Thaksin, Red Shirts Cast Shadow Over Yingluck Govt

[lannarebirth]

If the supposedly educated and intelligent members of this forum cannot cease their bitching about the election results what chance do the poorly educated majority of Thais have to reconcile. It seems the mutual hatred which has slowly become entrenched in the Thai psyche, the hatred between the rural and poor and the Bangkok affluent and the South, has been taken onboard by the farangs on this forum.

The PT are not yet in power yet many members are already rejoicing over their perceived future failures and demise. Cynicism is a useful tool if applied in moderation, some members are applying it by the bucketful.

Most (all) Thai parties have skeletons in their cupboards, they don't need to be constantly revealed ad nauseam, the best use of bones is to grind them up as fertiliser to help grow a better future. I think there are many people here who would rather prefer Thailand in ruins than truly reconciled, a "better dead than red" attitude. (I don't mean red in the Thai sense but in the sense of this saying).

What do you mean exactly by saying "truly reconciled"? To agree to sweep horrendous things under the carpet? To agree that everyone who has broken the law should face a court? What exactly do you mean?

[anterian]

If the supposedly educated and intelligent members of this forum cannot cease their bitching about the election results what chance do the poorly educated majority of Thais have to reconcile. It seems the mutual hatred which has slowly become entrenched in the Thai psyche, the hatred between the rural and poor and the Bangkok affluent and the South, has been taken onboard by the farangs on this forum.

The PT are not yet in power yet many members are already rejoicing over their perceived future failures and demise. Cynicism is a useful tool if applied in moderation, some members are applying it by the bucketful.

Most (all) Thai parties have skeletons in their cupboards, they don't need to be constantly revealed ad nauseam, the best use of bones is to grind them up as fertiliser to help grow a better future. I think there are many people here who would rather prefer Thailand in ruins than truly reconciled, a "better dead than red" attitude. (I don't mean red in the Thai sense but in the sense of this saying).

What do you mean exactly by saying "truly reconciled"? To agree to sweep horrendous things under the carpet? To agree that everyone who has broken the law should face a court? What exactly do you mean?

Thank you for illustrating my point, I meant by not posting comments and questions using emotive words like 'horrendous' .

As to what I mean by reconciled might I suggest that if you cannot understand this word that you try a dictionary. However, I think you are simply being emotively rhetorical.

What is clear is you would be unhappy with any form of reconciliation that did not first involve the punishment of those you despise. Unfortunately this seems equally true for your opponents.

[rubl]

I don't believe Thaksin will return to frontline politics.......so where does that leave all your pontificating?

I didn't (want to) hear you, so where does that leave you, lonely voice in the desert ? Logic is a beautiful, rare flower

[jdinasia]

I don't believe Thaksin will return to frontline politics.......so where does that leave all your pontificating?

I didn't (want to) hear you, so where does that leave you, lonely voice in the desert ? Logic is a beautiful, rare flower

Some people don't even believe what they type on here (and admit it) so what they claim to believe has no relevance at all

[lannarebirth]

If the supposedly educated and intelligent members of this forum cannot cease their bitching about the election results what chance do the poorly educated majority of Thais have to reconcile. It seems the mutual hatred which has slowly become entrenched in the Thai psyche, the hatred between the rural and poor and the Bangkok affluent and the South, has been taken onboard by the farangs on this forum.

The PT are not yet in power yet many members are already rejoicing over their perceived future failures and demise. Cynicism is a useful tool if applied in moderation, some members are applying it by the bucketful.

Most (all) Thai parties have skeletons in their cupboards, they don't need to be constantly revealed ad nauseam, the best use of bones is to grind them up as fertiliser to help grow a better future. I think there are many people here who would rather prefer Thailand in ruins than truly reconciled, a "better dead than red" attitude. (I don't mean red in the Thai sense but in the sense of this saying).

What do you mean exactly by saying "truly reconciled"? To agree to sweep horrendous things under the carpet? To agree that everyone who has broken the law should face a court? What exactly do you mean?

Thank you for illustrating my point, I meant by not posting comments and questions using emotive words like 'horrendous' .

As to what I mean by reconciled might I suggest that if you cannot understand this word that you try a dictionary. However, I think you are simply being emotively rhetorical.

What is clear is you would be unhappy with any form of reconciliation that did not first involve the punishment of those you despise. Unfortunately this seems equally true for your opponents.

I think you don't know what the hell you're talking about. I could have said murder or arson or civil inserrection or extortion or treason or even trespassing or restraint of trade. but I think one nasty word could be inclusive. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to expound on the subject.

