Abhisit: I Came To Power Purely With Support From The Parliament

[jdinasia]

You're picking up on ONE word out of one sentence in a Nation article, which is a translation from Thai. Do you know the context of that statement? Have you seen the full translation of the facebook page?

I think that says enough. It certainly doesn't make it fact.

I don't put it down to a fault with the language. I put it down as a fault with the reader.

how expected

All together now, give me an A, give me a B

So from this point forward you will consider everything reported in ANY news source as gospel, and that each and every translation is 100% accurate? Good to know

edit to add a quote from the asiancorrespondent link provided ...

… I am now reviewing as to whether she should become Thailand’s first woman prime minister or not.

If not Yingluck, whom will you select as the next prime minister?

There are several choices in the party. I am pondering the choices of Mingkwan [saengsuwan], Prach [Promnok], Yongyuth [Wichaidit] and some outsiders. I have approached a few outsiders for the task.

[random]

You're picking up on ONE word out of one sentence in a Nation article, which is a translation from Thai. Do you know the context of that statement? Have you seen the full translation of the facebook page?

I think that says enough. It certainly doesn't make it fact.

I don't put it down to a fault with the language. I put it down as a fault with the reader.

how expected

All together now, give me an A, give me a B

So from this point forward you will consider everything reported in ANY news source as gospel, and that each and every translation is 100% accurate? Good to know

Give me an A

On another note, i think Abhisit is doing his best to lose this election, telling us a deal was done with the army, a couple of days ago telling us how corruption has escalated under his watch, what will it be tomorrow? an admittance that he ordered the army to kill protesters last year or an admittance he had no control over their actions but is happy to be complicit in the cover up?

Still, at least it wont be long now until the truth can come out,

[anterian]

it has been said that the people do not elect the Prime Minister but the Members of Parliament. This may be theoretically true but in reality the people know a vote for PT is a vote for Yingluck, a vote for the Dems is a vote for Abhisit.

Yesterday in my village a canvassing team were doing the rounds for the Dems, no mention was made of the local candidate, it was all about Abhisit, what he had achieved and what he was proposing.

Furthermore, the people know, and the canvassers agreed, that Abhisit came to power with the help of the military. To most people, even Democrat supporters, the equation Dems=Army is inescapable, they also know that the tail does not wag the dog.

Unless Abhisit can totally distance himself from army control he will never be a good leader, not that I think Yingluck would be better, Thailand has to choose between the frying pan and the fire.

Wow!

I swear I have read even Thaksin say that Yingluck might not be PM if they win.

I 100% doubt that you had a conversation with the canvassers(or overheard one) where they said "Dems=Army".

I do not doubt that if you actually heard/spoke with Dem canvassers that they dpoke about Abhisit -- The Dems aren't playing coy about who will be PM. I also doubt the local candidate was not mentioned.

Your "to most people" statement isn't factual either as far as I can see. In highly red areas people may leap to that illogical conclusion but I doubt that most people do. I would suggest that most people think that some of the top brass lean heavily towards the Dems. If you look at PTP's candidates etc it would suggest that the Army backing of the Dems is not an absolute nor even a given.

I do not doubt that anybody doubts the equation regarding PTP that PTP=UDD=Thaksin though ...

All in all I'd rate your post as not only highly unlikely to be true but also truly shortsighted.

You are politely calling me a liar in my report of my conversation with the canvasser, well that is your perogative, but it does not alter the facts. i'm sure that even if I had recorded the conversation you would claim that I had edited it :jap:

As to "illogical conclusions", this is often the comment of people who cannot think logically and have preconceptions of reality.

As to your rating of my post, do you honestly have such an ego as to think I care?

I guess you are correct --- in that I do not believe you are telling the truth about the conversation with a Dem canvasser.

That you fail to see that the Army isn't a singular cohesive unit and that PTP has not only some Army former top brass with it, but that it also has ties with current military top officers suggests to me that you may have missed the point of last year's red-shirt political violence being aimed at having control on Oct 1st to allow them to appoint the next army chief. Nothing about not being able to think logically in noting that the PTP and Thaksin has some strong allies in the military though the opposite can surely be said about people who fail to see that PTP and Thaksin have strong allies in the military Do I think you care? Yes. You responded.

In that case there is no further point in further discussion with you. I am not used to being called a liar.

I am well aware of the split in the army ranks, both horizontally and vertically.

please don't bother to reply, i find you arrogant and rude.

