CNN, BBC all English news really love Thaksin and hate Abhisit

[monkfish]

The interview was way to kind.
They should have asked if the protest was braught about to get them off the charges.
They have nothing to loose!

[monkfish]

You're either grossly misreading this, or not hep with interviewing methods in the Western media...

Well I watched both of the interviews all of them. I have come to the conclusion that neither interviewer was aware of the whole situation. (they would fit in nice with some of the TV posters)

Abhist did a good job. I think he should have shut CNN up by asking the interviewer if he thought it was democratic with less than half the population behind them for the PTP to spend 2 and 1/2 years trying to white wash the Prime Ministers brother. Allowing him to call into the cabinet meetings and siphoning disaster relief money into their own pockets while they turned down help from the US Navy who could have delivered supplies to those in need with out the government making a single baht of off of their for free efforts there by prolonging the suffering of the victims of mother nature aided by the government lack of concern.

If he could have asked that question and got a yes or no answer out of him it would have been a whole different interview..

As for the BBC the interviewer was absolutely completely clueless as to 2010. She started off by saying the army killed every one the protestors didn't kill any one. To cover the lack of knowledge she just talked louder and asked the same questions over and over making it hard for Abhist to answer her.

She had no reply for when Abhist said it was natural to have an inquest after a police man or army had killed some one and he was willing to face the court even if it meant his death. Where as Thaksin refused to even come back to the country where he would be welcome. It is his choice to stay away. She was just completely lost at sea.

She came into the interview clueless and left clueless.

Abhisit spoke 90% of the time and wouldn't let the interviewer ask a question!

Pretty sure they ran out of time.

[MAJIC]

You guys know that he was a policeman turned billionaire because of his government monopoly contracts and that his second in charge Chalerm is a gangster whose son executed a guy in a nightclub right? ...

.. and Mr. Abhisit did order the Military to kill dozens of innocent UNARMED People in Bangkok together with the for the same crime act (illegal land deal) sentenced Mr. Suthep...

Some say that all are corrupt - who knows the real truth? But then in the end it counts what is left for the Country. Do you have any points speak for Abhisit? Do you know anything

he did in his time being Prime Minister of Thailand what lasts, just something he did someone can remember is done under his power or he initialized it, like pay back

a multibillion debt to the worldbank in 2 years, or build Suvarnabhum, or make health care affordable, or come up with OTOP, or let some money flow back to the poor...

or ..?? You can say about Mr. Thaksin what ever you want, but he is a top worldclass Manager - and thats far better for the development of a Country then a spoiled boy

with the only trackrecord to have visited a US University for rich guys..

Hardy99! your last line of your post: "with the only trackrecord to have visited a US University for rich guys"

It's difficult to decide,who exactly you are referring to, in the midst of all the other inaccuricies?

Edited December 30, 2013 by MAJIC

[Ulic]

The western media support democracy while Suthep is working hard to end democracy. Western media

don't support Yingluck's policies, they support the democratic process.

[7by7]

Neatly summed up, Ulic.

Unfortunately, based upon the posts in this topic, it seems that many TV members agree with Suthep and only believe in democracy if the party they support wins!

[phantomfiddler]

BBC proved beyond doubt during the last "troubles" that they have absolutely no clue about what is really going on here They say the most terrifying thing in the world is ignorance in action. One would expect better from a major news company, but I have completely lost all respect for the BBC

[nisakiman]

They're not on the side of Thaksin or Abhisit

They're on the side of democracy.

"What Democracy"

Like it or not, the Thai people voted for the current shower.

So what if it was on the back of populist policies? Populist policies aren't illegal, are they?

What government hasn't promised the earth to win a freakin' election?

"What Democracy"

Oh come on "Hardened Soul" you know very well,there is no concept of Democracy! Thaksin has already stated,that he has no interest in Democracy. And don't you remember his speech "The United Nations is not my Father" ?

"The United Nations is not my Father"

Probably the most intelligent thing he ever said.

