This phenomenon indeed shows how Thai people are woefully lacking in discipline and ethics. No doubt a lot of Thais are nominal Buddhists and go to the Buddhist monastery presumably to make merit and wish happiness on themselves. But they fail to put one basic tenet into practice: metta (compassion) for their fellow human beings. A life based only on hatred and revenge can only lead to misery.
I have now said, in two comments, that Aphisit’s purported offer of elections in exchange for ending the protests was not legitimate and that the red shirts therefore did not reject an offer of compromise, but instead avoided being tricked.
If you want to dispute that factually, please do so.
You can also continue with your obfuscation. I don’t think these rhetorical gimmicks are helping either you or Aphisit, but feel free to carry on. You both seem to be impressing yourselves.
I don’t think the Democrats care two hoots about their abysmal poll showings or the thumping defeat that awaits them on July 3rd. Because the PT election victory will be followed by an army or judicial coup within 6 months. And the civil disorder that will provoke will be of a magnitude that Gen. Prayuth cannot even dream of.
Will you now move past the sematics and deal with the issue?
It’s not just semantics Leah, it’s the difference between making an honest argument or just broadcasting propaganda.
You want to deal with the ‘issue’. OK, what did a hundred people die for during last year’s protest? What was gained? And why did the UDD leadership abandon its followers and leave them to their fate at the bitter end?
I at least have some respect for the mad Englishman and the down-and-out Australian that camped out with the protesters. I don’t have to agree with them, but they did ‘put their money where their mouth was’.
If this gets through, there’ll have to be a few other changes. The Indian Ocean will have to be the African/Australian/Arabian/ Indian Ocean, the English Channel will as I saw somewhere become the “Anglo-french pond” (although the French might want to call it the French/Anglo Pond), the Mediterranean Sea will have to be “The Sea that the Romans Used to Think was at The Center of the World when They Thought The Earth was Flat” and the Red Sea, Black Sea and Blue Danube will have to be qualified with an extra phrase “but only to drunks, romantics and the colour blind”.
“More seriously, though, it seems to me that the Democrat Party and their supporters – including the less than entirely visible lot – seem to have decided that if they are going to win an election then they need to provoke a bit of red shirt violence.” – C20
With elections drawing very near, I guess inane comments as above (and happily gulped with a burp by SteveCM) should be expected. But if holding a Democrat Party election rally at Rachaprasong area is a provocation for red shirt violence then I encourage the Democrat Party to hold such election rally at Rachaprasong EVERYDAY for as long as permitted by election rules. Thailand needs reminding that Rachaprasong district was recently devastated by Red Shirts violence and arson inspired by phone-ins from Dubai from a spiteful fugitive Thaksin.
Former Red Shirt chairman Veera Musikapong was certainly correct to lament the infiltration by very violent radical elements of the Red Shirts movement. That being the case . . . those violent Red radicals need only a small nudge to be provoked to bomb, burn and kill.
c20 “More seriously, though, it seems to me that the Democrat Party and their supporters – including the less than entirely visible lot – seem to have decided that if they are going to win an election then they need to provoke a bit of red shirt violence.”
And, if they can’t provoke it, they’re happy to provide it. Very easy for Newin to put together again his bunch of “blue-shirt” thugs that featured at the ASEAN summit in Pattaya (2009) – this time of course in new “red” T-shirts for the occasion.
I hope that UDD Chair Thida will a] make it very clear to UDD/redshirt followers that there’s a trap being baited for them and they should stay well away from it….. and b] warn loud and clear in advance of the very real prospect of a “staged” incident at Rachaprasong on 23 June.
With luck, most UDD/red supporters will see through Mark’s crude tactics anyway – as indeed may many of the middle ground voters. They, after all, have an interest in a better, calmer future that supersedes Mark’s “heat and hate” route back to the PM’s chair.
Les, I am arguing (as I have for a very long time) for the electoral process, not violent confrontation. Do you support the electoral process? AW
I most certainly do Andrew. Not only that but I also believe there is a place for extra-parliamentary opposition, so I would not argue against the right of either the PAD or the UDD to exist.