[random]

In that case there is no further point in further discussion with you. I am not used to being called a liar.

I am well aware of the split in the army ranks, both horizontally and vertically.

please don't bother to reply, i find you arrogant and rude.

Don't worry, you are not the only poster he behaves this way with, feel free to use the report button to highlight his breach of forum rules.

[anterian]

In that case there is no further point in further discussion with you. I am not used to being called a liar.

I am well aware of the split in the army ranks, both horizontally and vertically.

please don't bother to reply, i find you arrogant and rude.

Don't worry, you are not the only poster he behaves this way with, feel free to use the report button to highlight his breach of forum rules.

thank you for your support, however I'm a firm believer that moderators should restrict themselves to censorship of vulgarity and LM transgressions. simple rudeness from a member is simply best left "as is" to be viewed by others. We reveal our nature by the way we interact with others

[Pi Sek]

In that case there is no further point in further discussion with you. I am not used to being called a liar.

I am well aware of the split in the army ranks, both horizontally and vertically.

please don't bother to reply, i find you arrogant and rude.

In that case allow me to politely retort I too was at a Prachapitat rally recently, at Saphan Hin in Phuket the Friday before last.

First Suthep and a bunch of lackeys sat behind him came onto stage and started talking about the consequences of a PT victory - namely that a criminal who was responsible for 91 deaths (I've called pro-reds liars, and even scumbags in extreme cases, for repeatedly stating the same non-truth and I'll call Suthep a liar and a scumbag for the same reason) would be calling the shots, along with other politicians like Nattawut, Jatuporn, Dr. Weng and Veera, and that Yinglak was just a puppet. The only worthwhile thing he said was that PT have been so restrictive in their opposition to any policies that they had not allowed the Dems to do as much work as they would have liked. He also said that the Dems would win "neh-non". Hmff.

Then Abhisit arrived and started talking about his national policies. It was good and informative - and it was clear he had a model by which he plans to enact these policies. Then he introduced the 3 local khet representatives and talked with them on stage about their local problems and what they were going to do about them (i.e. local policies).

If you were aware that the army does have ambitious and high ranking factions supportive of Peua Thai/Thaksin, surely you can't believe that the Dems = RTA? I do realise you said that this was your perception of your village's mindset, not your own.

However, in the interests of reconciliation, could it be possible that jdinasia was merely suggesting you mis-understood the canvassers rather than suggesting you are a liar? He did say he didn't believe you were telling the truth about your conversation, but he drew the line at that. A proper canvasser would not be saying such rubbish as "the army = the dems"... well, not a Democrat one anyway! I'm not suggesting you're necessarily lieing, but maybe you misunderstood or maybe the canvassers were buffoons (because that's not a Democrat Party standard response)?

[xminator]

It strikes me how similar certain members way of dealing with forum opposition is to Thai politics. Give up arguing quickly, start attacking anyone differing, or have perceived differing view, personally, and if that fail do anything possible to get them banned.

[jayboy]

That you fail to see that the Army isn't a singular cohesive unit and that PTP has not only some Army former top brass with it, but that it also has ties with current military top officers suggests to me that you may have missed the point of last year's red-shirt political violence being aimed at having control on Oct 1st to allow them to appoint the next army chief. Nothing about not being able to think logically in noting that the PTP and Thaksin has some strong allies in the military though the opposite can surely be said about people who fail to see that PTP and Thaksin have strong allies in the military

This is a absurd depiction of the Thai army and its loyalties, as though there are a number of equally powerful factions linked to different political factions.He simply doesn't understand the dynamics.

[hanuman1]

In that case there is no further point in further discussion with you. I am not used to being called a liar.

I am well aware of the split in the army ranks, both horizontally and vertically.

please don't bother to reply, i find you arrogant and rude.

In that case allow me to politely retort I too was at a Prachapitat rally recently, at Saphan Hin in Phuket the Friday before last.

First Suthep and a bunch of lackeys sat behind him came onto stage and started talking about the consequences of a PT victory - namely that a criminal who was responsible for 91 deaths (I've called pro-reds liars, and even scumbags in extreme cases, for repeatedly stating the same non-truth and I'll call Suthep a liar and a scumbag for the same reason) would be calling the shots, along with other politicians like Nattawut, Jatuporn, Dr. Weng and Veera, and that Yinglak was just a puppet. The only worthwhile thing he said was that PT have been so restrictive in their opposition to any policies that they had not allowed the Dems to do as much work as they would have liked. He also said that the Dems would win "neh-non". Hmff.

