This is not the time for a full account of Eric Campbell’s Foreign Correspondent report, which was broadcast on ABC television last night (and is available here on ABC iView).
Nor is it the right time for a comprehensive rehearsal of the background to the evidence and arguments that were presented. Those New Mandala readers who caught the program will probably feel, like us, that there was little substantively new in the coverage. It painted a picture that is all too familiar to academics, analysts and others who follow Thai political life closely.
Nonetheless Eric Campbell’s report was exceptional, and exceptionally brave, in a number of ways.
First, it provided a coherent and unflinching account of the current moment in Thai politics with video footage to illustrate its main points. Within the first few minutes the notorious birthday party video of the Crown Prince and his wife was broadcast into hundreds of thousands of Australian living rooms. The video was shown to highlight concerns within Thailand about the reputation, status and public behaviour of the Crown Prince.
Second, the report was punctuated by comments from the king’s unauthorised biographer, Paul Handley. Handley, as readers of this New Mandala interview will know, has continued to make incisive points about the Thai royal family since the publication of The King Never Smiles back in 2006. He was in particularly good form in this interview. No doubt Handley’s involvement contributed to the quality of Campbell’s final analysis.
Third, Campbell took the time to interview people who tend not to get enough international attention. He sought out both Chotisak Oonsong and Chiranuch Premchaiporn who have both been charged under Thailand’s draconian laws that protect the monarchy. Campbell’s conversations with them were poignant, and firsts for Australian television. Campbell also interviewed Kittichai, the brother of lese majeste prisoner Darunee Charnchoensilpakul. This was, again, powerful television.
Finally, Campbell directly confronted the hypocrisy of Thailand’s media establishment through an interview with The Nation‘s Thanong Khanthong. It was a spectacular ambush. It started with Thanong declaring that lese majeste laws do not influence what he publishes. It ended with Campbell asking Thanong why he hasn’t reported on the notorious birthday party video. Thanong had no answer, except some clearly uncomfortable words about not reporting on private matters.
And so ended a remarkable contribution to Australian, and perhaps now international, understanding of Thailand’s current political strife.
Inside Thailand, people may never get an opportunity to appreciate the coherence and compassion of Campbell’s report. That is, in itself, a tremendous pity.
Could you post a link to the video for American audiences? I’d very much like to see it, but it isn’t accessible for those of outside Oz. Thanks.
Quality comment or not?
1
0
While I agree the report broke new ground for television coverage of the Thai monarchy I didn’t agree with its main argument, that the real problem is that the Crown Prince is not morally capable of “following in the footsteps” of his well-loved father – and that the Thais are not allowed to talk about it because of the lese majeste law.
In my opinion the Crown Prince’s personal character is a minor issue.
The real issue is the monarchy’s undemocratic hold over the Thai polity, especially through the Privy Council’s influence over military appointments, the judiciary, and the bureaucracy. This is what the lese majeste law is really intended to hide and prevent discussion of.
For this we must blame the father, not the son.
I realize that there is only so much you can say in a 30 minute report,
but rather than dwell on the Crown Prince’s peccadillos I would have liked the report to have discussed much more important matters that Thais are not allowed to discuss, especially the king’s interventions in the judiciary since 2006, and his involvement in the coup.
Then there is the 24/7/365 propaganda, the Crown Property Bureau, the Royal Projects, the king’s role in the October 1976 massacre, etc.
Hopefully these issues could be dealt with in a follow-up report, because this would do much to explain the impetus behind the Red Shirts demonstrations today.
Quality comment or not?
1
0
This was a courageous report in the finest traditions of Foreign Correspondent. Time and time again we see foreign correspondents doing the hard yards in situations where the local media is either unable or too feeble to report accurately. I hope the local Thai media are amboldened by the brave examples set by their international peers.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Lèse majesté in New Mandala-land?
One needs to observe great circumspection before insulting New Mandala royalty so I will try to be as cautious as possible.
Where exactly does Mr. Campbell face prosecution? Why does ABC not allow distribution outside of Australia? Is it true that ABC already evacuated their Bangkok staff?
If the report breaks no ground that the Economist covered previously, Mr. Campbell does not live in Thailand, and Australia faces no political repercussions, where does the heroism come from? This is not to denigrate New Mandala-land or her subjects!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Video not accessible from outside of Australia.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thanong certainly does report on “private” issues. He has posted a number of articles full of hearsay and scuttlebutt about Thaksin having cancer.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Bh V,
Under the lese majeste laws as I understand them, he faces prosecution in Thailand – wherever he may have committed the so-called crime.
However, the Australian government would not extradite him and I don’t think the Thai government would be morally strong enough to uphold its laws by seeking his extradition. They would not want to invite the international contempt, ridicule and exposure that this would bring.
Their preferred strategy for breaches of the law outside Thailand is secretive suppression of information rather than following the logic of their laws and seeking the extradition of all offenders.
By the way, Bh. V, I think you can criticize anyone at New Mandala without fear of arrest or prosecution so I’m not quite sure what need you have to be circumspect. Pretty baseless, weak and pointless sarcasm on your part.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aladdin, agreed…
this episode is a very useful ground breaker for the deeper story
nice to see Thanong exposed to some real questioning
Quality comment or not?
0
0
ABC iView:
“Due to copyright reasons this video program is available for download by people located in Australia only. If you are not located in Australia, you are not authorised to view this video.”
Could somebody please make this available to Thai downloaders?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Have you Australians never heard of Youtube?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thank you very much Aladdin. My thoughts exactly. Not having seen the video I can’t comment on it, but from what I have read it appears that it is another story about the King’s son, not the King, and the deeper issues of the role of monarchy in Thailand. This prince is the least of Thailand’s worries. The nobility of the people has been completely excised from the national narrative in Thailand instead supplanted by a cult of personality manufactured and cultivated by this King’s Ministry of Propaganda.
Where are the icons of Pridi? How many statues are there of King Rama VII?
I guess I better stop now.
Quality comment or not?
1
1
Dear Maratjp,
The comments here may give the impression that the report is mostly about the Crown Prince, but that is not the case. Its focus is restrictions on political expression at this particularly difficult moment in Thai history and, of course, the use of laws to “protect” the monarchy.
Obviously, it ranged into many other areas too; mostly alongside the comments by Paul Handley.
Perhaps journalists reading here will be inclined to push coverage more fully into some of those other areas, as suggested by Aladdin. The Eric Campbell report shows there will be no lack of interest from Thailand, and around the world. There is an enormous appetite for well-informed coverage.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Quality comment or not?
1
0
youtube it, please …
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Been trying to watch via an australian proxy but still to no avail. Hope someone will upload it to youtube for everyone outside Aus.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
I agree with Aladdin here. Vajiralonkorn’s sexual appetite does not disqualify him for the job of King. Augustus the Strong (354 bastards) was not troubled on the throne of strongly Catholic Poland (perhaps this is because he clearly followed the Church’s doctrine on contraception). The Crown Prince will have his own set of cronies and is likely to put an end to his father’s Privy Council. He may be happy enough for the Privy Council to be reformed on the democratic lines of modern European monarchies and attend its meetings now and then while mainly pursuing other interests. If, on the other hand, he falls in with the hard-liners, he will probably become involved in a civil war that he is unlikely to survive.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Although this doco is a great primer on the origins of Thailand’s current
predicament it does leave the impression that the present situation is a result
of accidents of birth. We have no control over how our children turn out! (I sure as hell think parents have some influence over the directions their kids
take.)
Funnily enough, the other story is that Phumiphon has been such a fabulous
success that his unfortunate son couldn’t possibly hope to compare.