The United Nations is busy working on the New World Order with its fellow travellers the WHO and the EU. If they get their way, the world will be controlled by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in an unknown location, and will regulated to death. The UN spells the end of any type of autonomy for any individual. You can see it all around you. Laws restricting things on the basis of 'Public Health'; laws restricting freedoms based on the carefully constructed 'International Terrorism'; the destruction of the family by promoting the 'gay rights' movement (I'm not anti-gay, by the way, just pointing out the bigger picture); the marginalisation of religion; the diluting of nations (and thus national pride and patriotism) with huge influxes of incompatible immigrants; ever increasing centralisation; the list goes on and on, and people are sleepwalking into it. If Thaksin actually rejected the UN (I haven't read the speech you refer to), then he has suddenly gone up in my estimation.

And no, I'm not a tinfoil hatter. I've just read an awful lot of unsettling facts about the UN and it's modus operandum.

[HardenedSoul]

Democracy is determined by definition not location. Sorry bout that.

As much as you don't like the elected government it is the government and you are not God.

I think Obama should be impeached. When enough other people feel that way they will impeach him. Until then he has a job. I can't kick him out. Nor can you kick out a government because you think they are corrupt. They may be corrupt. Should we take your word for it? Who are you.

You are so so wrong.. they bought their votes in the rural areas and even threatened them.. you should not believe him because you know nothing

Do you really believe that the opposition didn't grease the same palms as PTP? They were all at it.

I'm sure that any number of TV forum members can relate stories of how their wives and/or family members were offered money by candidates/representatives of the two main parties.

Again, both sides are as bent as the other

[TechnikaIII]

Peacefully unarmed (with catapults).

Anyone ever seen what a catapult can do?

Ever seen what the media can do when they select what the audience gets to see, in order to distort reality? The media wants ratings, and it performs for an audience which gets off on violence. This confrontation is absolutely nothing compared with vastly superior peaceful protest gatherings which have taken place in Bangkok.

[manarak]

I propose that only people who pay more taxes than they get aided by the government can vote. This includes the working class and is an elegant way to balance political power. Give away too much and the socialist base is eroded, reduce welfare and then more socialist voters flow in.

So, under your regime

• Many pensioners couldn't vote because many pensioners don't have an income high enough to pay tax.
• Disabled people unable to work through no fault of their own couldn't vote; including ex service men and women disabled whilst serving their country.
• What about someone working and paying tax who gets laid off or otherwise loses their job through no fault of their own in an election year?
• Then there's the rich company directors who arrange to be paid offshore to avoid paying tax; they couldn't vote either.

But of course in most countries everyone pays some tax through VAT or the equivalent on nearly everything they buy.

I may be ridiculing your point of view; but only because it's ridiculous.

A rule is only as good as its exceptions. Remember I said the rule was "simplistic"?

Of course there would be a large number of exceptions, such as voting rights definitively earned after 25 years of paying taxes.

Another example would be to consider wages (pensions) of teachers, soldiers and other employees of the state as normal salaries, not as "social transfers".

Also, where I come from, pensions and unemployment benefits are paid by insurance bodies and not by tax money, so the unemployed and the pensioners still qualify for taxes and thus voting.

You mention 2 times people becoming unable to vote "through no fault of their own". The point is not to punish people for anything and much less to strip people of their right, it is the opposite: have people qualify for voting.

The idea is to let people who contribute to society qualify for voting.

This doesn't mean only paying taxes but also includes voluntary work / community service as well.

One principle of democracy is taxation as a basis for representation.

Another related thought is 'When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.' - I know everyone can copy paste some clever quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin, but this one hits the nail on the head.

In countries such as France, Spain, Portugal, Greece the socialists did exactly play on that to win the elections. They just let the people vote money for themselves.

A significant part of their electoral basis is composed of people who never worked and never paid taxes, but gave their vote to receive more money.

[shiok]

The western media support democracy while Suthep is working hard to end democracy. Western media

don't support Yingluck's policies, they support the democratic process.

You are also absolutely clueless to the situation in Thailand with that remark.

[shiok]

They're not on the side of Thaksin or Abhisit

They're on the side of democracy.

Like it or not, the Thai people voted for the current shower.

So what if it was on the back of populist policies? Populist policies aren't illegal, are they?

What government hasn't promised the earth to win a freakin' election?

Democracy= Government in name of the people.

Which means exactly what it says: the people.

Democracy is governing in name of the people for ALL the people.

If you want to compare western democracy with Asian democracy with western ideas, you will see, eventually, that does not fit.