I looked in the dictionary and I know what it says, but YOU'RE the one talking about reconciliation, so I want YOU to tell me what it means.

You are correct a bout one thing however. I do want those who have commited wrong to be brought to justice before the law. Both those I despise and those i admired.

[LindsayBKK]

Well it could be worse, will Yingluck ask Thaksin for a loan to buy a container

load of new 15,000baht laptops the Pheu Thai Party promised.

With or without the red mafia it was the first broken election promise.

Next the minimum wage increases. Good luck on that one, businesses are already complaining.

Edited July 12, 2011 by LindsayBKK

[lannarebirth]

Well it could be worse, will Yingluck ask Thaksin for a loan to buy a container

load of new 15,000baht laptops the Pheu Thai Party promised.

With or without the red mafia it was the first broken election promise.

I never heard that one. Can you please provide some documentation. TIA.

[Bkkorupcountry]

Well it could be worse, will Yingluck ask Thaksin for a loan to buy a container

load of new 15,000baht laptops the Pheu Thai Party promised.

With or without the red mafia it was the first broken election promise.

I never heard that one. Can you please provide some documentation. TIA.

I doubt if there will be any documentation provided. 15,000 baht laptops? Where or when was this ever promised? Even you must admit that this is (yet another) gross exaggeration.

[anterian]

If the supposedly educated and intelligent members of this forum cannot cease their bitching about the election results what chance do the poorly educated majority of Thais have to reconcile. It seems the mutual hatred which has slowly become entrenched in the Thai psyche, the hatred between the rural and poor and the Bangkok affluent and the South, has been taken onboard by the farangs on this forum.

The PT are not yet in power yet many members are already rejoicing over their perceived future failures and demise. Cynicism is a useful tool if applied in moderation, some members are applying it by the bucketful.

Most (all) Thai parties have skeletons in their cupboards, they don't need to be constantly revealed ad nauseam, the best use of bones is to grind them up as fertiliser to help grow a better future. I think there are many people here who would rather prefer Thailand in ruins than truly reconciled, a "better dead than red" attitude. (I don't mean red in the Thai sense but in the sense of this saying).

What do you mean exactly by saying "truly reconciled"? To agree to sweep horrendous things under the carpet? To agree that everyone who has broken the law should face a court? What exactly do you mean?

Thank you for illustrating my point, I meant by not posting comments and questions using emotive words like 'horrendous' .

As to what I mean by reconciled might I suggest that if you cannot understand this word that you try a dictionary. However, I think you are simply being emotively rhetorical.

What is clear is you would be unhappy with any form of reconciliation that did not first involve the punishment of those you despise. Unfortunately this seems equally true for your opponents.

I think you don't know what the hell you're talking about. I could have said murder or arson or civil inserrection or extortion or treason or even trespassing or restraint of trade. but I think one nasty word could be inclusive. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to expound on the subject.

I looked in the dictionary and I know what it says, but YOU'RE the one talking about reconciliation, so I want YOU to tell me what it means.

You are correct a bout one thing however. I do want those who have commited wrong to be brought to justice before the law. Both those I despise and those i admired.

Your last sentence is the meat of your comment, if you can accept that those of an opposite view to you feel the same, but with different targets, then in effect both groups are playing 'chicken' with the other. Who will blink first? If no one blinks then Thailand becomes like Norther Ireland or the Palestinian West Bank, a permanent vendetta.

[Britannia]

It amuses me to see how quickly some members are already sounding the death knell for PT, on the basis of a shoddy piece of reporting. Some members are even patting themselves on their backs, claiming that their predictions have come true :D

Well my predictions are coming true, sadly.

Thaksin, the thin end of the globalist wedge. By agreement he'll move aside and become a "commerce facilitator", as ASEAN breaks down the Thai borders. Death to Thailand from within and without.

http://www.cfr.org/t...nd_thai_-070511

I read the first few paragraphs and stopped as it's obvious to me that author shares the same opinion as most of the anti-Reds on this forum. In any case, this article is merely an opinion and not exactly gospel, is it?

All posts are peoples opinions unless they are pure facts relating to the topic subject. Of course they are not gospel but you "reds" must admit that everything isn't exactly going swimmingly for Khun Yingluck as everyone and everything is coming back to bite her.

First rule in politics is don't promise what you can't deliver - according to the experts this is exactly what she has done and done it spectacularly wrong at that!!

Abhisit must be having a right good chuckle to himself, don't you think???

No sir the first rule in politics is never tell the truth, now everyone knows that

[jdinasia]

[so there were street demonstrations, marches etc etc resulting in Thaksin's government being toppled in 2006?

