Thai Reds Mass In Bangkok To Mark Anniversary Of Protest

[Pi Sek]

And all 65 million are eligible to vote??? LMAO.

No, 63.7m are, I believe.

I think you're including those under 18 in your count!!! Who number about 15 million (rough guess)

Yep, you're totally right! Nonetheless, 30,000 (or even a million) reds should not speak for 45+ million Thais (as opposed to 63.7m). They should have a voice, but they would do well to take care that they do not become a dictatorship themselves.

Without trying to discredit your point, I must note however that many under-18s went to the red and yellow political protests, even though they don't have a vote - they're included in the head counts. Even foreigners went, and we all know how highly their political opinions are held! Still, though, we're not talking about anywhere close to 10% of the crowd numbers, so I'm rambling a bit.

The same with some of these protests across the Mahgreb - I've seen 12-year-olds talking about corruption and dictatorship. With all due respect (and there is respect due), what do they know other than what has been fed to them? What does a 12-year-old with a catupult know about the ins and outs of intricate policies that gave them cash yesterday and lifelong debt today and installed a convenient hierarchy of power (the Red "amaat") in strategic parts of the country? Why is he prepared to shoot that catupult at armed soldiers who clearly told them that doing so will encourage return live fire, if his beliefs are flawed by misinformation (same goes for the PAD)?

My real problem with democracy in general (and this is why the NPP - the political arm of the "People's Alliance for Democracy" - believe that diminishing democracy for the time being is in the long term best interests in democracy, which is obviously a messed up argument) is the above need not only be applied to U18s, especially in Thailand where all sides have proven track records of plain and candid repeated lies. The only exception I can think of is Abhisit, who might withhold the truth on occasions but he makes it a priority not to come out with anything totally untrue - so far. That's one fo the reasons I would lean my support towards him, in addition to his excellent performance as a leader of the opposition and his clear academic qualifications.

[rubl]

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

A person of my own heart. I know what you mean. The attacks on any member who dares to express even the slightest pro-Red sentiment are swift and unrelenting.

Up the Res!

Maybe you confuse an attack on the contents of a post with argumentum ad hominem. The last to be avoided, doesn't help a discussion. Luckily most discussions here are on contents, even though sometimes very frank in tone

Edited March 13, 2011 by rubl

[anterian]

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

A person of my own heart. I know what you mean. The attacks on any member who dares to express even the slightest pro-Red sentiment are swift and unrelenting.

Up the Res!

To many members the Reds have no redeeming features, they are simply brainless hooligans paid for by Thaksin. This is such an over simplification of reality that it is laughable. This is not really Red versus Yellows, it is the people versus the Amartya.

For those unfamiliar with this term it means the elite, it comes from an Indian word that means Immortals. Governments come and go but the Amartya stay in charge. This is what the Reds oppose, and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same.

This is a grassroots movement, a rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top, it is not a true political movement which is why it is so difficult to characterise, but it has one common theme, people want to control their lives, they want their vote to have meaning, not be thwarted every time by the army.

[Insight]

Yawn.

So what was Thaksin's request for the reds to vote for him so he could win "by a landslide" all about last night?

[jdinasia]

Anterian --- I would suggest that you do not see things the way that other people do. Thaksin and the rest of the backers of the reds are not the downtrodden masses, and the redshirt movement isn't about a class struggle on a grass roots level. I would also suggest that your post truly belies your claim of previous neutrality and the reasons that you claimed said neutrality changed.

The reds are tools/lackeys of one group of elites fighting another group of elites.

LOTS of people who are both anti-Thaksin and by extension anti-red feel that there needs to be major reform in the areas of land, wealth, opportunity etc. While it is a matter of Thaksin/PTP/UDD that will never happen. What has PTP done as an opposition party? What have they proposed as a platform to help the poor?

The Dems have made significant inroads into land reform, healthcare etc. The Dems are supported by rural farmers from many areas of the country (particularly the South.) That very fact makes any claim of this being about the poor vs the rich absolutely silly.

When the Reds dump Thaksin and swear off violence as a means to attaining any goal THEN they will find more support, until then they remain tools of the elite.

[rubl]

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

A person of my own heart. I know what you mean. The attacks on any member who dares to express even the slightest pro-Red sentiment are swift and unrelenting.

