NY Times corrects opinion article about Thailand

[bunuel]

Am somewhat surprised that many of the posters in this thread have not taken issue with the absurd premise of the NY Times op-ed piece in question. I have been a faithful subscriber to the paper for years, and, with first-hand knowledge of both LOS and Egypt, I found the comparison between the two countries preposterous - a classic case of apples and oranges. I wrote a letter to the Times with my objections, and it was published. If any of the posters here have been to Egypt, they will understand my feelings. I choose to live in LOS, and have done so happily for years. One week in Egypt, on the other hand, was enough for a lifetime!

[Globeman]

This was the most disgusting piece of journalism I have read for a long time. To me it smacked of the writer having been influenced (with money???) to produce an article in favour of the Thaksin regime. Lies from start to finish. TheThaksin PR machine is hard at work,

Why is it the most disgusting piece of journalism you have read in a long time? because he did not agree with your opinions? Many incidents, outcomes, things that are happening previously in Thailand or are happening are not facts but conjecture, opinion etc. Just because this writer holds a different opinion to you does not make it wrong, as is your opinion is yours and cannot really be argued as fact or otherwise.

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

He has more than a few lies of omission... His description of the Red Shirt protests clearly conveys the impression that a large group of peaceful democratically minded protesters were mercilessly crushed under the army's boot heel. There is no mention of incitement to violence by the Red Shirt leaders, no mention of the Black Shirts, none of the protesters' use of weapons. Likewise, there is no mention that these people who "just want the democracy" were making ridiculous demands that the government stand down, when it was legally formed under parliamentary rules... And of course, there was no mention of the city being in flames at the hands of Red Shirt thugs - after their leaders openly instructed them to turn Bangkok into a "sea of fire". This isn't about differing opinions - this writer was definitely attempting to manipulate the opinions of readers who know little about what actually happened.

[Roadman]

This was the most disgusting piece of journalism I have read for a long time. To me it smacked of the writer having been influenced (with money???) to produce an article in favour of the Thaksin regime. Lies from start to finish. TheThaksin PR machine is hard at work,

Why is it the most disgusting piece of journalism you have read in a long time? because he did not agree with your opinions? Many incidents, outcomes, things that are happening previously in Thailand or are happening are not facts but conjecture, opinion etc. Just because this writer holds a different opinion to you does not make it wrong, as is your opinion is yours and cannot really be argued as fact or otherwise.

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

He has more than a few lies of omission... His description of the Red Shirt protests clearly conveys the impression that a large group of peaceful democratically minded protesters were mercilessly crushed under the army's boot heel. There is no mention of incitement to violence by the Red Shirt leaders, no mention of the Black Shirts, none of the protesters' use of weapons. Likewise, there is no mention that these people who "just want the democracy" were making ridiculous demands that the government stand down, when it was legally formed under parliamentary rules... And of course, there was no mention of the city being in flames at the hands of Red Shirt thugs - after their leaders openly instructed them to turn Bangkok into a "sea of fire". This isn't about differing opinions - this writer was definitely attempting to manipulate the opinions of readers who know little about what actually happened.

Good summary...

[honzad]

The article in the NYT was obviously very odd - not up to their usual standards, which are pretty high and they are usually very quick to address mistakes and publish them.

What worries me though is the extreme vitriol poured out on these pages. I assume most of the posters are Farang living in Thailand because they choose to. (If you don't like it here there are a couple of hundred other countries around the world that you could try and move to - including your own.)

Why then do you all get so wound up about the current political tension in the country? Your views are irrelevant as you can't vote or be otherwise involved, and your rhetoric is offensive.

Every time I look at the comments on these pages all I see is racist slurs against the Thai people, abuse against their chosen political representatives, and a level of cynicism which is corrosive in it's bitterness.

I see the problems the Thai people have to face, but they are light compared to the sad misery of Farang living in Thailand but hating it.

