New Mandala

95 responses so far ↓

• 1 David Brown // Mar 24, 2009 at 9:30 pm

  did I imagine that someone claimed there is a recording of a conversation between General Prem and the senior judge in the asserts concealment case?

  unfortunately my filing system has failed me on this one….

• 2 Susie Wong // Mar 24, 2009 at 10:33 pm

  “The Nation” is bias against Thaksin, UDD, Giles, Red Shirt movement, consequently it reports different version from other Thai newspapers. It is a serious problem for scholars who cannot read Thai to find out what exactly the news is when one can only read from an inaccurate sources like “the Nation.” When we compare this particular news with other newspaper such as Matichon, Prachatai, Thairath, Komchadluek, we can see that “the Nation” reports news according to its bias agenda against Thaksin.

  In Thai language newspaper, all of them reported that General Panlop Pinmanee, the vice-director of the internal security command stated that General Surayudh Chulanont had played a role in the effort against former Prime Minister Thaksin.

  In the power struggle for domination, the Monarchy is also afraid of the Military. The fear of the Military had made the Monarchy to recruit General Prem Tinsulanond, Chief of the Infantry Division, and General Surayudh Chulanont, Chief of the Special Forces Division to join the Privy Council in order to control the Military.

  “The Nation” is prejudice against Jakrapob Penkair and Veera Musikapong because “the Nation” wants the Monarchy institution as the absolute Fuhrer. “The Nation” is unable to state the fact that General Surayudh Chulanont’s father was a communist insurgent yet he is a Privy Council member.

• 3 bangkokpundit // Mar 24, 2009 at 10:37 pm

  David – there is a conversation between judges and a government official where Prem’s name came up – see here and here.

• 4 Ralph Kramden // Mar 24, 2009 at 11:07 pm

  See http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1092/
  and
  http://bangkokpundit.blogspot.com/2007/06/prem-allegations-part-2.html#7895927818016297350
  and
  http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0603/286/

• 5 Colum Graham // Mar 25, 2009 at 1:27 am

  I think it’s interesting that the Avudh Panananda mentions the King in a political context by saying that it’s not to be done. Or, in Thai, is it written differently? Wouldn’t this fuel the King being thought of in a political context? Does the increasing demonization of the UDD leadership coincide with an increasing public ‘politicization’ of the King?

  Because the King is above politics so it was just a fabrication to get rid of me. Panlop went along, but didn’t do anything. – Thaksin (from BKP)

  He seems to say that rather flippantly, revering the King as he claims. It’s especially flippant for a former democratically elected leader if his aim is to accuse Surayud and the Privy councillors of manipulating the King’s or His name, as what he says I interpret as more for self-exoneration than justice for Thai citizens.

  It’s plain that very few of the sharks in Thai politics would respect the King, a delicate seahorse, in the manner that the goldfish in the rest of the lake do. So, is it silly to ask what’s a lesson a goldfish can teach a shark?

• 6 chris baker // Mar 25, 2009 at 2:30 am

  Here are the key parts of Thaksin’s speech in Chiang Mai on Sunday
  —————————————————————————

  Remember in 2006, at the election we won mightily, 377 MPs in parliament. One day, my defense minister said to me, ‘I fear we’ll be tired. I heard from a journalist who said, the Democrat Party as an opposition is so weak, so few seats, the journalists will join together to act as the opposition. I was perplexed, why should journalists act as the opposition, their role is to tell the truth, what is right and what is wrong.
  Later I heard from the son of a newspaper-owner, I asked why his father’s paper was bashing me, bashing the government. He said, ‘Can’t help you.’ A privy councilor dined with his father (I’ll say the name later) and said, claimed, the palace won’t have me anymore, wants me removed from the position.

  I was perplexed. Then I was still prime minister. I did not know what was happening. Then there was news of attempts on my life, and finally the car bomb in August.

  I heard later from General Panlop Pinmanee, who came to see me recently in China that in early 2006 he was called to meet General Surayud Chulanont at a house in a Sukumwit soi. General Surayud said he had been with two privy councilor to an audience with 901 [the king’s radio code] to inform that they would work for His Majesty because I was not loyal. How could I be disloyal? I believed this was a fabrication. Because out king is elevated, does not get involved in politics. So it was just a fabrication, made to deal with me. Panlop went along with it, but didn’t do anything.

  Two attempts were made on my life, but my fate was to survive them. Then the attempt to get rid of me with the car bomb. General Panlop said he knew about it, and his subordinates were used, but he was not involved. Those who did it were the coup group.

  Do you remember Ja Yak [Sgt-Maj Chakrit Chantra, an ISOC driver who confessed to taking part in the plot]? Ja Yak told the police when I was still prime minister that if I didn’t die from the car bomb, there would be a coup, and if the coup was successful, the premier would be Surayud….

  Remember, in October 2002, I moved General Surayud to be Supreme Commander. The reason was not because I was angry or had anything against General Surayud…. But the reason I moved him, never told before but today I must tell it, was not because he was a bad man. But when the Burma number 2, Mong Aye, who had not come to Thailand for a long time, I invited him, and took him for an audience with the king and queen on 18 April 2002. On 25 April the army used force without my knowledge, killing over 300 Burmese soldiers. All when I was trying to negotiate for his help over the drug issue…

  So there were attempts to deal with me, by claiming I’m disloyal. Yet I am loyal over one million percent…. These people who sound off on the street, how can they be more loyal than me?

  To overthrow a government that is very powerful, the easiest way, the barami of the king is the supreme thing for all Thai, so they allege disloyalty. This is the origin of the political turmoil down to today….

  I became prime minister under the 1997 constitution, that I did not draft. The person who drafted it was Anand Panyarachun, and the concept or idea was laid down by Dr Prawase [Wasi]. Prawase said, politics in the past, governments were weak, the prime minister lacked the authority of a leader, because he was challenged all the time, making him unable to take decision over the country’s major problems. That was the background of the 1997 constitution. Later both Dr Prawase and Anand undermined my government which was a product of the 1997 constitution they drafted. They said I was too strong, had too much power….

  I travel around the world, people say, in English, “Thailand is a joke.” They say Thailand is a joke, a joke in every way. The prime minister does a cooking show on TV for a little money and gets thrown out of office.

  The TRT party was dissolved because they decided to dissolve it. A group of the witnesses came to see one of my people. They said they were paid to give false witness. They begged my forgiveness….

  This government they call the Drag-Eleven Government, to form the government they used the Constitutional Court to dissolve parties so they could pull away their MPs. Then the army forced groups to form the government. Though Pok [Anupong] denies it until today, Pok was involved totally…

  After General Panlop met General Surayuth, and they had talked about dealing with me, another four people came in. One was Pramote Nakhonthap, who invented the story (niyai) of the Finland Plot, a pack of lies. If challenged in court today, there would be no answer. He invented the whole story. There never were the words, Finland Plot…

  After that, another three people came in. One was Ackaratorn [Chularat], president of the Administrative Court. Another is Charun Phakdithanakun. Another is Charnchai Likitjittha. This is what General Panlop told me. True or false, go and ask him. He said these three or four met together further, and each accepted assignments to deal with me by alleging I was a premier who was disloyal.

  At the time of the coup, news was released that I was behind, was the sponsor, of making the book The King Never Smiles, written by Paul Handley. A book I’d never seen. As soon as I knew, I immediately ordered Surakiat [Sathirathai], who is no longer with me, then a deputy prime minister, to meet Bush the father, who had close connections with Yale University that published the book, to appeal to them that there was a royal celebration in June, appeal for them not to release it yet. And they agreed. And later in April I met Bush the father and appealed to him myself. I also ordered Police-General Kowit Phuwanit [a mistake for Wattana?], then the police chief, to prevent the book entering Thailand….

  I will speak out more and more clearly. I’m not angry. I pity the people.

  After the 2006 election, there was pressure for the ECT commissioners to resign, until there were only three left. Those who resigned later told me, the people who pressured them to resign were Chamlong Srimuang and Surayud Chulanont. I was still prime minister, so I rushed to see General Surayud in the office of the Privy Council to ask what was going on, but he replied that he was not involved, he was a paratrooper that didn’t kill his juniors, tell on his seniors, or sell his friends.

• 7 Colum Graham // Mar 25, 2009 at 11:33 am

  …. ‘the Avudh Panananda’, it was to be ‘the Nation’, but I thought it was better to put the authors name. Yes, I must exonerate myself from the typo curse! Perhaps I was a little damning of Thaksin. I love all of these accusations!

  So how will revealing the tangled web play into Thaksin re-entering the fray? Surely by doing this he is getting his hands dirty again, going back on his promise to keep clear of politics. I wish he revealed this while he was in office with more weight attached to his words. Is he viewed as too much of a bleating goat to be of use to the UDD?

• 8 Nudi Samsao // Mar 25, 2009 at 11:33 am

  Is it lese majeste to complain how a royal procession holds up traffic? This traffic halt is really aggravating upcountry. During these few days Sia O and his wife and son are in Songkhla for the Commencement at Rajabhat Universities as well as visits to some local hot spots. What annoys local people is that traffic is made to halt for half an hour or more to wait for a royal procession to pass, and when it comes no one can catch a glimpse of anything as it goes so fast to not even accommodate a fly. Maybe this is out of the fear for the life of somebody. But should there be a tire blowout, for example, some life may be lost all the same. And how do we reconcile this to the spirit of rapport between royalty and commoners? If speed is required, a helicopter might be more appropriate and hamper traffic much less. It seems that the people come last when it comes to welfare.

• 9 boonchuay // Mar 25, 2009 at 12:05 pm

  I suggest read some articles, a source, which I find has deep understanding of Thai politics:Quoted from
  http://preapism.com/2009/03/25/thaksin%E2%80%99s-other-hand/

  “With Thaksin’s popularity slipping significantly in the polls, the sense of desperation is becoming increasingly apparent. The most recent poll showed Thaksin’s popularity to be in the 23% range, and that is a far cry from where it was just a few months ago. There is no doubt the democrats are gaining ground.

  The fact that Thaksin has made more phone-ins in recent days to a variety of places to gather as many supporters as possible in Bangkok, clearly shows a full on push to rally big numbers to attend. The more of Thaksin supporters in Bangkok, the more eyes will be watching, and that includes top military brass.

  The other news in recent days was about a potential Thaksin staged coup attempt, and if there was ever a time to try and pull it off, it would be during the rally. A significant number of troops will be deployed to the rally, leaving the barracks on the lean side.

  There is still a significant number of people in the military who are still loyal to Thaksin, and what they will be doing during the rally needs to be closely observed. Connecting the Dots has no idea where they are in their present assignment, but we can clearly see a potential of a coup during this distraction.Thaksin has made sure as many players are watching the rally as possible. He has brought up the privy counsel again in efforts to distract them. He has cited a so called conspiracy to oust him from office. Although in reality this for the most part is ancient history as there have now been 4 Prime Ministers after Thaksin. It is like still arguing over an umpire call for the 1999 World Series, in short who cares the game is over.

  These are all actions consistent with a ruse, and a Thaksin lead coup is by no means beyond Thaksin psychotic ego.”

• 10 Oppai // Mar 25, 2009 at 1:15 pm

  FTA: ” And he offers no shred of evidence to link the Privy Council to the political feud. ”

  Maybe Sondhi Limtongkul, a main opponent of Thaksin, can provide the “evidence.” Read what he said back then when Surayudh was the prime minister :

  http://www.manager.co.th/Home/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9500000057530

  Rough translation (I’m sorry for my poor English skills):

  “Thank you for those who ask about the PTT. Surayudh once said about the gasoline prices. I’ll tell you. A journalist said to him, “the price of gasoline has exceeded 30 baht/litre.” The PM said, “it’s the nature of it.” I’m very disappointed because the PM knows well that part of the the ousting of Thaksin was him; he urged me to do many things. He knows that PTT is another story. That is, privatize the PTT to the private sector. And that private sector is Thaksin’s people. Those who listen to me will remember this. Even if you give me a chance to speak million times, I will keep saying the same because I stick to the truth. I always say that, you the board of directors of PTT, don’t you know why politicians privatized the PTT? Why they have to give considerable profit to the private sector? Today, PTT is a secret land. No one knows what they are doing inside.”