Up the Res!

To many members the Reds have no redeeming features, they are simply brainless hooligans paid for by Thaksin. This is such an over simplification of reality that it is laughable. This is not really Red versus Yellows, it is the people versus the Amartya.

For those unfamiliar with this term it means the elite, it comes from an Indian word that means Immortals. Governments come and go but the Amartya stay in charge. This is what the Reds oppose, and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same.

This is a grassroots movement, a rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top, it is not a true political movement which is why it is so difficult to characterise, but it has one common theme, people want to control their lives, they want their vote to have meaning, not be thwarted every time by the army.

This was a grassroot movement till it got hijacked by k. Thaksin c.s. Maybe not Amartaya in the traditional sense, but elite none the less.

As the events last night show k. Thaksin will do and solve all and make you rich as well, in six months no less. Out of the goodness of his heart, no strings attached. Maybe a skeptic like me may wonder why the glorious information on solving problems cannot be divulged at this moment. Why does k. Thaksin need to be back first? Out of his love for the Thai people and democracy and maybe the THB47B which was confiscated. By Jove, a true grassroot person this k. Thaksin.

""Please help the Puea Thai (opposition party) win a landslide victory and then I'll solve problems and fix the economy and bring prosperity in six months," he said."

Edited March 13, 2011 by rubl

[Pi Sek]

Spend some time in Isaan where you'll see plenty of red flags, posters of Taksin, and other indications that they command a great deal of popular support amonst ordinary people. Bangkok does not Thailand make, as has been shown before.

Yes, you're right - Thaksin and the UDD are still popular around Isaan. But not as much as 4 years ago, nowhere close.

Out of interest, where in Isaan (which province(s), and in the cities or in the villages?) are you talking about?

Here's a quoted post from someone "with very close links to Surin" and one from me regarding red support in Udon Thani province (from November last year)... (would be interesting to get a load of representations from different parts of Isaan).

Afarang.

Like you I too have lived here for some twenty years and I have very close links to Surin. I assure you that there is indeed a total mistrust of Thaksin and the Red Shirt leadership in its current guise and aims.

The Red Shirt movement was hi-jacked by power crazed self enriching megalomaniacs intent on restoring Thaksin to power so as to enable them ( his little toadying acolytes) to dive head first into the pork barrel in their quest for corrupt self enrichment and the massacre of democracy as so graphically demonstrated by the previous Thaksin regime.

Cast your memory back to, '' Animal Farm." Indeed the pigs were soon shown in their true light as we have also seen with the likes of the greater majority of the Red Shirt leadership.

The monies that have not been accounted for, the total ignoring of the rank and file members in gaol who have been left high and dry and with no legal representation, the list is endless, the pawns are worthless to the power crazed megalomaniac (mis) leaders. of the Red Shirt movement

Indeed a wonderful show of democracy from a self proclaimed democratic led movement.

Cast the mote from thine eye.

I’m afraid I am not as senior in my Thai residency as you two (only 9 years so far), but I am yet in my 30’s. However, I am fluent in Isaan and have a long-term ex-girlfriend from Udon (Phang Ngu, so in the sticks and not the city) with whom I am still friendly. She now no longer loves Thaksin - she has seen the light - but doesn’t like me mouthing off about how evil he is... I guess that she doesn’t like me bringing up that she was wrong for so long. Her family are pretty-much split between those who sympathise with Thaksin (but realize they were very wrong when they thought he was a nice guy) and those who despise him. I also have countless friends, giks, etc, from other provinces, particularly Chaiyaphum and Nakhon Ratchassima - similar feeling there.

The Red Shirt support has indeed dwindled in many parts of Isaan - as I am sure afarang has noticed, much to his annoyance - and support for Thaksin and certainly the UDD leadership has gone very much down the toilet. Their base was Isaan, who generally didn’t know that Thaksin was all that bad. Many of them are shocked to find that Jatuporn, Veera and Nattawut are all from the South!

As many say, the key to democracy is education. Shutting down many red media has definitely improved education. Now they are being fed government-bent truths instead of red mistruths; not perfect, but an improvement. They can now use their minds to unravel the facts behind the government-bent spin rather than being fed utter lies (e.g. the doctored Abhisit “Kill ‘em all” voice clip, the 20 mythical corpses from 2009, the army’s use of M79s in 2010) from the UDD media.

