New Mandala readers who have waited in anticipation to download Andrew Marshall’s “Thai Story” can whet their appetite with this beauty from Not The Nation. The explanatory graphic that goes with it is pretty good too.
And then there is Marshall’s story itself. It is now online and getting a tremendous amount of attention. Part I (of IV) is 107-pages of reportage, quotation, interpretation and argument. You can download it here.
I encourage New Mandala readers to get started — there is plenty to digest.
Marshall has also penned an essay for The Independent titled “Why I decided to jeopardise my career and publish secrets”. As he writes:
The answer is that — incredibly, a decade into the 21st century — this is the price that has to be paid for trying to tell the truth about an apparently modern and open country: Thailand.
Much discussion — here, there and everywhere – will, I’m sure, follow. If you want to keep up-to-date with this breaking story then this page and this one should do the trick. And for those of you who prefer to surf the tweet stream this will be a good place to start, as will this.
As Saksith Saiyasombut tweeted a minute ago, “So it has begun…!”
I haven’t got to Andrew M’s stuff yet, but for the past 24 hours have been on the receiving end of many, many of the leaked cables. Much of interest and much that suggest embassy’s are also prone to reading the Nation and Bkk Post as well as listening to the rumor mills and sending them back to DC. Great reading.
Quality comment or not?
11 
1
Ralph reminded me that one of the sources for the raw cables is available here. There are efforts to disseminate this information far-and-wide, and to avoid the kind of control of online material that has become a preoccupation of Thai authorities. This unfolding #thaistory episode will, I’d imagine, test those resources in new and unpredictable ways.
Two questions to ponder: When will the Thai media report on this breaking story? To what extent will they continue to self-censor?
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Quality comment or not?
21 
2
Front page of the Times of London, I see.
So much for low-profile.
Big day for Thailand. Wikileaks for breakfast, Abhisit’s revelations at Rajprasong for lunch. Dinner will be a stiff drink.
Quality comment or not?
27 
1
And Richard Lloyd Parry from The Times has a good tweet about the length of Marshall’s work:
Readers intrigued by the range of responses that #thaistory is generating will also want to see The Nation editor Thanong Khantong’s twitter feed.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Quality comment or not?
12 
3
Very interesting. Andrew Marshall must be writing a book if this is only part one of four. I have no problem with much of it being common knowledge although some of it to me was still new. So:
Some underwhelmed critics of the leaking of Cablegate documents have dismissed them as containing few genuine revelations – in general, they have largely tended to confirm what everybody suspected all along. And this is to some extent true of the cables on Thailand. There are no bombshells that will stun Thais or foreign experts on Thailand who are already aware – at least privately – of the story that the cables tell.
And I will agree with:
Hans Christian Andersen made the same point in his parable The Emperor’s New Clothes. Even if most people privately suspect the truth, putting it in the public domain makes it impossible to sustain official narratives that depend on a refusal to acknowledge the reality.
Don’t we all at times feel like the little boy crying out that the Emporor is naked?
I will hope as it continues that people will begin to realize that what is being argued about is the choice of lesser evils. Anyway, what I do have trouble with is Not the Nation’s humour. I always struggle with it even though being a child of sixties London I thought I my mind was quite open. Please can someone tell me whether they are attacking Marshall or his detractors. I admit I have no idea.
Quality comment or not?
7 
12
My story is, indeed, hopelessly long. And it has dismayed some academics: I am a journalist and a storyteller, not a professor. All I can say is that in the past 3 months as I wondered how to report this material, my instinct was that it needed to be done compellingly, exhaustively, and unfolding its revelations slowly rather than making immediate headlines of them all. Many of you may disagree, and if so, you can now view the raw cables to provide your own interpretation. Best wishes.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
103 
5
A refuters point of view:
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/06/wikileaks-strikes-again-asian-summer.html
Summary: Wikileaks is all but hearsay and Andre Marshall is serving Thaksin.
Does trusting the Wikileaks documents equal a leap of faith?
Quality comment or not?
7 
42
The proverb on the story’s first page ช้างตายทั้งตัวเอาใบบัวปิดไม่มิด (Chaang dtaii tang dtua aow bua bid mai mid) means “one can’t cover up a dead elephant with a lotus leaf”.
Quality comment or not?
27 
1
I find Thanong’s twitter stream amazing for several reasons:
1) He’s an editor at the Nation but has no idea that Thaistory was going live or even existed, despite fellow colleague Pravit Rojanaphruk foreshadowing its publication on the 15th of June.
2) First he thought @freakingcat was responsible.
3) He didn’t know who @zenjournalist is.
4) Then he played the conspiracy/”something fishy” card, as it’s ten days to poll time, when we’ve all been waiting for this story for ages as Andrew Marshall has been burning the midnite oil.
To me it completely confirms McCargo’s conclusion:
“The overall effect of the garbled and incoherent coverage in the Thai press was simply to reinforce a deeply dysfunctional political system” (2000, p. 238-239)
Refs
McCargo, D. (2000) Politics and the Press in Thailand: Media machinations. Bangkok, Thailand: Garuda Press.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
38 
2
“Andrew Marshall”:
WOW! Compelling!
That will take some time for me to digest. I am eagerly expecting the remaining parts – please don’t wait too long
Quality comment or not?
31 
3
Les Abbey @5:
Why does Not The Nation have to be “attacking Marshall or his detractors”? Are those the only two choices? Maybe they’re just taking the piss at everyone, like The Onion, which they are clearly ripping off.
As a child of the 60s, maybe your world shouldn’t be so narrowly polarized.
(that was a joke, neither attacking you nor your detractors.)
Quality comment or not?
14 
3
Andrew Marshall @6:
Read the whole thing and found it very thorough, valuable, and concise. Even if none of the conclusions are outside the known locus of Thai-whispered rumors, concretizing them with notarized government communications provides the smoking gun(s). Many thanks for providing this work, and for going so for free.
Quality comment or not?
23 
0
The refuter’s point of view linked to by Markus is well worth a read:
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/06/wikileaks-strikes-again-asian-summer.html
It’s not often that one comes across a piece which is as entertainingly barking mad.
Quality comment or not?
18 
4
For the record, I think Not The Nation XXXXXXX rocks
Quality comment or not?
23 
4
Wow! All I can say at this point, having read the first 25 pages and having jumped to the last 10 pages, and relying upon two wornout cliches, is that 1) those of us here in Thailand are living in a fool’s paradise; 2) if we get through the next month without a military coup, it will be by the skin of our teeth.
Quality comment or not?
15 
0
The Thunderer weighs in with an editorial
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/leaders/article3072414.ece
Quality comment or not?
6 
3
One of the interesting aspects of this brilliant and comprehensive summary of recent Thai history with the Queen at the center of various plots against three elected governments, (using her intermediary Prem, the Head of the Privy Council, and her private heavily armed militia, the Queens’ Guards, despite her lack of any hereditary, historical or constitutional authority of position), is that any future books or articles about Thailand’s recent history and present situation must now, it would seem, include and account for this material which is now so very public. IE., all those books that have been omitting this stuff, can now no longer omit it and all the veiled references, must now be explicit. This will revolutionize Thailand studies and scholarship.
The various cliche’s about the Thai monarchy being “above politics” and the Queen being somehow “benevolent” and the entire royal family “revered” by “all Thai citizens” has now gone completely out the window.
Interestingly, in Andrew’s account, the King is sort of an elderly bystander, and thus it is still possible for people to respect and accept the King while at the same time not respecting and accepting the actions and views of the Queen.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
39 
1
After a long wait, I have to say its a very satisfying piece. I’ve only read about 40 pages so far and like Andrew mentioned earlier, if you have been following what is going on, nothing in the articles will surprise you. Other than part of cable that Andrew quote which is more like a confirmation of the rumors that we have heard.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
WHL – 11
As a child of the 60s, maybe your world shouldn’t be so narrowly polarized.
Thanks WLH, it must be an age thing. I just struggle to find the humour in it. Still everyone to their own.
And talking about everyone to their own, Andrew Marshall obviously has his own horse to flog, but thank you Andrew for putting some of the cables out in the public domain as promised.
The great thing about these Wikileak cables is they were obviously only meant to be read by team players. That means there unlikely to be many reasons for the writer not to tell the what they think is the truth. We could probably imagine someone very ambitious ramping up the stories or someone not so smart just getting it totally wrong, but overall we should be able to expect mostly the truth.
Well I’m working my way down the list slowly and can see where Andrew saw some of his story, but this one from 2005 is a classic on Thaksin. For those that can see no fault in the man read http://thaicables.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/05bangkok2219-the-thaksinization-of-thailand-impressions-after-three-months/
I think I will enjoy reading more of these;-)
Quality comment or not?
4 
6
Cassandra – 16
The Thunderer weighs in with an editorial
Cassandra I think it’s behind Rupert Murdoch’s paywall, which for some of us is a wall to far
Quality comment or not?
4 
4
This gonna be your master piece, Kudos to Andrew. However, in the first part ,nothing surprises me much except those guys explicit opinions regarding the monarchy as it seems like the compilation of TKNS, Rev King, and Hi s Tale. So, I’m looking forward to the second half of #ThaiStory.
BTW. I feel like PT ,especially Thaksin, not gonna like the first part of #ThaiStory. Democratic may gain more vote from this LOL
Quality comment or not?
3 
4
Kudos to Andrew Marshall… a very brave man who has made his mark on Thai history!
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
The Times article is behind a paywall
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
There is now a funny Twitter Exchange between “zenjounalist” and Thanong on “The Nation”.
Supposed to be the only hint about today’s publication one can get on their website.
Quality comment or not?
5 
0
Wikileaks is not a credible source. It is basically what diplomats say semi-off the record and can constitute anything from a biased opinion to indeed accurate information. Without documented facts to back up the cables, they are essentially the same “he said, she said” we’ve had all along and hardly worth quitting your 14 year job as a journalist for.
I would also like to ask “Cassandra” why they believe that article they posted is “barking mad.” Is that because you read it and believe the New York Times is lying when they said US organizations plotted to overthrow the Tunisian and Egyptian governments long before the “Arab Spring” started? Or because you simply saw something that runs contra to your own beliefs and dismissed it out of hand? Because there are indeed facts within that article that Marshall really needs to either explain, or he can accept the illegitimacy that comes with propelling such a disingenuous agenda promoted by such disingenuous people.
I also spotted some documents within the same site directly from the US Senate website that indeed confirms Thaksin is working directly with foreign lobbying firms against his own nation. How about Marshall write about that – where real documents do exist and stop covering “leaked” cables that amount to nothing more than unsubstantiated hearsay?
Forgive me, but I simply don’t understand what this back-patting, masturbatory celebration is all about. Anyone could find these cables, and all Marshall is doing is pulling a big PR stunt to direct attention toward them and perhaps add some more spin to an already dubious collection of “resources.”
Hope you understand my skepticism. After all, I’d hate to see one backwards cult-like hierarchy simply be replaced by another in Thailand – but that appears, from the comments I see here, and the political agendas being promoted, to be what’s happening.
Hot debate. What do you think? Quality comment or not?
15 
50
No I don’t think Andrew Marshall’s story is hopelessly long. His build-up of the story is very very good.
I am expecting that Andrew Marshall would quickly formalize all this into a book. I’ll certainly buy and I have no doubt it would be a world best-seller.
Congratulations Andrew Marshall. You’re a damn good story teller.
Somewhere later on in Part II I could almost sense the part when and why the Red Shirts leaders started getting radicalized, violence-inclined and in a hurry to ‘sow hatred’.
Quality comment or not?
6 
17
The part about the power struggle between the Queen and Prince V are fun to read
Quality comment or not?
15 
0
Great work by Andrew M. Marshall. What about translating it into Thai and distribute it in the” Red Shirts villages” in Isan and North. They know already what is going on but will confirm what they know.
People at The Nation may pretend the cables do not exist, let them continue with their ignorance. Thanong and Suthichai thought readers still believe what they write — no, not anymore.
Quality comment or not?
20 
1
@Peter said: “Interestingly, in Andrew’s account, the King is sort of an elderly bystander, and thus it is still possible for people to respect and accept the King while at the same time not respecting and accepting the actions and views of the Queen.”
I disagree that the King deserves to be respected and accepted when the Queen is doing the wrong things, Peter. He is the Constitutional Monarch. His primary duty is he must defend democracy and uphold the Constitution which is drafted by the people. Thus, he has the duty of “due diligence” to prevent all this mess from happening. Instead. he chose to do nothing about it, and as thus he is not doing his job properly. More importantly, it is his wife who is making a mess for the country he has the duty to protect. Being that his wife is probably the second most powerful person in the country (at least legally, as evidenced by the Constitution), he is the only one who can stop her, and as a Constitutional Monarch, he has the duty to do everything he can to stop her. Yet he chose to do nothing. Thus he needs to be blamed for failing to do his duty. I used to respect him a lot, but now all my respect to him has gone down the drain. I mean, if the nation is in such turmoil, and the Constitutional Monarch who can stop all this mess chooses to do nothing to solve this mess, what’s the use of having him and wasting taxpayers’ money to feed him?
Quality comment or not?
33 
5
Having said about Andrew Marshall flogging his own horse I have to admit that my steed is close to death, or maybe already dead. Even so let’s have another go.
Seeing that Andrew has put up the cables he is referencing please take the trouble to look at them. They are at http://thaicables.wordpress.com/. We should all have the ability to make up our own minds from the evidence provided.
Now it’s very easy to get into a chicken and egg, which comes first, argument, but could we be looking in the first part of Andrew’s Thai story at the symptoms rather the cause.
If we took a rather crude look at democracy we could say that it is an attempt to elect a benign dictator with a limited term of power. Fortunately in most mature democracies we are not that gullible and we make sure there are some checks and balances built in.
Sometimes these checks and balances do not work as they should, for example the dismissal of Gough Whitlam, the Australian prime minister, by the Governor General John Kerr in 1975. In most cases though I think it’s more often the checks and balances not kicking in when they should rather than the other way round. In the UK this may have allowed Blair to lead the country into the Iraq adventure.
In Thailand we do have a problem. The checks and balances are far from ideal. We see in America that their Supreme Court can be a powerful balance against a too powerful executive. The Thai judiciary has improved a lot but the real check and balance has resided with the army and palace. The Suchinda coup against Chatchai’s buffet cabinet was a recent example of that power being used. Another, although not official, check and balance is the public disgust and citizens in the street. We saw the power of this in 1992 when Suchinda made a power grab.