• 11 Oppai // Mar 25, 2009 at 1:56 pm

  Another evidence from Sondhi Limtongkul (How irony!):

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRnYDFUvGrM

  “We could gather ten thousands of people. Sometimes hundred thousands. So, they were like, ‘the chink Limthongkul is kinda great.’ So, they came to support me. Now, they started. General Surayudth called me. General Sondhi had his close aide call me. In the palace… In the palace we had privilege. Everyone was close to me. They were close to me as hell. (Laughter.) I could reach. You don’t have to ask if I could actually reach. If you have something to say, say it. I assure you that it will reach the King/Queen’s ears (พระกรรณ). I don’t care. So, they started backing our movement.

  Until there was a signal sent to me. I was fighting then. There was a gift from the palace, sent through Kunying Busaba, the Queen’s sister. It turned out that, after I had just received it from Kunying Busaba in person, many people called me. Prem had his aide call me. General Chawalit, everyone called me, asking me if it is true.”

• 12 Sidh S. // Mar 25, 2009 at 2:12 pm

  PMThaksin finally squeaks and more details are promised tomorrow. Ofcourse, the challenge is to differentiate between fact and fiction – as a desparate, cornered and clearly ‘untamed’ dog will say anything – and blame everyone else but himself – for personal survival.

  By publicly coming out in this personal manner may do much more harm than good for his own cause of returning to politics in Thailand. Would it have been easier for PMThaksin to come back and face his jail term and the pending court cases – so facts can be determined from the Red said, Yellow said, Thaksin said, Surayud said scenario that we are experiencing now?

  Yes, he would probably get an extended jail term beyond the two years of the first case – but it is the public sympathy that he can build upon and milk for its maximum effect which he was once so good at. He can even lay claim to sacrificing in the service of the rule of law, a fundamental democratic ingredient.

  As commentators have been saying, time and again, since early in his regime, he is tripping, yet again, on his own impatience. Good, well meaning advice is not taken but rather advice that suits his delusions and impatience from the questionable, self-interested Red leadership (as PMSamak seem to also observed). My guess it that he won’t even take advise from his own wife and hence the divorce and differing approach to fight their court cases (ofcourse, KYPotjaman’s low profile, translucent, soft and sweet approach is arguably more dangerous to justice. It takes more time, but she has a greater chance of escaping the charges).

  This is MuayWat (’temple boxing’) as some commentators put it. He has shut his eyes and is throwing a flurry of swings at his more organized opponents, hoping one will land a knock-out blow. However, even a worse case scenario of Red civil unrest in Bangkok tomorrow will only take down one or two opponents and many of his sweared enemies will remain standing while he is drained of most of his resources (unless ofcourse, he has not put all his money in tomorrow’s pot). Remember, the PAD and Newin’s Phumjai Thai are not even on the ring in this round…

• 13 jonfernquest // Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 pm

  The credibility of the source of this information is questionable.

  For General Panlop Pinmanee, one could pull quotes from newspapers where he makes himself out to be a hired gun. He explicitly states that he switched sides from yellow shirts to red shirts after not getting what he wanted. There is even one quote where he seems to threaten the life of a Prime Minister serving in office. Then there is also the Krue Se mosque incident. Mental stability might even be an issue.

  In short, General Panlop Pinmanee could hardly be taken as a credible source if one was writing history. One would need additional corroborating sources. Furthermore, this source comes secondhand from Thaksin acting in desperation, trying to stir up and muster his forces together in the provinces (the 21st century equivalent of Lucius Cornelius Sulla).

• 14 dantampa // Mar 25, 2009 at 5:07 pm

  To my way of thinking, any objective study of Thailand’s experiment in democracy since the revolution of 1932 , most of which has come under the reign of one man, can only be seen as an attempt by reactionary pro-monarchist forces to use the crown to cripple the development of populist democracy, through political manipulation of a weak multi-party system populated with venal politicians, or governments imposed by coup d’etat, frequently with tacit royal approval.

  Given the secrecy of Thai palace life, the carefully nurtured cult of personality surrounding it, and the fanatical taboo against any discussion of its involvement in politics, the degree to which the royals have been directly involved in many critical events for the past 50 years may never be known. Indeed, we may know more about the intrigues of the Caesars than the Ramas, given the black hole in Thai history left by the force of lese majeste.

  What is clear, however, is that Thai monarchists, unlike their counterparts in Europe and elsewhere, have shown little interest in accommodating the role of a truly constitutional monarch to the sovereign will of the people in democracy. More likely than not, one can only speculate that the whispers heard more often within Bangkok’s palaces among the faithful have been : “Who will rid us of these troublesome elections.”

• 15 Portman // Mar 25, 2009 at 6:17 pm

  The challenge to the Privy Council seems to require a response. It will be interesting to see what this will be.

• 16 nganadeeleg // Mar 25, 2009 at 8:29 pm

  “….political manipulation of a weak multi-party system populated with venal politicians….”

  Did the venal outnumber the others?

• 17 Ralph Kramden // Mar 26, 2009 at 3:57 am

  jonfernquest questions Panlop’s mental state and credibility and claims that corroborating evidence is required. Oppai provides some. There is more at Bangkok Pundit and Political Prisoners in Thailand.

  Actually, Panlop as and ISOC person, until Thaksin removed him, seems to be a person who was in the right place to know what was going on.

  Historical documents on all this are probably going to be hard to come by, but if participants like Sonthi Lim, Panlop, and General Saprang are not reliable, then who might be?

• 18 rookie // Mar 26, 2009 at 4:03 am

  If you read/believe The Nation, of course Thaksin’s popularity is slipping but wait for tomorrow (26 March) and see how the huge forces of democracy (including Thaksin supporters) will be unleashed. The Red Shirts phenomenon is scarcely mentioned in the mainstream media, including the pro-military and pro-ammart The Nation (I stopped buying The Nation to save my money even though I still read its online version to see how it tells lies and twists the news). To those outside Thailand, I want to encourage you to type this URL http://www.dstation.tv and listen to the voice of democracy currently gaining momentum in this country.

• 19 Ralph Kramden // Mar 26, 2009 at 4:32 am

  Oh by the way, not sure I understand jonfernquest’s reference to Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Sounded like someone not engaged sufficiently at the ground level and too ivory-tower-esque and maybe even faux-Marxist-drivellist in inspiration. However, worth listening to, perhaps (source for some of the words in the 2nd sentence: post 19, 20 Mar 2009, http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2009/03/19/the-ivory-tower-democrac-and-all-that-jazz/).

• 20 David Brown // Mar 26, 2009 at 9:43 am

  jonfernquest #12

  apparently its Sondhi in a 2006 speech in the USA (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRnYDFUvGrM) that provides the corroborating evidence

  he also mentions Busapa which is interesting in the light of rumours that Sondhi may be linked to the Royal Family in some perhaps blackmailable way

  its a mess and the sooner these people are in gaol or neutered in some way the better

• 21 chris baker // Mar 26, 2009 at 11:47 am

  In his Time interview on 6 March, Thaksin said two things about the Sukumwit meeting.

  First, that he would soon name names. He’s done that.

  Second, that he has a recording of the meeting….

• 22 Book Zone // Mar 27, 2009 at 1:49 am

  I would welcome the day when Bangkok Pundit and New Mandala go out and look for some REAL issues that have absolutely nothing to do with the tawdry soap opera of the so-called Thai elite. Your style of punditry only serves to perpetuate the elite in its fantasy of invincibility.

• 23 Book Zone // Mar 27, 2009 at 2:00 am

  Let the fool Thaksin name all the names he wants. He will thus discredit a system in which he has long been a very active and avid participant. He will only hasten the dawning realization that he and the other members of Thailand’s elite are an increasing irrelevance.

• 24 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Mar 27, 2009 at 10:40 am

  Re: #10

  I have posted background infomation on Sondhi’s speech at Thai-DC Forum, Virginia, in which he revealed Surayut’s role, as well as the origins of the “Blue Scarf” and Thaksin’s alledged remark in New York (at the time of 2006 coup) insulting the king. There are links to complete video and sound files of the speech. See here (sorry, in Thai only)
  http://www.sameskybooks.org/board/index.php?showtopic=27502

  or here
  http://www.prachataiwebboard.com/webboard/wbtopic.php?id=787664

  The date of the speech is Monday 20 August 2007 Virginia time (not 24 or 25 August as widely reported)

• 25 Sidh S. // Mar 27, 2009 at 1:54 pm

  DAY 1: Thairath estimated 30,ooo Reds:
  http://www.thairath.co.th/offline.php?section=hotnews&content=129976

  Nation gave it 40,ooo Reds:
  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/03/27/politics/politics_30098982.php

  Bangkokpost 20,ooo Reds:
  http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/14041/udd-demonstration-goes-ahead-without-thaksin

  Matichon also gave it 20,000 Reds (noting that the Red leadership estimated 50,000):
  http://www.matichon.co.th/matichon/view_news.php?newsid=01p0102270352&sectionid=0101&day=2009-03-27

  A disappointing number for PMThaksin that he did not give his full rant/expose last night? Would postponing to today – and maybe Saturday – rally larger numbers? Or is this a tactic to sustain the numbers through many days on the cheap. Either PMThaksin has not ‘invested’ enough and/or the Red leadership took too large commissions combined with the effect of the government’s 2,000 baht cheques. Ah, bad amateurish planning – or maybe they fear that the Red leaning populace could be ‘bought’ and hence had to hold the rally on the same day? Matichon (same article above) noted that ~30 people donated their checks to the Reds movement amounting to 60,ooobaht.

  All the while he is negotiating a ‘video phone-in’ to make his case in court for the 70+ billion baht assets seizure case!:

  http://www.matichon.co.th/news_detail.php?newsid=1238047387&grpid=05&catid=01

  Maybe coming back to coordinate all this (Pheu Thai in parliament, Reds in the streets, fighting court cases as well as suing others while attacking the courts at the same time) from jail would have saved a lot of trouble!

  Time for AjarnGile’s video-link as a drawcard and sideshow to PMThaksin’s???

• 26 Sidh S. // Mar 27, 2009 at 2:28 pm

  On both what PMThaksin, GenPanlop, TycoonSonthi or others say, regardless of the accuracy we also have to keep in mind that they are not ‘passive’ observers, nor are they secondary actors. They are the key, active players in all this and it will be very hard to determine – impossible if you ask them directly – what their exact actions and roles were/are (GenPanlop in particular is very interesting – as he seems to be a double-agent). With PMThaksin, at least we’ll get some inkling through piecing evidences that arises from his many court cases together and, besides, he’s heading the Reds show now telling his version of the story and naming names. However, it will likely lead to nothing as long as he does not admit his own incriminating role. For example, to bring down former allies turned enemy (whether TycoonSonthi or Mr.Newin), he will have to admit his own wrongdoings – all those questionable deals turned sour. I doubt PMThaksin has the guts for that and hence his increased isolation.

• 27 Oppai // Mar 27, 2009 at 10:09 pm

  Re: Somsak #23

  Thank you very much for sharing that. I have translated an interesting part from Sondhi’s speech that you have pointed out. Someone has posted this part on YouTube. You can watch it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YN_Oq6COVlk

  “General Surayuth, basically… I know before he became the prime minisiter. At the time I was fighting against Thaksin, he would confidentially call me and say, “Khun Sondhi, keep up fighting. Please tolerate.” Today I am disillusioned. You let me be wounded. You let me be soaked in blood. And then you came to enjoy the power. But that’s OK. To gain more benefits [กิน], the work for the country is a minor matter. Just tolerate. Then… The reason I say this is not that I’m demanding something in return. [Surayuth said] “Sondhi, I admit that today the nation lacks knowledge. When I become the PM, I will give you a free television channel so that you will use it to educate people.” This is from Surayuth’s mouth. About Gen. Sondhi… After I presented my appeal letter to him at the army headquarters at the time Thaksin was the PM and then the next day he gave an interview criticizing me… Do you remember that? Then I said that my friends at PAD were angry at Gen. Sondhi. I said that don’t be angry. Gen. Sondhi might be in a predicament. So, he must speak in this way to not make Thaksin suspicious of him. After they had seized the power… Shortly before they seized the power, he called me. He sent Gen. Panthep, who was his senior friend, and Gen. Charoensak to meet me. … They said that “Bang [Gen.Sondhi] said that ‘Sondhi, please tolerate.’ I told him that nowadays Sondhi L nearly had to fight for food with dogs. He said that, ‘it’s gonna be fine. After the work is done, I will give you a television channel so that you can work for people.’ “”

• 28 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Mar 27, 2009 at 11:01 pm

  Sidh S.
  Either PMThaksin has not ‘invested’ enough and/or the Red leadership took too large commissions

  How much have Prem and his royalist circles ‘invested’ to get your service, then?