“If I was a villager and was made to listen to that, I would have joined the protests myself”, Abhisit said of the voice clip in the post-dispersal censure debate.

Part of the reconciliation plan is that the media are no longer allowed to circulate lies... they can only circulate facts and their interpretation of it - whichever way it slants - but not circulate things that aren’t actually true. I think that’s fair. You’ll notice (if you choose to) that many red media which haven’t yet started lieing or slandering the highest institution are still on air. But that’s not as interesting for those with red-tinted glasses.

Great Animal Farm reference, by the way.

As for the south, this is what I've noticed (of course, one can argue that I'm not in a position to get honest responses, and one can even argue that these conversations never happened and I am a pro-govt paid poster - but, sorry, I am just a guy who likes talking Thai politics with Thais in Thai, so I think I'm fairly well-informed but I'll that for you to judge):

In Kanchanadit (Surat Thani), PAD support is still strong, but far less so than support for the Democrats. The same is the case for the Ron Phibun/Thung Song area in Nakhon Sri Thammarat. In Na Sarn (Surat), where Jatuporn is from, the UDD are seen as traitors to king and country and Jatuporn in particular is not welcome and his own mother publicly disowned him, claiming that he chose to look after his pocket instead of his people. I think that they are very scared that one of their own could be bought, so they realise how susceptible Thaksin's own in Pak Neua and the "misinformed and lazy" (not my opinion, theirs) Isaan people would be to promises of money.

In Koh Samui, it's very mixed but there are an awful lot of migrants there so it can't really be called local opinion. But go down to Thong Krut-Taling Ngam area and it's the same as in rural Surat.

In Phuket there is immense support for the Democrats and very little support for PTP, but there are a vocal chapter of Red Shirts - there's not many of them though.

In Ao Luek (Krabi), the few people I have spoken to just laugh if you ask them whether they like Thaksin or the Red Shirts - they think it's a joke question.

In much of Narathiwat - but I'll say I've only sat down an really discussed it in Sungai Kolok - there is strong support for the Dems and I have noticed no support for the PAD at all.

[jdinasia]

To add to Pi Sek's post ----

Buriram -- went PPP last election ... will go BJT this election. Nakhonrachasima --- mixed. SiSaket will follow Sanoh's lead. Chiang Mai?--- not so sure. Mostly red but with strong enclaves of pro-Dems. I just don't know where the constituency lines fall well enough to guess if ANY constituencies will go to the Dems or BJT. Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP.

I think the Dems will pick up some seats in the upcoming elections but not enough to get a majority. I expect that they will form the next government through a coalition just like this government. I also think no matter how clean the elections are, that the Reds will accept nothing less than getting Thaksin back and that just won't happen.

[rubl]

To add to Pi Sek's post ----

Buriram -- went PPP last election ... will go BJT this election. Nakhonrachasima --- mixed. SiSaket will follow Sanoh's lead. Chiang Mai?--- not so sure. Mostly red but with strong enclaves of pro-Dems. I just don't know where the constituency lines fall well enough to guess if ANY constituencies will go to the Dems or BJT. Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP.

I think the Dems will pick up some seats in the upcoming elections but not enough to get a majority. I expect that they will form the next government through a coalition just like this government. I also think no matter how clean the elections are, that the Reds will accept nothing less than getting Thaksin back and that just won't happen.

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

[jdinasia]

To add to Pi Sek's post ----

Buriram -- went PPP last election ... will go BJT this election. Nakhonrachasima --- mixed. SiSaket will follow Sanoh's lead. Chiang Mai?--- not so sure. Mostly red but with strong enclaves of pro-Dems. I just don't know where the constituency lines fall well enough to guess if ANY constituencies will go to the Dems or BJT. Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP.

I think the Dems will pick up some seats in the upcoming elections but not enough to get a majority. I expect that they will form the next government through a coalition just like this government. I also think no matter how clean the elections are, that the Reds will accept nothing less than getting Thaksin back and that just won't happen.

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

I don't mind there being a clear winner, but the opposition must have enough power to censure the government (yes even if the opposition is PTP, like I expect it will be). My feelings are (note, this is not backed up by fact) that coalitions tend to be even more corrupt than a single winner with a strong opposition.

