Abhisit, Suthep Could Face 700 Charges Of Attempted Murder: Tarit

[Pimay1]

Unfortunately that was actually a tongue in cheek account as one might expect to hear from the most biased and impartial mind. It is blatantly obvious to all that no one was attempting to overthrow the Government by force of arms. One need only look at the casualties to see where the real aggression and force of arms lay. Had Thaksin and the reds wanted to overthrow the Government through force of arms the death toll would have been magnified tenfold. That is quite clear as is the reality that this was not the aim; the man is many things but an idiot is surely not one of them.

The plan i think was a little more sophisticated and subtle than the slegde hammer type approach that you allude to and dismiss. Thaksin knew from the outset that he could never really match the military for fire power, so i agree that the plan was not to topple the government directly by force. The plan rather was:

• to bring the capital city to a complete stand still for weeks and weeks, stop business, stop trading, stop tourists ✓
  
• to create a sense of fear and panic ✓
  
• to create a distraction big enough to prevent the government from doing anything during their term besides managing the "protest" ✓
  
• to refuse all proposals to end things amicably ✓
  
• to destroy property, burn buildings, intimidate ✓
  
• to continue prodding and poking the military with a various assortment of armaments like grenades and rocket launchers, until such a point that the military has no choice but to react, bringing about bloodshed and death, and subsequently allowing for claims to be made about evil dictatorial anti-democratic clampdowns ✓
  

It was with all these tactics that Thaksin hoped intense pressure would be put on the government, to such a point that it would have to stand down, or the military would have to step in and take over, and when one of those things happened, the government would leave completely disgraced, with human rights violations aplenty, thus vindicating him in the process, showing to the world how he was only ever the innocent victim.

A hypothesis supported by evidence:

UDD co-leader Jakkrapob has told some contacts privately that he favors instigating small acts of violence in hopes of triggering an overreaction by security forces, which in turn would give momentum to red calls for systemic change.

Great link and very informative for all here on TVF. I am waiting for a response from our red brothers on this communication from the US Embassy.

[rixalex]

If that's the case then it worked remarkably well didn't it?

90 odd unnecessary deaths, scores of injuries, billions of baht lost, for an election that was coming anyway, doesn't seem like my definition of something that worked remarkably well.

[Ferangled]

'er not if he is to be held accountable. He has been held accountable and convicted. A convicted criminal on the run. A bizarre attempt to give Thaksin a get out of jail card on the grounds that others are guilty of other offences. Except that the corruption extends to putting pressure (squeezing) Abhisit to force compliance to 'liberate' Thaksin. Apart from that a novel interpretation of election trumping the law.

I'm afraid you miss the point. You can't expect to single out one man for investigation while ignoring others that engage in the very same shenanigans and have that deemed as fair practice. If all men are measured equally and by the same token then no one can complain that they have been unfairly treated.

We see the hypocrisy now when the same games are played by the current Government with remarkably similar special investigation committees being formed. The agenda is clear as it was previously but the parallels fail to get drawn by their respective supporters. To be fair Rich Teacher raised this point earlier but his thoughts were deafened by the usual suspects belligerence in seeing the similarities.

The crimes of others do not absolve the crimes of one man, but one man should not be singled out for special treatment when the crimes of others go unchecked and they are allowed to operate with impunity.

It's not the case that one man has been singled out, it's rather the case that one man for once was unable to evade justice, in spite of million baht lunch boxes. The term singling out evokes a sense of someone having been some how hard done by, or having been harshly treated. Thaksin has not. Yes, it's true that there are many who have been softly treated by the law, including both those opposing Thaksin, and including those supporting Thaksin. The focus of energy should be on bringing those to justice also... instead all we get is all these measly attempts at illiciting sympathy.

You are just mincing words while the reality remains the same... if you prefer... It's the case of one man being unable to evade justice while all those around him were left free to act with impunity and remain unchecked because they had allied themselves with the major power brokers. Yes the focus should be on bringing those elements to justice and not simply pointing the finger at one man, especially not one who enjoys far greater public support than his, free to act with impunity, opponents.