So back to Andrew Marshall’s Thai story. We see a fractured palace reacting against Thaksin especially by his second term. The palace has its own problems. There is no way they can avoid an eventual royal succession, but they know some of the possible scenarios will not have widespread public support. This future brings control of the Privy Council into focus. Thaksin is rolling up the new checks and balances built into the 1997 constitution. Let’s refer to this cable. http://thaicables.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/05bangkok2219-the-thaksinization-of-thailand-impressions-after-three-months/.
In power, he took full advantage of the new charter’s creation of a strong executive, while distorting, dismantling or delaying the new “watchdog” institutions that were supposed to check and balance that new executive power.
At the same time we know that Thaksin’s CEO style of governing is all about power being in the hands of one man and his cronies. So from the same cable.
This is probably a good place to note that Thaksin,s vaunted CEO style of management differs markedly from the model which would have the company listed on the stock exchange, shares traded on the market, stockholders to placate and a board of directors to be responsive to. No, Thaksin,s style is much more like the family-owned private company where the CEO speaks and the lieutenants carry out his will ) much like, say, Shinawatra Corporation used to be while Thaksin was making his billions, or dozens of other Thai conglomerates.
And following it is.
And now he runs his cabinet just like that. Among the 35 ministers are Thanong Bidaya, Thaksin,s former banker (and widely rumored to have tipped Thaksin off about the coming baht devaluation when Thanong was Finance Minister in 1997), four former aides, six business friends, one police classmate, one family doctor and only eight MPs. Thaksin today has ably positioned himself to be the only star in the political constellation and could thus well be around for the next eight years or more.
But not only this, Thaksin has used his money to get involved in the royal succession. I suspect he is also looking at control of the Privy Council and would prefer a much weakened palace as he seems to dislike these checks and balances. From this cable http://thaicables.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/06bangkok3916-whats-thaksin-up-to/
The Ambassador noted that Thaksin felt he was a rival of the King for the affections of the rural population. Piya agreed, and pointed out how TRT officials had sycophantically received Thaksin on his trips to the North and Northeast, swelling his ego.
Even so he thinks that his relationship with the king is still good up until he decides to sell Shin Corp. From this cable http://thaicables.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/08bangkok2243-thaksin-predicts-national-unity-government-pardon-life-abroad/.
Thaksin cited his decision to sell his Shin Corporation conglomerate to Singaporean investment firm Temasek as a key turning point in his relationship with the King. Thaksin claimed he told the King about the sale in an audience prior to a public announcement. On hearing that Thaksin would sell the conglomerate to a foreign entity, the King reportedly stiffened visibly and asked, “To whom?” Thaksin told the Ambassador he had not heard the King’s question clearly and asked, “Pardon?” The King then erupted, loudly and angrily repeating his question. Thaksin told the Ambassador he had never before seen the King behave thusly.
So back to my flogged horse. Is the reaction of palace and the army before and after 2006 a symptom of a disease caused by Thaksin’s megalomania? Were there any working checks and balances left apart from them. I know the argument against this view is to say another election is the ultimate check and balance, but as we can see in Italy it does need more. In their case, with a similar authoritarian populist prime minister, it takes the services of some brave magistrates.
(To Andrew and Nich – If you feel that this is too long to be a comment would you consider making it an article instead. It would be a shame to waste the morning’s effort I put into it.)
Quality comment or not?
18 
12
The article behind a pay wall at “The Times” is free here:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/wikileaks-cables-reveal-scandal-and-disease-in-thai-royal-family/story-e6frg6so-1226080868978
It’s a summary of the most sensational parts of Andrew Marshall’s article. My own summary would be:
Mad and bad Queen fights with mad and bad Thaksin for control of mad and bad future King.
Quality comment or not?
16 
0
Network Monarchy- For when one Invisible Hand just isn’t enough. http://twitpic.com/5fk209
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
Isn’t it strange when we start to look at who comes out of the Wikileaks cables with any credit so far. They are so few we can easily list them.
From the earlier released cables it would have to be the minister under the coup installed government fighting the US over generic drugs. Then the old men of the Privy Council seem to be some of the few people mentioned that have altruistic motives. Then today’s release even shows Abhisit trying to do the right thing.
http://thaicables.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/10bangkok478-thailand-gt200-bomb-detector-failure-ignites-discussion-on-civil-mil-relations-human-rights-procurement/
So R.N. England do you agree with what your summary of Andrew Marshall’s says? If so why on earth have you been flying Thaksin’s flag on New Mandala for so long?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
LesAbbey: Your comment is not dissimilar to Chapter V of #thaistory , upcoming later today. You and I clearly have many different views, but we agree on some things too. Best wishes.
Quality comment or not?
10 
2
The transliteration of “ช้างตายทั้งตัวเอาใบบัวปิดไม่มิด” is supposed to be “Chaang dtaii tang dtua aow bai bua bid mai mid”, tsai mai ka?
Quality comment or not?
1 
2
Marilyn #34
According to the official Thai government system for transcribing Thai into English (which no-one else seems to use with any measure of accuracy and consistency), the transliteration of “ช้างตายทั้งตัวเอาใบบัวปิดไม่มิด” is “chang tay thang tua ao bai bua pit mai mit”.
The system does not really lend itself to transcribing spoken Thai into English because it doesn’t differentiate between short and long vowel forms and it ignores tones. However, its only real purpose is for transcribing Thai names into English, and it does that rather well. Had it been correctly applied, the new airport would have been called Suwannaphum, the outgoing prime minister would have been Aphisit Wetchachiwa and his replacement Yinglak Chinawat, and Andrew Bigg’s regular column would have been called Sanuk.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
I sure hope Andrew doesn’t plan on making a living in future from peddling this story. I don’t think there will much a market for a book made up of mostly excerpts, often taken out of context, of previously published works and unconfirmed allegations from illegally leaked US diplomatic cables carefully chosen to reinforce Andrew’s obvious bias.
Of course, there will be the small, but highly vocal hard core, that will crow about what an insightful, truthful piece that will change forever how Thailand is perceived simply because it agree with their position.
As long as it is freely available, I will continue to read the forthcoming chapters. Unlike many others here, I have no problem reading other viewpoints and when you ignore the bias, it does contain a good summary of events as perceived by a variety of sources.
Keep it up Andrew, it is a good read and you deserve credit for putting it together.
Quality comment or not?
5 
19
LesAbbey (30). Guess who owns the majority of Shin Corp now? After creating the situation where Temasek had to sell cheaply!
When most of the third world is run by big crime families, why keep picking on the Shinawatras? It’s obsessive and unbalanced.
Quality comment or not?
20 
4
R.N.England #31
Thanks for the guidance to The Times article – which contains the odd error of fact.
1. Prince Vajiralongkorn was born on 28th July 1952. Princess Sirindhorn was born on 2nd April 1955. That would make her his younger sister, and to the best of my knowledge she has NEVER challenged his claim to the throne.
2. I think the Thai government is worldly enough to be aware of the content of secret diplomatic cables. Imagine what the Thai ambassador in Washington would have reported about, say, Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
3. Foreigners convicted of lese majeste tend to be pardoned and deported faily quickly. Harry Nicolaides only served 6 months, and in my view he deserved it for the grammatical errors in his novel.
4. Fufu the white poodle wasn’t named after an air marshal; he holds the rank of air marshal. A little eccentric, perhaps, but if the Roman emperor Caligula could make his horse a consul, why not make a poodle an air marshal? At least he wouldn’t be taking kick-backs on fighter aircraft purchases.
5. Princess Srirasm was wearing high-heeled shoes with her g-string, and very fetching she looked, too. “The people”, whoever they are, may have difficulty accepting her as queen, but there seems to be no shortage of loyal subjects willing to protrate themselves at her feet during her public appearances (if the evening royal news is anything to go by).
6. If Thaksin was skimming cash from the lottery, then how come he hasn’t been charged with that as well?
Thank you, Khun Kitti, for the concluding statement. Nothing like a little diplomatic calm and dignity. It’s a pity that so many New Mandala commentators are going to be disappointed when the inevitable occurs and the transition is actually smoothly executed.
Quality comment or not?
7 
9
The transliteration of “ช้างตายทั้งตัวเอาใบบัวปิดไม่มิด” is supposed to be “Chaang dtaii tang dtua aow bai bua bid mai mid”, tsai mai ka?
Mai chai, khrap. Pid, not bid. Or bpid, using your scheme. Personally I’d prefer p, ph, t and th to bp, p, dt and t, but there are as many different transliterations as there are authors of get-by-in-Thai books, so take your pick.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Thanks Andrew, very much enjoyed your article. It certainly tied together several other things I had heard into a concise explanation of what the dramas here are really (probably) all about. Naturally the critics who know better never actually put themselves out there so ignore them.
I thought the King was rightfully dealt with in a positive light, however comments about his wife and children will of course mean you will never set foot in Thailand again unless you plan an insiders expose of Thai prison life.
Seems like Taksin is set for another electoral win, but still can’t see how his protagonists could ever allow it. Seems we wait and see which of the only bad outcome will triumph.
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
I think the author should be called Andrew MacGregor Marshall, since Andrew Marshall did not write this Thai Story. I had thought he did write it.
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
” If Thaksin was skimming cash from the lottery, then how come he hasn’t been charged with that as well?” -C38 KA
Read the Andrew Marshall story again KA. Thus to implicate Thaksin in the lottery skimming, the prosecutors would also have to implicate a Deputy Police Commander (who lost nomination to be Police Chief) and, er . . . . the other third party.
Get it yet KA?
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
In looking at the cables while Skip Boyce prided himself to having the inside track on the RTG I’m not too sure if he was fully aware to the extent of the misinformation that was fed to him from by both sides especially from 2005 up to the coup. In contrast Eric John, especially towards the end of his term, seemed to be quite cognisant of this fact. In regard to the perceived slight to Prem concerning the inviation to the dinner for Bush Sr., the only US President that he held in high esteem was Ronald Reagan and I really doubt if he was offended.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
Thank you, Andrew, for such exhaustive reporting. The hyperlinks are particularly appreciated. Just finished reading part I, which will take some time to think over, but eagerly awaiting Part II. Not too much new information but still nice to hear those rumors confirmed and see it all laid out in writing for the public.
I guess what struck me more than anything else, what didn’t dawn on me even after reading most of the source material, is how normal They seem as a family dynamic – the same problems so many other families have – and maybe that’s the real danger of the truth: the cognitive dissonance people will suffer when we all realize, They are human, just like us, and not at all infallible.
Quality comment or not?
6 
2
Hey anyone knows , apart from thaicable blog ,where else has the direct link to download thaistory part 2. I can’t download the one in thaicable blog ( box.net doesn’t work here )
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
I have really enjoyed reading part 1 and 2, and look forward to the rest. I appreciate all the work that has gone into it and the fact it’s downloadable for free is amazing! For the first time in years it’s got me digging out all my old Thailand and journalism textbooks (e.g. McCargo, quoted in 9, above) and having a good read.
I guess the sad thing is that #Thaistory shows how completely irrelevant the Nation and the Bangkok Post are for English-speaking news in Thailand. Some might say they’ve known that for years, but for me it’s a real eye opener as to the level of interference in Thai political life, such as the recent struggle over appointing a new police chief, where neither paper could say why the PM’s choice kept getting rejected and an unsuitable alternative continually nominated. If this is the continued future of Thailand things could keep getting messier and messier…
The uselessness of both papers in telling us what actually is happening is only amplified by Thanong’s ever more ridiculous stream of tweets. Jealousy? Denial? Who can tell? For me, his attitude as a senior Thai journalist mirrors that of the army and the malfunctioning bomb detection units. Sad…
Keep up the good work!
Quality comment or not?
13 
2
CT – 29
I was going to response to peter but you beat me to it. However, I view this a bit different from you. Although the cable seems to suggest that Queen and the privy councilors are behind all the palace politic, but if we look on nature of the cable itself, it would be illogical for the establishment to even mention the king’s name. After all, the king has been painted as above politic so whatever the information that the ambassader been given must not contain any relation to the king. With that in mind, if they were to mention the king’s name then the whole show will be ruined, therefore, I still firmly believe that the king has been playing the main role in Thailand politic with the Queen and the privy councilors as his fall-man in case something went wrong.
No, its not as simple as bad Thaksin, bad queen, and succession but rather a much more complex confrontation between the progressive vs conservative; the new and old money; the confrontation between social classes; the breakdown of the hold system. There are so many players and factors.
Quality comment or not?
27 
1
So how exactly does John Eric’s two cents “confirm” what people already “know?” Where is a single shred of evidence to back up anything John or the people say or “know?” I have to agree with John Smith that all this is obvious pandering to a select group of individuals who have already made up their mind and just enjoy extra fuel in the fire to warm their own hands.
Please find me some evidence of anything Marshall postulates or anything Eric John or the other inept, dubious clowns that constitute America’s self-serving diplomatic corps have said within this lengthy work. Marshall claims to be a journalist yet seems to have no qualms whatsoever about publishing book-length pieces of complete factual desolation. I read the first part with absolute disappointment, finding Eric John’s commentary – which I have read already by the way – to be far from something that would “revolutionize” my understanding of Thailand as Marshall has promised. In fact, besides the same rumors I’ve heard while in Thailand for years, I found nothing exceptional in Marshall’s part 1.
The more I read it the more clear it is that what Marshall has produced is a one-sided rant directed with a political, manipulative agenda in mind. Please don’t tell me it is “objective” it clearly isn’t. The fact that so many Thaksinphiles are “crowing” over this as John Smith aptly puts it, proves what purpose it serves. No matter what the political battle may be, there is ALWAYS dirt on both sides. Marshall’s myopic obsession with a particular side and the whitewashing he lends to the other (as he has done throughout his time at Reuters) is in poor taste and divorced from the best traditions of western journalism he claims to have been a part of for 17 years.
Like I said previously, there is confirmed documentation held in the US Senate’s database available publicly confirming Thaksin Shinawatra has enlisted foreigners to assist him politically in his bid to return to Thailand and to power – treason, as one article puts it. How is that not part of the “Thai Story,” but unconfirmed rumors floating around in Thailand’s gossip prone society retold by Eric John in an “alleged” cable are?
Marshall, here’s hoping you do some soul searching, or at least Google the meaning of “journalistic integrity.”
Quality comment or not?