[rubl]

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

I don't mind there being a clear winner, but the opposition must have enough power to censure the government (yes even if the opposition is PTP, like I expect it will be). My feelings are (note, this is not backed up by fact) that coalitions tend to be even more corrupt than a single winner with a strong opposition.

I have to check, but I don't think in my country of birth The Netherlands we ever had a political party gaining a majority. Always coalitions and it works well, we even had left-right cabinets leaving out the middle. Mind you, you may be right about how it might not work that well in Thailand. Under (Thai) circumstances the current Thai government doesn't do too bad though.

[Pi Sek]

To many members the Reds have no redeeming features, they are simply brainless hooligans paid for by Thaksin. This is such an over simplification of reality that it is laughable. This is not really Red versus Yellows, it is the people versus the Amartya.

For those unfamiliar with this term it means the elite, it comes from an Indian word that means Immortals. Governments come and go but the Amartya stay in charge. This is what the Reds oppose, and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same.

This is a grassroots movement, a rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top, it is not a true political movement which is why it is so difficult to characterise, but it has one common theme, people want to control their lives, they want their vote to have meaning, not be thwarted every time by the army.

I truly empathise with your post, but I think it's not exactly correct.

Firstly, I have seen only a handful of posters that you describe. Many anti-red posters are anti-red because the Red Shirt movement is being directed by an alternative amaataya to the one currently holding the cards. Sure the Red Shirt movement has a grassroots factor, but it also has an elite factor. And the grassroots factor is blindly following the elite factor (same as the PAD)... so "it is the people versus the Amartya" is just not the reality - it's the reality perceived from the eyes and ears of those who have been stifled for as long as they can remember. But who was it that stifled them? I don't think it was who they think it was, not in the last 10 years anyway.

"and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same." I don't get this impression amongst the Yellows, and I know more Yellows than showed up at the last protest. Amongst the "uncommitted", I partially agree, but many remain uncommitted because they recognise the point I made in the above paragraph.

The "rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top" is certainly what has fuelled this anger and it is the basis of the grassroots philosophy. The thing is this few at the top includes Thaksin and, whatever anyone says, he is THE major Red Shirt facilitator.

I totally agree that the army needs to stop making coups, but there are so many people that truly believe that the last coup was unavoidable. Thaksin pushed his agenda too far, not so much about taking power from the elite as raping the country for his own personal gain. If legitimacy was quantitative and not qualitative (which it's not), the last coup would have a higher level of legitimacy than the others I can think of. Still doesn't change the fact that it was undemocratic (as Abhisit said at the time) but, if Thai democracy was developed and not so inherently corrupt as to allow Thaksin to do what he did, the coup would never have happened. For example, can you imagine the outrage if David Cameron tried to use public funds to buy, say, the New York Yankees and personally obtain the rights to some of their income (as Thaksin tried with Liverpool a few months before before the coup)? His party (of course the word "his" is even more appropriate when applying to Thaksin) would have had him hand in his resignation within days!

[jdinasia]

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

I don't mind there being a clear winner, but the opposition must have enough power to censure the government (yes even if the opposition is PTP, like I expect it will be). My feelings are (note, this is not backed up by fact) that coalitions tend to be even more corrupt than a single winner with a strong opposition.

I have to check, but I don't think in my country of birth The Netherlands we ever had a political party gaining a majority. Always coalitions and it works well, we even had left-right cabinets leaving out the middle. Mind you, you may be right about how it might not work that well in Thailand. Under (Thai) circumstances the current Thai government doesn't do too bad though.

IMHO -- they (the current government) has to appease the minority coalition partners too much. I don't think we can compare coalition governments in the West to those in Thailand. I do know that 2005 showed the issues with a government that was too strong. The government back then did anything they wanted and if it wasn't legal, they changed the laws to make it legal, while breaking down the checks and balances needed in a democracy. I wouldn't want ANY party to have that much power again.

[Pi Sek]

To add to Pi Sek's post ----

Buriram -- went PPP last election ... will go BJT this election. Nakhonrachasima --- mixed. SiSaket will follow Sanoh's lead. Chiang Mai?--- not so sure. Mostly red but with strong enclaves of pro-Dems. I just don't know where the constituency lines fall well enough to guess if ANY constituencies will go to the Dems or BJT. Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP.