Measly attempts at sympathy? Sympathetic to the ideals of democracy perhaps. You have no stance until such time as all are treated equally. If at that time Thaksin still refuses to be held accountable for his actions then by all means judge away but until such a time as all enjoy fair and equal treatment it's a non argument. The point you seem to be missing is that special investigation committees were formed specifically to dig dirt on the man and find him guilty of something. Until the same happens for some of the really shady characters in this country I sincerely doubt that Thaksin will return. As it is everyone turns a blind eye to the everyday horrors that we are all well away of but continue to point the finger across the water... people are literally getting away with murder but still all the focus is on Thaksin.

[whybother]

Was there ever a court order deeming the protest illegal?

"The government claimed that the protests were illegal and attempted to evict the protesters without a court order, as the Civil Court had ruled that the PM is already empowered to do so." (wiki)

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Court-says-PM-empowered-to-evict-protects-without--30126454.html

[Ferangled]

If that's the case then it worked remarkably well didn't it?

90 odd unnecessary deaths, scores of injuries, billions of baht lost, for an election that was coming anyway, doesn't seem like my definition of something that worked remarkably well.

You really are the master of carefully editing posts out of context and twisting others words aren't you? Frankly a disgusting assertion to apply to someone else's reply to your own deliberate post. Especially given the very clear and frank attempts to make my own opinions clear.

You have adequately displayed your true colours and believe me they paint a far worse picture than anything red or yellow. You and your ilk are exactly what is wrong with Thailand, a devious and malicious cancer gnawing at it's very roots, happy to twist anything to suit your own ends. I really couldn't do a better job than you are already in discrediting yourself and your own assertions.

[OzMick]

'er not if he is to be held accountable. He has been held accountable and convicted. A convicted criminal on the run. A bizarre attempt to give Thaksin a get out of jail card on the grounds that others are guilty of other offences. Except that the corruption extends to putting pressure (squeezing) Abhisit to force compliance to 'liberate' Thaksin. Apart from that a novel interpretation of election trumping the law.

I'm afraid you miss the point. You can't expect to single out one man for investigation while ignoring others that engage in the very same shenanigans and have that deemed as fair practice. If all men are measured equally and by the same token then no one can complain that they have been unfairly treated.

We see the hypocrisy now when the same games are played by the current Government with remarkably similar special investigation committees being formed. The agenda is clear as it was previously but the parallels fail to get drawn by their respective supporters. To be fair Rich Teacher raised this point earlier but his thoughts were deafened by the usual suspects belligerence in seeing the similarities.

The crimes of others do not absolve the crimes of one man, but one man should not be singled out for special treatment when the crimes of others go unchecked and they are allowed to operate with impunity.

It's not the case that one man has been singled out, it's rather the case that one man for once was unable to evade justice, in spite of million baht lunch boxes. The term singling out evokes a sense of someone having been some how hard done by, or having been harshly treated. Thaksin has not. Yes, it's true that there are many who have been softly treated by the law, including both those opposing Thaksin, and including those supporting Thaksin. The focus of energy should be on bringing those to justice also... instead all we get is all these measly attempts at illiciting sympathy.

You are just mincing words while the reality remains the same... if you prefer... It's the case of one man being unable to evade justice while all those around him were left free to act with impunity and remain unchecked because they had allied themselves with the major power brokers. Yes the focus should be on bringing those elements to justice and not simply pointing the finger at one man, especially not one who enjoys far greater public support than his, free to act with impunity, opponents.

Measly attempts at sympathy? Sympathetic to the ideals of democracy perhaps. You have no stance until such time as all are treated equally. If at that time Thaksin still refuses to be held accountable for his actions then by all means judge away but until such a time as all enjoy fair and equal treatment it's a non argument. The point you seem to be missing is that special investigation committees were formed specifically to dig dirt on the man and find him guilty of something. Until the same happens for some of the really shady characters in this country I sincerely doubt that Thaksin will return. As it is everyone turns a blind eye to the everyday horrors that we are all well away of but continue to point the finger across the water... people are literally getting away with murder but still all the focus is on Thaksin.

Do you have nothing to do with your life but type out vast slabs of casual lies and seldom-held opinion stated as irrevocable truth? Is this a full-time occupation?

[Pimay1]

If that's the case then it worked remarkably well didn't it?

90 odd unnecessary deaths, scores of injuries, billions of baht lost, for an election that was coming anyway, doesn't seem like my definition of something that worked remarkably well.

