Our ultimate goal is to bring down the 'Thaksin regime'

[Pimay1]

I have a novel idea. Treat all Thai farmers equally whether they grow rice, rubber trees or any other product. Don't single out a certain group assisting them and leave the others to their own devices. Give them them all same opportunity and equal support.

[nicknostitz]

You are aware that most on this forum here support DP and Abhisit. Aren't we (also) representing the international community?

If Abhisit was so bad, why did Kofi Anan meet him early 2012 and support him. Who in the international community has ever said that Abhisit should face the court in The Hague because of what happened in 2010? (besides Robert Amsterdam, Thaksin and the Red shirts). There are many more articles written by the BBC and CNN (or anybody else in the world) that talk bad about the actions of Thaksin and his Red shirts. You don't remember?

And last but not least, it's not up to you to Judge Yingluck but you judge Abhisit on a daily basis. Strange. Just like you claim to have met everybody, seen it all, but have no images of the MIB.

Now I know that it doesn't make sense to debate Thai politics with you because you only support the reds.

http://kofiannanfoundation.org/newsroom/press/2012/02/statement-kofi-annan-and-martti-ahtisaari-their-visit-to-bangkok

You really seem to have reading and comprehension issues. In no way did Kofi Annan express support for Abhisit. The statement which you linked to is in support of ongoing efforts for reconciliation as he was invited by the TRCT, and spoke with both Abhisit and the opposition leader, met victims and stakeholders.

Read your own link, please, before making these claims.

And as to your question what a couple of serial posters here on thaivisa represent, i rather prefer not to answer.

[Nickymaster]

Do you know what you wrote? Democrat MPs have been at the protest. Democrats MPs support the rubber farmers.

With evidence jonnie means: proof that the democrats use the rubber farmers to overthrow the government using violent tactics, as you stated in your earlier post. (I believe).

So clearly no evidence in your reply.

And, yet again, what you believe is wrong as you haven't read what i posted. I stated that the DP party is in alliance with the rubber farmers. Which it is.

I have stated that the rubber farmers have used violent tactics. Which they have - just watch the video clips.

There is no evidence that the DP has organized the whole thing, so far. But there is quite clear evidence that the DP is attempting to politicize the protest.

But there is quite clear evidence that the DP is attempting to politicize the protest.

How dare they politicize the protest .. Aren't you happy that somebody is helping the rubber farmers who are clearly suffering?

A simple question: Why didn't the government dare to lower the buying price of rice to THB 12,000?

[Nickymaster]

You are aware that most on this forum here support DP and Abhisit. Aren't we (also) representing the international community?

If Abhisit was so bad, why did Kofi Anan meet him early 2012 and support him. Who in the international community has ever said that Abhisit should face the court in The Hague because of what happened in 2010? (besides Robert Amsterdam, Thaksin and the Red shirts). There are many more articles written by the BBC and CNN (or anybody else in the world) that talk bad about the actions of Thaksin and his Red shirts. You don't remember?

And last but not least, it's not up to you to Judge Yingluck but you judge Abhisit on a daily basis. Strange. Just like you claim to have met everybody, seen it all, but have no images of the MIB.

Now I know that it doesn't make sense to debate Thai politics with you because you only support the reds.

http://kofiannanfoundation.org/newsroom/press/2012/02/statement-kofi-annan-and-martti-ahtisaari-their-visit-to-bangkok

You really seem to have reading and comprehension issues. In no way did Kofi Annan express support for Abhisit. The statement which you linked to is in support of ongoing efforts for reconciliation as he was invited by the TRCT, and spoke with both Abhisit and the opposition leader, met victims and stakeholders.

Read your own link, please, before making these claims.

And as to your question what a couple of serial posters here on thaivisa represent, i rather prefer not to answer.

Ah ok.

I assume that Kofi Annan in a way represents the International Community. Did he criticize or blame Abhisit for anything that has happened in 2010? You claim that the international community dislikes (or whatever) Abhisit.

Kofi Annan praises the TRCT report; Our view is that the TRCT is making an important contribution, one that remains highly relevant. And the Reds claim that the TRCT report is written to favor Abhisit...

Please stop talking for the world. Us foreigners can judge what the world thinks for ourselves.

[nicknostitz]

But there is quite clear evidence that the DP is attempting to politicize the protest.

How dare they politicize the protest .. Aren't you happy that somebody is helping the rubber farmers who are clearly suffering?

A simple question: Why didn't the government dare to lower the buying price of rice to THB 12,000?

Oh my...

If you would have read the papers, you would have seen that the government went into direct negotiations with the rubber farmers, offered programs that were initially accepted by the representatives of the rubber farmers, but then by some of the protesters rejected.

That's politics - people protest, government negotiates. Negotiations break down, and will be taken up again. And then solutions may be found, or not. You saw, for example, that the government found amicable solutions for P-Move, by direct negotiations.

The Democrat Party's involvement now might complicate matters, and might not be too the advantage of the farmers demands, but more to their own primary goals, as stated in the original article, of "Our ultimate goal is to bring down the Thaksin regime."

But it's too early to make any final judgement on the case, as it's still ongoing.

[nicknostitz]

Ah ok.

I assume that Kofi Annan in a way represents the International Community. Did he criticize or blame Abhisit for anything that has happened in 2010? You claim that the international community dislikes (or whatever) Abhisit.

Kofi Annan praises the TRCT report; Our view is that the TRCT is making an important contribution, one that remains highly relevant. And the Reds claim that the TRCT report is written to favor Abhisit...

Please stop talking for the world. Us foreigners can judge what the world thinks for ourselves.

Eh, no, Kofi Annan has not praised the TRCT report.

He couldn't have.

The report has at the time of his visit not been published, or even half finished as the TRCT was still in its investigation stage. Annan praised the efforts of the TRCT for reconciliation.

Again - please read before you post.

[Robby nz]

Just read the papers and watch the news please - Democrat MP's were reported to have been at the protests, many Democrat MP's have openly declared their support, Blue Sky TV and T-News - both modeled by the Democrat Party and supporters on ASTV and Asia Update as propaganda spokes-pieces for the DP - are deeply involved, and openly take sides with the protesters (just watch their coverage - i spent several hours watching it yesterday night).

And does it worry you Nick when you watch red TV or listen to red radio or read red sponsored papers?

Does it worry you when you see red schools teaching the kids red propaganda which can only carry on the hate into future generations?

Does it worry you when you hear the hate messages spewed out over the loudspeakers when the reds are attempting to disrupt the legal and peaceful rallies of groups that oppose PT.

Did it worry when you saw kids being used to fire missiles with catapults at the white mask gathering?

Does it worry you when PT MP's and cabinet ministers attend red gatherings?

Does it worry you that there are PT cabinet members who have stood up on the red stage and called for burning and violent behavior from their supporters in the past?

Nick, of course the Dem MPs are deeply involved with the people of their constituencies, it is their job to look after the people who voted for them.

If the people who voted them in to parliament have grievences and problems that pertain to politics then their MP's should be there to help and support them.

That may not be a widely known principle among PT members of the house but it is obvious that the Dems understand it.

[Nickymaster]

But there is quite clear evidence that the DP is attempting to politicize the protest.

