Thai Charter Reform Process Starts To Look Sinister

[GentlemanJim]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Edited March 5, 2012 by GentlemanJim

[Roadman]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had there heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

You are a true gentlemen Jim to explain it so mildly. I wish I had such patience with idiots.

[Siam Simon]

thaicbr, #17

"....they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. it happens all over the world and strangely called the rule of law."

They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government. They were the electoral majority, knew it and were validated last year.

For the coupists to ask them to leave is silly. And attempting to ignore them out of existence was particularly cynical, considering the massive nature of the protest.

The coupists needed to negotiate an end to their illegal rule with this electoral majority. The 'rule of law' needed to apply to them first and foremost.

Their 'mafia offer' followed by an armed attack showed their weakness. They were too electorally weak to consider an election, so they resorted to force.

Here we go again, the Amsterdamite and his shotgun of lies approach to posting. This strategy does nothing for your credibility.

1, the coup removed a self appionted care taker govrnment that over stayed its mandate and was attempting to retrospectively change the rules to suit itself.

2. The democrates werent coup appionted but lawfully elected by a majority of MPs.

3. Redshirts werent protesting against the coup but against the consification of Thaksins ilegally gained frozen assests.

4. despite achieving their stated goals of an early election the redshirts continued to riot in the center of Bangkok

5, thaicbr, #17 is completely correct

Here we go again. One of the usual suspects and their shotgun of lies, selective and partial truths approach to posting.

1. The coup pre-empted a general election scheduled for four (yes, that's four) weeks later which had been given Royal approval. The restoration of democratic normalcy couldn't wait four weeks. Instead we had to have a coup and wait, how long was it for the restoration of democracy?

2. The Democrats were elected by a parliamentary vote after enough small grouping MP's had been illegally made an offer they couldn't refuse by the army at a meeting on a military barracks.

3. Your opinion with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

4. The early election offer was never really on the table, as confirmed by Korn in that terrible slip of the tongue during an interview with Western media. Close analysis of Abhisit's various offers for an early election showed that they were full of provisos 'if this/that circumstance is in place', and he wouldn't even set a provisional date for house dissolution. It was always his plan to hold elections when it suited him.

[Siam Simon]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Some people read more than TVF and the Thai English language press (and which contain a wealth of material, much of which can't be used on this forum due to restrictive Thai law), and thus have a much bigger picture than ones such as the narrow-minded and rather childish one quoted above.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Siam Simon

[waza]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Some people read more than TVF and the Thai English language press (and which contain a wealth of material, much of which can't be used on this forum due to restrictive Thai law), and thus have a much bigger picture than ones such as the narrow-minded and rather childish one quoted above.

You mean the red shirt media? I agree due to forum rules we cant talk about what Thaksin was really up to when he was removed by the coup.

PS: Use your vast intellect, which you daily display by parroting the Amsterdam rhetoric, to make up your own catch phrases rather than plagiarizing mine.

Edited March 5, 2012 by waza

[yoshiwara]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Some people read more than TVF and the Thai English language press (and which contain a wealth of material, much of which can't be used on this forum due to restrictive Thai law), and thus have a much bigger picture than ones such as the narrow-minded and rather childish one quoted above.

You mean the red shirt media? I agree due to forum rules we cant talk about what Thaksin was really up to when he was removed by the coup.

PS: Use your vast intellect, which you daily display by parroting the Amsterdam rhetoric, to make up your own catch phrases rather than plagiarizing mine.

Both immediately prior to the coup and the 2010 Bangkok riots were linked by a common factor, which irks Thaksin to this day and provides a suitable backdrop to his deliberate march to turn the Thai state into his personal fiefdom. Prior to the coup there was one important piece of state power jigsaw missing from Thaksin's armoury. The army. The coup stopped him putting his own people into the army leadership and closing out political control which already had effective control of the police force through appointing his proxies to the leadership. Knowledge of this explains why Thaksin's stooges permanently rail against the army leadership which is not in his pocket. Some are confused why the riots continued even after a deal was ostensibly made between the then government and the reds to hold an early election, a demand which was seemingly the main objective of the reds. It wasn't. The main objective was to bring down the government ahead of the army leadership appointments. The army again. Fast forward to the so-called Charter. We can be absolutely sure that the main objective of Thaksin is to stranglehold any independent institutions that threaten him. Second on his list after the army is the judiciary. The forum red apologists haven't got a clue. But then they never did.