You really are the master of carefully editing posts out of context and twisting others words aren't you? Frankly a disgusting assertion to apply to someone else's reply to your own deliberate post. Especially given the very clear and frank attempts to make my own opinions clear.

You have adequately displayed your true colours and believe me they paint a far worse picture than anything red or yellow. You and your ilk are exactly what is wrong with Thailand, a devious and malicious cancer gnawing at it's very roots, happy to twist anything to suit your own ends. I really couldn't do a better job than you are already in discrediting yourself and your own assertions.

When all else fails attack the messenger not the message.

[rixalex]

You are just mincing words while the reality remains the same... if you prefer... It's the case of one man being unable to evade justice while all those around him were left free to act with impunity and remain unchecked because they had allied themselves with the major power brokers. Yes the focus should be on bringing those elements to justice and not simply pointing the finger at one man, especially not one who enjoys far greater public support than his, free to act with impunity, opponents.

Measly attempts at sympathy? Sympathetic to the ideals of democracy perhaps. You have no stance until such time as all are treated equally. If at that time Thaksin still refuses to be held accountable for his actions then by all means judge away but until such a time as all enjoy fair and equal treatment it's a non argument. The point you seem to be missing is that special investigation committees were formed specifically to dig dirt on the man and find him guilty of something. Until the same happens for some of the really shady characters in this country I sincerely doubt that Thaksin will return. As it is everyone turns a blind eye to the everyday horrors that we are all well away of but continue to point the finger across the water... people are literally getting away with murder but still all the focus is on Thaksin.

If people want to focus on Thaksin, why would that put a crink in your knickers? Let them. Not like he is innocent is it? They can focus on him, you can focus on whoever you want to. Plenty of bad guys to go around.

[Robby nz]

If Suthep as the minister in charge of the CRES is guilty of murder because he approved the decisions made by the CRES then surely those who made the decisions namely the committee are also guilty.

That of course would include Tarit who was on that committee.

Now if the defendants were to call Yingluk as a witness and ask about her recent statement that it is a Govts job to maintain law and order.

She would be too busy to attend of course.

[Ferangled]

You are just mincing words while the reality remains the same... if you prefer... It's the case of one man being unable to evade justice while all those around him were left free to act with impunity and remain unchecked because they had allied themselves with the major power brokers. Yes the focus should be on bringing those elements to justice and not simply pointing the finger at one man, especially not one who enjoys far greater public support than his, free to act with impunity, opponents.

Measly attempts at sympathy? Sympathetic to the ideals of democracy perhaps. You have no stance until such time as all are treated equally. If at that time Thaksin still refuses to be held accountable for his actions then by all means judge away but until such a time as all enjoy fair and equal treatment it's a non argument. The point you seem to be missing is that special investigation committees were formed specifically to dig dirt on the man and find him guilty of something. Until the same happens for some of the really shady characters in this country I sincerely doubt that Thaksin will return. As it is everyone turns a blind eye to the everyday horrors that we are all well away of but continue to point the finger across the water... people are literally getting away with murder but still all the focus is on Thaksin.

If people want to focus on Thaksin, why would that put a crink in your knickers? Let them. Not like he is innocent is it? They can focus on him, you can focus on whoever you want to. Plenty of bad guys to go around.

And as reason fades to infantile rantings, I'll leave the discussion firmly with you Rixalex. Good day.

[muttley]

A hypothesis supported by evidence:

UDD co-leader Jakkrapob has told some contacts privately that he favors instigating small acts of violence in hopes of triggering an overreaction by security forces, which in turn would give momentum to red calls for systemic change.

Great link and very informative for all here on TVF. I am waiting for a response from our red brothers on this communication from the US Embassy.

You (and others that are interested) may wish to read more than this one cable to get a flavour of the relationship and it's slant on the "intelligence" it receives between the American Embassy officials and Thaksin and his supporters.

Suffice it to say it was (is?) not cordial.

More importantly to the quote in question - You may want to note when it was written, April 2009, when considering it's relevance to events a year later.

[Pimay1]

You are just mincing words while the reality remains the same... if you prefer... It's the case of one man being unable to evade justice while all those around him were left free to act with impunity and remain unchecked because they had allied themselves with the major power brokers. Yes the focus should be on bringing those elements to justice and not simply pointing the finger at one man, especially not one who enjoys far greater public support than his, free to act with impunity, opponents.

