Democrats Will Never Join Pheu Thai Government: Former Premier Abhisit

[nurofiend]

They cant stop it, they can only try to ensure its done in a legal and democratic manner. However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum, or if they are not given this right then their democratic right to protest against charter change, as before. If they still fail they can vote in the next election against pro charter change politicians and for a repeal of the charter change politicians.

This proposed coalition initiated by Thaksin sounds credible and accutate. It makes sense for Thaksin to stack the deck in his favour, not only for the life of his government but well into the future.

With the Democrat Party in his back pocket it would be decades before any substantial opposition emerged. However, they would just be another tool in his tool chest, along with the redshirts, PTP, Amsterdam ect. But as like Thaksin has shown he has no loyalty to his tools and he discards them when he thinks they loose value. He has thrice disavowed the redshirts before the cock has crowed.

The logic of this proposal is undeniable, you would have to be part of the red haze lunatic fringe to miss the brilliant simplicity of the plan.

However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum

which is what was proposed, but seemingly the democrats have a problem with leaving it up to the people.

with regards to the topic at hand, i think i'm gonna reserve my judgement on whether this is a load of lies or the factual truth, until there is at least a single shred of evidence.

[waza]

They cant stop it, they can only try to ensure its done in a legal and democratic manner. However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum, or if they are not given this right then their democratic right to protest against charter change, as before. If they still fail they can vote in the next election against pro charter change politicians and for a repeal of the charter change politicians.

This proposed coalition initiated by Thaksin sounds credible and accutate. It makes sense for Thaksin to stack the deck in his favour, not only for the life of his government but well into the future.

With the Democrat Party in his back pocket it would be decades before any substantial opposition emerged. However, they would just be another tool in his tool chest, along with the redshirts, PTP, Amsterdam ect. But as like Thaksin has shown he has no loyalty to his tools and he discards them when he thinks they loose value. He has thrice disavowed the redshirts before the cock has crowed.

The logic of this proposal is undeniable, you would have to be part of the red haze lunatic fringe to miss the brilliant simplicity of the plan.

However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum

which is what was proposed, but seemingly the democrats have a problem with leaving it up to the people.

with regards to the topic at hand, i think i'm gonna reserve my judgement on whether this is a load of lies or the factual truth, until there is at least a single shred of evidence.

I wonder how many protestors will die before the Thais can vote in a referendum.

I guess that would be Thaksins denial through his spokeperson. What do you expect an embossed invitation card from Thaksin or one of the very influencial women to confirm?

Edited June 18, 2012 by waza

[nurofiend]

They cant stop it, they can only try to ensure its done in a legal and democratic manner. However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum, or if they are not given this right then their democratic right to protest against charter change, as before. If they still fail they can vote in the next election against pro charter change politicians and for a repeal of the charter change politicians.

This proposed coalition initiated by Thaksin sounds credible and accutate. It makes sense for Thaksin to stack the deck in his favour, not only for the life of his government but well into the future.

With the Democrat Party in his back pocket it would be decades before any substantial opposition emerged. However, they would just be another tool in his tool chest, along with the redshirts, PTP, Amsterdam ect. But as like Thaksin has shown he has no loyalty to his tools and he discards them when he thinks they loose value. He has thrice disavowed the redshirts before the cock has crowed.

The logic of this proposal is undeniable, you would have to be part of the red haze lunatic fringe to miss the brilliant simplicity of the plan.

However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum

which is what was proposed, but seemingly the democrats have a problem with leaving it up to the people.

with regards to the topic at hand, i think i'm gonna reserve my judgement on whether this is a load of lies or the factual truth, until there is at least a single shred of evidence.

I wonder how many protestors will die before the Thais can vote in a referendum.

I guess that would be Thaksins denial through his spokeperson. What do you expect an embossed invitation card from Thaksin or one of the very influencial women to confirm?

just something stronger than the word of suthep, that's all.

but if that's enough to have you convinced, that's cool by me.

[dickyknee]

which is exactly why they can't stop it... legally.

but fits in parliament and storming the chair of the house speaker seemed to stall it at least, so that's probably their best hope, more of the same.

you missed the bit about the CC intervention, that's what actually stalled it. Legal intervention.