[Siam Simon]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Some people read more than TVF and the Thai English language press (and which contain a wealth of material, much of which can't be used on this forum due to restrictive Thai law), and thus have a much bigger picture than ones such as the narrow-minded and rather childish one quoted above.

You mean the red shirt media? I agree due to forum rules we cant talk about what Thaksin was really up to when he was removed by the coup.

PS: Use your vast intellect, which you daily display by parroting the Amsterdam rhetoric, to make up your own catch phrases rather than plagiarizing mine.

No, Waza, I mean all the informed media available internationally, not to mention the Thai Wikileaks . And the sooner you and your ilk stop parroting TANNetwork, The Nation and suchlike, the sooner we can all start having proper debate on here (there, I've pinched another of your catchphrases . Better get them copyrighted quick, eh?). But, then again, your 'liker' doesn't want debate, he wants perception management. He's going to save Thailand via a specialist internet forum.

[Siam Simon]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Some people read more than TVF and the Thai English language press (and which contain a wealth of material, much of which can't be used on this forum due to restrictive Thai law), and thus have a much bigger picture than ones such as the narrow-minded and rather childish one quoted above.

You mean the red shirt media? I agree due to forum rules we cant talk about what Thaksin was really up to when he was removed by the coup.

PS: Use your vast intellect, which you daily display by parroting the Amsterdam rhetoric, to make up your own catch phrases rather than plagiarizing mine.

Both immediately prior to the coup and the 2010 Bangkok riots were linked by a common factor, which irks Thaksin to this day and provides a suitable backdrop to his deliberate march to turn the Thai state into his personal fiefdom. Prior to the coup there was one important piece of state power jigsaw missing from Thaksin's armoury. The army. The coup stopped him putting his own people into the army leadership and closing out political control which already had effective control of the police force through appointing his proxies to the leadership. Knowledge of this explains why Thaksin's stooges permanently rail against the army leadership which is not in his pocket. Some are confused why the riots continued even after a deal was ostensibly made between the then government and the reds to hold an early election, a demand which was seemingly the main objective of the reds. It wasn't. The main objective was to bring down the government ahead of the army leadership appointments. The army again. Fast forward to the so-called Charter. We can be absolutely sure that the main objective of Thaksin is to stranglehold any independent institutions that threaten him. Second on his list after the army is the judiciary. The forum red apologists haven't got a clue. But then they never did.

You're part the way there, Yoshi. Now turn your perception on Thaksin's equally ugly opponents (not easy, I know, with the forum rules and Thai law). Then the debate can go beyond this silly taking of sides and name calling.

[tlansford]

thaicbr, #17

"....they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. it happens all over the world and strangely called the rule of law."

They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government. They were the electoral majority, knew it and were validated last year.

For the coupists to ask them to leave is silly. And attempting to ignore them out of existence was particularly cynical, considering the massive nature of the protest.

The coupists needed to negotiate an end to their illegal rule with this electoral majority. The 'rule of law' needed to apply to them first and foremost.

Their 'mafia offer' followed by an armed attack showed their weakness. They were too electorally weak to consider an election, so they resorted to force.

They were a majority government, as shown by getting a majority of MPs to vote for the PM.

The red shirts weren't (and aren't) an electoral majority. They are a (large) minority political movement and make up a large portion of PTP supporters.

It seems the (newly formed) PTP showed their weakness by not going to the polls to get a new mandate after the PPP disbanding. Instead they tried to elect a new PM in parliament, and failed to get the support of the majority of MPs (ie the representatives of the people).