Measly attempts at sympathy? Sympathetic to the ideals of democracy perhaps. You have no stance until such time as all are treated equally. If at that time Thaksin still refuses to be held accountable for his actions then by all means judge away but until such a time as all enjoy fair and equal treatment it's a non argument. The point you seem to be missing is that special investigation committees were formed specifically to dig dirt on the man and find him guilty of something. Until the same happens for some of the really shady characters in this country I sincerely doubt that Thaksin will return. As it is everyone turns a blind eye to the everyday horrors that we are all well away of but continue to point the finger across the water... people are literally getting away with murder but still all the focus is on Thaksin.

If people want to focus on Thaksin, why would that put a crink in your knickers? Let them. Not like he is innocent is it? They can focus on him, you can focus on whoever you want to. Plenty of bad guys to go around.

And as reason fades to infantile rantings, I'll leave the discussion firmly with you Rixalex. Good day.

The agony of defeat

[rixalex]

If Suthep as the minister in charge of the CRES is guilty of murder because he approved the decisions made by the CRES then surely those who made the decisions namely the committee are also guilty.

That of course would include Tarit who was on that committee.

Now if the defendants were to call Yingluk as a witness and ask about her recent statement that it is a Govts job to maintain law and order.

She would be too busy to attend of course.

Indeed. I've raised this point about Tarit before. It's not like he claims he had no idea what was going on. He says that he knew about the plan to use weapons on the people, but he disagreed with it. OK, he did absolutely nothing about it, but the fact that he now tells us that he was opposed all along, means he thinks he is in no way culpable or responsible. How jolly convenient for him...

[OzMick]

A hypothesis supported by evidence:

UDD co-leader Jakkrapob has told some contacts privately that he favors instigating small acts of violence in hopes of triggering an overreaction by security forces, which in turn would give momentum to red calls for systemic change.

Great link and very informative for all here on TVF. I am waiting for a response from our red brothers on this communication from the US Embassy.

You (and others that are interested) may wish to read more than this one cable to get a flavour of the relationship and it's slant on the "intelligence" it receives between the American Embassy officials and Thaksin and his supporters.

Suffice it to say it was (is?) not cordial.

More importantly to the quote in question - You may want to note when it was written, April 2009, when considering it's relevance to events a year later.

So was there a policy change in the following 12 months?

I presume that US Embassy officials are intelligent, educated and articulate people, politically aware and ethical enough to be chosen to represent their country abroad. That there was a level of disdain for Thaksin and his proxy government is only to be expected.

[AleG]

It's good to know that Abhisit only intended to be dictator for a short period and not for life. I'm sure the Thai populace should have trusted him to willingly hand over the reigns once his term was over...

What did the protests achieve? An early election; The people actually got to vote in their own chosen party and leader as opposed to the military deciding for them. I would have thought that was quite obvious as was the illegitimacy of the Dem Government given the election results. It also brought Thailand's Government firmly under the international eye, curbing the impunity with which the powers that be could act.

I guess by the same token we should have tolerated Hitler for a bit longer, I'm sure he would have kept good on his promises of peace keeping; indeed invading the neighbouring countries and massacring large swathes of the population were just misconstrued acts. I'm sure he would have handed over the power and called free and fair elections when he was done...

Now comparing Abhisit to Hitler is disingenuous at best but the ideals of democracy are that important. You can't simply pick and choose when democracy suits and fall back on military power and dictatorship when it doesn't. Thailand is either a democracy or it isn't and such abuse of power can't be permitted; in such situations the people have every right to take to the streets and let their voices be heard.

"It's good to know that Abhisit only intended to be dictator for a short period and not for life." Substantiate this BS.

Comparing Abhisit and Hitler is disingenuous, yet you do it.

Later on you wrote that the end justified the means, more than 90 people dead to justify early elections. What a morally bankrupt stance. Nothing else to say.

[Ferangled]

Definitive proof on this thread that reason has long since died... comments taken totally out of context, smug replies the order of the day and the forum gets more trollish day by day.