Then Abhisit arrived and started talking about his national policies. It was good and informative - and it was clear he had a model by which he plans to enact these policies. Then he introduced the 3 local khet representatives and talked with them on stage about their local problems and what they were going to do about them (i.e. local policies).

If you were aware that the army does have ambitious and high ranking factions supportive of Peua Thai/Thaksin, surely you can't believe that the Dems = RTA? I do realise you said that this was your perception of your village's mindset, not your own.

However, in the interests of reconciliation, could it be possible that jdinasia was merely suggesting you mis-understood the canvassers rather than suggesting you are a liar? He did say he didn't believe you were telling the truth about your conversation, but he drew the line at that. A proper canvasser would not be saying such rubbish as "the army = the dems"... well, not a Democrat one anyway! I'm not suggesting you're necessarily lieing, but maybe you misunderstood or maybe the canvassers were buffoons (because that's not a Democrat Party standard response)?

Your final suggestion of the canvassers possibly being buffoons highlights what is at the crux of these problems. What if they were buffoons? What if all the millions of PTP voters - as many on these forums like to suggest - are buffoons?

Of these 2 things:

1) Things that are 'facts'.

2) Things that are perceived as 'facts'.

it is No.2 that makes the world go round.

[anterian]

In that case there is no further point in further discussion with you. I am not used to being called a liar.

I am well aware of the split in the army ranks, both horizontally and vertically.

please don't bother to reply, i find you arrogant and rude.

In that case allow me to politely retort I too was at a Prachapitat rally recently, at Saphan Hin in Phuket the Friday before last.

First Suthep and a bunch of lackeys sat behind him came onto stage and started talking about the consequences of a PT victory - namely that a criminal who was responsible for 91 deaths (I've called pro-reds liars, and even scumbags in extreme cases, for repeatedly stating the same non-truth and I'll call Suthep a liar and a scumbag for the same reason) would be calling the shots, along with other politicians like Nattawut, Jatuporn, Dr. Weng and Veera, and that Yinglak was just a puppet. The only worthwhile thing he said was that PT have been so restrictive in their opposition to any policies that they had not allowed the Dems to do as much work as they would have liked. He also said that the Dems would win "neh-non". Hmff.

Then Abhisit arrived and started talking about his national policies. It was good and informative - and it was clear he had a model by which he plans to enact these policies. Then he introduced the 3 local khet representatives and talked with them on stage about their local problems and what they were going to do about them (i.e. local policies).

If you were aware that the army does have ambitious and high ranking factions supportive of Peua Thai/Thaksin, surely you can't believe that the Dems = RTA? I do realise you said that this was your perception of your village's mindset, not your own.

However, in the interests of reconciliation, could it be possible that jdinasia was merely suggesting you mis-understood the canvassers rather than suggesting you are a liar? He did say he didn't believe you were telling the truth about your conversation, but he drew the line at that. A proper canvasser would not be saying such rubbish as "the army = the dems"... well, not a Democrat one anyway! I'm not suggesting you're necessarily lieing, but maybe you misunderstood or maybe the canvassers were buffoons (because that's not a Democrat Party standard response)?

Pi Sek, I am aware of your political affiliation so would expect that to colour your view of the current political opponents. I do not see Abhisit as a man with a halo, to me the strings attached to his arms and legs are all too obvious. Having said this I do not see any Thaksin clone as a better replacement. Thailand is a hell of a long way from democracy, but I feel the grassroots Reds, not their leaders are starting to understand what democracy means, more so than most Dem supporters.

i am aware that at the time of the coup Those sections of the Thai army that supported Thaksin were neutralised by geography, the coup leaders were able to take possession of Bangkok unopposed. since then Officers and Generals that supported Thaksin have been either removed or sidelined, thus I stand by my contention that the present army is predominantly in cahoots with the Dems and exerts a controlling influence.

As to the canvasser, we spoke in English, which he spoke surprisingly well. Thus there was no likelihood of him not understanding me or my comments to him. It may well be that knowing I am a farang and so cannot vote he felt freer to discuss such issues with me. Of course he did not say "the army=the dems", that was my choice of shorthand, what he accepted was that the Army and the Dems support each other. If being candid and realistic makes him a buffoon, well that is a matter of opinion, he did not strike me as such.

jdinasia, called me a liar in that he said I lied. Rather than addressing me on his behalf I think you could more usefully suggest that he apologised.