Sorry, I've dragged this OT.

On topic, power in numbers for those who can't see the benefit of the alleged proposal.

i had actually typed a sentence about the CC's involvement, i kid you not. but i deleted it as i didn't want to get into that debate.

"you missed the bit about the CC intervention, that's what actually stalled it. Legal intervention"

the "legal intervention" part is very open to debate.

it's based on whether you interpret something as how it actually reads or not.

but it's open to interpretation, hence why i didn't want to bring it up.

um, you started the debate about bills passing legally, now you don't want to get into it.

moving on.

[nurofiend]

which is exactly why they can't stop it... legally.

but fits in parliament and storming the chair of the house speaker seemed to stall it at least, so that's probably their best hope, more of the same.

you missed the bit about the CC intervention, that's what actually stalled it. Legal intervention.

Sorry, I've dragged this OT.

On topic, power in numbers for those who can't see the benefit of the alleged proposal.

i had actually typed a sentence about the CC's involvement, i kid you not. but i deleted it as i didn't want to get into that debate.

"you missed the bit about the CC intervention, that's what actually stalled it. Legal intervention"

the "legal intervention" part is very open to debate.

it's based on whether you interpret something as how it actually reads or not.

but it's open to interpretation, hence why i didn't want to bring it up.

um, you started the debate about bills passing legally, now you don't want to get into it.

moving on.

what i started talking about was the democrats stopping the bill legally

what i didn't want to get into, is whether the act taken by the CC was legal or not as it's

so no need for you to be sneery about it.

[Siripon]

Oh dear, tlandsford, i'm not sure you understand Thai politics or Thaksin.

Supposing Thaksin persuaded the Democrats to join the goverment, the bills whitewashing Thaksin and others sail through Parliament, Thaksin smiles and says at last reconciliation has been achieved, look he's even forgiven his enemies.

Thailand's united!

Suthep and Apisit smile sheepishly as they go to work in their chosen ministries.

After the bills pass Parliament, Thaksin calls an election, as usual promising the earth to the deluded.

The Democrats lose heavily, being blamed by their supporters for betraying the country.

Thaksin is now lord of all.

Of course it won't happen, the Democrats saw through Thaksin a long long time ago. They're just waiting for the rest of the nation to catch up.

[nurofiend]

do any of ye have an opinion as to why suthep kept shtum about this big event until now?

[MaiChai]

If the coup maker can be brought over to the Taksin camp why not go the whole hog and eliminate any opposition by bringing the Democrats onside? I think Suphets story is credible. As they say the truth can be more amazing that fiction and I also remember Suthep being pretty honest and straight post coup.

[ThaiOats]

They cant stop it, they can only try to ensure its done in a legal and democratic manner. However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum, or if they are not given this right then their democratic right to protest against charter change, as before. If they still fail they can vote in the next election against pro charter change politicians and for a repeal of the charter change politicians.

This proposed coalition initiated by Thaksin sounds credible and accutate. It makes sense for Thaksin to stack the deck in his favour, not only for the life of his government but well into the future.

With the Democrat Party in his back pocket it would be decades before any substantial opposition emerged. However, they would just be another tool in his tool chest, along with the redshirts, PTP, Amsterdam ect. But as like Thaksin has shown he has no loyalty to his tools and he discards them when he thinks they loose value. He has thrice disavowed the redshirts before the cock has crowed.

The logic of this proposal is undeniable, you would have to be part of the red haze lunatic fringe to miss the brilliant simplicity of the plan.

However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum

which is what was proposed, but seemingly the democrats have a problem with leaving it up to the people.

with regards to the topic at hand, i think i'm gonna reserve my judgement on whether this is a load of lies or the factual truth, until there is at least a single shred of evidence.

When you say 'people' you mean 'red shirts' right? Obviously you're excluding the other 11 million people that seem to have a problem with what's going on. The government is NOT holding any public referendum. That was supposed to be the point when the government said they were setting aside some money so that the people can have a say in it. Instead they squashed the idea and brought up the mandate thing.