How dare they politicize the protest .. Aren't you happy that somebody is helping the rubber farmers who are clearly suffering?

A simple question: Why didn't the government dare to lower the buying price of rice to THB 12,000?

Oh my...

If you would have read the papers, you would have seen that the government went into direct negotiations with the rubber farmers, offered programs that were initially accepted by the representatives of the rubber farmers, but then by some of the protesters rejected.

That's politics - people protest, government negotiates. Negotiations break down, and will be taken up again. And then solutions may be found, or not. You saw, for example, that the government found amicable solutions for P-Move, by direct negotiations.

The Democrat Party's involvement now might complicate matters, and might not be too the advantage of the farmers demands, but more to their own primary goals, as stated in the original article, of "Our ultimate goal is to bring down the Thaksin regime."

But it's too early to make any final judgement on the case, as it's still ongoing.

You are amazing Nick.

And you haven't been here long enough that common practice is that you make a quick deal with a representative.... before the farmers wake up. This time they failed.. I hope you get what I mean.

The Democrat Party's involvement now might complicate matters, and might not be too the advantage of the farmers demands, but more to their own primary goals, as stated in the original article, of "Our ultimate goal is to bring down the Thaksin regime."

Pure propaganda Nick. let's leave it here. You clearly have a second agenda when posting on TV.

[Nickymaster]

Ah ok.

I assume that Kofi Annan in a way represents the International Community. Did he criticize or blame Abhisit for anything that has happened in 2010? You claim that the international community dislikes (or whatever) Abhisit.

Kofi Annan praises the TRCT report; Our view is that the TRCT is making an important contribution, one that remains highly relevant. And the Reds claim that the TRCT report is written to favor Abhisit...

Please stop talking for the world. Us foreigners can judge what the world thinks for ourselves.

Eh, no, Kofi Annan has not praised the TRCT report.

He couldn't have.

The report has at the time of his visit not been published, or even half finished as the TRCT was still in its investigation stage. Annan praised the efforts of the TRCT for reconciliation.

Again - please read before you post.

You are right. He only praised the TRCT for their work in trying to achieve reconciliation. But anyhow, PT prefers the Bring-Thaksin-Back forum to achieve uh... oh yeah right RECONCILITION.

[nicknostitz]

You are amazing Nick.

And you haven't been here long enough that common practice is that you make a quick deal with a representative.... before the farmers wake up. This time they failed.. I hope you get what I mean.

The Democrat Party's involvement now might complicate matters, and might not be too the advantage of the farmers demands, but more to their own primary goals, as stated in the original article, of "Our ultimate goal is to bring down the Thaksin regime."

Pure propaganda Nick. let's leave it here. You clearly have a second agenda when posting on TV.

Well, i somewhat get what i mean, in a rather convoluted way. Possibly.

Are you trying to say now that you have been privy to the close door negotiations, and know exactly what was, or what was not offered? Any evidence of your claims you want to share?

"A second agenda" - and what may that be?

[nicknostitz]

You are right. He only praised the TRCT for their work in trying to achieve reconciliation. But anyhow, PT prefers the Bring-Thaksin-Back forum to achieve uh... oh yeah right RECONCILITION.

You ignore the complex and very convoluted relationship between the different factions in PT - while there are some that supposedly try to bring Thaksin back (Chalerm - who also has his own private agendas), there are others who prefer that Thaksin would continue to stay away, for the time being.

But that is hardly the topic of this thread.

[Slip]

Bearing in mind the way that the poor Isaan rice farmers are getting shafted by the rice scheme, I'd suggest that the rubber farmers have zero hope of any assistance.

[Thai at Heart]

This whole thing is a fight for survival for the radical parts of the DP. They have made a major strategical mistake with the hardline approach in 2010. While the Red Shirts may have lost the battle on the ground, they have won on all other battle fields, both inside Thailand, and internationally. The international perception over the DP has massively changed after 2010, and especially after the PT won the 2011 elections. Both Pueah Thai and Red Shirts have now beaten the DP at their own game - the creation of a positive international perception, while the DP is increasingly struggling in that aspect, especially by the constant defense against the indefinable - the refusal to acknowledge that soldiers killed unarmed protesters.

What we see right now, as expressed in this article, is a sign of utter desperation of the present powers of the DP.

Come on please stop with this propaganda. You are clearly looking desperate. Nobody in the international community has ever said something bad about the DP and Abhisit EVEN after the crackdown. For every article you can show me that the international perception about the DP has changed after 2010, I give you 2 articles about what the international press thinks about Thaksin and the Red shirts after 2010.

As you know most foreigners on this forum support DP and Abhisit.

I will tell you a secret, if this corrupt, self serving government keeps on mismanaging this beautiful country, they will bring themselves down. This could happen sooner than you think. Don't underestimate the mess this country is in at the moment. So far PT has done a lot of damage the last 2 years. Any PM with some dignity would have resigned by now. She is clearly not qualified.

Or do you think yingluck is doing a good job?

Of course i am aware that most on this forum here support DP and Abhisit.

There is a slight irony though that i may be the only person posting here who has talked with Abhisit and many other DP MP's on many occasions.

As to your claims on a positive international perception in the media after 2010 - is that why CNN and BBC and many other foreign publications were serial attacked by the DP, their supporters, and by many here on the forum as well. Don't you remember?

Have you read the recent Fuller article? The preceding Op-ed in the NY Times "Can Egypt learn from Thailand?" ?

On another level of foreign perception i would suggest to have a look at the level of diplomacy, look that straight after the 2011 elections countries that have barred Thaksin from entering have lifted that ban (such as Germany), look at the number of visits by foreign delegations before the 2011 elections, and after, especially the rank of members of these delegations. There are certain subtleties in diplomacy which probably might escape you.

So far Yingluck has managed to keep Thailand relatively peaceful, has somewhat smoothed over the strained relationship between PT and the military, so in those aspects she has done a good job. In the rice pledge conflict the government has not exactly done very well. But in the end - it is not up to me or you - but entirely up to the Thai voters to decide if she has done a good or bad job.

All of the major embassies have their political analysis.

What do you reckon they were saying after the dems/army got newin to switch?

The dems will be in for a few years and ptp will win the election. So why hurry to deal with a bunch you know will inevitably only be in for a year or two?

[nicknostitz]

All of the major embassies have their political analysis.

What do you reckon they were saying after the dems/army got newin to switch?

The dems will be in for a few years and ptp will win the election. So why hurry to deal with a bunch you know will inevitably only be in for a year or two?

Quite amazingly the politicos of the embassies were quite split in their views, even within some embassies.

The embassy of one western European country, for example, has been so pro-Democrat, its ambassador even on many occasions publicly voicing his support for the DP and his dislike for PT, that when it was foreseeable that the PT was going to win the elections, the whole team had to be exchanged as the old team could not have worked with the new PT government.

One of the reasons was that pre-2010 the DP party has the best possible public diplomacy network, and TRT/PPP/PT was quite lacking. Many high powered western businessmen in Thailand are deeply allied to DP networks (often through marriage into the right families), and they are often the first address for embassy politicos to go to due to their longstanding and close relationships with the embassies and their wide ranging contacts in the establishment here.