In building his families financial position I would certainly have to concur, there have been few to come close. But if judged on his political contributions of 40+ years of meddling, he has out lived so many of his military business partners, then I feel the present political mess should be laid firmly at his door.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
If you think any particular person should be blamed, you probably have feeble mind. The Thai impasse was shaped by all walks of life- military, monarchy, bureaucrats, business elites, spoiled middle class, and yes corrupted politicians too. They were in it together, corrupting the country by cooperating their network and shared divisions of power. Removing this network, each isn’t so powerful. The monarchy is the most venerable of all- that is you know how to think (there’s a few who can at New Mandala).
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Was this report done with no assistance from local Thai reporters and fixers? If not, let’s give them credit for putting themselves on the line — with nowhere to escape to. (Of course, I assume they can’t be named, but a mention that Campbell was helped by them, if he was, would be good.)
Quality comment or not?
0
0
laoguy (16). Even the royalists’ childish cult of personality backfired on them when Thaksin stepped so rudely into the old man’s shoes.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
hmmm… also copyright ABC…
and 27 mins
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Nich,
Thanks for the clarification. I’d love to see the piece like many others but I guess I’ll do with the scraps I get for now. Perhaps at least a transcript could be provided somehow.
I’ll tell you, I hope these journalists are aware of how important their work is. I have spoken with many red shirts this past month about Paul Handley’s work and many are familiar with it. It spares them, any Thai, the very uncomfortable job of being critical of a very sacred cow here. Actually I wish I had Paul Handley’s email to tell him as much.
Many of these red shirts are better informed than the main stream media would make them out to be.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Maratjp, I’ve forwarded your comments to Paul Handley.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Funnily enough, the other story is that Phumiphon has been such a fabulous success that his unfortunate son couldn’t possibly hope to compare. In building his families financial position I would certainly have to concur, there have been few to come close. But if judged on his political contributions of 40+ years of meddling, he has out lived so many of his military business partners, then I feel the present political mess should be laid firmly at his door.”
Quite right. He built this mess, how can he not bear the responsibility for it?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
So, at the end of the day Eric Cambell’s ‘show’ was all virtually a waste of time. Eric spills the beans and gives everything for a 27 minute special that the rest of the world outside of Australia will never see.
ABC are pathetic to have locked this program like they have done
Quality comment or not?
0
0
For those outside Australia you might find it interesting to do a google search for : Foreign Correspondent 13/04/10
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thomas Hoy#7
Re. extradition you are correct – Australia’s extradition treaty with Thailand only covers certain crimes that the two governments have jointly agreed are in fact crimes – eg. drug smuggling, murder, money laundering, etc.
Australia has never agreed to extradition on grounds of LM, or any other Political “crime”.
No Australian government would ever agree to such – the electoral backlash would be too great.
Indeed it is a gross afront to our democracy that,
as you say :
“Under the lese majeste laws ….., he faces prosecution in Thailand – wherever he may have committed the so-called crime.” In other words this Thai law invades our freedom of speach, outside Thailand.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Adding my voice to requests for someone to youtube this!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Any update on availability outside Australia?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
David Brown //Hmmm… also copyright ABC…
and 27 mins
Many of BBC : Hardtalk/Fox : American Idols clips have been put on Youtube so outside their country can watch it and I think that’s the reason why do we have internet for because we don’t have to care much about copyright.
Please, youtube it.
You can split it and put it anonymously(register new email and using proxy).
If you really want to share it with the world it’s not that hard!!!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Can please someone from australia do this video on youtube or a other website? Please post the link here …
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Actually, many of those ABC copyright videos are already on YouTube but just not this episode.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
I had no trouble downloading the video in Thailand!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
There are some self-professed gurus of Thai history out there. How long has Bhumibol been on the throne? And how long have generations of the Junta been meddled in Thai politics? when Sarit Thanarat died with massive corrupted wealth, Bhumibol was only about to find his footing. Was Sarit the first corrupt military man?
Use your own brain. Don’t read too much from biased republicans and historians with personal history (6 October) with Bhumibol. I want to LOL- Paul Handley’s book is widely read among the UDD rurals- NO, wake up self imagined, self-professed experts! It’s all about them wanting to bring back their elected leader, Thaksin Shinnawatra. Go to talk to them, mean really go to talk to them. Over two-thirds of the red-shirts are still loyal to the king, and the rest don’t mind the monarchy. The republican sentiment is very low in the UDD main rally (the republicans are with Red Siam; they are very very small in number).
I don’t care much about monarchy, just want to be fair, can you people with so much hate and anger do so? Some of you sound like babies whose life ended at teenage years. Grow up boys!!!!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
I think all this talk about the succession is a canard designed to distract from the sordid realities of Thai money politics and the gangsters who control it. Thailand’s feudal structure is based on decentralizing power into the hands of gangster cliques who form alliances and political parties for reasons that have little or no ideological significance. Chinese Thai business families function like mafioso undermining what is left of a democratic system that has consistently failed to cope with the kinds of local pressures that can be brought to bear to influence voting, particularly outside Bangkok. In a situation where the entire mechanism of democracy has been thoroughly subverted the reliance of the people on the monarchy and even the military becomes a little more understandable. Both institutions claim, and in my opinion actually have broad based ethical approaches to their public actions. In western societies these sources of unaccountable authority would naturally be viewed with suspicion. The fact that they have such credibility in Thailand stems I think from the comparisons that people make with the all too easily elected criminally corrupt placemen who populate the parliament. Abhisit’s popularity probably owes more to his lack of a godfather status than any of his other political skills. If only other leading members of his government could be thought of the same way. But with Thailand’s biggest pimp as Commerce Minister I think its safe to say its only by focusing on the Oxford educated part of the leadership that the Democrats gain any credibility at all.
If the reds and their allies, albeit more accidentally than by design, manage to introduce a kind of left wing politics into Thai public discourse then, simply by creating a politics based on an ideology, they will have moved Thai politics forward a bit. An ideologically based system of corruption, cronyism and patronage would surely be a step forward. Not a big step perhaps but it might over time bring about a gradual improvement. Of course Thaksin was taking politics in this general direction before he was deposed. It seems fair to assume then that the forces of reaction in Thailand fear the emergence of any kind of modern political party far more than interventions through coup, mediation by the King or violent conflict. The Reds represent a new politics based on ideas would undermine all the traditional sources of authority in Thailand and this is why they are united and determined to prevent this happening…
(Ironically, if the Red’s could be shown to be the creatures of a traditional godfather grouping then I think they would be treated much more sympathetically by the media too. The anti-Thaksin rhetoric shores up the impression of a godfather pulling the strings from a distance thus bringing them back into the normal political spectrum in Thailand… )
Quality comment or not?
0
0
For those asking how to view this ouside thailand please follow the instructions on #25.
Also I notice PPT has a post on this subject you might check
http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/
Its not rocket science
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Frank Anderson once told of how to get around this censoring for the SBS report. Can he remind us?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
It apparently IS rocket science to find a copy of this program. All pirated copies–include the one at mediafire.com –have apparently been quickly removed. None on YouTube apparently survived, either.
If anyone can find it online outside of Australia, please post.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
First, it’s good that ABC does real journalism in Thailand. Not enough of this. However, it’s very bad that ABC acts as if by doing so it has done anything whatsoever illegal.
I’m not the least bit impressed with ABC making a big brouhaha about pulling its correspondent out of Thailand in advance of the screening, as if by practicing journalism anyone had broken any laws.