Edited June 19, 2012 by ThaiOats

[nurofiend]

They cant stop it, they can only try to ensure its done in a legal and democratic manner. However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum, or if they are not given this right then their democratic right to protest against charter change, as before. If they still fail they can vote in the next election against pro charter change politicians and for a repeal of the charter change politicians.

This proposed coalition initiated by Thaksin sounds credible and accutate. It makes sense for Thaksin to stack the deck in his favour, not only for the life of his government but well into the future.

With the Democrat Party in his back pocket it would be decades before any substantial opposition emerged. However, they would just be another tool in his tool chest, along with the redshirts, PTP, Amsterdam ect. But as like Thaksin has shown he has no loyalty to his tools and he discards them when he thinks they loose value. He has thrice disavowed the redshirts before the cock has crowed.

The logic of this proposal is undeniable, you would have to be part of the red haze lunatic fringe to miss the brilliant simplicity of the plan.

However, the Thai population can stop it legally by using their democratic right to vote against it in a referendum

which is what was proposed, but seemingly the democrats have a problem with leaving it up to the people.

with regards to the topic at hand, i think i'm gonna reserve my judgement on whether this is a load of lies or the factual truth, until there is at least a single shred of evidence.

When you say 'people' you mean 'red shirts' right? Obviously you're excluding the other 11 million people that seem to have a problem with what's going on. The government is NOT holding any public referendum. That was supposed to be the point when the government said they were setting aside some money so that the people can have a say in it. Instead they squashed the idea and brought up the mandate thing.

no when i say the people, i mean the people, that's why i said it.

are you telling me they're not planning to have a public referendum on charter change?

you're telling me that the public will have no say in any of it?

[Siripon]

and how can the dems stop the bill?

oh, i mean legally btw.

Legally is how they are trying to stop it.

so how can they stop it legally?

The Democrats have to do what they are doing now, ie go around the country informing the people how these bills are intended to whitewash criminals. Then all those opposed to Thaksin have to take to the streets again, as they did in the days prior to the coup, to show their disgust.

I don't mean seize Ratchprasong, Government House or the airport, but hold massive protests at night after work in Bangkok, as the PAD did prior to the coup, once the bills enter Parliament.

At least show the Thai public there is serious opposition to this blant misuse of Parliament.

[ThaiOats]

The Yingluck government's plan to amend or overhaul the Constitution needs to overcome its first obstacle, the highly contentious question of whether and/or when a public referendum on the issue should take place.

Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on Saturday expressed ambiguous support for a referendum, without spelling out when it should be held. The Election Commission and the red-shirt movement have adopted clearer, opposing stands on the timing of the referendum. The opposition Democrats, meanwhile, are keeping their options open.

Thailand's ruling party Pheu Thai MP Natthawut Saikua on Sunday ruled out a referendum before amending the charter, saying the people should be consulted only after draft amendments are completed.

"Pheu Thai is very clear about charter amendment, therefore it has the mandate to rewrite the charter based on the July 3 voting outcome," he said.

Natthawut said the main coalition party and red-shirt movement would push to amend Article 291 of the Constitution, paving the way for formation of the Constitution Drafting Assembly to take charge of the rewriting process.

http://www.asianewsnet.net/home/news.php?id=25452&sec=1

I'm half right wrong, meaning the referendum will be held after the drafts are done. Kinda like, here are the options take it or leave it.

[nurofiend]

The Yingluck government's plan to amend or overhaul the Constitution needs to overcome its first obstacle, the highly contentious question of whether and/or when a public referendum on the issue should take place.

Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on Saturday expressed ambiguous support for a referendum, without spelling out when it should be held. The Election Commission and the red-shirt movement have adopted clearer, opposing stands on the timing of the referendum. The opposition Democrats, meanwhile, are keeping their options open.

Thailand's ruling party Pheu Thai MP Natthawut Saikua on Sunday ruled out a referendum before amending the charter, saying the people should be consulted only after draft amendments are completed.

"Pheu Thai is very clear about charter amendment, therefore it has the mandate to rewrite the charter based on the July 3 voting outcome," he said.

