Like it or not, the foreign envoys sure had a point

May I remind Promote Nakornthab that I also witnessed the shut-down of a country due to the insurgency of a group of people politically motivated (trade unions), and the economic strangulation it caused for decades.

If you support the recent PAD action of shutting down a nation's airport and economy as somehow worthy and for the greater good then fair enough, but you do not remember the three-day week, power black-outs every night, rationing and the severe economic hardship it caused.

When next year the real economy goes to pieces and you lose your job under Thaksin's stewardship and Pojaman's auspices - back in the country just in time for a weekend of frantic and self-serving political lobbying - and under a system with no social security safety net to fall back on, perhaps you might reconsider that the foreign envoys had a point. If not, would you be prepared to stifle these foreign voices if and when the country yet again has to go cap-in-hand to the IMF?

JAMES GROVEWAY

BANGKOK

What happened to arrest warrant against Pojaman?

Re: Pojaman back in the country

I was surprised to read that Pojaman Damapong has returned to the Kingdom considering her present legal predicament. Moreover, in your piece you failed to mention that she has an extant arrest warrant in force against her. And I was flabbergasted that you report the Immigration Police Chief as saying there was no arrest warrant for Pojaman.

Just where has this man been? This is clearly a dereliction of duty and a contempt of court as I do not believe the warrant has been rescinded by the court. He should be moved swiftly to the usual inactive post.

Furthermore, given Pojaman's delinquent record on bail there is no option than for her to be held in custody until the determination of her appeal as she has shown by her behaviour to be untrustworthy. And why pray should she and her daughter be afforded such special treatment as to be processed onboard the aircraft on arrival?

JOHN SYMONS

BANGKOK

PAD must prove the |merits of its case

A recent Washington Post editorial deplored Thailand's vicious circle and branded the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) as a violent, anti-democratic force bent on turning Thailand into an elitist autocracy and alleged that the Thai elite could not stomach populist democracy that emerged with Thaksin's People Power Party (PPP).

The international community is frowning on the PAD, and Thailand's middle class should heed such disapproving views. Like in the use of so-called 'responsibility to protect', the PAD must justify its actions and the socio-political and economic price that the country has to pay as a result of the airport closure and months-long protests. While my view is that the PPP-led government no longer has the legitimacy to rule through proxy after proxy, the actions of PAD leaders also leave much to desire for. The PAD must quell public doubt about its hidden agenda and narrow interests. We must not forget that the PAD did not start out as a social movement with a firm ideological foundation, but originated more from the personal vendetta of its core membership.

While the riddance of a massively corrupt government is certainly a good thing, the PAD and its supporters must also prove to the people why and how the minority overthrow of an elected government could be justified.

A strong case must be made for this exception to democratic rule to show how the tyranny by the majority is unacceptable. If the PAD insists that the airport siege was indeed the last resort, it must explain why and how it ran out of more legitimate alternatives to get rid of the PPP.

If this is not a premeditated murder, then the PAD must show why it is a manslaughter to protect good, innocent people or in defence of something worthy of the economic and political price that had to be paid.

WALLY JARIYA

WASHINGTON, DC