To me, he's a Mickey Mouse soldier for disobeying the direct order of his superior, General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, and storming Krue Se mosque, resulting in the killing of all 32 militants inside. He should have been court-martialled to determine his guilt or innocence in the incident.

But I find it extremely hard to believe that there was really a plot to blow up Thaksin and that, if so, Pallop is the mastermind. Thaksin's doing quite well in getting himself into trouble, thank you - so why not let him finish the job? If, as Pallop says, the car circled the area several times, that sounds like something out of a Mr Bean comedy plot, guaranteed to attract police attention - and all with a bomb that wasn't even wired up. Does such a performance sound like his work?

Thaksin, please call off your spin doctors and let's get on with serious business - like probing Kularb Kaew or rescuing our education system.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

High time to raise awareness about proper waste disposal

 Why is it that the majority of citizens (urbanites especially) don't do more to respect their own personal environs around their homes, or the country at large?

Many areas throughout the Kingdom are disrespectfully strewn with rubbish. A lot of such places lie outside of the zones in which local municipalities employ street cleaners or garbage collectors. Needless to say, they are left untouched and untidy.

I have asked friends why elementary school students aren't taught to identify and separate rubbish according to its composition as is done elsewhere (separating paper, aluminium-steel, and plastic-polystyrene). The usual answer is that this would inevitably put a lot of uneducated people out of work. These people need to go through bins to find some rubbish that they can sell in order to eke out a living.

This way of thinking might make it kind of acceptable for people to let rubbish lie where it falls, but what about the rubbish that can't be easily resold? And does the government condone people who might not necessarily be working legally? The general public seems to view scrap collectors sympathetically, as if to say "well, at least they're not begging".

Is society doing itself any favours by justifying slovenliness? Does society actually think that there are people who aspire to scavenging through rubbish in order to make a living?

Is it not possible that with the proper forethought, municipalities would be able to gainfully employ the people (who depend upon rubbish) to clean other areas of the country that lie outside the municipality zone? In order for this to be achieved, the government would have to be financially supportive of the municipalities.

Rubbish that is not separated is good for nothing; rubbish that is separated can be reused and/or recycled.

How long will it take for the government to acknowledge that if they want to truly support His Majesty's environmental initiatives, it has to implement a programme in which people learn to "Reduce, Reuse and Recycle"? If children started to learn in schools what effect rubbish has on the environment, and how to identify and separate rubbish, it would ensure that people gradually start to treat the Kingdom's environment more respectfully.

Litter Bugged

Chon Buri

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

Citizens' groups should take pro-Thaksin thugs to court

 Thank you to the news media and photographers who brought to our attention the attacks on old men who were shouting anti-Thaksin slogans.

To see old men being attacked is one thing, but to see police officers turn a blind eye in this matter is unacceptable. All of the policemen on the scene at the time should be fired. Their job was to take care of the prime minister as well as stop any violence that occurred, on either side.

The anti-Thaksin slogans expressed a desire to see him out of politics - he is not wanted. The slogans were not obscene and peaceful protests are part of a democratic process that hopes eventually to yield a better result.

I don't believe that the police officers didn't know who the attackers were. The pictures don't lie.

The People's Alliance for Democracy and other groups should take all those who wore white wristbands and white sport shoes to court and let the law determine their fate.

Surasak Piputtana

Bangkok

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

Siam Paragon assault brings to mind the 'brown shirts'

 Re: "Anti-PM protester gets fat lip", News, August 20.

I see from your report that violence accompanied Thaksin on his latest visit to Siam Paragon. Last time it was ladies that booed him. This time it was more sinister, however, as the protester was set upon by "four of Thaksin's supporters in black jackets" and in your words, "started pounding him with their fists".

I hope that they were duly arrested for assault but somehow I doubt they were. In the 1930s in Germany, brown shirts helped a demagogue through street violence and the intimidation of political opponents. Can you see any similarities?

Brian J Maddor

Norfolk

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

Mandatory voting is bad for a good democracy

 Re: "Thailand's democracy is still very far from representing all the people's interests", Letters, August 21.

Chavalit Van made some very cogent points that do need to be addressed; however, he forgot to mention the main reason that governments such as the current one are able to get into office and stay in office.

I do not know when the Constitution was drafted, or who drafted it, but there was a law written into it that is the reason it is so easy to buy your way into office in Thailand. Mandatory voting.

Chavalit is concerned about the education required to run for office in Thailand but not the lack of education required to vote in Thailand. And to make it worse, it is mandatory.

I submit to you that those that would buy their way into office through populist policies or outright bribes could not do so if the mandatory voting law did not exist. I say this because the type of person who would vote for someone because they see some money in it is the type of person who would not vote at all if it were not mandatory.

In the United States, voting is seen as a "duty", but is not mandatory. I believe it is because the drafters of the American Constitution knew that those people who would not take the time to investigate the backgrounds of the people running for office and what they stood for would also not take the time to vote.

If Thailand would revoke the mandatory voting law, I think you would see a much smaller vote, but one that was well thought out. I believe you would also see a lot of bribe money going to waste.

Just a thought.

John Arnone

Yasothon

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

Penalties for not voting in Thailand include being disqualified from running for office; there are no fines. - Editor

Some reasons why Thailand is losing ground in tourism

 Re: "Stephff's view", Opinion, August 20. Whilst very funny, this cartoon was also very sad as it translates into a sizeable drop in income for Thais involved in the tourism industry. Why should other countries in the region be doing so well and Thailand not so?

It is obviously a complex problem, but let me outline some points. First, the initial impression of Thailand for many tourists is the immigration service at Don Muang. A more surly, unhelpful group of people it is hard to imagine. Having just returned from Malaysia the comparison is striking.

Next is the "how can I empty your wallet attitude" of taxi drivers, shopkeepers etc. A friend, who lives here, has just returned from Chiang Mai where he experienced the full spectrum of this behaviour, from "no meter" to very wrong change.

Then there are the more and more restrictive rules on serving alcohol and closing times. I could go on but there is no point.

Tourists are not stupid. If they feel cheated and badly treated they don't come back and they tell their friends. The old adage "you reap what you sow" is very relevant here.

John de Laurent

Bangkok

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

Blatant double standards in applying wildlife laws

 The prosecution (or should it be persecution) of Edwin Wiek for illegal possession of wildlife is a classic case of double standards.

Two years ago, three government officers were found guilty of malfeasance for their involvement in the export of 100 tigers to China in contravention of the Wildlife Protection Act. None of them was prosecuted, and one is currently in charge of Chiang Mai Night Safari, where he once suggested that the meat of some endangered species such as tigers could be served in the zoo's restaurant.

Bangkok's Safari World was let off for illegal possession of over 50 orang-utans, the matter being dealt with as a minor customs violation -similar, I suppose, to a tourist bringing in an extra carton of cigarettes.

The government-owned Night Safari currently has five orphaned baby orang-utans that were imported illegally. What legal action is proposed for this violation of the Wildlife Protection Law? Or is that different?

J Ball

Bath, England