Thaksin denies PM’s accusation that he pulls the strings behind anti-government activities

[Wilsonandson]

"Thaksin said that he had kept his silence all along and stopped making any comments"

So Al-Jazeera are fabricating claims such as "After nearly two years of relative quiet, Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand's controversial former prime minister, has gone on a media offensive with a series of interviews lashing out at the country's military government and its proposed constitution." which they reported on 24th February ?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/thaksin-thai-military-government-long-160223053538667.html

also confirmed in other media ...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/22/thailand-thaksin-shinawatra-draft-constitution-is-charade

or http://www.wsj.com/articles/thailands-former-leader-thaksin-shinawatra-says-juntas-election-plans-a-charade-1456043195

or Reuters in http://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics-thaksin-idUSKCN0VX0PA

Perhaps they were all making it up, as "he had kept his silence all along".

He's obsessed more than us on Thai politics. Every interview he has done since running away is about Thai politics. I saw he has done some interviews that are over 2 hours long in English. He could talk about politics until the cows come home. Kept his silence, you can't shut him up! Cut out his tongue might do it, if they catch the slippery toad!!!

Well. given that he is a Thai politician ( elected) who was deposed by a military coup. and given that his party has since twice been elected and twice been forced out by the military, I can rather understand his obsession.

Are you Thaksin?

If Thaksin were to disappear from politics, what would you do? There are 68 million other Thai people out there, whats the fascination? Fancy him, do yer?

[Ricardo]

"Thaksin said that he had kept his silence all along and stopped making any comments"

So Al-Jazeera are fabricating claims such as "After nearly two years of relative quiet, Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand's controversial former prime minister, has gone on a media offensive with a series of interviews lashing out at the country's military government and its proposed constitution." which they reported on 24th February ?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/thaksin-thai-military-government-long-160223053538667.html

also confirmed in other media ...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/22/thailand-thaksin-shinawatra-draft-constitution-is-charade

or http://www.wsj.com/articles/thailands-former-leader-thaksin-shinawatra-says-juntas-election-plans-a-charade-1456043195

or Reuters in http://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics-thaksin-idUSKCN0VX0PA

Perhaps they were all making it up, as "he had kept his silence all along".

He's obsessed more than us on Thai politics. Every interview he has done since running away is about Thai politics. I saw he has done some interviews that are over 2 hours long in English. He could talk about politics until the cows come home. Kept his silence, you can't shut him up! Cut out his tongue might do it, if they catch the slippery toad!!!

Well. given that he is a Thai politician ( elected) who was deposed by a military coup. and given that his party has since twice been elected and twice been forced out by the military, I can rather understand his obsession.

So you would agree with my own thought, that when he says "he had kept his silence all along and stopped making any comments", he is in fact talking total <deleted> ?

Nice to see such unanimity among TV-posters, for once.

[arrowsdawdle]

He must be comparing himself to luminaries such as Nelson Mandela or Aung San Suu Kyi,

and hi thinks that if he be in exile long enough, he one day, will come back triumphant riding on a white

elephant to reclaim back his place.....

Exile is the correct term and good on you for not perpetuating the 'fugitive' myth. Nobody is chasing him and he is not running from anyone or hiding from anyone.

[Wilsonandson]

He must be comparing himself to luminaries such as Nelson Mandela or Aung San Suu Kyi,

and hi thinks that if he be in exile long enough, he one day, will come back triumphant riding on a white

elephant to reclaim back his place.....

Exile is the correct term and good on you for not perpetuating the 'fugitive' myth. Nobody is chasing him and he is not running from anyone or hiding from anyone.

Except in his own tiny world. The man with 8 telephones on him at all times. Maybe he's an octopus.

[heybruce]

"Fortunately the majority have woken up to the shenanigans by thaksin and his ilk with this hypocrisy they spew."

On this (but not the rest of your post) I am in qualified agreement with you. In 2014 the people were tired of the demonstrated incompetence of the PTP, which was why it was an excellent time to hold a nationwide election and start the process of removing the PTP and Shinawatras from power democratically.

However the Democrats were also extremely unpopular and would have suffered as well, and Thailand would have been governed by a coalition of parties chosen by the majority, not the power-brokers of Bangkok. Obviously this was unacceptable to Suthep, Prayuth, quite a few posters on TV, and others who can not be named.