Natthawut said the main coalition party and red-shirt movement would push to amend Article 291 of the Constitution, paving the way for formation of the Constitution Drafting Assembly to take charge of the rewriting process.

http://www.asianewsn...?id=25452&sec=1

I'm half right wrong, meaning the referendum will be held after the drafts are done. Kinda like, here are the options take it or leave it.

The government is NOT holding any public referendum.

i believe that's called 'fully' wrong.

[ThaiOats]

The Yingluck government's plan to amend or overhaul the Constitution needs to overcome its first obstacle, the highly contentious question of whether and/or when a public referendum on the issue should take place.

Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on Saturday expressed ambiguous support for a referendum, without spelling out when it should be held. The Election Commission and the red-shirt movement have adopted clearer, opposing stands on the timing of the referendum. The opposition Democrats, meanwhile, are keeping their options open.

Thailand's ruling party Pheu Thai MP Natthawut Saikua on Sunday ruled out a referendum before amending the charter, saying the people should be consulted only after draft amendments are completed.

"Pheu Thai is very clear about charter amendment, therefore it has the mandate to rewrite the charter based on the July 3 voting outcome," he said.

Natthawut said the main coalition party and red-shirt movement would push to amend Article 291 of the Constitution, paving the way for formation of the Constitution Drafting Assembly to take charge of the rewriting process.

http://www.asianewsn...?id=25452&sec=1

I'm half right wrong, meaning the referendum will be held after the drafts are done. Kinda like, here are the options take it or leave it.

The government is NOT holding any public referendum.

i believe that's called 'fully' wrong.

I'm half wrong in that they are NOT holding any public referendum until the drafts are completed. If it makes you happy I'll admit I'm fully wrong, I can let go of my ego when it's due unlike some people on here.

[nurofiend]

The Yingluck government's plan to amend or overhaul the Constitution needs to overcome its first obstacle, the highly contentious question of whether and/or when a public referendum on the issue should take place.

Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on Saturday expressed ambiguous support for a referendum, without spelling out when it should be held. The Election Commission and the red-shirt movement have adopted clearer, opposing stands on the timing of the referendum. The opposition Democrats, meanwhile, are keeping their options open.

Thailand's ruling party Pheu Thai MP Natthawut Saikua on Sunday ruled out a referendum before amending the charter, saying the people should be consulted only after draft amendments are completed.

"Pheu Thai is very clear about charter amendment, therefore it has the mandate to rewrite the charter based on the July 3 voting outcome," he said.

Natthawut said the main coalition party and red-shirt movement would push to amend Article 291 of the Constitution, paving the way for formation of the Constitution Drafting Assembly to take charge of the rewriting process.

http://www.asianewsn...?id=25452&sec=1

I'm half right wrong, meaning the referendum will be held after the drafts are done. Kinda like, here are the options take it or leave it.

The government is NOT holding any public referendum.

i believe that's called 'fully' wrong.

I'm half wrong in that they are NOT holding any public referendum until the drafts are completed. If it makes you happy I'll admit I'm fully wrong, I can let go of my ego when it's due unlike some people on here.

it makes me neither happy or sad, just appreciative of truthfulness.

[Crushdepth]

In this day & age... let's have some proof thanks Suthep. For one who rushes to say Jatuporn makes false accusations, let's see him back up his far fetched tale.

And what kind of proof would you accept, exactly?

[gregb]

Thaksin is a truly dangerous individual, and he scares me. What he might do in the future scares me. I love this country and my family lives here. I don't want to see it destroyed in the way other countries have been destroyed by similar people throughout history. If that means civil war...well, sometimes wars are necessary to defeat evil.

Be careful what you wish for....your side might lose.

I would suggest that civil wars are never necessary, I've seen what they do to a country. I suspect that you, and the others here that espouse the idea haven't.

Your attempt to take the moral high ground is commendable, however your attempted slur that I espouse war is disingenuous. I wish for nothing of the sort. I sincerely hope that when it comes to witnessing it you can continue to be alone in that rather dubious honor. What I do recognize however is that there may be no alternative, and no matter how distasteful war would be, allowing Thaksin to resume his tyranny over this country may turn out to be far worse. Certainly the world would be a much different place had those who espoused appeasement of Hitler not continued in their futile quest for as long as they did.