I think the Dems will pick up some seats in the upcoming elections but not enough to get a majority. I expect that they will form the next government through a coalition just like this government. I also think no matter how clean the elections are, that the Reds will accept nothing less than getting Thaksin back and that just won't happen.

I have witnessed the same in Buriram, in particular Non Din Daeng.

However, could you possibly add to your own post and specify which areas of these provinces you're talking about (no need to be exact, but I'm specifically talking rural/urban - Korat is a huge province!)? I have heard of these Northern "Democrat enclaves", but I've never seen them and I imagine they're fairly quiet locally as they don't want to get bombed by the fake reds.

Also, you mention that Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP. Have you noticed that the vast majority (as I suspect) of these PTP supporters are pro-red (and vice versa) or are there non-Red PTP supporters (as I have witnessed in rural Udon Thani)?

[Pi Sek]

Personally I would not like any party to get a majority. Thai democracy has not reached a stage where that would benefit the country. In a way the de-facto two-party system in the USA doesn't work well, why would it here ?

I don't mind there being a clear winner, but the opposition must have enough power to censure the government (yes even if the opposition is PTP, like I expect it will be). My feelings are (note, this is not backed up by fact) that coalitions tend to be even more corrupt than a single winner with a strong opposition.

I have to check, but I don't think in my country of birth The Netherlands we ever had a political party gaining a majority. Always coalitions and it works well, we even had left-right cabinets leaving out the middle. Mind you, you may be right about how it might not work that well in Thailand. Under (Thai) circumstances the current Thai government doesn't do too bad though.

IMHO -- they (the current government) has to appease the minority coalition partners too much. I don't think we can compare coalition governments in the West to those in Thailand. I do know that 2005 showed the issues with a government that was too strong. The government back then did anything they wanted and if it wasn't legal, they changed the laws to make it legal, while breaking down the checks and balances needed in a democracy. I wouldn't want ANY party to have that much power again.

I don't think we can compare Western coalitions with Thai ones either - your first sentence made me realise why not.

I don't mind the "need to appease the partners" - my problem is how the partners are appeased!

At the end of the day, I don't mind having a party lots of power, as long as the constitution is strong enough to rebuff attempts by that party to overmanipulate that power (as TRT did).

[jdinasia]

I have witnessed the same in Buriram, in particular Non Din Daeng.

However, could you possibly add to your own post and specify which areas of these provinces you're talking about (no need to be exact, but I'm specifically talking rural/urban - Korat is a huge province!)? I have heard of these Northern "Democrat enclaves", but I've never seen them and I imagine they're fairly quiet locally as they don't want to get bombed by the fake reds.

Also, you mention that Loei is mixed but rurally very much PTP. Have you noticed that the vast majority (as I suspect) of these PTP supporters are pro-red (and vice versa) or are there non-Red PTP supporters (as I have witnessed in rural Udon Thani)?

In most of Isaan I would suggest that PTP=UDD in the minds of the rural people.

Korat = some of the city is Dem and some of it is Red. Rurally I could only guess that it would depend on who was the power-family in any given constituency. I am actually interested in Rayong and Chantaburi ... as well as more industrialized areas. Is it local family controlled or more open? (Buriram is Newin territory etc)

[Pi Sek]

In most of Isaan I would suggest that PTP=UDD in the minds of the rural people.

Korat = some of the city is Dem and some of it is Red. Rurally I could only guess that it would depend on who was the power-family in any given constituency. I am actually interested in Rayong and Chantaburi ... as well as more industrialized areas. Is it local family controlled or more open? (Buriram is Newin territory etc)

Like I said, I witnessed the opposite to PTP=Reds* in one village in particular (tambol Phang Ngu, amphoe Ku Kaew, Udon Thani) - I suppose that could be an isolated case, but I noticed the same in rural Chaiyaphum and rural parts around Pak Chong (in Nakhon Ratchassima). Maybe the locals were too shy to tell me that they liked Thaksin because he granted them direct short-term benefits, even if they know he was messing the country up.

I don't really know about Rayong, but I gather Chantaburi has very strong Red support.