[Ferangled]

You are just mincing words while the reality remains the same... if you prefer... It's the case of one man being unable to evade justice while all those around him were left free to act with impunity and remain unchecked because they had allied themselves with the major power brokers. Yes the focus should be on bringing those elements to justice and not simply pointing the finger at one man, especially not one who enjoys far greater public support than his, free to act with impunity, opponents.

Measly attempts at sympathy? Sympathetic to the ideals of democracy perhaps. You have no stance until such time as all are treated equally. If at that time Thaksin still refuses to be held accountable for his actions then by all means judge away but until such a time as all enjoy fair and equal treatment it's a non argument. The point you seem to be missing is that special investigation committees were formed specifically to dig dirt on the man and find him guilty of something. Until the same happens for some of the really shady characters in this country I sincerely doubt that Thaksin will return. As it is everyone turns a blind eye to the everyday horrors that we are all well away of but continue to point the finger across the water... people are literally getting away with murder but still all the focus is on Thaksin.

If people want to focus on Thaksin, why would that put a crink in your knickers? Let them. Not like he is innocent is it? They can focus on him, you can focus on whoever you want to. Plenty of bad guys to go around.

And as reason fades to infantile rantings, I'll leave the discussion firmly with you Rixalex. Good day.

The agony of defeat

A great example to illustrate my point!

[Ferangled]

"It's good to know that Abhisit only intended to be dictator for a short period and not for life." Substantiate this BS.

Comparing Abhisit and Hitler is disingenuous, yet you do it.

Later on you wrote that the end justified the means, more than 90 people dead to justify early elections. What a morally bankrupt stance. Nothing else to say.

And another... sterling stuff!

[Ferangled]

If people want to focus on Thaksin, why would that put a crink in your knickers? Let them. Not like he is innocent is it? They can focus on him, you can focus on whoever you want to. Plenty of bad guys to go around.

And the icing on the cake!

[muttley]

So was there a policy change in the following 12 months?

I presume that US Embassy officials are intelligent, educated and articulate people, politically aware and ethical enough to be chosen to represent their country abroad. That there was a level of disdain for Thaksin and his proxy government is only to be expected.

Was it policy? According to the embassy at the time the quote was in a private discussion - could have been, could be B/S to suit the stance of the time. Nobody on this forum can state that it was related to events in 2010, you can speculate but that's it. Too many people on here state things like that as fact.

I wonder what the embassy stance on Thaksin and the PTP is now?

[OzMick]

Definitive proof on this thread that reason has long since died... comments taken totally out of context, smug replies the order of the day and the forum gets more trollish day by day.

Apt self-criticism.

[gl555]

And yet you're still here posting! I mean seriously, you really should stop trolling the boards.

Definitive proof on this thread that reason has long since died... comments taken totally out of context, smug replies the order of the day and the forum gets more trollish day by day.

Edited December 21, 2012 by gl555

[OzMick]

So was there a policy change in the following 12 months?

I presume that US Embassy officials are intelligent, educated and articulate people, politically aware and ethical enough to be chosen to represent their country abroad. That there was a level of disdain for Thaksin and his proxy government is only to be expected.

Was it policy? According to the embassy at the time the quote was in a private discussion - could have been, could be B/S to suit the stance of the time. Nobody on this forum can state that it was related to events in 2010, you can speculate but that's it. Too many people on here state things like that as fact.

I wonder what the embassy stance on Thaksin and the PTP is now?

But it was stated by Jakkraprob, and later events, from then on, show a remarkable similarity to this ploy. And isn't that what Wikileaks was all about, revealing indiscrete statements never meant to be made public.

Currently? I'm not in a position to know but will ask Julian when I see him.

BTW JA is tipped to run as a senator in the upcoming Oz elections, and should walk it in.

[Ferangled]

Do you have nothing to do with your life but type out vast slabs of casual lies and seldom-held opinion stated as irrevocable truth? Is this a full-time occupation?

Nothing like a bit of rank hypocrisy to really polish things off nicely! 7165 posts and counting, well done!

[rixalex]

^

And as reason fades to infantile rantings, I'll leave the discussion firmly with you Rixalex. Good day.

Can't even get your facts right about your own comings and goings.

[Rich teacher]

My bias is based on my actual experiences with the Udonthani reds, local government and policing ( lack of in the case of the latter two. )

Good to see your admission of bias.