[winstonc]

welcome to thai visa,im sure youl give us many a good laugh....you will probably find people care about there adopted country as much as thais .thats why they get angry,,unless ofcourse you know somewhere we johny foreigners can go and protest.under the safe arm of the all protecting boys in brown...to vent our feelings of injustice..look forward to your kind advice..regards winston-c

The article in the NYT was obviously very odd - not up to their usual standards, which are pretty high and they are usually very quick to address mistakes and publish them. What worries me though is the extreme vitriol poured out on these pages. I assume most of the posters are Farang living in Thailand because they choose to. (If you don't like it here there are a couple of hundred other countries around the world that you could try and move to - including your own.) Why then do you all get so wound up about the current political tension in the country? Your views are irrelevant as you can't vote or be otherwise involved, and your rhetoric is offensive. Every time I look at the comments on these pages all I see is racist slurs against the Thai people, abuse against their chosen political representatives, and a level of cynicism which is corrosive in it's bitterness. I see the problems the Thai people have to face, but they are light compared to the sad misery of Farang living in Thailand but hating it.

[Emdog]

I wish many of the posters would note that this was on the OPINION page... not the standard news reporting body of the paper. Sure you can disagree, point out what you consider errors and wrong conclusions, etc. What bothers me is that there is too much lack of civility amongst many of the posters, the ad hominem slams against other members ("Idiots" etc) and the newspaper ("low brow farmers"). FYI not a lot of farmers in NYC... this seems to be a growing trend, the Fox News style of ripping into the person rather than showing some thoughtful reasoning and debate. Even if the posters lack class, please try to study and emulate those who can disagree in a logical, civil manner.

[khunken]

The article in the NYT was obviously very odd - not up to their usual standards, which are pretty high and they are usually very quick to address mistakes and publish them. What worries me though is the extreme vitriol poured out on these pages. I assume most of the posters are Farang living in Thailand because they choose to. (If you don't like it here there are a couple of hundred other countries around the world that you could try and move to - including your own.) Why then do you all get so wound up about the current political tension in the country? Your views are irrelevant as you can't vote or be otherwise involved, and your rhetoric is offensive. Every time I look at the comments on these pages all I see is racist slurs against the Thai people, abuse against their chosen political representatives, and a level of cynicism which is corrosive in it's bitterness. I see the problems the Thai people have to face, but they are light compared to the sad misery of Farang living in Thailand but hating it.

Ah the infantile 'if you don't like it here, just leave' post which unfortunately crops up quite often, usually as a poor substitute for arguing a topic.

The opinions of Farangs on TV are as different & diverse as the opinions in any newspaper's letters section. Having an opinion about politics here does not mean one hates Thais or hates living in the country. False allusion.

I don't agree with some of the comments about Thais in general. But there is much that deserves criticism from the BIB, justice 'system', to the current and previous governments. Many of the criticisms are relevant to Farangs because the topics affect them - e.g. BIB bribery demands, bias against non-Thais by the BIB & some courts.

I think you need to be a lot more open to other people's viewpoints. Post your views but refrain from shooting the messenger.

[Pimay1]

The article in the NYT was obviously very odd - not up to their usual standards, which are pretty high and they are usually very quick to address mistakes and publish them. What worries me though is the extreme vitriol poured out on these pages. I assume most of the posters are Farang living in Thailand because they choose to. (If you don't like it here there are a couple of hundred other countries around the world that you could try and move to - including your own.) Why then do you all get so wound up about the current political tension in the country? Your views are irrelevant as you can't vote or be otherwise involved, and your rhetoric is offensive. Every time I look at the comments on these pages all I see is racist slurs against the Thai people, abuse against their chosen political representatives, and a level of cynicism which is corrosive in it's bitterness. I see the problems the Thai people have to face, but they are light compared to the sad misery of Farang living in Thailand but hating it.

Ah the infantile 'if you don't like it here, just leave' post which unfortunately crops up quite often, usually as a poor substitute for arguing a topic.

The opinions of Farangs on TV are as different & diverse as the opinions in any newspaper's letters section. Having an opinion about politics here does not mean one hates Thais or hates living in the country. False allusion.

I don't agree with some of the comments about Thais in general. But there is much that deserves criticism from the BIB, justice 'system', to the current and previous governments. Many of the criticisms are relevant to Farangs because the topics affect them - e.g. BIB bribery demands, bias against non-Thais by the BIB & some courts.

I think you need to be a lot more open to other people's viewpoints. Post your views but refrain from shooting the messenger.

