Red-Shirt Leader Thida: Abhisit Out Of Touch With The Grassroots

[msg362]

Can someone please address the critcisms? What is wrong with what was said.? comment on the points made? not ramble on?

Assuming you read all posts on this topic, you mean to say you found nothing worthwhile or to the point?

That was helpful and discussed the points raised. anything else to add?

[ianbaggie]

Standard Maoist play book move.

Blame you opponent with being out of touch with the poor.

Thilda is playing to type.

Sorry, so tell me,

How in touch multi-billionaire Yingluck is with the actual poor of Thailand?

I think Thida and I watched the same musical this week --- but took home different messages from it. (referring to Evita) Thaksin is so much more obviously "in touch" with the poor sitting in a mansion in Dubai

No.................Shinawatra Snr is still very much in touch with the poor at grass roots.............through the payments of 500 baht each from his bank account after each red shirt rally and attended Pheu Thai conference. He knows people can be bought VERY cheaply!! He also knows that his gain from the handouts to them will be magnified a billion times when his crimes are whitewashed at christmas.

[animatic]

Standard Maoist play book move.

Blame you opponent with being out of touch with the poor.

Thilda is playing to type.

Sorry, so tell me,

How in touch multi-billionaire Yingluck is with the actual poor of Thailand?

In the OP its about bureaucrats vs. the people and not a rich vs. the poor argument.

From what play book comes that - to blame the opponent for something he never said?

The people, what you mean the people? The OP is about whoever against k. Thaksin. If k. Thaksin hadn't been mentioned I might believe this is about bureaucrats versus people. As it is, it's pure red propaganda in my eyes

*The people* as in the the point that is mentioned in the OP

a deep conflict between the bureaucratic polity (amatiyathipatai) and the people.

There is nothing about *the poor* vs. *the rich*.

Some people should made up their mind before starting their rants and blaming reds=PT=Thaksin for various things which includes at the same time:

a) being a Maoist

b ) being a Thaksin lover

c)being an anti democratic coup hater)

d) that Thaksin is amorally mega rich

Point d) is almost Maoist itself.

Staunch Anti-maoists seems to become Anti-capitalists and "Anti-rich" is case the rich capitalist is Thaksin.

And you are right, the OP is about a critique of Abhisit. So it must be pure and poor propaganda, red coloured.

Shooting the messengers from the handbook of those who want to construct the truth by themselves and alone rather then let to be the truth a product of the discourse.

If only there was a real coherent argument here, and not simplistic, disjointed cut and paste ideas, I could respond....but what's the point.

[ianbaggie]

Part quote from thida: "..............When Abhisit has to campaign and get in touch with the people following the crackdown, he confronts with the stark reality that the people are angry and demanding answers from him in connection with the last year's killings. ................"

Well that's the vewrsion that thida wants people to think.

YES - and the red reason the red shirts are ahead in the polls and will probably win the election is that this is the only voice being heard. The democrats are too nice. They should have matched the Pheu Thai "nasty blow for nasty blow" from the first time they came to Bangkok in 2009 and burnt buses in the road'. Mr Abhisits only fault is hes TOO lenient thats because the Democrats are civilised and have morals which many PT and red shirt leaders unfortunately seem to lack. Watch this space for the rally tonight in Rachaprasong and compare that to the civilised way the Democrats - both Government and supporters have behaved during red shirt rallies.

When Thaksin started the Pheu Thai and the red shirt movement (directly or indirectly) which was violent from its conception, the Democrats had a choice - civil war and confrontation or stand back and hope not too much happens. They chose to thyeir credit to stand back. Thaksin Shinawatra chose NOT to stand back from his mansion in Dubai and threw his minions into fully fledged aggresion at every opportunity.

The people are angry the red shirts cry - MAYBE the army was angry in 2006 - and maybe they will be again.

[ianbaggie]

Standard Maoist play book move.

Blame you opponent with being out of touch with the poor.

Thilda is playing to type.

Sorry, so tell me,

How in touch multi-billionaire Yingluck is with the actual poor of Thailand?

In the OP its about bureaucrats vs. the people and not a rich vs. the poor argument.

From what play book comes that - to blame the opponent for something he never said?

1) whats the OP?

2) Where does it state that its about beaurocrats - a link please

3) Whats a play book - is it a kids pop up Noddy annual?

40 What are you trying to say

5) Why dont you use proper English to say it?

[ianbaggie]

What a joke.

This kind of statement coming form Thida/her son. I should not judge people by their appearance, but Thida looks out of touch with reality.