Now the incompetence of the PTP government has been forgotten, overridden by the incompetence and oppression of the junta. If there is another election the Shinawatras will be as influential as ever.

Agree, there is no really credible party in the picture right now.

On the other hand, if you think the paymaster and his ilk are good for Thailand, god help us.

Well, there was an attempt to form a new political party for all the right reasons before the coup http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1398086388&section=11&typecate=06. Of course that's not going to happen now.

I think it's clear from the above post, and many others, that I don't think the Shinawatra's are good for Thailand. I've also made it clear in many posts that I don't think military rule is good for Thailand. I think democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

Democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

If it stayed in place long enough when yingluck was in power the economy would have crashed, the tourist sector would have crashed along with it, terrorist attacks in Bangkok would have sky rocketed unabated without a single arrest by the govt and yingluck would be running the country on FB with back up from thaksin on Skype.

Democracy! It has to be born before it can mature.

You're becoming more detached from reality. The protests were fading, as was the violence. Tourism took it's biggest hit after the coup, and in spite of the stories hyping the wonderful Chinese tourists, many tourism dependent businesses have yet to recover. The economy has stagnated since the coup.

Yingluck was no longer PM. The PTP government was attempting to hold an election in July 2014 when both it and the ironically misnamed Democrats were at a low point in popularity. Democracy had a tenuous foothold and a chance to advance. Then there was the coup.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the coup was staged to ensure the "right" people had a secure grip on power during and after an upcoming event. It wasn't staged for noble "save the country" reasons, it was staged out of pure self-interest for a small minority of the country.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the coup was staged to ensure the "right" people had a secure grip on power during and after an upcoming event. It wasn't staged for noble "save the country" reasons, it was staged out of pure self-interest for a small minority of the country.

Pure speculation. It was staged to wipe the Shin's off the political arena full stop. Since 2006 they the PAD yellow shirts have been trying everything to get rid of Thaksin. The elite want Thailand to stay the same as it always has been, like Victorian England. The army is the force, just one cog in the elites machine. It is the elite that ordered the coup. Above the elite are the unmentionables. To form a connection between each cog in the machine is wrong. The unmentionables are totally seperate from the elite. The elite is the manipulator of the army cog that's job is to rid Thailand of the Thaksin machine. The elite installed Abhisit before and want a similar result in 2017. Imo.

Of course it's speculation. These are very secretive people.

However rather than the analogy of a machine with cogs, I prefer an arch made of many stones, weighing down on the people supporting it. There will be a change in the keystone of the arch soon. The other stones like their elevated position want to make sure those underneath don't do anything to upset the order when this happens.

[heybruce]

Even compared to the unsubstantiated speculation this topic has generated in abundance, your post is remarkably lacking in substance.

Which of course means 'substance you care for'

No problem, difference of opinion.

No, I mean substance in general. A post of unsubstantiated opinions and quotes that are meaningless without context.

Thanks for reminding me this topic is on Thaksin.

Thaksin didn't deny, he only said he didn't need to. The 'calender' issue got lots of posters into 'democracy' mood, till it was clear to all that it was politics as usual instead and the 'all innocent line' had lost is believability. With the Thaksin meddling in 'peace talks' we had the same. I think it was a too early departed friend who tried to convince me I wouldn't be able to prove Thaksin did such thing because Thaksin wouldn't do such thing. Thaksin only non-denied "who am I to do such". Well, I won't tell you what I think he is, but half a year later it came out he did do such. His PM sister at that time also non-denied.

Enough context on Thaksin's non-denials and believability for you or would you like to know more

Would I like to know more? Only if you'll finally say something direct and unambiguous. However if you'll only provide more vague meandering, I'll pass.

[baboon]

^^

That'll be a No, then.

[JAG]

"Thaksin said that he had kept his silence all along and stopped making any comments"

So Al-Jazeera are fabricating claims such as "After nearly two years of relative quiet, Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand's controversial former prime minister, has gone on a media offensive with a series of interviews lashing out at the country's military government and its proposed constitution." which they reported on 24th February ?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/thaksin-thai-military-government-long-160223053538667.html

also confirmed in other media ...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/22/thailand-thaksin-shinawatra-draft-constitution-is-charade

or http://www.wsj.com/articles/thailands-former-leader-thaksin-shinawatra-says-juntas-election-plans-a-charade-1456043195

or Reuters in http://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics-thaksin-idUSKCN0VX0PA

Perhaps they were all making it up, as "he had kept his silence all along".