Also, a person's personal experience is insufficient to base an opinion. To have a respected, informed knowledge of the events in question you must be more well rounded by researching every available source. The simple fact is that there are far more sources of information about this in Thai.

[Pimay1]

If people want to focus on Thaksin, why would that put a crink in your knickers? Let them. Not like he is innocent is it? They can focus on him, you can focus on whoever you want to. Plenty of bad guys to go around.

And the icing on the cake!

What's the old saying about the heat and the kitchen?

[Rich teacher]

I travel up and down the country, have been living here well over a decade, and am able to converse with locals in their own language, and i think you are plain wrong about people hating Abhisit. Hate for the Dems? Yes certainly, in certain parts of the country. More often than not though, the over-riding impression i get about how people feel about both the Dems and Abhisit, is more along the lines of apathy. They feel like the Dems are slow and dithering and to some extent stuck in the past. They feel like Abhisit is a nice guy but question his ability to get things done. There is also a growing sense of sympathy for the way he was stuck in between a rock and a hard place whilst he was in power, and sympathy for the way he is now at the centre of the most blatant and ridiculous hatchet job. That's not to say they want him back in power - recent election results bear that out - but they don't think he deserves what is happening.

And whereas Abhisit illicits little in the way of strong emotion, Thaksin is the polar opposite. I have yet to meet one single Thai person who is on the fence about him. Have you? They either love him with a passion, or they despise his very being. I put it to you that he is likely the single most divisive person in modern day Thai history.

Of course i can only go on what i have heard, what i have seen, and other people may have different experiences. You for one obviously have. I can't help wondering though, for you to have the impression of Thai people despising "toffee nose", as you call him, just how deep within red heartland you are residing? My guess is very deep, and perhaps surrounded by red fanatical in-laws. It's the only explanation that makes any sense to me. It's either that or I, by some freak occurrence, and happening upon Thai people who are completely unrepresentative of all other Thais.

I have been in Thailand on and off since 1994 and in total for around 13 years. My Thai language skills are excellent, I can easily understand Thai parliament, documentaries, talk shows, newspapers and books.

I live in central Bangkok and have a wide range of Thai friends ranging from one with a PHD in Thai literature to others with limited formal education.

I remember gauging opinion on the street during the protests. Each evening I would walk around the nearby market and down the street to talk to the local vendors. Overwhelmingly they were red supporters. They were also vitriolic in their hatred for Abhisit, Suthep and Prem. I regularly heard them referring to AV as the "animal" and "murderer". I heard others saying they wanted to personally kill him. Doesn't sound like 'apathy' as you put it. From what I have garnered from the average Thai on the street they are disgusted by AV's role in the perversion of democracy (Anupong's coalition, etc) and even moreso for his excessive use of force in 2010.

Obviously I heard similar hatred towards TS from other Thais, but in every case they were rich, educated, and disenfranchised by Thaksin's populist policies.

Having said all of this, I don't contend any of this to hold any significance to anyone. This was written in direct response to Rivalex's conjecture about me. Any one person's personal experience is not representative of any general truths.

[Pimay1]

I travel up and down the country, have been living here well over a decade, and am able to converse with locals in their own language, and i think you are plain wrong about people hating Abhisit. Hate for the Dems? Yes certainly, in certain parts of the country. More often than not though, the over-riding impression i get about how people feel about both the Dems and Abhisit, is more along the lines of apathy. They feel like the Dems are slow and dithering and to some extent stuck in the past. They feel like Abhisit is a nice guy but question his ability to get things done. There is also a growing sense of sympathy for the way he was stuck in between a rock and a hard place whilst he was in power, and sympathy for the way he is now at the centre of the most blatant and ridiculous hatchet job. That's not to say they want him back in power - recent election results bear that out - but they don't think he deserves what is happening.

And whereas Abhisit illicits little in the way of strong emotion, Thaksin is the polar opposite. I have yet to meet one single Thai person who is on the fence about him. Have you? They either love him with a passion, or they despise his very being. I put it to you that he is likely the single most divisive person in modern day Thai history.

Of course i can only go on what i have heard, what i have seen, and other people may have different experiences. You for one obviously have. I can't help wondering though, for you to have the impression of Thai people despising "toffee nose", as you call him, just how deep within red heartland you are residing? My guess is very deep, and perhaps surrounded by red fanatical in-laws. It's the only explanation that makes any sense to me. It's either that or I, by some freak occurrence, and happening upon Thai people who are completely unrepresentative of all other Thais.