This statement coming from her son, written by a PR machine that gets millions from Thaksin.

Who is out of touch with the poor?

-Giving poeple credit cards who you know cannot pay back is not allowed in the western world. Thaksin gives the poorest people credit cards. They will never be able to pay back the money.

-Thaksin is a billionaire who never paid taxes. All these billions could have gone indirectly to the poor but Thaksin decided to keep the money inside his family.

Looks like PT is going bananas over 1 rally-1 day at the spot they have terrorised Bangkok for months.

Give me a break!!

Someone else who see things as they really are!! Red Democracy rules KO!!

[ianbaggie]

Standard Maoist play book move.

Blame you opponent with being out of touch with the poor.

Thilda is playing to type.

Sorry, so tell me,

How in touch multi-billionaire Yingluck is with the actual poor of Thailand?

In the OP its about bureaucrats vs. the people and not a rich vs. the poor argument.

From what play book comes that - to blame the opponent for something he never said?

The people, what you mean the people? The OP is about whoever against k. Thaksin. If k. Thaksin hadn't been mentioned I might believe this is about bureaucrats versus people. As it is, it's pure red propaganda in my eyes

*The people* as in the the point that is mentioned in the OP

a deep conflict between the bureaucratic polity (amatiyathipatai) and the people.

There is nothing about *the poor* vs. *the rich*.

Some people should made up their mind before starting their rants and blaming reds=PT=Thaksin for various things which includes at the same time:

a) being a Maoist

b ) being a Thaksin lover

c)being an anti democratic coup hater)

d) that Thaksin is amorally mega rich

Point d) is almost Maoist itself.

Staunch Anti-maoists seems to become Anti-capitalists and "Anti-rich" is case the rich capitalist is Thaksin.

And you are right, the OP is about a critique of Abhisit. So it must be pure and poor propaganda, red coloured.

Shooting the messengers from the handbook of those who want to construct the truth by themselves and alone rather then let to be the truth a product of the discourse.

Staunch Anti-maoists seems to become Anti-capitalists and "Anti-rich" is case the rich capitalist is Thaksin.

BUt thats because hes a greedy hypocrite and YOu are extremely naive at best - Id love to know who brainwashed you Samurai - your time would have been better spent at English classes. Or else reading something that might benefit you as a person or society.

[ianbaggie]

It's true that Apisit has looked ridiculous at times in this election campaign, for instance when he planted rice, he thrust the rice stalk in with his fingers half way up the stem, any farmer knows your thumb should be against the stem to offer support and form a hole as you press it into the mud.

He's a Tong Lor-Oxford protege as they say!

But it's not important, the point is he has an excellent grasp of issues facing the country, something sorely lacking in Yinglak, and her refusal to join the P net debate this Friday only leads to more doubt as to her ability to be the PM of Thailand.

Yes - the refusal to join the debate shows her weakness in political argument and her inability in grasping anything but how to act as a link between her brother and his pandering to his terrorist puppets.

[ianbaggie]

Can someone please address the critcisms? What is wrong with what was said.? comment on the points made? not ramble on?

Better to ramble on than "Troll" methinks!! Do YOU have a point to make? Maybe add something that would blind us all thats to do with addressing the criticisms? No just Bak Maa at other posters?

Edited June 23, 2011 by ianbaggie

[geriatrickid]

Thaksins PR groups have plenty of employees who write this type of critical finger pointing. As noted the name could be changed to the other side and it would fit just as well.

sadly Abhasit is out of touch and no real match for vicious red propaganda. He is probably by far best Thailand has for a long time but has been brought up and educated in a proper democracy which plays by decent rules. Here mob violence and Taksins thugs are allowed by thais to get away with intimidation murder and more not to even start on total corruption and looting of thailand treasury by Taksin and his lot. Thais will get what they deserve and if their naieve enough to let Taksin in so be it. I can guarantee it will be very bad for Thailand and poor but theirs none so blind and those cant see

Oh please. You obviously have not seen the nasty attack ads that are common in North American elections. The Republicans and their PACs have some of the most disgusting ads on the planet.

The UK a proper democracy? Really? Look at the 2005 election results in the UK. The conservatives received 32.4% of the popular vote, and 30.7% of the seats.Labour received 35.2% of the vote and 55.2% of the seats. The Lib Dems had 22% of the vote and 9% of the seats. On a purely democratic basis, Labour had fewer votes but because it had more seats was able to form the government. I take my obligations to the crown to heart, but the UK has a quasi democracy. It functions, but should not be held up as a role model to Thailand.