He's obsessed more than us on Thai politics. Every interview he has done since running away is about Thai politics. I saw he has done some interviews that are over 2 hours long in English. He could talk about politics until the cows come home. Kept his silence, you can't shut him up! Cut out his tongue might do it, if they catch the slippery toad!!!

Well. given that he is a Thai politician ( elected) who was deposed by a military coup. and given that his party has since twice been elected and twice been forced out by the military, I can rather understand his obsession.

Are you Thaksin?

If Thaksin were to disappear from politics, what would you do? There are 68 million other Thai people out there, whats the fascination? Fancy him, do yer?

What a silly reply!

You asked why he is obsessed with Thai politics.

I suggested a reason. A reason which rather resonates with many of the 68 million Thai people you mention, and no I'm not Thaksin, nor do I "fancy him"!

[rubl]

No, I mean substance in general. A post of unsubstantiated opinions and quotes that are meaningless without context.

Thanks for reminding me this topic is on Thaksin.

Thaksin didn't deny, he only said he didn't need to. The 'calender' issue got lots of posters into 'democracy' mood, till it was clear to all that it was politics as usual instead and the 'all innocent line' had lost is believability. With the Thaksin meddling in 'peace talks' we had the same. I think it was a too early departed friend who tried to convince me I wouldn't be able to prove Thaksin did such thing because Thaksin wouldn't do such thing. Thaksin only non-denied "who am I to do such". Well, I won't tell you what I think he is, but half a year later it came out he did do such. His PM sister at that time also non-denied.

Enough context on Thaksin's non-denials and believability for you or would you like to know more

Your rhetoric is especially obtuse today.

Let's go back to the article at hand. The first two sentences are

Fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has denied Prime Minister Prayut Chan-ocha’s accusation that he was the man behind all the anti-government activities in the country.

He also denied that he hired foreign lobbyists to tarnish the image of Thailand.

I interpret that to mean a "denial" of the accusations, not a "non-denial".

The sentence is from the reporter. On his facebook page Thaksin only says he doesn't need it.

[rubl]

Which of course means 'substance you care for'

No problem, difference of opinion.

No, I mean substance in general. A post of unsubstantiated opinions and quotes that are meaningless without context.

Thanks for reminding me this topic is on Thaksin.

Thaksin didn't deny, he only said he didn't need to. The 'calender' issue got lots of posters into 'democracy' mood, till it was clear to all that it was politics as usual instead and the 'all innocent line' had lost is believability. With the Thaksin meddling in 'peace talks' we had the same. I think it was a too early departed friend who tried to convince me I wouldn't be able to prove Thaksin did such thing because Thaksin wouldn't do such thing. Thaksin only non-denied "who am I to do such". Well, I won't tell you what I think he is, but half a year later it came out he did do such. His PM sister at that time also non-denied.

Enough context on Thaksin's non-denials and believability for you or would you like to know more

Would I like to know more? Only if you'll finally say something direct and unambiguous. However if you'll only provide more vague meandering, I'll pass.

I guess like Thaksin you don't need it. It would only disturb your view of how the world should be.

[heybruce]

No, I mean substance in general. A post of unsubstantiated opinions and quotes that are meaningless without context.

Thanks for reminding me this topic is on Thaksin.

Thaksin didn't deny, he only said he didn't need to. The 'calender' issue got lots of posters into 'democracy' mood, till it was clear to all that it was politics as usual instead and the 'all innocent line' had lost is believability. With the Thaksin meddling in 'peace talks' we had the same. I think it was a too early departed friend who tried to convince me I wouldn't be able to prove Thaksin did such thing because Thaksin wouldn't do such thing. Thaksin only non-denied "who am I to do such". Well, I won't tell you what I think he is, but half a year later it came out he did do such. His PM sister at that time also non-denied.

Enough context on Thaksin's non-denials and believability for you or would you like to know more

Would I like to know more? Only if you'll finally say something direct and unambiguous. However if you'll only provide more vague meandering, I'll pass.