Excellent advice.

[Baerboxer]

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

Irony ??? Not really.

"ianf" has as much right to consider the story disgusting journalism as I have to consider your comment as a load of bulldust. And if he wants to insult Hitler in his spare time, that's up to him. Most of us don't have a problem with that. Or are you pissed off because ianf's opinion does not reflect yours ?

Forum members have the right to say anything subject to forum rules and moderators' discretion.

However that is very distant from being the same as suggesting that one person's opinion is as good (or as informed, articulate, amusing etc) as another's.The reference to the NYT piece as "disgusting journalism" isn't forbidden but it instantly identifies the poster as someone of limited comprehension and insight.Such a person is unable to provide coolly analytical responses to views with which they disagree - hence the use of terms like "disgusting journalism" or "load of bullshit."

It wasn't a particularly great piece in the NYT and it contained some errors of fact but its conclusions were very reasonable and few fair minded intelligent people would dispute them.The problem for the usual suspects that it's virtually impossible for them to find reports in the international media that support their reactionary views.Even canny right wing regional figures like Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore makes many of the same points as the NYT piece.

I actually agree with most of your comments. The difference being, I think, is that I cannot see any factual evidence that PM/DM Yingluck actually runs the current government or makes any policy decisions. I cannot see any evidence of a reduction in corruption since this government took up office, rather the opposite if the parliamentary discussions on expenditure are to be believed. There is evidence that the government has acted illegally, questions of which remain unanswered for a disproportionate amount of time and there is little doubt of the main item on their agenda.

Based on this, I cannot see how any rational person, regardless of their political or religious persuasions, could support the notion that Egypt could learn anything from Thailand.

I'm not a supporter of any of the Thai political parties, or any of their leaders, and try to keep an open mind. If you believe Yingluck is the real PM, leader of the government and chief policy maker, and that she has implemented policies that have been beneficial to the country then please tell us on what you base that belief; and also what exactly you believe Egypt could learn from this. The floor is yours!

[LomSak27]

noticed there wasn't a link supplied by The Nation - or an address ot the article.

Good to see the news made the faithful happy

[hellodolly]

Good on the NY Times for correcting however it still doesn't get away from the fact that they allowed the article to be published in the first place.

Someone on the editorial team is needing a metaphorical slap. Articles like that have a way of taking on a life of their own.

Don't be a dope.The New York Times stands by the article after having made some corrections of fact.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/opinion/tepperman-can-egypt-learn-from-thailand.html?_r=0

What the slightly inane comments so far on this thread reflect is that the objectors don't so much have a problem with the incorrect facts but rather with the article's conclusions (which weren't really affected by the original errors).

Thank you for the article. It was an opinion obviously written by a PTPredshirt. They neglected to correct this statement.

"The trouble really began in 2006, when the military, in connivance with royalists and the courts, overthrew the populist prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra"

As I recall and the records will show he was not the Prime Minister at the time He was a trying to be dictator sitting in the Prime Ministers office.

The New York Times was about as accurate as the Nation.

It neglected to mention that there was no blood spilled or opposition to the army throwing the imposter out of the illegally held office.

It said the Army killed 90 people in 2010 It neglected to mention that they did not start the whole thing they were acting in defense of the Nation which was being attacked by a group funded by a known criminal Thaksin Shinawatra trying to create a real coup. In short the article was so far off the mark that I am surprised they even printed it. I have heard of journalism being not always honest but this takes the cake considering it comes from a supposed to be respected News Paper. Randolph Hearst is more than likely trying to claw his way out to get at the people who would allow the paper to sink that low.

It has Yingluck being the Prime Minister leading the nation out of despair having meetings with the opposition to discuss unification. Not a word about the soaring National debt or the rising family debts or the cost of inflation out racing the raise in income.

Not a word about Amnesty for the leader of the red shirts who started the staged the failed coup in 2010. Not a word about the sudden popularity of Hitler in the school system. One handled with no real change in the teaching of the Nazi horror show. Just a don't do it they were bad people then dropped the subject not a word said in the class room.