Many politicos believed that the DP will be in for the foreseeable future, as they trusted the propaganda of Red Shirts and Thaksin supporters having only been paid, that the military will not allow a return of a pro-Thaksin government, etc - the usual.

Things have changed though - the DP's network began collapsing after 2010, while at the same time Thaksin, the PT and the Red Shirts made their homework in terms of public diplomacy. The killing of protesters by the military is quite a convincing argument, especially when it has been so well documented - and even witnessed by some embassy staff. The election results of 2011 made things quite clear. Every foreign country *will* support the elected government of Thailand, whoever that may be. Right now it is PT, and if one day the DP transforms itself, it may then be the DP in the future - as long as they come to power via elections.

Edited August 27, 2013 by nicknostitz

[metisdead]

Some trolling nonsense posts have been removed as some content which might be better suited to another topic regarding the rubber price protests.

[geriatrickid]

All of the major embassies have their political analysis.

What do you reckon they were saying after the dems/army got newin to switch?

The dems will be in for a few years and ptp will win the election. So why hurry to deal with a bunch you know will inevitably only be in for a year or two?

Quite amazingly the politicos of the embassies were quite split in their views, even within some embassies.

The embassy of one western European country, for example, has been so pro-Democrat, its ambassador even on many occasions publicly voicing his support for the DP and his dislike for PT, that when it was foreseeable that the PT was going to win the elections, the whole team had to be exchanged as the old team could not have worked with the new PT government.

One of the reasons was that pre-2010 the DP party has the best possible public diplomacy network, and TRT/PPP/PT was quite lacking. Many high powered western businessmen in Thailand are deeply allied to DP networks (often through marriage into the right families), and they are often the first address for embassy politicos to go to due to their longstanding and close relationships with the embassies and their wide ranging contacts in the establishment here.

Many politicos believed that the DP will be in for the foreseeable future, as they trusted the propaganda of Red Shirts and Thaksin supporters having only been paid, that the military will not allow a return of a pro-Thaksin government, etc - the usual.

Things have changed though - the DP's network began collapsing after 2010, while at the same time Thaksin, the PT and the Red Shirts made their homework in terms of public diplomacy. The killing of protesters by the military is quite a convincing argument, especially when it has been so well documented - and even witnessed by some embassy staff. The election results of 2011 made things quite clear. Every foreign country *will* support the elected government of Thailand, whoever that may be. Right now it is PT, and if one day the DP transforms itself, it may then be the DP in the future - as long as they come to power via elections.

You are the only person to have posted what many foreigners with actual contacts with Thai politicos and position have long known. It must come as quite a shock for a great many of TVF's self appointed experts. I have always found it amusing to see some of the PTP bashers pronounce on how the government had no international support. There were so many clues as to how the international community saw the Democrats.

[ThaiOats]

The Democrats changed their mode of operation after they have lost the previous election. They started taking to the streets because no news channel would disseminate their concerns or point of views. They need an avenue to reach out to the public, hence their "Stage for Truth" gatherings across the country excluding the provinces they were harassed and attacked by Red Shirts. Without the Blue Sky channel or these stages, the public would still be in the dark, including the red shirts. For example, the tiny problem with a 'misprint' in budget allocation for the minivans. If the opposition wasnt there to do their job,,it would have sailed through and tax payers get the shaft.

As much as the likes of nicknostitz and other pro-PTP, who like to bring up the Democrats continuous defeat at the elections and harp on the ultra-royalist tune, the fact is the Opposition is needed to do their job. If anyone has been paying attention to Abhisit's speeches, he started off being polite and didn't resort to ad-hominem tactics. He would expose the malfeasance of the government policies such as the rice pledging, first car scheme and the urgent loan bills. He would talk about Thaksin's current and previous corruptions and how the public should call for his arrest. Yet, when the truth starts spreading and the PTP government starts putting pressure on him with bogus charges of premeditated murder, he still kept his cool.

That started to change when the PTP brought the amnesty bill back on the agenda. Coupled with the outrageous 2.2 trillion ad hoc loan bill and constitutional amendment, they needed to thrown the gloves down. The public who support the Dems do want to come out in force but they need to know that the DP would go all the way with them. This was evident when they marched with the DP to parliament and was disappointed when they were told to go home. But I think the DEMs made the right move as not to instigate violence and showed that they would rather utilize the non violent pressuring tactics, unlike another group.

Further, if you've seen his speeches, people cheered when he recently started mocking Yingluck and othet ---wits in the government. Rightly so too. You can imagine how much of a mockery it is for anyone thats intelligent enough to know that a PM shouldnt avoid parliamentary debates. He talked about how Yingluck was seen in parliament and 5 minutes before the meeting,, leaves the compound. He talked about how Nattawut makes up BS for the rising price of eggs. In summary, he attacks the stupidity of the government and their ineptitude.

But of course, people are going talk about 'democratically elected government' because that's all there is to a democracy. Right?

[nicknostitz]

The Democrats changed their mode of operation after they have lost the previous election. They started taking to the streets because no news channel would disseminate their concerns or point of views. They need an avenue to reach out to the public, hence their "Stage for Truth" gatherings across the country excluding the provinces they were harassed and attacked by Red Shirts. Without the Blue Sky channel or these stages, the public would still be in the dark, including the red shirts. For example, the tiny problem with a 'misprint' in budget allocation for the minivans. If the opposition wasnt there to do their job,,it would have sailed through and tax payers get the shaft.

As much as the likes of nicknostitz and other pro-PTP, who like to bring up the Democrats continuous defeat at the elections and harp on the ultra-royalist tune, the fact is the Opposition is needed to do their job. If anyone has been paying attention to Abhisit's speeches, he started off being polite and didn't resort to ad-hominem tactics. He would expose the malfeasance of the government policies such as the rice pledging, first car scheme and the urgent loan bills. He would talk about Thaksin's current and previous corruptions and how the public should call for his arrest. Yet, when the truth starts spreading and the PTP government starts putting pressure on him with bogus charges of premeditated murder, he still kept his cool.

That started to change when the PTP brought the amnesty bill back on the agenda. Coupled with the outrageous 2.2 trillion ad hoc loan bill and constitutional amendment, they needed to thrown the gloves down. The public who support the Dems do want to come out in force but they need to know that the DP would go all the way with them. This was evident when they marched with the DP to parliament and was disappointed when they were told to go home. But I think the DEMs made the right move as not to instigate violence and showed that they would rather utilize the non violent pressuring tactics, unlike another group.

Further, if you've seen his speeches, people cheered when he recently started mocking Yingluck and othet ---wits in the government. Rightly so too. You can imagine how much of a mockery it is for anyone thats intelligent enough to know that a PM shouldnt avoid parliamentary debates. He talked about how Yingluck was seen in parliament and 5 minutes before the meeting,, leaves the compound. He talked about how Nattawut makes up BS for the rising price of eggs. In summary, he attacks the stupidity of the government and their ineptitude.

But of course, people are going talk about 'democratically elected government' because that's all there is to a democracy. Right?