I simply recognize that given the choice between two evils, it is often necessary to accept the lesser one. I would be overjoyed to accept neither if someone could provide a realistic third option. However, short of supporting an action by a special operations force that we are explicitly not allowed to voice support for by the rules of this forum, I can see no other way out of the current dilemma.

My point is that to those who support Thaksin and think he isn't as bad as described, I sincerely encourage you to put your bias aside, open your mind and look again. If you haven't personally engaged him, you have no idea what you are saying, nor how truly dangerous he is.

[SuneeTH]

Suthep, a truly honest politician.

It would not surprise me at all if Thaksin is making overtures in the background with people who matter ... But I can't see how that would include Suthep.

While nothing is impossible, where is the advantage for either the PTP or the Democrats in this alleged proposal? It doesn't make sense...

Suthep is the "real PM" when Mark was the puppet. He was the real power broker then, to form Mark's govt. However he did do a good job running the country which in whole or in part let to 98 death and 2,000= injured. Hence DEM was not re-elected.

[hellodolly]

Thaksin is a truly dangerous individual, and he scares me. What he might do in the future scares me. I love this country and my family lives here. I don't want to see it destroyed in the way other countries have been destroyed by similar people throughout history. If that means civil war...well, sometimes wars are necessary to defeat evil.

Be careful what you wish for....your side might lose.

I would suggest that civil wars are never necessary, I've seen what they do to a country. I suspect that you, and the others here that espouse the idea haven't.

Your attempt to take the moral high ground is commendable, however your attempted slur that I espouse war is disingenuous. I wish for nothing of the sort. I sincerely hope that when it comes to witnessing it you can continue to be alone in that rather dubious honor. What I do recognize however is that there may be no alternative, and no matter how distasteful war would be, allowing Thaksin to resume his tyranny over this country may turn out to be far worse. Certainly the world would be a much different place had those who espoused appeasement of Hitler not continued in their futile quest for as long as they did.

I simply recognize that given the choice between two evils, it is often necessary to accept the lesser one. I would be overjoyed to accept neither if someone could provide a realistic third option. However, short of supporting an action by a special operations force that we are explicitly not allowed to voice support for by the rules of this forum, I can see no other way out of the current dilemma.

My point is that to those who support Thaksin and think he isn't as bad as described, I sincerely encourage you to put your bias aside, open your mind and look again. If you haven't personally engaged him, you have no idea what you are saying, nor how truly dangerous he is.

Funny thing about wars take Hitler a well placed bullet could have avoided it.

[whybother]

So if the Dems won't go into coalition with PTP, they will have to win an election to get into government (hmm), or rely on another organisation to put them in power(hmm hmm)!

They got into power previously because they had the majority of MPs supporting them. They could do that again if PTP don't have a majority of MPs even without "winning" the election.

Sent from my shoe phone

[SuneeTH]

Keep dreaming Mark.

[MobileContent]

Democrats will never join the PTP? Agree to that one but democrats have a long history of bringing in MP's from the opposite parties such as Newin, Banharn etc to take power. PTP doesn't need the Democrats and also not a unity government.

[phiphidon]

If the coup maker can be brought over to the Taksin camp why not go the whole hog and eliminate any opposition by bringing the Democrats onside? I think Suphets story is credible. As they say the truth can be more amazing that fiction and I also remember Suthep being pretty honest and straight post coup.

You are joking aren't you? Random quotes and actions from the pretty honest and straight Suthep

CRES director Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban later assured the public that the government would not stay idle. It was collecting evidence relating to the temple deaths.

"The government will speak about this case when we have complete information," he said. He even said men on the Skytrain line could be thieves, as security officers were not able to enter Siam Square station on May 19. Officers were only stationed at Sala Daeng and Ploenchit stations, he said.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/05/31/national/Mysterious-death-at-Wat-Pathum-Wanaram-30130490.html

We had no intentions to kill our people, we have never ordered the police and the army to use force during the dispersal of the [red shirt] protest but those [who got] killed ran into [the bullets]

.http://asiancorrespondent.com/49822/thai-deputy-pm-protesters-died-because-they-ran-into-bullets/

It would be ‘inappropriate’ to allow outside involvement in the poll, which is due in June or July and comes after deadly street protests last year, said Suthep Thaugsuban.