I guess like Thaksin you don't need it. It would only disturb your view of how the world should be.

And the vagueness continues.

[rubl]

Thanks for reminding me this topic is on Thaksin.

Thaksin didn't deny, he only said he didn't need to. The 'calender' issue got lots of posters into 'democracy' mood, till it was clear to all that it was politics as usual instead and the 'all innocent line' had lost is believability. With the Thaksin meddling in 'peace talks' we had the same. I think it was a too early departed friend who tried to convince me I wouldn't be able to prove Thaksin did such thing because Thaksin wouldn't do such thing. Thaksin only non-denied "who am I to do such". Well, I won't tell you what I think he is, but half a year later it came out he did do such. His PM sister at that time also non-denied.

Enough context on Thaksin's non-denials and believability for you or would you like to know more

Would I like to know more? Only if you'll finally say something direct and unambiguous. However if you'll only provide more vague meandering, I'll pass.

I guess like Thaksin you don't need it. It would only disturb your view of how the world should be.

And the vagueness continues.

Terribly sorry about that, my dear heybruce. Unfortunately in this topic we have Thaksin who tells not to have a need and previously saying 'who am I to do such'. It would seem it's difficult to get him to be more clear.

So, Thaksin accused and defending himself with saying "I have no need". Vague? Yes, vague. Here we seem to agree.

[heybruce]

Would I like to know more? Only if you'll finally say something direct and unambiguous. However if you'll only provide more vague meandering, I'll pass.

I guess like Thaksin you don't need it. It would only disturb your view of how the world should be.

And the vagueness continues.

Terribly sorry about that, my dear heybruce. Unfortunately in this topic we have Thaksin who tells not to have a need and previously saying 'who am I to do such'. It would seem it's difficult to get him to be more clear.

So, Thaksin accused and defending himself with saying "I have no need". Vague? Yes, vague. Here we seem to agree.

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

Edited April 30, 2016 by heybruce

[Squeegee]

This is better than Borg V Conners on a ZX Spectrum.

[tomwct]

The Government has the goods on Thaksin and his THUGS and the people in custody to testify. More of the Red Shirts will be heading to

jail and then Prison, with prison terms, in the near future!

[Squeegee]

The Government has the goods on Thaksin and his THUGS and the people in custody to testify. More of the Red Shirts will be heading to

jail and then Prison, with prison terms, in the near future!

Amazing stuff. Are you the guy that soldier fella goes to?

Pray, tell me: how much longer must I wait before I can have sex (with another person) again?

And... will I ever be rich and famous?

Is it just future stuff, or do you do potential repercussions of life decisions, as well?

I mean, should I do Rachel (if she were to let me), given that we work together?

[Ricardo]

The Government has the goods on Thaksin and his THUGS and the people in custody to testify. More of the Red Shirts will be heading to

jail and then Prison, with prison terms, in the near future!

"The Government has the goods on Thaksin"

So, given your apparent sources in the government, when will they actually be revealing what they know to the rest of us ?

[Holy Cinema]

The Government has the goods on Thaksin and his THUGS and the people in custody to testify. More of the Red Shirts will be heading to

jail and then Prison, with prison terms, in the near future!

They said the very same thing about the alleged "Black shirts" they rounded up, back in 2014, non have been tried yet, and no big names arrested for being the paymasters behind them.

Shall I rephrase what you wrote and put it into context.

"Thaksin has the goods on many people sitting in Government, the Police and the Military , and they know this, his party will bide their time, More of those people will flee the country once his party win the next election, for fear of a systematic clampdown of their basic human rights "

In other words, stop with the bullshit, either produce the evidence, don't use it to delay any referendum/elections, which I strongly suspect they will do, citing that it's a security risk, and that the country is too dangerous to allow it to be returned to the people.. throw in the elephant in the room to the mix, and it will be highly likely it will be closer to 2020 before any sort of elections will happen.

The Junta know that sooner or later, if they're to keep their (broken) promises, politicians will need to be allowed to begin their political campaigns, that means complete freedom of movement, free speech, and being able to slag each other into the ground.. if you really think Prayuth would allow this to happen ?

[rubl]

I guess like Thaksin you don't need it. It would only disturb your view of how the world should be.

And the vagueness continues.

