Credo

Ecologically speaking a species with a single food source risks extinction when the environment changes, an example is the Giant Panda. Successful species are the omnivores that can eat many different food types.
The PAD are Pandas, their only target was the Thaksin family , the Reds are omnivores, they are targeted on the entire social structure of Thailand.

rixalex, on 2012-05-27 10:48:05, said:

Why should PAD be disbanded? It's a free country and it is completely entitled to hold rallies if complying with the law.What is more its origins, leaving aside the issue of its unsavoury and authoritarian minded leadership, seem quite honourable - a middle class reaction against Thaksin's meglomania and the tyranny of the majority.The fact that it was ruthlessly exploited by the unelected elites is of course unfortunate, as was the increasingly thuggish and violent element among its younger followers.Once it had served its purpose it was muzzled: the unelected elites no more like yellow unpredictability than they do red unpredictability because both represent potential destabilisation of the status quo.If it is unleashed again it will be a calculated step by the elite to warn Thaksin not to overreach himself - all part of the great behind the scenes negotiation.If those Chinese grannies, thugs and weirdos now assembling in modest numbers think they are in control they are sadly mistaken.

The ruling in '62 was clear, only Thailands nationalist elements, when faced with losing the decision in implementation, have demanded creating some miraculous avenue to pin some somewhat forlorn hopes to, that their predecessors didn't irretrievably drop the ball, and lose the land rights completely back then.

I believe they did lose, and it's taken then over 50 years to even start acknowledging this fact. It didn't really mean anything to 99% of Thais past the historian level, until the world was shown Cambodia actually planing to do something with the temple. Suddenly the nationalists took the bit in their teeth. Since this multi-cultural nation is primarily held together by uber-nationalism as the sole bonding mechanism, this must rankle fundamentally with less logical minds..

Likely, they actually have lost completely. Some most certainly have NOT believed it is a done deal.  So we see the spectacle of the NEW Pm trying to calm the nationalists in the hopes that don't tack her to the wall as they did Abhisit. Hang on to your support hose dahlink it will be a bumpy ride.

Of course as Soundman notes the reality is a done deal, likely tied to much great real world financial interests for the principals involved. How to sell this oil for land for face deal to the nationalist wingnuts and general public is another thing entirely.

zydeco, on 2012-05-12 13:41:03, said:

I think its sort of funny when people talk about "they" meaning the State as being the enemy. I don't fear the state, I don't break the law, so they can tap my phone or read my emails or whatever. Ultimately I'm paying their salaries with my taxes and I'm paying them to stop terrorists and criminals. I am infact a lot more concerned with a different "they", criminals who (unlike the state) have broken into my house and robbed me and left me with serious injuries, on different occasions. I take the side of law-enforcement including anti-terror and intelligence agencies, because ultimately I am their employer by paying their wages & I remain their employer until I break a law of the land. Criminals are different, they don't care what you write in your emails or talk about on your phone, they will smash your skull in & rob you, rape you etc. for no reason at all.
And whatever you say, those are the two options ;  anarchy with mob rule by the strongest criminals, or state law with rule by the police & the intelligence departments.
Like I said before - violent criminals have almost killed me in my own home, and police/MI5 have not done this to me. Its an easy decision which side I will take. Re: Terrorism policing, the law agencies are not Doctor Spock, they can not know who is plotting to blow up trains and buses unless they investigate them & we have to manage without the use of magical psychic powers.
Re; airports they can look under my underwear if they want to, its only a human body.

Jingthing, on 2012-05-05 20:34:44, said:

Why the fascination for Trayvon? Is it because he was such a "cute boy"?

I posted a long list of the problems I see with this whole issue. Zimmerman - who while likely guilty of manslaughter - is being used by the true racists in the media and on the left as a symbol of something sinister when it was just a tragic event that took one life and ruined another plus those of their families and loved ones.

folium, on 2012-05-05 09:03:30, said:

What you say is very true.  Being from Texas I have seen it with my own eyes, but I'm a bit curious as to why you make it sound as if it is America's job to fix this problem.  If there were no supply of drugs making it to the border, then dealers would have to go elsewhere for their supply, which of course then would have to dealt with, but if Mexico's police, military and government weren't so corrupt, if they actually took care of their own business then the whole thing would be a non-issue.  Contrary to popular belief, it is not America's job to take care of every other countries' problems, be it drugs or anything else.  America has done that for too long and look at the shape the country is in.  You are a fool if you think that the NRA supports supplying guns to drug cartels and criminals.  The war on drugs is never going to be won if OTHER countries, i.e. Mexico and Columbia to name a couple, don't clean their own side of the street and stop depending on others to solve their problems for them.

chops, on 2012-05-05 16:25:38, said:

Outrage is fine.  Murder is not.

Colin Yai, on 2012-03-29 20:06:17, said:

Whilst I find myself in total agreement with these comments I also realize that all we can realistically do is be vocal. We, the western powers, can never defeat an enemy such as the taliban. What we should be doing is securing our own borders and conducting surgical strikes, the likes of which eliminated Osama, against targets which pose a clear threat to country/people.

DeepInTheForest, on 2012-03-28 05:33:21, said:

Your thoughts are legitimate and well expressed.  Nevertheless, it feels a bit disappointing, though unsurprising, that the accusations of "bigotry", racism and prejudice have surfaced.  As usual, this serves to shut down any debate and therefore spare whole peoples from criticism while the rest have to endure it.  It is critical obfuscation at its finest and minority groups in countries like the US have used this technique to prevent debate (in the media) over the power of the Zionist lobby in America and cow concerned citizens into silence in neighborhoods ridden by crime.

The comments that I personally made regarding Thailand and problems with Thai education have nothing to do with genetics or biology.  Thai culture encourages one to relax, avoid challenge and have fun.  It should come as little surprise then, that there are Nobel-prize winning Thai scientists, astronauts, and authors.  To accomplish great things, one must challenge oneself and seek constant self-improvement.  I have met brilliant, cosmopolitan Thais with whom I enjoy long intellectual conversations, but they were educated outside Thailand or in Thailand's international schools.

As for the future of Thai society, again, it has nothing to do with genetics.  Cultural problems in Thailand are fundamentally preventing the country from making any progress while simultaneously marginalizing it politically and economically in the ASEAN region.  The government is currently a puppet-administration that attracts little attention from foreign diplomats, whether they are Singaporean or European.  That's because the level of corruption in Thailand has reached a crisis level.  These things are readily demonstrated in media and regional studies.  This is a cultural problem.  Thailand is not "doomed".  It will just become poorer and less important in the Southeast Asian region, all of which will only hurt Thai people and continue to prevent their assimilation into the global workforce.  Optimism concerning Thailand's future is cute.  It doesn't comport at all with the country's general political and economic progress in the last decade, though.  We can be optimistic about Yemen too.  That doesn't solve the massive cultural problems (tribalism) that are preventing peace, security and prosperity in the country.  

Many of the posters on Thai Visa try to blame the government for Thailand's problems.  What they fail to recognize (and this has been demonstrated) is that even if a country's government isn't democratically elected, that country's government is a fundamental reflection of its culture.  Do you see much hope for the Thai government over the next decade?