[DrDweeb]

This was the most disgusting piece of journalism I have read for a long time. To me it smacked of the writer having been influenced (with money???) to produce an article in favour of the Thaksin regime. Lies from start to finish. TheThaksin PR machine is hard at work,

The NYT asia desk (same journalist??) also wrote an article some time ago about government by Skype.

In the article they described Thaksin as self exiled from corruption charges, rather than the accurate "bailjumper fleeing from corruption conviction".

I complained via email with no response from NYT

[smutcakes]

Good on the NY Times for correcting however it still doesn't get away from the fact that they allowed the article to be published in the first place.

Someone on the editorial team is needing a metaphorical slap. Articles like that have a way of taking on a life of their own.

Don't be a dope.The New York Times stands by the article after having made some corrections of fact.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/opinion/tepperman-can-egypt-learn-from-thailand.html?_r=0

What the slightly inane comments so far on this thread reflect is that the objectors don't so much have a problem with the incorrect facts but rather with the article's conclusions (which weren't really affected by the original errors).

Thank you for the article. It was an opinion obviously written by a PTPredshirt. They neglected to correct this statement.

"The trouble really began in 2006, when the military, in connivance with royalists and the courts, overthrew the populist prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra"

As I recall and the records will show he was not the Prime Minister at the time He was a trying to be dictator sitting in the Prime Ministers office.

The New York Times was about as accurate as the Nation.

It neglected to mention that there was no blood spilled or opposition to the army throwing the imposter out of the illegally held office.

It said the Army killed 90 people in 2010 It neglected to mention that they did not start the whole thing they were acting in defense of the Nation which was being attacked by a group funded by a known criminal Thaksin Shinawatra trying to create a real coup. In short the article was so far off the mark that I am surprised they even printed it. I have heard of journalism being not always honest but this takes the cake considering it comes from a supposed to be respected News Paper. Randolph Hearst is more than likely trying to claw his way out to get at the people who would allow the paper to sink that low.

It has Yingluck being the Prime Minister leading the nation out of despair having meetings with the opposition to discuss unification. Not a word about the soaring National debt or the rising family debts or the cost of inflation out racing the raise in income.

Not a word about Amnesty for the leader of the red shirts who started the staged the failed coup in 2010. Not a word about the sudden popularity of Hitler in the school system. One handled with no real change in the teaching of the Nazi horror show. Just a don't do it they were bad people then dropped the subject not a word said in the class room.

And theirs another OPINION. Everyone has them and you can agree or disagree with them. Your opinion is not factual either- it is opinion. What makes your opinion more valid than anyone else's.

[Tatsujin]

The article in the NYT was obviously very odd - not up to their usual standards, which are pretty high and they are usually very quick to address mistakes and publish them. What worries me though is the extreme vitriol poured out on these pages. I assume most of the posters are Farang living in Thailand because they choose to. (If you don't like it here there are a couple of hundred other countries around the world that you could try and move to - including your own.) Why then do you all get so wound up about the current political tension in the country? Your views are irrelevant as you can't vote or be otherwise involved, and your rhetoric is offensive. Every time I look at the comments on these pages all I see is racist slurs against the Thai people, abuse against their chosen political representatives, and a level of cynicism which is corrosive in it's bitterness. I see the problems the Thai people have to face, but they are light compared to the sad misery of Farang living in Thailand but hating it.

You are exactly the type of "foreigner" that I dislike so much with attitudes and opinions like this.

If I choose to live in a country that is not my own, I am "living" there, I am "investing" there, I am paying taxes and living life exactly the same as all the locals. As I've said before, I pay FAR more taxes than 99.9% of the Thai's that are here, and although I have no right to vote, I most certainly do have a right to voice my own thoughts and opinions about what I see as good or bad in that country. Why? Because it affects me also.

As for the "pointlessness" of our complaining I again would take issue. Many here have partners and friends and businesses, and we can and do influence those people, and they can and do in turn influence others in a small way.

You claim to see the problems that the Thai people have to face, yet I question whether you actually see the deeper picture or whether you are simply one of those "foreigners" that live their life in their own little bubble and think everything is wonderful and that we shouldn't ever complain about anything because we are "guests" here. I don't know anyone here that hates living here, I know many however that would love to see Thailand and it's people become "better" than they are currently without having to go through all of the pain and heartache that many other countries have already been through during their rise in the global arena. Things are changing here, but very slowly. Thailand cannot stand on its own any longer. They need foreign investment, support, visitors, know how etc etc, but they also need to drop the overriding xenophobic attitude and misplaced superiority complex.