The effect of this kind of admission is to give credence an immoral law. This is a problem because Thai people can’t run and hide. Some Thais may have done and said the same things that ABC now “admits” could be a crime. Where does that leave brave Thais?
Foreigner broadcasters would do well simply to practice journalism, which is not a crime. By acting as if they broke a law, Australian organization sets a bad precedent.
Paul Handley, the Economist, and a certain Australian academic blog set a much better example. They speak the truth without acting as if speaking the truth — practicing journalism or scholarship — is a ever a “crime”.
ABC should act as if it represents a mature world-leading democracy and set a bloody example!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
thailand needs fundamental change, they are just unlucky that thailand has not developed like australia, with its system of government, not perfect but much better than theres.Will a new election change anything.Same horse different jockey. Most of the politicans are corrupt, No what most of these third world countries and developing nations need are administrators, to run governemnt till they get there act together.But i think this is just wishful thinking, thailand will just muddle a long, hopefully they will get it all together oneday.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
1) This is nothing new in the program and everybody knows it all already, and 2) It’s all rumors anyway, and 3) Only Thais can understand Thai problems, but 4) Anybody that doesn’t tolerate the situation is not “really” Thai, and 5) nobody good could want Thaksin the Evil One in charge again anyway.
Old excuses!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thank you Of Course I’m Anonymous.
Actually, now that I think about it, I’m going to get business cards made for this site with the URL and hand them out at protests.
Several comments from other posters were interesting in regards to any discussion of the monarchy in Thailand here at NM. In my opinion, the criticism of the role of monarchy and its use of lese majeste to silence any dissent here in Thailand goes much deeper than whether or not Thailand should have a monarchy or that the monarchy is the source of all ills in Thailand. I have spoken with countless Red Shirts this past month and continue to do so and most, from what I can gather, have no intent of disabusing themselves of this institution. From what I have heard, albeit in very hushed tones, and with nods of approval, is that they feel the monarchy has sided with the Yellow Shirts and that after this current king the monarchy should be placed alongside, not over, the people, where it can be manipulated by the elite to exploit the poor.
Most of these Red Shirt protesters simply will not even mention their king, feeling that he is, like one Red Shirt told me, “untouchable” though those around him can be so “touched.” I’ve been here almost seven years, so I’m not saying all this as some backpacker on vacation on Kaosan Rd. Most of the Thais I have met relate to this monarch as a child relates to a father. It’s emotional.
This is not to say of course that these very same protesters don’t appreciate an open and respectful discussion of the future role of their monarchy. As it is NOTHING can be discussed and this is a tragedy. So great journalism by foreigners is heroic in the sense that it shows that the sky isn’t going to fall down if one criticizes Dad. And that Dad need not be perfect to be loved.
It’s amazing how much more success I’ve had speaking with Thai people using this father/love metaphor. Their guard goes down immediately.
But I digress.
Thus the importance of NM in the wider discussion. The other night I heard a UDD leader mention “Andrew Marshal” on stage at Pan Fah Lila no doubt he was reading from one of his articles, and I thought how great it was for the free exchange of ideas.
Perhaps we are all here playing a little part here, as long as we keep our criticism of the monarchy reasonably civilized. Discussion is what’s needed most now in Thailand.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Coup could not be justified, neither could Thaksin be justified in coming to power by bribing judges, buying votes.
But this is Thailand, a potential failed state, and now it is because Thai bureaucrats (Ammart in Thaksin’s parlance) allowed Thaksin and other politicians to become rich by giving them state concessions in return for a few million baht in bribe money.
Thaksin blamed elite bureaucrats for driving him from power (true), but he did not blame them when he bribed them to give him mobile phone concessions, satellite concessions and allowing his firms to amend the original contracts so many times that enrich himself and his family while the state got less concesssion money.
Who is the hypocrite? Blaming elite bureaucracy when they did not suit him. Kept silent when they helped him.
Thaksin is as bad or worse than corrupted military chief and his predecessor who when in power, procured unnecessary hardware, just so that they can receive a cut (commission).
It was also the case during Sarit, Thanom, Jiew. It is hard to find any chief who is not corrupted. But it is even harder to find a politician who is not corrupted. I can name a few who are not, but won’t put their names here. You should know.
I can say that there are only TWO army chiefs who are not totally corrupted. At least, they don’t try to enrich themselves and they are poorer than other army chiefs by the normal standard. Thaksin hate these TWO the most because Thaksin could not bribe them.”
There are more posts on this topic from Thailand. Here is the link that is being discussed in English in Thailand’s most popular website pantip.com
http://www.pantip.com/cafe/library/topic/K9111403/K9111403.html
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Literally a lot of the comments on this site make me feel physically sick. It is not just the culturally colonial rational/liberal imperialism, but more starkly the hypocrisy.
I mean Australia’s courting of Chinese Resource contracts in spite of a closed door trial of an Australian executive over there would presumably be more of an excuse to get excited. But when money is coming through the Australian back door people are all too ready to shut up.
But if there is an excuse to attack monarchic or authoritarian government where the baby-boomer neo-liberal mafia, their protégés, and academic propaganda machinery have a limited ability to gain an absolute grip on power – they go in all guns blazing from a hypocritical moral high ground.
Look at the social division in the United States where so many black people live below the poverty line, look at the people’s democracy where for so long power has rested only in the hands of two competing groups, look at how business giants and corporate monopolies manipulate the political system through lobbying.
But that’s ok right coz its mainly white people guarded by euro-centric notions of rights and democracy that have very little historical connection to Asian culture.
I support the Thai government, the Thai King, and Thailand’s right to non-interference and protection from the hypocritical agenda of Western academics who are too lazy and self satisfied to look at problems in their own society.
Let’s think about what the Australian government would do if there was another anti-capitalist protest, where the rioters had grenades and AK-47′s and occupied a shopping centre for over … See Morelike a month or something. I seem to remember a lot of police violence at the G8 summit when the protestors were students armed with traffic cones.
The bottom line is that there are problems within all societies but the monarchy in Thailand is a sacred non-rational social and political force. Thai people and the Thai nation is capable of evolving on its own terms without petty bourgeois hypocrites from Australian Universities and media organizations, or cashed up Chinese-Thai telecommunication tycoons, trying to colonize its political space with tired and flawed concepts from yesterday’s political science manifesto.
There are laws in Australia/Britain the US that prohibit preaching Jihad or Holy War, in the Thai context Lesse Majeste has a similar effect – but I guess you can’t get out of your hypocritical colonial mindsets and think about a society to which Eurocentric liberal notions of justice don’t exactly match.
The program spoke about Thailand and its laws and its sacred monarchy as though it was a case study in a high school text book. In many people’s minds this is the power of religion and the force of culture – too great for your 2nd rate academic analysis to frame I am afraid.
Long may the Thai monarchy reign over and protect Thailand. Long Live the King
Quality comment or not?
1
0
The king, my friend, won’t be doing anything for very much longer. He won’t be reigning; he certainly won’t be protecting; and I doubt he’ll be doing much living in the foreseeable future either. You need to find another mindless slogan.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Long live the King,
I think you’ll find a lot of people haven’t shut up about Stern Hu.
There’s no ‘all-guns blazing’, indeed, we are at pains to have a referendum on becoming a republic because of a good proportion of the population’s respect for the British monarchy.
Sure, the US has a problem with lobbying, but it being a problem is talked about openly.
If twenty-one people were just shot dead or beaten to death in street protests, I am inclined to presume the Australian public wouldn’t be vying to protect the monarchy and declaring it ‘above politics’ as a cultural inspiration before asking why.