‘I don’t respect ‘farangs’. We do not have to surrender to them,‘ he said, using the Thai word for ‘Westerners’.

…

‘I am surprised that Red Shirts do not respect our country’s sovereignty… I don’t understand why they constantly call for foreign involvement, it is inappropriate,’ Mr Suthep told reporters.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/51084/thailand-rejects-foreign-election-observers/

“Of the Democrat Party me and the prime minister are those who need special protection. But we have to be careful, because some parties and some persons are deliberately creating a situation [or scenario] by shooting their own cars or throwing bombs and blaming other parties or their rivals (…)”

http://asiancorrespondent.com/56168/tongue-thai%e2%80%99ed-part-v-shooting-for-sympathy/

Recently, some people have been making some rather serious insinuations about Suthep Thaugsuban, Thailand’s deputy prime minister. Suthep, whose family is one of a handful who control the palm oil industry in the South, also happens to be chairman of the National Palm Oil Policy Committee. Conflict of interest? Arai na?

In an artfully worded op-ed in the Bangkok Post, Voranai Vanijaka did an impressive job of explaining how the crisis has happened and how a certain politician whose name begins with “S” may have benefited. And on page 11 of this week’s Matichon Weekend, there’s a damning article that throws caution to the wind and places the blame squarely at the feet of Suthep. The anonymous writer claims palm oil refiners in the South have pocketed at least 4-5 billion baht as a result of the shortage.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/49900/thailands-palm-oil-crisis-mr-s-strikes-again/

"All this occurred because of just one man: Thaksin Shinawatra," Suthep told the House of Representatives on the last day of the censure debate, adding that the handling of the protests, which resulted in 91 deaths of both sides, "was carried out in accordance with international standards". "Only rubber bullets were used, which was the last measure" said Suthep, adding that the use of live bullets by soldiers to defend themselves or fight with armed elements of the red shirts was another matter.

http://www.daylife.com/quote/0e3JbxE55d3l6?__site=daylife

Finally, former deputy prime minister for security and one-time head of the Center for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) Suthep Thaugsuban has admitted that a leaked document showing that the center had ordered security officers to use live rounds during last year's protests is in fact authentic............the three pages of the CRES order clearly are dated April 10 and 13........

http://www.tannetwork.tv/tan/ViewData.aspx?DataID=1046658

Yes, pure and honest as the driven snow.............................

[tlansford]

tlansford said:

"OK Siripon does hit the max on the hyperbole meter more than most, but sociopathic autocrat - he's not that bad..............."

Here is a list of ways to identify a sociopath. This list is from "Profile of a Sociopath." Is is a pretty good list of sociopathic indicators.

• Glibness/superficial charm
  
• Manipulative and conning (cunning)
  
• Grandiose sense of self
  
• Pathological lying
  
• Lack of remorse, shame or guilt
  
• Shallow emotions
  
• Incapacity for love
  
• Need for stimulation
  
• Callousness/lack of empathy
  
• Poor behavioral controls/impulsive nature
  
• Early behavior problems/juvenile delinquency
  
• Irresponsibility/unreliability
  
• Promiscuous sexual behavior/infidelity (maybe)
  
• Lack of realistic life plan/parasitic lifestyle
  
• Criminal or entrepreneurial versatility
  
• Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
  
• Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
  
• Authoritarian
  
• Secretive
  
• Paranoid
  
• Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
  
• Conventional appearance
  
• Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
  
• Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
  
• Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
  
• Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
  
• Incapable of real human attachment to another
  
• Unable to feel remorse or guilt
  
• Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)
  
• May state readily that their goal is to rule the world
  

Read more: http://wiki.answers....h#ixzz1y9wgXOV4

Autocratic:

au·to·crat (ôt-krt)

n.

1. A ruler having unlimited power; a despot.

2. A person with unlimited power or authority: a corporate autocrat.

Based on the ones I underlined, I think Mr Thaksin might qualify as being a sociopath and possibly an autocrat.