That is a completely twisted version of history.

[tlansford]

Before we start, I am neither pro-Thaksin nor pro-Yellow, I believe neither share my interests, this is the name of the game in a political world.

How can Thaksin be allowed to publicly have a voice, when he is officially a fugitive, and has been convicted on serious charges?

If he were serious about being innocent (I'm unsure if he has denied them or not), he has the right (and the financial and political willpower) to ensure a fair trial in Thailand. Perhaps the oversight of some sort of international body to ensure a fair and even trial? Criminals do not have voices in most countries, let alone political voices. It is the constant publishing of the newspaper that give this situation life. Ignoring him will not remove the problem, but it certainly will stop public interest and the growth of a very dangerous adversarial movement. The movement has political intentions, but as with many political movements in Asia,has strong para-military and anarchist ties. Drop the guns, bombs, grenades, stop inspiring people to threaten to blow up petrol tankers outside major population centers, and use your heart to win the heart of your people.

Why do Thai people continue to negotiate with someone who has been convicted of crimes, and fails to return and fight the charges or serve the time?

The thing is Thaksin has several PR firms working for him as a concerted effort in perception management, he is not a hermit living in a cave seeking isolation from the world.

It's not just that news sources go after him, he pays people to remain in the spotlight. See for example R. Amsterdam's antics at the Hague.

Perception management is political theatre as old as Methusaleh.

Amsterdam's so-called 'antics' at The Hague are focussed on bringing to justice, those who are avoiding accountability for the R'song deaths of anti-coup taxpayers at the hands of pro-coup forces.

I don't expect anything to come of it, but it is also part of 'perception Management".

Projecting the correct perception of certain people who ordered an attack by their political brethren on those who opposed them politically.

This unnecesary resort to force to extend a non-electoral coupist Governing mandate for a relatively short time, was starkly revealed by last years election.

they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. it happens all over the world and strangely called the rule of law.

what about thaksins reign of terror against drug dealers. 2500 dead in 9 months.

um, small type-o in your statement,

"they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. killed them"

[rubl]

For a (very) short moment I thought this topic was on the 'Charter Reform Process'. Oh boy, how wrong can one be! It's about poor tax-payers being shot by coupist Army soldiers instructed by that wicked ex-PM Abhisit 'to kill me some'.

Reconciliation in optima forma

[yoshiwara]

thaicbr, #17

"....they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. it happens all over the world and strangely called the rule of law."

They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government. They were the electoral majority, knew it and were validated last year.

For the coupists to ask them to leave is silly. And attempting to ignore them out of existence was particularly cynical, considering the massive nature of the protest.

The coupists needed to negotiate an end to their illegal rule with this electoral majority. The 'rule of law' needed to apply to them first and foremost.

Their 'mafia offer' followed by an armed attack showed their weakness. They were too electorally weak to consider an election, so they resorted to force.

'They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government.'

Interesting that for the first time a Thaksin apologist has admitted that the red riots of 2010 were not a peaceful demonstration but were intended from the off as a violent attack on the State. When Arisman said 'burn down Bangkok', not just rhetoric eh? What gives the lie even here to a part of the stated objective is that an election was scheduled and the reds said that what they wanted was an earlier election. Negotiations took place and an earlier date was agreed. Thaksin said go ahead when asked if it was OK to make an agreement , but he hadn't bargained for the negotiated agreement. So he let loose the dogs of war. So why? Why go all out when a deal had been made? Because the true objective was not having an elected government in his favour. It was being in a position to make the appointments to the army leadership positions in autumn of 2010. The negotiations hadn't allowed for this. Even today it is unfinished business for him. Back in 2006 when his term of office had expired it was the same story. If only he had locked up the army leadership positions he would be home and dry. Thaksin has absolutely no interest in democracy per se. His commitment to the corruption of political activity is sufficient evidence of that. What he is committed to is the capture of the organs of state power: The army, the police force and the judiciary. Forum Thaksin cheerleaders vacillate between lying (its not about Thaksin) to full-out gung ho aggression. Not impressed.

