I am definitely not going to believe it in Thailand. He demands to be listened to, but his voice has been granted by the favour of the very people he is now criticising. A very dangerous ally to have in any politics I would suggest.

He will very rapidly find out that it is better to have a few bad friends than to have none.

Very interesting observations. He certainly presents himself as one who's had a "road to Damascus" experience as a result of getting down and dirty with Thaksin.

Whether Sondhi has discovered principles or not, however, is a moot point. My question is still whether, principles or otherwise, his analysis is valid, and I would be skeptical that Suthep (of all people) has turned against him because of his lack of principles and loyalty. It may be much more to do with the fact that he exposes the naked expediency of the Democrats (especially Suthep's faction) and is seen by the Democrat heavies as a loose cannon that needs to be restrained.

I don't really know enough to agree or disagree with you, but it'll be very interesting to see how things pan out over the next few months. TBH I'm not all that passionate about Thai politics (except when they start shooting and burning), but I enjoyed Sondhi's public presentations in 2005-6, despite some of his bizarre claims (e.g. invoking Lombroso's physiognomically-based methods of identifying criminality, which he mischievously applied almost convincingly to Newin Chidchop). Mrs Xangsamhua has great faith in him, however.

Thanks for your thoughts.

When Suthep speaks like this, he is largely speaking on behalf of the Dem party to show the party line. We don't support Sondhi anymore.

It is a complicated one, but we need to look back at how the PAD became such a force in the beginning. At the beginning, Sondhi decided to take on Thaksin essentially because he felt he had been shafted. It became a bigger and bigger event, and Thaksin's hold on control of the country started to wane. More and more important people and organisations (including the Dems) decided that it was time for Thaksin to go. The dems boycotted the election, and TRT's goose was cooked, coup, court cases, convictions, elections bla bla.

So to cut a very long story short, it was decided that there needed to be a way found for the Dems to get back in because they couldn't dare let Thaksin back. Well that was going swimmingly until the Dems didn't manage to cobble together a government after the coup. So what did the very important groups at the top (knowing that they had had a coup only just before) let Sondhi loose again. This time even some members of the Dems publically paraded around with him. And provided supporters. We won't know exactly who funded him, but the army never stepped in, and he was allowed to run amok to achieve the aim they wanted. What percentage of the supporters sitting in yellow for months were staunch Dems wanting to see of Thaksin? 99%? Or were they supporting Sondhi's policies? Abhisit was his wet dream come true.

So it was decided, Thaksin will be out, Dems will be back, we will pay off Newin to do it, we get a Democrat government, Abhisit finally gets his chance to run the country, we will allow him to do more for the poor because this is what started all this trouble in the first place. Back to normal everyone go home and lets get on with business as we know how to do it.

But Sondhi won't go back in the box. He is threatening to have a party of his own. He runs off to Phraer Viharn. He calls Abhisit nasty names. He might even take a vote or two off the Dems. He was the catalyst needed to spark brining down Thaksin, but he was granted the freedom to do what he did by the establishment. This granting of freedom never included doing what he is doing now, so they need to shut him up and stop him doing stupid nonsense like complaining about the goverment trying to demarcate the border. Why? Because he wants the Dems to do what HE wants. He is a massive threat to a very fragile situation simply because he won't let go.

Interesting you say your wife has great faith in him? I would have to ask faith in his to do what? I say this because, anyone can be his target, us included.

[whybother]

<snipped>

Why would Sondhi and the PAD need to protest if they (the elite) had control of the courts anyway?

[jdinasia]

In the other paper, it states in addition that Suthep urged the local Southern politicians to not provide support for the PAD.

A rather important part of the story that the Nation appears to have missed completely.

Actually -- that is what they were saying here .... (though not worded very well)

He called on the silent powers to act against Sondhi and Chamlong Srimuang who have announced a major rally on December 11. "If there is no support, let Sondhi and Chamlong rally alone, see how far they can go,'' he said.

[jdinasia]

<snipped>

Why would Sondhi and the PAD need to protest if they (the elite) had control of the courts anyway?

Because .... all this "amart" crap is just silliness cooked up by some reds (that some tvf members have bough into). Both sides are led by some people that would be considered "elite" and both pretty much are useless. (Though I admit to happily buying the PAD line when it was just Anti-Thaksin)

[jayboy]

<snipped>

Why would Sondhi and the PAD need to protest if they (the elite) had control of the courts anyway?

Because .... all this "amart" crap is just silliness cooked up by some reds (that some tvf members have bough into). Both sides are led by some people that would be considered "elite" and both pretty much are useless. (Though I admit to happily buying the PAD line when it was just Anti-Thaksin)

I don't normally respond to this kind of post - "all this amart crap etc" - but I think it's worth pointing out "amart" is just a label.In 1960's Britain it would have been the "establishment" or the "Boston Brahmins" in the U.S of the 1950's.The comparisons don't quite work out I agree, but the point is "amart" is just a convenient description.Baker and Pasuk have written interestingly on this but their audience is primarily well educated people.They and most other commentators would certainly recognise the existence of an "amart", though not necessarily a class war as some Reds would have it.

[jdinasia]

<snipped>

Why would Sondhi and the PAD need to protest if they (the elite) had control of the courts anyway?

Because .... all this "amart" crap is just silliness cooked up by some reds (that some tvf members have bough into). Both sides are led by some people that would be considered "elite" and both pretty much are useless. (Though I admit to happily buying the PAD line when it was just Anti-Thaksin)

I don't normally respond to this kind of post - "all this amart crap etc" - but I think it's worth pointing out "amart" is just a label.In 1960's Britain it would have been the "establishment" or the "Boston Brahmins" in the U.S of the 1950's.The comparisons don't quite work out I agree, but the point is "amart" is just a convenient description.Baker and Pasuk have written interestingly on this but their audience is primarily well educated people.They and most other commentators would certainly recognise the existence of an "amart", though not necessarily a class war as some Reds would have it.

And yet again Jayboy resorts to personal attacks

I do notice that while trying to defend his attack he fails to address the fact that BOTH sides are led by these so called "amart" and that both sides (PAD vs UDD/PTP/Thaksin) are pretty useless.

[jayboy]

And yet again Jayboy resorts to personal attacks

I do notice that while trying to defend his attack he fails to address the fact that BOTH sides are led by these so called "amart" and that both sides (PAD vs UDD/PTP/Thaksin) are pretty useless.

And where is the personal attack exactly ? Perhaps I should remind you that accusing forum members of succumbing to "crap" is very disrespectful and could be construed as a personal attack.

Moving on to the substance you don't seem to understand what "amart" means.Because Thaksin (and other red supporters) are very wealthy doesn't make them "amart".You simply need to read more I think to obtain context and deep backgound.One could make a case for a struggle between elite groups but these wouldn't both be "amart".