  Of course, I don’t really believe you get paid for doing this. But, whatever the number of marchers yesterday (and from what I saw, I believe it’s much larger than any of the numbers mentioned above), to link it to Thaksin’s money is simply a pretenteous, snobbish, crappy piece of reasoning, but too often typical of our ‘educated’, middle class intellectuals these days.

• 29 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Mar 27, 2009 at 11:18 pm

  More seriously, anyone who cliams that the number of Red marchers is relative, or linked, to Thaksin’s money I challenge him/her to produce evidence. (Sodhi L of course says each day that all Red marchers are paid. But is Sidh S a ‘paid’ emplyee of Sondhi L, so that repeating such craps is mandatory?)

  Of course everybody, including the marchers, know that Thaksin probably contributes to the funds used for such rally. So did probably many TRT politicians. But why should one think the marchers themselves – their ‘number’ – depend on these money? Give ordinary people some credits. In fact I’ve often found they are more respectable for their self-sacrify and their love of political principle – above all, that the right to choose government belongs to the people themselve not the unelected, unaccountable group of royalist privy councilors, judges and militarymen. Certainly more respectble in this regard than pretenteous ‘educated’ person like Sidh S.

  P.S. I never write that the PAD marchers were paid for or in any case joined the PAD rally because of anyone’s money either.

• 30 Joseph Strachan // Mar 28, 2009 at 6:48 am

  The vast majority of us living in Thailand are sick and tired of Thaksin and his paid nodders, and we just wish for some peace, and for our incomes to return to the level they were before Thaksin came to power. Now, for the first time in many years, we have both a functioning government and a respected Prime Minister who has no record of corruption.

  The 30,000 strong screaming mob organised by Thaksin is being led by opposition Members of Parliament. How does this reconcile with their supposed respect for the law and democracy? How can an opposition party take part in inciting civil unrest and still retain any respect from us? Why are they even permitted to do so?

  The delusional ex-PM, probably the most corrupt politician Thailand has ever had, has sworn to take the whole Nation down with him. even if it takes all of the tax-free cash he has stashed away in foreign bank accounts.

  It’s so sad !

• 31 Ralph Kramden // Mar 28, 2009 at 12:16 pm

  Joseph Strachan has appointed himself spokesman for the “vast majority” in Thailand. On top of that he knows that all Thaksin’s supporters are paid and has heard Thaksin say that he is going to bring down the country. Sounds eerily familiar. Blame Thaksin for everything while claiming to speak for all the good people. Who was it that did that? A few people sitting around plotting a coup perhaps?

• 32 Portman // Mar 28, 2009 at 2:28 pm

  Nice touch by the red shirts to taunt pictures of Angkana Radubpanyawut lying naked on the mortuary slab after being murdered by the police with an explosive tear gas grenade. Perhaps snuff porn is the latest desperate tactic for Thaksin to whip the mob into a frenzy. I hope that Ajarn Giles can get a video of that gruesome scene for part 3 of his Thai State Crimes series on Youtube.

  I think Joseph Strachan # 29 accurately reflects the views of many farangs and Thais who are not tenured ivory tower academics at foreign universities but struggle to make a living in the real world Thailand.

  “The delusional ex-PM, probably the most corrupt politician Thailand has ever had, has sworn to take the whole Nation down with him. even if it takes all of the tax-free cash he has stashed away in foreign bank accounts.” Thaksin has never explained how he got around Thailand’s money laundering regulations to get so much cash overseas. Squashing the SC Assets assets concealment case against him, involving fake Labuan based investment funds, was a top priority, involving getting rid of the entire DSI top brass when Samak became PM. Conveniently this also happened to be the only case that was not investigated by the AEC and so couldn’t be whitewashed through a constitutional amendment. It was bad luck for him that Temasek refused to play his dirty game with the block of Shin Corp shares he had secreted offshore in Ample Rich and forced him to sell it onshore on the big lot board.

• 33 amberwaves // Mar 28, 2009 at 4:28 pm

  Joseph Strachan is being ironic, right?

  When he says “How can an opposition party take part in inciting civil unrest and still retain any respect from us? Why are they even permitted to do so?” he is actually trying to remind people about the Democrat Party MPs who were in the PAD leadership last year, right?

  When the PAD employed armed thugs to safeguard their occupation of Government House and Bangkok’s two airports, right? I guess he and his “vast majority” were just wishing for some peace then, as well, yes?

  Very clever, sir, I tip my hat to you!

• 34 Srithanonchai // Mar 28, 2009 at 4:42 pm

  “It’s so sad !” >> Quite true. However, I don’t refer to the reds but rather of the “self-inflicted ignorance” (Preuss) displayed in your comment. How can we hope to solve Thailand’s political crisis when many people simply refuse to take out their heads from the sand in which they have buried them in the assumption that, if they don’t see a phenomenon, it does not exist, hanging instead on to an ideological image of harmony that is “destroyed” by some supposedly paid hooligans. This position is also self-defeating, because it ignores the actual dynamics of political-opinion building etc. that have been going on in wide parts of Thailand’s regions. Thus, you hopes can never come true.

• 35 Regular Reader // Mar 28, 2009 at 7:11 pm

  Whilst Joseph Strachan would have been better to open his comments less generally, than to say he speaks for the “vast majority”of expats(presumably those are the people he refers to as “us”), I think many of the other commentors on this thread should also be careful, that they too, are not appointing themselves as “spokespersons” for the Thai people – without first gaining acceptance of such a position…from the Thai people, themselves.
  Still, I do admit, to being one of his “us” and agree with much of what he said.
  Further, I would like to add to his thoughts, with the following:
  There seems to be a collective amnesia about what Thaksin did, to get himself deposed in the first place.
  Perhaps it would be a good idea, if he did “win back” his position at the “top of the Thai tree”(well at least along side the top- where he seemed to believe he was at).
  I am sure, that after a short period, this belief that he, and only he, is capable of bringing “true” democracy to the Thai people (having only experienced it in its “true form” whe he was in power) will surely be put to the test, with the same old, same old tricks as before.
  It will not be too long before, once again, forums like this, will need to watch what they say about him. Nor would it be too long, before the threat of “force” and “depravation” of government funds would again be used against the medie, because they will not do his bidding.
  For those who might comment on media freedoms, by claiming, “that is exactly what the current authorities are doing, re the LM laws”, I would say, as important as this matter is, it was regularly used 2001-6 to shut people up. It was pleasing to see Abihisit say yesterday, that the law must administered carefully. I hope it is,form here on in, but that is another issue and not part of my commentary here.
  If you really want a champion to fight for real democracy in Thailand,
  I doubt that man from “somehwere in Africa”, who is now using a storyline, which it seems, was developed by the writers of Thai soaps, to tell his tale of misery and woe and has a group of followers who need to show such simple symbolism, as the wearing of Red shirts, so a to so unimaginatively ape, the “yellow shirts”,is the answer.
  But maybe that’s the sort of “democracy” many of the writers here feel is appropriate for Thailand.
  I think the country is better than that.

• 36 John Francis Lee // Mar 28, 2009 at 8:01 pm

  The Bangkok Post had a very interesting article on Thaksin’s speech. If Thaksin said what they say he said then this is a very constructive speech. He made four points, according to the Bangkok Post :
  1. The country must revert back to the April 2, 2006, general election.
  2. Thaksin said that if a general election was called now, he would not enter the race.
  3. [Thaksin] added the Democrat-led government was not legitimate and must quit.
  4. After a new government was formed, the constitution must be rewritten, using the abrogated 1997 charter as a model.

  These seem to me to be very reasonable suggestions. Coupled with the Post’s reporting of Thaksin’s very level-headed assessment of the whole lèse–majesté mess I think this was a very constructive speech on Thaksin’s part and I wrote to them congratulating the Bangkok Post for publishing it in such a disinterested manner.

  In fact their newly acquired disinterest attests to the inherent reasonableness of this proposal, to its transparent appeal to the majority of Thai people (there seem to be hundreds rather than tens of thousands of Thais in the streets in Bangkok), and to the imminent return of a measure of democracy to the wonderful country of Thailand.

• 37 chris baker // Mar 29, 2009 at 1:33 am

  [Below are the key parts from Thaksin’s video speech last night (27/3/09). These extracts are the parts where he talked about the past, and said something which added to the information from the speech on the previous night (posted above). In between these extracts, he spoke several times saying privy councilors should not be involved in politics because it makes people misunderstand that the King is behind them. In the middle, he gave a rabble-rousing address, calling on the red shirts to help restore democracy. Towards the end he gave a proposal: reverse back to the point prior to the April 2006 election; bring back the 1997 constitution with amendments to correct the problems over appointment to independent bodies; hold a general election; he will not be involved.]

  ——————————————————————————————

  That day I had a meeting with government officials at Santi Maitri house. I told all of them to work to the full, because I knew officials had begun to run in “neutral gear”, had begun to have interference by the person with extra-constitutional charismatic power. I had to push them to work. A person with extra-constitutional charismatic power, what does it mean? It means the constitution does not lay down any structure, any power in administration, but because he has charismatic power (barami) he can covertly give orders. Officials are deferential and agree to follow, agree to go against the orders of their superior.

  The phrase person with extra-constitutional charismatic power created a big fuss. Sondhi [Lim] claimed I meant the King. I was not so bold. I’m loyal. I was not so bold as to say that. In truth, the person with extra-constitutional charismatic power is General Prem Tinsulanond [Big cheer]. I didn’t dare say it then. And one of General Prem’s people phoned to ask me to say clearly that it was not General Prem. But it was, so I wouldn’t. [Big cheer]

  Because General Prem was involved in politics, and the military was involved, we had the coup, the constitution of 2007, and the country has gone backwards by at least 15 years.

  Panlop said it was not General Surayud that called him to the meeting but the owner of the house, Pi Malakul…. General Surayud said that three privy councilors went to have audience with the king, General Surayud, General Prem, and a third I won’t name because I’m not sure

  At the coup, General Prem took Nai Bung and the others to audience. Why? If a coup group wants to go to audience, they can go, why should a privy councilor go too? It’s as if he was the head of the coup group.

  That Pa descends to play politics, to order this and that, in his role as a person with extra-constitutional charismatic power, is something that destroys the procedures of the country, gives rise to a system of double-standards, gives rise to social injustice

  Pa has no children but children are growing up. They must have a future, must live in a country with a proper system, a democracy that commands international acceptance, and social justice, not a system in which Pa can press this button and that button.

  When I was premier, I thought there was something funny with one deputy PM. Later I learnt that he invited a business friend of mine to be a minister. It turns out, General Surayud intended to make him [i.e., the deputy pm] prime minister under Article 7. This was wrong. Inviting a businessman to be a minister. I was shocked. My own deputy pm, why should he act so funny.

  The intervention, the meeting at Khun Pi’s house in Sukumwit gave rise to many events. There were attempts on my life—people dare not talk about it because of criminal proceedings. There were two attempts by sniper fire but I was lucky. The first time, I changed my route, returning from Chiang Rai to Chiang Mai, not via Lampang, and they had set the gunman at Lampang. The second time in Sanam Luang, they arranged to place the gunman in the Political Science Building at Thammasat. They thought I would speak at 8 p.m. but as it happens I spoke earlier and so the gunman was not ready when I left the building. And the third time was the car bomb, two times at the airport, and the third near my house, at the Sangyi intersection of Charan[sanitwong] road. In the end they caught the culprits with firm evidence. As far as I enquired, the person who was behind all three times and who followed the matter closely, often, two to three times, is called Nai Bung, Nai Bung.

• 38 Joseph Strachan // Mar 29, 2009 at 4:11 am

  Ralph / Amberwaves, I apologize if what I have said antagonizes you. Yes, we wished for some peace while the PAD was similarly engaged in their own wrongdoings. But did I not hear Thaksin’s nodders crying out against the PAD? So why are they now doing the same thing themselves?