[whybother]

No. That's just a fault of Thaksin. He "believes" a lot of things ... like he's not corrupt.

Wow, that is a bit of a poor comeback, it is not even relevant

give me an A, Give me a B, give me an H come on join in, where is the rest of your cheer leading crew?

About as irrelevant as you ignoring that the interview was after Yingluck was appointed #1 on the party list.

Is there a problem with supporting Abhisit rather than the red shirt thugs?

[TAWP]

What everyone knows, but chooses to forget or ignore, is the pressure from outside parliament, by the military, elite, PAD, & ...., was the reason for other parties siding with the Dems, not at all that they wanted too. Bleat all you want, but the people know this. Never elected never respected.

Not to mention that there is not another democracy in the modern world where a coalition is led by the party that has substantially less seats in parliament.

You are wrong, wrong and wrong.

I think it is against forum rules to post things that are knowingly wrong so either you are uneducated or you are telling untruths. Which one is it?

[Ricardo]

<snip for brevity>

abhisit has never won and will never win an election.

I'd be fascinated to learn from you, how Abhisit became an MP then, and also how he became PM without being elected by his fellow-MPs ?

When did the dems last win a General Election?

If you want to nitpick and call winning a seat a parliament as winning an election the go ahead, but the fact is Abhsit has never led his party to win a general Election, I know this, and you know this, and despite the posturing of the usual cheerleaders on here, they also know this. You also know how he came to power, it was after the current government was dissolved for vote buying while his own party was also found guilty and not dissolved, and as seen from his own statement, a deal was made with the army as he refers to is as the deal.

Not long now until he is out on his ear and hopefully facing charges along with suthep for his actions last year, no doubt at that point he will think an amnesty is a top notch idea

With respect random, the statement I was responding to, claimed that "abhisit has never won and will never win an election", you're free to try to narrow this down to 'General Elections' if you wish, that's a different thing. I meanwhile believe that PM-Abhisit was elected, both as an MP, and later as PM.

And what you call 'nitpicking', is what I would call 'paying attention to the facts', sorry if this appears to upset you.

I wouldn't think a general-amnesty a good thing, I'd like to see the people who incited last year's riots before the courts, just as much as I'd hope (but don't expect) to see former-PM Thaksin face justice in the many cases against him. And if other politicians did wrong, I see no reason to give them a 'free pass', this talk of an amnesty merely continues the corrupt mess which is old-style Thai politics.

[brianb1944]

Don't worry Abhisit. It wont be long before this nightmare is soon over and you can start looking for a new job.

Talking to a person featured in a TV report is akin to talking to people on your Television, Wake up, he cant hear you, (or read your dribble)

[jdinasia]

<snip for brevity>

abhisit has never won and will never win an election.

I'd be fascinated to learn from you, how Abhisit became an MP then, and also how he became PM without being elected by his fellow-MPs ?

When did the dems last win a General Election?

If you want to nitpick and call winning a seat a parliament as winning an election the go ahead, but the fact is Abhsit has never led his party to win a general Election, I know this, and you know this, and despite the posturing of the usual cheerleaders on here, they also know this. You also know how he came to power, it was after the current government was dissolved for vote buying while his own party was also found guilty and not dissolved, and as seen from his own statement, a deal was made with the army as he refers to is as the deal.

Not long now until he is out on his ear and hopefully facing charges along with suthep for his actions last year, no doubt at that point he will think an amnesty is a top notch idea

With respect random, the statement I was responding to, claimed that "abhisit has never won and will never win an election", you're free to try to narrow this down to 'General Elections' if you wish, that's a different thing. I meanwhile believe that PM-Abhisit was elected, both as an MP, and later as PM.

And what you call 'nitpicking', is what I would call 'paying attention to the facts', sorry if this appears to upset you.

I wouldn't think a general-amnesty a good thing, I'd like to see the people who incited last year's riots before the courts, just as much as I'd hope (but don't expect) to see former-PM Thaksin face justice in the many cases against him. And if other politicians did wrong, I see no reason to give them a 'free pass', this talk of an amnesty merely continues the corrupt mess which is old-style Thai politics.

I concur ---

Even the PAD is against an amnesty which would include themselves (and the leaders face serious charges!) Random think that Abhisit and Suthep should face charges. If so then obviously an amnesty would be a bad idea in that case as well.