For example, Indonesia and the Phillipines are democracies, right?

So you condone that Indonesia is more or less the playground for the Suharto family, and the Phillipines the playground for the Marcos family?

Becasue they are voted in?

Democracy?

What about Thailand?

In short, no way you can let loose western ideas about democracy on Asian countries.

You can not compare apples and pears.

Democracy is determined by definition not location. Sorry bout that.

As much as you don't like the elected government it is the government and you are not God.

I think Obama should be impeached. When enough other people feel that way they will impeach him. Until then he has a job. I can't kick him out. Nor can you kick out a government because you think they are corrupt. They may be corrupt. Should we take your word for it? Who are you.

Sorry, but you would disagree if you knew the depth of the corruption.

[shiok]

put it this way... they don't love suthep

and who does?... (except suthep)

oh what a DUMB statement!

[shiok]

they made him look like an idiot contradicting him with THE TRUTH, in the form of Video as he says we did not go in as they showed a tank going in LOL the demonstrations are peaceful as they show the protesters throwing rocks and a monk with petrol bombs LOL

What an idiot he is

And the reason he is made to look a fool is the real democracys can SEE THROUGH all this BS and will ask him the hard questions which he cannot answer without looking like an idiot.

The idiots are the idiotic, clueless to the situation, prapaganda spreading and dramatizing interviewers, oh not forgetting they think they are superior to an Asian eg. look at how they bombard him with questions? If they are so capable why don't they bombard Taksin too, am sure he's waiting to lie!

[shiok]

This is the heart of the matter. There is nothing to prevent Mr. Abhisit from following in the fine tradition of British conservatives like Sir. Winston Churchill, Maggie Thatcher and David Cameron, and using his ample financial resources to run a campaign and actually win an election !

The fact that he is incapable of doing so does not give him the right to seize power by undemocratic means - quite to the contrary, he should step aside and let someone else with more charisma run for the conservative Thais! As it is , he is behaving in a completely irresponsible fashion and leading his followers and the country. If he has any integrity, he will negotiate with the sitting government and seek a peaceful solution.

They're not on the side of Thaksin or Abhisit

They're on the side of democracy.

Like it or not, the Thai people voted for the current shower.

So what if it was on the back of populist policies? Populist policies aren't illegal, are they?

What government hasn't promised the earth to win a freakin' election?

oh dear, you are so behind the fire of taksin, are you actually understanding that the people are fedup of the all taksin-corruption? hello! wake up and please!

[mogandave]

This is the heart of the matter. There is nothing to prevent Mr. Abhisit from following in the fine tradition of British conservatives like Sir. Winston Churchill, Maggie Thatcher and David Cameron, and using his ample financial resources to run a campaign and actually win an election !

The fact that he is incapable of doing so does not give him the right to seize power by undemocratic means - quite to the contrary, he should step aside and let someone else with more charisma run for the conservative Thais! As it is , he is behaving in a completely irresponsible fashion and leading his followers and the country. If he has any integrity, he will negotiate with the sitting government and seek a peaceful solution.

They're not on the side of Thaksin or Abhisit

They're on the side of democracy.

Like it or not, the Thai people voted for the current shower.

So what if it was on the back of populist policies? Populist policies aren't illegal, are they?

What government hasn't promised the earth to win a freakin' election?

oh dear, you are so behind the fire of taksin, are you actually understanding that the people are fedup of the all taksin-corruption? hello! wake up and please!

Taksin started the corruption here?

[shiok]

Democracy is determined by definition not location. Sorry bout that.

As much as you don't like the elected government it is the government and you are not God.

I think Obama should be impeached. When enough other people feel that way they will impeach him. Until then he has a job. I can't kick him out. Nor can you kick out a government because you think they are corrupt. They may be corrupt. Should we take your word for it? Who are you.

You are so so wrong.. they bought their votes in the rural areas and even threatened them.. you should not believe him because you know nothing

Where did I say they didn't buy votes? I said democracy is determined by definition not location.

Who should I not believe? I believe the dictionary. Democracy = a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

I meant the part about your doubt on corruption

All the proof out in the open so look it up like the 'dictionary'

[thailiketoo]

Democracy is determined by definition not location. Sorry bout that.