[waza]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Some people read more than TVF and the Thai English language press (and which contain a wealth of material, much of which can't be used on this forum due to restrictive Thai law), and thus have a much bigger picture than ones such as the narrow-minded and rather childish one quoted above.

You mean the red shirt media? I agree due to forum rules we cant talk about what Thaksin was really up to when he was removed by the coup.

PS: Use your vast intellect, which you daily display by parroting the Amsterdam rhetoric, to make up your own catch phrases rather than plagiarizing mine.

No, Waza, I mean all the informed media available internationally, not to mention the Thai Wikileaks . And the sooner you and your ilk stop parroting TANNetwork, The Nation and suchlike, the sooner we can all start having proper debate on here (there, I've pinched another of your catchphrases . Better get them copyrighted quick, eh?). But, then again, your 'liker' doesn't want debate, he wants perception management. He's going to save Thailand via a specialist internet forum.

I dont read the nation or watch TANN, I just talk with my Thai family and friends and form my own opinions. Thats why I believe anyone without a vested interest, can see that Thaksin and his governments are bad for Thailand, they are divisive and plutocratic driven by greed and nepotism. He has shown that his agends is to make Thailand a family business with his family as the major shareholders and him as the CEO.

Edited March 6, 2012 by waza

[whybother]

thaicbr, #17

"....they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. it happens all over the world and strangely called the rule of law."

They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government. They were the electoral majority, knew it and were validated last year.

For the coupists to ask them to leave is silly. And attempting to ignore them out of existence was particularly cynical, considering the massive nature of the protest.

The coupists needed to negotiate an end to their illegal rule with this electoral majority. The 'rule of law' needed to apply to them first and foremost.

Their 'mafia offer' followed by an armed attack showed their weakness. They were too electorally weak to consider an election, so they resorted to force.

They were a majority government, as shown by getting a majority of MPs to vote for the PM.

The red shirts weren't (and aren't) an electoral majority. They are a (large) minority political movement and make up a large portion of PTP supporters.

It seems the (newly formed) PTP showed their weakness by not going to the polls to get a new mandate after the PPP disbanding. Instead they tried to elect a new PM in parliament, and failed to get the support of the majority of MPs (ie the representatives of the people).

That is a completely twisted version of history.

How do you want to twist it?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[tlansford]

thaicbr, #17

"....they were asked to leave repeatedly. they refused. so the government used force. it happens all over the world and strangely called the rule of law."

They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government. They were the electoral majority, knew it and were validated last year.

For the coupists to ask them to leave is silly. And attempting to ignore them out of existence was particularly cynical, considering the massive nature of the protest.

The coupists needed to negotiate an end to their illegal rule with this electoral majority. The 'rule of law' needed to apply to them first and foremost.

Their 'mafia offer' followed by an armed attack showed their weakness. They were too electorally weak to consider an election, so they resorted to force.

They were a majority government, as shown by getting a majority of MPs to vote for the PM.

The red shirts weren't (and aren't) an electoral majority. They are a (large) minority political movement and make up a large portion of PTP supporters.

It seems the (newly formed) PTP showed their weakness by not going to the polls to get a new mandate after the PPP disbanding. Instead they tried to elect a new PM in parliament, and failed to get the support of the majority of MPs (ie the representatives of the people).

That is a completely twisted version of history.

How do you want to twist it?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

the only real twisting that went on in order to put Abhisit in power was arm-twisting.

You know that as well as anyone here. Let's not be disingenuous.

[philw]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Very sorry and wish not to sound conceited, but I am a moderately educated person and I am sorry that I am beyond you.

"How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. "

Who else did it ???

Who employed snipers ???

Who shot the medics and Journos ??

Fact remains about 90 people were shot by the army and it has caused a huge rift in the country.

It's a major problem and it's not going away.