I have been in Thailand on and off since 1994 and in total for around 13 years. My Thai language skills are excellent, I can easily understand Thai parliament, documentaries, talk shows, newspapers and books.

I live in central Bangkok and have a wide range of Thai friends ranging from one with a PHD in Thai literature to others with limited formal education.

I remember gauging opinion on the street during the protests. Each evening I would walk around the nearby market and down the street to talk to the local vendors. Overwhelmingly they were red supporters. They were also vitriolic in their hatred for Abhisit, Suthep and Prem. I regularly heard them referring to AV as the "animal" and "murderer". I heard others saying they wanted to personally kill him. Doesn't sound like 'apathy' as you put it. From what I have garnered from the average Thai on the street they are disgusted by AV's role in the perversion of democracy (Anupong's coalition, etc) and even moreso for his excessive use of force in 2010.

Obviously I heard similar hatred towards TS from other Thais, but in every case they were rich, educated, and disenfranchised by Thaksin's populist policies.

Having said all of this, I don't contend any of this to hold any significance to anyone. This was written in direct response to Rivalex's conjecture about me. Any one person's personal experience is not representative of any general truths.

In reply read this.

i was the first man to visit Mars in a space capsule 130 years ago. At that time the Martians were preparing to invade earth because they were running out of oxygen. I talked them out of it and returned to earth. This has been top secret until now but I felt I should share it with my friends on TVF. I speak fluent Martian as well as read Martian.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Pimay1

[OzMick]

I travel up and down the country, have been living here well over a decade, and am able to converse with locals in their own language, and i think you are plain wrong about people hating Abhisit. Hate for the Dems? Yes certainly, in certain parts of the country. More often than not though, the over-riding impression i get about how people feel about both the Dems and Abhisit, is more along the lines of apathy. They feel like the Dems are slow and dithering and to some extent stuck in the past. They feel like Abhisit is a nice guy but question his ability to get things done. There is also a growing sense of sympathy for the way he was stuck in between a rock and a hard place whilst he was in power, and sympathy for the way he is now at the centre of the most blatant and ridiculous hatchet job. That's not to say they want him back in power - recent election results bear that out - but they don't think he deserves what is happening.

And whereas Abhisit illicits little in the way of strong emotion, Thaksin is the polar opposite. I have yet to meet one single Thai person who is on the fence about him. Have you? They either love him with a passion, or they despise his very being. I put it to you that he is likely the single most divisive person in modern day Thai history.

Of course i can only go on what i have heard, what i have seen, and other people may have different experiences. You for one obviously have. I can't help wondering though, for you to have the impression of Thai people despising "toffee nose", as you call him, just how deep within red heartland you are residing? My guess is very deep, and perhaps surrounded by red fanatical in-laws. It's the only explanation that makes any sense to me. It's either that or I, by some freak occurrence, and happening upon Thai people who are completely unrepresentative of all other Thais.

I have been in Thailand on and off since 1994 and in total for around 13 years. My Thai language skills are excellent, I can easily understand Thai parliament, documentaries, talk shows, newspapers and books.

I live in central Bangkok and have a wide range of Thai friends ranging from one with a PHD in Thai literature to others with limited formal education.

I remember gauging opinion on the street during the protests. Each evening I would walk around the nearby market and down the street to talk to the local vendors. Overwhelmingly they were red supporters. They were also vitriolic in their hatred for Abhisit, Suthep and Prem. I regularly heard them referring to AV as the "animal" and "murderer". I heard others saying they wanted to personally kill him. Doesn't sound like 'apathy' as you put it. From what I have garnered from the average Thai on the street they are disgusted by AV's role in the perversion of democracy (Anupong's coalition, etc) and even moreso for his excessive use of force in 2010.

Obviously I heard similar hatred towards TS from other Thais, but in every case they were rich, educated, and disenfranchised by Thaksin's populist policies.

Having said all of this, I don't contend any of this to hold any significance to anyone. This was written in direct response to Rivalex's conjecture about me. Any one person's personal experience is not representative of any general truths.

For somebody so astute in all things Thai, I find it amazing that you have been a member of TVF for only 2 months.