The problem for those like you Andrew is whether supporting the UDD protest in 2009 and 2010 was supporting the electoral process? In 2009 there had been no indications that Abhisit was going to cancel future elections. In 2010 just before the grim end of the protest the UDD was offered elections for last November. And here we are now in run-in to an election called earlier than need be against the predictions of many on the New Mandala. So not only do I believe in the electoral process, I can see it exists here in Thailand.
Can you tell me what the hundred odd deaths achieved. If you can’t think on anything, doesn’t that make support of the protest an embarrassment.
There was no offer from Aphisit. If I recall correctly the reds were told that if they packed up and went home, they could then start talking about an election.
It was obvious to the red leaders, that the offer was a fraud and if they shut down the protest, they would be jailed and no election would take place.
That’s exactly what happened to Ne Win. An army usurper coming along and doing away with the strong man. Not that it’s done any good to the country, much worse in fact. Than Shwe could end up worse than Ne Win and he knows it.
The “establishment” only supports elections if they can win them.
It is good to see that Abhisit is now set to have the Democrat Party rally at Ratchaprasong. Business suits and ties will be required for gentlemen and ladies should be fashionably attired. Maids and drivers will be there to furnish cool drinks, wave fans and mop brows.
More seriously, though, it seems to me that the Democrat Party and their supporters – including the less than entirely visible lot – seem to have decided that if they are going to win an election then they need to provoke a bit of red shirt violence. This was a tactic in 2009 and 2010 as well (for anyone who cares to go back and trawl through the press for the periods prior to red shirt rallies).
@ Greg Lopez #10 (1) The crux of my posting is to ask why the double standards in decision making – one standard for what some Australians deem important (animal rights) against …[human rights of refugees]
I think your stance is wrong for 2 reasons. As pointed out by another poster it makes no sense to link 2 completely different issues – one regarding extreme cruelty to animals and the other regarding the best way to deal with refugees. The 2nd reason is that you see the proposed scheme as being an attack on the human rights of refugees. But the current system (of sorting out who gets accepted as a refugee into Australia) on the basis of who drums up the funds to pay people smugglers and undertakes a hazardous ocean voyage, is in itself terrible for the human rights of all would-be refugees wanting to come to Australia. It is a system which says “you want us to accept you? Good! Then come up with a large sum of money, deal with (usually vicious) criminals, and put your and your family’s life at risk before to prove that you’re worthy!” There is indeed a large pool of worthy people. Deciding who to accept from that pool should be done rationally and on the basis of need, not on survival of a sea journey. That is why I say getting rid of the boat trade will, overall, be beneficial to the rights of refugees. The proposed scheme has a very good chance of doing this.
My friend, a middle aged wealthy Australian economist, believes that it is good economics to have the boat people processed in Malaysia
I prefer not to discuss this problem simply in terms of economics. My standpoint is based on human rights.
My friend is not a racist and I don’t think you are too.
Likewise, despite your apparent acceptance of the current system, which I believe is terrible for refugees, and your reluctance to accept a system which might help them overall, I don’t think you are a racist.
Hi Huw, I’m trying hard to avoid crowding out the discussion, so a quick question.
If it is the same people fighting the cause to stop live cattle exports and the Malaysia solution (I argue that a larger constituent is against the Malaysia solution than banning live cattle exports), why did the Gillard administration respond so differently?
That’s really the crux of my question (& post).
I’d really appreciate if Australians can actually shed light on why they think the Gillard administration has made two opposing decisions on the same set of core values i.e. Rights – Rights of Australian cattle against Rights of refugees arriving in Australia.
Yes, of course, Soonuk and Les, we should not encourage people to rise up.
I guess it depends on what you are rising up about. If, like I do, you consider the UDD a part of Thaksin’s PR campaign, then to be killed to enrich an already rich man seems a terrible waste.