  In case you good people don’t realize, we are in deep trouble in this country, while all you good folks are nonchalantly discussing these issues out of academic interest, people here are losing their homes, jobs, health, and in some cases, their lives.

  Now we have some stability and some accountability, but you just can’t wait to bring back the chaos again, can you?

• 39 Lleij Samuel Schwartz // Mar 29, 2009 at 9:28 am

  re: Joseph Strachan

  *dons his pith helmet and safari suit*

  Yes, yes…with all these natives running amok and screaming about “political enfranchisement” and “social/ethnic equality” , it is bloody difficult to do any business nowadays isn’t? Hopefully, he will soon restore some damn order to this godforsaken place. Yes, he may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he’s our son-of-a-bitch, right?

  Anyway, Joseph, I do hope you can attend the cotillion that my wife is organizing at the Colonial Club next month. It will be a very flash time, what?

• 40 David Brown // Mar 29, 2009 at 10:19 am

  Joseph #37,

  thanks for reminding us that things are serious and your (tearful?) concern for the Thai people

  what do you think of Thaksins advice on how to run the country compared to the Democrats efforts?

  specifically I wonder how the miltary billion on top of their bloated budgets are improving the situation in the country? do you think a submarine and additional jets will help ordinary Thais or just keep them docile in their villages?

  do you think that the delays caused by the hysterical PAD against implementing infrastructure projects and actually crashing the electronic exports through the airports at a critical time last year have assisted Thailand weather and climb out of the financial situation?

• 41 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Mar 29, 2009 at 10:54 am

  Chris Baker #20 :
  In his Time interview on 6 March, Thaksin said two things about the Sukumwit meeting.

  First, that he would soon name names. He’s done that.

  Second, that he has a recording of the meeting….

  Actually, what Thaksin said was : ” there was a meeting in one house on Sukhumvit [Road in Bangkok] and one of the attendees revealed to me–and I have the tapes of what happened–that the meeting was about getting rid of me”

  From the rally last night, it seems that “the tapes of what happened” turned out to be the same video of Sondhi L’s Virginia speech I mentioned #23 above. And the part that Sondhi L talked about the role of Surayut had already been shown at previous rally.

  Thaksin’s supporters now put the video on YouTube using as title, the well-known Thai sarcasm : “sia ma” (not sure how to translate into English). The first part is the one Khun Oppai mentioned at #26, the second part is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fqnB6TZpvc&feature=related

  Last night one of the Red rally organizers, Natthawut Sai-kua, was about to show a new part of the video, but apparently technical difficulty intervened. Natthawut then went on to summerize the content (”it’s about the ‘cliam of the High-Up’ [อ้างเบื้องสูง] [support] Sondhi made”) and told his audience to watch it on YouTube instead (the “sia ma” above).

  What’s interesting about the part that Natthawut wanted to show is that it concerns Sondhi’s recounting of the Queen’s sister (Lady Bussaba) summonded Sondhi [to the palace ?] to receive “a gift from the Royal Court” (widely understood to be the Blue Scarf”) from Bussaba. Here’s what Sondhi said in the clip:

  จนกระทั่ง มีสัญญาณบางสัญญาณมาถึงผม จู่ๆ ผมสู้อยู่ ก็มีของขวัญชิ้นหนึ่ง มาจากราชสำนัก ผ่านมาทางท่านผู้หญิงบุษบา ซึ่งเป็นน้องสาวพระราชินี ปรากฏว่าผมแค่ได้รับวันเดียว ผมเข้าไปรับด้วยตัวเองกับท่านผู้หญิงบุษบา โทรศัพท์มาหาผมเต็มเลย ป๋าเปรมให้คนสนิทโทรมา พลเอกชวลิต ยงใจยุทธ ทุกคนโทรมาหมด ถามว่า จริงหรือเปล่า ….

  As he was about to show the clip, Natthawut shouted: “I don’t believe any of what Sondhi said in this clip that I’m going to play, but I want you all to know what Sondhi said.”

  Had it been shown, it would be the first time the Red rally, via the showing of the clip, openly mentioned the Queen’s sister’s (and presumeably [?] the Queen herself [?]) support of the PAD.

• 42 David Brown // Mar 29, 2009 at 2:45 pm

  having claimed that major infrastructure projects are “cesspits of corruption”

  I notice that the Democrats, with no sign of complaint by the PAD, have had cabinet meetings to get the infrastructure projects moving “to save the country”

  does anyone know which ministers are happily now at the “trough” planning for their happy and wealthy retirement, or

  should we assume that the Democrats are corruption=free and because of the secrecy surrounding their military-controlled government noone will ever question where the money is going?

• 43 amberwaves // Mar 29, 2009 at 3:43 pm

  Dear Joseph Strachan: You’re not antagonizing me. I’m just suggesting you are ignorant. But points for coming back, I thought you would be one of those hit-and-run commenters.

  You say “So why are they now doing the same thing themselves?” Well, perhaps I missed it, but I don’t believe the Red Shirts have broken into and tried to seize a television station, occupied Government House and stole all sorts of materials (including guns, Uzi’s, remember?) and immobilized Bangkok’s airports.

  The Democrats in the PAD leadership? What was that you had to say about them? I’m listening.

  When you say “We are in deep trouble in this country,” I agree, but I’m curious when you date this big trouble to. Can you clarify that for us?

  It’s also puzzling that you seem to be against both street protests and “nonchalantly discussing these issues out of academic interest.”

  I don’t quite understand the “nonchalantly” part when I see vigorous debate, but what exactly are you suggesting? Shut up and do what the government says?

  Certainly you can understand why the Red Shirts might think that the same rules that applied to the PAD should apply to them. Do you support prosecuting the PAD for their illegal actions last year? Certainly a good way to teach respect for the law is to apply it equally.

  What exactly are you suggesting is acceptable behavior?

• 44 Sidh S // Mar 29, 2009 at 4:55 pm

  AjarnSomsak #27 & #28, I will argue that my reasoning – that you branded “crappy” and “pretentious” – is simply based on my own deep skepticism of PMThaksin’s democratic credentials and my own deep suspicions that all his rabble-rousings are merely ‘business transactions/investments’, in the style of the ultimate capitalist mafia and the main objectives here are to get all his court cases dismissed and all his money back. I don’t think for a minute that the Pheu Thai censure debate and the Reds street protests are pure coincidence with his asset seizure case going to court (yes, the Big One). In fact I see parallels with the huge crowd outside the courts in his first assets concealment case – the now infamous “honest mistake”. ‘Hear the crowd/voters, they say I’m innocent’ PMThaksin is implying.

  On the other hand, I will not dispute that many Reds are there because they love PMThaksin and his policies. And they rightly equate PMThaksin with a democracy that they can directly benefit from. That is surely PMThaksin’s bright side and Thai electoral democracy is already practiced differently as can be seen in the Democrats’ few months reign so far – but it is his darkest sides and total refusal to be held accountable that is extremely detrimental to Thai democracy’s progress.

  I am also Thai, and like you AjarnSomsak I have friends and relatives in both the Red and Yellow camp. They fight and get emotional when politics is raised and social gatherings are not what they used to be. Surely addressing both the Red’s call for less military influence in politics (which I have argued in another topic, PMThaksin played a significant role in drawing them back) and the Yellow’s call for a much less corrupt (not on PMThaksin’s scale for starters) and more accountable democracy will certainly lead Thai politics to a better direction. But this will only be possible post-Thaksin self-interested politiking.

• 45 Srithanonchai // Mar 29, 2009 at 5:19 pm

  “Now we have some stability and some accountability, but you just can’t wait to bring back the chaos again, can you?” >> You are actually a “Thaksin nodder” yourself, because it was actually him who wanted to create a Singaporean stule “ning politics” (quiet politics). This yearning for authoritarianism in exchange for peace and wealth seems undefeatable. Somethimes, though, it goes wrong (see Burma). And what if this yearning in effect supports one suppressive group, which is why there are counter-acting groups, which might lead to even bigger chaos if the ruling clique insists of defending its vested interests to the extent the Abhisit-led clique does it now? Just look a little bit deeper, and a little bit ahead of your immediate yearning for a quiet life…

• 46 dantampa // Mar 29, 2009 at 6:21 pm

  Amidst all the demands for proof of the possible involvement of General Prem and others in the September 19 coup, there was a fascinating photo that appeared on a website known as Thai Photo Blogs on September 22, 2006, six days after the coup.

  The photo purports to show the chiefs of the Thai Army, Air Force and Navy, meeting informally with HM the King, the Queen and General Prem, on Tuesday, September 16, 2007, the very night Thaksin was overthrown. The photo does not give the specific time of day or night it was taken on September 16.

  If accurately dated, the photo certainly raises interesting questions about what General Prem and the coup leaders were doing at the palace on the very day or night of the coup.

  The photo and caption can be seen at:

  http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.thaiphotoblogs.com/media/king_junta.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.thaiphotoblogs.com/index.php%3Fblog%3D5%26p%3D215%26more%3D1%26c%3D1%26tb%3D1%26pb%3D1&h=263&w=380&sz=75&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=IL1QR7Vd24IdJM:&tbnh=85&tbnw=123&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dthai%2Bcoup%2Bmeets%2Bwith%2Bking%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

• 47 amberwaves // Mar 29, 2009 at 10:42 pm

  What a disgraceful display of distortion by omission is Suthichai’s Yoon’s blog entry on the “conspiracy dinner”!

  (http://blog.nationmultimedia.com/ThaiTalk/2009/03/29/entry-1
  referenced also at http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/03/29/headlines/headlines_30099125.php)

  Piya Malakul’s account may or may not be accurate and it may or may not be to the point. But to omit the context of Piya’s links to the palace and his long-time role as its PR man is shoddy journalism, and Suthichai knows better. Dishonest would perhaps be the better word to describe it.

  Can some NM reader enlighten us as to whether the original Matichon article, to which Suthichai neglected to offer a link, is as negligent?

• 48 BZ // Mar 30, 2009 at 1:01 am

  One thing Mr Strachan seems to have got right here. A lot of the Thaksin and PAD apologists on this site are well-remunerated expat & local academics and businesspeople living in cloud-cuckooland comfort. From the standpoint of my always precarious social & financial nightmare, I would be more than happy if the entire Thai elite and their well-off apologists would eff off to the Turks & Caicos and give the rest of us a chance to scratch out a meagre and reasonably contented existence. I have now even come to think of thaivisa.com, 2bangkok.com, New Mandala and Bangkok Pundit and all the other boring bastard bloated ego bloggers as the spoilt lackeys of this bloody awful political system. It is a sad fact that millions of discontented people CAN be manipulated by both sides in this farce. Can’t you people get it through your thick skulls that regardless of the dubious merits of both sides (I despise both!), it is high time to actually do something before this country erupts in civil war? Your well-honed academic arguments are gong nowhere, on either side!

• 49 Ralph Kramden // Mar 30, 2009 at 4:35 am

  Amberwaves: the Matichon report and its linked CV on Piya is reasonably comprehensive, although some things the reader has to think through themselves. Also see http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/new-surayud-the-privy-council-piya-malakul-and-the-2006-coup/

  BZ – how do you know “A lot of the Thaksin and PAD apologists on this site are well-remunerated expat & local academics and businesspeople living in cloud-cuckooland comfort?”

  Good for you for not being one of the “millions of discontented people” being “manipulated.” I am thus surprised that you join the ranks of “boring bastard bloated ego bloggers.”

  You say it is “high time to actually do something before this country erupts in civil war” but your own “solution” seems to be for the “entire Thai elite and their well-off apologists [to] eff off to the Turks & Caicos and give the rest of us a chance to scratch out a meagre and reasonably contented existence.” But have you ever thought that it might take a civil war to achieve that? If the whole elite is to be effed off, they’ll have to be pushed, shoved and even killed.

  Presumably they will also have had to drain the country’s coffers dry so they can live grandly in the Turks & Caicos. (They should feel at home there as there have been numerous corruption scandals and a suspension of self government.)

• 50 David Brown // Mar 30, 2009 at 10:35 am

  BZ….

  so peace and quiet that allows you to eke out an existence is the most important thing?