Terribly sorry about that, my dear heybruce. Unfortunately in this topic we have Thaksin who tells not to have a need and previously saying 'who am I to do such'. It would seem it's difficult to get him to be more clear.

So, Thaksin accused and defending himself with saying "I have no need". Vague? Yes, vague. Here we seem to agree.

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

You get to resemble your hero. You twist and turn as usual, you resort to semi-intelligent gibberish and try to ignore and deflect from 'Thaksin said he had no need to do such' which is a non-denial. Just like his famous "I'm too rich to need to be corrupt'. If that's not clear and direct I fear you are in denial.

[MZurf]

And the vagueness continues.

Terribly sorry about that, my dear heybruce. Unfortunately in this topic we have Thaksin who tells not to have a need and previously saying 'who am I to do such'. It would seem it's difficult to get him to be more clear.

So, Thaksin accused and defending himself with saying "I have no need". Vague? Yes, vague. Here we seem to agree.

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

You get to resemble your hero. You twist and turn as usual, you resort to semi-intelligent gibberish and try to ignore and deflect from 'Thaksin said he had no need to do such' which is a non-denial. Just like his famous "I'm too rich to need to be corrupt'. If that's not clear and direct I fear you are in denial.

Speaking of twist and turn, can you, as a junta supporter, finally answer this simple and unambiguous question:

After 19 coups & attempts where NOTHING changed what makes you think it's different this time around??

[heybruce]

Terribly sorry about that, my dear heybruce. Unfortunately in this topic we have Thaksin who tells not to have a need and previously saying 'who am I to do such'. It would seem it's difficult to get him to be more clear.

So, Thaksin accused and defending himself with saying "I have no need". Vague? Yes, vague. Here we seem to agree.

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

You get to resemble your hero. You twist and turn as usual, you resort to semi-intelligent gibberish and try to ignore and deflect from 'Thaksin said he had no need to do such' which is a non-denial. Just like his famous "I'm too rich to need to be corrupt'. If that's not clear and direct I fear you are in denial.

Speaking of twist and turn, can you, as a junta supporter, finally answer this simple and unambiguous question:

After 19 coups & attempts where NOTHING changed what makes you think it's different this time around??

"twist and turn" is the phrase rubl uses when he has nothing to post, but is going to post anyway.

[sjaak327]

Thaksin doesn't need to spend even a single satang to discredit this government. Their incompetence and their human rights abuses among other things are more than enough..

[djjamie]

Agree, there is no really credible party in the picture right now.

On the other hand, if you think the paymaster and his ilk are good for Thailand, god help us.

Well, there was an attempt to form a new political party for all the right reasons before the coup http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1398086388&section=11&typecate=06. Of course that's not going to happen now.

I think it's clear from the above post, and many others, that I don't think the Shinawatra's are good for Thailand. I've also made it clear in many posts that I don't think military rule is good for Thailand. I think democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

Democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

If it stayed in place long enough when yingluck was in power the economy would have crashed, the tourist sector would have crashed along with it, terrorist attacks in Bangkok would have sky rocketed unabated without a single arrest by the govt and yingluck would be running the country on FB with back up from thaksin on Skype.

Democracy! It has to be born before it can mature.

You're becoming more detached from reality. The protests were fading, as was the violence. Tourism took it's biggest hit after the coup, and in spite of the stories hyping the wonderful Chinese tourists, many tourism dependent businesses have yet to recover. The economy has stagnated since the coup.

Yingluck was no longer PM. The PTP government was attempting to hold an election in July 2014 when both it and the ironically misnamed Democrats were at a low point in popularity. Democracy had a tenuous foothold and a chance to advance. Then there was the coup.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the coup was staged to ensure the "right" people had a secure grip on power during and after an upcoming event. It wasn't staged for noble "save the country" reasons, it was staged out of pure self-interest for a small minority of the country.

Quite correct on the tourist hit.

The number plummeted up to he coup due to tourist attacks against protestors and continues until one month after the coup. Then they rose again to record levels

Tourists prefer peace and stability to death and terrorism my friend even if it doesn't suit some agenda.

FACTS. The PTP's greatest enemy.

[heybruce]

Well, there was an attempt to form a new political party for all the right reasons before the coup http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1398086388&section=11&typecate=06. Of course that's not going to happen now.