On the other hand if you consider the the raising of political consciousness among the long discriminated peasant class of the north and northeast of Thailand worth a hundred odd lives and the political comeback of an authoritarian leader, then please continue to support the UDD movement.
I would of course be more impressed with pictures showing you in with a red bandana, a catapult and facing off against those soldiers with their sniper rifles.
Then again even the UDD leaders didn’t stay with their supporters, being escorted out of the site by Phue Thai MPs instead of either waiting with the supporters at what was thought to be a safe zone or joining the martyrs on the barricades.
LesAbbey (13). It’s too early to say the 100 died in vain. I thought at the time it was a terrible mistake, and that they should have taken up Abhisit’s offer of an early election. But if the event has caused sufficient revulsion against the Army to break its power over Thailand, then they are national heroes who died in the battle that led to the liberation of their country from tyrants. Armies are often defeated because they kill too many people; in Vietnam, for example. And still the Americans won’t learn. The reason they haven’t lost the war against militant Islam is that their enemy is even more bloodthirsty and stupid than they are.
Yes, of course, Soonuk and Les, we should not encourage people to rise up. We should encourage them to go out and peacefully cast their votes, just as they did in 2001, 2005, 2006 and 2007. I have noted your strong support for the electoral process. AW
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s invisible hand
The invisible hand must indeed be divine to be so active and yet unseen.
Thailand’s ballots and bullets
This phenomenon indeed shows how Thai people are woefully lacking in discipline and ethics. No doubt a lot of Thais are nominal Buddhists and go to the Buddhist monastery presumably to make merit and wish happiness on themselves. But they fail to put one basic tenet into practice: metta (compassion) for their fellow human beings. A life based only on hatred and revenge can only lead to misery.
Thailand’s invisible hand
LesAbbey,
I have now said, in two comments, that Aphisit’s purported offer of elections in exchange for ending the protests was not legitimate and that the red shirts therefore did not reject an offer of compromise, but instead avoided being tricked.
If you want to dispute that factually, please do so.
You can also continue with your obfuscation. I don’t think these rhetorical gimmicks are helping either you or Aphisit, but feel free to carry on. You both seem to be impressing yourselves.
Thailand’s invisible hand
I don’t think the Democrats care two hoots about their abysmal poll showings or the thumping defeat that awaits them on July 3rd. Because the PT election victory will be followed by an army or judicial coup within 6 months. And the civil disorder that will provoke will be of a magnitude that Gen. Prayuth cannot even dream of.
Thailand’s invisible hand
Leah Hoyt – 25
Will you now move past the sematics and deal with the issue?
It’s not just semantics Leah, it’s the difference between making an honest argument or just broadcasting propaganda.
You want to deal with the ‘issue’. OK, what did a hundred people die for during last year’s protest? What was gained? And why did the UDD leadership abandon its followers and leave them to their fate at the bitter end?
I at least have some respect for the mad Englishman and the down-and-out Australian that camped out with the protesters. I don’t have to agree with them, but they did ‘put their money where their mouth was’.
Thailand’s invisible hand
LesAbbey,
OK. There was a fraudulent offer.
Will you now move past the sematics and deal with the issue?
The “Aphisit offer” is a canard.
With a comment like that I wonder if LesAbbey is a nom de plume for Aphisit.
Your use of rhethorical tricks to evade substance is very similar.
What did they say: Dee Tae Phoot?
The Southeast Asia Sea?
If this gets through, there’ll have to be a few other changes. The Indian Ocean will have to be the African/Australian/Arabian/ Indian Ocean, the English Channel will as I saw somewhere become the “Anglo-french pond” (although the French might want to call it the French/Anglo Pond), the Mediterranean Sea will have to be “The Sea that the Romans Used to Think was at The Center of the World when They Thought The Earth was Flat” and the Red Sea, Black Sea and Blue Danube will have to be qualified with an extra phrase “but only to drunks, romantics and the colour blind”.
