This mega project is fit only for the dustbin for two reasons:

1. No such city can be found on earth today. Dear planners, you can go ahead with your mega project if you can find an example.

2. State investment in infrastructure and real estate around the Suvarnabhumi area will have to be increased several times over. We taxpayers have to pay for the enormous extra costs, most of which will go into the pockets of land speculators and project contractors who are close to the government.

At first I thought they must have been blinded by lust for gain; no, they are clear-headed with a lust for gain. They have long planned it and must have it done at all costs - all costs on the people - for their dirty gain. Watch out, they are starting to advertise the mirage on TV - at our expense.

Don't waste time conducting investigations or holding public hearings, as we know what the results will be. The only thing for all of us to do is to stifle this project in the cradle. We cannot afford to make an irredeemable mistake.

Abee

Bangkok

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

Two more questions for World Cup sponsor

 I read DhosPaak managing director Vorawut Rojanapanich's comments about its sponsored World Cup broadcast in the June 23 edition of your sister publication BangkokPlus and would like to pose two more questions to this seemingly arrogant gentleman.

1. I was in Japan a few days ago where, as in Thailand, World Cup matches are free to air on public channels and commentary is only in the local language. For all matches, however, the Japanese broadcasters include a small box in the top left corner showing not just the duration of the match, but also the score, the team names and the team colours. This information is not only for the benefit of foreigners but provides real-time information to all viewers. Since the team names were in Japanese, it is impossible (as Khun Vorawut suggested) that Fifa feeds this detail in their coverage. The national broadcasters must have added it. So why is it not possible for Thailand to do the same?

2. Regarding commentary in other languages, he has frequently stated that Fifa regulations prohibit this in free-to-air broadcasting. Fair enough, if it is true. But surely Fifa must also have another clause in its contract stating that rights holders must ensure the matches are in fact broadcast. If there were no such clause, Fifa would lose all its sponsors. So why were part or all of many matches not shown last week?

Nick Derek

Bangkok

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

Carry anti-noise campaign right across the country

 Re: Three (silent) cheers for the People Who Love Quiet Club, Letters, June 23.

Panchalie Sathirasas and her "PWLQC" are terrific news for Thailand. I had always thought the Thai people had some hereditary condition by which they were unable to survive in ambient noise levels less than 80dBA. Happily, I was wrong.

When Khun Panchalie has sorted out Bangkok's transport systems, I would invite her to tour up and down Thailand's coastlines to explain to resort operators that holidaymakers do not want to hear "Hotel California" or Thai pop divas singing down their noses while they are eating their corn flakes. Actually, they prefer to hear the sound of waves lapping on the beach.

Then she could turn her attention to inland waterways, starting at Kanchanaburi. To have garishly-lit barges decorated as steam locomotives, floating in a river, blaring out amplified "chugging" noises at a thousand times their natural volume is not only absurd, it is probably disturbing to the families of victims of the Death Railway who have come to pay their respects.

As a longer-term project, perhaps she could help the government draw up an enforceable Noise Abatement Act. I am sure it would be welcomed by the foreign property owners of Phuket and elsewhere whose quality of life (not to mention property value) has been wrecked by noise from adjacent karaoke bars, mafia-run and therefore "untouchable".

How do we sign up to PWLQC? I want to be part of the (silent) action.

Nigel Pike

Phang Nga

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

Democratic principles more important than ousting PM

 Re: "Questions that The Economist has to answer", Opinion, June 21.

Besides boring The Economist to death, Tulsathit Taptim is doing a good job boring me to death as well. He seems to miss the point The Economist is making: in a representative democracy, should demonstrators who number in the thousands throw out politicians who've been elected by millions?"

A representative democracy is a principle of governance in which leaders and representatives acquire political power by means of a competitive struggle for people's votes. Power not through the barrel of a gun, not through mob intimidation, not through journalistic activism, but through the people's vote.

Let me quickly say that no one doubts - in fact they applaud - the right of Tulsathit and The Nation to perform journalistic activism. For all I know, every charge against caretaker Premier Thaksin Shinawatra is rock solid. But to ignore either pole of an argument is to miss the full reality: a principle, such as that the country should be ruled by a good and just man, sometimes has to be set aside for a greater principle, such as to be ruled always by law. A mob isn't expected to ponder the finer points in the heat of a demonstration. But we would expect it of a journalist.

I, and presumably The Economist, would have no quibble if Thaksin were removed through the democratic or judicial process. But we don't want to see him removed by a mob, especially when there is lingering doubt as to the motives of those casting the first stone.

Of course, if we were under a military dictatorship, by all means, "Put up the barricades!" In that case there would be no honourable alternative.

My fear is that the mob will not be able to remove him peacefully, but could cause Thaksin, and the whole country, to suffer a coma and die a lingering death. We will then have the distinction, like ancient Greece, of having won a Pyrrhic victory and invented a form of democracy, in our case known as "the mob crazy".

Is that what we want? I say, don't compromise our democratic principles; let history judge Thaksin.

Trirat Petchsingh

Nonthaburi

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

Sterling service from Land Transport Department

 In the midst of a situation that has everyone's attention focused on the problems of Thai politics and bureaucracy, I would like to simply applaud one group of civil servants as outstanding in their work. Sometimes people take the time to complain but don't do the same to praise.

I would like to offer my praise to the staff of the Driver's Licence section at the Department of Land Transport's main office on Phaholyothin Road. A year ago I applied for and received a one-year Thai licence. The entire process, which included a slight wait to take a basic test of colour recognition and reaction time, took less than an hour and I thought that was great.

At the end of March of this year I went to renew that licence, and less than 10 minutes after walking through the door I was given a licence valid for five years.

While I was there, I decided to apply for an "International Driving Permit", as well, and although the helpful staff were concerned there were a lot of people that day and I might have to wait, within 30 minutes I received that document, too.

Again, thanks to all the staff - at the information desk, those who prepare and issue the documents and the photo and lamination staff.

Please let me add that although I can speak basic Thai, I am far from fluent, but there was no need for a translator thanks to the helpfulness of the staff.

Okay, I know this sounds effusive, but these were better, faster and more pleasant results than I have had in all of the Western Europe and North and South American countries I have lived.

I am using a pseudonym because I don't want anyone to think I am writing this to curry favour with the government service.

Impressed

Bangkok

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

Iraq's invaders reaping the results of haste and greed

 Whatever one's political, religious or national leanings, one thing is clear: the American game in Iraq is up; it is game set and match to the opposition.

The immoral attack with its flawed planning has reaped what it sowed - disastrous failure. And to further substantiate the underlying errant greed and underestimation of the task, it recently came to light that high-ranking figures such as the British ambassador to Iraq had warned at the time that it was a divided, violent country that would require a much bigger task force for occupation and a long-term strategy to try and piece things together. This was passed on to the governments concerned and ignored. What we have is the complete exposure of radical right-wing desires to grab at a pot of gold that they were told was there for the taking. America cannot pull out - it faces shame and disgrace whatever the outcome. It has lost the face of righteousness and justice.

Unfortunately this is everyone's problem now - even the white-flag-waving nations such as France will have to become involved in holding this brittle explosive land together in some form or shape to prevent it bursting out of control.

What this debacle has shown is the quality of leadership the Americans opted for in the 2000 election fiasco in Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Co. A dubious election decided by a right-wing judge and obediently accepted by the American public. And now we have the consequences.

Paradoxically, I don't think that any of these people should go from US government - they should stay on and carry the can for whole mess, which should haunt them for the rest of their days.

A Warner

Bangkok