8 
41
And one final frustration I would like to share… I am truly of an objective mind and I am certain that Thailand’s establishment is far from perfect. However the opposition is so childish, so devoid of a legitimate argument, let alone legitimacy themselves, that the have failed completely in objectively holding the establishment accountable.
Accountability is not their objective, for they are corrupt and power-crazed as well. Thus real issues, real corruption, real exploitation is going entirely unnoticed while these two groups play their games of political power grabbing – using only their own losses as evidence of the other’s transgressions against the nation.
My frustration comes with supposed journalists like Marshall who must, in 17 years, have garnered a tremendous amount of resources to commit to researching these issues, when he simply regurgitates PTP talking-points, and those of the red’s academics like the ignoble Giles Ungpakorn. It is frustrating and entirely disappointing.
And unfortunately, as I say this, and search for real credible evidence against the very enemies of the government’s opposition, I am berated by them simply because I don’t fall into the cult of nihilism and hate, and refuse to just fawn over Marshall’s sophomoric work. Yes it is sophomoric. You don’t promise to “revolutionize” someone’s understanding and then just post a US diplomat’s commentary on a particular nation with your own biased opinions, all completely devoid of any sort of documentation. That is indeed childish, no matter how you package and deliver it.
Hot debate. What do you think? Quality comment or not?
12 
46
It was a pretty good read, even though much of the analysis was of a derivative nature in the form of excerpts from other works. However, I wouldn’t have given up my day job to publish this in Andrew’s position. I am not sure it will lead to new career opportunities and any follow up commentary on Thailand will have to be done from afar.
I liked the description of Prem as Thailand’s “director of human resources” from 1988 to 2001 and some of the cables relating to HMQ are, if true, revealing to say the least.
I look forward to the following parts.
Quality comment or not?
8 
2
ThanongK on Twitter is still good fun to read. Where did this guy double and cross-check all his fabricated stories about Thaksin serious ill and close to death ?
Was he paid by getting his share of Thaksin’s confiscated billions by UK Authorities? Waiting for some answers from “Nationleaks” !
Quality comment or not?
13 
1
Part 2 is available. http://www.scribd.com/amarshall_13 Best wishes.
Quality comment or not?
4 
3
@Jimmy asked:
“Where is a single shred of evidence to back up anything John or the people say or “know?”
How about these events?
1) the Queen attended the PAD funeral, signifying that she sides with them.
2) the Queen attended Colonel’s Romklao’s funeral (a Queen’s guard who died on his ‘duty’ when the Queen’s Guard went to shoot the red shirts on the street on 10 April 2010), signifying that she supports the massacre.
3) the Royal Family’s open support for the 1976 massacre, which are aplenty.
Are these evidences not enough, to make any reasonable person stop and think whether the Royals are really above politics like they claim?
Like most brainwashed royalists, you attack the story as unreliable, yet you failed to point out “where” and explain “why” it is unreliable, not to mention that you have not brought any evidence to the contrary to rebut what the author has said. If you want to accuse the author as unreliable, then prove your allegation by providing evidences to the contrary to disprove him. First, find the sentence which you think unreliable, point it out, and explain why that sentence is unreliable, then bring up evidences to the contrary to disprove it.
Until you can do that, no one will take your allegation seriously.
@Tarrin,
One of the academics who is quite an expert about Thai politics whom I know quite well have told me (I was his student in university, and we still keep in touch until today, for an obvious reason that we are both interested in Thai politics) that he believes that the King is somewhat ‘quite red’. Of course I did not believe it when he told me this, but he said he believes that the King wants Prince V to be the King, because he realises the Monarchy cannot fool Thai people forever. Having Prince V becoming the King will force the elites to ‘revolutionize’ the system, and by doing that the Monarchy will survive. Of course the Queen does not like that idea.
I never believed his assumption. But from reading some cables of wikileaks where it is clear that the King had acted implied that he prefers Prince V to become the next King (despite the fact that he does not like him, and they hardly talk to each other), caused me to consider his assumption more seriously.
Quality comment or not?
25 
3
This is kind of like a re-run of all the comments that were made about Handley’s book, often by people who have taken the trouble to read the accounts.
It is interesting to read what various higher ups are said to have told diplomats from Thailand’s most trusted ally over a long period. These statements have to be given some credence as they are attributable to named persons. What then has to be done is ask about the motivations of those who talk to the embassy. One might also like to weigh the positions of those doing the reporting (e.g. Boyce was very close to a lot of yellow shirts and went to school with one in particular; and John was said to be closer to “the dark side”).
It is interesting for me to see the Thai Embassy in London refute the cables in the same way that Thaksin does.
The more that comes out the better. Keep ‘em coming!
Quality comment or not?
19 
0
I’ve just completed Part II. A very fascinating engrossing read definitely. Andrew McGregor Marshall’s Thai Story mainly confirms what I’ve known and/or suspected about what goes on behind Thailand’s opaque politics, but, yes too added new revelations.
People of course will have to make up their own minds about Andrew’s interpretation of Thailand’s turbulent political past and prospects (including the cables ‘legitimacy’). But if anything else, Andrew’s Thai Story had increased my already ingrained suspicions about almost every Thai political player of note. That’s a depressing thought: Not having a leader to attach to, draw inspiration from, and build my hopes from.
At first I’ll vote for Abhisit, then Yingluck, and at this moment back to Abhisit. I am just voting on pure ‘guts’ for the lesser evil.
Quality comment or not?
12 
8
CT an interesting theory re the King’s motivation for wishing the CP to succeed him but rather torturous logic, if I may say so. If this were his intention, wouldn’t it have been a lot simpler for him to “force the elites to revolutionize the system” during his own lifetime, rather than leaving the job to the next generation with a plan that perversely relies on that generation’s lack of popularity to ensure the survival of the monarchy?
Quality comment or not?
14 
0
I’m about half-way through Part 1 and just a touch underwhelmed. So far, Andrew has provided an excellent, well written and constructed overview of the main issues – recommended reading for those new to the plot. But he hasn’t broken news or provided groundbreaking insights, which is surprising considering his former position at Reuters where he must surely have picked up an enticing nugget or two. I hope I’m speaking too soon (indeed, I assume it) because so far he’s done little to justify leaving his day job. Perhaps I’m being harsh; this is the first of a four-part series and he may well be setting the scene ahead of the real beans to follow. I read on…
Quality comment or not?
7 
4
@Demon:
Try here:
Part 1 and Part 2
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
@Portman said: “CT an interesting theory re the King’s motivation for wishing the CP to succeed him but rather torturous logic, if I may say so. If this were his intention, wouldn’t it have been a lot simpler for him to “force the elites to revolutionize the system” during his own lifetime, rather than leaving the job to the next generation with a plan that perversely relies on that generation’s lack of popularity to ensure the survival of the monarchy?”
—
This is why I still only “start to consider” this theory, and still don’t believe what my professor’s assumption wholeheartedly
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
All power to Andrew Marshall for taking a bold position.
But am I the only one to be slightly disappointed?
My main concern is about the focus of the story. It’s all about a change in the Thai Monarchy, dissolute souls, tensions etc… Yet it reads like an episode from Dallas. There are people dying in Thailand from the military control, lack of regulation, or misplaced investment. But in this story we get all the details of who had which lover; what the Queen does; how the King misses the good old days. I think there is more to criticize in Thailand than the personalities of the Royal Family. What of the military (and I don’t just mean Prem)? What of the rise of other forces of inequality?
A lesser concern is that the story cites so much existing material (see comment 36).. and there are so many cliches (gathering storms… dreams turning to dust…). A tiny point too: the King is announced as being born in Brookline but later on in Cambridge. He was born in Cambridge (Mt Auburn Hospital – there is a square named after him).
And mixing all this with Al Quaeda early on? More sensationalism.
Andrew: good work and thanks for this. But please think if Thailand needs a version of ‘Princess in Love’ (the romantic book about Diana…) or something less like a soap opera.
Quality comment or not?
7 
2
From the point of view of historians or people interested in understanding the recent history, what we now know from the cables Khun Andrew already made public that is ‘new’?
I think we now have new information of at least three incidents that, in my view, are very important (chronologically):
- in early 2006 just prior to the sale of Shin Corp, Thaksin had told xxx privately of the sale. xxx reacted (according to Thaksin) quite badly. After that, as everyone knows, crises broke out. This means that, Thaksin must have known at the time that the opposition he was facing included xxx or was connected to xxx.
From what is just said, I now think that it’s quite possible that, when Thaksin came out in July of that year to renounce “people who have Charisma but are outside the Constitution”, he could in fact mean more than Prem (as I, for one, previously thought).
- in early June 2006 just before the 60th Anniversary Festivities, “Piya” made hundreds of pages print-out from the web-sites “Manusaya.com” and spent 3 days showing them to yyy, explaining to yyy that Thaksin was behind the websites.
- in mid-2008, just before the verdict on the Ratchada Land case was announced, Thaksin told the ambassador that he learned that xxx had issue order to have him convicted (he used the word “eliminate”, but I presumed he didn’t mean “kill”, just legally and politically eliminated).
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
59 
1
“I thought the King was rightfully dealt with in a positive light”
Overall, I think the jury is still out regarding the extent of involvement of various players, but I’m not so sure being painted as weak and unprincipled is all that positive.
(though I suppose it is slightly better than being shown to be the mastermind behind everything:)
Quality comment or not?
4 
2
1. Andrew: It has taken a long read to get to the point p22 in part 2 the be precise where is written-
“Since 1932, Thailand’s history has been shaped by the shifting balance of power between three
institutions: the monarchy, the military, and parliament. For the vast majority of the time, the Royal
Thai Army has had the dominant role, usually – although not always – with the explicit backing of, and
in alliance with, King Bhumibol. As Federico Ferrara writes in Thailand Unhinged, “the symbiotic
relationship between the palace and the military has come at the expense of Thailand’s democracy”.
In order to justify and legitimize their persistent and destructive meddling in Thai politics, the military
and the network of powerful officials around the palace have fostered the myth that Bhumibol and the
monarchy are under threat. And in the name of protecting the monarchy, democracy has been been
repeatedly abrogated and freedom of speech denied.”
If you do a book I suggest you start with this. Then you will be closer to the position of Ji Ungpakorn.
Of course you would also need to remove your unsubstantiated praise of the King’s achievements (This is not a criticism of HM)
I especially wonder about his rural development efforts and dam advocacy. Is he a rank amateur in this field?
You give no information about his formal education to answer this question.
2. I have an update on: “We may attribute the failure of such efforts to divisions
within the royal family, or to the lack of mechanisms to effectively convey Palace views to
the public while maintaining plausible claims that the Chakri dynasty plays an appropriately
apolitical role.”
This past week on TV I saw a broadcast message with the palace pictured in a gilt frame quoting the
King as saying “Kham Kaeng Samkang..” Strength is most Important but really “Vote Democrat”; the
party which promoted “Thai Kham Kaeng” to launder its corruption money to stimulate the economy
and registered a new name Kham Kaeng in the event the old party was de-registered.
The palace appears to have given up the pretence entirely.
3. LesAbbey : “The great thing about these Wikileak cables is they were obviously only meant to be read by team players. That means there unlikely to be many reasons for the writer not to tell the what they think is the truth. We could probably imagine someone very ambitious ramping up the stories or someone not so smart just getting it totally wrong, but overall we should be able to expect mostly the truth.”
“Sometimes these checks and balances do not work as they should, for example the dismissal of Gough Whitlam, the Australian prime minister, by the Governor General John Kerr in 1975. In most cases though I think it’s more often the checks and balances not kicking in when they should rather than the other way round. In the UK this may have allowed Blair to lead the country into the Iraq adventure. In Thailand we do have a problem. The checks and balances are far from ideal. We see in America that their Supreme Court can be a powerful balance against a too powerful executive. The Thai judiciary has improved a lot but the real check and balance has resided with the army and palace. ”
My rejoinder to Les is that firstly he fails to realise how self delusional is the thinking of agents of the US State Department who write these cables.
Take this most recent example. Last Friday a former US ambassador to the UN and member of the Whitehouse staff who worked for both Bush father
and son gave a presentation to promote the sale of his book “Golden Bones” in Chiang Mai. The talk was sponsored by the US Consulate General here
and given at Payap University. Yes, an arch right wing Republican sponsored by a Democrat headed State Department.
The speaker was born in Cambodia but his loyalty is firmly with the USA judging from his refusal to comment on the present day troubles of that
country raised by the audience. He was asked a couple of ticklish questions. Had he read Noam Chomsky? Noam must be the most consistent well informed
and strident domestic critic of US imperial polocy of foreign intervention and support of military dictatorships and has written over 60 books. He answered
that he had heard the name but read none. And this fellow was US ambassador to the UN for 6 years and was unaware of the criticism.
He was aslo asked about what efforts he had made to have his country make reparations for the tremendous damage to Cambodia, Laos & VietNam inflicted
by the US attacks on those countries. He responded by ignoring this and accusing the Viet Cong of inflicting suffering on Cambodia and vietNam of twice invading
the country. (The latter statement is correct. The US puppet ARVN invaded Cambodia during the US war, but he failed to mention they were backed by the US.
The second occasion was when Socialist Vietnam invaded to destroy Deomcratic Kampuchea.) Then talk about pot calling kettle black, he proceeded to state
that invasion of one country by another as VietNam had done or Tanzania had to remove Idi Amin waas contrary to international law etc.
Yes we may be witnessing an honest interchange of State Department views, but no doubt we could find a UFO followers website from the USA with honestly
held opinions by the delusional.
We are seeing nothing about how the USA has built up the military of Thailand so that just as in the USA all governments are beholden to the men with guns.
Secondly the real checks and balances are not in instutions like the courts. I remember being taught history in Australia in junoir high school by a tall skinny
old spinster named Elvie Drummond. She taught us about the great shearers strike of the 1890′s and the lesson came loud and clear – the only defense of
democracy is a free trade union movement. Ask any dictator and you will find agreement that he will not tolerate such freedom. In the case of the Whitlam sacking
, it succeded because the then head of the trade unions was Robert Hawke who betrayed the country by refusing to allow a general strike to defend the government.
Later he became Prime Minister and took the country along the neo-Liberal path.
Quality comment or not?