You reference mob violence in Thailand. I am sorry but the attack on Prince Charles and his wife with cries of off with their heads hardly was a warm welcome was it? The violent protests subsequent to the attempt to increase tuition was hardly a peaceful student gathering. The G8 protests in the west are hardly peaceful and usually feature mobs running amuck. In the meantime, corruption is out of control in Thailand. What exactly did PM Abhisit do to address the endemic corruption on Phuket? Everyone knows that Phuket is as solidly Democrat as it gets and yet there the local authorities seem to be profiting from, aiding and abetting the organized crime in the form of the transportation industry and the licensing and policing of tourist related businesses. PM Abhisit is a scion of the community that sits atop of that one big steaming dung heap of corruption in Thailand.

Victoria Gotti did not engage in organized crime, nor was she ever convicted of a criminal offense. However, she sure lived a nice life as mobster John Gotti's wife.

[msg362]

Can someone please address the critcisms? What is wrong with what was said.? comment on the points made? not ramble on?

Better to ramble on than "Troll" methinks!! Do YOU have a point to make? Maybe add something that would blind us all thats to do with addressing the criticisms? No just Bak Maa at other posters?

Since I posted there have been some interesting comments ( not yours I might add, you simply like to attack people). I won't claim my posting stimulated better ideas, it's just a coincidence! I've no idea what Bak Maa means, clearly not English, must be a foreign language of some sort, or maybe just a misspelling. Not to worry I'd suggest a darkened room for you to calm down.

[Siripon]

Since I posted there have been some interesting comments ( not yours I might add, you simply like to attack people). I won't claim my posting stimulated better ideas, it's just a coincidence! I've no idea what Bak Maa means, clearly not English, must be a foreign language of some sort, or maybe just a misspelling. Not to worry I'd suggest a darkened room for you to calm down.

Bak maa is ปากหมา the mouth of a dog, it means to be abusive when talking to people.

[msg362]

[

Since I posted there have been some interesting comments ( not yours I might add, you simply like to attack people). I won't claim my posting stimulated better ideas, it's just a coincidence! I've no idea what Bak Maa means, clearly not English, must be a foreign language of some sort, or maybe just a misspelling. Not to worry I'd suggest a darkened room for you to calm down.

Bak maa is ปากหมา the mouth of a dog, it means to be abusive when talking to people.

dosen't seem right. I don't think I was being abusive, just asking for more directed comments I understand now ( I can speak some Thai) but all in all a bit over the top from that Guy i think. Funny how some people just like to attack from behind their avatars,

[rubl]

Can someone please address the critcisms? What is wrong with what was said.? comment on the points made? not ramble on?

Assuming you read all posts on this topic, you mean to say you found nothing worthwhile or to the point?

That was helpful and discussed the points raised. anything else to add?

Member samurai and I gave it a try, but it seems you didn't like our conversation?

[msg362]

Can someone please address the critcisms? What is wrong with what was said.? comment on the points made? not ramble on?

Assuming you read all posts on this topic, you mean to say you found nothing worthwhile or to the point?

That was helpful and discussed the points raised. anything else to add?

Member samurai and I gave it a try, but it seems you didn't like our conversation?

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4506694

Terribly sorry, you are clearly cleverer than me. I couldn't understand the relevance of your comment, but is was, I must say succinct.

Like or dislike did not come nto it.

[animatic]

'msg362' timestamp='1308755836' post='4507063'

Can someone please address the critcisms? What is wrong with what was said.? comment on the points made? not ramble on?

Assuming you read all posts on this topic, you mean to say you found nothing worthwhile or to the point?

That was helpful and discussed the points raised. anything else to add?

Member samurai and I gave it a try, but it seems you didn't like our conversation?

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4506694

Terribly sorry, you are clearly cleverer than me. I couldn't understand the relevance of your comment, but is was, I must say succinct.

Like or dislike did not come nto it.

It was commenting on earlier discussion and dispute on your subject between him and another presently 'on vacation' poster.

Essentially what you requested has already been done to a crisp, you just weren't finding it yourself.

Edited June 23, 2011 by animatic

[Thai at Heart]

It's true that Apisit has looked ridiculous at times in this election campaign, for instance when he planted rice, he thrust the rice stalk in with his fingers half way up the stem, any farmer knows your thumb should be against the stem to offer support and form a hole as you press it into the mud.

He's a Tong Lor-Oxford protege as they say!