  IMHO the way to achieve that is to force Prem to resign and either exile or gaol

  this will signal to the military and the justices that have been festering under his wings that they must obey the government or they will go too

  without military support the current government will call democratic elections which will result in some legitimate government that will run Thailand for the benefit of all Thais and, because that means justice and equity will be restored that will benefit you as well

  a democratic PM can lift the people so that all will, again, want to live and work in a peaceful and cooperative society

  some remember how even the immigration offices were organised to be helpful, efficient and not corrupt under the democratic Thasksin governments, compare to before and now

  I will be happy if you have any such memories/hopes

• 51 Sidh S. // Mar 30, 2009 at 10:46 pm

  My analysis of current situation: I suspect that PMThaksin and the Reds are now trying to to focus the hate to a person and that person is PMPrem. They have learnt through PAD’s ’success’ that focusing the hate on one person can actually sustain the crowd for very long periods and the call to battle will be around the aims to, as David Brown #48 succintly puts it:

  “Prem to resign and either exile or gaol” (and I notice the deep Red commentors in Matichon’s comments section are repeating the same lines)

  Maybe it would work – but it may also backfire terribly on PMThaksin’s popularity if Abac polls is representative of what the general population think:

  http://www.thairath.co.th/online.php?section=newsthairathonline&content=130346

  It is a huge risk now that PMThaksin has very publicly taken over running the whole show in parliament and on the streets. If anything goes wrong, he will shoulder all the blame in the minds of the broader public and take the fall (whereas his listed enemies can evenly disperse the blame or one or two can take the fall – the PAD, the Democrats, the military, competing businesses, Newin’s friends and now the Privy counselors). And as I have mentioned in a previous comment, all his enemies are not on the ring here (come to think of it – even PMThaksin is not physically present)…

  And it seem for the Democrat government to fall, PMThaksin will have to push the crowd into do something very drastic – or he must provoke a violent crackdown from the police/military (and they must use Chinese-made gas bombs). Maybe he need elements in the military, still loyal to him, to stage a coup against their commanding officers. Maybe he needs the PAD to step in and rally at Sanam Luang and then move to Government House fully armed to attack his Reds. Maybe he needs a ‘third hand’ that fires guns and military grade M79 at the Red crowd… Blood & deaths to test the Reds resolve and possibly to provoke mass anger, anger enough to take over Bangkok’s business districts (Silom and Sathorn) to avoid copying PAD’s takeover of the airport (which is manned by Mr.Newin’s ‘blue-shirts’ to defend his financial interests in King Power and the Ministry of Transport. Besides, I don’t think PMThaksin and the Reds have the guts to take on Mr.Newin as they know full well what he is capable off)…

  What can break PMAbhisit’s resolve to yield to his demands?
  What is going through PMThaksin’s mind now? How to maintain this momentum for weeks if not months? “May 5″ must have some significance as Pheu Thai MPs have pushed for a blanket amnesty bill from the time of the 2006 coup to May 5 (a month or so away) and some drastic, illegal move must have been planned…

  I hope and pray for the country (and my fellow Red countrymen in the crowds) that it will survive what ever PMThaksin has in mind. It will be hard enough to survive the global financial meltdown as it is where even the mighty Singapore has already succumbed to recession…

• 52 Portman // Mar 31, 2009 at 2:27 am

  David Brown #48 “some remember how even the immigration offices were organised to be helpful, efficient and not corrupt under the democratic Thasksin governments, compare to before and now”.

  Others remember how Purachai, in the year that he was Thaksin’s interior minister, ranted against foreigners and rejected the entire backlog of applicants for permanent residence and Thai citizenship on the grounds that not one of them was qualified in his eyes, whatever that meant. After he got the boot from Thaksin he went off to live in New Zealand (no doubt with permanent residence) where he happily owned land and sent all of his children to private school on funds thriftily saved on his miniscule stipends as a police officer and an academic. No thanks David. Please don’t bring Thaksin or any of his racist cronies back to be in charge of the Immigration Bureau.

  “without military support the current government will call democratic elections which will result in some legitimate government that will run Thailand for the benefit of all Thais and, because that means justice and equity will be restored that will benefit you as well” If that means bringing back Thaksin, there will not be justice and equity for all. Thaksin is not a person who respects the rule of law.

• 53 John Francis Lee // Mar 31, 2009 at 12:12 pm

  I hope and pray for the country (and my fellow Red countrymen in the crowds) that it will survive what ever PMThaksin has in mind. It will be hard enough to survive the global financial meltdown as it is where even the mighty Singapore has already succumbed to recession…

  Mighty Singapore has no hinterland to which to retreat and subsist for the duration of the global depression.

  But to survive not just whatever is in sociopath Thaksin’s mind but in the minds of the sociopaths at the PAD and in the military as well. What they all have in mind is the least profit for the smallest number of people. They only differ on the identity of the individuals composing that numerically smallest set.

  The only way out of all this is for the people to push their “leaders” out of the way and to take charge of their own movements. Top-down “democracy” is conflicted from the start.

  Perhaps the spread of the protests to the provinces is a hopeful sign. A super-sandwich making democratic rain.

• 54 chris baker // Mar 31, 2009 at 2:18 pm

  Somsak #40. I think you’re right.

  I wonder if Somsak or anyone else would like to comment on Thaksin’s use of the phrase เสียงปืนแตก (sound of gunfire) in his speech last night. He doesn’t know what it ‘means’? He knows exactly?

  ถ้าเมื่อไหร่เสียงปืนแตก ทหารยิงประชาชน ผมจะเข้าไปนำพี่น้องเดินเข้ากรุงเทพฯทันที

• 55 chris baker // Mar 31, 2009 at 2:36 pm

  Here’s the whole quote, from the Matichon transcript (I haven’t watched the video).
  ———————————————————

  “Today there was news that the international terrorist who is foreign minister will take back my passport. Come on. A passport costs a thousand baht plus. Take it. But you cannot take from me the heart of a Thai. Today, brothers and sisters, there’s no need to worry about me. I’ll survive. But I worry about you. If there is the sound of gunfire, of soldiers shooting the people, I’ll return immediately to lead you to march on Bangkok. I can no longer accept such dictatorship. Brothers and sisters in the army and police, we are all Thai flesh and blood, all love the King and Queen the same as you, as Thais. But there are some people trying to monopolize [? power] to your disadvantage… I want to say that this is one of the most important occasions for us to change the country to a true democracy, to abolish authoritarianism from the country. Brothers, sisters, and friends in the bureaucracy, today many of you are afraid because you are threatened or sometimes transferred. Today you must be as neutral as you can until a neutral government is in place. Please uphold the dignity of the country by coming to join our movement.”

• 56 dantampa // Apr 1, 2009 at 2:56 am

  Apropos my post two days ago, questioning just when the palace photo was taken, showing General Prem, the King and Queen meeting with the coup leaders on September 19, Prem broke silence today and was quoted in the Bangkok Post as follows:

  “Gen Prem also said he did not lead army commanders to see His Majesty the King on Sept 19, 2006, as alleged. He was already with the King at Chitralada Palace before they arrived.

  The Privy Council president said that after hearing about the coup that day he went to the palace about 3 pm in case the King wanted to issue any special orders. The army commanders arrived later at the palace, about 5pm. He was not informed about their visit in advance.”

  Prem’s statement appears to confirm that he had knowledge of the coup at least 6 hours before the first troops arrived in Bangkok after 9 PM, followed by a BBC news bulletin sometime after 10 PM, Bangkok time. It thus appeares to confirm that the photo showing the junta leaders meeting with Prem, the King and Queen, was taken at least 6 hours before the coup was officially announced on Thai TV around 11 PM.
  That time line varies significantly with previous reports.

• 57 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 1, 2009 at 4:39 am

  Re: Khun dantampa #55
  It thus appeares to confirm that the photo showing the junta leaders meeting with Prem, the King and Queen, was taken at least 6 hours before the coup was officially announced on Thai TV around 11 PM.

  No, no. The full text of Prem’s talk is here (sorry, in Thai only), together with embeded record of his talk that you can listen:
  http://www.innnews.co.th/politic.php?nid=164684
  or you could download the voice clip directly here:
  http://baygon3.no-ip.org/savefiles/prem_164684.mp3

  Bangkok Post mis-translates the time

  What Prem said is the following:

  He arrived at the Palace shortly after 9 pm. (not 3 pm., he used the Thai words “3 thum” which means 21 o’clock) following the announcement of the coup.

  He further claims that two generals/coup leaders arrived at the Palace around 11 pm. but the last one only arrived nearly midnight. “This proves that we [he oddly used the pronoun 'we' during most of this talk! - Somsak] didn’t bring them to the Jitladda Palace to have an audience with HM: we went by ourselve [as did they]“.

  The photo was released shortly after the coup and it’s understood that it was taken around midnight, the time the coup leaders had an audience with HM King and Queen. Thaksin supporters always claim that the photo supports their theory that Prem was involved in the coup. I personally don’t think it does, but that doesn’t mean Prem’s involement isn’t true either.

• 58 Peter // Apr 1, 2009 at 5:27 am

  To “dantampa” #55.

  Good try for laying out the time line linking Gen. Prem to the coup, but sorry to say that your fact-distorting effort here has failed miserably based on Gen. Prem’s press interview below which I copied it from Matichon newspaper. I’m sure you can read Thai. If not, ask an independent third party to translate the factual information particularly the italic part below for you.

  For our foreign friends, I just want to let you know that it’s well-known among Thais that Matichon has been a staunch supporter of Thaksin throughout the time before & after the political crisis/infighting. In fact, Matichon has outwardly acted as a media arm for him & his cronies. So, no one should doubt or suspect if the statement was twisted around or manipulated to suit one’s own bias opinions.

  ข้อ 3 เขาบอกว่า เราเป็นคนนำผู้บัญชาการเหล่าทัพไปเฝ้าทูลละอองธุลีพระบาท พระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัว ซึ่งก็ไม่จริง คืนนั้นเขาประกาศปฏิวัติกัน ประมาณ 3 ทุ่มเศษๆ คือ วันที่ 19 กันยายน พอเราได้ยินว่า เขา ปฏิวัติกันไป เราก็เข้าไปในพระราชวังสวนจิตรลดา ที่เราเข้าไป เพราะเป็นหน้าที่ของเรา ที่เป็นองคมนตรีเนี่ย เมื่อมีปัญหาอย่างนี้ เราก็ต้องไปอยู่ใกล้ๆ พระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัว เผื่อว่า ท่านจะมีพระราชกระแสรับสั่งอย่างไรบ้าง เราจะได้รับใส่เกล้าใส่กระหม่อมมาปฏิบัติเพราะมันเป็นเหตุการณ์ฉุกเฉิน

  เราเข้าไปประมาณ 3 ทุ่มเศษๆ คุณสนธิกับ คุณชลิต ผบ.ทอ. (พล.อ.อ.ชลิต พุกผาสุข) 2 คนนั้น เข้าไปเมื่อตอน 5 ทุ่มเศษ คุณสถิรพันธุ์ ผบ.ทร.(พล.ร.อ.สถิรพันธุ์ เกยานนท์) มาทีหลัง มาเกือบ 2 ยาม แสดงให้เห็นว่า เราไม่ได้นำ 3 คน เข้าไปที่พระราชวังสวนจิตรลดาเพื่อเข้าเฝ้าฯ เราไปของเราเอง แต่พอตอนที่เมื่อพระบาทสมเด็จเจ้าอยู่หัวเสด็จลงมา

  เราเล่าข้ามตอนไปนิดว่า พวกที่เข้าไปบอกสมุหราชองครักษ์ว่า เขาจะมาเข้าเฝ้าฯพระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัว สมุหราชองครักษ์ก็ไปกราบบังคมทูลพระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัว สักพักหนึ่ง ก็เสด็จลงมาทั้ง 2 พระองค์ พวกนี้ก็ไปเข้าเฝ้าฯ แต่มีเราอยู่ด้วย นอกจาก 3 คนแล้ว ยังมีเราอีกคนหนึ่ง ซึ่งรูปถ่ายก็มี รูปถ่ายนี้ พระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัวทรงพระกรุณาโปรดเกล้าฯ ให้ไปลงในหนังสือพิมพ์ เพราะฉะนั้น เราก็เป็นคนเข้าไปร่วมในการเฝ้าฯ จะว่าเรานำเข้าเข้าเฝ้าฯก็ไม่ถูก แต่ว่าเราไปอยู่ในที่นั่นด้วย

  เพราะฉะนั้น ที่คุณทักษิณบอกว่า เราเป็นคนที่นำ 3 คนนี้ไปเข้าเฝ้าฯพระบาทสมเด็จพระเจ้าอยู่หัว ก็เป็นเรื่องที่ไม่ตรงกับข้อเท็จจริง เพราะเราเข้าไปก่อน ชั่วโมงกว่า และเราก็ไม่รู้ว่า เขาจะมาหรือไม่มา เรารู้ก็ต่อเมื่อคุณสนธิเข้าไปกับคุณชลิต ไปเจอเราในพระราชวังสวนจิตรลดาแล้ว นี่คือเรื่องจริงๆ ที่เกิดขึ้น

• 59 Peter // Apr 1, 2009 at 5:44 am

  To Mr. Joseph Strachan #29:

  Thank you for being frank & impartial. I know how you feel & I totally agree with your comment.