You also have to add that several of the Blue Sky stages were purposely held in Red Shirt domains, trying to provoke Red Shirts into disturbing the Blue Sky rallies. The most blatant was as Laksi, where the Red Shirts had a permanent stage, and the Democrat Party erected their stage in a school barely 200 meters away. Didn't work though, as the Red Shirts remained at their stage.

As some of you DP supporters don't want to understand - being critical of the Democrat Party does not mean that one is automatically a Pueah Thai supporter. I am a supporter of a multi-party system and would love to see the Democrat Party transform itself into a viable alternative in elections. It is not my position to support either one of the two parties. While many Democrat Party MP's and supporters whine that the electorate in Isaarn is too uneducated, and easily bought by Pueah Thai, the true problem is here that with that attitude displayed by those Democrat candidates will never persuade these people to vote for them. They are educated enough to see who looks down upon them.

While i do not dispute that the government has to be criticized on many points, which is also the job of the opposition, and i also do not dispute the right of the Democrat Party to have their own TV channel (the Red Shirts have their as well), or to erect their stages - i do though have a problem with the hate speech on these stages. Yes initially Abhisit was more polite than many of the other speakers (who weren't), but he turned increasingly radical, especially also on the monarchy issue, presenting a very different picture of himself than he does when he speaks to us, the foreign media.

I also have a problem with the constant lies over 2010 - Suthep and many others still propagate the myth of the "MIB" having killed protesters, and soldiers not having killed any protesters.

I do have a huge problem when on these stages Khao Sod and Mathichon are heavily attacked, making these stages very dangerous areas for journalists of those two news organizations to cover. Generally when they come to work there, they have to remove any press cards issued by Matichon or Khao Sod, and anything that could identify them of working for them.

For me it is slightly less dangerous, but there were two incidents where i was physically attacked and intimidated (didn't work though), which i cleared though with the leaders, and since then no attempts against me have been made. For Thai journalists of media not deemed friendly it is far more dangerous.

A show of force? On the march to parliament the DP had 2000 people (The Nation reported "thousands", and BP was rather generous with their 3000 estimate). This was not a show of force, it was an embarrassment. The Lumpini Park people had so few, that they didn't even bother to come out of the park. They had to send their supporters home because there was no way that they could have pushed the police away, even if they would have tried.

None of the previous Blue Sky rallies had more than a bit more than 1000 attendants, most only a few hundred.

This should show DP supporters that this is clearly the wrong tactic to reach a support base. Being vulgar, pounding on the monarchy issue and trying to get people on the streets "as in Egypt" (Satit Wongnongtoey) does not seem to work. What the DP should do nationwide is what they did in Don Mueang - get close to the voters by walking the streets instead of accusing potential voters of being "uneducated".

If you would have observed the 2011 election campaign, and looked how both sides campaigned, there would be a whole lot more to be said regarding who ran a professional campaign, and why the Democrat Party did not. It had nothing to do with money though, but with attitude and coordination.

Even the Nation recently ran an editorial about the DP's negative tactics. Fuller's article is spot on. But no - these articles are not seen as justified and constructive criticism as any criticism seems to simply drop off.

That is why Alongkorn made his comments and suggestions regarding reforming the DP. And unfortunately he was sidelined.

What you DP supporters don't seem to see is - that i would like nothing better than the DP turning into a viable alternative, as only one party that can win in elections is not healthy for any democratic system. But before that the DP has to reform itself, and it has to come to terms with the fact that it has mishandled the 2010 protests badly, and has to come clean at some point. And it has to make changes in the leadership.

[nicknostitz]

Sorry can't agree. IMHO highly unethical would be more appropriate words.

Whilst it's true that they win votes I can never agree that their tactics are clever or sophisticated.

Manipulation of very large targeted voter blocks (mostly with large numbers of unaware people) with populist stuff (some of it offered by the paymasters mob never delivered) which wastes billions of Baht contributed to some extent by the middle classes who mostly don't get benefits of the populist policies is in reality not all that clever, it's a pretty obvios model.

The difference is that some folks have no ethics nor morals and go right ahead.

Plus, the populist stuff (PT) has no content whatever in terms of long-term development policy, nor policy to get many more Thais into a situation whereby they lift their situation through their own productivity is non existent.

Other folks (parties) have more morals and dismiss this approach as unethical and look for other (more ethical) approaches.

Abhisit has several times tried to talk about more sophisticated stuff in terms of long-term policies / policies to take many more Thais into a better quality of life. In reality many folks just didn't know / understand what he was talking about.

Our next door neighbors illustrate part of this. Both neighbors, husband and wife, are doctors of medicine, they say that long-term policy is not appropriate to even talk about, because voters should focus on whichever party promises to control pork and egg prices.

Excuse me, but i have directly observed the 2011 election campaigns of both parties (and briefly Bhum Jai Thai as well). I worked for three of the most important German language publications during that time. PT had straight and easy access to interview Yingluck, announced widely where they were campaigning, and how journalists could come along. One day, for example, Yingluck went through 3 provinces in Isaarn, and press could accompany her, even cars for the press were supplied. It was impressive - she spoke on more than 12 stages that day. One van was the computer van, in which people only read what media and social media reported, they summarized this, and while driving sent this over to Yingluck's assistant, who then primed her on it, so that Yingluck could adjust her speech on the next stage. In between journalists got their ten minutes for exclusives with her.

This is a modern election machine.

In addition to that Thaksin opened his house in Dubai to media, and suddenly we got long interview time with Thaksin, including lots of time for photos.

DP, well...

I met Abhisit at the airport when i just came back from Isaarn. I asked him for exclusives for the publications i worked for, he said no problem, referred me to Panitan to scedule it. When i called Panitan, he did not do Abhisit's schedule anymore, and referred me to Korbsak. I called Korbsak, and he was obstructive, said that i should write a letter to them asking for interview time, refused to acknowledge that Abhisit said OK already, knowing most likely of the importance of media relations. Media doesn't work that way - we work with tight deadlines.

I called the DP spokesman, who was nice and apologized for Korbsak's behavior, could though not over Korbsak's head offer us exclusives. Tough luck - two of the publications i worked for will only do exclusives, and they brought wide coverage on PT views, from both Thaksin and Yingluck, and nothing of the DP.

Finding out about the campaign schedule of the DP was almost impossible. In the end i found their schedule out from police, as the DP HQ could not get me reliable information where and when Abhisit will campaign.

The saddest part was when Korbsak at their Central World stage accused the foreign media of being in the pocket of Thaksin and not paying attention to Abhisit.

See the difference?

Edited August 27, 2013 by nicknostitz

[ThaiOats]

The Democrats changed their mode of operation after they have lost the previous election. They started taking to the streets because no news channel would disseminate their concerns or point of views. They need an avenue to reach out to the public, hence their "Stage for Truth" gatherings across the country excluding the provinces they were harassed and attacked by Red Shirts. Without the Blue Sky channel or these stages, the public would still be in the dark, including the red shirts. For example, the tiny problem with a 'misprint' in budget allocation for the minivans. If the opposition wasnt there to do their job,,it would have sailed through and tax payers get the shaft.