What sort of role model for Thailand is the monarchy when it seems incapable of scrutiny, self-reflection and ‘letting go’? Seems to have projected itself onto Thai society rather nicely, wouldn’t you agree?
It is rather amusing conflating counter-terrorism and Lese Majeste. Not that I support counter-terrorism measures, or what my country does, but at least I am able to openly criticise them and it and I won’t be put in jail for eighteen years as a result. This, I feel, is more the point of the Eric Campbell’s report.
Long live the King, he doesn’t have much longer to go. What are you going to do?
Quality comment or not?
1
0
The whole thing about the king of Thailand is he is just another dictator in disguise.
In this time and age of broadband internet and instant communications he is quickly becoming just a relic from 19th century.
Thais must redistribute his massive multitrillion dollar wealth among the rural poors.
Come out all the progressive Socialists of Thailand. Now is the time for the Peoples’ Republic of Thailand!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thanks ‘Long live the King’ for a perfect example of why the situation in Thailand is so hopeless.
Instead of attacking the messenger, why not try reflecting on your own misguided reverence for someone who has routinely approved military coups, sided with despots to reap mutual rewards, and allows those who merely question the role of the monarcy to be harassed & imprisoned for draconian jail terms?
We keep getting told how a certain person is ‘revered’ and ‘loved’, and how the people are ‘loyal’ etc etc
Well, as long as Thai’s hold billionaire monarch’s (or billionaire telco magnates) in reverence, and are prepared to do bad things to the name of protecting them, then the country will continue to be fcuked!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie alumnus – I’m not trying to defense Thaksin here, but I think you got the info in concessional fees all wrong, since to total sum paid to state (ministry of finance + TOT) remain the same, before AIS paid to TOT then TOT deduct any “Operational cost” and pass on to ministry of finance.
Anyway, just a question, by getting rid of Thaksin trough Coup Detat, how was that suppose to solve the problem Thailand has now???
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Literally a lot of the comments on this site make me feel physically sick. It is not just the culturally colonial rational/liberal imperialism, but more starkly the hypocrisy.”
New Mandala-land is at the end of the rainbow, where there is a pot of gold and iron ore. The people down under that rainbow have a mystic attraction to the bright colors without seeing this wish-fulfilling pot has at the same time affected their decision-making abilities.
Eventually, Australia will become a part of Asia-Pacific and then they will teach longingly about the heroic past when Campbell and true patriots ruled.
LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
The king doesn’t approve of the military coups. He endorses any law proposed by cabinet, the same way as the governor general does in Australia. Thais deeply respect the King not because he is believed to be living god. It is because he has been devoting his entire life to our nation, our land. Lèse majesté law is there to guard monarchy from politics. The woman who says that royal supports military coup deserve to be in jail. She wrongfully accuses someone in public with intention to defame him.
The red shirt protest has nothing to do with the monarchy. It’s Thaksin’s tactic to revenge. He has asked the privy council many times to help take him back to Thailand and obviously he is rejected. No one knows, Thai problem better than Thai people. Please stop judging other countries from your own point of view.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“total sum paid to state (ministry of finance + TOT) remain the same, before AIS paid to TOT then TOT deduct any “Operational cost” and pass on to ministry of finance.”
You are certainly biased and pretend not to know Thaksin’s ultimate purpose? It is to weaken TOT and CAT so that AIS could take them over. It is also a strategy to set up a barrier for new entry into the telecom field. If it does not help his business, why did he bother to issue such a regulation? You also don’t seem to argue against AIS and Shin Sat that engineered amending the original contracts so many times that favour their operations (Do you pretend not to know this again?). Do you think a failed and cheating son of his was capable of holding his riches without him interferring in running the telecombusiness while still being PM? Then you are certainly putting your head in the sand.
“Anyway, just a question, by getting rid of Thaksin trough Coup Detat, how was that suppose to solve the problem Thailand has now???”
If Thaksin died right now, who could provide finance to the red shirts? Pray tell me.
Don’t tell me that the red shirts, supposed to be poor Isan farmers, could commandeer all pick-ups to drive to Bangkok.
Don’t tell me that they survive by the generosity of Bangkokians.
I am saying that Thaksin or the elite bureaucrats are the same type of people. They just use the hard working men/women as pawns in the political game to win power.
That’s why I say that Thailand is a potential failed state and it is now. The monarch could not do anything now because Thaksin is very powerful. Chicken comes to roost. You give him concessions in return for bribes. He uses his wealth to win seat of power and does not care about human rights or the poor at all. When he was toppled from power by a certain someone who sees danger Thaksin posed to the monarchy institution, Thaksin would not lie down easily.
The analogy is Al-Kaeda and Taleban which were supported by the US. Now they come home to roost.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Thai at heart”, it is simply not true that the King passively accepted the 2006 coup.
The King has on numerous occasions rejected military coups, most recently in 1982 and 1985. He made his rejections in public and explained his reasoning for the entire nation.
He had a choice about whether he was going to accept the 2006 coup.
Days after the coup, he acknowledged the junta’s right to govern, and months after the coup he praised the junta’s leadership. He was not forced to do this through any legal mechanism or precedent. It was his choice, wise and infallible, to support the coup.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thai at heart. It is no good posting unsubstantiated – indeed, in this case, false – information to blogs like this. There are too many examples of the king not signing and sending back legislation to even begin to list them here. Tens of thousands of people will need to be arrested if any fool follows your advice. Perhaps the standards for judging Thailand will shortly be the same as those for judging Burma.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Umm, Thai a h # 50: ” The king doesn’t approve of the military coups. He endorses any law proposed by cabinet, the same way as the governor general does in Australia.” Tell us, what cabinet has ever gone to the King with a law proposing that a coup be accepted? My understanding is that the generals go to the King informing him of a coup & asking him for permission to form a cabinet & govern. The legitimate cabinet has been couped, & is out of the picture.
In the unlikely event of a military coup in Oz, I doubt that a GG would endorse it. The Constitutional Court (i.e. High Court) would step in if he did. Interesting that that doesn’t (can’t?) happen in Thailand. Something to do with a glitch in the separation of powers, perhaps?
Your statement that “Lèse majesté law is there to guard monarchy from politics” is equally confused. It is there to protect the monarchy from insults.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thai at Heart – I’m also Thai at heart, so for my advise, please read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Carlos_I_of_Spain
and see the difference.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Bh. V. #49: Australia IS ALREADY a part of Asia-Pacific. Didn’t you know that? Just kidding; I know that you’re suggesting that it’s not truly an Asia-Pacific nation because it doesn’t share the political and social views of its neighbours, indeed thinks some of them are wrong – and says so, rocking the boat, as it were. Well, you’re welcome to come to Oz & preach from your self-assumed elevated position that it’s fine for governments in the region to practice clamp-downs on free speech and imprison people for years for criticizing a head of state, to turn the army on its people as if they are hostile foreign invaders, to promote the belief that certain humans are gods and have superhuman powers, to practice extreme inequality under the law as a cultural value, to have closed trials, no verbatim court recording with available transcripts, no separation of powers, etc…but I think you would be ridiculed. Especially since you seem concerned to impress your Bh status on people, and Australian people would be surprised that a career Buddhist would support such authoritarian, indeed fascist, views.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thai at Heart: You might also see if you can spot one teeny insignificant congruence, too
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Long Live the King,
What a delight to hear a rant from Oz itself. We actually need more Thai people fluent enough in English to go on tirades because it does help us to understand Thailand better. It’s much more valuable to really hear from a Thai Royalist than to speculate on what they really think inside. LltK, you’ve made some good points:
1. That the monarchy in Thailand is a sacred non-rational social and political force.
2. That Thai people are capable of evolving on their terms.
3. That Euro-centric notions of rights and democracy have very little historical connection to Asian culture.
However, much of what you said was nonsense. No one here I would assume, believes our respectful countries are without sin. It’s not that we don’t look at problems in our own societies, we do. I am from the US and I’d be the first one to tell you that my country has plenty of problems and has made a lot of problems for others too. The original sin of the United States was slavery. And I could go on and on as could others from other countries. The difference is that we have the freedom to criticize our governments and that means everyone. You have no such freedom and this is wrong. And this freedom, in my opinion, is not a Eurocentric value, but a human one. On a personal level my concern for the vast majority of Thai people is a human one which transcends nation and culture.