This is when I couldn't be bothered to continue reading.

No there weren't. Thaksin's government was removed because he was not the legitimate leader at that time. There was none. There was a power vacuum that he assumed, but not legitimately.

Exactly. But that's not the picture the author was trying to paint so I call into question his objectivity and balanced writing reporting style.

Which you'll apparently never know about since that is where you stopped reading. Yes he oversimplified in his op-ed piece, I pride myself in actually reading the stuff that is out there. I even read NewMandala which is amongst the most radical leftist tripe I have ever read. Then again choosing not to wear blinkers is important to me.

[jayboy]

I even read NewMandala which is amongst the most radical leftist tripe I have ever read. Then again choosing not to wear blinkers is important to me.

Spot the comical failure of logic here.

[samran]

I even read NewMandala which is amongst the most radical leftist tripe I have ever read. Then again choosing not to wear blinkers is important to me.

Spot the comical failure of logic here.

Tripe I agree with.

Comical I also agree with.

The NewMandala is a red shirt apologists sanctuary (though I know we'll probably disagree on that one Jayboy!)

[Bkkorupcountry]

[so there were street demonstrations, marches etc etc resulting in Thaksin's government being toppled in 2006?

This is when I couldn't be bothered to continue reading.

No there weren't. Thaksin's government was removed because he was not the legitimate leader at that time. There was none. There was a power vacuum that he assumed, but not legitimately.

Exactly. But that's not the picture the author was trying to paint so I call into question his objectivity and balanced writing reporting style.

Which you'll apparently never know about since that is where you stopped reading. Yes he oversimplified in his op-ed piece, I pride myself in actually reading the stuff that is out there. I even read NewMandala which is amongst the most radical leftist tripe I have ever read. Then again choosing not to wear blinkers is important to me.

Choosing not to read tripe is not wearing blinkers. Wearing blinkers is choosing not to accept the legitimacy of a reasonable and logical alternative viewpoint.

[hammered]

I even read NewMandala which is amongst the most radical leftist tripe I have ever read. Then again choosing not to wear blinkers is important to me.

Spot the comical failure of logic here.

Tripe I agree with.

Comical I also agree with.

The NewMandala is a red shirt apologists sanctuary (though I know we'll probably disagree on that one Jayboy!)

A lot of the New Mandala regulars and editors have been under attack by extreme reds in the past few months. In general it has more pro-red posters than anti but the same unbanned anti-red voices continue there as have pretty much always been around. In recent times it seems to reflect a lot wider scope of views than maybe before. It is usually best to read a variety of sources including ones you disagree with ihmo, or you may find yourself Murdoched

I hope both red and yellow TV and publciations continue in Thailand even though I find plenty to disagree with in them

As to NM. I dont think radical leftist sites would have pieces on buddhist gatherings etc

Edited July 13, 2011 by hammered

[LindsayBKK]

Well it could be worse, will Yingluck ask Thaksin for a loan to buy a container

load of new 15,000baht laptops the Pheu Thai Party promised.

With or without the red mafia it was the first broken election promise.

I never heard that one. Can you please provide some documentation. TIA.

Yingluck's Challenge

That's because she and her party have promised their people no less than a golden future. She's pledging an increase in minimum wages, price guarantees for farmers, affordable housing, scholarships for students, a laptop for every school pupil and a lump payment of 1 million baht (around €25,000) to every village in the country -- all pricy infrastructure measures.

Yingluck Wikipedia

She also planned to provide free public Wi-Fi and a tablet PC to every schoolchild (a Thai Rak Thai Party plan to provide one laptop per child was cancelled after the 2006 military coup)

The Laptop giveaway has been cancelled from reports I hear.

Economists say that the 300baht min wage could cost as much as 450 billion baht

Edited July 13, 2011 by LindsayBKK

[whybother]

Well it could be worse, will Yingluck ask Thaksin for a loan to buy a container

load of new 15,000baht laptops the Pheu Thai Party promised.

With or without the red mafia it was the first broken election promise.

I never heard that one. Can you please provide some documentation. TIA.

Yingluck's Challenge

That's because she and her party have promised their people no less than a golden future. She's pledging an increase in minimum wages, price guarantees for farmers, affordable housing, scholarships for students, a laptop for every school pupil and a lump payment of 1 million baht (around €25,000) to every village in the country -- all pricy infrastructure measures.

The Laptop giveaway has been cancelled from reports I hear.

Economists say that the 300baht min wage would cost 4Tril Baht.