Thailand’s invisible hand
“More seriously, though, it seems to me that the Democrat Party and their supporters – including the less than entirely visible lot – seem to have decided that if they are going to win an election then they need to provoke a bit of red shirt violence.” – C20
With elections drawing very near, I guess inane comments as above (and happily gulped with a burp by SteveCM) should be expected. But if holding a Democrat Party election rally at Rachaprasong area is a provocation for red shirt violence then I encourage the Democrat Party to hold such election rally at Rachaprasong EVERYDAY for as long as permitted by election rules. Thailand needs reminding that Rachaprasong district was recently devastated by Red Shirts violence and arson inspired by phone-ins from Dubai from a spiteful fugitive Thaksin.
Former Red Shirt chairman Veera Musikapong was certainly correct to lament the infiltration by very violent radical elements of the Red Shirts movement. That being the case . . . those violent Red radicals need only a small nudge to be provoked to bomb, burn and kill.
Thailand’s invisible hand
c20
“More seriously, though, it seems to me that the Democrat Party and their supporters – including the less than entirely visible lot – seem to have decided that if they are going to win an election then they need to provoke a bit of red shirt violence.”
And, if they can’t provoke it, they’re happy to provide it. Very easy for Newin to put together again his bunch of “blue-shirt” thugs that featured at the ASEAN summit in Pattaya (2009) – this time of course in new “red” T-shirts for the occasion.
I hope that UDD Chair Thida will a] make it very clear to UDD/redshirt followers that there’s a trap being baited for them and they should stay well away from it….. and b] warn loud and clear in advance of the very real prospect of a “staged” incident at Rachaprasong on 23 June.
With luck, most UDD/red supporters will see through Mark’s crude tactics anyway – as indeed may many of the middle ground voters. They, after all, have an interest in a better, calmer future that supersedes Mark’s “heat and hate” route back to the PM’s chair.
Thailand’s invisible hand
Kevin Hewison – 20
The “establishment” only supports elections if they can win them.
So any reason why we having one now when there is a good chance that Phue Thai will win?
Leah Hoyt – 21
There was no offer from Aphisit.
It was obvious to the red leaders, that the offer was a fraud…
Leah there was either no offer or the offer was a fraud, you really can’t have both.
Thailand’s invisible hand
Andrew Walker – 19
Les, I am arguing (as I have for a very long time) for the electoral process, not violent confrontation. Do you support the electoral process? AW
I most certainly do Andrew. Not only that but I also believe there is a place for extra-parliamentary opposition, so I would not argue against the right of either the PAD or the UDD to exist.
The problem for those like you Andrew is whether supporting the UDD protest in 2009 and 2010 was supporting the electoral process? In 2009 there had been no indications that Abhisit was going to cancel future elections. In 2010 just before the grim end of the protest the UDD was offered elections for last November. And here we are now in run-in to an election called earlier than need be against the predictions of many on the New Mandala. So not only do I believe in the electoral process, I can see it exists here in Thailand.
Can you tell me what the hundred odd deaths achieved. If you can’t think on anything, doesn’t that make support of the protest an embarrassment.
Thailand’s invisible hand
R. N. England (#17),
There was no offer from Aphisit. If I recall correctly the reds were told that if they packed up and went home, they could then start talking about an election.
It was obvious to the red leaders, that the offer was a fraud and if they shut down the protest, they would be jailed and no election would take place.
War in Kachin State
plan B,
That’s exactly what happened to Ne Win. An army usurper coming along and doing away with the strong man. Not that it’s done any good to the country, much worse in fact. Than Shwe could end up worse than Ne Win and he knows it.
Thailand’s invisible hand
The “establishment” only supports elections if they can win them.
It is good to see that Abhisit is now set to have the Democrat Party rally at Ratchaprasong. Business suits and ties will be required for gentlemen and ladies should be fashionably attired. Maids and drivers will be there to furnish cool drinks, wave fans and mop brows.
More seriously, though, it seems to me that the Democrat Party and their supporters – including the less than entirely visible lot – seem to have decided that if they are going to win an election then they need to provoke a bit of red shirt violence. This was a tactic in 2009 and 2010 as well (for anyone who cares to go back and trawl through the press for the periods prior to red shirt rallies).