  I know it’s a futile effort, but I’d like to urge Thai & Farang commentators who are highly educated here to be more open-minded, constructive, fair & truthful in making your comments. Distortion or manipulation of fact to justify one’s self is a form of lie. It’s a sin to lie & slander against others without evidence.

• 60 Ralph Kramden // Apr 1, 2009 at 10:53 am

  Somsak, I thought the coup announcement was at 9.30PM via channel 5?

• 61 Ralph Kramden // Apr 1, 2009 at 10:58 am

  Peter likes posters to be “frank & impartial” and deplores “fact-distorting”. Then comes up with this gem: “Matichon has been a staunch supporter of Thaksin throughout the time before & after the political crisis/infighting. In fact, Matichon has outwardly acted as a media arm for him & his cronies.” Better put the Bangkok Post in that category as well as they obviously distorted General Prem’s words in order to suppport the devilish Thaksin. Happy April Fools’ day.

• 62 David Brown // Apr 1, 2009 at 11:03 am

  Peter #57

  why are you so gleeful?

  dantampa was misled by the incorrect reporting by the Bangkok Post…

  are you so happy that there is no proof that Prem waited until it was nearly time for the coup to happen before he went to the palace?

  why is this important to you? do you think it was good for Thailand for the coup to happen?

  Portman #51

  I dont understand why your story about Purachai is interesting or relevant… “Thaksin booted him out” presumably because he disagreed with his position….

  my people tell me that Thaksin inspired Thai people to be constructive and helpful rather than repressed as they are by the military… hard to quantify bit it means a lot in terms of Thailands productivity and place in the world

  pity to sacrifice this because you believe the ravings of Sondhi Lim… and the carefully orchestrated “wise” words from Prem

  why does Prem want the Army to create a new division in the north-central region?

  seems Sondhi Lim is both paranoid and schizophrenic… believes everyone is against him and cant decide if anyone is really his friend.. love/hate Thaksin, love/hate Prem, Sarayud, Abhisit…

• 63 Peter // Apr 1, 2009 at 11:04 am

  Khun Somsak Jeamteerasakul #56

  Gen. Prem used “เรา” (if directly translated, it’s “WE”), to refer to himself. It’s not uncommon at all, and you should know as a Thai, for Thai people particularly the young ones to use “เรา” as “I” in normal conversation.

• 64 Oppai // Apr 1, 2009 at 2:48 pm

  If you were Prem and you known that today there would be a coup, for what reason did you have to go to the palace with the coupmakers and make people suspect that you were behind them? It’s basic logic. Just because Prem went to the palace before the coupmakers doesn’t mean he wasn’t involved. To conclude from Prem’s speech is miserably wrong. He said he wasn’t involved, but let’s consider Prem’s behavior before the coup. Prem, the chief advisor of the King, spoke to the cadets publicly before the coup that “jockey does not own the horse” (รัฐบาลแค่จ๊อคกี้ มาแล้วก็ไป), “don’t pay respect to rich men who are corrupt” (อย่าไหว้คนรวยแต่โกง), and “Thailand has a Hitler” (ไทยมีฮิตเลอร์) despite that he had been quiet for a long time. If you are not innocent, you will surely know what he meant, given the political situation at that time. Let alone the evidence from the leaders of the anti-Thaksin movement itself such as Sondhi and Suriyasai. To say that Prem didn’t know anything about this is like, well, a joke.

  Not long ago, the spokeman of the army said that Gen.Anupong wasn’t involved with the coup. But it is Gen.Sondhi himself who said a year ago that he planned the coup with Anupong only. Strangely enough, Anupong didn’t deny this at the time Gen.Sondhi said. I still remember that back then it was kind of heroic if you staged the coup to “rescue” the nation from evil Thaksin. But now it seems like everyone tries to deny it.

  Let’s see this topic http://www.sameskybooks.org/board/index.php?showtopic=27605 (in Thai only) and see how their claims conflict with each other’s.

• 65 Portman // Apr 1, 2009 at 5:04 pm

  Chris Baker #53
  “I wonder if Somsak or anyone else would like to comment on Thaksin’s use of the phrase เสียงปืนแตก (sound of gunfire) in his speech last night. He doesn’t know what it ‘means’? He knows exactly?”

  I would suggest the latter. He knows exactly what it means because he is going to organize some violent incidents, like the RPG attacks on the yellow shirts encamped at Don Muang, in the hope of provoking a conflagration between the army and the red shirts.

  This he hopes will force out the Abhisit government and allow Pheua Thai to form a new government that will change the constitution, amnesty him and give him back his loot. Using this to advantage he will come back in triumph in new elections. After a few of years of unbridled corruption, gruesome attrocities committed by police and military, repression of freedom of expression and liberal use of criminal defamation and LM suits against his enemies, foreign academics will express deep disappointment with the restoration of “democracy” and start digging out those old yellow shirts from the bottom of the wardrobe.

• 66 amberwaves // Apr 1, 2009 at 6:02 pm

  Peter said: “.. it’s well-known among Thais that Matichon has been a staunch supporter of Thaksin throughout the time before & after the political crisis/infighting. In fact, Matichon has outwardly acted as a media arm for him & his cronies.

  Really? Why don’t you go back and look at Matichon’s front pages reporting the PAD-police clashes of Aug. 29 and Oct. 7, and explain how that helped Thaksin?

  I have to assume you are one of the crowd that believes any criticism of the PAD makes a person or institution pro-Thaksin.

  You say: “It’s a sin to lie & slander against others without evidence.”

  Where’s your evidence?

• 67 dantampa // Apr 1, 2009 at 7:57 pm

  I don’t think it’s very fair to call my post a “fact-distorting effort” when it was based precisely on what a Thai publication, the Bangkok Post, reported.

  Moreover, the statement made by General Prem two days ago, breaking silence after years of refusing comment on his role in the coup, still varies considerably with the contemporaneous minute-by-minute accounts of the coup published by the Nation, and which indicate that Gen Prem was having “an audience with HM the King, reportedly on a merit-making ceremony for ML Bau Kittiyakala” at 630 PM on the night of the coup. That’s two and a half hours earlier than Prem now claims he arrived at the palace “after the coup was announced.”. http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/20/headlines/headlines_30014092.php

  As far as I can determine, the coup was not publicly announced until 11 PM in Bangkok, witness the fact that Thaksin attempted to issue his “state of emergency” decree sacking General Sonthi from New York City at 10:20 PM. What was Prem doing rushing to the palace at 9 pm ?

  None of this proves, of course, that General Prem had any prior role in instigating the coup, as claimed by Thaksin, nor does it impugn in any way the appropriate role of a constitutional monarch in this dire constituional crisis.

  But Prem certainly appears to have supported the coup post-facto, and he certainly was Johnny on the Spot at precisely the right moment in time, wasn’t he ? Coincidence . . .perhaps. But Thailand’s long history of coups seems full of such coincidences, too many of which are frequently overlooked by the coup makers and their supporters.

• 68 Sidh S // Apr 1, 2009 at 8:36 pm

  AjarnSomsak #56. I understand the pronoun “เรา” or “we” can be used interchangeably with “I” (it may be incorrect usage but I have heard it used often through the years). The Thai language seem to have many versions of “I” (whether gender based masculine ‘phom’ and feminine ‘deechan’; the neutral ‘chan’; the ‘impolite’ or used amongst close friends ‘ku’; the seniority based ‘pee’, ‘nong’, ‘noo’ etc…etc…).

  On an amusing note, PMThaksin seemed to have met his match in Kasit:

  http://www.thairath.co.th/offline.php?section=hotnews&content=130707

  http://www.matichon.co.th/news_detail.php?newsid=1238508867&grpid=00&catid=01

  It is this kind of strong, emotional language that gets you on the Thai dailies front page! Cool, rational language is boring!

• 69 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 1, 2009 at 9:17 pm

  Peter #62
  Gen. Prem used “เรา” (if directly translated, it’s “WE”), to refer to himself. It’s not uncommon at all, and you should know as a Thai, for Thai people particularly the young ones to use “เรา” as “I” in normal conversation.

  Yes, precisely: it’s normal “for ….. the young ones to use “เรา” as “I” in normal conversation”. But do you know of any 70plus years old man who uses this pronoun as much as Prem does here? I cannot think of any (HM the King excluded).

  To prevent mis-understanding, let me state emphatatically that I’m not hinting at the issue of Prem’s sexual orientation because I absolutely reject such frivoluous ‘explanation’. (Many of the anti-Prem webboard writers from the pro-Thaksin camp regratbly resort to this kind of atttack. They’d say that ‘we’ is quite commonly used among adults too if they are female or in the ‘third sex’. Really sorry to have to bring this up, but I don’t want any mis-understanding.

  (By the way, the ‘gender’ explanation is implausible too: if one is a closet ‘third-sex’, wouldn’t he be even more careful to hide any possible sign that could lead other to think of him that way?)

  What I find particularly ‘odd’ about Prem’s use of this pronoun is more serious and more disturbing, namely I think he seems to be delusional about his own importance. No longer an ordinargy guy, but someone unuusally significant, perhaps kind of institution onto himself that he has to refer to himself with this kind of pronoun.

  I admit I speculate a bit here. But I ask if anyone can think of any other explanation or any other example of an old Thai man (who is not a royal prince or a monk) who consistently uses such pronoun as Prem does here.

  I’m happy to apologize and withdraw such speculation if a better explanation is offered, or if anyone could tell me how it’s not ‘odd’ here.

• 70 Sidh S // Apr 1, 2009 at 10:02 pm

  dantampa #66 – not to mention the other coincidence that PMThaksin’s “state of emergency” decree from New York, seemingly pre-written, assumed that there’s violence in Bangkok!
  It may be safe to assume that everyone smelt a coup way before the event including PMThaksin, who, remember, retained the support of the Supreme Commander (Yongyuth and Newin fled there on the night if I am not wrong). It was quite literally a power-play chess game for months before with the military shuffle of commanders in and around Bangkok (if I remember correctly).

• 71 Portman // Apr 2, 2009 at 3:49 am

  David Brown #61
  “I dont understand why your story about Purachai is interesting or relevant… “Thaksin booted him out” presumably because he disagreed with his position….”

  It is both interesting and relevant because it contrasts with your unsubstantiated claim that immigration offices were organized to be helpful, efficient and not corrupt under the “democratic” Thaksin regime. Thaksin booted Purachai out, not because he disagreed with his xenophobic and hypocritical position but because he was getting scared that Purachai was getting too popular as a result of his social order campaign and was being mentioned too often in the press as a possible successor to Thaksin. I can’t remember Thaksin doing anything at all during his time in office that was particularly beneficial for foreigners, unless of course you count his amendment to the Telecoms Act to increase foreign ownership in telecoms companies to 49% a few days before he sold his nominee held shares to Temasek or his sponsorship of the Chinese FTA which has wiped out many Northern Thai farmers.

  “my people tell me that Thaksin inspired Thai people to be constructive and helpful rather than repressed as they are by the military… hard to quantify bit it means a lot in terms of Thailands productivity and place in the world”

  Who are your people and where did they get their information on this? Productivity is very easy to quantify economically and there are no signs that there were productivity gains at the macro level under Thaksin. There were also no signs that corruption which corrudes Thailand’s potential for economic and social development was in any way diminished.