As for the elections issue -- It may be awhile since the Dems (as a party) won one .. but Abhist has certainly won some Then again Samak and Somchai have only won in the same way that Abhisit has. They didn't pull over 50% of the electorate as a party either and were voted into the PM office the same as Abhisit --- by their peers in parliament.

[Pi Sek]

Pi Sek, I am aware of your political affiliation so would expect that to colour your view of the current political opponents. I do not see Abhisit as a man with a halo, to me the strings attached to his arms and legs are all too obvious. Having said this I do not see any Thaksin clone as a better replacement. Thailand is a hell of a long way from democracy, but I feel the grassroots Reds, not their leaders are starting to understand what democracy means, more so than most Dem supporters.

Well, I have made no secret that I am a big fan of Abhisit... not necessarily the Democrats, but I think that Abhisit is by far the most suitable man to be Thai Prime Minister. That's my opinion. I have also made no secret that I am very skeptical about Thaksin (in the past I have suggested he would be a suitable basis for a bad guy in a new James Bond movie because he is a "super villain" and I have likened him to Star Wars' Chancellor Palpatine because of his use of lies, deception and mistrust to manipulate politics). Unfortunately for Peua Thai, that must also transfer to them; so, whilst not exactly being a fan of the Democrat Party, I am most certainly critical of Peua Thai. Such are the foundations for my political opinions - and they are just opinions, no matter how much I see, hear or read or no matter how my opinion evolves with such information. I'm just clearing this up to make sure you are aware of my political affiliation - so here it is for all to see.

However, I also see that there is a need for social change in Thailand. In my opinion this is what differentiates the Red Shirt movement from the UDD. I believe myself to care far more about the Red Shirts than Thaksin does. Therefore, when you say the Red Shirts' leaders do not understand what democracy means and the Red Shirts themselves have a better understanding of it, I'd have to agree. However, as I said in another thread this morning, "Democracy isn't about making the most people happy, it's about not being unacceptable to the majority". It seems the Democrats understand this better than the Red Shirts do, to the point that Abhisit is trying to lead the Democrats into a more encompassing path that involves those that the Red Shirts claim have been unfairly treated. This is why I was so critical of Suthep above - he spent much of his speech shouting about Red terrorists (though, to be fair, he was talking about the leaders) - what is that supposed to achieve?

i am aware that at the time of the coup Those sections of the Thai army that supported Thaksin were neutralised by geography, the coup leaders were able to take possession of Bangkok unopposed. since then Officers and Generals that supported Thaksin have been either removed or sidelined, thus I stand by my contention that the present army is predominantly in cahoots with the Dems and exerts a controlling influence.

Not all of them, by any means! However, I agree that certain personnel changes were made in the armed forces with political motives and I think you're right to think that the army saw Abhisit as "their boy", but I'm not convinced this is still the case - really, apart from their common aim of not allowing Thaksin to dictate last year's army chief appointment, they haven't seen eye to eye on a number of things since the coup, have they?

As to the canvasser, we spoke in English, which he spoke surprisingly well. Thus there was no likelihood of him not understanding me or my comments to him. It may well be that knowing I am a farang and so cannot vote he felt freer to discuss such issues with me. Of course he did not say "the army=the dems", that was my choice of shorthand, what he accepted was that the Army and the Dems support each other. If being candid and realistic makes him a buffoon, well that is a matter of opinion, he did not strike me as such.

I think this might have been the cause of the above confusion - above you said that the canvasser "agreed that Abhisit came to power with the help of the military". I too find this a ridiculous thing for the Democrat canvasser to say - he should be sacked, whether his words are true or otherwise (which only the likes of Prem, Anupong, Newin, Banharn know for sure)! The only justification I can think of for saying this is to try to get a word in edgewise and attract some sympathy from a crowd jeering his every comment (which I'm not saying is what was happening).

jdinasia, called me a liar in that he said I lied. Rather than addressing me on his behalf I think you could more usefully suggest that he apologised.