As much as the likes of nicknostitz and other pro-PTP, who like to bring up the Democrats continuous defeat at the elections and harp on the ultra-royalist tune, the fact is the Opposition is needed to do their job. If anyone has been paying attention to Abhisit's speeches, he started off being polite and didn't resort to ad-hominem tactics. He would expose the malfeasance of the government policies such as the rice pledging, first car scheme and the urgent loan bills. He would talk about Thaksin's current and previous corruptions and how the public should call for his arrest. Yet, when the truth starts spreading and the PTP government starts putting pressure on him with bogus charges of premeditated murder, he still kept his cool.

That started to change when the PTP brought the amnesty bill back on the agenda. Coupled with the outrageous 2.2 trillion ad hoc loan bill and constitutional amendment, they needed to thrown the gloves down. The public who support the Dems do want to come out in force but they need to know that the DP would go all the way with them. This was evident when they marched with the DP to parliament and was disappointed when they were told to go home. But I think the DEMs made the right move as not to instigate violence and showed that they would rather utilize the non violent pressuring tactics, unlike another group.

Further, if you've seen his speeches, people cheered when he recently started mocking Yingluck and othet ---wits in the government. Rightly so too. You can imagine how much of a mockery it is for anyone thats intelligent enough to know that a PM shouldnt avoid parliamentary debates. He talked about how Yingluck was seen in parliament and 5 minutes before the meeting,, leaves the compound. He talked about how Nattawut makes up BS for the rising price of eggs. In summary, he attacks the stupidity of the government and their ineptitude.

But of course, people are going talk about 'democratically elected government' because that's all there is to a democracy. Right?

You also have to add that several of the Blue Sky stages were purposely held in Red Shirt domains, trying to provoke Red Shirts into disturbing the Blue Sky rallies. The most blatant was as Laksi, where the Red Shirts had a permanent stage, and the Democrat Party erected their stage in a school barely 200 meters away. Didn't work though, as the Red Shirts remained at their stage.

As some of you DP supporters don't want to understand - being critical of the Democrat Party does not mean that one is automatically a Pueah Thai supporter. I am a supporter of a multi-party system and would love to see the Democrat Party transform itself into a viable alternative in elections. It is not my position to support either one of the two parties. While many Democrat Party MP's and supporters whine that the electorate in Isaarn is too uneducated, and easily bought by Pueah Thai, the true problem is here that with that attitude displayed by those Democrat candidates will never persuade these people to vote for them. They are educated enough to see who looks down upon them.

While i do not dispute that the government has to be criticized on many points, which is also the job of the opposition, and i also do not dispute the right of the Democrat Party to have their own TV channel (the Red Shirts have their as well), or to erect their stages - i do though have a problem with the hate speech on these stages. Yes initially Abhisit was more polite than many of the other speakers (who weren't), but he turned increasingly radical, especially also on the monarchy issue, presenting a very different picture of himself than he does when he speaks to us, the foreign media.

I also have a problem with the constant lies over 2010 - Suthep and many others still propagate the myth of the "MIB" having killed protesters, and soldiers not having killed any protesters.

I do have a huge problem when on these stages Khao Sod and Mathichon are heavily attacked, making these stages very dangerous areas for journalists of those two news organizations to cover. Generally when they come to work there, they have to remove any press cards issued by Matichon or Khao Sod, and anything that could identify them of working for them.

For me it is slightly less dangerous, but there were two incidents where i was physically attacked and intimidated (didn't work though), which i cleared though with the leaders, and since then no attempts against me have been made. For Thai journalists of media not deemed friendly it is far more dangerous.

A show of force? On the march to parliament the DP had 2000 people (The Nation reported "thousands", and BP was rather generous with their 3000 estimate). This was not a show of force, it was an embarrassment. The Lumpini Park people had so few, that they didn't even bother to come out of the park. They had to send their supporters home because there was no way that they could have pushed the police away, even if they would have tried.

None of the previous Blue Sky rallies had more than a bit more than 1000 attendants, most only a few hundred.

This should show DP supporters that this is clearly the wrong tactic to reach a support base. Being vulgar, pounding on the monarchy issue and trying to get people on the streets "as in Egypt" (Satit Wongnongtoey) does not seem to work. What the DP should do nationwide is what they did in Don Mueang - get close to the voters by walking the streets instead of accusing potential voters of being "uneducated".

If you would have observed the 2011 election campaign, and looked how both sides campaigned, there would be a whole lot more to be said regarding who ran a professional campaign, and why the Democrat Party did not. It had nothing to do with money though, but with attitude and coordination.

Even the Nation recently ran an editorial about the DP's negative tactics. Fuller's article is spot on. But no - these articles are not seen as justified and constructive criticism as any criticism seems to simply drop off.

That is why Alongkorn made his comments and suggestions regarding reforming the DP. And unfortunately he was sidelined.

What you DP supporters don't seem to see is - that i would like nothing better than the DP turning into a viable alternative, as only one party that can win in elections is not healthy for any democratic system. But before that the DP has to reform itself, and it has to come to terms with the fact that it has mishandled the 2010 protests badly, and has to come clean at some point. And it has to make changes in the leadership.

I'll make it clear that, perhaps like you, I dont want Thailand to be a one party state and agree that the opposition does need a reform. However, that doesn't legitimize how the maladministration is operating. The failure to reform the opposition shouldn't give the government free reign and ability to plunder the state coffers. If anything, as Abhisit has been calling, the PTP should be working for the country starting with it's own reform by appointing appropriate candidates and step out of Thaksin's shadows. But clearly there hasnt been a speck of sincerity to the country shown by Yingluck and her cohorts.

The Democrats debate with intelligence and data gathering, which is why they believe they can expose the government in Parliament. The PTP knows this which is why they silence the opposition time and time again. Compared to the Red Shirt MPs, they did nothing that came close to the effort put forth by the Democrats in informing the public of government issues. Instead, they (Red Shirts leaders now MPs) took to the streets and bullied their way into position of power. When was the last time you heard Jatuporn came out with statistics and fact finding against the Democrats. No, he's not going appeal to the logos but the pathos of his audiences. Clearly, the Democrat MPs have better work ethics.

Back then, people talked about the Democrats bedding with the military and how evil it was to be their puppet. Now look at affair the military is having the PTP and previois critics stay silent. There will be no coup because of this arrangement but yet Red shirts and PTP keep using it to keep the flames burning. If there is any coup to be done, it would most likely be to get rid of the opposition. Giles Ungpakorn wrote a decent blog about this.

I've already mention the ineptitude of the PM and her continuous dodging of state issues. If you want to support Yingluck and how well she's doing, go ahead and entertain us by defending her absence from parliament and her 5th cabinet reshuffle. Of course, you'll mention her popularity but that is irrelevant unless you want to argue that it is. Popularity doesn't make her a good PM, it just has to do with how the press portrays her, especially in Matichon and Khaosod. Which brings me to my next point.

When was the last you see Matichon or Khaosod be critical of the PM? They only publish and spin good things about her and her brother. For example, when the country singer Sayan Sanya was hospitalized, they made sure they portray Thaskin as a nice guy. The rice scheme and other detrimental news gets the blind eye. As you were talking about how these two news sources were being treated unfairly, do you think they would give a fair account of the Democrat rallies, especially if something happens with the red shirts?