I think it's clear from the above post, and many others, that I don't think the Shinawatra's are good for Thailand. I've also made it clear in many posts that I don't think military rule is good for Thailand. I think democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

Democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

If it stayed in place long enough when yingluck was in power the economy would have crashed, the tourist sector would have crashed along with it, terrorist attacks in Bangkok would have sky rocketed unabated without a single arrest by the govt and yingluck would be running the country on FB with back up from thaksin on Skype.

Democracy! It has to be born before it can mature.

You're becoming more detached from reality. The protests were fading, as was the violence. Tourism took it's biggest hit after the coup, and in spite of the stories hyping the wonderful Chinese tourists, many tourism dependent businesses have yet to recover. The economy has stagnated since the coup.

Yingluck was no longer PM. The PTP government was attempting to hold an election in July 2014 when both it and the ironically misnamed Democrats were at a low point in popularity. Democracy had a tenuous foothold and a chance to advance. Then there was the coup.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the coup was staged to ensure the "right" people had a secure grip on power during and after an upcoming event. It wasn't staged for noble "save the country" reasons, it was staged out of pure self-interest for a small minority of the country.

Quite correct on the tourist hit.

The number plummeted up to he coup due to tourist attacks against protestors and continues until one month after the coup. Then they rose again to record levels

Tourists prefer peace and stability to death and terrorism my friend even if it doesn't suit some agenda.

FACTS. The PTP's greatest enemy.

"tourist attacks against protestors"?

I assume you meant "terrorist". You continue to ignore the violence committed by the protesters, and that the violence was low by Thailand standards. Tourists stayed away because international news was showing Bangkok in gridlock because of the protests. Both violence and gridlock were part of Suthep's plan to provide justification for a coup. The protest was dwindling because the government wasn't taking the bait and ordering a bloody crackdown, which also would have justified the coup.

The coup was staged because life was returning to normal in Bangkok, which would have made an election possible. A successful election would have resulted in a government with electoral legitimacy, which would have made a coup much more difficult. After the coup tourists stayed away because they didn't want to holiday in a place under military rule with martial law and curfews.

Your self-serving opinion of why the tourists stayed away doesn't qualify as a fact. Also, you are the first one I know who claimed that the protest was dwindling due to the attacks. Do you have any sources to support that claim, or is it also a made up fact?

REALITY. The junta huggers greatest enemy.

[sjaak327]

Aha Jamie reiterating TAT propaganda. Just a few years ago, we had three daily direct flights to BKK from Amsterdam. That's 21 each week. One airline has cut down to only 4 flights a week and starting December 2, another one will cease flying to Bangkok altogether.

From 21 flights down to just 11. Not to mention the fact that prices for those flights have been rock bottom the last three to four years.

Tourism numbers are indeed up, 100% due to Chinese tourists, the ones on package tours, that don't spend much outside that package.

[MZurf]

Democracy, if it's ever allowed to stay in place long enough to mature, will be good for Thailand.

If it stayed in place long enough when yingluck was in power the economy would have crashed, the tourist sector would have crashed along with it, terrorist attacks in Bangkok would have sky rocketed unabated without a single arrest by the govt and yingluck would be running the country on FB with back up from thaksin on Skype.

Democracy! It has to be born before it can mature.

You're becoming more detached from reality. The protests were fading, as was the violence. Tourism took it's biggest hit after the coup, and in spite of the stories hyping the wonderful Chinese tourists, many tourism dependent businesses have yet to recover. The economy has stagnated since the coup.

Yingluck was no longer PM. The PTP government was attempting to hold an election in July 2014 when both it and the ironically misnamed Democrats were at a low point in popularity. Democracy had a tenuous foothold and a chance to advance. Then there was the coup.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the coup was staged to ensure the "right" people had a secure grip on power during and after an upcoming event. It wasn't staged for noble "save the country" reasons, it was staged out of pure self-interest for a small minority of the country.

Quite correct on the tourist hit.

The number plummeted up to he coup due to tourist attacks against protestors and continues until one month after the coup. Then they rose again to record levels

Tourists prefer peace and stability to death and terrorism my friend even if it doesn't suit some agenda.

FACTS. The PTP's greatest enemy.

"tourist attacks against protestors"?