11 
3
An entertaining read though I confess I have not quite finished. Isn’t this all rather irrelevant? And it still seems to be all smoke and mirrors. At the moment the country is facing an election. The problem now is who is going to carve up the country, because, whether Andrew knows this or not, that is what politicians, even in ‘honest’Abhisit’s circle, have been literally doing for the last decade on an unsurpassed level, while we are being asked to look at the Palace. The succession issue is one that has been discussed for the last 20 years, nothing new. And it may all turn to be totally irrelevant. Is there a conspiracy against Thailand? Yes. Just look in the right direction. A couple of posters here get it.
Quality comment or not?
3 
8
To A M Marshall – Whatever your genuine motive was in sacrificing the job you love, I appreciate your time and effort spent in compiling this 4 part series and sharing it to us at no cost. At least you’ll be safe from Khun Napas Na Pombejra when you wrote without the official Reuters journalist’s hat on (no guarantee though \:-)).
As a regular follower of your RSS feed at Reuters, I don’t see the problems with the US ambassador cables being quoted. Their accuracies aren’t really the ambassadors’ responsibility, but rather the truthfulness given to them by the persons present at the time of particular ‘talks’ or ‘interviews’ (and most of them were named, as RK #53 pointed out). Prudent readers have to judge by themselves how much weight they should give to each paragraph for its reliability. This is what most of us do all the time to information obtained from other sources.
Personally, if I have to make a choice, I’ll pick the cables as the more reliable sources when others on the list are mainstream Thai media.
Quality comment or not?
12 
0
No matter how many times one has read about the 1976 Thammasat massacre, it is still harrowing to read about it again. I can still remember the newsreel clips of shirtless male and female students being kicked and beaten as they crawled on the ground shown overseas at the time. However, younger Thais are stunned and stupified when confronted with the facts of this story that is almost entirely eradicated from the national consciousness. It should be taught in schools as a key part of the history curriculum.
Part 2 is generally pretty good and doesn’t hesitate to show how Thaksin’s hubris led to his fall in detail. I only have minor quibbles such as the use, as in Part 1, of Nick Nostitz a highly partisan red shirt supporter, as a source. Also I am not sure that M855 red tipped rounds are only used by Thai special forces. They are NATO’s standard issue 5.56mm ammunition that is green tipped to distinguish it from orange tipped tracer rounds. I would think it likely that this ammo is used throughout the Thai military and could easily have been used by Men in Black also.
Quality comment or not?
11 
4
“Portman”:
“I only have minor quibbles such as the use, as in Part 1, of Nick Nostitz a highly partisan red shirt supporter, as a source.”
Andrew quoted me also in Part 2.
The other day i was accused by a Thai journalist, who was once part of the PAD, of having been paid by Thaksin, and he cited as the reason for stating this would be because he would know that many foreign journalists are in the pay of Thaksin, and that i would behave the way as if i would be in the pay of Thaksin, and therefore he knows that i am in the pay of Thaksin. And that i am a second rate journalist. And an arsehole.
Oh, well…
The problem here with accusing me off being “highly partisan”, and whatever else is that so far none of my facts have been disproved. I have on numerous occasions invited every critic to correct factual mistakes i made, or find important omissions in my work i should consider.
So far, nil, zilch, nothing, just the same old “he is a Red Shirt supporter”.
This gets a bit boring.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
41 
4
Wikileaks diplomatic cables are just that, cables, letters, regarding the opinion and assessment of US diplomats. Sometimes this information is accurate, and capable of being documented, like 05Bangkok2219 where the US refers to Thaksin as a reliable ally in their pursuit of a US-Thai FTA. You can find many references to this including official United States International Trade Commission documents confirming this. However, EVERYTHING regarding the latest unrest and the Royal Family is as unsubstantiated as it was years ago when many of these rumors started floating around.
That doesn’t mean that John or Boyce are liars, that means they simply relayed in their cables the rumors on the street back to their superiors in the US. It doesn’t lend any more credence to these rumors – just because they repeated what they’ve heard, regardless of their credibility. Marshall’s story would have had more impact had he actually provided evidence – had he had such evidence, why even use the Wikileaks as the primary subject of his “story?” Why not use them as supporting evidence for irrefutable documentation?
Marshall, who I personally suspect is politically motivated, would have impressed me if he offered up actual evidence to back up the rumors he is highlighting in this body of work. He hasn’t, worst yet, he is not upfront about how tenuous his work actually is. In fact, he promises to “revolutionize” our understanding of Thailand by simply pointing out people he believe we perceive as credible, repeating the same tired rumors floating about Thai society for years.
He attempts to simply re-introduce them with what he believes is added authority to give them more weight in the court of public opinion – I read part 1 in its entirety and failed to see any real evidence to back up many of the key accusations the opposition is making, citing Marshall’s work as a reference.
Such comments as “This confirms what I suspected,” baffle me, because while it is yet more people repeating these rumors, they are simply repeating them and offering no new evidence. They do not do so maliciously, they are simply relaying the “word on the street.” Such word gives you a place to start, but is by no mans evidence in and of itself. It is the equivalent of an “accusation” that requires more research and investigation. Such additional research and investigation, depending on what it turned up, would be worthy of a “Thai Story.”
Please read my work, search it, scrutinize it, and tear it apart. You will see I am no supporter of the Democrats, or the Thai army. I simply dig for real, irrefutable evidence. My truest belief is that people need to pursue pragmatism, not the political agenda of any party, PTP or Democrats. Pragmatic self-sufficiency liberates the people from ALL forms of tyranny, traditional or new-money.
Read between the lines and use your brains when you read my work. You will see I am on your side (assuming you truly care about the Thai people and their future.)
Quality comment or not?
7 
36
@Tarrin said: ” I still firmly believe that the king has been playing the main role in Thailand politic with the Queen and the privy councilors as his fall-man in case something went wrong.
No, its not as simple as bad Thaksin, bad queen, and succession but rather a much more complex confrontation between the progressive vs conservative; the new and old money; the confrontation between social classes; the breakdown of the hold system. There are so many players and factors.”
—
Well, I have finished reading Part I, and I agree with you that it isn’t just the Queen vs Thaksin. In fact I tend to believe that now the Royals and the elites themselves are competing for a power struggle and they are divided into four groups:
-the Queen, with Prem and Prayuth on her side, planning to raise Dipangkorn to become the next King and that the Queen serves as Regent.
-Prince V
-Princess Sirindhorn
-Finally, some elites in the army who believe that neither the Queen or Prince V will command the full respect of the Thai people, and they plan to play hero and expose both the Queen and Prince V’s dirty secrets, and seize the power…
…but of course there is the fifth group: the people in Thailand who have woken up from Matrix, and they only want true democracy. Who will win at the end? I don’t know, but I am in the fifth group. That’s for sure.
It is quite interesting to hear that the King himself is unhappy about these power struggles, and that Sondhi’s act in 2008 where he dismissed Dr.Sumet’s plea from the King to the PAD, “if you love the King, please go home”, is an important political move on the Queen’s part. That the Queen is trying to make it clear (through Sondhi’s daring refusal to the King’s request) to all the elites that her ‘group’ has more power than the King’s group, and that not even the King can order her to stop what she’s doing.
But that does not mean the King can be excused for not doing anything further to stop the PAD. The King is too afraid that he would fail if he exercises his influence, so he decides not to do anything further to stop the PAD. A real Constitutional Monarch must not stop at that point; he must keep pressing the PAD to stop. And if necessary, he must go by himself to stop them. I still think he has not done enough to stop this mess, and he still should be blamed for it.
Quality comment or not?
14 
2
As a farang struggling with learning Thai as a second language, perhaps some our Thai correspondents can help me out:
1. It seems to me that the honorific unit military title “Raksa Phra Ong” means “Royal Guards”, as in Kong Phon Thahan Rap Thi Nueng Raksa Phra Ong (1st Infantry Division, Royal Guards). What exactly is the Thai for “King’s Guards” and “Queen’s Guards”? Which unit is the Queen’s Guards, and how can we identify them?
2. If “Kong Thap Bok Thai” means “Royal Thai Army”, which word in “Kong Thap Bok Thai” means “Royal”?
3. The first Thai Army unit to be deployed to South Vietnam in 1967 was called, in Thai, the “Krom Thahan Asasamak Jong Ang Suek”, which according to my copy of the Mary Haas Thai-English Student’s Dictionary of 1964, should be translated as the King Cobra Volunteer Regiment, but was officially called the Queen’s Cobras Regiment. Can anyone explain the error in my translation?
Any enlightening comments from Thai native speakers, or more skilled Farang speakers of Thai, would be very much appreciated.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Censorship update:
Most links are now blocked by MICT if using Loxinfo.
However, using HTTPS everywhere extension on Firefox still gets you to the WordPress site.
So far the MICT has been unable to block HTTPS protocol on any site, as far as I can tell.
Carry on.
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
KA- 70
1. The 1st Infantry Division official name is 1st Infantry Division “Mahardlek Raksa Pra Ong” (มหาดเล็กรักษาพระองค์). Not sure what the direct translation for Mahardlek but my best guess is something like Earl or Viscount of British equivalent. The English equivalent of Mahardlek Raksa Pra Ong would be King’s Own Guard. The 1st Infantry Division usually regard as the King’s Guard and the unofficial name is Vongtawan (วงศ์เทวัญ) . The 2nd Infantry Division official name was 2nd Infantry Division Raksa Pra Ong (Royal Guard). However, the unofficial name for the 2nd division was “Burapa Payak” (บูรพาพยัคฆ์) (Eastern Tiger) and is considered as the “Queen’s Guard” . Usually the only way to distinguish them other than the unite’s insignia is their ceremonial uniform, the regiments from the 1st division wear red or white while the 2nd division use purple and/or black. I’m note sure about the exact colour since its different from regiment to regiment.
2. Royal Thai Army is the official English name, there’s no equivalent word for “Royal” in Thai.
3. I think its the same with 2. just different in official Thai and Eng name.
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
Nick Nostitz “The problem here with accusing me off being “highly partisan”, and whatever else is that so far none of my facts have been disproved. I have on numerous occasions invited every critic to correct factual mistakes i made, or find important omissions in my work i should consider.
So far, nil, zilch, nothing, just the same old “he is a Red Shirt supporter”.
This gets a bit boring.”
As Naa Chart used to like to say in defence of his Buffet Cabinet, “Show me the receipts”. Sorry, I can’t show you them but your 2008 piece justifying the police brutality in front of parliament and the use of repeated volleys of explosive tear gas grenades including one that killed Nong Bow, who you obviously thought asked for it, is about as objective as accounts of street protests in Tehran by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards.
Quality comment or not?
4 
21
I finished reading Part II of Andrew’s story already, and noticed the reference to Luangta Maha Bua’s (a highly revered Buddhist monk) opinion about Thaksin that Thaksin is a “giant monster who will devour Thailand, and he will destroy the Monarchy, and make himself the first President of Thailand” in 2005.
Can anyone provide me with the link so that I can see this news to confirm that he has really said this? (also feel free to provide extra evidences of Luangta Bua’s further derogatory comment about Thaksin). If he really did say that, then it was extremely uncalled for.
I know monks should be allowed to express their political opinions, but to say he is a ‘giant monster who will devour Thailand, destroys the Monarchy etc’, is not an appropriate remark, because you cannot prove any of those at the time when the speech was made. It is a mere speculation of an uncertain future, and as he himself is someone the public gives high regard to his opinion, making this kind of ‘speculative’ statement is very inappropriate.
Quality comment or not?
6 
3
“Tony”:
The Wikileaks cables are a bit more than “word of the street”. They are word of streets that the average person, the average journalist, and even the average diplomat is not able to walk.
US diplomats have far closer access than any other country’s diplomats to the palace, and to people close to the palace. Of course Wikileaks is not the holy grail, it is not no-holds barred interviews with these people, but it is as close as we can presently get information from and about these notoriously secretive quarters of Thai society, and therefore they do revolutionize our understanding of things here.
Your little story is full of assumptions, loony conspiracy theories and blatant falsehoods.
Lets just start with Giles Ungpakorn here – you call him a leading Red Shirt member. Leading what? Giles is not, and never was in the central committee of the Red Shirt movement.
You state that the Red Shirt movement is “foreign financed”, implying that it may be financed by the US, or US lobbying companies, and that there is “a United States government intent on regime change and the reinstatement of Thaksin as Thailand’s leader.”
Eh, …what? Have you got any proof or evidence of sizable enough monetary transfers that could substantiate these accusations? The Red Shirt movement has of course financial backers as the donations by common Red Shirts is hardly enough, but the financial backers are wealthy Thai businessmen. Not all rich Thais are on the side of the state, or support the PAD.
Your accusations that US ambassadors, and the US government would support the Red Shirt movement and work towards a regime change in Thailand are laughable, and show complete lack of insight into their world. Reality is that the US has no singular policy how to deal with this entirely homegrown ongoing crisis in Thailand. US diplomats and officials of the state department themselves argue over how to deal with the situation, even over how to analyze it in the first place. There are diplomats who completely reject the Red Shirts, and others who do have some sympathies for the Red Shirts’s demands. Traditionally though the US needs a stable Thailand, and therefore will have certain preferences for the status quo. Your funny idea that the US would want to destabilize Thailand is the exact opposite of the truth – the US needs a stable Thailand, as Thailand still is its most important partner in the region.
Your repeated accusations that Prachatai would be some sort of foreign funded tool of dissemination of falsehoods receiving large budgets to further the agendas of those foreigners is completely out for lunch. Have you ever visited their office? Seen them working? Personally know their staff?
Reality is that Prachatai has constant trouble to obtain their required funds, operates on shoestring budgets, and works to a large part with unpaid volunteers.
Thailand’s “long standing unity”? Have you ever read anything regarding Thai history? You have had long before the US became a player in the world stage, and still have, internal wars, uprisings, intrigues, palace conflicts, military factionalism and coups, separatism, and whatever else.
Unity? Not exactly.
It is rather funny when you accuse Andrew Marshall of just repeating rumor, yet your entire… hmm … “work” … on Thailand consists of nothing but completely unsubstantiated fabulations.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
46 
4
“Portman”:
“Sorry, I can’t show you them but your 2008 piece justifying the police brutality …”
So, you cannot show any proof that i have omitted anything of substance, or that i have falsified facts, and your claim of me being “highly partisan” stems from your disagreement with what i wrote on the October 7, 2008, incident? In which you, as far as i can recall, have not been personally present?
Police brutality?