To conclude, PTP needs to start working for the whole nation instead of their personal interest if it wants to convince people that they are currently Thailand's best government. That of course ideal and far from being pragmatic. By the way Abhisit NEVER called people uneducated. He said people who 'did not know' are gettin manipulated.

[Thai at Heart]

All of the major embassies have their political analysis.

What do you reckon they were saying after the dems/army got newin to switch?

The dems will be in for a few years and ptp will win the election. So why hurry to deal with a bunch you know will inevitably only be in for a year or two?

Quite amazingly the politicos of the embassies were quite split in their views, even within some embassies.

The embassy of one western European country, for example, has been so pro-Democrat, its ambassador even on many occasions publicly voicing his support for the DP and his dislike for PT, that when it was foreseeable that the PT was going to win the elections, the whole team had to be exchanged as the old team could not have worked with the new PT government.

One of the reasons was that pre-2010 the DP party has the best possible public diplomacy network, and TRT/PPP/PT was quite lacking. Many high powered western businessmen in Thailand are deeply allied to DP networks (often through marriage into the right families), and they are often the first address for embassy politicos to go to due to their longstanding and close relationships with the embassies and their wide ranging contacts in the establishment here.

Many politicos believed that the DP will be in for the foreseeable future, as they trusted the propaganda of Red Shirts and Thaksin supporters having only been paid, that the military will not allow a return of a pro-Thaksin government, etc - the usual.

Things have changed though - the DP's network began collapsing after 2010, while at the same time Thaksin, the PT and the Red Shirts made their homework in terms of public diplomacy. The killing of protesters by the military is quite a convincing argument, especially when it has been so well documented - and even witnessed by some embassy staff. The election results of 2011 made things quite clear. Every foreign country *will* support the elected government of Thailand, whoever that may be. Right now it is PT, and if one day the DP transforms itself, it may then be the DP in the future - as long as they come to power via elections.

You are the only person to have posted what many foreigners with actual contacts with Thai politicos and position have long known. It must come as quite a shock for a great many of TVF's self appointed experts. I have always found it amusing to see some of the PTP bashers pronounce on how the government had no international support. There were so many clues as to how the international community saw the Democrats.

Everyone knew that the dems were a lame duck government. No one paid them too much attention. Both parties are equally odious in my view.

Why abhisit doesn't leave and make another party I have no idea. What do they stand for?

Anyone?

[nicknostitz]

I'll make it clear that, perhaps like you, I dont want Thailand to be a one party state and agree that the opposition does need a reform. However, that doesn't legitimize how the maladministration is operating. The failure to reform the opposition shouldn't give the government free reign and ability to plunder the state coffers. If anything, as Abhisit has been calling, the PTP should be working for the country starting with it's own reform by appointing appropriate candidates and step out of Thaksin's shadows. But clearly there hasnt been a speck of sincerity to the country shown by Yingluck and her cohorts.

The Democrats debate with intelligence and data gathering, which is why they believe they can expose the government in Parliament. The PTP knows this which is why they silence the opposition time and time again. Compared to the Red Shirt MPs, they did nothing that came close to the effort put forth by the Democrats in informing the public of government issues. Instead, they (Red Shirts leaders now MPs) took to the streets and bullied their way into position of power. When was the last time you heard Jatuporn came out with statistics and fact finding against the Democrats. No, he's not going appeal to the logos but the pathos of his audiences. Clearly, the Democrat MPs have better work ethics.

Back then, people talked about the Democrats bedding with the military and how evil it was to be their puppet. Now look at affair the military is having the PTP and previois critics stay silent. There will be no coup because of this arrangement but yet Red shirts and PTP keep using it to keep the flames burning. If there is any coup to be done, it would most likely be to get rid of the opposition. Giles Ungpakorn wrote a decent blog about this.

I've already mention the ineptitude of the PM and her continuous dodging of state issues. If you want to support Yingluck and how well she's doing, go ahead and entertain us by defending her absence from parliament and her 5th cabinet reshuffle. Of course, you'll mention her popularity but that is irrelevant unless you want to argue that it is. Popularity doesn't make her a good PM, it just has to do with how the press portrays her, especially in Matichon and Khaosod. Which brings me to my next point.

When was the last you see Matichon or Khaosod be critical of the PM? They only publish and spin good things about her and her brother. For example, when the country singer Sayan Sanya was hospitalized, they made sure they portray Thaskin as a nice guy. The rice scheme and other detrimental news gets the blind eye. As you were talking about how these two news sources were being treated unfairly, do you think they would give a fair account of the Democrat rallies, especially if something happens with the red shirts?

To conclude, PTP needs to start working for the whole nation instead of their personal interest if it wants to convince people that they are currently Thailand's best government. That of course ideal and far from being pragmatic. By the way Abhisit NEVER called people uneducated. He said people who 'did not know' are gettin manipulated.

You calling the Pueah Thai to reform first is quite typical. Why should the Puaeh Thai reform itself when their approach has worked in every single general election since 2001?

The DP has not been able to win a general election since 1992 (with 21% of the vote) - it is the DP what seems to be doing something wrong there as it just cannot manage to attract voters. It really doesn't matter what you say here how bad PT is, or how bad Thaksin is. You do not need to convince me - you need to convince the common Thai voter.

The common Thai voter though will not be convinced by being called Kwai, or being accused of being manipulated, or by bullets (as in 2009 and 2010), but finding a way how to build trust. After 2010 this will be very difficult for the DP, especially when the head of the party is seen by the voter base of the PT as the person responsible for the dead. And that voter base is quite obviously larger than the DP's voter base. Logically, certain decisions over leadership changes should be made. But they aren't.

The strategy of the DP is clearly not working, and hasn't since before Thaksin entered politics. Don't blame the DP's inability to communicate with voters on Thaksin, or the present government, or the voters themselves - it already could not do that long before. It is not the voters job to learn to understand a political party - it is the job of the political party to find the right way of communication.

The DP has a structural problem, and has had that for a long time.

And as to corruption - do you remember why the Chuan 1 government fell - because of the Sor Por Kor 401 corruption scandal. Do you remember who was mostly responsible for this? Suthep.

Maybe the DP should start cleaning its own house if it wants to become a viable alternative at the ballot box. It's been long overdue.

[yoshiwara]

You are right. He only praised the TRCT for their work in trying to achieve reconciliation. But anyhow, PT prefers the Bring-Thaksin-Back forum to achieve uh... oh yeah right RECONCILITION.

You ignore the complex and very convoluted relationship between the different factions in PT - while there are some that supposedly try to bring Thaksin back (Chalerm - who also has his own private agendas), there are others who prefer that Thaksin would continue to stay away, for the time being.

But that is hardly the topic of this thread.

Indeed it is because without the primary aim of the reds and their cheerleaders (and that includes you) to bring back Thaksin we would be unlikely to be facing the topic of this thread, not withstanding the meally-mouthed obfuscations mind you.

[MrSlatersParrot]

The 'Blue shirts' et al.

So far no information that can be independently verified. Only the propaganda posted on Nick Nostitz's web site which had a few photos and a fully biased account of blue on red. That BS is used to justify the red shirts attack on the Asean venue.