* dam_n hard one, as I differentiate the Reds from the UDD. The UDD is very PTP-connected (possibly to the extent of one and the same), but so many of the factions just don't agree, so I would not argue that Reds=PTP.

[anterian]

To many members the Reds have no redeeming features, they are simply brainless hooligans paid for by Thaksin. This is such an over simplification of reality that it is laughable. This is not really Red versus Yellows, it is the people versus the Amartya.

For those unfamiliar with this term it means the elite, it comes from an Indian word that means Immortals. Governments come and go but the Amartya stay in charge. This is what the Reds oppose, and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same.

This is a grassroots movement, a rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top, it is not a true political movement which is why it is so difficult to characterise, but it has one common theme, people want to control their lives, they want their vote to have meaning, not be thwarted every time by the army.

I truly empathise with your post, but I think it's not exactly correct.

Firstly, I have seen only a handful of posters that you describe. Many anti-red posters are anti-red because the Red Shirt movement is being directed by an alternative amaataya to the one currently holding the cards. Sure the Red Shirt movement has a grassroots factor, but it also has an elite factor. And the grassroots factor is blindly following the elite factor (same as the PAD)... so "it is the people versus the Amartya" is just not the reality - it's the reality perceived from the eyes and ears of those who have been stifled for as long as they can remember. But who was it that stifled them? I don't think it was who they think it was, not in the last 10 years anyway.

"and increasingly the Yellows and the uncommitted feel the same." I don't get this impression amongst the Yellows, and I know more Yellows than showed up at the last protest. Amongst the "uncommitted", I partially agree, but many remain uncommitted because they recognise the point I made in the above paragraph.

The "rejection of being used and manipulated by a few at the top" is certainly what has fuelled this anger and it is the basis of the grassroots philosophy. The thing is this few at the top includes Thaksin and, whatever anyone says, he is THE major Red Shirt facilitator.

I totally agree that the army needs to stop making coups, but there are so many people that truly believe that the last coup was unavoidable. Thaksin pushed his agenda too far, not so much about taking power from the elite as raping the country for his own personal gain. If legitimacy was quantitative and not qualitative (which it's not), the last coup would have a higher level of legitimacy than the others I can think of. Still doesn't change the fact that it was undemocratic (as Abhisit said at the time) but, if Thai democracy was developed and not so inherently corrupt as to allow Thaksin to do what he did, the coup would never have happened. For example, can you imagine the outrage if David Cameron tried to use public funds to buy, say, the New York Yankees and personally obtain the rights to some of their income (as Thaksin tried with Liverpool a few months before before the coup)? His party (of course the word "his" is even more appropriate when applying to Thaksin) would have had him hand in his resignation within days!

I agree with much that you say, unless I am writing a blog I tend to keep my comments short, so I could have said much more. However, I think collectively we manage to cover the salient points, both for and against the various movements in this country. There are several obstacles this country has to overcome before it has a chance to sort itself out. One is the removal of censorship and the free dissemination of information, the other is the education to be able to process that information. Until then the people will always be pawns in the internal struggles of the Amartya.

personally I feel that Thaksin has become increasingly sidelined by events, he is more a bogeyman that the yellow elite threaten us with.

[dominique355]

PiSek ....

The total population of Thailand does not equal eligible voters. (I think the number is just over 1/2 the total population is eligible to vote. Many are too young etc.) Also with the voting laws in Thailand absentee voting is more complicated which means that some people registered upcountry will have a hard time getting there to vote.

To be fair -- the casino in question is between the 2 checkpoints of Thailand and Cambodia. Regardless, the Thai city corresponding to Poi Pet is Aranyaphrathet.

Some Thais cannot vote (active right of vote), such as monks, some cannot be elected (passive right of vote), eg. you need a university degree to be eligible as an MP.

[Buchholz]

Quote from Nation

"An intelligence official from an internal security unit, who wanted to remain anonymous, said Arisman and Suporn Attawong - another suspect wanted on terrorism charges -had stayed at Grand Diamond City in Poi Pet for two days. The wanted Thais were protected by four security guards of Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen. So no one dared to touch them."

Hahahaha , so much for Thai internal security when Hun Sens thugs come to another country to protect his Fellow Thai Thugs .