Before you accuse the police of brutality at parliament you have to proof intent. All evidence points clearly to one fact – police was not aware of the lethal nature of their teargas grenades. Police believed that the horrific injuries came from Ping Pong Bombs by the PAD (these injuries are consistent with injuries caused by such, and the PAD had Ping Pong Bombs – as proven by images i took at a later stage of PAD members arrested with such). This believe of the police was a fatal mistake, as it turned out.
Accuse the police of incompetence regarding the teargas grenades, and i will not dispute this. But brutality? No – brutality needs intent.
Police has not fired guns against the PAD protesters. But on numerous occasions PAD protesters that day have fired guns against the police, injuring three officers with gunfire.
Police – different than the military against Red Shirts in 2009 and 2010 – has held back during October 7, 2008.
The problem with Nong Bo is that we do simply not have a proper investigation into her death. Dr. Pornthip has never personally performed an autopsy, and during her investigations of the crime scene she has used the GT200 device. This means that the investigations were completely screwed up.
We have a counter investigation by the police that has found explosive residue on her clothes that came from devices other than the RDX charges of the teargas grenades. But i have pointed out in my books (have you read them?) that this is also not an independent investigation as the police is accused, and i have pointed out the need for another investigation, if that is still possible.
But it is clear that Nong Bo was clearly taking part in an attack against the police, and not, as claimed, simply walking back from parliament to Government House. I have substantiated this claim by the location of her death, and by now even have an absolutely trustworthy witness who saw her just before her death from the side of the PAD.
Again, it is not proven if Nong Bo died by her own ping pong bombs, or by police teargas (or a combination of both). What though is clearly proven is that she was a combatant, and not just a bystander – as the PAD claims.
And i won’t even go into the relevant Wikileaks cable over the intent of the PAD for that day, which further supports and substantiates my reporting of that fateful day…
I was there. From before the early morning attack until the fighting stopped at night. I have taken the only still photo known to be existing of the location of Nong Bo’s death at the time of her death. Where were you?
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
46 
3
Oh dear, this is all getting a bit personal and off topic. Personally I do not mind journalists giving a story a slant if it is the right one. I am not a great supporter of the even handed ‘on the other hand her Hitler said there was absolutely no evidence that x million people died in the gas ovens’ type of journalism.
Andrew’s stuff I believe would be warmly received by Thaksin, the red shirts and Phuea Thai, none of whom have the same objectives, and probably not liked by the Democrats, and PAD.
He may be right. He may be wrong. But based in Singapore and having visited I am sure all the regional countries here, I am a little surprised to hear him banging on about the truth that cannot be told in Thailand.
A lot of journalists do seem to however have fallen as usual into the ‘democratic’ trap and support the red-shirts as a genuine revolutionary movement (though there will be many genuine democracts amongst them)
And contrary to the impression given by Andrew, Reuters did not dog Thaksin much, especially when he was buying into the Premier League.
Quality comment or not?
10 
12
The matter mentioned in Andrew Marshal’s Thai Story about Thaksin ‘skimming the lottery and using the Deputy Police Chief to be the bagman for an eventual . . . er third party’ should underscore to everyone that Thaksin’s reputation as ‘Thailand’s mother of all corruption” is well-deserved. Include Thaksin’s extra-judicial (killing) bent, megalomania, voodoo, and Machiavellian genius . . . gentlemen we’ll all have to fasten tight our seat belts because after the elections we’re all for a hair-raising puke-inducing ride, with Thaksin remote-driving of course.
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
CT – 69
Couldn’t agree more. Moreover, the force that hold fraction 1 – 4 is the king no doubt, and if he is to pass away we might see what might be resemble what had happen to the Nepali monarch.
Keep in mind that the fraction that you just mentioned are really dynamic, they might form into one group and split up as soon as they formed.
Quality comment or not?
1 
1
Re Richard H #58
as at June 28 both links are blocked in Thailand by the MICT
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
The cat-and-mouse MICT game is well underway.
I suggest Andrew M up the ante by posting the story in parts as sequential Notes on a personal Facebook page (or public interest page).
Forcing the MICT to go against Facebook would cause them new problems. They can’t block all of it and I don’t think FB will cave like YouTube and agree to block specific pages.
Quality comment or not?
8 
1
KA#70 and Tarrin#72:
The Krom Thahan Mahat Lek, meaning Royal Pages Regiment, was raised in 1887 when the Thai Army Officer Cadet School was established. It was organized and equipped along modern European lines as a training unit to instruct Thai officers, most of them members of the nobility, in Western military technology and tactics, and to give them experience of service in a modern regiment. It was disbanded after a satisfactory level of Western-style military professionalism had been achieved by the army as a whole.
The unit was reformed as part of the 1st Infantry Division after the Crown Prince returned to Thailand after military training in Australia to give him something to command.
Both the 1st and 2nd Infantry Divisions are formally titled “Raksa Phra Ong”, meaning “Royal Guards”. There is nothing in their Thai titles that means “King’s Guards” or “Queen’s Guards”.
The 1st Infantry Division is informally known as the Wong Thewan, meaning the Celestial Circle, because of the physical proximity of its HQ to Chitralada Palace and the fact that most (but not all) senior army commanders rise through its ranks.
The 2nd Infantry Division is informally known as the Burapha Phayak, meaning the Eastern Tigers, because its HQ is located east of Bangkok at Wattana Nakhorn, and its officers and men see themselves as Tigers (i.e. real combat soldiers) and not just palace guards occupying cushy billets in the capital.
At present the Burapha Phayak occupy all key command appointments in the army. If I were Thaksin, I’d be cultivating supporters within the Wong Thewan.
Quality comment or not?
6 
1
c78
“as at June 28 both links are blocked in Thailand by the MICT”
Certainly not on all Thai ISPs. My 3BB connection still goes straight through to those links. TOT and certain other ISPs are usually more prone to blocking – presumably (though not definitely) on instruction from/at the request of MICT.
Quality comment or not?
2 
2
Re Andrew’s comment #14.
Does the total number of X’s give us a clue as to what the word is?
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
A half time summary is given by http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/wikileaks-cables-truth-and-thailand/ and I share the concerns raised.
Quality comment or not?
5 
1
Darren Nelson – 85
http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/wikileaks-cables-truth-and-thailand/ and I share the concerns raised.
Will Andrew Marshall join the middle class revolutionaries enemies list along with Amnesty International and Human Rights watch? It seems you can’t be just a little bit pro. You have to go the whole hog and stick with the propaganda line.
The Wikileaks cables are unacceptable to these people as they don’t fit their present line. That they were not meant to be in public domain gives them their own strength and truth. It’s very noticeable the experts on New Mandala who are making no comments on probably the best glimpse behind curtains for many years. You should be ashamed of yourselves. About time you spoke out guys.
Quality comment or not?
4 
11
LesAbbey,
“It’s very noticeable the experts on New Mandala who are making no comments on probably the best glimpse behind curtains for many years. You should be ashamed of yourselves. About time you spoke out guys. ”
Seriously?
Andrew Walker and I talk to every journalist (or student, colleague, member of the public, etc, etc) who asks about the Wikileaks cables and the wider Thai political conflict. For what it’s worth, I just did a long interview on the topic this morning, broadcast all over the Asia-Pacific. We do all this under our own names and make no effort to shield ourselves from debate.
We have a longstanding commitment to open debate — why else would we continue to run New Mandala? Our University hosts the most prominent website for discussing all of the most important and sensitive issues, with a 5-year-old policy of welcoming voices from all points-of-view.
I am sitting at my desk, right now, writing an analysis of the unfolding Wikileaks saga. These things take time. You suggest we should be ashamed of ourselves? Are you serious?
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
32 
2
And we do have day jobs as well! AW
Quality comment or not?
20 
1
As well as being mean spirited towards NM, Les probably hasn’t read the PPT guest contributor article or read it with his blinkers on. It seems to me that the article makes a case for a subaltern historical view. That is not earth-shattering. Nor is the statement that cables are elite-centric views.
Plenty of historians have been making a similar point about the need for a view from below for decades (not least at ANU).
The article says that relying on cables like these doesn’t do that. It also makes the point, as was made above, that these cables are a partial story. Who could disagree with that?
There’s no attempt to say that the whole thing is ideologically unsound as far as I can see.
Meanwhile, I am reading the cables and finding them of considerable interest. I’m grateful to Andrew M. for his efforts.
Quality comment or not?
11 
0
Andrew and Nich thanks for your replies. Now I’m sure my day job takes up many more hours than yours, but I do recognize the importance on what’s being released. This is the inside look at many of the subjects both you and to a far lesser extent of course, myself, have posted about. It’s a chance to modify some viewpoints now a few facts have been unearthed to support or disprove previous conjecture.
I will take your word and look forward to plenty of comment from you on these cables. How about some of the others out there? You are very noticeable by your absence.
We do all this under our own names and make no effort to shield ourselves from debate.
Now now Nich, if that’s a dig at me the circumstances are very different between us, and I don’t actually see any attempt to shield myself from debate. It is a fact you know full well my real name and that I trust New Mandala to honour my wishes on anonymity. If I didn’t I would obviously not be posting or commenting here. Of course if I end up as refugee down where you are because of a new government’s actions, I would hope for your support, and maybe a settee to sleep on for a few days
Quality comment or not?
3 
5
I thought I would wait until the whole article is made public to write any critical comment. But since PPT has already started, I think I might as well register certain reservations of Khun Andrew M Marshall’s analysis in the first two parts. (What I’m saying here is to some extent similar to PPT’s, though I also have some, perhaps not large, disagreement with their assessment, especially concerning the rather theoretical/philosophical issue of the legitimacy of presenting the “elite” vs “mass” levels of politics.)
There are two related issues that I disagree with Khun Andrew. First, the role, resposibility, and thus the distribution of criticism, of the King relative to the other members of the royal family and all their ‘entourages’ or ‘networks’ of royalists (from privy councilors to the PAD, etc). Second, the relative significance of the monarchy (the king especially) and the military, in terms of promoting/hindering the road to democracy past and present. The latter issue is argued quite strongly in the second part of the article (PPT’s comment only covers the first part), hence my quite strong disagreement with it.
But here’s my problem (which I think Khun Andrew would fully understand) – if I were to argue against his analysis, I would inevitably have to provide counter-examples of facts and arguments, which I or anyone else under Thai law, would not be able to.
Take the well-known and often-cited incident of the King’s 2005 birthday speech, which a lot of people take as his reluctance or even disapproval of the use of LM in recent years (or, similarly, a cable report of his telling Abhisit in a private audience). Suppose I were to say that there is a much more plausible (in terms of both factual and historical context) explanation of the speech that is quite the opposite of what people are saying? How am I to say anything more than just such assertion? In fact simply making assertion like this already runs the risks of violating LM.
Khun Andrew has done a great service to Thailand’s future by making public all the WikiLeaks cables relating to the monarchy. But I think he — I would say the majority of observers –would need to think more thoroughly the issue of the monarchy, the relative roles of the individuals within the institution, and the relative roles of them vis-a-vis the military and other political actors. Even something that seems so “obvious” as the supposed “genuine love, affection, etc. of the Thai people towards their king” that most observers are fond of repeating, is – I would love to argue, but I couldn’t! – actually much more complex a phenomenon, much least legitimate or “genuine”.
Needless to say, what I just wrote is quite risky already.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
37 
2
Very fair comments from many posters here and I am particularly grateful for Ajarn Somsak’s informed analysis. It is humbling and educative to have such respected experts commenting on my journalism. I would also like to put on record that I consider Nick Nostitz’s work to be a superb contribution to our knowledge of modern Thailand. Unlike all the armchair pundits (and I fall into that category, alas) he has been totally immersed in what he writes about and that makes his insights exceptionally valuable.
I welcome all informed debate and criticism of my story, other than the abuse from people who have not bothered to read it. Debate is exactly what Thailand needs right now. I will join the debate more fully in coming days but first I need to finish parts 3 and 4. I have added a few more interesting cables on http://www.zenjournalist.com – the top post is sticky but please look below and I will find them. Best wishes.
Quality comment or not?
15 
0
I should add also that I have incredible admiration for Andrew Walker and Nich Farrelly for the work they do – and not least for hosting this site on which we are all able to comment on these issues. Many people have made sacrifices to help improve our understanding of Thailand, and Andrew and Nich’s contribution is clearly not as self-hyped as mine but should not be underestimated. I am sure they will comment when they are ready to do so, and whether their views on my story are positive, negative or mixed, I have no doubt they will contribute to the debate in a useful way.
Quality comment or not?
15 
1
Correction: I have taken the cables off my front page. You can find the new ones, and soon ALL cables, here: http://www.zenjournalist.com/category/cables/
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
“Andrew Marshall”:
Thank you very much
I have also just read your article “In memory of Hiro Muramoto”, which i found shocking/disturbing/enlightening, and incredibly important.
This article somehow seems to go under a bit in the Wikileaks discussion, and has to be highlighted here as well. I am blown away by this article, and the politics involved.
What is it with Thailand? Why does Thailand invoke such emotions even under us journalists, and why is Thailand treated differently than any other country when it comes down to reporting facts, or why is it permissible/excusable to omit so much of what we should report about? Why are we so scared?
Why do even global news agencies like Reuters behave this way?
Why is it seen so problematic even by many of us foreign journalists in Thailand to be uncomfortable? Isn’t that what we are supposed to be in the first place, regardless where we work? Why should this not be so in Thailand as well? What is it that makes Thailand so special?
I have been working/living here 18 years now, and i still don’t get it.
Anyhow – thank you for being uncomfortable
Quality comment or not?
31 
2
Nick Nostitz, what do you mean “out to lunch” regarding Prachatai’s foreign funding?
It is right on the official US National Endowment for Democracy website….
http://ned.org/where-we-work/asia/thailand
They get paid 1.5 million baht by the US government. Period. What’s worse is that Prachatai doesn’t disclose the fact that they receive money from a foreign government on their website, and instead claim to be “independent,” while they plea for donations and play the victim when the Thai government shakes them down. Seems they even have you fooled. Last time I checked, taking money from a foreign government to undermine your own was treason.
Furthermore, if you look at the Endowment’s Board of Directors you will find people like Francis Fukuyama, Zalmay Khalilzad, Frank Carlucci (2002), Will Marshall, and Vin Weber. These are not men interested in independent journalism, democracy, or human rights. In fact they are some of the best examples on earth of those working against such ideals.