Don’t hide behind the “this is my culture, you don’t understand” argument. You can use that in many ways, but when human suffering is involved, the world should not stand idly by. Was it the “culture” of South Africa to treat blacks the way they did? Was it “culture” when black people worked on plantations in the American South? Is it “culture” when the monarchists, military, and Bangkok elite throw out elected governments without due process?
Nations have never existed in vacuums and this is even more of the case now. We are all constituted by each other. All culture, as Edward Said argues, is borrowed. Don’t think that you can retreat from the world. The world is at the doorstep of these Red Shirt protests despite your desire to silence them.
Nations exist for their people, not their Kings.
How’s that for some neo-l iberal-petty-bourgeois thinking?
Oh, and BTW: “There are laws in Australia/Britain the US that prohibit preaching Jihad or Holy War, in the Thai context Lesse Majeste has a similar effect.” Don’t conflate terrorism with the right of people to criticize their leaders/institutions.
Long Live the People!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Khun Tarrin,
I have answered your question, but after 24 hours, my reply is still being censured, 555.
Aussie Alumnus
Quality comment or not?
0
0
This documentary make The Australian Broadcasting Corporation look like tabloid newspaper.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie alumnus…
good grief, what a mess dear old Sondhi Lim, of bankruptcy and royal affairs fame, has made of your mind…
briefly…
are you aware that the telecommunications industry around the world was in dramatic growth and flux… Thaksin was positioning the industry in Thailand to best match these forces for the benefit of Thailand… the other telecoms players in fact gained market share relative to Shin/AIS and Shin did much worse on the SET than the banks for example… you are just hung up trying to answer your assumption that there must have been some hidden personal gain he was angling for… lift that assumption it will all get clearer for you
are you saying that because the reds are poor then if Thaksin dies that will solve the problem because they will all have to go back home and forget their aspirations?
btw… the reds live rough and cheaply, dont imagine there is luxury sleeping on the streets, and even though below your standards they are self-funding!
Thaksin was toppled because he challenged the power of the military, he tried to bring them under control of the democratically elected government, which is where they should be! He reduced their insane budget and interfered in their sacred reshuffle which is what any future government will have to do.
The military must be brought under control. Reduce the number of generals, no involvement in business and no impunity for crimes committed inside Thailand.
It is a very big challenge and the Thais need a very strong and committed leader to drag Thailand into a stable, productive democratic state from the near failed Burma-like situation its in now.
I dont know if Thaksin is the right leader again or not, but the Thai people need to make a very wise choice!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
I once wrote a review of the book Is Australia An Asian Country ? written by Stephen Fitzgerald, who was Gough Whitlam’s – and Australia’s – first ambassador to the People Republic of China.
Fitzgerald wrote his book in part as a retort to the ridiculous Pauline Hanson.
At the time I wrote my review I thought it would take about a generation or two at most for Australia to become integrated with Asia. Clearly most Australians were not going to go with Hanson.
Now – in t he light of what is happening in Thailand, and especially in relation to many of the comments above on this post – I think such integration is more likely to take three or four generations.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
The failure of the 1982 and 1985 coups had nothing to do with the King. Coupmakers were defeated by government forces, not turned away at the royal door.
In 2006, on the other hand, coupmakers faced no opposition whatsoever and there were no options to choose from, no challengers, Thaksin conceded, there was no parliament, no senate, and the junta had absolute de-facto power which the King acknowledged.
I remember two pieces of legislation that didn’t pass through royal secretary in Thaksin’s time, but that was due to sloppy, error ridden presentation, not the royal opposition or interference.
Another, related thought – the coup and the “judicial revolution” were bloodless and relatively painless methods to depose Thaksin. His fight back, however, is anything but.
Just imagine how much blood would have been spilled if he was directing this fight from inside the country and from position of total control.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
StanG: where was the king in 1985? Why was he there? He’ll be dancing on the corpses this time around.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Long live the King is actually half British half Australian but did undertake some education in Thailand.
One more issue:
Did showing the video violate any privacy laws? If someone illegally fimed footage of your wife in your house in the Uk there could certainly be a case against a national broadcaster for airing on national television. The case could be made in virtue of reformed privacy laws.
Certainly the embassy was right to call it shameless tabloid journalism – the video screening at least.
Most of the responses to the initial post seems to attack by prioritizing an appeal to rationalism over an appeal to the sacral. Most post-colonial scholars will tell you that such a prioritization is imperialistic.
In terms of lesse majeste and anti terror legislation – yes you can openly criticize anti terror legislation – but no – you cannot preach jihad on the streets of Sydney or call for violent attacks on Australian Institutions in Public – NO YOU ARE NOT FREE TO DO THAT I AM AFRAID. In Thailand you are not free to verbally or in any other way attack the King. Everybody knows that.
Looking forward to Wednesday!
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alummnus # 51 –
You are certainly biased and pretend not to know Thaksin’s ultimate purpose? It is to weaken TOT and CAT so that AIS could take them over. It is also a strategy to set up a barrier for new entry into the telecom field.
I’m not bias, I simply state the fact. However, looking from another side, can you answer this question. Why do we need TOT and CAT??? what did they ever do??? under the B-T-O, TOT and CAT didn’t have to invest a single dime, the investment was all from the TelCo. The only effect having TOT and CAT around is that in increase the cost of operation for AIS, DTAC, and True, thus, increase the monthly subscription fees for customers. Moreover, it was Thaksin who actually lower the barrier of entry by enact the new concessional fees.
here is some like to the detail
http://asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pundit-blog/2007/09/tot-bureaucratic-monstrosity-in-need-of.html
http://asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pundit-blog/the-76-billion-baht-question
If you have any other evidence that prove otherwise, so please, share.
Do you think a failed and cheating son of his was capable of holding his riches without him interferring in running the telecombusiness while still being PM? Then you are certainly putting your head in the sand.
I have hold the above argument true, so no I dont feel cheat if the argument holds true.
If Thaksin died right now, who could provide finance to the red shirts? Pray tell me. Don’t tell me that the red shirts, supposed to be poor Isan farmers, could commandeer all pick-ups to drive to Bangkok.
This really shows that you are out of touch with what is going on in the up country. About the funding, if you recalled there are so many red fund raising all over the country since Nov-Jan, but of cause the main stream media never pick it up, suddenly, people like you who never know about what was going on came to the conclusion that the red got paid by Thaksin.
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/04/18/damon.thailand.redshirt.cnn?iref=allsearch
That’s why I say that Thailand is a potential failed state and it is now. The monarch could not do anything now because Thaksin is very powerful. Chicken comes to roost
your statement goes against what was going on, if Thaksin was really that powerful, the coup of 2006 wouldn’t be successful in the first place.