• 72 Peter // Apr 2, 2009 at 6:10 am

  Ralph Kramden #59 & 60:

  Why did you get defensive? Did I mention you for distorting and/or manipulating the facts to justify your view points?

  As a occasional visitors here, I made my comments with the constructive wordings (frank & impartial) & brought up the fact on Matinchon newspaper. If you can’t be frank & impartial & if you prefer to include Bangkok Post to whatever category, be my guest! Please don’t tell me that highly educated persons like you do not know & are incapable of being frank & impartial but prefer to do opposite & use negative words such as fool, etc.

  By the way, didn’t you know that Thaksi, in his hotel room in NY, had spent hours on the phone directing his designated care-takers in BKK on the situation before & during the coup, according to Jukkrapop & others?

  If you’re still uncertainty about the time on the official announcement of the coup, I’d suggest you to read get the news/info from other sources, not solely rely on Bangkok Post.

  Peter

• 73 Peter // Apr 2, 2009 at 6:24 am

  Somsak Jeamteerasakul #68:

  I was trying to help you define the pronoun “เรา” used by Gen Prem on the question you raised in your earlier comment. As long as we agree that it represent “I” or a singular pronounce/person, we’ve concluded that it’s the right answer.

  I don’t you know of any 70 plus years old man who uses this pronoun as much as Prem does here either.

• 74 Peter // Apr 2, 2009 at 7:02 am

  Amberwaves #65:

  Thanks for pointing out that Matichon printed or reported the story on the tragic day of Oct 7, 2008. Based on the equipment used and preparation as well as actual actions executed, any fair-minded audience who saw the raw VDO clip or live broadcast would not say that it was the PAD-police clashes but rather it was the riot control Police’s brutal assaults on the defenseless protesters!

  Based on the coverage you mentioned, if I interpret it correctly, you have fully accepted that Matichon has impartially done its duties as the independent journalists/media, and has not leaned quite heavily toward Thaksin’s camp at all. If this is the case, we should accept any conclusion by the scientists based only on a few experiments and testing.

  As for the evidence on lie & slander, all you need to do is compare Matichon’s reports against other sources over time & on consistent basis. Llike I told Mr. Ralph Kramden #59 & 60 earlier, if you’re not guilty in manipulating or distorting the facts, there’s no need to get defensive or feel the heat. I did not mention a single name including yours.

• 75 Peter // Apr 2, 2009 at 9:37 am

  Mr. David Brown #61:

  Did you see me jump up for joy? Is being gleeful bad & health hazardous?

  In answering your interesting question you posted (why is this important to you?), it’s important because it involves Thailand politics, right/wrong (ethics), and truth/lie. Do you think these matters (Thailand politics, right/wrong (ethics), and truth/lie) should not be viewed as important for Thai citizens who love their country, care about the society & truthulness? For another question of yours, I hope you’re not mad if I were to say, yes, I was so happy that I skipped going to the restroom all day because there was no proof Prem… But seriously, just to help make you happier, I am indifferent on this. To me the questions that need to be asked & Thaksin must provide answers are the long list of allegations of misconduct & the absence of accountability of them that Sondhi Lim & his PAD leaders as well as other non-PAD activists have accused Thaksin & cronies were involved.

  As for my thought on the coup, is there a new need to do more beating on the dead horse? What useful purposes for you & I to talk about this except you are looking for the opportunity to criticizing me and/or others who may make the comments?

  You do have many interesting questions for others. I wonder why don’t you ask yourself more questions instead of looking for room, however little, to criticize others in a disdainful way that you’re better than the native Thais who don’t agree with your ways of thinking & preference? Some of these questions include:

  • What you would do if you were another elite ruling class of Thailand but with high ethical standard but opposite Thaksin & his cronies on that juncture of the time (Sep 19, 06) after months of political infighting?
  • What kind of detail evidence that makes Thaksin a democratic PM?
  • Do you think people in Thailand and/or in other countries (especially Iraq, Palestine, Somalia,etc.) do not want to live in peace & cooperative society?
  • In the desire to live in peace & cooperation, should we allow ample opportunities for the govt leaders in power & their exclusive cronies to get rich quick in exponential amount while handling little left over for the average citizens & the poor? Should we allow them to get away with murders, abuses & widespread corruption?
  • What kind of things that prompted you to conclude that the PAD group is hysterical when you called them Hysterical PAD?
  • Since you so keen on the issues of human rights among others, would you care to rank the severity of human right violations committed by Thai governments, from the current to previous ones (Somchai, Samak, Surayuth & Thaksin)?

• 76 Portman // Apr 2, 2009 at 4:12 pm

  From Michael Connors article in Bkk Post today. Full article here http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/14383/country-needs-change-so-he-wants-to-make-history

  “Protests led by the UDD may intensify and develop the infrastructure required for political mobilisation. Open sentiment against aristocratic privilege and bureaucratic/military power may become a political force. The shoddy ambitions of a one-time authoritarian leader might well morph into a more enduring egalitarian ethos that comes to challenge the historical pact of statists and liberals.

  But where such politics will end, in the absence of principled political leadership which can speak openly about the failings of its chosen symbol, which can come to terms with the democratic malaise (2001-2006) under the man who promises to return Thailand to a ‘true democracy,’ no one knows.”

• 77 amberwaves // Apr 2, 2009 at 4:20 pm

  Peter said: “As for the evidence on lie & slander, all you need to do is compare Matichon’s reports against other sources over time & on consistent basis.”

  Can you tell us what other sources you mean? I have trouble coming up with a single Thai media source that would not be considered biased (mostly pro-PAD). If you compare Matichon to reports by Western media, the Straits Times and the Third World news service IPS, Matichon does not appear to be pro-Thaksin at all.

  Matichon *does* provide a diversity of opinion, something the PAD crowd doesn’t believe in.

  Perhaps it is unfair to ask you to present evidence of Matichon’s bias, since making a fair case would require presenting a lot of material.

  So let me ask you a very simple question: What Thai media outlets presented balanced and fair reports of last year’s events, in your opinion? That would give us a benchmark to consider your judgment.

• 78 David Brown // Apr 2, 2009 at 10:06 pm

  Portman #70

  we seem to be on the wrong foot somehow… my comments about immigration were reported by Thai people and their experiences in obtaining and amending their passports

  I realise that it is important subject for many non-Thais but I have only long arms length experience on the behaviour of Thai immigration and their handling of non-Thai entry and residence matters.

• 79 David Brown // Apr 2, 2009 at 10:23 pm

  Peter #74

  thank you for your long response

  “To me the questions that need to be asked & Thaksin must provide answers are the long list of allegations of misconduct & the absence of accountability of them that Sondhi Lim & his PAD leaders as well as other non-PAD activists have accused Thaksin & cronies were involved.”

  Why should Thaksin need to provide answers to the many unsubstantiated and in most case unverifiable accusations? A few people seem to be filled with envy and greed and indulge in emotional outbursts. Why and how should a rational, reasonable human being (or lizard?) respond?

  Why shouldnt the military of Thailand and their various nominee governments have to respond and be held accountable for their substantiated and verifiable criminal behaviour?

  And why is not the criminal behaviour of the military a higher priority than the sundry allegations of a few?

  “In the desire to live in peace & cooperation, should we allow ample opportunities for the govt leaders in power & their exclusive cronies to get rich quick in exponential amount while handling little left over for the average citizens & the poor? Should we allow them to get away with murders, abuses & widespread corruption?”

  So the military, big business (eg CP, PTI, etc) and Crown Properties get rich in exponential amount, etc, etc…. I agree we should not let them get away with murders, abuses & widespread corruption!

  My conclusion is that whenever Sondhi Lim, PAD, Democrats, Prem accuse anyone of something its because they are doing it themselves and have discovered that transferring the charges gets them off the hook most easily….

  Your turn now I suppose….

• 80 Peter // Apr 3, 2009 at 2:45 am

  Khun amberwaves /#76:

  I could not believe what I said “being frank & impartial” would affect you this much.

  For the western media sources you mentioned, since the new stories occur in Thailand & the players or newsmakers are all Thais while the language used is Thai, how accurate will the stories be after translated from Thai to foreign languages compared to the original version? For Thai readers or foreign friends who can read & understand Thai language well, do you think which version of report (Thai or translated foreign language) they would read first? Do you think the native Thai in general will feel more at ease & open to tell their stories to foreigners or fellow Thais during the interview or conversation?

  On the proof of bias, I’m glad you’re able to realize what you asked me to do by your own following statement “Perhaps it is unfair to ask you to present evidence of Matichon’s bias, since making a fair case would require presenting a lot of material.”

  I would love to debate with you all day long & endlessly but I can’t because I have to work for a living. After my full time job, I have household/family duties to perform. Additionally, I’ve given fraction of my time doing voluntary work for Thai community as well while the balance is catching up with news/what happens globally. I’m not a retiree or a professional comment poster who has plenty of time to post comments everywhere arguing with others to show off one’s superiority over others.

  So, instead of answering your question (So let me ask you a very simple question: What Thai media outlets presented balanced and fair reports of last year’s events, in your opinion? That would give us a benchmark to consider your judgment.), please simply tell me & other readers this. Is it more important for journalists, media and readers to have detail truthful information or balance stories even though some of the stories are not factual?

• 81 Peter // Apr 3, 2009 at 3:58 am

  Dear Dave Brown #78:

  Thanks for your response but I’m disappointed that you could only provide very limited answer to many questions I asked for your constructive opinions. You’ve been asking others a lot of questions & expecting appropriate amount of responses to satisfy your probing mind. I wonder if it’s fair for me to interpret your response/comments here as hypocritical? I’m sure there’re a few other readers/commentators here would agree with me on this.

  In your answer “Why should Thaksin need to provide answers to the many unsubstantiated and in most case unverifiable accusations? A few people seem to be filled with envy and greed and indulge in emotional outbursts. Why and how should a rational, reasonable human being (or lizard?) respond?”, I also wonder if there is a need to add the adjective word LIZARD? I’m surprised that Mr. Nicholas Farrelly or Andrew Walker did not delete this word while part of my previous comment (#72) to Somsak Jeamteerasakul which did not represent a derogatory term or directly insult any particular person was censored & deleted. Can you & would you tell us who envied whom & for what? Your answer also clearly suggests to readers here that you are a spokesman for Thaksin! One has to wonder why a foreigner like you acted this way as if you’re his lawyer defending him. Other following up questions are what kind of return did you get, how much you were paid?

  In your reply, you also said other leaders (military nominees & military ones were included but not police officers?) and businesses (CP, PTI, and Crown Properties, etc) are just as corrupted, were and have been enriched exponentially. In your defense of Thaksin’s wrongdoings, please give us your clear & direct answer on this: Do two wrongs make it right? If you have any evidence at all, I would urge you to bring them out into the public. I & along with millions of Thai (if not the whole country) are sick & tired of unchecked corruption & official misconducts. We want accountable, responsible & ethical leaders/officials. Thai people are not as stupid as you & some of our foreign friend thought. Like any society & country on Earth, we have qualified, educated & smart people as well as the ignorant ones. It’s just that we do not have more brave men/women. We need more heroes/heroines. You have the golden opportunity to be our hero. If you have any traces of significant wrongdoings, please expose the bad guys for us, will you?

  You & a few other commentators seem to have a strong resentment against Thai military. I also don’t like what they did in the 70s’ & 90’ massacres as well as the killing of southern Muslim Thais at Grue Sae & Tak Bai. But because of their past mistakes, so you would prefer Thailand not to have arm-forces, wouldn’t you? Is it OK with you for the mighty USA, UK, Russian, Israel and China as well as Cambodia, Vietnam to have arm-forces, right?

• 82 Peter // Apr 3, 2009 at 3:59 am

  Dear Dave Brown #78:

  Thanks for your response but I’m disappointed that you could only provide very limited answer to many questions I asked for your constructive opinions. You’ve been asking others a lot of questions & expecting appropriate amount of responses to satisfy your probing mind. I wonder if it’s fair for me to interpret your response/comments here as hypocritical? I’m sure there’re a few other readers/commentators here would agree with me on this.