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/02/neo-cons-for-human-rights.html
I don’t expect an apology, and I don’t even particularly blame you for not looking into it. Yes it does sound crazy that Prachatai is receiving money directly from the planet’s most notorious cabal of war criminals. It also happens to be the truth. Apparently you spent some time with them and they gained, and betrayed your trust. Please realize, that out of everyone posting here, and at Prachatai, I am the only one presenting REAL verifiable evidence. Not dubious “cables” depending on the word of equally dubious diplomats. At least do me the favor of reexamining my other “conspiracy theories,” you may just yet really “revolutionize” your understanding of Thailand and the world.
Quality comment or not?
6 
17
Last week I started to read Part I of Andrew M’s paper and thought I would not need to print it. But IT access probeelms have changed my mind and I have now printed out Parts I and II.
I congratulate AMM on the time and effort he has taken. If I could suggest something, it is that the work would impress more if he wrote more narrative and comment rather than quoting chunks of Handley/ Stevenson etc.
That being said, I look forward to reading Parts III and IV, and the book that I hope will be forthcoming. Of course it will be banned in Thailand. And he is probably on the blacklist already, so no more holidays in Phuket. He deserves the support and encouragement of all of us, for making the sacrifices that he has in the interests of freedom of expression.
Quality comment or not?
5 
0
I’ve ready both parts and so far I don’t find anything surprising but am pleasantly surprised that I was not the only one who thought the same of the situation at the time the cables were written. The only problem is I am like you and like the people who have written the cables a foreigner, and as Thais always remind me, I am not a Thai. Like you mentioned in your interview the love that Thai people have for their King is genuine. He is only king that 80% of the popluation know this is a concept that is alien to all foreigners and it cannot be compared to anywhere else. My view, like the view of Thailand like many other foreigners is skewed and it fails the moral litmus test time and time again. The only conclusion I can reach is that its just the way business and transactions have been done for hundreds of years and it won’t and cannot change. That being said I learnt a long time ago that Thais as a nation and people have excellent survival instincts and as difficult as the challenges may be I do believe that the country will somehow find its way out of its current morass.
Quality comment or not?
1 
4
RE: Nick # 96
I remember some time ago I read an academic article complaining that the anthropological studies done in Thailand largely ignored the negative sides of village life like the roles of the nak laengs in favor of endless reports on merit making ceremonies. The argument went that foreigners were co-opted by the Thai friendly, sabaay, sanouk culture and turned a blind eye to the darker side of village life.
Also, for all the frustrations, long time foreign residents of Thailand want to either live here or at least return. There may be some paranoia involved.
There is also the question of being published. I have found these online discussions very helpful. The web has enabled me to see more truthful and honest analysis than has ever been possible previously.
Thank you all for your contributions.
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
Nick Nostitz, Andrew Marshall
Yes it was terrible what happened to Hiro.
I was curious about what you both think about the death of Fabio Polenghi, another foreign journalist who died in equally dubious circumstances. His death seems to almost have been forgotten by most commentators.
Any thoughts?
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
Vichai N: The sad thing is that every side in thailand has done the same thing, the monarchy, the military (whatever faction), the police, the political parties. The lottery has always been seen as something to raid (remember, for instance, the 999 lottery miracle? Where did that come from?) and police bagmen, what’s new? people on every side are and have long been impervious to the law
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
May I put my five cents in about ‘Love” to the King?
Khun Domo mentioned that many Thais genuinely love the King. But I tend to believe (after I have seen the acts of many Thais who claim they ‘love’ the King) that ‘love’ isn’t really an appropriate word. I rather find it to be ‘fanaticism’. “Love” tends to be a positive feeling towards each other, while the person who has this positive feeling still retains a certain level of objectivity. For example, a mother may love her child. But she will be objective enough to tell her child off if her child behaves badly. She will warn her child to be more diligent if he is lazy at school. This is because she is objective enough to know what what her child is doing is wrong, and her criticism towards her child is done for the purpose that her child will become a better person.
However, ‘fanaticism’ signifies an extremely irrational positive feeling, just like one may have to a superstar who receives a lot of promotions. One will cry when they see the person they are fanatical to. They will not tolerate any criticism about that person. They are ready to harm anyone who criticises the person they are fanatical to.
I believe that the feelings most Thais have to the King is not love but fanaticism. They cry when they see him on TV. They cannot stand any criticism of him. They will expose anyone who criticises him, report those people to police, so that those people will be jailed. They are ready to inflict violence towards people who criticise, or speak negatively of him. They will do anything to hide the bad information about him, even if they know that it is true, because they do not want others to know about it.
I believe this is not love, but it is fanaticism of an extreme kind. So the feelings that the elites put into the Thais’ minds is not love, but it is fanaticism. And this is very dangerous, because fanaticism equals irrationality.
Quality comment or not?
28 
5
What CT (#103) is describing is not “love, respect and admiration” but a Personality Cult, similar to the one in North Korea around the “Dear Leader”.
Quality comment or not?
14 
0
#101: I wrote extensively about Fabio Polenghi and the unanswered questions here: http://blogs.reuters.com/andrew-marshall/2011/02/13/reclaiming-the-truth-in-thailand/
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
“Tony” #97 is somebody with a fake identity getting paid to undermine #thaistory, Prachatai etc. He is also very active on Twitter. As I have said on this forum, I welcome informed debate, but not his mad rants. They are however, highly entertaining for his inept attempts to pretend to be a left-wing anti-U.S. activist and if you read his posts with that in mind, you can have a lot of fun. Enjoy.
Quality comment or not?
24 
3
CT 103′
Without getting overly Freudian I think you have made an incorrect comparison. The monarchy has the love demanded/expected/required of a child by it’s parent and not the other way round. A child is not expected to criticize it’s parent.
This is a given in most Asian societies
However a good parent should also exercise tolerance and understanding. My children sometimes criticize me sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly, it’s part of growing up and learning to think for themselves. Excessively punitive behavior will only diminish the child and it’s ability to function when the parent is no longer around to take care of it…..
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
@Billy,
I can see your point. However, I never intended to use the mother example to be a comparison to the ‘feeling’ (I won’t use the word ‘love’, as I do not believe that it is the right word) most Thai people have to the King. I merely wish to make an example of the meaning of the word ‘love’, and the mother’s feeling to a child seems to be a good example. I never intended to draw any analogy. And yes, I agree with you, that had I intended to use that mother example as an analogy, it would not be a scenario where you can reason by analogy seamlessly.
My point is that Thai people’s feelings to the King is not love but fanaticism, very similar to Raymond’s (#104) example of the feelings which brainwashed North Koreans have to Kim Jong-Il or Kim Il-Sung. And I cannot stress out how dangerous it is for the elites to indoctrinate this kind of feeling into Thai people’s heads by daily propaganda. People who are fanatical are usually incapable to argue with reasons. Instead, they usually choose to be rude and resort to personal attacks, or worse, they resort to violence to silence their opposition.
I also would like to comment about this sentence of yours: “the monarchy has the love demanded/expected/required of a child”. I can tell you right now that Thai people usually only love the King and respect Princess Sirindhorn, but I would not say that most of them actually “love the Monarchy”. Talk to any Thai you meet in Thailand. Most of them will say, “I love the King, and I respect his daughter Pra-Thep (sirindhorn)”…then they will go on to say different things about other royals.
That’s what I have heard when I speak to other Thais about this matter. Most of them cannot distinguish that the King and the Monarchy are two different identities. Have the King abdicate today and let someone else take over the throne, then ask Thai people if they still love the Monarchy. Then you might get a more objective answer.
Now,
“A child is not expected to criticize it’s parent.”-well, it is a tradition, I agree. But then this is when the parent raises the child, feeds the child, gives the child shelter, pays for the child’s living. Does the Thai Monarchy raise or feed its citizens at its own expenses? Does the Monarchy give its citizens free shelter, or pay for their living expenses? You know the answer; it is a no. In fact it is another way around. So who is not supposed to criticize who in this situation?
“However a good parent should also exercise tolerance and understanding”
Assuming that the Royals are ‘parents’ like you claim, then I wholeheartedly agree. Ironically, any ‘child’ who dares to do this in Thailand becomes exposed, alienated, exposed to threats (both mental and physical), and in the worst case, jailed. So are they good parents then?
Just my two cents though. No offense intended
Quality comment or not?
11 
2
“Tony”:
No, asking for a grant in a grant program which gives grants specifically to non-governmental groups is not treason, but normal procedure, and very transparent – no cloak and dagger stuff as you imply here (on their website they have a page how to apply for grants, unfortunately not available for individual journalists as i could very well do with some funding). There are many grants by many foundations available for a multitude of purposes – be they art grants, journalism grants, science grants, etc.
From year to year Prachatai barely manages to cover operating costs. No, they did not “betray my trust”. No, Prachatai does not “undermine” their government – Prachatai is a highly respected alternative news source. Critical journalism is uncomfortable, but to label that as “undermining their government” is an extremely totalitarian point of view.
It is quite laughable to state that you present “REAL verifiable evidence” – even you yourself are not verifiable. The only thing i read from you is tinfoil hat gobbledegook.
Quality comment or not?
21 
1
“Dead Journalist”:
The day Fabio was killed, i made the decision not to be in the Red Shirt camp, but to be behind the military. My primary objective that day was to survive. I knew that the final assault by the military will mean an overwhelming amount of gunfire into the Red Shirt camp before crossing the barricade, of which i did not want to be on the receiving end (again). But i also remained well behind the military when they crossed the barricade as i knew that the barricade was mined, and only crossed when i was sure that the explosives did not blow.
I believe that working in Rajadamri Road behind the Saladaeng barricade was insanely dangerous, no side alleys, no cover, and a looong way to some sort of safety. From the barricade up to Sarasin intersection i would have potentially been under fire from several directions – Silom, Lumpini Park, Snipers at Chula Hospital, and from the BTS tracks, without any available cover. I knew that the military would not keep the rules of engagement and only aim at armed militants, but shoot at everything that moves, as i have seen on numerous occasions the preceding days. I knew that in order to get good images from that location i would have had to take a gamble i was not willing to take.
I and several of my colleagues still got into the shit though when militants lobbed a round of M79 grenades at the military when we reached the Sarasin/Rajadamri intersection (where Chandler was hit), but at least there was cover.
Fabio made a different decision. He died.
Quality comment or not?
15 
0
Nick Nostitz
Do you have anything to add to Andrew’s very brief comment on the death of Fabio Polenghi?
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
@ Seh Fah:
The 2nd Infantry refer to *themselves* as the Queen’s Guard in English. They’ve even got it on the sign at the main gate of the military base in Chong Mek (near the Laos border.)
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
@Nick Noztitz “I knew the barricade was mined,and only crossed when I was sure the explosives did not blow.”……..Nick can you tell me what kind of “explosives” were being used.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
“Darren Nelson”:
The Saladaeng barricade had C4 explosives. The other barricades had fertilizer based bombs in fire-extinguishers.
“Dead journalist”:
Nothing to add really. What else shall i say? It is terrible that he died. He made a decision that i did not make, and would not have.
In my opinion many of us journalists (and all these people running around with their little tourist cameras) during last year’s mess made some very wrong calls, and underestimated the dangers. Some were outright callous. And some had to pay a very high price (I had my own wake-up call on May 15 …).
There are endless contributing factors for this. One is definitely the nature of the business, which is in constant demand for the closest action shots, if possible transmitted to the clients within minutes after the action took place and resulting in enormous competition. Less important is in depth knowledge, but regular delivery of hard images from wherever action takes place. Photographers specialized in conflict, or hoping to make their name in this business, go to conflict zones all over the place, without often having any idea whatsoever about the details, language or particulars. It’s not a nice business. A photographer dies, big news for a few days, and then it’s back to normal, and he/she is only remembered by family and a few close friends, while the conflicts continue to take their course.
Don’t forget, another young and very nice photojournalist who has been taking images during last year’s mess here in Bangkok died in Tunesia – EPA photographer Lucas Dolega.
Quality comment or not?
11 
0
“Darren Nelson”:
And to be impartial and unbiased here – mining barricades in this conflict here in Thailand is quite normal – the PAD in 2008 also mined their barricades around government house against a possible police assault.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
John Snitizen # 112:
Perhaps you could do me small favour. When next you pass by the main gate of the Kong Phon Thahan Rap Thi 2 Raksa Phra Ong (2nd Infantry Division, Royal Guards) base camp in Chong Mek, please stop and ask the sentry exactly which part of the Thai version of the unit title says “Queen’s Guard”. And please take a photograph (sorry, capture an image – I’m a little old fashioned) and post it on this site.
I am beginning to suspect a “fool the farang” plot. Consider the following facts (and we all work with facts, don’t we?):
1. The official Thai version of Royal Thai Army is Kong Thap Bok Thai, the correct translation of which is simply Thai Army. Not Royal Thai Army.
2. The Royal Thai Navy used to call itself the Ratcha Nawi, which means Royal Navy in English. But then they started calling themselves the Kong Thap Ruea Thai, the correct translation of which is simply Thai Navy. They actually dropped the word which meant “royal”. Wouldn’t that constitute lese majeste?
3. The first Thai combat unit to be deployed to South Vietnam called itself the Krom Thahan Asasamak Jong Ang Suek in Thai and the Queen’s Cobra Regiment in English, although the correct translation was King Cobra Volunteer Regiment. A “jong ang” is a king cobra.
What is going on? Surely accurate translation from Thai into English is not all that difficult. Or does “prachathipatai” actually mean “win the election and then establish a dictatorship by dismantling all the checks and balances democracy requires”, or perhaps “the dictatorship of the privileged elite”, rather than “democracy”?
Oh well, back to my Mary Haas Thai-English Student’s Dictionary.
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
OK thanks Nick, it is just that I watched a BBC report just before the crackdown,with Alistair Leithead. It went something like this….”But hidden between the bamboo there are high explosives..” Well I realise that fertilizer bombs are lethal.At the time I thought the redshirts had just loaded the barricades with gas bottles primed.I think the point I’m trying to make is “public perception” on news reporting.You say the word “explosives” and one immediately think of a terrorist action or someone in possesion of a restricted substance.If you say the protestors improvised gas canisters and fertilizer as weapons it takes a completely different sense of what is really happening.Having explosive material like TNT or similar would indicate something entirely different compared to using legal “over the counter” material.I hope you understand what I’m trying to say,and it may sound silly to some,but you know,in a court of law the Redshirts could say,hey we were only planning a BBQ with the gas bottles. (By the way what is C4 ?)