Yes, I'm only starting to learn about this incident which is so 'elementary' that - if it really happened - is actually so insignificant in comparison to the red shirt group various militias' violence including killing a few defenceless people. There has been no media information about any blue shirt activities since.

I'm now well past giving Mr Nostitz the benefit of the doubt. The posting about vocational students was deliberately inaccurate as usual because it is so (historically) dangerous to recruit students who might wake up to the potential dictatorship which awaits them in future.

Only getting to learn about it then.

[MrSlatersParrot]

No the blue shirts attacked the redshirts on the road. Pictures emerged of Newin using a walkie talkie at the scene. Doing his bit for the royalists.

Hay Mrs slaters Parrot, that would be the same day the reds smashed Abhisit's car wouldn't it?

He is lucky to be alive, if he had been in the car that day there is a very good chance he would not.

And that was after the reds broke into the ASIAN meeting that that some of the delegates scrambling to get into helicopters to escape wasn't it?

But of course breaking down doors isn't violence is it, not when the reds do it anyway.

That day was a great show of just how much Thaksin cares about the county and its reputation overseas.

And Nick;

So now we move forward to last weekend when the poor reds were so viciously attacked by some students.

What were the reds doing there anyway?

I know if you don't, they were there doing their best to disrupt someone else's meeting. As they have done many times before.

In other words they were trying to cause trouble, so the got trouble, diddums.

And 2 old ladys got hurt you say? So the red leaders are still hiding behind old ladys, its a wonder they didn't have children there in front of them as well, as they have in the past.

Your attempt to go back to the seventies and use a fictional film to label vocational students as violent just doesn't wash.

Could it be that some of the violent students from back then are now red shirt leaders or even PT MP's? That would fit very well.

Interesting you mention the reds and Abhisit's car.

My understanding was it was proven he was not in the car but continued to pretend that he was to garner support until it was proven otherwise.

Sleeps as he lies. Not straight.

[MrSlatersParrot]

^ His difficulty in being re-nominated can be for his lack of fresh appeal as much as his his 'moderate' views, can it not? Its not as f he did such a great job as governor and people were enthused by him running again.You are certainly right about Korn having greater ambitions, but in my memory his name was mentioned as a possible candidate, and I don't remember him turning it down, but Suthep (among others) insisting that Sukhumband be renominated.

If Abhisit is such an 'hard core ultra royalist conservative why is he hated by the PAD? Why did the PAD effectively work against the democrats in the last election if the democrats are as you say?

I think this ultra-royalist label is dished out too readily, anyone who says anything other than "amart they bad, oh so bad" is labelled an 'ultra-royalist'. Its almost cute the way its used.

In another era or country it would something akin to calling your political opponent a 'nigger-lover' or 'communist'.

I don't particularly like the democrats the way they are now, but I think their internal politics goes well beyond what you described. However you would know more than me, so I continue to read what you say with interest.

There is so much hate and negativity on both sides.

I don't think that Abhisit personally is an ultra-royalist. I think he is liberal-conservative. But he is deeply entrenched in the ultra-royalist factions, and at least on the stage, he increasingly uses their lingo. This becomes immediately obvious if you attend the Blue Sky rallies (more than 60 stages since their start in June 2012), and listen to the speeches.

Of course not all MP's in that group are ultra-royalists. I have spoken with many younger MP's - foreign educated, polished, intelligent, but with very little exposure to the life and culture of the common Thai citizen. But - they go along with this course, which i find very destructive, both to the DP itself, and the stability of the country.

The PAD - DP alliance is a on-off situation. In 2008 Abhisit personally, with Khunying Kalaya and others, walked from parliament to Government House, where they have helped stalling an ongoing dispersal action by the police, giving the PAD time to regroup, charge the police, and send the officers off the streets (and before anyone accuses me again of spreading Red propaganda - i was there and photographed it).

In 2011 the PAD has protested against Abihist. But already soon after the elections the different yellow shirt factions and subgroups have already organized events together (Siam Sammakhi, Pitak Siam, the rallies at parliament in May/June 2012 - where i photographed Suthep and other DP luminaries walking through the PAD, and being applauded by PAD protesters).

If you look at the DP/Blue Sky stages, and the different Yellow subgroup stages, you may notice for example that on many levels not just the same people attend, but that also many of the guards are shared. The relationship between the PAD, the different yellow subgroups and the DP is complex, and based more on a common hatred than any shared future vision over Thailand. Sort of - the enemy of my enemy is my friend. That is why the easiest common denominators are expressing what they hate, and the rallying call of protecting the monarchy.

This whole thing is a fight for survival for the radical parts of the DP. They have made a major strategical mistake with the hardline approach in 2010. While the Red Shirts may have lost the battle on the ground, they have won on all other battle fields, both inside Thailand, and internationally. The international perception over the DP has massively changed after 2010, and especially after the PT won the 2011 elections. Both Pueah Thai and Red Shirts have now beaten the DP at their own game - the creation of a positive international perception, while the DP is increasingly struggling in that aspect, especially by the constant defense against the indefinable - the refusal to acknowledge that soldiers killed unarmed protesters.

What we see right now, as expressed in this article, is a sign of utter desperation of the present powers of the DP.

There are many in the DP who did not agree with the hardline approach in 2010, and who would prefer to start over without Abhisit, and especially without Suthep.

As to Sukhumband and the position as Bangkok governor - nobody can do a stellar job in that position, as it is a job with almost no real power over anything. While he may not be "sexy" on the stage, no abilities to rouse the masses, i personally appreciate his intelligence, his fine sense of humor, his very moderate views - all points that do not suit the present course of the DP.

I saw him (Sukhumband) in Silom after the redshirts and again at Paragon, campaigning for re-election where I met him.

My brother went to school at Winchester the same time as Korn but doesn't remember him. Mind you most of my brother's friend's dad's were stockbrokers.

[Thait Spot]

 

I'll make it clear that, perhaps like you, I dont want Thailand to be a one party state and agree that the opposition does need a reform. However, that doesn't legitimize how the maladministration is operating. The failure to reform the opposition shouldn't give the government free reign and ability to plunder the state coffers. If anything, as Abhisit has been calling, the PTP should be working for the country starting with it's own reform by appointing appropriate candidates and step out of Thaksin's shadows. But clearly there hasnt been a speck of sincerity to the country shown by Yingluck and her cohorts.

The Democrats debate with intelligence and data gathering, which is why they believe they can expose the government in Parliament. The PTP knows this which is why they silence the opposition time and time again. Compared to the Red Shirt MPs, they did nothing that came close to the effort put forth by the Democrats in informing the public of government issues. Instead, they (Red Shirts leaders now MPs) took to the streets and bullied their way into position of power. When was the last time you heard Jatuporn came out with statistics and fact finding against the Democrats. No, he's not going appeal to the logos but the pathos of his audiences. Clearly, the Democrat MPs have better work ethics.

Back then, people talked about the Democrats bedding with the military and how evil it was to be their puppet. Now look at affair the military is having the PTP and previois critics stay silent. There will be no coup because of this arrangement but yet Red shirts and PTP keep using it to keep the flames burning. If there is any coup to be done, it would most likely be to get rid of the opposition. Giles Ungpakorn wrote a decent blog about this.