Not only that, but their accommodations at the Grand Diamond City Casino in Poi Pet are in keeping with the latest standards for fugitives.... given that the owner is a Thai fugitive himself :

This convicted fugitive Thai, former Deputy Interior Minister Vatana Asavahame:

He's the biggest shareholder in the Grand Diamond City Casino just across the border in Poipet.

It's the go-to place for Thai fugitives on the run.

.

Edited March 13, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

So you are a reluctant red-shirt supporter only. You want to see them win not for what they can do to/for the country, but just to be able to annoys members here. well that's as good a reason as others have

[timekeeper]

Quite a good turnout with the police estimating 30,000 so probably somewhat more than that. If they can still rally that many numbers in an area miles away from their heartland the upcoming election is going to be a tight one.

You really believe 30,000 votes out of 65 million people will make it a tight election? LMAO

Spend some time in Isaan where you'll see plenty of red flags, posters of Taksin, and other indications that they command a great deal of popular support amonst ordinary people. Bangkok does not Thailand make, as has been shown before.

if you did spend some time there and decided to exercise your democratic rights the reds speak so passionately about and hang a poster in your window in support of the yellows or the democrats or any of the opposition parties

what do you think would happen to you?:

a). you would be congratulated by the local community as being a strong minded, free thinking individual?

. you would be viewed as a rather eccentric person who's opinion is not worth consideration anyway

c). you would be invited to change your views to the local majority or suffer the consequences

d). you would be beaten within an inch of your life

e). killed by the red thugs

Edited March 13, 2011 by timekeeper

[timekeeper]

'To many members the Reds have no redeeming features, they are simply brainless hooligans paid for by Thaksin''

i agree

''they want their vote to have meaning, ''

yet they are happy to sell it to the highest bidder

''being used and manipulated''

to do what exactly?

''not be thwarted every time by the army''

if they don't want that then do not break the law, let the elected government get on with their job

Edited March 13, 2011 by timekeeper

[hanuman1]

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

So you are a reluctant red-shirt supporter only. You want to see them win not for what they can do to/for the country, but just to be able to annoys members here. well that's as good a reason as others have

I can entirely understand anterian's point.

From a farang's point of view, what one party or another could/would/should/will/won't do for the country is a matter so influenced by political maneuverings, cultural idiosyncrasies and faulty communication on all sides that I defy you to present a clear case even for why your own favorite political party should be in power next time.

That's why it's so galling to have all the smirkers constantly shoving their 'holier than thou' whiter-than-white Western influenced socio-political ideals in the faces of people who may love those ideals just as much as they do, but unlike them realize it's like standing in the middle of a field and whining about the color of grass.

You offer 'what they can do for the country' as the antithesis for more facetious reasons behind choosing a party to back (not that most of us can - in the real/practical sense - back any of these parties at all). I wouldn't leave out the possibility of people voting or forwarding the cause of other parties out of nothing at all apart from individual self interest. That's how most people vote in the West, so probably here too.

So whilst I applaud and admire your relatively bright outlook on human nature in general, might I be so bold as to suggest that the myriad views expressed here by the good, bad and downright ugly, by minds calm and fiery, by the scholarly and the life-experienced, would be largely absent were it not for the fact that we have all turned our attentions to this country and subsequently its internal affairs purely as a result of enriching our own individual lives in one way or another by being here.

[rubl]

begin removed ...

personally I feel that Thaksin has become increasingly sidelined by events, he is more a bogeyman that the yellow elite threaten us with.

To read such a remark after the latest 'red-shirt' protest with guests of honour UDD leaders saw our saint and saviour Thaksin declare

""When you are ready for me to come back and serve you, I'll be ready," Thaksin told the crowd by video link from an undisclosed location overseas.

"Please help the Puea Thai (opposition party) win a landslide victory and then I'll solve problems and fix the economy and bring prosperity in six months," he said."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gGI1ON2HVrrMxrKPKqyX0qJrpr5Q?docId=CNG.a02012aae39ef7633415c33c7bb96572.7f1

[rubl]

I used to be neutral in the Red versus Yellow debate, both have valid arguments. Now I am so bored with the outpourings of snide anti Red comments that I want to see the Reds win, just to wipe the smirk of so many members faces.

So you are a reluctant red-shirt supporter only. You want to see them win not for what they can do to/for the country, but just to be able to annoys members here. well that's as good a reason as others have

I can entirely understand anterian's point.