Quality comment or not?
1 
1
“Darren Nelson”:
C4 is not legal over the counter mixed up into something nasty. It is a plastic explosive.
If they would have blown the bombs, also the fertilizer based bombs – the final death toll would have been considerably higher, especially at Saladaeng, where there were countless soldiers, and journalists eager to photograph and film the military crossing the barricade. Some photographers even managed to cross before the soldiers, which i think shows a plain insane disregard for one’s own life.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
OK “C4″ …http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-4_(explosive) Well I know in Thailand that its easy to get hold of anything legal or illegal, including explosives.But anyway the explosives didn’t detonate.Not a proffesional job in that case ? …but back to the BBC report I mentioned.Alistair Leithead said before mentioning the “high explosives” words to the effect that “this was all being stirred” from outside the country by Thaksin”….Well we now know(the general public that is) due to Andrews #thaistory that Mr Thaksin isn’t the only stirrer,but Queen Sirikit and many others are tottally immersed in this conflict.If only the BBC had the guts to tell us this in the first place.
Quality comment or not?
9 
1
(Darren Nelson, #117) I also saw that BBC report, though I’m pretty sure the reporter was Rachel Harvey. I was surprised it didn’t cause much comment at the time. It was filmed from the Red Shirt side of the barricades and showed cables running to some objects inside the barricade, said to be bombs. Has anyone ever explained what happened to these objects? Nothing big exploded when the troops pushed through, and they didn’t even seem to be taking major precautions. Was it all a bluff?
Quality comment or not?
5 
0
Can anyone imagine a BBC correspondent saying as glibly as Alistair did “and this is all being stirred by Queen Sirikit”……can you ?
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
“Snipers at Chula hospital”
That was a concern of redshirts, and quite a fuss was made over their purportedly clumsy attempt to find out about them.
Has there been any further information come out about the use of Chula hospital by the military?
Quality comment or not?
9 
1
On the question of love or fanaticism raised by CT:
Despite his many failings, St. Paul did give us a pretty good definition of love which may be worth considering in this context.
“Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. ” (1 Corinthians 13: 4-7)
Quality comment or not?
8 
2
“Darren Nelson”, “superanonymous”:
I don’t want to go too deep into this issue of why the explosives did not go up right now, it would need more context. But they were real explosives.
“Nganadeeleg”:
It is quite clear that there were soldiers in Chula, Matichon published photos of some in the parking lot. My own sources are quite clear about this as well.
Nevertheless – the search by Red Shirt guards was an incredible idiocy.
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
Nick, let’s see what happened here.
First I stated the fact that Prachatai is funded by the US government via the notoriously dubious Neo-Con lined National Endowment for Democracy. You claimed that was not true, stating that making such claims was “out to lunch.” Now that Prachatai was forced to admit it, you are back peddling and making excuses as to why it is harmless for them to take money from such a despicable organization.
Between you and Walker, you both have true contempt for objective, fact-based debate and instead myopically fixate on my identity and credentials in an attempt to deflect the reality that I was factually right, and you were fanatically wrong. These are not the issues, because I am not making statements that depend on my character, history, or credentials – unlike Marshall and his entire Thai Story – I am making statements based on irrefutable evidence ANYBODY interested in the truth can obtain.
Exhibit A: Prachatai’s NED funding:
http://ned.org/where-we-work/asia/thailand
Exhibit B: Thaksin’s lobbying registrations taken directly from the public US Senate disclosure database:
Edelman: http://www.fara.gov/docs/3634-Exhibit-AB-20070125-4.pdf
Baker Botts: http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/pdfform.aspx?id=200059128
BGR: http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=getFilingDetails&filingID=1AA1A98A-2494-44E5-A5CB-F658EB445C4B
Amsterdam (as if this could be contested): http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/pdfform.aspx?id=300322917
The point being that between NED’s board of directors, Freedom House’s inclusion of Kenneth Adelman, Thaksin’s former lobbyist under Edelman, James Baker, and Robert Blackwill, you see a concerted effort by a cabal of notorious Neo-Cons and big business interests aligning behind Thaksin and his movement to destabilize and over throw Thailand just like they have admitted to doing in Egypt and Tunisia, and are attempting to do else where. If you’d like to call such a statement “tinfoil gobbledygook” please read New York Times’ “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings” where a full admission to all of this is given.
If you think that’s great, that’s fine, but people have a right to know the truth about who is really behind this, who is really funding Prachatai, and to what end they are really working for. Let them decide for themselves if a foreign funded color revolution, for which NED is notorious for, is how they want to end their country’s national sovereignty and have US Senators escorting Fortune 500 elitists through Bangkok’s streets when its over so they can strip mine the nation.
As for Walker’s comments that I am “ranting,” I would like to remind him once again, that out of everyone here, I am the only one posting verifiable, documented evidence, while the rest of you sycophantically grovel at Marshall’s feet and hail his collection of unsubstantiated and already public cables, as revolutionary truth. That being said, Walker’s supposed justification for not carrying my comments (his right to do so) is tenuous at best, and it is much more likely he either knows full well what it is he is participating in, or is suffering from severe cognitive dissonance.
Quality comment or not?
4 
13
#106 Walker [NF: Don't you mean Marshall?], that’s quite an accusation you just made against me. And as usually, like most of what you cover on your site, completely baseless and tragically divorced from reality.
However, Prachatai is on record funded by the US government and that completely undermines their objectivity and their claims of being “independent.” The fact that they haven’t disclosed it, and many people trying to defend them are still unaware that it is true, is proof of how disingenuous they really are.
Pointing that out is not an attempt to “undermine them” rather expose who they really are, and where they get their money. Transparency, honesty, openness, and truth. Why should I have to point it out at all? Why isn’t it on their own website? If it’s no big deal like you seem to believe, why have they hidden it all this time?
What my “credentials” are or who I am is irrelevant. Nothing I say depends on my credibility, the facts speak for themselves. For instance, what level of credibility do I need to point out NED.org’s page featuring Prachatai’s funding?
http://ned.org/where-we-work/asia/thailand
I think no more credibility than I’d need to point out that the sky is blue.
And what amount of credibility do I need to point out that this isn’t on their website? It is self-evident. Walker [NF: Again, don't you mean Marshall?], I appreciate the strawman you are trying to build up here, but the facts are the facts, and they dwarf you and your efforts to obfuscate them. I also appreciate the myriad of excuses you use to cover up arguments you are incapable of dealing with.
Be careful with how obnoxious and arrogant you are, and how quick you are to dismiss me and my work. Some of your readers might actually be interested in challenging their beliefs and expanding their understanding of the world.
Quality comment or not?
5 
16
Tony 125
“a concerted effort by a cabal of notorious Neo-Cons and big business interests aligning behind Thaksin and his movement to destabilize and over throw Thailand”
As you say this information is in the public domain and comes as no real surprise. All entrepreneurial parties in Thailand have been in the BMW/Big Mac import business for 60 years now. Thanks for the documentation though. Thaksins lobbying activities in the west and his business links are well known. Andrew Marshalls compilations are more controversial because they are not to be openly discussed in polite society. It comes as no surprise that foreign investors want liberalization of Thai markets. Whether Thaksin can tease that away from nationalist xenophobia remains to be seen.
A growing middle class increasingly wants to have it’s Big Mac and eat it too. Time will tell if this is a healthy choice or if they should stick to the diet prescribed by their elders and betters. Like it or not this is modern democracy-freedom of choice.
My personal experience however is that many Thais although espousing freedom of choice often do not like to live with the consequences of their decisions and expect “Father” to make everything right again.
I expect it will be some time before this cultural mind set matures to catch up with political evolution.
Quality comment or not?
6 
1
Tony, I love your parodies. Classic Not-The-Nation stuff (with the nice stylistic flourish of getting your Andrews mixed up, as if you are writing in a fit of passion). Very clever critique of the anti-globalist position. Be careful, however, as sometimes irony doesn’t translate well (as I have discovered several times) and some readers may think you are serious. But, rest assured, I don’t. AW
Quality comment or not?
15 
2
Over at Prachatai, where Tony has posted his comment on evil, foreign scum funding that organization, a contributor had this comment, worth repeating here:
…$55,000 seems a drop when compared to the billions upon billions that the US has handed over to the Thai military and to arms of the Thai state that repress and torture. A recent example has been the training of Army snipers by US Marines. Why is that okay and considered valid while Prachatai is condemned for… providing information that is censored from much of the mainstream media? Isn’t there just a little too much ideological inconsistency and lack of weight and judgement in this so-called conspiracy of scum and traitors?
Quality comment or not?
14 
1
Just to update you on the publication schedule, Part 3 will be published July 5 and Part 4 on July 11. Unlike previous self-imposed deadlines which I then spectacularly missed, these are designed to give me time to do the work properly and also eat and sleep. In the meantime, for those who have not seen it, I have summarized key insights from the cables in Foreign Policy magazine: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/06/29/red_shirts_and_rowdy_royals I’m not thrilled about the headline they gave it, but the story is rather shorter than the Mahabarata-length #thaistory and has hyperlinks to a number of cables.
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
#128 try dealing with the facts that I presented. Attacking me personally belittles not just yourself as an intellectual, but everyone with a doctorate.
Fact is Prachatai is funded by the US government via a very notorious organization, NED known for engineering political destabilizations and regime change – in the interest of its big-business tied board members.
http://ned.org/where-we-work/asia/thailand
http://ned.org/about/board
Francis Fukuyama, Zalmay Khalilzad, Frank Carlucci (2002), Will Marshall, and Vin Weber? You don’t understand what’s wrong with taking money from people like this? This is satire? This is a fact you mean, a fact you can’t deal with so you call it satire. For the people being duped by NED and the outfits like Prachatai who perpetuate their nefarious agendas, it’s not “satire,” it is misleading and disingenuous and damaging.
Again, Prachatai doesn’t post this info on their site, because they do seem to have something to hide.
Freedom House, who Prachatai dutifully reports on often, is also lined with similar people who’s ideals are less than conducive with the stated purpose of both NED and Freedom House.
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=10
Kenneth Adelman (former Thaksin lobbyist), Max M. Kampelman, Donald Rumsfeld (formally), Paula Dobriansky, Leonard Sussman, and Ellen Bork? These are people genuinely interested in “freedom” and “human rights?” You mean when they aren’t covering up atrocities in Iraqi and Cuban prisons? Or conducting rendition flights in their fraudulent “war on terror?”
These very same people, through their own private lobbying firms, Edelman, Baker Botts, Amsterdam & Peroff, Kobre & Kim, BGR, are propping up Thaksin Shinawatra, on record, along with his disingenuous, self-serving “red shirt” movement. Yes, it is HIS movement.
So go on Marshall/Walker, the two of you belittle the professions you undertake when you shrink from facts and instead attack the messenger. You accuse me of being “paid” and of having dubious credentials. My message, as I’ve said before, is self-evident. I challenge you to research it first, then comment on the facts, not my personality, not what the Thai army is also doing (a tactic we’ve all learned in the 5th grade), but why Prachatai and Thaksin are receiving aid from this nefarious cabal of foreign business interests and how we should perceive it as anything other than treason and neo-colonialism….
If I truly believed the Thai military was taking this money, and carrying out the West’s agenda, I would most certainly cover it. I have not seen any credible evidence of this, instead it seems very similar to Pakistan where the money is given in hopes that someone will at the right moment turn toward the US.
I suggest, Mr. Walker, you put down Marhsall’s unsubstantiated cables, and pick up Brookings Institution’s signed confession titled, “Which Path to Persia?” and see how very real this all is.
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/05/which-path-to-persia-redux.html
Read it and prove me wrong – prove that you can be objective, and bury your pride and face the facts. On this, I would enjoy thoroughly being wrong.
Quality comment or not?
3 
14
“Tony”:
Actually, no, i have never doubted that Prachatai received a grant from this foundation. I also know that it received a grant from another German foundation.
What is out for lunch is your tinfoil hat speculation that it all is part of “concerted effort by a cabal of notorious Neo-Cons”. Laughable.
Do you know that Prachatai has actually been founded as a critical news website during Thaksin’s government to counter Thaksin’s pressure against the media?
Do you understand/know that the amount of money you are so fixated upon is less than the operating cost for a month of a half decent magazine here (excluding printing costs), and Prachatai has to stretch such sums for a lot longer?
If a “Neo-con cabal” is so poor that they have just 1.5 Million Baht left over for Thailand’s most important critical news website, than the last thing we all need to be scared off is that cabal. Do you understand this? A revolution needs a whole lot more money. And Prachatai could do with a whole lot more money – not to start a revolution, but to simply report news.
Keep on ranting, it is amusing indeed.
Quality comment or not?
19 
1
Andrew M Marshall,
The ‘Foreign Policy’ article is a terrific distillation of your recent extended essays. Reading some of the sentences on paper (or online) – of things we all know, but have never been able to see written before – is frankly, jaw-dropping. My own view is that it will probably be these kinds of articles that have a more profound impact than the longer pieces.
Out of interest, do you think Reuters would have published the Foreign Policy piece? If not, does this disappoint you or have you sufficiently rationalised it?
Terrific work.
Quality comment or not?
8 
1
Have just read cable 07BANGKOK5738 and items 7/8 on succession planning are quite revelatory for me in my ignorance.
It seems that at the very highest levels of power and influence any discussions of mortality are believed to be unpropitious to put it mildly and are therefore uncountenanced.
This would explain what so many fahrangs (inc Paul Handley) do not fully understand. If Tej Bunnags highly confidential request is to be accepted and understood at face value it behoves us to try to understand this cultural mindset.
That said; it is interesting that 65 years ago Prince Dhani could lecture on Malinowski’s socio-anthropological viewpoint :
‘‘A society which makes its tradition sacred has gained by it inestimable advantage of power and permanence. Such beliefs and practices, therefore, which put a halo of sanctity round tradition, will have a ‘survival value’ for the type of civilization in which they
have been evolved. . . . They were bought at an extravagant price, and are to be maintained at any cost.’’
Yet, in this modern age the court would appear to have reverted to what some would call primitive superstition.
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
“Grey Area” #9: Belated kudos for a great comment on Thanong. I enjoyed it a great deal.