(I hope that last sentence wasn't too corrosive or bitter for you honzad - I prefer to see things as they really are and say what I really think rather than sugarcoat things for fear of causing offense to our "hosts")

[ratcatcher]

Congratulations to the NY Times, this is good, responsible journalism. Thai media please take note.

I presume the author of the piece will not be used by NY times again and irrespective of whether his article was deliberately biased or simply poorly researched resulting in glaring inaccuracies I wonder how he can be managing editor of a magazine called Foreign Affairs.

Maybe we'd be surprised by the number of politicians having foreign affairs?

[ianf]

This was the most disgusting piece of journalism I have read for a long time. To me it smacked of the writer having been influenced (with money???) to produce an article in favour of the Thaksin regime. Lies from start to finish. TheThaksin PR machine is hard at work,

Why is it the most disgusting piece of journalism you have read in a long time? because he did not agree with your opinions? Many incidents, outcomes, things that are happening previously in Thailand or are happening are not facts but conjecture, opinion etc. Just because this writer holds a different opinion to you does not make it wrong, as is your opinion is yours and cannot really be argued as fact or otherwise.

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

Disgusting because it was factually incorrect and smacked of propaganda, not journalism. Disgusting because it was not researched. Disgusting because good journalism, as opposed to the gutter variety, seeks to offer balanced views and does not attract the kind of retaliation that this piece clearly has. A bit like your post really, as it now tells the world that I have made a direct comparison between Hitler and Thaksin. What I have said, and oft repeated, is that there are huge similarities between the nationalk socialists, the early days of Mussolini and what we are seeing/have seen in Thailand recently. Mein Kampf was very clear on how to develop complete control - a lesson, I have said, that Thaksin seems to have learnt well. If you studied the mass psychology of facsism - if you looked at the way various dictators have seized power, if you then understood the subtleties of the way Thaksin and his cohorts are going about things, then you may draw similar conclusions.

[mayday49]

So then Sir , I presume that you have applied your expressed talent ,volunteraly as "The ad hoc Administer" ... and factotum .

[smutcakes]

This was the most disgusting piece of journalism I have read for a long time. To me it smacked of the writer having been influenced (with money???) to produce an article in favour of the Thaksin regime. Lies from start to finish. TheThaksin PR machine is hard at work,

Why is it the most disgusting piece of journalism you have read in a long time? because he did not agree with your opinions? Many incidents, outcomes, things that are happening previously in Thailand or are happening are not facts but conjecture, opinion etc. Just because this writer holds a different opinion to you does not make it wrong, as is your opinion is yours and cannot really be argued as fact or otherwise.

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

Disgusting because it was factually incorrect and smacked of propaganda, not journalism. Disgusting because it was not researched. Disgusting because good journalism, as opposed to the gutter variety, seeks to offer balanced views and does not attract the kind of retaliation that this piece clearly has. A bit like your post really, as it now tells the world that I have made a direct comparison between Hitler and Thaksin. What I have said, and oft repeated, is that there are huge similarities between the nationalk socialists, the early days of Mussolini and what we are seeing/have seen in Thailand recently. Mein Kampf was very clear on how to develop complete control - a lesson, I have said, that Thaksin seems to have learnt well. If you studied the mass psychology of facsism - if you looked at the way various dictators have seized power, if you then understood the subtleties of the way Thaksin and his cohorts are going about things, then you may draw similar conclusions.

You are obviously the most intelligent and perceptive of anyone here, and pardon anyone who cannot understand the subtleties. How pompous can you get!

I think you are over complicating things somewhat.The reason TS can control a large vote is due to the fact that much of the population have received nothing for the past 80 years when various Governments/alliances have ruled over the country,generally lording it up at the countries expense. TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table and they obviously have an allegiance with him over alternatives. It makes little difference what/how he says or gives them anything, and quite frankly i dont think they really care what they get- they will vote for him as he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly. Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts, and done something about education/development of regions outside of Bangkok- the situation we have here today would have been averted. Obviously they are all crying now, but they have no one to blame but themselves and their predecessors. Ironically it is these old party dinosaurs which are standing in the way of party reform.