Btw, I’m agree with you are Thailand is coming a fail state, but not because of Thaksin, but rather because of the old system is trying to stop of wheel of progression. That’s why the whole system is collapsing.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Yesterday, I nearly gave up participating in this forum as my post did not appear even after 24 hours. Very surprised from the country I used to stay for many years during McMahan/Whitlam govts which should value freedom of expression, 555.
No matter how inefficient TOT, CAT were or are, the fact was and is Thaksin did put in Telecom Tariff to weaken these two state enterprizes, while trying to privatise these two so that Shin Corp could take over as they still held assets of AIS, DTAC, True due to BTO (Build, Transfer, Operate) concessions.
It was plain and simple that Thaksin was bribing elite bureaucrats to gain advantages for AIS and Shin. If your memory was not too short, Gen Sunthorn, former Armed Forces Chief, who presided over 1992 coup, was so rich that when he died, he was reported to have assets worth more than 500 million baht. During the junta rule, AIS and Shin were successful in amending original concession terms. 555
In pantip.com, I have stated that his failed and cheating son (got caught in the exam room red hand) got advertising contract, just because of connection. He was just emulating his father.
Don’t you know that the law prohibits PM, MP, cabinet members to be involved in companies that hold stat concessions? Yet Thaksin ignored this. That was why Telecom law was amended to facilitate his business. That was why he flew to Singapore to conduct his sale to Temasek.
I said Thaksin was powerful and still is. But that does not mean that he is all powerful because one person is more powerful than him, militarywise. But Thaksin is still powerful in enough to finance the red shirts movement.
Do you think Veera (a former Temple boy and a Thai proofreader in newspaper) do it for the poor? For ideology? He milked financiers as much as he could. He left the Democrat party and set up a splinter party financed by a businessman so that he could get his hands for more money. He is just for hire. Look at his mansion (costing more than 30 million baht) and you can know his motive.
He joined Thaksin just for money and for a revenge when he was briefly jailed for his lese majesty remark.
Thailand and other less-developed countries are steeped in corruption for so long. Everybody is corrupted including the military as well. I don’t see the future for my country.
Thaksin is no better than the military+royalists. He is worse in my opinion. Just look about extra-judicial killings during drug war. Just look at grenades are being thrown daily in Bangkok. He is really powerful. Do you think the poor Isan folks can do that?
Once the three UDD leaders say go home, these sheep just go home. It was the case yester-years. It is the case now or in the future.
Dream on if you think the proletariats can rise up agains the corrupted and all powerful establishments whether they are led by greedy businessman or seasoned politicians/military.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus, it’s hilarious that a report that talks about the repression of the Abhisit government and the appropriateness of royal family habits results in criticisms of Thaksin Shinawatra!
By what calculus of political ethics do the misdeeds of Thaksin excuse Abhisit and the palace from their misdeeds?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Of Course I’m Anonymous #68 -
The misdeeds of Thaksin don’t excuse any failings on the part of Abhsit or the palace, you’re right.
But Aussie Alumus is spot on when he states that the powerful and corrupted ON BOTH SIDES are calling, and will continue to call, the shots. I continue to be baffled that all the pro-red posters on this forum continue to harp on about genuine people power and the need to support all these poor and disadvantaged in their worthy battle against the elites, with hardly a mention of the leaders of the UDD movement and what they truly (as opposed to opportunistically represent). The red masses are taking directions from these people don’t forget; the Veeras, Jatuporns, Arismans etc……..those moral, righteous, long-standing champions of true democracy.
Practicing and preaching come to mind in this instance….
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus – again you simply accused Thaksin on something he didn’t even do, it all based on your assumption alone, which is hard to even put up an argument on since its impossible for neither you nor me to know what the man was thinking. Furthermore, as a conscious business people, no one would want to touch organization such as TOT and CAT, not even SHIN or DTAC because those organizations were ridden with corruption and inefficiency, any company that willing to absorb TOT and CAT will be facing with many death-weight and dinosaur like organization that extremely hard to gobble down.
Anyway, the rest of your post was full of ranting, name calling, and accusation. I dont want to start a useless discourse so I will just leave it at that.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus,
I’d like to know more about Veera and you seem to know a lot.
Could you give us a general picture of why he was jailed for lese majeste? No need to go into details. Just the general layout of events would be fine.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
I never cease to amaze me that an educated Thai like Khun Tarrin could be so naive and accuse other poster as ranting when he did not refute the argument about how corrupted Thaksin was.
How could a mere general could have assets worth more than 500 million baht when he died?
How could AIS, Shin Satellite amend the original contracts during this general’s time in power?
Another poster even accused me as listening to Pae Lim (a derogatory term referred to Sondhi) without ascertaining the fact? He was no better than most corrupted politicians and Thaksin.
An Aussie alumnus like me who was not educated in Thailand during my formative years would not be easily prone to rhetorics/rants of seasoned politicians or businessman/cum politicians. I can read foreign sources as well.
It never ceases to amaze me if someone sees through Thaksin’s evil way is lumped as being a YELLOW.
I hereby state categorically that I am not a royalist and in a private conversation I and a few of my friends often ridicule the notorious PRINCE. He is the same age like me and was in Australia at the same time like me. I know him well, too well to be a cast as a royalist. 555
I don’t even care if Thailand is republic, period.
I just don’t like corruption whether it is committed by seasoned politicians, businessman cum politicians or generals or even by the notorious PRINCE.
I rest my case.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Could you give us a general picture of why he was jailed for lese majeste?”
Veera came to power because he was good at sucking up to powerful people. He was once regarded as Gen Prem’s favourite son and one time was secretary general of the Democrat party whose leader at the time was Bhichai Rattakul.
Veera came from Phattalung, a southern native like Prem. One time he was campaigning for fellow Democrats in two provinces in Isan. During both occasions, he mentioned that he was not born rich and thus could not lead a lazy life like a Raja (King) in a palace. This was widely reported in the place and caused an uproar. A privy councillor, a former general, openly came out to criticise him. At the time he was deputy interior minister. He immediately set up a worship shrine with HM the King picture on top and performed a ceremony to ask for Royal pardon.
However, this case was forwarded to the criminal court. He was sentenced to jail. I think he surrendered and was granted bail and sought Royal pardon officially and duly granted.
This ruined his political career as later he was not successul in the powerful struggle to control Democrat party and had to leave the party like Khun Samak who had left before him.
Veera and his finacier set up Prachachon (People) party but was not successful.
He was in political wildnerness for several years before Gen Chavalit plucked him in to help coordinate running the general election for his New Aspiration Party.
During his hiatus year, he did not live as a poor man at all. His 30-million baht mansion could attest to that.
How could a mere Temple boy earn that much from being a career politician to afford a 30-million baht mansion?
I am quite sure that with his leadership of the Red Shirts, he will become even richer and does not have to work again unless he gets addicted to his rhetorics!
This is Amazing Thailand.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“A privy councillor, a former general, openly came out to criticise him. At the time he was deputy interior minister. He immediately set up a worship shrine with HM the King picture on top and performed a ceremony to ask for Royal pardon.”
This should read.
A privy councillor, a former general, openly came out to criticise him. At the time he (VEERA) was deputy interior minister. Veera in full official uniform immediately set up a worship shrine with HM the King picture on top and performed a ceremony to ask for Royal forgiveness.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus #72
so, does it come down to you not understanding how someone can gain wealth in business?
how about checkout Bill Gates or any number of billionaires around the world… Bill did not complete Uni, Thaksin did, they both started off pretty ordinary
Thaksin resigned as a policeman to keep his business alive and then expanded it
Thaksin is a technology entrepreneur, so was Bill Gates
and btw, Thaksins wealth expanded in line with the SET share prices, the Thai banks increased their value much more, he should have sold his business and invested in bank shares when he became PM he would be much more wealthy than he turned out!