But it's not important, the point is he has an excellent grasp of issues facing the country, something sorely lacking in Yinglak, and her refusal to join the P net debate this Friday only leads to more doubt as to her ability to be the PM of Thailand.

This is where you are sorely missing the point of getting elected in the modern day. It is bad enough that he has to have the PAD, the army, Kasit and Suthep sitting on his coat tails, even before he has to plant rice. He can't drag these dinosaurs over the line on his own.

What I learnt the other day was that until the late 80s was that there was a direct levy on rice production/exports that went centrally to the government to essentially build Bangkok. If I was a rice farmer and I knew that I would have expected some payback.

[MrChangers]

Standard Maoist play book move.

Blame you opponent with being out of touch with the poor.

Thilda is playing to type.

Sorry, so tell me,

How in touch multi-billionaire Yingluck is with the actual poor of Thailand?

Standard CIA play book move

Blame the opponent for putting the poor down, question what does the other person know about the poor,

Promise better for the poor, blame your opponent.

Arm the poor and incite them to revolt.

Ensure the Army has bought your weapons,

Quell the poor

Repeat line 2

[craigt3365]

An reply with improper use of quotes has been removed. Along with a few replies to it.

When replying to previous posts, please use the proper format. If you are not sure what to do, please post in the Support Desk forum for help. We'll gladly help out. :jap:

[jayboy]

It's true that Apisit has looked ridiculous at times in this election campaign, for instance when he planted rice, he thrust the rice stalk in with his fingers half way up the stem, any farmer knows your thumb should be against the stem to offer support and form a hole as you press it into the mud.

He's a Tong Lor-Oxford protege as they say!

But it's not important, the point is he has an excellent grasp of issues facing the country, something sorely lacking in Yinglak, and her refusal to join the P net debate this Friday only leads to more doubt as to her ability to be the PM of Thailand.

I have just watched Khun Abhisit's interview with Stephen Sackur on Hardtalk.I must say I thought he handled himself very well, a bit irritated and tetchy at times, but overall very impressive - and as honest as it's possible to be as a PM defending his government.While I have sympathy with some of the redshirt aims (as do most well educated foreigners), I have to say that if I had a vote it would be for Abhisit.What struck me quite forcibly is that he was really doing his best to give intelligent and honest replies.(It helps that Sackur - a Cambridge graduate - is both intellectually incisive and thoughtful and I'm guessing perhaps a kindred spirit).I was also struck that in this interview at least Abhisit appeared ready if he gets a second term to deal with the country's structural problems including the army and lese majeste abuse.

[AleG]

It's true that Apisit has looked ridiculous at times in this election campaign, for instance when he planted rice, he thrust the rice stalk in with his fingers half way up the stem, any farmer knows your thumb should be against the stem to offer support and form a hole as you press it into the mud.

He's a Tong Lor-Oxford protege as they say!

But it's not important, the point is he has an excellent grasp of issues facing the country, something sorely lacking in Yinglak, and her refusal to join the P net debate this Friday only leads to more doubt as to her ability to be the PM of Thailand.

I have just watched Khun Abhisit's interview with Stephen Sackur on Hardtalk.I must say I thought he handled himself very well, a bit irritated and tetchy at times, but overall very impressive - and as honest as it's possible to be as a PM defending his government.While I have sympathy with some of the redshirt aims (as do most well educated foreigners), I have to say that if I had a vote it would be for Abhisit.What struck me quite forcibly is that he was really doing his best to give intelligent and honest replies.(It helps that Sackur - a Cambridge graduate - is both intellectually incisive and thoughtful and I'm guessing perhaps a kindred spirit).I was also struck that in this interview at least Abhisit appeared ready if he gets a second term to deal with the country's structural problems including the army and lese majeste abuse.

Alright, game's up. Who are you and what have you done to jayboy?

[hyperdimension]

I have just watched Khun Abhisit's interview with Stephen Sackur on Hardtalk.I must say I thought he handled himself very well, a bit irritated and tetchy at times, but overall very impressive - and as honest as it's possible to be as a PM defending his government.While I have sympathy with some of the redshirt aims (as do most well educated foreigners), I have to say that if I had a vote it would be for Abhisit.What struck me quite forcibly is that he was really doing his best to give intelligent and honest replies.(It helps that Sackur - a Cambridge graduate - is both intellectually incisive and thoughtful and I'm guessing perhaps a kindred spirit).I was also struck that in this interview at least Abhisit appeared ready if he gets a second term to deal with the country's structural problems including the army and lese majeste abuse.

For those who missed it, here is the video of the interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVPJI9SN6EY