My wife, who is a land owner in Suphan ( you can call her rice farmer if you like .) promised me a BJ everyday if I quit smoking...........still haven't quit though.

Very much do like your last paragraph.

Enlightened.

[TAWP]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Very sorry and wish not to sound conceited, but I am a moderately educated person and I am sorry that I am beyond you.

"How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. "

Who else did it ???

Who employed snipers ???

Who shot the medics and Journos ??

Fact remains about 90 people were shot by the army and it has caused a huge rift in the country.

It's a major problem and it's not going away.

My wife, who is a land owner in Suphan ( you can call her rice farmer if you like .) promised me a BJ everyday if I quit smoking...........still haven't quit though.

Very much do like your last paragraph.

Enlightened.

The 91 dead includes red shirts, soldiers, police officers, journalists and civilian bystanders.

Are you claiming the army killed them all? Perhaps the civilian woman that was killed during the M79-launched grenade rain on Sala Daeng too?

Edited March 6, 2012 by TAWP

[nurofiend]

just most.

[whybother]

the only real twisting that went on in order to put Abhisit in power was arm-twisting.

You know that as well as anyone here. Let's not be disingenuous.

Arm twisting along the lines of "if you don't join us you'll miss out on all that money"?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[philw]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Very sorry and wish not to sound conceited, but I am a moderately educated person and I am sorry that I am beyond you.

"How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. "

Who else did it ???

Who employed snipers ???

Who shot the medics and Journos ??

Fact remains about 90 people were shot by the army and it has caused a huge rift in the country.

It's a major problem and it's not going away.

My wife, who is a land owner in Suphan ( you can call her rice farmer if you like .) promised me a BJ everyday if I quit smoking...........still haven't quit though.

Very much do like your last paragraph.

Enlightened.

The 91 dead includes red shirts, soldiers, police officers, journalists and civilian bystanders.

Are you claiming the army killed them all? Perhaps the civilian woman that was killed during the M79-launched grenade rain on Sala Daeng too?

Obviously not, like NF says below, " just most "

Agree ???

[whybother]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Very sorry and wish not to sound conceited, but I am a moderately educated person and I am sorry that I am beyond you.

"How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. "

Who else did it ???

Who employed snipers ???

Who shot the medics and Journos ??

Fact remains about 90 people were shot by the army and it has caused a huge rift in the country.

It's a major problem and it's not going away.

My wife, who is a land owner in Suphan ( you can call her rice farmer if you like .) promised me a BJ everyday if I quit smoking...........still haven't quit though.

Very much do like your last paragraph.

Enlightened.

Are you suggesting that they were all killed by the army?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[Roadman]

I can understand Peasant Red Shirt folk from up North believing all the crap fed to them by Thaksin and his followers and the constant brainwashing on Red radio and TV. What I cannot understand is how any educated person, in particular from the West can spout off the same support for the crook, Thaksin. How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. These people had brought a city and a nation to its knees, they would have had their heads busted far sooner in any Western country. The reds had hired guns to stir up the heat. The military did what they are there to do and that is to protect this Nation, its Citizens, the Government and the Monarchy.

I only assume that educated supporters of Thaksin on TV must be married in to families in the North and their wives threaten a total ban on BJ's unless they (the husbands) regurgitate the same mindless garbage we are used to hearing from idiotic brain washed red shirts.

Very sorry and wish not to sound conceited, but I am a moderately educated person and I am sorry that I am beyond you.

"How any educated person can say that the soldiers killed 90 odd peaceful red shirt protestors is beyond me. "

Who else did it ???

Who employed snipers ???

Who shot the medics and Journos ??

Fact remains about 90 people were shot by the army and it has caused a huge rift in the country.

It's a major problem and it's not going away.

My wife, who is a land owner in Suphan ( you can call her rice farmer if you like .) promised me a BJ everyday if I quit smoking...........still haven't quit though.

Very much do like your last paragraph.

Enlightened.

Not long said and one turns up.