I always thought much of the hate Thaksin is jealousy by naive people, seems you are another example… and dear old Sondhi loves to play with these emotions… in between having affairs with influential women
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus – 72
Yes I know all of the thing you said, and no, I’m not naive. I’m not the one who said you listen to Pae Lim and seems like you know more than many of the yellow here knew. However, Thaksin was not the only one who benefit from the Coup of 1992, there were other business group that greatly benefit from it such as the Bangkok Bank and CP, moreover, the coup of 2006 had bought a large some of money to Gen. Sondhi as well. The exact amount is debatable but it was raged somewhere from 800M – to 1.5B give or take. Blaming Thaksin alone is not going to solve anything because he was only a part of the wheel of corrupted elite that has been put in place in Thailand for well over half a century.
Moreover, about the price, regardless of what he had done in the past, I would say he is the best of the bunch since he never tried to hide the fact that he is an A-H. On the other hand, we have this horde or royalty who had run amok around Thailand trying to crate their godly impassioned image, whether they successful in helping people or not is totally different matter. I respected the prince in that he is true to himself.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus, it never ceases to amaze me if someone sees through Abhisit’s repressive ways is lumped as being a SUPPORTER OF THAKIN.
It’s not that I don’t think Thaksin was destructive to Thailand – I just think that Abhisit is even more destructive. His censorship, media manipulation, and outright lies are insults to human dignity. To support him is in fact furthering the destruction of Thai democracy.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus, Veera never actually used the word “Raja” in the controversial speech.
You asked how Veera got so rich? Quick answer: he was a cabinet member during a Democrat Party government. Repression and corruption – trademarks of the Democrat Party.
(and before you answer: yes, I know that Thaksin was repressive and corrupt as well)
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus,
Whatever one thinks about Veera’s character, personality or wealth, the whole LM case against him demonstrates again that the law is used as an opportunistic tool for political in-fighting and vendettas not to protect the king.
Veera was convicted for using a common idiom like “I’d like to live like a king.”
To demonstrate the absurdity of the application of this law, I submit this quotation from one of the Nation’s opinion writers.
“If the earth is just a pale blue dot, what is Thailand then? Something smaller than a pixel on that dot? And even in this tiny pixel, we have managed to mess it up so royally.”
Should she be charged with LM for the use of this idiom? The care which with language needs to be processed under this law leads to all sorts of evils.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Veera was a party to a coup attempt in 1978, the coup leader was sentenced to death and Veera thrown to jail. It was Prem who “plucked” him out and gave a ministerial position.
I don’t remember where I know this from, however.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thomas – how do you know Veera was simply translating English idiom into Thai, you just learned about it today!
How do you know it was a case of political opportunism and infighting?
He was at the height of his political career (under Prem) when he made “I’m poor” comment, over thirty years ago, and I highly doubt the house in question was built then.
Five years as a minister with Thaksin would explain it better.
The real allegation, though, is that Veera and others siphoned funds from red protests over the past couple of years.
If the house is indeed “post coup” that should raise some legitimate questions.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
StanG: do you mean 1985 coup?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Veera was a party to a coup attempt in 1978, the coup leader was sentenced to death and Veera thrown to jail. It was Prem who “plucked” him out and gave a ministerial position.”
Here is the event on 26 March 1977 failed coup.
9.15 A coup led by Gen Chalard Hirunsiri, Lt Col Sanan Kachornprasart (who was later promoted by Gen Chatichai Choonhavan to Maj.Gen when he was agriculture minister in Chatichai govt. Sanan at the time was Democrat’s secretary general after Veera left the party. Sanan later left the Democrat party to set up his own party as well. It seems the Democrat party was the training ground for three famous politicians: Samak, Veera, Sanan who later left the party to set up their own) etc.
10.15 Defence Minister Adm Sa-ngad Chaloryoo appointed Army Chief Gen Serm Na Nakorn to lead the capital force to fight against the coup and insisted on TV Channel 5 (Army Channel) that all three armed forces including police still belong to the Thanin Kraivixian govt.
The coup began to crumble when Maj Gen Aroon Tawathasin, 1st Infantry Division commander, was shot dead, allegedly by the coup leader Gen Chalard for refusing to order his troops to support the coup. It was the first time that a powerful struggle between generals resulted in a death of a general.
13.30 The coup’s mouthpiece, Public Relations Department’s Radio Thailand, ceased broadcasting due to electricity cut by the government’s force. Some coup’s officers/soldiers began to surrender to the govt force. Gen Kriengsak Chamanan, armed forces deputy chief, went in to negotiate with the coup leaders and they finally agreed to surrender and allowed to leave the country to Taiwan.
21.00 When the five coup leaders went to Don Mueang to board the plane to Taiwan, they were arrested, charging with insurrection. The govt later clarified that Taiwan did not agree to accept them and Thai govt decided not to ask any other country to accept the Five.
April 21, 1977
The govt used the constitution’s section 21 to summarily take over judicial power and stripped Gen Chalard off his military rank and executed him (allegedly for killing Maj Gen Aroon, who was posthumously promoted to full general). The other four and 8 other ring leaders were sentenced to life imprisonment. There were 11 other civilians recruited by Gen Chalard were also sentenced to serve time in jail as well including Veera Musikapong.
However, as it the case of Amazing Thailand. All served prison time less than a year and then were granted amnesty on December 2, 1987, allegedly to heal the rift. 555
You see how corrupted Veera was and is. He is now against the coup, leading the red shirts. But when it was convenient for him he was ready to join to coup so as to gain power for himself, to enrich himself.
BTW, when Veera was out of prison, he persuaded Sanan to join the Democrat party. Both Veera and Sanan could not be elected as Bangkok MPs. Veera volunteered to fight Samak in Dusit constituency, which was the stronghold of military with so many barracks in that area.
Samak became a star for Democrat party when he could defeat sitting premier Kukrit in Dusit and was rewarded with a deputy agriculture minister post if my memory did not fail me. He rebelled against his own party and sided with the right wing forces who later staged the coup, the so-called October 6, 1976 massacre. He was rewarded with an Interior Minister post in the proxy civilian govt.
Samak was never defeated in Dusit while he led his Prachakorn Thai party, a Bangkok-based political party. Veera tried once and failed. So Veera decided to run in his native Phattalung and got elected with the help of a popular puppet master there.
The reason Veera left Democrat party was he was not satisfied that he was given only a deputy interior minister post even though he was secretary general of the Democrat party. Bhichai gave the reason that Veera was still very junior in term of MP tenure. When Veera engineered leadership challenge against Bhichai by proposing a businessman financier/politician Chalermphan Srivikorn to be the party’s leader failed, he left Democrat party and set up Prachachon party with Chalermphan as party leader. The party was not successful. Chalermphan quit politics. Veera was in wildnerness for several years until Gen Chavalit plucked him out of obscurity to help run the NAP’s campaign.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Thomas Hoy#76 :
Do you realise you could be charged with LM for repeating both
what Veera said, and what that lady at The Nation wrote ? !
Such is the absurdity of these LM laws.
I’ll never come back to Thailand – a lovely country – until these laws are gone !
I just hope the monarchy does NOT go with them, in every sense.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Must be getting old. Here is the date correction.