But, hey, he's not that bad...........................is he?

not my post, actually.

Do you know Thaksin ?

Not my post either. And I have previously been chastised by the mods after stating my observations about Thaksin and being told that was defamation.

But you need to define your term "know".

Until you are ready to clarify that rather sticky definition, I will say that I have first hand knowledge of Thaksin, yes. And all I will say as to the above, so as to avoid the possibility of getting scolded again by the mods, is that you should read that list above very, very carefully, and really look at some of Thaksin's antics in public. You may draw your own conclusions, but my first hand knowledge of the man gives me the confidence to say that any benefit of the doubt regarding the applicability of the above would be misplaced.

Draw your own conclusions, but before you allow your biases to cloud your judgement, look honestly at what he has done and what he continues to do. You will bear the moral burden of supporting a man like this.

Thaksin is a truly dangerous individual, and he scares me. What he might do in the future scares me. I love this country and my family lives here. I don't want to see it destroyed in the way other countries have been destroyed by similar people throughout history. If that means civil war...well, sometimes wars are necessary to defeat evil.

Well, that is why I asked. You know him in some way - first hand knowledge - which is more than most here.

IMO judging someone, or let's say taking measure of some one accurately is extremely difficult. It's something that people like to do and we all try, but mostly it is not useful either. There are several reasons I believe that, but more to your point is to look at his actions. I imagine that most people will find things that which he did which were positive, negative, and abhorrent. I do. But what does my opinion of his mental state count? Zero.

BTW, I do not support Thaksin and have said multiple times that my personal interest (I suspect like yours) is that Thailand move forward, and I do not see how that can happen until the issue of Thaksin is resolved. What most posters probably confuse with Thaksin-support is that I do not believe in the equation UDD=Thaksin or Thaksin=UDD. The Red Shirts appear to me to be a genuine social-political movement in Thailand which IMO is generally a positive development. Not to say that everything the UDD or its members do is good - the violence in 2010 an example. The same can be said of the PAD, although I do not agree at all with their nationalist views & anti-democratic positions, nor do I personally feel that the PAD broadly represents Thai society. But if the Thai society continues to become more active, or let's say concerned in the running of the country, I think that is a good development.

[ratcatcher]

tlansford said:

"OK Siripon does hit the max on the hyperbole meter more than most, but sociopathic autocrat - he's not that bad..............."

<snip>

Based on the ones I underlined, I think Mr Thaksin might qualify as being a sociopath and possibly an autocrat.

But, hey, he's not that bad...........................is he?

not my post, actually.

Do you know Thaksin ?

My apologies to you for attributing phiphidon's post to you.

I do not know Thaksin, neither do I like what he is, but I would enjoy meeting him in a safe environment just to see whether my feelings about the man would change..

I still maintain he exhibits many of the sociopathic symptoms I cut and pasted in my post.

I posted late at night and ppd's subtle humour was lost on me at that time. Mea culpa.

[lannarebirth]

tlansford said:

"OK Siripon does hit the max on the hyperbole meter more than most, but sociopathic autocrat - he's not that bad..............."

Here is a list of ways to identify a sociopath. This list is from "Profile of a Sociopath." Is is a pretty good list of sociopathic indicators.

• Glibness/superficial charm
  
• Manipulative and conning (cunning)
  
• Grandiose sense of self
  
• Pathological lying
  
• Lack of remorse, shame or guilt
  
• Shallow emotions
  
• Incapacity for love
  
• Need for stimulation
  
• Callousness/lack of empathy
  
• Poor behavioral controls/impulsive nature
  
• Early behavior problems/juvenile delinquency
  
• Irresponsibility/unreliability
  
• Promiscuous sexual behavior/infidelity (maybe)
  
• Lack of realistic life plan/parasitic lifestyle
  
• Criminal or entrepreneurial versatility
  
• Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
  
• Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
  
• Authoritarian
  
• Secretive
  
• Paranoid
  
• Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
  
• Conventional appearance
  
• Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
  
• Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
  
• Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
  
• Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
  
• Incapable of real human attachment to another
  
• Unable to feel remorse or guilt
  
• Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)
  
• May state readily that their goal is to rule the world
  

Read more: http://wiki.answers....h#ixzz1y9wgXOV4

Autocratic:

au·to·crat (ôt-krt)

n.