[mikemac]

You are obviously the most intelligent and perceptive of anyone here, and pardon anyone who cannot understand the subtleties. How pompous can you get!

I think you are over complicating things somewhat.The reason TS can control a large vote is due to the fact that much of the population have received nothing for the past 80 years when various Governments/alliances have ruled over the country,generally lording it up at the countries expense. TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table and they obviously have an allegiance with him over alternatives. It makes little difference what/how he says or gives them anything, and quite frankly i dont think they really care what they get- they will vote for him as he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly. Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts, and done something about education/development of regions outside of Bangkok- the situation we have here today would have been averted. Obviously they are all crying now, but they have no one to blame but themselves and their predecessors. Ironically it is these old party dinosaurs which are standing in the way of party reform.

"TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table"..........buying votes with money that belongs to all the population, including the Democrat voters and the people who live in the south (remember them ???)

".................................he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly.".....................Well, is it right or wrong ? Who is being pompous now ?

"Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts,....................................................."

[Baerboxer]

You are obviously the most intelligent and perceptive of anyone here, and pardon anyone who cannot understand the subtleties. How pompous can you get!

I think you are over complicating things somewhat.The reason TS can control a large vote is due to the fact that much of the population have received nothing for the past 80 years when various Governments/alliances have ruled over the country,generally lording it up at the countries expense. TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table and they obviously have an allegiance with him over alternatives. It makes little difference what/how he says or gives them anything, and quite frankly i dont think they really care what they get- they will vote for him as he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly. Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts, and done something about education/development of regions outside of Bangkok- the situation we have here today would have been averted. Obviously they are all crying now, but they have no one to blame but themselves and their predecessors. Ironically it is these old party dinosaurs which are standing in the way of party reform.

"TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table"..........buying votes with money that belongs to all the population, including the Democrat voters and the people who live in the south (remember them ???)

".................................he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly.".....................Well, is it right or wrong ? Who is being pompous now ?

"Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts,....................................................."

Many "leaders" gained power by promising the impoverished and uneducated masses riches - Lenin, Mao, Castro, Marcos, etc etc. Doesn't matter what political affiliation they claim - left or right, they deliver nothing except riches to themselves and their clans.

[timewilltell]

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

Irony ??? Not really.

"ianf" has as much right to consider the story disgusting journalism as I have to consider your comment as a load of bulldust. And if he wants to insult Hitler in his spare time, that's up to him. Most of us don't have a problem with that. Or are you pissed off because ianf's opinion does not reflect yours ?

I am not sure how to respond to your post- I am neither annoyed nor have been rude or in any derogatory to Ianf, so i am unsure why you are being so confrontational. I am not sure what you are talking about insulting Hitler, calm down and read the post again.

I merely pointed out that someone who regularly criticizes the current Government and accuses them of all kinds of mind bending tactics, dictatorship and the alike, calls something 'disgusting journalism' as the writers opinion did not reflect that of their own

Many things that have happened in Thailand are not fact and as such although one person might disagree with an opinion, i don't think that is akin to disgusting journalism, unless of course you are the type of person who cannot abide those with different opinions, and as such would make all of Ianf's comments on Thaksin rather ironic.

All the things that happening Thailand are facts. Many of the things written about Thailand are fiction. Unfortunately most of the fiction is a whitewash.

[smutcakes]

You are obviously the most intelligent and perceptive of anyone here, and pardon anyone who cannot understand the subtleties. How pompous can you get!

I think you are over complicating things somewhat.The reason TS can control a large vote is due to the fact that much of the population have received nothing for the past 80 years when various Governments/alliances have ruled over the country,generally lording it up at the countries expense. TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table and they obviously have an allegiance with him over alternatives. It makes little difference what/how he says or gives them anything, and quite frankly i dont think they really care what they get- they will vote for him as he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly. Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts, and done something about education/development of regions outside of Bangkok- the situation we have here today would have been averted. Obviously they are all crying now, but they have no one to blame but themselves and their predecessors. Ironically it is these old party dinosaurs which are standing in the way of party reform.

