Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra must be proud and emboldened by his supporters' show of loyalty for him in the provinces. It shows that, after having won the 2001 general election, he still garners huge support from those who see him as an asset to the country five years later.

However, without any restraint from the premier, Thai Rak Thai supporters, such as those hoodlums in Chiang Mai, seem to get the wrong idea that their dear leader condones, or even encourages, the use of extreme methods in showing their loyalty for him - such as intimidation and hooliganism

I, for one, condemn the propaganda placards posted by the Thai Rak Thai supporters around the old city walls of Chiang Mai. It shows how clumsy and obtuse these people are in showing posters using such foul language and claiming they represent all the people of Chiang Mai, who are famous for their friendliness and politeness to visitors.

It also shows that Thai Rak Thai still has something it doesn't want the people here to know about Thaksin's and his government's wrongdoings, if there were any, during his premiership in the past five years.

If Thaksin is to experience serious political difficulties in the near future, part of the reason will be because of his cronies' show of love for him in the wrong way. This is detestable.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

'Car bomb' drama would make for a top-notch thriller

Re: "Top general said to be mastermind", News, September 8.

Is this April Fool's Day in September? The news sounded as if it were a real story and may confuse the readers. The Nation says the bomb plot is a ploy to gain sympathy for Thaksin and it should stick with that stance. So the lead paragraph should read like this.

The plot of "Car Bomb: The Movie" is getting more and more complicated each day as new characters who play themselves are added daily. Critics had earlier said the plot was predictable, dull and the movie would never make the top-10 list. By contrast, it is full of twists, most unexpected, fascinating and fun. One critic said it best: "If this movie doesn't get your pulse racing, you need to see your doctor."

Somsak Pola

Samut Prakan

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

Upcountry support of  PM baffling given TRT's policies

Raising the possibility that Thaksin might resign so that he doesn't lose face any more than he already has is just wishful thinking. He'd rather lose his entire face than a single baht of the fortune he has made from all of us.

The only way he would step back is if he lost the support of upcountry voters.

And quite frankly I can't understand how anybody can still vote for TRT. When Thaksin hands out Bt1,000 bills to rural folks, he has, in the meantime, taken several times that amount out of their pockets. Only when opposition politicians and the People's Alliance for Democracy can convince the farmers and other of his supporters of this fact, only then will Thaksin tumble.

A simple example would be to point out the effects of the Thai-Chinese Free Trade Agreement for northern Thai farmers, who have to compete against cheap Chinese products because of the FTA Thaksin and his gang have signed. Another one: Why do taxi drivers cheer Thaksin, when he has allowed so many taxis to roam in Bangkok that the income for each taxi driver has nose-dived, because the money people spend on taxis hasn't increased? Most taxi drivers are from upcountry.

How many people have lost their jobs because of early closing times for department stores and gas stations, even if the latter don't pay well?

When Thaksin and his Thai Rak Thai display such an easygoing manner with the money they spend, the opposition should point out that this is not Thaksin's private income that he's throwing around but tax money that could be better spent on education and other useful projects. By the way, what is the track record for his rule regarding education? Better education means better pay and a better future. Point this out and suddenly the rural folks will listen.

Phuyai Lee

Bangkok

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

Critiques on People's Bank using wrong set of criteria

I am no fan of expensive or poorly managed populist policies, but recent criticism of the Government Savings Bank's People's Bank is missing the point. The nature of consumer lending is that you will always have problem customers, especially in the under-served lower income segments the GSB is aiming to help. Non-performing loans (NPLs) are inevitable and, under Thai banking practices where there is no automatic charge off, those NPLs accumulate on the books to increasingly high percentages. NPLs stick around for longer while good loans are paid off.

Instead of the NPL ratio, GSB's critics should look at the commercial profitability of the People's Bank lending portfolio as a whole - both the actual year-by-year results and also the forecasts for the future. If they have designed and priced their product correctly, losses of over 10 per cent per year may actually be acceptable if the portfolio can reliably be shown to make money. This is after all how non-government lower-income segment lenders make money. Holding NPLs to a very low percentage through excessively strict approval policies may actually make the scheme unprofitable, as not enough customers would be booked to cover the operating costs. Look at whether the GSB manages its portfolio risks and rewards properly, look at whether it measures and forecasts profitability reliably, but don't just complain about NPL rates out of context.

If the People's Bank project is not designed to make money, then different benchmarks must be set and these should relate to controlling corruption and fraud as well as the social benefits of the scheme which could not be created at a lower cost by other types of expenditure.

Martin Searle

AIG Finance (Thailand) Plc

Bangkok

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

Irwin put his money where his mouth was for conservation

Re: "Shed no tears for animal-tormenting crocodile hunter", Letters, September 7.

I usually find Eric Bahrt's contributions to be informed and balanced. His comments on Steve Irwin were neither and do him no credit.

He should do some research then ask himself if he has done a thousandth of what Irwin did to protect and conserve wildlife, especially in Australia.

I was born and raised in the Australian bush so I have a great love of wildlife and enormous respect for the magnitude of Steve Irwin's contribution. I wept when he died, partly because I know that wildlife had no better friend than Steve. He put his life on the line and he put his money where his mouth was.

Steve was saving crocodiles long before the cameras ever turned up and made him known worldwide. The crocodiles he hunted were those under threat from human encroachment. He risked his life to catch and release them away from harm.

The money he made that you referred to was considerable and it went to funding things such as building a Wildlife Hospital in Queensland, and buying over 24,000 hectares to preserve as wildlife sanctuaries across northern Australia, thus protecting wildlife natural habitats in perpetuity. That's a lot of animals that will be able to survive without fear of "torment" from mankind. Had Eric known enough about the man he might have wept too. Irwin was an ordinary man who did extraordinary things.

Boris Loosebrain

Bangkok

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

Crocodile hunter delivered a message of respect for the wild

Steve Irwin taught the world to understand and respect wildlife. He was a true conservationist, able to communicate across languages and cultures.

Of course he was a showman and an entertainer, but this is how he so effectively got his message across, particularly to children. He was also an archetypal Aussie, representing all the qualities the world finds attractive in the Australian character. However, for these reasons, left-wing elitists like Greer looked down their noses and found him distasteful. But to accuse him of "tormenting" animals is just ridiculous and a blatant grab at sensationalism. Many of the crocodiles that Irwin captured and looked after in his zoo had to be removed from their original habitats because they had become a danger to local Aboriginal communities and their livestock.

The truth is that Irwin had the unique ability to deliver worldwide, essential messages for our planet about understanding and co-exiting with wildlife. As such, he represented the highest ideals of the environmental movement.

Rodney Sheaves

Sydney, Australia

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

Terrorists do not deserve the same rights as the rest of us

Re: "Secret prison news no surprise given US history of telling lies", Letters, September 8.

Sibeymai is upset that the US imprisoned captured terrorists in secret CIA prisons for interrogation. They were secret, thus their existence was of course, denied. Information gleaned from this undoubtedly nasty work has prevented dozens of terrorist plots, and saved countless thousands of innocent lives.  Presumably Sibeymai would prefer that captured terrorists be placed in the local Holiday Inn where every secret gleaned would then be leaked to the press, the information thus being rendered useless.

 Terrorists have no legal rights afforded to US citizens under its Constitution. They are not afforded rights under the Geneva Convention. Applying US jurisprudence is a right they would gleefully deny Sibeymai as they slowly sliced his neck in half before a video camera.

 Terrorists do not deserve, nor do they have, the same legal rights as civilians. If information extracted from these goons, by whatever methods the CIA chooses, saves one human life, then that's okay by me.

W Knight

Orange County, California