As much as you don't like the elected government it is the government and you are not God.

I think Obama should be impeached. When enough other people feel that way they will impeach him. Until then he has a job. I can't kick him out. Nor can you kick out a government because you think they are corrupt. They may be corrupt. Should we take your word for it? Who are you.

You are so so wrong.. they bought their votes in the rural areas and even threatened them.. you should not believe him because you know nothing

Where did I say they didn't buy votes? I said democracy is determined by definition not location.

Who should I not believe? I believe the dictionary. Democracy = a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

I meant the part about your doubt on corruption

All the proof out in the open so look it up like the 'dictionary'

Telling people they know nothing or that someone is corrupt is not a very useful debate tool.

It the Thai people want to vote for a corrupt person that is their right. You can not take that right away from them because you think they are corrupt and stupid and still call in a democracy.

What you are pushing is a dictatorship. Where a leader is appointed not elected.

[Sayonarax]

Zionist need a good puppet to control so they can get there foot in the door in Asia.

Is this a conspiracy theory thread?

[txp158]

Telling people they know nothing or that someone is corrupt is not a very useful debate tool.

It the Thai people want to vote for a corrupt person that is their right. You can not take that right away from them because you think they are corrupt and stupid and still call in a democracy.

What you are pushing is a dictatorship. Where a leader is appointed not elected.

“The true essence of a dictatorship is in fact not its regularity but its unpredictability and caprice; those who live under it must never be able to relax, must never be quite sure if they have followed the rules correctly or not.” excerpted from Hitch-22: A Memoir of Christopher Hitchens.

http://www.manager.co.th/asp-bin/Image.aspx?ID=371527

Unexpected mocking manner shown by Thaksin during 2005 press conference. In he event held, Thaksin selectively answered questions. If the question raised is deem uncreative, he would show a cross signs with warning buzzer.

The news report was done by AFP but it couldn't be found anywhere now. It just reminds me of how some people are so quick to forget.

Btw both saddam and hitler were elected democratically. Pushing dictatorship....what?

Edited December 31, 2013 by txp158

[thailiketoo]

Zionist need a good puppet to control so they can get there foot in the door in Asia.

Is this a conspiracy theory thread?

Probably better if you chose another word. Zionist not a good word for discussion purposed.

Every time I read the word I just tune out because I think it is going to be another anti Semitic rant.

[Sayonarax]

Zionist need a good puppet to control so they can get there foot in the door in Asia.

Is this a conspiracy theory thread?

Probably better if you chose another word. Zionist not a good word for discussion purposed.

Every time I read the word I just tune out because I think it is going to be another anti Semitic rant.

Actually that topic has nothing to do with being anti Semitic.

[thaibeachlovers]

Don't know about western media lovin' Thaksin, but they sure hate LOS. They always write garbage.

[thaibeachlovers]

Zionist need a good puppet to control so they can get there foot in the door in Asia.

Is this a conspiracy theory thread?

Probably better if you chose another word. Zionist not a good word for discussion purposed.

Every time I read the word I just tune out because I think it is going to be another anti Semitic rant.

Zionism is a political system. To criticise it is not being anti Jewish, and many Jews also are against it.

[rotary]

If CNN says it, Do Not believe it.

[Kudel]

Don't know about western media lovin' Thaksin, but they sure hate LOS. They always write garbage.

And what do you think about the English rags from places such as pattaya and phuket talk about garbage ,produced by people with self inflated ego's and crappy bussiness promotion and apparently people read and believe such crap.

[farang000999]

It's crazy how many of you would be willing to make a deal with the devil because you think the devil will give you some of things you want even though you know that the devil is not giving you these things because he is kind or honest or believes in them. He will just as soon take them from you and stab you in the back at any given moment. He cares only for power and control yet here you are in your naivety groveling at his feet.

The devil changed rules to allow himself to sell his company that was built on government monopolized contracts and to also sell it tax free over night.. yeah, totally democratic! The guy murdered thousands of people, was the main cause of the Southern insurgency, massive human rights violations, suppression of freedom of speech, surrounds himself with gangsters like Samak (Mr. 1973 and Mr. 1992 nice combo there) and Chalerm whose son is killing people in the middle of public venues execution style... and yet you all think he is a man of the people and wants to help the poor. Maybe you should take a step back and open your eyes... it is not the "Elites" who are anti-Thaksin it is the MIDDLE CLASS.

what an infuriating discussion...

[PHP87]

The BBC has admitted to a bias on a variety of issues. Don't even get me started on CNN

A random sampling of articles:

http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/bbc-admits-anti-american-bias/

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/jul/03/bbc-deep-liberal-bias-immigration

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3318582,00.html

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/07/30/bbc-trust-admits-a-key-programme-on-welfare-state-was-biased/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2354713/BBC-chief-admits-We-deep-liberal-bias-migrants--changed.html

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/09/02/bbc-chief-admits-massive-left-wing-bias-vows-remedy-imbalance

http://www.wnd.com/2007/06/42130/

[PHP87]

Zionist need a good puppet to control so they can get there foot in the door in Asia.

Is this a conspiracy theory thread?

Probably better if you chose another word. Zionist not a good word for discussion purposed.

Every time I read the word I just tune out because I think it is going to be another anti Semitic rant.

"Zionism is a political system. To criticize it is not being anti Jewish......"

Although it usually is.

I'm not Jewish, but those that use the term "Zionism" or "Zionist" are 9/10 times Anti-Semites.

Edited December 31, 2013 by PHP87

[PHP87]

They're not on the side of Thaksin or Abhisit

They're on the side of democracy.

Like it or not, the Thai people voted for the current shower.

So what if it was on the back of populist policies? Populist policies aren't illegal, are they?

What government hasn't promised the earth to win a freakin' election?

Democracy= Government in name of the people.

Which means exactly what it says: the people.

Democracy is governing in name of the people for ALL the people.

If you want to compare western democracy with Asian democracy with western ideas, you will see, eventually, that does not fit.

For example, Indonesia and the Phillipines are democracies, right?

So you condone that Indonesia is more or less the playground for the Suharto family, and the Phillipines the playground for the Marcos family?

Becasue they are voted in?

Democracy?

What about Thailand?

In short, no way you can let loose western ideas about democracy on Asian countries.

You can not compare apples and pears.

Democracy is determined by definition not location. Sorry bout that.

As much as you don't like the elected government it is the government and you are not God.

I think Obama should be impeached. When enough other people feel that way they will impeach him. Until then he has a job. I can't kick him out. Nor can you kick out a government because you think they are corrupt. They may be corrupt. Should we take your word for it? Who are you.

Obama won't be Impeached despite the fact that he has committed more abuse of power than any President that has preceded him.

The media in the US has spent the last 5-6 years covering his ass and has lied by omission and has refused to report on anything that might damage their Messiah.

Even if a Majority of Republicans should take office, they won't have the stones to Impeach him even though his job approval ratings are in the low 40's and have dipped into the 30's. Another fact the media refuses to report. Obama's job approval ratings are lower than GWB's at the same point of their Presidencies despite the fact that the media spent 24/7 beating up on GWB while spending 24/7 with their lips firmly planted on Obama's ass.

I remember when GWB was in office. If his job approval rating fell by a single percentage point, it would be the lead story on every single nightly newscast along with a running death count of soldiers lost in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The media has suddenly lost interest in reporting on either of those since Obama has taken office. We've lost close to 2,300 American soldiers in Afghanistan alone, yet the media seems to have a black out on that news since 2008.

Remember the big deal about the supposed lack of body armor? That story died right after the 2004 election.

Cindy Sheehan? The media dumped her like an unwanted ex-girlfriend right after the election as well, but before the election, she was a media darling.

Or should I say, a useful (useless?) idiot.

Americans don't elect their Presidents any longer, the media does. And numerous studies back up this claim.

Obama is nothing but an empty suit. The media has lowered the bar to the point that were supposed to be happy with McJobs and years of low or no GDP growth and high unemployment along with low wages.

I could write examples of the double-standards all day and night about how incompetent this guy is and how he gets a free pass.

I can't wait to get out of here and head to the LOS. My 62nd Birthday can't get here soon enough although I might just empty my 401k and make the move now, but that money is for emergencies and for my exit plan just in case things go south and not to live on for the next 2-3 years.

I just hope that Social Security doesn't go broke in the next couple of years.