From a farang's point of view, what one party or another could/would/should/will/won't do for the country is a matter so influenced by political maneuverings, cultural idiosyncrasies and faulty communication on all sides that I defy you to present a clear case even for why your own favorite political party should be in power next time.

That's why it's so galling to have all the smirkers constantly shoving their 'holier than thou' whiter-than-white Western influenced socio-political ideals in the faces of people who may love those ideals just as much as they do, but unlike them realize it's like standing in the middle of a field and whining about the color of grass.

You offer 'what they can do for the country' as the antithesis for more facetious reasons behind choosing a party to back (not that most of us can - in the real/practical sense - back any of these parties at all). I wouldn't leave out the possibility of people voting or forwarding the cause of other parties out of nothing at all apart from individual self interest. That's how most people vote in the West, so probably here too.

So whilst I applaud and admire your relatively bright outlook on human nature in general, might I be so bold as to suggest that the myriad views expressed here by the good, bad and downright ugly, by minds calm and fiery, by the scholarly and the life-experienced, would be largely absent were it not for the fact that we have all turned our attentions to this country and subsequently its internal affairs purely as a result of enriching our own individual lives in one way or another by being here.

Did you actually read my last sentence, the part that went like "well that's as good a reason as others have" ?

BTW grass is green, I know I'm from the Netherlands, we've got lots of the stuff

(see also:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/If_grass_is_green_because_the_blades_reflect_green_light_what_colour_is_grass_by_nature

and

http://blog.artificial-grass.com/2010/08/grass-colour-is-more-important-than-you.html )

Edited March 13, 2011 by rubl

[cheshiregent]

corruption can not coexistent with democracy

is there any point in carrying on with this topic ?

[Buchholz]

begin removed ...

personally I feel that Thaksin has become increasingly sidelined by events, he is more a bogeyman that the yellow elite threaten us with.

To read such a remark after the latest 'red-shirt' protest with guests of honour UDD leaders saw our saint and saviour Thaksin declare

""When you are ready for me to come back and serve you, I'll be ready," Thaksin told the crowd by video link from an undisclosed location overseas.

"Please help the Puea Thai (opposition party) win a landslide victory and then I'll solve problems and fix the economy and bring prosperity in six months," he said."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gGI1ON2HVrrMxrKPKqyX0qJrpr5Q?docId=CNG.a02012aae39ef7633415c33c7bb96572.7f1

It was also translated elsewhere as :

"If you vote [for Puea Thai Party] to win by a landslide, I would come back to solve Thailand's economic problems and make the country boom again within six months."

It's from an article titled, coincidentally and appropriately enough as Red Shirts urged to vote for Pheu Thai.

"bogeyman", indeed...

"I'm neutral", indeed...

.

Edited March 13, 2011 by Buchholz

[anterian]

begin removed ...

personally I feel that Thaksin has become increasingly sidelined by events, he is more a bogeyman that the yellow elite threaten us with.

To read such a remark after the latest 'red-shirt' protest with guests of honour UDD leaders saw our saint and saviour Thaksin declare

""When you are ready for me to come back and serve you, I'll be ready," Thaksin told the crowd by video link from an undisclosed location overseas.

"Please help the Puea Thai (opposition party) win a landslide victory and then I'll solve problems and fix the economy and bring prosperity in six months," he said."

http://www.google.co...33c7bb96572.7f1

I'm glad to see that you support my viewpoint, namely that Thaksin is used as a threat to frighten the Yellow elite, it certainly works with you

Events have moved on, Thaksin is in the past, do you honestly think the present Red leaders if they win will calmly hand over power back to Thaksin?

If you think that you don't understand Thais, this is a wolf pack environment, former pack leaders never make a comeback.

Anyone with a modicum of brains know he cannot come back, but it is useful to keep the threat hanging in the air, it keeps the Democrats off balance. Makes them react even more stupidly than they would do otherwise.

[rubl]

corruption can not coexistent with democracy

is there any point in carrying on with this topic ?

The topic is "Thai Reds Mass In Bangkok To Mark Anniversary Of Protest". That may have less to do with corruption than democracy, although we're talking about Thailand here. So why not carry on with this topic ?