Who, of a sane and responsible mind, would - rather than express sorrow for the clashes that happened at CentralWorld and Siam Paragon - instead use them as an argument for his not backing down from power? This truly is amazing Thailand!

What's more amazing is the repetitive logic that our Dear Leader and his supporters use regardless of the situation. In fact, their responses have become so mundane they sound almost robotic, like the types of replies found on answering machines.

Reply A: "Why are you causing so much trouble? Are you Thai?" Nice try playing on the nationalistic nerve. This of course could make a lot of people pause and rethink whether shouting "Thaksin get out!" is really a good idea; it might even cause feelings of guilt among those who think these actions are damaging to Thailand's reputation.

But think about it carefully. Thais are rarely confrontational and we have been very much the compromising types, until all hell broke loose at CentralWorld that is. Are anti-Thaksin supporters the villains? What caused Thais, who at most usually gossip behind others' backs, to dare shout out what they feel? The situation must have become unbearable.

Reply B: "Everyone, please calm down. Please unite for the sake of peace and quiet in Thailand." This is similar to the first reply in that it brands those shouting anti-Thaksin slogans as "troublemakers".

Again, who wants to see the country divided? Who would want to be branded as someone with such a goal? The answer is nobody! Maybe it's high time to ask the one causing all of this discord in the first place. The clash at CentralWorld is not the first and certainly won't be the last because anger in both camps has increased to the point that it's scary to even think about what might happen in the future. It's also incredible that the caretaker prime minister has to shuffle his schedule around every now and then and can no longer walk among the public.

Reply C: "Why shout so much? Just pick who you like on election day - that's democracy." Oh, please, as if we were born yesterday! I need not elaborate on how clean Thai elections are. Furthermore, democracy is not only about ticking a box on a ballot and it doesn't mean that public participation stops there or that the elected can do anything they want.

Of course, autocratic leaders hope that once we walk out of the voting both we will turn a blind eye to whatever they do over the course of their terms. What happens before the next election is none of our business. Democracy is about more than just elections. Listening to dissent, carrying out policies transparently and admitting one's fallacies are also features of a democracy, but is seems that our own Dear Leader only listens to what he finds pleasing.

Reply D: "I can't back down, the villagers need me." True, the numbers supporting Dear Leader in the April 2 election were impressive with 16 million party-list votes, but the nine million No votes recorded in that election were no less historic. The point though is a leader should not only focus on those that support him and take that as a basis for his legitimacy, but rather must bridge the divide in society, especially if it is a divide that he himself has caused.

This is not what we are hearing though. It's the protesters that are clamped down on, as was made evident by the melee at CentralWorld, during which anti-Thaksin protesters were the ones who got hurt and arrested.

In fact, Dear Leader sounded upset at what happened when he said the following day that he can judge for himself when it's time to leave his job, and does not need people trying to shoo him off. Therefore, he will fight on. He didn't sound angry at the two unidentified men who attacked anti-Thaksin protesters. Now, that's what the public is upset over. Does he have things wrong or do we?

Replies A through D are the "classics", because they are the standard responses that are issued. And even though they've become stale, they will surely turn up again in the future.

A reply that is missing: "I am the leader. I will demonstrate my leadership by taking responsibility." A great leader will not take pride in polarising society, but rather consider it a total failure. A leader will not try to cling to power when the country would be better off without him. But, again, this is Thailand and logic might be twisted here and there.

Please don't be fooled and don't be sidetracked by the foiled well-planned bomb attack! I know smart people like you won't because we all know that being responsible is still a responsibility!

 Veenarat Laohapakakul