I think you'll find the reference to "a laptop for every school pupil" actually refers to the tablets (now only for every grade 1 student), and estimated to cost 4000 baht each.

The 15,000 baht that you refer to might be the 15,000 baht minimum monthly wage for graduates.

I don't remember their ever being a 15,000 baht laptop promised for every student.

edit: your added wiki reference refers to TRT's promise in 2006, not PTP's current promises.

Edited July 13, 2011 by whybother

[hyperdimension]

Well my predictions are coming true, sadly.

Thaksin, the thin end of the globalist wedge. By agreement he'll move aside and become a "commerce facilitator", as ASEAN breaks down the Thai borders. Death to Thailand from within and without.

http://www.cfr.org/t...nd_thai_-070511

I read the first few paragraphs and stopped as it's obvious to me that author shares the same opinion as most of the anti-Reds on this forum. In any case, this article is merely an opinion and not exactly gospel, is it?

In the longer run, both Thailand's urban middle classes and its poor must accept the need for painful change. The poor, and their allies in Ms Yingluck's party, must accept that they have to protect private property rights and the rule of law and also that they must not let Mr Thaksin back into Thailand, no matter how much they love him.

......

. Hardest of all, Mr Thaksin must accept that he really does have to retire, if he wants his country to flourish and his positive legacies – including political empowerment and poverty reduction – to stand the test of time. But if he and his sister insist on a comeback, he may yet have to take responsibility for the final fiery death of a once-promising democratic nation.

I redacted one questionable sentence that might violate the forum rules.

"they must not let Mr Thaksin back into Thailand"? But he is supposed to come back to serve prison time.

"Mr Thaksin must accept that he really does have to retire"? Only after spending time in prison.

It's not a bad piece but the author omitted the pertinent fact that Thaksin is a wanted man not only by his supporters but also by the justice system.

Edited July 13, 2011 by hyperdimension

[hyperdimension]

Maybe you might want to do a Google on the "pillars of democracy". Barring that a former Thai statesmean and PM gave a nice talk on it once:

http://www.anandp.co...ech/e240608.pdf

Another former PM made a speech about democracy to an elite international audience here:

A Conversation with Thaksin Shinawatra, Prime Minister of Thailand on September 18, 2006 at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York

I love this transcription of Thaksin's response to a question about his tax-free sale of ShinCorp:

GREENBERG: The sale of your company, Prime Minister, to Singapore was very controversial. Would you like to comment on it?

THAKSIN: Yes. (Laughter.) Yes. My—the company has been transferred to my children before I become the prime minister, under the old constitution, under the old law. And one day, they want to sell because it had been approached. And I think it’s a good idea so I don’t have to be—alleged of conflict of interest anymore.

So they agreed to sell. And after the sale, I’d been attacked on not paying tax, which is actually, you know, the—a capital gain in Thailand’s stock exchange—we have no tax involved, which Mr. Greenberg know very well, because he (has ?) so many stock there. (Laughter.) Is tax-exempt, no tax.

And someone trying to say that, “Oh, you know if you sell noodles, you have to pay tax. But we sell the companies, why you do not pay tax?” Sale of noodle is—you sell goods, goods is subject to be taxed, but not the capital gains of selling shares. So that is confusing the message. And at that time, I’ve been—really, you know, I’ve been attacked by all the press, and the confusion is there.

And I’m trying to open the Parliament for debate, but the opposition said that no useful, we not participate in that debate because we have to find the “no confidence” motion, which they cannot do it because they don’t have enough votes to do it. So, but I said, I’m generous enough to open the general debate for them to ask me, I can answer. But they don’t agree. So I have to dissolve the house and let the people make decision on their own, whether they want me to come back or not. So that’s why the controversy comes.

Actually, it’s really—you know, all the money is in Thailand. You know, we bring the—the sale brings U.S. dollars to Thailand, at that time about 2 billion U.S. dollars, and the baht, stronger at that time, because of the money flow in. And, actually, that money is going to help build business, the economy in Thailand because we have new money—fresh money into Thailand for 2 billion U.S. dollars.

But it’s very difficult to explain at that time, and I’m in awkward position to explain because my children is the one who own the company, so they are still very young. But anyway, I think this has paved the way that we don’t have to be alleged of conflict of interest anymore because we have no (business anymore ?).

GREENBERG: Thank you for responding to that.