However, as it the case of Amazing Thailand. All served prison time less than a year and then were granted amnesty on December 2, 1987, allegedly to heal the rift. 555
Should read
However, as it the case of Amazing Thailand. All served prison time less than a year and then were granted amnesty on December 2, 1977, allegedly to heal the rift. 555
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus –
However, as it the case of Amazing Thailand. All served prison time less than a year and then were granted amnesty on December 2, 1977, allegedly to heal the rift
There are report that an entire village of around 50-60 has been massacre by the military simply because they had align themselves with the CPT. We wouldn’t even know about this until a monk from a temple around that area plead to the government to help raising about 30 orphans, because they are daughter and son of those villagers who the soldier refuse to kill. The amnesty is just for show, for the entire 1980s, several ex-leader of the student movement had been drag into a van and disappear forever. I dont think the rift was heal that easily.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
However, as it the case of Amazing Thailand. All served prison time less than a year and then were granted amnesty on December 2, 1977, allegedly to heal the rift. 555
86 Tarrin // Apr 21, 2010 at 11:25 am
Khun Tarrin,
You’re so fixed with your preconception that you did not even read my post carefully.
December 2, 1977, allegedly to heal the rift. >
This event did not even talk about the students or CPT. It was about the military faction that Veera was involved in. What I meant to say that the amnesty was designed to heal the rift within the army itself. There was nothing in my post about students’ activists or the CPT.
You are so fixed with the hatred with the present establishment installed by the military that and educated person like you could not even avoid ranting about something which I did not even post.
May be you like your own rhetoric so much like that you forgot to read carefully?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Just another timeline clarification – Samak left Democrats in the mid 70s, Veera in the mid 80s, Sanan in the mid 00s. Sanan, unlike two others, was a spent force by then.
Democrats lost dozens of MPs to Thaksin’s TRT, and it was probably a good riddance.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“David Brown // Apr 20, 2010 at 8:11 pm
Aussie Alumnus #72
so, does it come down to you not understanding how someone can gain wealth in business”
You presumed too much without reading my background. I was educated in Australia during McMahan/Whitlam govts. My Bachelor degree is in Economics (Money and Banking).
If I don’t know how wealth is created, my Aussie degree from a state university in 1976 must be worth nothing. Do you really think that low about higher education in Australia?
If that is not enough, do you think the standard of education in USA is also that low too? A few years after that I got another scholarship to study in America, earning an MA in SE Asia Studies (International Trade).
I was there when Microsoft was still a small start-up company, buying a crude DOS code for Intel X86 microprocessor and then repackaged with some changes to IMB to and was called IMB DOS, while retaining the right to seel separately under MS DOS.
Wealth creation through innovation is not one and the same with earning state concession to run telecom business by bribing politicians/bureaucrats in power.
The reason that AIS was successful was due to its concession from TOT with favourable term than the competitors who got them through CAT. That was why Singtel agreed to pay premium for a chunk of AIS stake, making it possible for AIS to expand faster than the competitors at the time.
Do you think Singtel was stupid? 555
The fact that Temasek agreed to take over AIS and Shin corp, paying premium was due to two factors. One it is for long-term investment as AIS and Shin Sat were regarded as good assets. Second, Singapore govt thought that Thaksin would stay in power for long, so want to gain favour with him so that Singapore could participate in Cobra Gold exercise and could rent facilities in Thailand for army and airforce training.
An MA in SE Asia Studies and B.E. from state universities in two countries by scholarships may still be not enough for someone who may still regard me as an ignorant fool, daring to open my mouth here to criticise All Mighty Thaksin. 555
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Aussie Alumnus and everybody else: I’m at a loss as to how the corruption of the Thaksin government excuses or mitigates in any way the censorship and political use of the lese majeste law of the current government. Or how the wealth of one man (Veera) who was involved in a coup and convicted of lese majeste twenty years and thirty ago provides the palace with any greater legitimacy. It all just seems like a bunch of obfuscation. This is, after all, a comments section on Eric Campbell’s royal report.
Or are you all saying that just because the leaders of the protest are bad people that we must stick with the current government and current ways of managing dialog about the monarchy?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Assie Alum,
According to wikipedia, Gen Sunthorn was a lot richer than you claim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunthorn_Kongsompon
But your conclusions seems strange and inverted. The conclusion is not that Thaksin alone was bribing senior bureaucrats, it is that senior bureaucrats were (and still are) extracting bribes from the entire private sector.
As you your question about how Gen Suntorn got that rich, the answer seems obvious. The same way other soldiers and bureaucrats got rich, extracting bribes from the private sector. You don’t think the current bunch of generals are living on $1000/month do you?
The sole function of CAT and TOT appears to be to tax mobile phone revenues and return them to soldiers and bureaucrats. It is said that sometimes this is done through fake employees, technology purchases, and selling rights and concessions that are the property of Thai citizens to the private sector.
In the Sunthorn-Thaksin transaction, Sunthorn is more guilty than Thaksin as he was the one who was shopping the concession. Thaksin just happened to buy it.
But even if you dispute that, you have to admit that it is extremely hypocritical for army generals to hold a coup to stop corruption activities and then point to a transaction made by the last general to hold a coup to stop corruption as an example of how politicians are corrupt.
Can we just accept the fact that the private sector, politicians and bureaucrats (including soldiers) all conspire with each other to loot the country – and always have?
Quality comment or not?
0
0
Anon – #90
Ah, so we’re starting to admit that the UDD leaders might be bad people? Of course that doesn’t matter if all we are debating is the role and future direction of the monarchy, but this can’t be discussed in isolation from the motives and actions of powerful state, military and business actors.
I’ve been trying to point out to the numerous pro-reds on this forum that the UDD is not simply a movement of the repressed poor rising up against a self-serving elite. The point Aussie Alumus is trying to make is that Veera is not holier-than-thou if one cares to dig a bit into their political history and actions. This applies to the cohort around him too.
Whilst the current polarisation will undoubtably assist in raising consciousness and broadening the debate amonst ordinary people, to think that the UDD is some kind of pure and honest gathering of the disenfranchised is nonsense. Thai social structure will ensure that it is the powerful and influential of whatever colour that will, for the foreseeable future, continue to call the shots and fight to try and make sure their own interests are protected…..
Quality comment or not?
0
0
“Can we just accept the fact that the private sector, politicians and bureaucrats (including soldiers) all conspire with each other to loot the country – and always have?”
This is my point exactly, but some posters here don’t seem to get this, defending Thaksin to the point that accusing me as being naive, don’t even know how wealth is created, etc.
Another poster asked why the comment about Veera, Thaksin etc are here when we talk about Eric’s lese majesty report? It is a legitimate question. The simple answer is the lese majesty law is always linked up with power struggle. It is a tool to use like any other tools including money, soldiers, politicians-for-hire so as to win over power to rule at the expense of hard working men/women.
There is no ideology struggle/class struggle here at all, unlike some posters who think otherwise.
The middle class in Bangkok, the working class from Isan/North are simply tools to be used and cast aside when convenience.
If we don’t discuss about the corruption, power struggle, you won’t understand why some academics are so hung up with lese majesty law. This law is really nothing bad in itself. It is the people who use this law to win power to govern in Thailand, period.
Quality comment or not?
0
0
It is often difficult for a non-Thai to understand the nuances behind what occurs in Thailand, be it politics or corruption. Clearly Aussie Alumnus does have in-depth understanding and much of the debate on this forum is due to arguments being put forward by well-intentioned people who simply do not understand what he is trying to get across.
For clarity on this impasse I recommend Pasuk & Bakers’ article of 15 April in the Asian Wall Street Journal.
Quality comment or not?
0
0