“Ryan” #133: I don’t really want to get into a slanging match with Reuters as I think it is a sideshow that distracts from the important issues. I don’t think they would have felt able even to publish my Foreign Policy piece, but I would have welcomed the chance to discuss it with them; instead they refused to publish anything and refused to discuss further without even seeing a proper draft of what I proposed.
One other interesting thing is that the day after my article on Hiro Muramoto was written [http://www.zenjournalist.com/2011/06/in-memory-of-hiro-muramoto/] the Asia editor, who was largely responsible for refusing to consider publication of #thaistory without seeing it, and also for many of the missteps in the debacle over Hiro, was demoted and replaced. I have no idea the extent to which these events are connected, but I am pretty sure they are not entirely unconnected.
Quality comment or not?
15 
0
Nick Nostitz re #124
“an incredible idiocy”
What were they supposed to do? Wait for the Chula army snipers to start killing them?
It was a bad PR move, granted, but if you had your peoples’ brains being splattered over the sidewalk what would you do? Wait for the press to show up and save you?
The full story of Chula has yet to be told – that that hospital’s PAD supporting managers likely allowed Thai Army snipers to be stationed there.
Quality comment or not?
10 
3
Andrew Marshall – 130
Andrew I understand much of what you are saying and even agree with some of it, but my disagreement with both you and others is that you give Thailand a binary choice of the bad old elite with the monarchy or a bright new future with the election of a pro-Thaksin government. Now is that the only choice? As you say yourself in the FP article:
Thaksin won overwhelming electoral mandates in 2001 and 2005, and he imposed his authoritarian “CEO style of management” on the country. He was deeply corrupt and had little time for democracy…
Thaksin has already taken a position over the succession issue, although I suspect quite a few of his supporters in Isaan don’t realize what that is. So how much choice is in offer? The old elite or new elite seems to be it.
Yet maybe that’s not all that’s there. I suspect that nobody would claim Abhisit, Chuan or even Apirak are awe-inspiring figures. They certainly don’t seem to have the strength, self-confidence or certainty that people like Thaksin have.
Yet one has to struggle to call them evil or corrupt and they seem to muddle through. Maybe we can also throw in those good men who are regarded as having a more altruistic outlook like Anand and Meechai (the population control one).
So maybe the answer isn’t just a choice of this evil or that evil. I hate to sound like Tony Blair, but maybe in this case there actually is a third way. The great thing about the cables is that they remind us of the evils in the other two ways.
Quality comment or not?
6 
3
Les: It may be futile concentrating on the Palace or the Parliament where selfish money interests dominate so look elsewhere to the sleeping power of workers and students as this brief interview suggests:
http://ourchiangmai.com/blog/2011/06/29/noam-chomsky-the-optimist/
In the Thai context the progressive sections on the constitution which arose in the 1997 People’s Constution, thanks in part to “good man” Anand P, and survived the post coup rewrite lie like a sleeping dog waiting to bite a foolhardy Napoleon:
http://ourchiangmai.com/blog/2011/02/22/%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%98%E0%B8%B4%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%82%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%82%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%A5/
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Les: Those names you listed are all part of the ‘bad old elite’ and we already know what it’s like with them in control.
Quality comment or not?
4 
2
Nganadeeleg – 139
Just one suggestion. Read the cables. Andrew Marshall has placed them at the link below.
http://thaicables.wordpress.com/
I can still access them on TOT so hopefully they are not blocked.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Tony,
Thanks for the entertainment. And thanks Andrew Walker for letting his rants get through the firewall. These discussion threads can get dry at times.
Allow me as a US citizen to help clarify American foreign policy. Tony, I don’t have enough time and space to discuss your argument at length that the US government, behind $50k, is planning to take over Thailand. No entity in the world has invested more in the status quo in Thailand than the US government. We threw hundreds of millions of dollars building the Thai military, infrastructure, and promotion of the monarchy as a bulwark against Communism during the Cold War. We didn’t try to colonize Thailand like England and France. We forgave Thailand after WW II stopping the British from punishing them. Thais love the US for these reasons, and we love Thailand because it was a domino that didn’t fall in SE Asia. You must look at the relationship between the US and Thailand within the context of a long history. The last thing the US would want would be an unstable Thailand. The US government looks at Thailand as a developing democracy, far from perfect, but a hell of a lot better than many, many, other developing countries in the world.
You bang on about neocons, but what you don’t understand, and I just don’t know why, is that the main controversy about the neocons is the preponderance of Jewish neocons (Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz) and their involvement in the run up to the Iraq War with many criticizing them as pushing America into a war because of interests of Israel, not the United States. It isn’t only the Jewish neocons that have been a problem, we can throw in the Christian Zionists and corporate America, particularly big oil, into the mix creating quite a toxic foreign policy cocktail. Would it make sense that the US government would be working in countries like Libya and Syria to subvert radical Islam under the guise of democracy? Yes. Pressure from the Israel lobby, oil interests, and the threat of some nutcase Muslim radical sending a nuclear bomb all play a role in US foreign policy. The other major concerns are North Korea and the influence of China.
This is why your rants about $50k for Prachatai are so amusing. You just have no idea, no common sense, about American foreign policy. Thailand is the least of our concerns!
And BTW this NED is NOT the US government, but a private organization.
I visited your website and couldn’t find any biography showing your credentials. I think it would be a good idea to reveal them if you continue to speak about credibility.
Quality comment or not?
16 
3
Nganadeeleg #122
Re snipers at Chula Hospital. Not long after 19 May 2010, I visited a office on one of the higher floors of the Abdul Rahim building. The security officer showed me how a round had come through every window all along the north side of the building on that floor. The rounds had come through sometime between 13 May, after the office had been closed for security reasons, and 19 May. I assumed that these rounds were fired by red-shirt supporters in the park, perhaps during the shooting directed toward the Dusit after Seh Deang was killed. Wrong.
Bullets holes in the walls in the interior of the office showed the trajectory of the rounds, which didn’t come from below. A corporate security expert from the US happened to be in the office that day; he didn’t follow Thai politics and hadn’t been in Bangkok during the Chula hospital “raid” controversy. He indicated that the rounds came from one of the Chula Hospital buildings. Moreover, the rounds were large caliber. It was also evident that the rounds had been carefully placed, one high up in each window along the length of the building, as if to discourage anyone who might be in the office from looking out the windows.
Quality comment or not?
11 
1
As far as the direction Thailand takes in the years ahead, I still say that the issue is not so much about who wins the election than how the red shirt movement transforms/evolves in the months/years ahead. There are plenty more chances for electoral victory whatever happens this time around. I’m looking long term.
Assuming the red shirts are here to stay -as they surely are- then, win or lose, will we see the movement slowly but surely marginalize Taksin and unite around policies, social themes and an agenda of equal opportunity for all, or will it remain as it is: a sort of popular one man cult.
It is perfectly possible to be a red shirt and anti Taksin at the same time. And that is the message I think more and more red shirts -a minority definitely- are trying to get across.
With the interests of Thailand at heart I would say that what the country needs is a red shirt win, a ditching of Taksin and identification of the movement with policies rather than a single deeply flawed personality. It would help, of course, if some young charismatic leader could step forth and take up the reigns. I have no idea who that could be. The leadership of the red shirts is a real put off.
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
Has anyone managed to download the Kindle-friendly version of these articles? Andrew tweeted about their availability but I can’t seem to get them downloaded.
Mariner #143: I completely agree, although I think the transition you envision will necessarily involve a longish period of more or less authoritarian rule by elected governments, i.e. Thaksin would have to be around for the foreseeable.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
@Mariner said: “It is perfectly possible to be a red shirt and anti Taksin at the same time. And that is the message I think more and more red shirts -a minority definitely- are trying to get across.
With the interests of Thailand at heart I would say that what the country needs is a red shirt win, a ditching of Taksin and identification of the movement with policies rather than a single deeply flawed personality.”
–
Count me in! I always think that the Red Shirts’ ideology are legitimate in itself that it seeks genuine democracy. In fact, I believe that if there is anything which can mar the red shirts’ legitimacy, that thing is actually Thaksin himself
I am one of the Reds who don’t vote for Thaksin. I am Red because I want democracy. I don’t like the ‘invisible hands’ to stand in the way of democracy, and I cannot stand them killing my fellow countrymen who dare to show ‘dissatisfaction’ for their unwarranted intervention!
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
Mariner – 143
It is perfectly possible to be a red shirt and anti Taksin at the same time. And that is the message I think more and more red shirts -a minority definitely- are trying to get across.
Possible? Possibly, but it’s a tightrope to walk down. On New Mandala I haven’t seen anyone do it very well. In the end they fall back to defending Thaksin, claiming double standards or saying that the other lot are just as bad.
I suspect the small minority that do take this line will be made very uncomfortable in a Thaksin run Thailand. Maybe even as far as a comparison with the German brown shirts in the 1930s.
Of course if Thaksin wasn’t there anymore it could all break down. Will the lucky lady become a new Eva? Will we have rock musicals about her? Stay tuned to New Mandala.
Quality comment or not?
5 
6
Les Abbey: To be fair, you don’t see people doing it very well mainly because you interpret just about any pro-red, pro-democracy sentiment as support of Thaksin.
Pointing out “double standards” and that the “other lot are just as bad” (or worse as I would suggest) does not constitute a defense of Thaksin; it’s just stating the facts.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
Sorry to break up this little fanclub but what new and original journalistic research did Andrew Marshall actually do?
Sure, he read some cables (which should’ve been put directly into the public domain), then a few books, and then regurgitated it all, but that’s it, surely?
His cliched “Thais all love the King” (no mention of the massive propaganda machine), “Thaksin is evil as are all political parties” (straight out of the PAD spin machine – and no, I don’t think AM is PAD, it’s just the analysis of a lightweight) and his failure, particularly in his FP piece, to really offer any insight whatsoever into the emergence of the Red Shirts, is hardly groundbreaking stuff.
In the final analysis, AM’s analysis is the same old same old, spun out over cables that should’ve been in the public domain from the outset (isn’t that what Bradley Manning went to prison for?). It focuses on the machinations of the Thai elite and the rumor mill of US Embassy staff as told, via over-dramatised self-promotion, by a Cambridge graduate based in Singapore.
It seems that the critical faculties of the people who run this blog have gone on the lamb in quite a tiresome display of almost teenagerish adulation.
Get a grip people – if only Somsak Jeam had been given these cables at the start!
[AW: some edits done on this comment, thus the delay.]
Quality comment or not?
6 
1
Today a Thai friend complained that having Yingluck in charge was effectively having Taksin, which may be true. Her complaint was about nepotism rather than Taksin the person. And so we discussed the role of nepotism in current Thai politics. My take is that the parties are the property of wealthy families battling it out to be tops at cleptocracy with clever front men like Taksin, Banharn, Newin. So to vote against a party because of nepotism likely just moves the vote to another similar mob.
The Red shirts are something different and sadly their ideology is not clearly progressive e.g. Rak Chiang Mai 51 attacking a Gay Pride march. Ji’s advice from exile is to join in with the Red Shirts and turn them into a truly progressive (left) force.
To defend themselves from the Brown Shirt analogy they need to follow up on their line of 2010 demanding that the guns be taken away from the army.
Quality comment or not?
2 
3
Emjay
I completely agree, although I think the transition you envision will necessarily involve a longish period of more or less authoritarian rule by elected governments, i.e. Thaksin would have to be around for the foreseeable.
I guess that’s walking into it with ‘eyes wide open’. My question is, why are you prepared to accept a a longish period of more or less authoritarian rule.
It was accepted in 2001 because many, myself included, thought that at last we have someone to fight corruption. How many times do we need to be proved wrong?
Still you are not alone. Both Maggie Thatcher and Tony Blair were elected three times in the UK and Ronald Reagan and GW Bush were elected twice in the US
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
c148
“The Red shirts are something different and sadly their ideology is not clearly progressive e.g. Rak Chiang Mai 51 attacking a Gay Pride march. Ji’s advice from exile is to join in with the Red Shirts and turn them into a truly progressive (left) force.”
Always puzzling (however often one sees it – and that’s very often) to see such a huge – and hugely diverse – amalgam of groups characterised by reference to the least representative examples. Do you seriously maintain that Ji is anything but way, way out on a far fringe? Imagining him in a discussion with average “reds” just prompts visions of them switching off en masse within very few minutes of him starting to talk.
As for CM51….. I have the misfortune to view that bunch up close. Quite what the causes are is difficult to gauge but it’s abundantly clear that their outlandish actions are anything but representative of the mainstream of what’s so broadly identified as “red”.
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
This may not seem to be related to this thread, but in a funny way, it is.
Your new banner “Thailand’s Choice”
May I say that I really LOVE its sense of humor. I mean … ahem… putting Thaksin’s and Yingluck’s pictures together.
But it’s debatable whether “Thaksin”, and not somebody else, should be pairing with “Yingluck ?
Quality comment or not?
11 
0
Despite reading the pre-trailing piece, parts 1 & 2 of Thai Story and the various articles, comments, tweets, radio interview etc. I am still struggling to understand Andrew MacGregor Marshall’s intentions and motivations.
I’m wondering what AMM’s presentation of the wikileaks in his story adds? They do not reveal anything new, substantiate anything really or greatly add to already known issues. Anyone who might be interested in reading his version of the story already knows and (sadly) those that don’t know aren’t interested.
For sure anyone who adds to the minimal writings on Thai politics is to be applauded by me, regardless of content. But the bare wikileaks themselves could have been flushed down the net generating such comment as they might support.
With respect, I don’t understand why he would sacrifice his career for the story he has presented.
While rough drafts I also don’t understand why any writer would publish any of the 4 parts until they are all ready. What is the urgency?
If as appears he’s rushing against self imposed deadlines (for whatever reason, why rush that for which you’ve walked away from your career?) that might explain the scattergun and at times aggravating lack of structure in the parts of the story already released.
Quality comment or not?
4 
4
Steve – 148
‘Do you seriously maintain that Ji is anything but way, way out on a far fringe? Imagining him in a discussion with average “reds” just prompts visions of them switching off en masse within very few minutes of him starting to talk.’
Hmm, no fan of Ji, but at one point in early 2009 he was up on the red stage addressing thousands of reds. I really don’t think too many of his views would be considered so outlandish by a lot of reds. His views on the monarchy aren’t much different from some red leaders (well, fringe leaders but with some popularity) like Surachai, in fact in a way he might be moderate than they are.
Ji’s agitprop style – which I must admit to finding simplistic – actually might appeal more to ