Royal Decree Sets Oct 15 Election Date

[Tony Clifton]

The winner will definitely require the longest nose and ability to endure having it up someone's behind for extended periods of time. ''NoNeck'' may be advantaged here with his abilyty to easily withstand the recoil effect from all the gagging.

[sriracha john]

Thaksin: Polls likely to be delayed

Also, EC candidate reveals phone call 'offers'

The Oct 15 general election will very likely be postponed, caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra conceded for the first time yesterday. And a candidate for the Election Commission has alleged there have been attempts to influence the selection process. Mr Thaksin said the cabinet will have to discuss the election date with the incoming election commissioners. But before any postponement of the date, the Senate must say exactly when it will be able to complete the selection of the five members of the Election Commission. After that, the new commissioners must make it clear to the caretaker government what they plan to do about the election date, Mr Thaksin said after a meeting of his Thai Rak Thai party. The Senate's EC vetting committee is currently listening to the explanations of eight of the 10 candidates who face allegations made against them in hundreds of letters of complaint. For the elections to be on Oct 15, the law requires the EC to arrange for the registration of election candidates by Sept 12. Supreme Court chief justice Wasant Soyphisuth, one of the candidates invited to clarify allegations against him, said yesterday that he had received a phone call during which the caller had tried to convince him to side with a certain party if he wanted to be confirmed as an election commissioner. ''I received the call just moments after I finished presenting my vision statement to the Senate's vetting committee,'' said Mr Wasant. The caller offered him supporting votes in the Senate, but he turned down the offer. Several other candidates had received similar phone calls, and they all knew which party the callers were working for, said Mr Wasant.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/30Aug2006_news03.php

Edited August 30, 2006 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

Poll date to be postponed

The government yesterday conceded that the October 15 election will be postponed because new election commissioners would not be elected this week as required.

"Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra told the Cabinet the Senate may not vote in the five new commissioners by tomorrow, prompting the rescheduling of election day," a Government House official said.

Cabinet secretary-general Rongphol Charoenphanthu expected the Senate to extend its session beyond tomorrow in order to complete voting for commissioners.

The Senate was expected to decide today on a new voting schedule before asking the government to amend the Royal Decree allowing its special session, he said.

Electoral officials said the new election commissioners must be in office by Friday for the poll to take place on October 15.

An election date hinged on how soon a new Election Commission could start work.

- The Nation

[Plus]

You left out the most intriguing part, unintentionally, I suppose, SJ:

"the royal decree, which took effect on Aug 24, required that it be enforced by both the caretaker prime minister and the EC chairman.

Since the selection of new election commissioners was still not complete when it took effect, there was no Election Commission chairman.

That could render the issuing of the decree incomplete, he said.

If someone was to file a complaint on the matter, the Administrative Court might have to intervene and rule whether or not the issuance of the decree was indeed legally complete"

That means the elections could be postponed indefintely if needed, or a completely new decree must be produced.

Just another example of a screw up by the nations brightest. And these idiots who can't even issue a decree right, want to go nuclear. I hope I won't live to see that day (nuclear plant in my neighbourhood, not the elections).

[sriracha john]

THAI RAK THAI LEADERSHIP

Somkid ready to take the reins

A close aide to caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra hinted yesterday that Somkid Jatusripitak could become the next premier if Thaksin decided not to accept the role after the next election.

"Somkid told me that he owed Thaksin a lot, so he is willing to work in any role that the prime minister orders him to," said Somchai Sunthornvut.

"Thaksin may step down and ask Somkid to replace him. It all depends on Thaksin's decision," he said. Somchai, who is also a caretaker deputy interior minister, said all factions in the Thai Rak Thai Party respected Somkid because he has worked alongside Thaksin as a key policy-maker for many years. Thaksin has great trust in Somkid, he said.

In recent months Thaksin has been pressured by opponents to announce that he would not accept the premiership and turn his back on politics if Thai Rak Thai wins the upcoming general election.

Somchai said Thaksin would make a decision after the election.

Meanwhile, a deputy party leader yesterday urged Thaksin to break his silence over speculation that he might not accept the premiership if the party won the next election.

"Our party members and the general public really want to know if Thaksin will assume the prime ministership after the election," said Pongpol Adireksan, adding that Thaksin's decision would affect the party's election campaigns nationwide.

He said he believed voters would have second thoughts before casting ballots for the party as long as doubt over leadership remained.

Pongpol said he was concerned about the crisis that had engulfed the party.

The party's strength derives from four factors - the party leader, policies, MPs and members, he said.

If it still depended on one person, as it does currently, the party would fail to upgrade itself to become a political institution, he said.

Pongpol is chief of the party's committee that selects party-list candidates.

A source in the party said faction leaders agreed that Somkid was the best choice to replace Thaksin in case the premier decided to take a break.

If a faction leader stood out as the new premier, other factions would not accept it, the source said.

As Somkid is independent of any factions, he is the best option, the source said.

- The Nation

[sriracha john]

Thaksin set to postpone polling date

Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is poised to postpone the next general election from Oct 15 as the Senate has yet to select new election commissioners. Thai Rak Thai deputy spokesman Pimuk Simaroj yesterday quoted Mr Thaksin as saying that the election is likely to be re-scheduled and those who will be contesting the poll should be prepared for a change. As the Senate has yet to select the five new election commissioners, it is now uncertain there will be a new Election Commission (EC) in time to organise the poll on Oct 15. Mr Pimuk said Mr Thaksin saw the possibility of revoking the royal decree calling a general election on that date. The Senate is due to end its current session today, and the government is waiting for Senate Speaker Suchon Chaleekrua to call another special session so it can complete the selection of the new election commissioners.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/31Aug2006_news09.php

[Martin]

If any Singaporeans ever take time off from making money to look at international political developments, they will no doubt feel a bit smug that Britain and Thailand are making such heavy weather of changing to their next PM.

Singapore, which is a liberal democracy of the Confucian variety, has managed a smooth and orderly transfer of PMship twice, and the cabinet seems to run well with two exPMs in it.

I heard some ladies discussing the election today. They started by having a moan about that lot in Bangkok who stirred up all this trouble and were getting in the way of Thaksin running the country; and so the price of one of their cash crops is going down. (Business people are like that. They steer clear of politics, until they feel it is harming their businesses.)

Innocently, I enquired about what they thought of the Democrats. Their view was that the Democrats 'couldn't run a whelk stall', would make a real mess of things, and any alleviation of poverty would only happen in the South if the Democrats got in.

I asked why Thaksin had been elected before. In effect, they told me that the Governments before Thaksin's had proved incompetent, and run things so badly that the IMF had taken over Thailand. So the people had elected a Chief Executive Officer, who was good at it, to run the 'national business'.

At first I was a bit surprised that they spoke about things ten years ago as if they were yesterday. But my wife told me that those things are etched on their memories, because all the construction coming to a dead halt in Bangkok, and Isaan workers not even getting the wages owed to them, had been so shocking. Some of them had had to send money to Bangkok so their sons and daughters had the fare to get the bus home.

Thinking it over, I shouldn't have been surprised. They are reminded every time they go to Khon Kaen, because the skyline is dominated in two main parts of the city by a couple of tall hotels that never got completed. And the tower cranes over the nearly-built Regional Heart Hospital haven't moved for this last nine years.

And rural people like them have very well-developed memories. Unschooled, they cannot store information on paper. But they have to remember things like weather patterns and their effects for decades and decades to guide them in their business-decision making. So nothing important gets forgotten.

Slightly michievously, and thinking of this thread, I said that Thaksin had done very well for himself by helping Shin to grow, changing the tax laws, and then selling out to Singapore. But all I got was knowing smiles, which my wife translated to me as "Well, he would, wouldn't he? They all do that sort of thing when they go to Bangkok. Especially Chinamen".

I thought that was an unjustifiably broad generalisation, but wasn't going to ask my wife to say so. I already have enough reputation as 'stoopid falang'.

[Plus]

Ask them if they remember who WAS in the government during that economic crisis, and who negotiated IMF's takeover of Thailand.

No one other than Thanong Bidaya, the current Finance Minister, Thaksin's right hand and personal banker. Thaksin himself was Deputy PM and made (allegedly) shitloads of money when Tanong warned him about baht devaluation. All at the time when your friends were sending bus fare to their sons and daughters.

Like they say: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice..."

[Tony Clifton]

Aren't they breaking electoral law with this?

Thai Rak Thai promises Bt15 flat rate for new electric train system

In its bid to fight for Bangkok residents' political support, the Thai Rak Thai (TRT) Party is now offering to charge just Bt15 for a ride on the capital's new railed-based transportation system if it storms to election victory once more.

The system will operate 10 electric-train routes, covering a stretch of 300 kilometres across the capital.

"This is a policy in our election campaign," Government Spokesman and TRT member Surapong Suebwongly said Thursday.

"We are competing for votes with our policy," Surapong said.

Recently, the Democrat Party has promoted its policy to construct seven more electric-train routes in the capital covering a stretch of more than 100 kilometres.

"We emphasise the comprehensive system to ensure that people will really enjoy transport convenience. We also ensure a cheap flat rate," Surapong said.

He added that more details about this policy would be disclosed tomorrow.

Surapong was speaking after Thaksin had a meeting with TRT key members - who were currently holding ministerial posts as caretakers at his official residence. The meeting discussed on the plan to construct 10 rail-based electric-train routes in Bangkok.

The Nation

Edited August 31, 2006 by Tony Clifton

[womble]

You can put promises like that in a manifesto, but I doubt they'll be believed since they went back on there word about extensions.

TRT are flogging a dead horse, they're gonna loose nearly every seat in Bangkok, it doesn't matter what they promise, the city folk don't believe them.

[John K]

Tony I think you are right, but I also suspect 60-20-20 with that. It is too far down the road to be credible. At the moment this thread is much like a car without a engine. When the new EC is seated and the courts start taking huge pieces out of Thaksin, and if Thaksin declares a police state to protect himself from himself, and if the TRT is dissolved and so on....

Perhaps this thread could be temporarily be renamed to “Absurd political posturing for fun and prizes” until then.

[hammered]

Ask them if they remember who WAS in the government during that economic crisis, and who negotiated IMF's takeover of Thailand.

No one other than Thanong Bidaya, the current Finance Minister, Thaksin's right hand and personal banker. Thaksin himself was Deputy PM and made (allegedly) shitloads of money when Tanong warned him about baht devaluation. All at the time when your friends were sending bus fare to their sons and daughters.

Like they say: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice..."

It is strange that people conveniently forget that Thaksin and some of his current cronies were heavily involved in the 1997 debacle. It is strange that few also want to talk about who profted from the use of the reseves to prop up the currency while the profiteering was done although many Asian bankers will openly name names.

[Plus]

Can you put some names here? Will you be sued for it? Will it break TV rules?

[Siripon]

If any Singaporeans ever take time off from making money to look at international political developments, they will no doubt feel a bit smug that Britain and Thailand are making such heavy weather of changing to their next PM.

Singapore, which is a liberal democracy of the Confucian variety, has managed a smooth and orderly transfer of PMship twice, and the cabinet seems to run well with two exPMs in it.

I heard some ladies discussing the election today. They started by having a moan about that lot in Bangkok who stirred up all this trouble and were getting in the way of Thaksin running the country; and so the price of one of their cash crops is going down. (Business people are like that. They steer clear of politics, until they feel it is harming their businesses.)

Innocently, I enquired about what they thought of the Democrats. Their view was that the Democrats 'couldn't run a whelk stall', would make a real mess of things, and any alleviation of poverty would only happen in the South if the Democrats got in.

I asked why Thaksin had been elected before. In effect, they told me that the Governments before Thaksin's had proved incompetent, and run things so badly that the IMF had taken over Thailand. So the people had elected a Chief Executive Officer, who was good at it, to run the 'national business'.

At first I was a bit surprised that they spoke about things ten years ago as if they were yesterday. But my wife told me that those things are etched on their memories, because all the construction coming to a dead halt in Bangkok, and Isaan workers not even getting the wages owed to them, had been so shocking. Some of them had had to send money to Bangkok so their sons and daughters had the fare to get the bus home.

Thinking it over, I shouldn't have been surprised. They are reminded every time they go to Khon Kaen, because the skyline is dominated in two main parts of the city by a couple of tall hotels that never got completed. And the tower cranes over the nearly-built Regional Heart Hospital haven't moved for this last nine years.

And rural people like them have very well-developed memories. Unschooled, they cannot store information on paper. But they have to remember things like weather patterns and their effects for decades and decades to guide them in their business-decision making. So nothing important gets forgotten.

Slightly michievously, and thinking of this thread, I said that Thaksin had done very well for himself by helping Shin to grow, changing the tax laws, and then selling out to Singapore. But all I got was knowing smiles, which my wife translated to me as "Well, he would, wouldn't he? They all do that sort of thing when they go to Bangkok. Especially Chinamen".

I thought that was an unjustifiably broad generalisation, but wasn't going to ask my wife to say so. I already have enough reputation as 'stoopid falang'.

Martin, please stop your jokes, 'Singapore a liberal democracy of the Confucian variety'! What does that mean?

Any opponent, ie the lone Opposition MP, to the Singapore government is targeted with financially ruining libel suits, as copied by Thaksin.

Just 2 weeks ago several foreign publications including 'The Far Economic Review' were ordered to deposit large funds in Singapore before publishing, money that can be seized if sued.

Thaksin censors TV, if Issan people could watch or listen to Sonti Limtongkun on Friday night on ASTV they would realise the truth about the great pretender.

By the way did you read what Khun Anand, ex-PM twice, said about Thaksin yesterday?

If you really want to help Issan people get an all round view of politics I recommend you invite them around to listen to Sonthi's programme tomorrow night on your computer.

[Martin]

'Siripon' asks:

"Martin, please stop your jokes, 'Singapore a liberal democracy of the Confucian variety'! What does that mean?"

I have no intention of stopping my jokes. I started sometime that was up to 71 years ago, and am now set in my ways. We all have our rights, and I have the right to crack jokes whose content is not inadmissable, and everybody else has the right not to smile, if my joke is 'not their cup of tea'.

The point of what I said is that the Singapore political situation is a very stable one (which the thinking Singaporeans want, as they are well aware of the fundamental dangers of a society that tries to run without an agricultural hinterland. Other countries can mess up their economies and still their farmers will bring enough food to market to feed everybody. But, if ever Singapore isn't earning enough foreign currency to buy its Thai rice and its oil, it will be in desperate straits very, very quickly).

However, that stability means that they forgo the everyday cut-and-thrust of arguing about this-and-that which is seen, in places that are dominated by Western-centric thinking, as the most obvious feature of a liberal democracy.

But the 'bottom line' fundamental of a liberal democracy is there. If the Peoples' Action Party (PAP) ever start to go wrong, they will be thrown out of office at the next General Election.

Lee Kuan Yew very cleverly set up the Constitution that the benefits of political stability could be had, without the danger of the "elected dictatorship" becoming an oligarchy.

The electorate there wouldn't throw out PAP unless things started to go badly wrong in PAP. But if they did, PAP would split in very short order, and those who had quit in dismay would fight the next General Election under a different banner and win and become the Government.

I was there in the GE of 1988 and surprised that PAP was taking it so seriously and working very hard at telling the electorate the facts of the matter.

I thought "Why?. PAP has a massive majority. They can lose a third of their seats and still be in office", (like New Labour in the UK at their last GE).

But when I looked at the Singapore constituencies, I saw they are all the same. PAP doesn't have a single safe seat. A mere couple of percent difference in the swing against PAP could mean the difference between none going and the vast majority of their seats going.

So Singapore has the great benefit of Liberal Democracy, but keeps its great dis-benefit of potential instability in check. Very Confucian.

I didn't think it necessary to spell out all of the above to those who know the elements of political structure, and believe in Democracy.

I thought they would just think "Yes. All the people are equally enfranchised and can sling out the Government at the next GE, so it is a democracy. And they have their fundamental individual freedom. So it is a liberal democracy. But how the Singaporeans choose to operate it is very different from how the US, mainland European nations, and Britain choose to operate their liberal democracies. And that will be bedded in the fact that the Singaporeans come from the Confucian tradition, rather than the Judeo-Christianic one."

[hammered]

'Siripon' asks:

"Martin, please stop your jokes, 'Singapore a liberal democracy of the Confucian variety'! What does that mean?"

I have no intention of stopping my jokes. I started sometime that was up to 71 years ago, and am now set in my ways. We all have our rights, and I have the right to crack jokes whose content is not inadmissable, and everybody else has the right not to smile, if my joke is 'not their cup of tea'.

The point of what I said is that the Singapore political situation is a very stable one (which the thinking Singaporeans want, as they are well aware of the fundamental dangers of a society that tries to run without an agricultural hinterland. Other countries can mess up their economies and still their farmers will bring enough food to market to feed everybody. But, if ever Singapore isn't earning enough foreign currency to buy its Thai rice and its oil, it will be in desperate straits very, very quickly).

However, that stability means that they forgo the everyday cut-and-thrust of arguing about this-and-that which is seen, in places that are dominated by Western-centric thinking, as the most obvious feature of a liberal democracy.

But the 'bottom line' fundamental of a liberal democracy is there. If the Peoples' Action Party (PAP) ever start to go wrong, they will be thrown out of office at the next General Election.

Lee Kuan Yew very cleverly set up the Constitution that the benefits of political stability could be had, without the danger of the "elected dictatorship" becoming an oligarchy.

The electorate there wouldn't throw out PAP unless things started to go badly wrong in PAP. But if they did, PAP would split in very short order, and those who had quit in dismay would fight the next General Election under a different banner and win and become the Government.

I was there in the GE of 1988 and surprised that PAP was taking it so seriously and working very hard at telling the electorate the facts of the matter.

I thought "Why?. PAP has a massive majority. They can lose a third of their seats and still be in office", (like New Labour in the UK at their last GE).

But when I looked at the Singapore constituencies, I saw they are all the same. PAP doesn't have a single safe seat. A mere couple of percent difference in the swing against PAP could mean the difference between none going and the vast majority of their seats going.

So Singapore has the great benefit of Liberal Democracy, but keeps its great dis-benefit of potential instability in check. Very Confucian.

I didn't think it necessary to spell out all of the above to those who know the elements of political structure, and believe in Democracy.

I thought they would just think "Yes. All the people are equally enfranchised and can sling out the Government at the next GE, so it is a democracy. And they have their fundamental individual freedom. So it is a liberal democracy. But how the Singaporeans choose to operate it is very different from how the US, mainland European nations, and Britain choose to operate their liberal democracies. And that will be bedded in the fact that the Singaporeans come from the Confucian tradition, rather than the Judeo-Christianic one."

Singapore is effectively a contolled one-party state with less democracy than Iran, and overt fascist tendencies amongst other things. And this is according to Singaporean friends. I wont try to analyse the place myself as I may introduce my biased western thinking or even come up with quaint western imperialist notions of how Singapore is a wonderful role model for Asia. No doubt Mr. Thaksin and his true acolytes would envy this set up. Indeed, many have speculated that Singapore and its use of state repression and one party paternalistic system is the exact model for his version of Thailand.

[Ricardo]

While not having been to Singapore, and therefore not really holding a view on its unusually stable political-system, I would however point out that the enthusiasm with which its nationals head for Hat-Yai, for long week-ends in sanuk Thailand, suggest that home is not quite as attractive a place as it is being suggested.

They are voting with their feet !

Unfortunately Thailand has become, in recent times, much less attractive as a destination for its southern neighbours. This might be blamed on the Southern-troubles, or social changes here over the past 5 years, either way people & the local-economy down there are suffering as a result.

I guess not only farangs, who like to drink late, or at least be free to do so when on holiday ?

[Plus]

Democracy is just one of the systems of putting good leaders in place. Since Singaporeans agree that they ALREADY have a good leader in place, they don't care much how he got there and how he maintains his position.

Pretty much the same as with The King here. Thais trust their King far more than any democratically elected PM, as democracy has failed them numerous times while The King was always there for them.

However, in a very wise setup, they don't burden the King with day to day running of the country as this will inevitably lead to mistakes being made, and it will reflect badly on the monarchy itself.

Lee Kwan Yew has proven to be a great statesman, so was Mahathir, Thaksin is a common greedy businessman looking for his interests, he is out of their league.

And PAP will not surrender it's position lightly, even if things start to go wrong. Total control of the population, like in communist countries, garantees they will always come on top, in any elections.

In fact we don't know if Singapore would have been worse off if it allowed functioning Opposition. We simply don't know what they have missed.

One day, and it's inevitable, their system will go broke, and since their citizens had never had any experience running a democracy, things might get ugly - with Thaksin-like wannabe Lees getting voted in. Maybe they will go the way of Russia, with long period of instability followed by another strongman taking the helm.

Bottom line is -hey will have to start practicing Democracy one day, are they ready? Will they learn fast? Probably yes.

And another question, Martin, could you ask your friends who they voted for in 1995 elections? Most probably Chavalit and NAP, I guess. Who do they vote for now? Not the party but local politicians. Do they have new faces with TRT, or just the same old clans promoting their offspring under a new banner? That is a prevailing view in Bangkok.

[Old Man River]

Ask them if they remember who WAS in the government during that economic crisis, and who negotiated IMF's takeover of Thailand.

No one other than Thanong Bidaya, the current Finance Minister, Thaksin's right hand and personal banker. Thaksin himself was Deputy PM and made (allegedly) shitloads of money when Tanong warned him about baht devaluation. All at the time when your friends were sending bus fare to their sons and daughters.

Like they say: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice..."

It is strange that few also want to talk about who profted from the use of the reseves to prop up the currency while the profiteering was done although many Asian bankers will openly name names.

Hammered, any Asian bankers who name names are doing so based on speculation and rumor. Due to the exchange controls in place in June 1997, gains on the devaluation would have had to be done onshore by Thai bankers, not offshore by Asian bankers and as you know, there are no secrets in this country. If it was done in 1997 by an individual based on inside information, everyone in Thailand would know for sure by now. Add to this that just a few weeks prior to the devaluation, bankers in Thailand were advising their clients that the situation was ripe for a devaluation. This advice was not given based on inside information, but rather pure economics.

[Plus]

If it was done in 1997 by an individual based on inside information, everyone in Thailand would know for sure by now.

Yeah, just like we know who planted that bomb, who killed that muslim lawyer, who killed Deputy Governor in Narathiwat, who took those loans at Krung Thai bank, who owns Frobisher that won ground services contract at the new airport, who owns that "Thai" company that owns Air Asia, what Thaksin talked to Burmese about, and what he said to Putin, Chirak and co. and so on. Thailand is really an open society and all information is easily available for anyone.

[Old Man River]

If it was done in 1997 by an individual based on inside information, everyone in Thailand would know for sure by now.

Yeah, just like we know who planted that bomb, who killed that muslim lawyer, who killed Deputy Governor in Narathiwat, who took those loans at Krung Thai bank, who owns Frobisher that won ground services contract at the new airport, who owns that "Thai" company that owns Air Asia, what Thaksin talked to Burmese about, and what he said to Putin, Chirak and co. and so on. Thailand is really an open society and all information is easily available for anyone.

You mean you don't know any of this?

[hammered]

If it was done in 1997 by an individual based on inside information, everyone in Thailand would know for sure by now.

Yeah, just like we know who planted that bomb, who killed that muslim lawyer, who killed Deputy Governor in Narathiwat, who took those loans at Krung Thai bank, who owns Frobisher that won ground services contract at the new airport, who owns that "Thai" company that owns Air Asia, what Thaksin talked to Burmese about, and what he said to Putin, Chirak and co. and so on. Thailand is really an open society and all information is easily available for anyone.

Thank you plus, for pointing out the obvious. There is somuch misinformation about the 1997 devaluation and the run up to it. However, it is better not to discuss it too much on here.

[Old Man River]

Plus, before you attack, I was just kidding. However, when someone says Asian bankers openly name names, and nobody in Thailand knows, then I really have to wonder about the sources. On the other issues you mention above, is anyone openly naming names? No. That is my point.

[Plus]

Sorry, I didn't mean to attack, it just make any sense, and it didn't look like you were kidding, as another part of your post was dead serious.

Names are named, but not openly. Rumors are abound, but you can't post them here, let alone in the papers.

[Old Man River]

Sorry, I didn't mean to attack, it just make any sense, and it didn't look like you were kidding, as another part of your post was dead serious.

Names are named, but not openly. Rumors are abound, but you can't post them here, let alone in the papers.

I just get tired of the accusations on both sides, with no proof. If there is proof on this or anything else you mentioned, the Democrates are just a phone call away. However, they are always rumors from unnamed sources with no back up. Best to not even bring these things up tying them to someone unless their is proof.

[kmart]

The mists never lift here. Ask any Thai about their role in WWII for instance. (Clue: It affects politics in the South to this day). "Mai ao; mai phut" means they get the government they deserve, sadly.

[Siripon]

Martin, there was an interview with Lee Kuan Yew a few months ago when he was asked about democracy. He replied any country with a democratic system had to have a sufficiently large base of middle class voters able to vote based on informed decisions.

Does Thailand have such a base, is it big enough? was his rhetorical question.

Under Mr Lee Kuan Yew's system rural folk in Issan, the north and south woud be disenfranchised.

In his view Thailand is not ready for democracy.

[Plus]

I just get tired of the accusations on both sides, with no proof. If there is proof on this or anything else you mentioned, the Democrates are just a phone call away.

Democrats tried to bring up all of these issues up for debate. Fat chance. You'll get sued for billions if you go on record. "Rumors" are usually started by people who saw what's going on with their eyes but can't speak up.

Proof, and truth, are made of unobtanium with strong kevlar protection. Enjoy the rumors while they last.

[Martin]

For 'siripon', re post # 417:

Thailand has a far bigger 'middle-class' than is recognised.

People fall into the trap of thinking that only the successfully-schooled in urbia are middle-class.

That is western-centric thinking writ large, and Lee Kuan Yew is steeped in it. (Not that I blame him. Look at his biography, and especially "No man is an island", which you can buy here, though not in Singapore!).

An appreciable part of the rural population are 'middle class' in their mores, and it is mores that make a class, not income band. In industrialised urban society middle incomes happen, with some exceptions, to coincide with the holders of middle-class mores, that is all.

Saying Thailand is not ready for democracy (which it wasn't when democracy was imported by westernised returnees in 1932, and not a huge amount has changed over the intervening 74 years) is on a par with saying that a teenage child is not ready for puberty. True, but does nothing to help.

Lee Kuan Yew is a man of great clarity of vision, and the least self-fooling man that I have ever come across. When he revealed that he does not expect Singapore to survive to the end of this century, it made me think and think and think. But I came to see that he is right, though absorbing a diaspora of 4 million ex-Singaporeans over the latter three-quarters of the century will hardly be more than a thickening of the line of the graph of world problems.

[Martin]

For 'Ricardo', re post #407:

Twenty years ago there was a joke that part of Hat Yai at the weekend was "the little Singapore to the north". It sounds like something hasn't changed.

Singapore even then was showing the world how to manage a city, and when one felt a bit managed, the appropriate steps to take were towards Changi Airport or the Causeway, not forgetting your passport!

It happened that I got asked to design and head-up the first "Character Development" program.

Fortunately, it was only a small pilot scheme for 600 students. But just to take them camping, I had to take them abroad.

Again fortunately, it struck me that the logistics were military-scale, and I had just finished giving some extra engineering lectures to cover the absence of one of my assistant lecturers who had been doing the logistics of manoeuvres on his reservist service. Rank hath its privileges, as he promptly found out, when I dropped my problem on him.

Being Singapore's first ever Student Development Officer, ( there are scads of them now), was one of the stranger threads in the rich tapestry of life!