Apart from in further posts where now it seems the Army didn't kill the whole 91, you also need to do further investigation in regards to who had snipers. The Army were not the only ones (at least right up to the DSI final warning before the storming) who were employing snipers. The convicted fugitive criminal Thaksin's Black Army were playing the same game.

[AleG]

'They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government.'

Interesting that for the first time a Thaksin apologist has admitted that the red riots of 2010 were not a peaceful demonstration but were intended from the off as a violent attack on the State. When Arisman said 'burn down Bangkok', not just rhetoric eh?...

One may even call it a coup attempt, and its supporters coupist...

[Siam Simon]

I dont read the nation or watch TANN,

And I don't read or watch Red Shirt propaganda outlets, nor have I ever read through a Robert Amsterdam release beyond what gets quoted on places like TVF. So it's a touche on that front.

I just talk with my Thai family and friends and form my own opinions.

So you're the guy Jim was referring to in his childish post, then? Joking aside, It's often interesting talking to Thai family and friends about politics, but one thing that always strikes me is the polarisation and evangelism whatever the political beliefs. It's often like being lectured by a born again Christian about the need to submit to the will of God. I often find myself inwardly recoiling, wishing that if only all of them, from all sides of the debate, had the access that I have to some of the realities of just how f****d up their country's ruling system really is (and could get their heads round it).....

Thats why I believe anyone without a vested interest, can see that Thaksin and his governments are bad for Thailand, they are divisive and plutocratic driven by greed and nepotism. He has shown that his agends is to make Thailand a family business with his family as the major shareholders and him as the CEO.

That's a rather naive POV. A handful of families have run Thailand as their personal fiefdom for it's entire modern history, and in a mostly not very benign way, too. Thaksin has tried to muscle in on this. That's what all this is currently about. What really scares the old families is Thaksin's use of populism. They see it as reckless because they know where it usually leads. Thaksin thinks he can take the lid off and put it back on at will. But history tends to disagree with him, and is littered with ousted, exiled and sometimes executed populists who outstayed their welcome when their population turned on them.

It all comes down to whether you want to see Thailand remain semi-feudal, with extremely slow social movement both micro and macro. Or Whether you want to take a chance with a genuine fledgling democracy, with all it's flaws and bogeyman characters. Personally, I think it's getting to the stage where it's either civil war or the latter. The lid can be put back on, but it won't be staying on for long any more.

[yoshiwara]

I dont read the nation or watch TANN,

And I don't read or watch Red Shirt propaganda outlets, nor have I ever read through a Robert Amsterdam release beyond what gets quoted on places like TVF. So it's a touche on that front.

I just talk with my Thai family and friends and form my own opinions.

So you're the guy Jim was referring to in his childish post, then? Joking aside, It's often interesting talking to Thai family and friends about politics, but one thing that always strikes me is the polarisation and evangelism whatever the political beliefs. It's often like being lectured by a born again Christian about the need to submit to the will of God. I often find myself inwardly recoiling, wishing that if only all of them, from all sides of the debate, had the access that I have to some of the realities of just how f****d up their country's ruling system really is (and could get their heads round it).....

Thats why I believe anyone without a vested interest, can see that Thaksin and his governments are bad for Thailand, they are divisive and plutocratic driven by greed and nepotism. He has shown that his agends is to make Thailand a family business with his family as the major shareholders and him as the CEO.

That's a rather naive POV. A handful of families have run Thailand as their personal fiefdom for it's entire modern history, and in a mostly not very benign way, too. Thaksin has tried to muscle in on this. That's what all this is currently about. What really scares the old families is Thaksin's use of populism. They see it as reckless because they know where it usually leads. Thaksin thinks he can take the lid off and put it back on at will. But history tends to disagree with him, and is littered with ousted, exiled and sometimes executed populists who outstayed their welcome when their population turned on them.

It all comes down to whether you want to see Thailand remain semi-feudal, with extremely slow social movement both micro and macro. Or Whether you want to take a chance with a genuine fledgling democracy, with all it's flaws and bogeyman characters. Personally, I think it's getting to the stage where it's either civil war or the latter. The lid can be put back on, but it won't be staying on for long any more.

