Nevertheless, serious questions remain, particularly surrounding the make-up of the new Parliament, which will choose Thaksin's successor and oversee political reforms. Clearly the status quo cannot be allowed to stand. Democratically minded people will not tolerate a House dominated by more than 460 Thai Rak Thai members, with a clearly impotent (currently non-existent) opposition unable to scrutinise the dealings of the government. It was precisely this sort of situation that brought protesters out into the street in the first place. Much of the anger and malicious rumours would have been mitigated had the government been properly scrutinised in Parliament and not in the street. An active opposition is essential for this process to occur.

Thus, the offer that opposition parties can run for the 38 empty seats can be treated as nothing but a bad joke. I am not asking that the current opposition be allowed to run the new government. But what we need is an opposition that will be effective in scrutinising the future dealings of the government and, if necessary, able to punish perpetrators with more than a transfer; otherwise, we can expect the cycle of street protests inevitably to begin again.

Of course, the maintenance of a parliamentary Thai Rak Thai majority may raise the spectre of Thaksin being offered his old post back. Should such a foolhardy offer be made, I appeal to Thaksin to reject it in the interest of the nation. We all know what happened last time a man made the same promise Thaksin made on Tuesday night and failed to keep it.

Apisake Monthienvichienchai

Cambridge, England

---------------------------------------------------------------

No means no, but yes is not necessarily yes

The 10-million abstentions in the recent elections can be regarded as a firm "no" against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, since there was nothing else that voters were voting for. But the 16 million votes cast for Thai Rak Thai cannot be regarded as a direct "yes" for the prime minister, since they also included supporters of the 99 other people on the party list, supporters of local constituency candidates and people pressured to vote by local officials, village elders and local political bosses. Once again, democracy has to make a distinction between a dedicated, informed minority and an artificially created soft numerical majority.

Prapa Tepchat

Bangkok

---------------------------------------------------------------

Chidchai is hardly a good choice to serve as interim PM

Re: "What lies ahead?" News, April 6.

Having read your headline, I saw farther into the story that caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Vanasatidya is to be interim prime minister. This is the man who was in charge of the Narcotics Control Board when Thailand suffered the war on drugs that led to thousands of extrajudicial killings, drawing condemnation from the civilised world and referral to the UN Human Rights Commission. Not something to be proud of as a democracy. So, out of the frying pan and into the fire, I fear.

Dr John Symons

Bangkok

---------------------------------------------------------------

The right to shop is as valid as the right to a free press

Re: "Thai media unites to fight harassment", Opinion, April 6.

I see that Nation journalists are outraged at being surrounded by what you describe as "the government's unruly supporters". I don't remember that the mob that forced Siam Paragon to close was described by you as "the People's Alliance for Democracy's unruly supporters". Is it the case that like the monkhood, you are untouchable?

Dom Dunn

Surat Thani

---------------------------------------------------------------

One man's freedom fighter is another man's rabble-rouser

Re: "Voters have the chance to write off dictatorship today", Opinion, April 2.

Sopon Onkgara recounted vividly and poignantly how the pro-government mob harassed the Manager office, clashed with the Democrat's rally in Chiang Mai and surrounded the Nation Group's complex. He portrayed the mob as having been hired by politicians in power who were half-crazed men, spoke Khmer dialects and were unruly, savage and brutal.

At the same time, he praised the pro-democracy alliance for having been such angels, holding rallies, protesting and demonstrating peacefully. (Never mind the traffic jam, because it jams anyway.)

I guess Sopon was abducted by a UFO and lost some of his time while the unruly People's Alliance for Democracy mob blocked the offices of the Election Commission (EC), holding its employees against their will while the police were reluctant to do anything. He also missed the best part, when the mob authoritatively searched cars that were leaving the building, in hopes of catching the EC president.

Somsak Pola

Samut Prakan

---------------------------------------------------------------

Thaksin was not as bad as he's been made out to be

Since Thaksin's tearful admission of his untenable situation, not a single letter sympathising with his sorry state has been printed in your Letters column, and all have attacked him venomously, even after his defeat. Strangely enough, most letter-writers have not been prepared to reveal their real names. I have never seen hatred towards a man so viciously expressed, even after his defeat.

Does Thaksin deserve this? His brash and authoritarian rule and insensitivity to principles of good governance may be the answer to that.

But let us not forget his deeds as a doer and not a rambler, like some of our past leaders. His devotion in attacking drug dealers has never been heralded by the opposition; only an outcry against extrajudicial killings. Look at the reduction in drug cases in the Thai courts during his term. And one always hears of the parents of drug-addicted children being grateful for his no-nonsense approach to drug dealers.

His social contributions to medical care, student loans, cheap housing for the poor, his restoration of human pride to the poor and changes in the civil-service structure are just a few examples of this extroverted and brash leader who has now been humbled. Give me this doer anytime, who dares to challenge the comfort of many and not fear the consequences. Keep away all those whining leaders who play it safe by doing nothing but get away with it through beautiful and gratifying words.

The events of the last few months are good for Thailand. They serve as an example to all future doers like him to be humble in their approach on the way up and of the necessity of being cleaner than clean in their dealings with their wealth. It is no good for you and your close advisers to laud you as sufficiently clean to the public; it is necessary for the press and the public to laud you first.

Alan Greenspan is a great example. He liquidated his stock portfolio and business interests when he first took office and moved his funds to US treasury instruments with paltry returns in exchange for paltry remuneration as the chairman of the US Federation Reserve Board, the world's financial leader. If he said there was sickness in the US economy, you'd better believe it! He was so effective during his reign and immensely respected for his principles. Immediately upon retirement, he followed a more commercial line in his public speaking, for which nobody could fault him.

Thank you, Thaksin, for all of your good deeds, and I am sorry to see you go in this immensely humiliating way, which it is. But in the back of my mind, I feel it is good for you to learn this lesson.

Songdej Praditsmanont

Bangkok

---------------------------------------------------------------

Journalists should always present both sides of a story

Re: "Scholars at Chula urge tax revolt", News, April 5.

I feel that your newspaper is presenting biased news. I believe that good and fair news should present both sides of a story. By getting the sources that represent only one side and one way to believe, you intentionally or unintentionally (I would hope it to be the latter) mislead the society.

This article in particular tells people it is all right to protest a crime with a crime (and that the PM was illegal). You may argue that you didn't say it yourself. However, by presenting only the opinions of one party without comparing them with the opposite opinions, I believe you are not representing those values that ethical media should have.

Nuttaa

Bangkok

---------------------------------------------------------------

US values foreign scientists because they come cheap

Re: "US faces serious shortage of qualified scientists", Opinion, April 5.

This article appears to use an interesting definition of "qualified scientists" that is apparently favoured by the economic elite. "Qualified" refers to those technical professionals who are willing to work at the low wages being offered by multinational corporations.

Another way to express the concept is "fresh young (inexpensive) blood" - now mostly from Third World nations.

The American reality is more like a gigantic Ponzi scheme. Immigrants are valued while they demonstrate the "remarkable loyalty" demanded by the employer, and special visa programmes like the H-1B are designed for them. Once they become US citizens, with rights to free employment, they are treated exactly like experienced American citizens: they are discarded like yesterday's newspaper! As my colleague Richard Tax noted more than a decade ago, "Today's immigrant is tomorrow's victim."

Gene Nelson

Bangkok

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com