I've already mention the ineptitude of the PM and her continuous dodging of state issues. If you want to support Yingluck and how well she's doing, go ahead and entertain us by defending her absence from parliament and her 5th cabinet reshuffle. Of course, you'll mention her popularity but that is irrelevant unless you want to argue that it is. Popularity doesn't make her a good PM, it just has to do with how the press portrays her, especially in Matichon and Khaosod. Which brings me to my next point.

When was the last you see Matichon or Khaosod be critical of the PM? They only publish and spin good things about her and her brother. For example, when the country singer Sayan Sanya was hospitalized, they made sure they portray Thaskin as a nice guy. The rice scheme and other detrimental news gets the blind eye. As you were talking about how these two news sources were being treated unfairly, do you think they would give a fair account of the Democrat rallies, especially if something happens with the red shirts?

To conclude, PTP needs to start working for the whole nation instead of their personal interest if it wants to convince people that they are currently Thailand's best government. That of course ideal and far from being pragmatic. By the way Abhisit NEVER called people uneducated. He said people who 'did not know' are gettin manipulated.

 

 

 

You calling the Pueah Thai to reform first is quite typical. Why should the Puaeh Thai reform itself when their approach has worked in every single general election since 2001?

The DP has not been able to win a general election since 1992 (with 21% of the vote) - it is the DP what seems to be doing something wrong there as it just cannot manage to attract voters. It really doesn't matter what you say here how bad PT is, or how bad Thaksin is. You do not need to convince me - you need to convince the common Thai voter.

 

The common Thai voter though will not be convinced by being called Kwai, or being accused of being manipulated, or by bullets (as in 2009 and 2010), but finding a way how to build trust. After 2010 this will be very difficult for the DP, especially when the head of the party is seen by the voter base of the PT as the person responsible for the dead. And that voter base is quite obviously larger than the DP's voter base. Logically, certain decisions over leadership changes should be made. But they aren't.

 

The strategy of the DP is clearly not working, and hasn't since before Thaksin entered politics. Don't blame the DP's inability to communicate with voters on Thaksin, or the present government, or the voters themselves - it already could not do that long before. It is not the voters job to learn to understand a political party - it is the job of the political party to find the right way of communication.

The DP has a structural problem, and has had that for a long time.

 

And as to corruption - do you remember why the Chuan 1 government fell - because of the Sor Por Kor 401 corruption scandal. Do you remember who was mostly responsible for this? Suthep.

 

Maybe the DP should start cleaning its own house if it wants to become a viable alternative at the ballot box. It's been long overdue.

Nick "I'm not red" Nostitz.

How many votes did the Dems get st the last election?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Thait Spot]

 

No the blue shirts attacked the redshirts on the road. Pictures emerged of Newin using a walkie talkie at the scene. Doing his bit for the royalists.

 

 

Hay Mrs slaters Parrot, that would be the same day the reds smashed Abhisit's car wouldn't it?

 

He is lucky to be alive, if he had been in the car that day there is a very good chance he would not.

 

And that was after the reds broke into the ASIAN meeting that that some of the delegates scrambling to get into helicopters to escape wasn't it?

 

But of course breaking down doors isn't violence is it, not when the reds do it anyway.

 

That day was a great show of just how much Thaksin cares about the county and its reputation overseas.

 

And Nick;

 

So now we move forward to last weekend when the poor reds were so viciously attacked by some students.

 

What were the reds doing there anyway?

 

I know if you don't, they were there doing their best to disrupt someone else's meeting. As they have done many times before.

 

In other words they were trying to cause trouble, so the got trouble, diddums.

 

And 2 old ladys got hurt you say? So the red leaders are still hiding behind old ladys, its a wonder they didn't have children there in front of them as well, as they have in the past.

 

Your attempt to go back to the seventies and use a fictional film to label vocational students as violent just doesn't wash.

 

Could it be that some of the violent students from back then are now red shirt leaders or even PT MP's? That would fit very well.

 

Interesting you mention the reds and Abhisit's car.

My understanding was it was proven he was not in the car but continued to pretend that he was to garner support until it was proven otherwise.

Sleeps as he lies. Not straight.

How do you know how Abhisit sleeps?

Your "understanding" does not make it a fact and doesn't detract from the hideous motive of your hideous idols.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Robby nz]

The posting about vocational students was deliberately inaccurate as usual because it is so (historically) dangerous to recruit students who might wake up to the potential dictatorship which awaits them in future.

This of course would include students of the red schools.

If there is any farther proof needed that Thaksin is now in firm control of not only PT but now the military then a little thing from a different source will confirm:

The source said a group of military officials had travelled to London to lobby Thaksin in support of their being promoted in the reshuffle.

That's right the military now have to go and beg Thaksin for their promotion.

So the police, the military and Government all in control of the one man.

Once the constitutional amendments are past then most of the other checks and balances can also be removed.

The amnesty bill is passed and tweeked a little and he returns.

Hence the real need, for the countries sake "to bring down the 'Thaksin regime'"

Or is it too late has he got too firm a hold?

I hope not as I want to continue making this country my home and have no wish to live under a Thaksin dictatorship.

[MrSlatersParrot]

No the blue shirts attacked the redshirts on the road. Pictures emerged of Newin using a walkie talkie at the scene. Doing his bit for the royalists.

Hay Mrs slaters Parrot, that would be the same day the reds smashed Abhisit's car wouldn't it?

He is lucky to be alive, if he had been in the car that day there is a very good chance he would not.

And that was after the reds broke into the ASIAN meeting that that some of the delegates scrambling to get into helicopters to escape wasn't it?

But of course breaking down doors isn't violence is it, not when the reds do it anyway.

That day was a great show of just how much Thaksin cares about the county and its reputation overseas.

And Nick;

So now we move forward to last weekend when the poor reds were so viciously attacked by some students.

What were the reds doing there anyway?

I know if you don't, they were there doing their best to disrupt someone else's meeting. As they have done many times before.

In other words they were trying to cause trouble, so the got trouble, diddums.

And 2 old ladys got hurt you say? So the red leaders are still hiding behind old ladys, its a wonder they didn't have children there in front of them as well, as they have in the past.

Your attempt to go back to the seventies and use a fictional film to label vocational students as violent just doesn't wash.

Could it be that some of the violent students from back then are now red shirt leaders or even PT MP's? That would fit very well.

Interesting you mention the reds and Abhisit's car.

My understanding was it was proven he was not in the car but continued to pretend that he was to garner support until it was proven otherwise.

Sleeps as he lies. Not straight.

How do you know how Abhisit sleeps?

Your "understanding" does not make it a fact and doesn't detract from the hideous motive of your hideous idols.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Motive?

There wasn't one just a government car hoved into view and they, some of the protestors, took umbrage.

But Abhisit wasn't in it but claimed he was.

He tried to make political capital. Tried to claim the moral high ground, to claim he was a victim whilst just being a public servant trying to conduct his duty.

He wasn't in the car. he extemporised.

They say he can't sleep straight in bed.

Get over it.