It is a grievous error to see Thaksin riding the wave of an essentially progressive movement which would eventually discard him. An outdated Stalinist view of the world (popular frontism) which historically has lead progressive forces into a nasty trap ending in dictatorship and oppression. Thaksin as a member of the establishment could easily have been accommodated if he had just wanted a slice of the action. In that position he could have been politically successful. But no he wanted more, he wanted (and wants) everything: total political control. All forces must bend to his will. The threat of civil war comes from him notwithstanding all the coup propaganda (a typical Thaksin tactic of accusing the other side of that which he is doing). Rather than his so-called populism leading to an eventual progressive turn in Thai civic society, the direction looks more like a neo-fascist development. Organised through the Thai working class? No. Organised through lumpen declasse elements and members of the lower middle classes. Yes. Those who have blinkers on and only see a wishy-washy end game justifying their support for Thaksin's forces are fools.

[yoshiwara]

'They were there to put an end to a minority, unelected, coup-based Government.'

Interesting that for the first time a Thaksin apologist has admitted that the red riots of 2010 were not a peaceful demonstration but were intended from the off as a violent attack on the State. When Arisman said 'burn down Bangkok', not just rhetoric eh?...

One may even call it a coup attempt, and its supporters coupist...

Throughout the whole of the 2010 events the red cheerleaders presented a picture we-are-so-peaceful red movement but occasionally the mask slipped.

Now, it appears, there is not even the faintest effort from this particular quarter to smooth the image.

The reason why the proposed charter appears sinister is that Thaksin's reps continue to talk out of both sides of their mouth at the same time.

Our friendly forum red apologist doesn't appear to have learned that trick. Just the violent bilge.

Oh well, they come and they go......

[waza]

It all comes down to whether you want to see Thailand remain semi-feudal, with extremely slow social movement both micro and macro. Or Whether you want to take a chance with a genuine fledgling democracy, with all it's flaws and bogeyman characters. Personally, I think it's getting to the stage where it's either civil war or the latter. The lid can be put back on, but it won't be staying on for long any more.

What is the use of trading one master for another, espesially if the new master is far worse than what has come before and the old one is so loved.

Northern Thailand was an agrarian society, the political controls were centered in Bangkok so society and law was controlled by the community. Thaksin changed that by bringing capitalism and national politics to the rice paddies to promote and enrich himself and sold it as a movement for a fairer distribution of profits. He gave them credit and enslaved them with debt, bankrupted them then sold their land to the Chinese and Arabs, blamed the foriegners, then took credit for a social security safety net.

He was aided by world events, there was world financial boom while he was in power, Thailand was a tiger economy, riding the wave of high profits and eternal growth. However, all that wealth had to trickle down through Thaksin and his cohorts pockets to reach the north, not a lot did. When that wasnt enough for him he went after everything, that triggered his downfall. Post Thaksin was the GFC, credit evaporated, the boom went to bust, the world cut back and tightened its belt including Thailand. Thaksin sold this to Thais as a result of his ousting and the return of the old system and controls. He fed on the peoples discontent and showered money on them from exile, for their votes and participation in his red army. It gives the illusion of that the good times just await his return.

I agree the lid cant be put back on, and all we farrangs can do it sit back and watch the train wreck through our front windows ( or skip town) and provide our slanted commentary in forums

Edited March 7, 2012 by waza

[hyperdimension]

It all comes down to whether you want to see Thailand remain semi-feudal, with extremely slow social movement both micro and macro. Or Whether you want to take a chance with a genuine fledgling democracy, with all it's flaws and bogeyman characters.

Would Thailand be "a genuine fledgling democracy" if it was ruled by the Shinawatra clan and their cronies without hindrance? A democratically elected dictatorship with only a facade of democracy does not make a country a genuine democracy.