You did ask for him not to reply, so an apology might not be forthcoming whether I suggest it or not, particularly as you said you found him "rude and arrogant" (in response to your understanding that he called you a liar). He didn't call you a liar, he said he didn't believe you were telling the truth... a slight, but significant, difference. However, in the interests of reconciliation, jdinasia - would you be good enough to message anterian and clear the air

[jdinasia]

Well, I have made no secret that I am a big fan of Abhisit... not necessarily the Democrats, but I think that Abhisit is by far the most suitable man to be Thai Prime Minister. That's my opinion. I have also made no secret that I am very skeptical about Thaksin (in the past I have suggested he would be a suitable basis for a bad guy in a new James Bond movie because he is a "super villain" and I have likened him to Star Wars' Chancellor Palpatine because of his use of lies, deception and mistrust to manipulate politics). Unfortunately for Peua Thai, that must also transfer to them; so, whilst not exactly being a fan of the Democrat Party, I am most certainly critical of Peua Thai. Such are the foundations for my political opinions - and they are just opinions, no matter how much I see, hear or read or no matter how my opinion evolves with such information. I'm just clearing this up to make sure you are aware of my political affiliation - so here it is for all to see.

However, I also see that there is a need for social change in Thailand. In my opinion this is what differentiates the Red Shirt movement from the UDD. I believe myself to care far more about the Red Shirts than Thaksin does. Therefore, when you say the Red Shirts' leaders do not understand what democracy means and the Red Shirts themselves have a better understanding of it, I'd have to agree. However, as I said in another thread this morning, "Democracy isn't about making the most people happy, it's about not being unacceptable to the majority". It seems the Democrats understand this better than the Red Shirts do, to the point that Abhisit is trying to lead the Democrats into a more encompassing path that involves those that the Red Shirts claim have been unfairly treated. This is why I was so critical of Suthep above - he spent much of his speech shouting about Red terrorists (though, to be fair, he was talking about the leaders) - what is that supposed to achieve?

i am aware that at the time of the coup Those sections of the Thai army that supported Thaksin were neutralised by geography, the coup leaders were able to take possession of Bangkok unopposed. since then Officers and Generals that supported Thaksin have been either removed or sidelined, thus I stand by my contention that the present army is predominantly in cahoots with the Dems and exerts a controlling influence.

Not all of them, by any means! However, I agree that certain personnel changes were made in the armed forces with political motives and I think you're right to think that the army saw Abhisit as "their boy", but I'm not convinced this is still the case - really, apart from their common aim of not allowing Thaksin to dictate last year's army chief appointment, they haven't seen eye to eye on a number of things since the coup, have they?

As to the canvasser, we spoke in English, which he spoke surprisingly well. Thus there was no likelihood of him not understanding me or my comments to him. It may well be that knowing I am a farang and so cannot vote he felt freer to discuss such issues with me. Of course he did not say "the army=the dems", that was my choice of shorthand, what he accepted was that the Army and the Dems support each other. If being candid and realistic makes him a buffoon, well that is a matter of opinion, he did not strike me as such.

I think this might have been the cause of the above confusion - above you said that the canvasser "agreed that Abhisit came to power with the help of the military". I too find this a ridiculous thing for the Democrat canvasser to say - he should be sacked, whether his words are true or otherwise (which only the likes of Prem, Anupong, Newin, Banharn know for sure)! The only justification I can think of for saying this is to try to get a word in edgewise and attract some sympathy from a crowd jeering his every comment (which I'm not saying is what was happening).

jdinasia, called me a liar in that he said I lied. Rather than addressing me on his behalf I think you could more usefully suggest that he apologised.

You did ask for him not to reply, so an apology might not be forthcoming whether I suggest it or not, particularly as you said you found him "rude and arrogant" (in response to your understanding that he called you a liar). He didn't call you a liar, he said he didn't believe you were telling the truth... a slight, but significant, difference. However, in the interests of reconciliation, jdinasia - would you be good enough to message anterian and clear the air

I pretty much concur with you on every single point .... including the statements you made at the end about me not believing that Anterian is telling the truth about a Dem political canvasser. He may simply have been mistaken which is why I did not use the word liar It is, imho, beyond belief, that a canvasser would say such a thing about the party he was working for. I wouldn't believe a poster that said he heard a PTP canvasser calling Jatuporn and Thaksin terrorists either.

The only thing I disagree with you on Pi Sek is that the "real reds" (to somehow separate out those that aren't JUST advocating Thaksin be allowed back into politics) have any better understanding of democracy now than in the past .... then again I would say the same about Thailand as a whole.

[Pi Sek]

The only thing I disagree with you on Pi Sek is that the "real reds" (to somehow separate out those that aren't JUST advocating Thaksin be allowed back into politics) have any better understanding of democracy now than in the past .... then again I would say the same about Thailand as a whole.