"TS comes along and throws this population some hope/scraps off the table"..........buying votes with money that belongs to all the population, including the Democrat voters and the people who live in the south (remember them ???)

".................................he is the first to even recognize them as anything more than house/field slaves which is the perception of the Democrat party, wrongly or rightly.".....................Well, is it right or wrong ? Who is being pompous now ?

"Maybe if previous parties had thought about the future, rather than their bank accounts,....................................................."

Do you understand what pompous means? it appears not if you think that is being pompous.

[mikemac]

pomp·ous

ˈpämpəs/

adjective

adjective: pompous

1.

affectedly and irritatingly grand, solemn, or self-important.

"a pompous ass who pretends he knows everything"

Yes I do know what it means, I have a dictionary (Google) and I believe the term suits you to a tee

[hellodolly]

This was the most disgusting piece of journalism I have read for a long time. To me it smacked of the writer having been influenced (with money???) to produce an article in favour of the Thaksin regime. Lies from start to finish. TheThaksin PR machine is hard at work,

Why is it the most disgusting piece of journalism you have read in a long time? because he did not agree with your opinions? Many incidents, outcomes, things that are happening previously in Thailand or are happening are not facts but conjecture, opinion etc. Just because this writer holds a different opinion to you does not make it wrong, as is your opinion is yours and cannot really be argued as fact or otherwise.

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

Disgusting because it was factually incorrect and smacked of propaganda, not journalism. Disgusting because it was not researched. Disgusting because good journalism, as opposed to the gutter variety, seeks to offer balanced views and does not attract the kind of retaliation that this piece clearly has. A bit like your post really, as it now tells the world that I have made a direct comparison between Hitler and Thaksin. What I have said, and oft repeated, is that there are huge similarities between the nationalk socialists, the early days of Mussolini and what we are seeing/have seen in Thailand recently. Mein Kampf was very clear on how to develop complete control - a lesson, I have said, that Thaksin seems to have learnt well. If you studied the mass psychology of facsism - if you looked at the way various dictators have seized power, if you then understood the subtleties of the way Thaksin and his cohorts are going about things, then you may draw similar conclusions.

You are so right on.

How ever it is a waste of time to try and tell a PTPredshirt any thing that is not Thaksin approved.

[hellodolly]

I am slightly concerned that with all your normal rhetoric on Thaksin (comparing him to Hitler amongst others) you call this piece disgusting journalism, purely i presume because his opinion on issues, does not reflect yours. There is a certain irony in there.

Irony ??? Not really.

"ianf" has as much right to consider the story disgusting journalism as I have to consider your comment as a load of bulldust. And if he wants to insult Hitler in his spare time, that's up to him. Most of us don't have a problem with that. Or are you pissed off because ianf's opinion does not reflect yours ?

I am not sure how to respond to your post- I am neither annoyed nor have been rude or in any derogatory to Ianf, so i am unsure why you are being so confrontational. I am not sure what you are talking about insulting Hitler, calm down and read the post again.

I merely pointed out that someone who regularly criticizes the current Government and accuses them of all kinds of mind bending tactics, dictatorship and the alike, calls something 'disgusting journalism' as the writers opinion did not reflect that of their own

Many things that have happened in Thailand are not fact and as such although one person might disagree with an opinion, i don't think that is akin to disgusting journalism, unless of course you are the type of person who cannot abide those with different opinions, and as such would make all of Ianf's comments on Thaksin rather ironic.

All the things that happening Thailand are facts. Many of the things written about Thailand are fiction. Unfortunately most of the fiction is a whitewash.

White wash is exactly what the article was not one negative thing about Thaksin or the red shirts. For those of us honest enough to admit the truth it was a joke. It was an attempt to make Thaksin and the red shirts look like angels. Not one word of explanation about what led up to the over 90 deaths or who fired the first shot.

To be published in such a supposedly respected news paper as the New York Times is beyond reason.

An article that would never see the light of day in The Nation a far less respectable news paper but be front page news on every red shirt news paper to appear in a Foreign news paper this far past the time of the occurrences to a population that would have a hard time finding Thailand on a map makes no sense what so ever.