  In your answer “Why should Thaksin need to provide answers to the many unsubstantiated and in most case unverifiable accusations? A few people seem to be filled with envy and greed and indulge in emotional outbursts. Why and how should a rational, reasonable human being (or lizard?) respond?”, I also wonder if there is a need to add the adjective word LIZARD? I’m surprised that Mr. Nicholas Farrelly or Andrew Walker did not delete this word while part of my previous comment (#72) to Somsak Jeamteerasakul which did not represent a derogatory term or directly insult any particular person was censored & deleted. Can you & would you tell us who envied whom & for what? Your answer also clearly suggests to readers here that you are a spokesman for Thaksin! One has to wonder why a foreigner like you acted this way as if you’re his lawyer defending him. Other following up questions are what kind of return did you get, how much you were paid?

  In your reply, you also said other leaders (military nominees & military ones were included but not police officers?) and businesses (CP, PTI, and Crown Properties, etc) are just as corrupted, were and have been enriched exponentially. In your defense of Thaksin’s wrongdoings, please give us your clear & direct answer on this: Do two wrongs make it right? If you have any evidence at all, I would urge you to bring them out into the public. I & along with millions of Thai (if not the whole country) are sick & tired of unchecked corruption & official misconducts. We want accountable, responsible & ethical leaders/officials. Thai people are not as stupid as you & some of our foreign friend thought. Like any society & country on Earth, we have qualified, educated & smart people as well as the ignorant ones. It’s just that we do not have more brave men/women. We need more heroes/heroines. You have the golden opportunity to be our hero. If you have any traces of significant wrongdoings, please expose the bad guys for us, will you?

  You & a few other commentators seem to have a strong resentment against Thai military. I also don’t like what they did in the 70s’ & 90’ massacres as well as the killing of southern Muslim Thais at Grue Sae & Tak Bai. But because of their past mistakes, so you would prefer Thailand not to have arm-forces, wouldn’t you? Is it OK with you for the mighty USA, UK, Russian, Israel and China as well as Cambodia, Vietnam to have arm-forces, right?

• 83 Peter // Apr 3, 2009 at 5:24 am

  For those who still think positively about Thaksin Shinawatra, please read this excerpt from Bagkok Post, EDITORIAL Thaksin should know better, Published: 2/04/2009 at 12:00 AM, Newspaper section: News

  While urging the red shirts to rise against the government and fight for his political comeback, Thaksin also proposed a way out of the political impasse – dissolve the House and call new elections – which the three-month-old government understandably has rejected.

  As a former government leader, Thaksin should know better than most that these protests, if prolonged, can only hurt the country and the people as a whole, more than it could ever hurt the government and his real or perceived enemies. In this climate of global economic recession, investors will likely turn away so long as there is no political stability in the country; likewise, tourists will seek to holiday elsewhere less riot-prone.

  Thaksin may still harbour deep grudges against Gen Prem, whom he holds accountable for his abrupt downfall in the 2006 putsch. But there is no justification whatsoever for his putting the country at risk or holding it hostage by inciting the masses to serve his own interests, under the guise of a democracy which he once despised and sought to suppress but which he now professes to cherish.

  As a former leader, Thaksin must also realise that the game of brinkmanship he is playing is extremely risky and only pushes the country closer towards deadly confrontation. The last thing this country wants or needs is a civil war or an open armed conflict between his followers and those who disagree with him.

  Thaksin appears to be right about one thing only: Thailand needs change. And the first to change should be the ex-premier himself, setting an example for the rest of us by truly becoming the selfless politician he sees himself as, who places the interests of the country above everything else.

  Here is the source of the entire article:

  http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/14380/thaksin-should-know-better

• 84 Ralph Kramden // Apr 3, 2009 at 7:31 am

  Peter, you keep saying I could not believe what I said “being frank & impartial” would affect you this much, but the point is that you are not displaying those characteristics in your own posts. That is what is questioned.

• 85 Oppai // Apr 3, 2009 at 7:51 am

  Re: Peter #57
  For our foreign friends, I just want to let you know that it’s well-known among Thais that Matichon has been a staunch supporter of Thaksin throughout the time before & after the political crisis/infighting.

  I doubt that, sir. I have been following news since the Sep 19 Coup and I can tell you that, among Thaksin’s supporters, Matichon was known after the coup as a pro-dictator newspaper (เลียเผด็จการ) and it has been nicknamed among them as Mati-jone (มติโจร). Just google this word and see how much it appears on pro-Thaksin forums. It’s only lately that Matichon has started criticizing Sondhi and some anti-Thaksin started using this word. ambarwaves’s #65 saying about Matichon’s front pages is one thing. Long time ago Matichon photoshopped Thaksin’s photo as a monk with his head shaved and compared him with a dictator in the past (Thanom Kittikachorn). I can’t see how this could be useful to Thaksin either.

• 86 Peter // Apr 3, 2009 at 8:40 am

  I wonder what were the reasons for US Ambassador to visit Gen Prem?

  THE NATION
  April 3, 2009 : Last updated 02:03 pm

  US envoy visits Gen Prem

  US Ambassador to Thailand Eric G John met Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda at his residence Thursday.

  It is unclear about objectives of the John’s visit.
  Also visiting Prem were Suankulab alumni who said they wished to give moral support to Prem. However they could not meet him due to Prem’s meeting with John.

  Vice Admiral Pajun Tamprateep, a head of the Office of the Statesman Foundation, recieved a bouquet from the group on behalf of Prem. Pajunsaid that Prem thanked everyone for coming.

• 87 David Brown // Apr 3, 2009 at 10:58 am

  hi Peter #81

  I used the word “lizard” because this is the word that has been used to describe Thaksin by PAD speakers… just as an example of the language used by people inspired by Sondhi Lim

  and, briefly, I did not say that the military, etc are “just as corrupted” as Thaksin

  I believe they are much more corrupted than Thaksin. Entrenched, traditional corruption. Being traditional does not make it right!

  I am not claiming two wrongs make a right, I am claiming the wrongs must be addressed for Thailand to achieve equity of opportunity for all its people.

• 88 amberwaves // Apr 3, 2009 at 11:51 am

  Peter: Since you are pouring out many times more words than I am, I have to laugh at you slagging off people you imagine have endless time to blog. I also have other things to do, including supporting a family.

  I was simply asking you to support your assertion about Matichon. You have not done so, or even bothered to answer a simple question to help us see what you consider good journalism.

  I will answer yours. It is not an either/or situation.

  Newspapers should publish detailed and balanced stories. They should not publish stories that are not factual (if by that you mean inaccurate or biased reporting. Opinion is fine, if it is clearly opinion.)

  That’s Journalism 101.

• 89 Peter // Apr 3, 2009 at 12:35 pm

  Ralph Kramden #83

  Based on your comment “Peter, you keep saying I could not believe what I said “being frank & impartial” would affect you this much, …”, would you count for all the readers here exactly how many time I’ve said it? There is no doubt at all that you & a few other Farangs posting comments have definite advantage in English proficiency over non-native speakers using English expressing point of views here. You guys are so good in all sorts of beautiful vocabularies including idioms & slangs which pose some problems for us non-native speakers. But 2 things I detected from your comment here: (1) You don’t know how to count; that’s why you used the phrase “KEEP SAYING”. (2) You just love to exaggerate based on the phrase “KEEP SAYING’ phrase!

  Well, ladies & gentlemen: I’ve to say goodbye. It’s going to be a long while for me to return to post comments to this website because it won’t worth my time here. Sayonara. Laa Gon.

• 90 amberwaves // Apr 3, 2009 at 4:51 pm

  Peter said: “It’s going to be a long while for me to return to post comments to this website because it won’t worth my time here.”

  Well, what exactly were you expecting?

  People might have been a little more welcoming if you were actually presenting cogent arguments rather than insisting they were arrogant and picking on you when they questioned your unsupported assertions.

  See you on the Manager web boards, I guess. Cheerio.

• 91 Sidh S // Apr 3, 2009 at 6:07 pm

  David Brown #77 “I realise that it is important subject for many non-Thais but I have only long arms length experience on the behaviour of Thai immigration and their handling of non-Thai entry and residence matters.”

  David Brown, are you Thai?

• 92 Portman // Apr 4, 2009 at 12:23 am

  David Brown #77
  “we seem to be on the wrong foot somehow… my comments about immigration were reported by Thai people and their experiences in obtaining and amending their passports

  I realise that it is important subject for many non-Thais but I have only long arms length experience on the behaviour of Thai immigration and their handling of non-Thai entry and residence matters.”

  You seem rather confused about what your observations or your informants’ observations pertain to. If the process for Thai citizens to obtain and amend passports was improved under Thaksin, that is a far cry from saying that the Immigration Bureau was made more efficient and corruption free under Thaksin. Apart from stamping Thais passports on exiting or entering the country, Immigration deals exclusively with foreigners. Thais get their passports from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Passport Office which has been generally known to be efficient and corruption free for as long as I can remember, certainly since long before Thaksin went into politics. Immigration and other procedures for foreigners for the most part more difficult under Thaksin but, to be fair, the Saruyudh government was more than happy to pick up the xenophobia ball and run with it.

• 93 Charrurat // Apr 4, 2009 at 5:58 am

  Peter#85

  I don’t know the real reason as I’m not US Ambassador. But isn’t it Gen Prem’s birthday?

  Having just read all the comments, it seems to me that you guys are talking about “evidences.” I would love to see evidences too, both in favour and against Thaksin, regarding all the issues you’re talking about here. Could someone please gather all in one comment ? And, if you’re kind enough, having just heard from the news this early night, could someone also provide me evidence –for and against– for the claim that Thaksin has a REALLY large sum of money somewhere at Cayman Islands?

• 94 Portman // Apr 5, 2009 at 6:12 pm

  Charrurat #92. Yes, I too am looking forward to the new episode of the Thaksin soap opera to be set in the Cayman Islands. However, the Caymans must be bracing themselves for the kind of drubbing that the British Virgin Islands, previously never mentioned in the Thai press, got over the Ample Rich affair. Thaksin’s Caymans assets, if he has any, could be in the form of assets owned by a Caymans corporation deposited elsewhere, a deposit in a Caymans bank, units in a real or fake hedge fund incorporated in the Caymans but invested elsewhere, including perhaps Thailand like the fake Labuan funds invested in SC Assets. Prepare yourselves for a lot of gobbledygook from financially illiterate Thai politicians and reporters. Even the Democrat bloodhounds, Korn and Korbsak, appeared amazingly ignorant when they went after Ample Rich. Perhaps it is dangerous for financially savvy Thai politicians to appear too knowledgable about tax havens.

• 95 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 10, 2009 at 2:00 pm

  Chris Baker #54:
  I wonder if Somsak or anyone else would like to comment on Thaksin’s use of the phrase เสียงปืนแตก (sound of gunfire) in his speech last night. He doesn’t know what it ‘means’? He knows exactly?

  I must thank Dr.Chris Baker for raising this issue. I admit when I first listened to Thaksin’s speech ‘live’, the phrase didn’t catch my attention. Even after I went back to re-listen to it (following Dr.Baker’s question) I still thought Thaksin used the phrase simply because he was in the “I-am-a-friend-of-Isan-people” mode and the phrase is quite naturally a piece of Isan coloquialism. In other words, Thaksin didn’t mean much and we shouldn’t read much into it. I am still inclined to think so. But now I should draw attention to this news, that some people who are high-up in the power hierarchy apparently took the phrase very seriously.

  The current Commander of Royal Thai Air Force yesterday singled out exactly Thaksin’s use of this phrase.

  “พล.อ.อ.อิทธพร ศุภวงศ์ ผู้บัญชาการทหารอากาศ (ผบ.ทอ.)….ขอให้คนไทยย้อนนึกถึงคำศัพท์ที่คนสร้างเงื่อนไขพูด ทั้ง “วันเสียงปืนแตก” และ “ปฏิวัติประชาชน” เป็นศัพท์ของคอมมิวนิสต์เก่าทั้งนั้น”
  http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9520000040231

  Interestingly, the charge that Thaksin and/or “his people” are “communists” began to be heard quite often in recent days. See for example, this headline by Manager:

  “ถ่อยแดง” ผีคอมมิวนิสต์เข้าสิง

  http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9520000040627

Leave a Comment