1. A ruler having unlimited power; a despot.

2. A person with unlimited power or authority: a corporate autocrat.

Based on the ones I underlined, I think Mr Thaksin might qualify as being a sociopath and possibly an autocrat.

But, hey, he's not that bad...........................is he?

not my post, actually.

Do you know Thaksin ?

Not my post either. And I have previously been chastised by the mods after stating my observations about Thaksin and being told that was defamation.

But you need to define your term "know".

Until you are ready to clarify that rather sticky definition, I will say that I have first hand knowledge of Thaksin, yes. And all I will say as to the above, so as to avoid the possibility of getting scolded again by the mods, is that you should read that list above very, very carefully, and really look at some of Thaksin's antics in public. You may draw your own conclusions, but my first hand knowledge of the man gives me the confidence to say that any benefit of the doubt regarding the applicability of the above would be misplaced.

Draw your own conclusions, but before you allow your biases to cloud your judgement, look honestly at what he has done and what he continues to do. You will bear the moral burden of supporting a man like this.

Thaksin is a truly dangerous individual, and he scares me. What he might do in the future scares me. I love this country and my family lives here. I don't want to see it destroyed in the way other countries have been destroyed by similar people throughout history. If that means civil war...well, sometimes wars are necessary to defeat evil.

Well, that is why I asked. You know him in some way - first hand knowledge - which is more than most here.

IMO judging someone, or let's say taking measure of some one accurately is extremely difficult. It's something that people like to do and we all try, but mostly it is not useful either. There are several reasons I believe that, but more to your point is to look at his actions. I imagine that most people will find things that which he did which were positive, negative, and abhorrent. I do. But what does my opinion of his mental state count? Zero.

BTW, I do not support Thaksin and have said multiple times that my personal interest (I suspect like yours) is that Thailand move forward, and I do not see how that can happen until the issue of Thaksin is resolved. What most posters probably confuse with Thaksin-support is that I do not believe in the equation UDD=Thaksin or Thaksin=UDD. The Red Shirts appear to me to be a genuine social-political movement in Thailand which IMO is generally a positive development. Not to say that everything the UDD or its members do is good - the violence in 2010 an example. The same can be said of the PAD, although I do not agree at all with their nationalist views & anti-democratic positions, nor do I personally feel that the PAD broadly represents Thai society. But if the Thai society continues to become more active, or let's say concerned in the running of the country, I think that is a good development.

I see see some evolving in your view and I welcome it. It takes time as there are so many actors in this drama and so much of seems surreal.

Anyway, wouldn't you say the onus is on the Red Shirts to nurture new voices and leaders to carry their message. They have laid down with pigs and except for a few "Squeelers" that have been invited up to the trough they have been muddied and suffered from it.

[Moruya]

In this day & age... let's have some proof thanks Suthep. For one who rushes to say Jatuporn makes false accusations, let's see him back up his far fetched tale.

Mister Avian Faeces,

if I think your opinions are misguided then only I know about that.

If I tell you verbally that you're opinions are such then only you and I know.

If I express that sentiment on this forum then everyone who take the time out to read the posting will know.

How can one have proof of a conversation? It's hearsay.

[JurgenG]

Honestly, where does this stupid idea come from ?

I know that the democrats are trying to get rid of Abhisit for quite some time but to believe that PT is going to accept him ...

[Siripon]

Honestly, where does this stupid idea come from ?

I know that the democrats are trying to get rid of Abhisit for quite some time but to believe that PT is going to accept him ...

It's not PT trying to accept him, it's Thaksin.

And Thaksin is lord and master of PT, their MPs are merely Thaksin's employees.

I didn't know the Democrats were trying to get rid of Apisit, just a few months ago they voted overwhelmingly to reinstate him as leader.

[Moruya]

Honestly, where does this stupid idea come from ?

I know that the democrats are trying to get rid of Abhisit for quite some time but to believe that PT is going to accept him ...

The Dems are trying to get rid of their leader?