[lannarebirth]

Maybe you might want to do a Google on the "pillars of democracy". Barring that a former Thai statesmean and PM gave a nice talk on it once:

http://www.anandp.co...ech/e240608.pdf

Another former PM made a speech about democracy to an elite international audience here:

A Conversation with Thaksin Shinawatra, Prime Minister of Thailand on September 18, 2006 at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York

I love this transcription of Thaksin's response to a question about his tax-free sale of ShinCorp:

GREENBERG: The sale of your company, Prime Minister, to Singapore was very controversial. Would you like to comment on it?

THAKSIN: Yes. (Laughter.) Yes. My—the company has been transferred to my children before I become the prime minister, under the old constitution, under the old law. And one day, they want to sell because it had been approached. And I think it's a good idea so I don't have to be—alleged of conflict of interest anymore.

So they agreed to sell. And after the sale, I'd been attacked on not paying tax, which is actually, you know, the—a capital gain in Thailand's stock exchange—we have no tax involved, which Mr. Greenberg know very well, because he (has ?) so many stock there. (Laughter.) Is tax-exempt, no tax.

And someone trying to say that, "Oh, you know if you sell noodles, you have to pay tax. But we sell the companies, why you do not pay tax?" Sale of noodle is—you sell goods, goods is subject to be taxed, but not the capital gains of selling shares. So that is confusing the message. And at that time, I've been—really, you know, I've been attacked by all the press, and the confusion is there.

And I'm trying to open the Parliament for debate, but the opposition said that no useful, we not participate in that debate because we have to find the "no confidence" motion, which they cannot do it because they don't have enough votes to do it. So, but I said, I'm generous enough to open the general debate for them to ask me, I can answer. But they don't agree. So I have to dissolve the house and let the people make decision on their own, whether they want me to come back or not. So that's why the controversy comes.

Actually, it's really—you know, all the money is in Thailand. You know, we bring the—the sale brings U.S. dollars to Thailand, at that time about 2 billion U.S. dollars, and the baht, stronger at that time, because of the money flow in. And, actually, that money is going to help build business, the economy in Thailand because we have new money—fresh money into Thailand for 2 billion U.S. dollars.

But it's very difficult to explain at that time, and I'm in awkward position to explain because my children is the one who own the company, so they are still very young. But anyway, I think this has paved the way that we don't have to be alleged of conflict of interest anymore because we have no (business anymore ?).

GREENBERG: Thank you for responding to that.

Pure Thaksin, pure lies.

[tlansford]

wow, more useless drivel from Pananda

I guess you mean the writer of the OP, Avudh Panananda ? Would you care to enlighten other posters here as to why you qualify the piece as 'drivel' and more specific 'the usual drivel'?

... Recognizing that it is just an opinion piece and not reporting, ... or journalism...

This is all speculation and emotional rhetoric. There is nothing of substance underneath this person's writing. It is all ideology - take a situation, add emotionally ladened catch-phrases and speculation and then that is good enough to go to press.

With this writer it is always the same formula.

[rubl]

wow, more useless drivel from Pananda

I guess you mean the writer of the OP, Avudh Panananda ? Would you care to enlighten other posters here as to why you qualify the piece as 'drivel' and more specific 'the usual drivel'?

... Recognizing that it is just an opinion piece and not reporting, ... or journalism...

This is all speculation and emotional rhetoric. There is nothing of substance underneath this person's writing. It is all ideology - take a situation, add emotionally ladened catch-phrases and speculation and then that is good enough to go to press.

With this writer it is always the same formula.

Basicly you accuse the writer of the opinion piece of various fallacies which equally apply to your post, I'm afraid. Just saying 'speculation', 'emotional rhetoric', 'no substance', etc., etc. Doesn't really explain anything, you just throw around a few labels

[tlansford]

wow, more useless drivel from Pananda

I guess you mean the writer of the OP, Avudh Panananda ? Would you care to enlighten other posters here as to why you qualify the piece as 'drivel' and more specific 'the usual drivel'?

... Recognizing that it is just an opinion piece and not reporting, ... or journalism...

This is all speculation and emotional rhetoric. There is nothing of substance underneath this person's writing. It is all ideology - take a situation, add emotionally ladened catch-phrases and speculation and then that is good enough to go to press.

With this writer it is always the same formula.

Basicly you accuse the writer of the opinion piece of various fallacies which equally apply to your post, I'm afraid. Just saying 'speculation', 'emotional rhetoric', 'no substance', etc., etc. Doesn't really explain anything, you just throw around a few labels

Hi rubl - no, I said it was drivel. Then I explained that it is speculation and emotional rhetoric. I can see that you don't agree with me, but it is neither my job to my job to read critically for you nor to convince you to agree with me.

Best regards,

Tom