Aw, I don't know... Sombat Boonngamangong (cool surname - merit that is as beautiful as a grape) is a Red Shirt, whilst Jatuporn is UDD. Sombat understands the principles of democracy fairly well, I believe, and makes his arguments with them in mind. Jatuporn's (or Nattawut's these days) statements tend to go against almost every facet of democracy.

I also notice that I made a mistake earlier. I think that the UDD leaders also understand the principles of democracy very well - I just don't think they want it so have decided to pretend it means something else.

[jdinasia]

The only thing I disagree with you on Pi Sek is that the "real reds" (to somehow separate out those that aren't JUST advocating Thaksin be allowed back into politics) have any better understanding of democracy now than in the past .... then again I would say the same about Thailand as a whole.

Aw, I don't know... Sombat Boonngamangong (cool surname - merit that is as beautiful as a grape) is a Red Shirt, whilst Jatuporn is UDD. Sombat understands the principles of democracy fairly well, I believe, and makes his arguments with them in mind. Jatuporn's (or Nattawut's these days) statements tend to go against almost every facet of democracy.

I also notice that I made a mistake earlier. I think that the UDD leaders also understand the principles of democracy very well - I just don't think they want it so have decided to pretend it means something else.

Oh ... I am SURE there are some that do understand --- I was intending to mean the real rank-and-file red. There are certainly a few academics and even probably some MP's that understand (and want) democracy on the red side of the political spectrum. I doubt Sombat's understanding ha significantly changed recently, do you? He understood it in the past and does now.

I think the concept that many Thais have of Democracy is "if our side wins we can do anything" including unilaterally changing the laws to benefit themselves to the detriment of the country. That, imho, isn't what democracy is about. Democracy includes checks and balances that, in fact, should preclude that type of thinking.

[Pi Sek]

The only thing I disagree with you on Pi Sek is that the "real reds" (to somehow separate out those that aren't JUST advocating Thaksin be allowed back into politics) have any better understanding of democracy now than in the past .... then again I would say the same about Thailand as a whole.

Aw, I don't know... Sombat Boonngamangong (cool surname - merit that is as beautiful as a grape) is a Red Shirt, whilst Jatuporn is UDD. Sombat understands the principles of democracy fairly well, I believe, and makes his arguments with them in mind. Jatuporn's (or Nattawut's these days) statements tend to go against almost every facet of democracy.

I also notice that I made a mistake earlier. I think that the UDD leaders also understand the principles of democracy very well - I just don't think they want it so have decided to pretend it means something else.

Oh ... I am SURE there are some that do understand --- I was intending to mean the real rank-and-file red. There are certainly a few academics and even probably some MP's that understand (and want) democracy on the red side of the political spectrum. I doubt Sombat's understanding has significantly changed recently, do you? He understood it in the past and does now.

I think the concept that many Thais have of Democracy is "if our side wins we can do anything" including unilaterally changing the laws to benefit themselves to the detriment of the country. That, imho, isn't what democracy is about. Democracy includes checks and balances that, in fact, should preclude that type of thinking.

I have tried to talk about democracy with rank and file Red Shirts. I think that there are a lot of cases where rank-and-file Red Shirts have chosen to warp the definition of democracy into something else; but they understand democracy nonetheless. All they seem to say is that Thaksin came to power democratically and was ousted by a coup, and that is not democratic. They are right in thus far.

What they refuse to acknowledge at all (i.e. on the whole, they have chosen to refuse rather than to question) is that Thaksin was operating outside democratic (not to mention constitutional) measures when he was deposed; and that the latter part of Thaksin's stint in office was perverting democracy on almost every front; and that Abhisit, also in power through democratical means, is trying to address their grievances as any truly democratic PM would.

The minority of Red Shirts who don't support Thaksin are on the path to enlightenment. That's why I don't see the UDD in the same light as those particular Red Shirts, who I think and I hope will have a say in the future of this country.

[jdinasia]

I hope that as well.... I am not sure I expect it, as long as the PTP and the UDD are so intertwined though.

I have said from the beginning of this mess that the rural poor (from ALL regions) deserve more form their government. I am also aware that Thailand can only support so much in the way of national debt and that many changes are going to take a lot of time. This includes realizing that a lion's share of the budget has to go into things that increase the tax-base and that it all can't go into redressing social issues.