Australians, cattles, refugees and Four Corners
@ Greg Lopez #10
(1) The crux of my posting is to ask why the double standards in decision making – one standard for what some Australians deem important (animal rights) against …[human rights of refugees]
I think your stance is wrong for 2 reasons. As pointed out by another poster it makes no sense to link 2 completely different issues – one regarding extreme cruelty to animals and the other regarding the best way to deal with refugees. The 2nd reason is that you see the proposed scheme as being an attack on the human rights of refugees. But the current system (of sorting out who gets accepted as a refugee into Australia) on the basis of who drums up the funds to pay people smugglers and undertakes a hazardous ocean voyage, is in itself terrible for the human rights of all would-be refugees wanting to come to Australia. It is a system which says “you want us to accept you? Good! Then come up with a large sum of money, deal with (usually vicious) criminals, and put your and your family’s life at risk before to prove that you’re worthy!” There is indeed a large pool of worthy people. Deciding who to accept from that pool should be done rationally and on the basis of need, not on survival of a sea journey. That is why I say getting rid of the boat trade will, overall, be beneficial to the rights of refugees. The proposed scheme has a very good chance of doing this.
My friend, a middle aged wealthy Australian economist, believes that it is good economics to have the boat people processed in Malaysia
I prefer not to discuss this problem simply in terms of economics. My standpoint is based on human rights.
My friend is not a racist and I don’t think you are too.
Likewise, despite your apparent acceptance of the current system, which I believe is terrible for refugees, and your reluctance to accept a system which might help them overall, I don’t think you are a racist.
Thailand’s invisible hand
Les, I am arguing (as I have for a very long time) for the electoral process, not violent confrontation. Do you support the electoral process? AW
Australians, cattles, refugees and Four Corners
@ Huw # 11,
Hi Huw, I’m trying hard to avoid crowding out the discussion, so a quick question.
If it is the same people fighting the cause to stop live cattle exports and the Malaysia solution (I argue that a larger constituent is against the Malaysia solution than banning live cattle exports), why did the Gillard administration respond so differently?
That’s really the crux of my question (& post).
I’d really appreciate if Australians can actually shed light on why they think the Gillard administration has made two opposing decisions on the same set of core values i.e. Rights – Rights of Australian cattle against Rights of refugees arriving in Australia.
Thailand’s invisible hand
Andrew Walker – 16
Yes, of course, Soonuk and Les, we should not encourage people to rise up.
I guess it depends on what you are rising up about. If, like I do, you consider the UDD a part of Thaksin’s PR campaign, then to be killed to enrich an already rich man seems a terrible waste.
On the other hand if you consider the the raising of political consciousness among the long discriminated peasant class of the north and northeast of Thailand worth a hundred odd lives and the political comeback of an authoritarian leader, then please continue to support the UDD movement.
I would of course be more impressed with pictures showing you in with a red bandana, a catapult and facing off against those soldiers with their sniper rifles.
Then again even the UDD leaders didn’t stay with their supporters, being escorted out of the site by Phue Thai MPs instead of either waiting with the supporters at what was thought to be a safe zone or joining the martyrs on the barricades.
Thailand’s invisible hand
LesAbbey (13). It’s too early to say the 100 died in vain. I thought at the time it was a terrible mistake, and that they should have taken up Abhisit’s offer of an early election. But if the event has caused sufficient revulsion against the Army to break its power over Thailand, then they are national heroes who died in the battle that led to the liberation of their country from tyrants. Armies are often defeated because they kill too many people; in Vietnam, for example. And still the Americans won’t learn. The reason they haven’t lost the war against militant Islam is that their enemy is even more bloodthirsty and stupid than they are.
Thailand’s invisible hand
Yes, of course, Soonuk and Les, we should not encourage people to rise up. We should encourage them to go out and peacefully cast their votes, just as they did in 2001, 2005, 2006 and 2007. I have noted your strong support for the electoral process. AW