I assume you meant "terrorist". You continue to ignore the violence committed by the protesters, and that the violence was low by Thailand standards. Tourists stayed away because international news was showing Bangkok in gridlock because of the protests. Both violence and gridlock were part of Suthep's plan to provide justification for a coup. The protest was dwindling because the government wasn't taking the bait and ordering a bloody crackdown, which also would have justified the coup.

The coup was staged because life was returning to normal in Bangkok, which would have made an election possible. A successful election would have resulted in a government with electoral legitimacy, which would have made a coup much more difficult. After the coup tourists stayed away because they didn't want to holiday in a place under military rule with martial law and curfews.

Your self-serving opinion of why the tourists stayed away doesn't qualify as a fact. Also, you are the first one I know who claimed that the protest was dwindling due to the attacks. Do you have any sources to support that claim, or is it also a made up fact?

REALITY. The junta huggers greatest enemy.

"REALITY. The junta huggers greatest enemy."

Be kind to them, they're a very small minority (and getting smaller).

[rubl]

Terribly sorry about that, my dear heybruce. Unfortunately in this topic we have Thaksin who tells not to have a need and previously saying 'who am I to do such'. It would seem it's difficult to get him to be more clear.

So, Thaksin accused and defending himself with saying "I have no need". Vague? Yes, vague. Here we seem to agree.

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

You get to resemble your hero. You twist and turn as usual, you resort to semi-intelligent gibberish and try to ignore and deflect from 'Thaksin said he had no need to do such' which is a non-denial. Just like his famous "I'm too rich to need to be corrupt'. If that's not clear and direct I fear you are in denial.

Speaking of twist and turn, can you, as a junta supporter, finally answer this simple and unambiguous question:

After 19 coups & attempts where NOTHING changed what makes you think it's different this time around??

Does that have any relation with "Thaksin said he didn't need such" ?

[rubl]

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

You get to resemble your hero. You twist and turn as usual, you resort to semi-intelligent gibberish and try to ignore and deflect from 'Thaksin said he had no need to do such' which is a non-denial. Just like his famous "I'm too rich to need to be corrupt'. If that's not clear and direct I fear you are in denial.

Speaking of twist and turn, can you, as a junta supporter, finally answer this simple and unambiguous question:

After 19 coups & attempts where NOTHING changed what makes you think it's different this time around??

"twist and turn" is the phrase rubl uses when he has nothing to post, but is going to post anyway.

... and Thaksin said he didn't need such.

[rubl]

Thaksin doesn't need to spend even a single satang to discredit this government. Their incompetence and their human rights abuses among other things are more than enough..

As Thaksin himself said "he doesn't need such". On the other hand 'not needing' has never stopped him before.

PS did you enjoy 'Kingsday' at the Embassy yesterday? Lucky the rain had stopped before things got really started late afternoon.

[MZurf]

rubl, this will be my last attempt to get you to post something worth reading. Let me make this very clear; nobody cares about your vague "Thaksin, sort of, maybe implied or dodged the question of...." stuff.

Remember, you are the one unconstrained by censorship. You are the one who can post "I hate Thaksin, I love Prayuth" stuff without fear of retribution. Go nuts! Be very specific. What have you got that tells us that all or part of Thailand's problems are due to evil, behind the scenes actions by Thaksin? Do you have anything beyond paranoid conspiracy theories that show that Thaksin was behind the small anti-government activities?

Do you have anything to say? If so, post it clearly, directly and unambiguously. If you post anything less, I will be done feeding the troll and let you have the last meaningless, noncommittal word and be done with this.

You get to resemble your hero. You twist and turn as usual, you resort to semi-intelligent gibberish and try to ignore and deflect from 'Thaksin said he had no need to do such' which is a non-denial. Just like his famous "I'm too rich to need to be corrupt'. If that's not clear and direct I fear you are in denial.

Speaking of twist and turn, can you, as a junta supporter, finally answer this simple and unambiguous question:

After 19 coups & attempts where NOTHING changed what makes you think it's different this time around??

Does that have any relation with "Thaksin said he didn't need such" ?

None whatsoever, but I have tried posing the question to the junta supporters probably close to a hundred times in a wide variety of threads but you all run away from it like Dracula from garlic.

Says it all, really