Real infrastructure improvements as well as a revamped education system nationwide would be a good starting point. Building roads, hospitals, and schools ... and teaching teachers how to teach would not only see more money going upcountry, it would also increase the tax-base, increase employment, and offer a better future to the rural poor. Stricter regulation (and yes regulation costs money) on graft along with harsher punishments to help ensure transparency (and get the regional power-blocs noses out of the trough) is needed as well.

[Pi Sek]

I hope that as well.... I am not sure I expect it, as long as the PTP and the UDD are so intertwined though.

I have said from the beginning of this mess that the rural poor (from ALL regions) deserve more form their government. I am also aware that Thailand can only support so much in the way of national debt and that many changes are going to take a lot of time. This includes realizing that a lion's share of the budget has to go into things that increase the tax-base and that it all can't go into redressing social issues.

Real infrastructure improvements as well as a revamped education system nationwide would be a good starting point. Building roads, hospitals, and schools ... and teaching teachers how to teach would not only see more money going upcountry, it would also increase the tax-base, increase employment, and offer a better future to the rural poor. Stricter regulation (and yes regulation costs money) on graft along with harsher punishments to help ensure transparency (and get the regional power-blocs noses out of the trough) is needed as well.

You wanna set up a party? I want the interior portfolio! $$$ I mean "for the good of the country"

edit - we need some populist policies... how about "free lao cao dispensed each morning" for the taxi motocycs and "marijouana decriminalised in 6 months" for the farmers?

[jdinasia]

I hope that as well.... I am not sure I expect it, as long as the PTP and the UDD are so intertwined though.

I have said from the beginning of this mess that the rural poor (from ALL regions) deserve more form their government. I am also aware that Thailand can only support so much in the way of national debt and that many changes are going to take a lot of time. This includes realizing that a lion's share of the budget has to go into things that increase the tax-base and that it all can't go into redressing social issues.

Real infrastructure improvements as well as a revamped education system nationwide would be a good starting point. Building roads, hospitals, and schools ... and teaching teachers how to teach would not only see more money going upcountry, it would also increase the tax-base, increase employment, and offer a better future to the rural poor. Stricter regulation (and yes regulation costs money) on graft along with harsher punishments to help ensure transparency (and get the regional power-blocs noses out of the trough) is needed as well.

You wanna set up a party? I want the interior portfolio! $$$ I mean "for the good of the country"

edit - we need some populist policies... how about "free lao cao dispensed each morning" for the taxi motocycs and "marijouana decriminalised in 6 months" for the farmers?

I'll pass --- Too much to do to help any form of legitimacy come to Thai politics.

I think Abhisit has made a start but he has decades of political corruption to overcome.

[hanuman1]

STOP PRESS: CIVILIZED CHAT BREAKS OUT IN THAI VISA NEWS FORUM.

[Pi Sek]

STOP PRESS: CIVILIZED CHAT BREAKS OUT IN THAI VISA NEWS FORUM.

Are you threatening me?

[bungalownights]

Don't worry Abhisit. It wont be long before this nightmare is soon over and you can start looking for a new job.

Talking to a person featured in a TV report is akin to talking to people on your Television, Wake up, he cant hear you, (or read your dribble)

wake up

people dont "talk" on this forum, they *drumroll* post

[Pi Sek]

evidently

[chuang]

Abhisit is correct what he says about the PAD. I well remembering him on TV warning the Yellows of the consequences of their actions outside parliament and at the airports, and they were not above the law.

Didn't hear any of the Peau Thai Leaders saying the same when their thug buddies were causing chaos and violence last year.

If so what are the consequences if any...

[whybother]

Abhisit is correct what he says about the PAD. I well remembering him on TV warning the Yellows of the consequences of their actions outside parliament and at the airports, and they were not above the law.

Didn't hear any of the Peau Thai Leaders saying the same when their thug buddies were causing chaos and violence last year.

If so what are the consequences if any...

Jail for some of them: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12092906

Ongoing court cases for others: http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7401592.html

[Buchholz]

Abhisit is correct what he says about the PAD. I well remembering him on TV warning the Yellows of the consequences of their actions outside parliament and at the airports, and they were not above the law.

Didn't hear any of the Peau Thai Leaders saying the same when their thug buddies were causing chaos and violence last year.

If so what are the consequences if any...

Jail for some of them: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12092906

Ongoing court cases for others: http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/7401592.html

We're still waiting on the consequences for the Red Shirts for their riot, a full year and a half BEFORE the airport, in July 2007.