It's one thing to be anti-coupist, but it's yet another to instead support the rule of an extremely dishonest, corrupt and megalomaniac alternative.

If there was a cleaner alternative who were not connected with the existing power groups and their dirty histories, then it would be a better situation. But it may be an impossible task for such a group to contend with the big and forceful money of Thaksin and his clan who invest heavily into perception management and social engineering. We can see the extreme success of their investments in social engineering in the form of the Red Shirt movement. It could also be difficult to remain independent of the existing power groups and abtstain from possibly billions of baht of "grants".

Edited March 7, 2012 by hyperdimension

[Siam Simon]

It is a grievous error to see Thaksin riding the wave of an essentially progressive movement which would eventually discard him. An outdated Stalinist view of the world (popular frontism) which historically has lead progressive forces into a nasty trap ending in dictatorship and oppression. Thaksin as a member of the establishment could easily have been accommodated if he had just wanted a slice of the action. In that position he could have been politically successful. But no he wanted more, he wanted (and wants) everything: total political control. All forces must bend to his will. The threat of civil war comes from him notwithstanding all the coup propaganda (a typical Thaksin tactic of accusing the other side of that which he is doing). Rather than his so-called populism leading to an eventual progressive turn in Thai civic society, the direction looks more like a neo-fascist development. Organised through the Thai working class? No. Organised through lumpen declasse elements and members of the lower middle classes. Yes. Those who have blinkers on and only see a wishy-washy end game justifying their support for Thaksin's forces are fools.

I fear you're allowing your Thaksinphobia to get in the way of clear thought, Yoshi. The weight of history supports my POV, not your's. If a Thaksin-like figure had got hold of Thailand 80 or 100 years ago, he would've had a chance of establishing some sort of dynasty. But politicians just don't get the opportunity to do this in the modern era. History has proven that.

Thailand is just going to have to take some bitter medicine and put up with Thaksin running riot for a while until he runs his race, and democracy can move on. One thing's for sure: His opponents' alternative of trying to keep the masses in a sort of pseudo-1920's poverty era where ignorance is bliss has failed completely

[Siam Simon]

It all comes down to whether you want to see Thailand remain semi-feudal, with extremely slow social movement both micro and macro. Or Whether you want to take a chance with a genuine fledgling democracy, with all it's flaws and bogeyman characters. Personally, I think it's getting to the stage where it's either civil war or the latter. The lid can be put back on, but it won't be staying on for long any more.

What is the use of trading one master for another, espesially if the new master is far worse than what has come before and the old one is so loved.

Northern Thailand was an agrarian society, the political controls were centered in Bangkok so society and law was controlled by the community. Thaksin changed that by bringing capitalism and national politics to the rice paddies to promote and enrich himself and sold it as a movement for a fairer distribution of profits. He gave them credit and enslaved them with debt, bankrupted them then sold their land to the Chinese and Arabs, blamed the foriegners, then took credit for a social security safety net.

He was aided by world events, there was world financial boom while he was in power, Thailand was a tiger economy, riding the wave of high profits and eternal growth. However, all that wealth had to trickle down through Thaksin and his cohorts pockets to reach the north, not a lot did. When that wasnt enough for him he went after everything, that triggered his downfall. Post Thaksin was the GFC, credit evaporated, the boom went to bust, the world cut back and tightened its belt including Thailand. Thaksin sold this to Thais as a result of his ousting and the return of the old system and controls. He fed on the peoples discontent and showered money on them from exile, for their votes and participation in his red army. It gives the illusion of that the good times just await his return.

I agree the lid cant be put back on, and all we farrangs can do it sit back and watch the train wreck through our front windows ( or skip town) and provide our slanted commentary in forums

Crikey! That's a long winded way of confirming that you're in the semi-feudal camp, Waza. You raise one good point, though, albeit probably not in the way you intended: Thaksin was lucky with economic conditions; but had he not been overthrown, his luck would've run out by now; he would now be facing huge popular discontent; and he would be close to the natural end of his tenure.