Re: “Attacks, ‘bomb plot’ allow regime to tighten its grip”, (Opinion, March 12).
Wassana Nanuam was spot on when she wrote that the recent bomb attacks on public places and court buildings have paved the way for the military to stage a full comeback.
The prompt arrests of suspects after Saturday night’s court bomb attack shows how well-prepared the Thai military was in dealing with opposing forces.
If violence should break out at this juncture, more military rule will be inevitable.
It is rumoured the recent bombings in Bangkok were designed to spur the United Nations to step in to Thailand’s politics, as violence has started to break out and the situation may prove hard to contain.
Hence, the UN and the United States government, with its excessive reliance on information acquired from the CIA and the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), should be warned absolutely not to interfere in local politics.
This is Thailand’s problem: Don’t throw any more fuel on the fire.
Vint Chavala
Charter plan murky
Re: “Charter to boost citizens’ power”, (BP, March 11).
Claims the new charter will boost citizens’ power all sound very good. But it is still not clear how more civil rights and participation, effective anti-corruption measures, and a balanced political system with increased checks and balances, all of which have been promised so far, reconcile with more self-appointed bodies or Thai people’s lack of faith in elections.
If the Supreme Sangha Council (SSC) could not root out corruption among monks, how will the new National Ethics Assembly investigate the moral behaviour of politicians, civil servants as well as private companies that do business with the state?
Like the SSC, will the unelected assembly be above the law, courts and the justice system? Will it be accountable to anyone?
Is there no one to hold them accountable, as is the case with the NCPO or NLA?
In the present regime, what sorts of checks and balances can the CDC cite that will be different from what we see now?
Thomas Edison, the famous American inventor and businessman, was right when he said: “A good intention, with a bad approach, often leads to a poor result.”
KULDEEP NAGI
Pay fair tax share
Between the land tax proposal and the Constitution Drafting Committee’s (CDC) charter, the former appears to be the better catalyst in awakening the generally apathetic populace.
If there was an opinion poll, I would bet that eight out of 10 respondents would have strong views about the land tax proposal.
By contrast, how many can comment on what the CDC is actually doing?
I for one, can’t. But I can give my two satang on the land tax.
I agree with it completely. Thailand means “land of the free” ... and when things are free, we take them for granted. At about 3,500 baht a year for the average household, taxes would be a mere 10 baht per day. What can you buy for 10 baht?
Sure, there will be those on the fringe who can’t even pay this, so help them out.
But for the opinions coming from the Democrats and Pheu Thai, it is hard to feel sorry for them when their members are some of the country’s biggest landowners.
If we can get everyone to pay their fair share of taxes, the sense of ownership or having “skin in the game” translates to greater scrutiny of how tax money is used.
Just observe the difference between how renter-occupied versus owner-occupied houses look.
This land tax is a catalyst to participatory democracy more effective than anything the CDC can ever come up with. Just my opinion.
Sukit Bejrsuwana
Helmets always best
Re: “Strap in motorcyclists”, (PostBag, March 11).
Excuse me, but have I missed something? I didn’t see the referenced ThaiPulse article of March 10, but has some halfwit suggested that motorcycle riders be required to wear a seatbelt, presumably a static lap strap?
In my humble opinion, a rider wearing an approved crash helmet being thrown clear of a collision would suffer fewer injuries than if he or she was firmly attached to the machine.
With the common scenario, albeit in contravention of existing traffic laws, of the driver wearing a crash helmet whilst the toddler perched on the front and the pillion passenger are not, the person in least danger of serious injury is the driver.
He or she has control of the vehicle and is gripping the handlebars, thus mitigating potential injuries. The other two passengers are at risk of suffering serious injury, especially if they come off the vehicle.
Of course, if the current laws were correctly enforced, then many more people would escape death or disability.
Bernie Hodges
CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
Fax: +02 6164000 email: postbag@bangkokpost.co.th
All letter writers must provide full name and address.
All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.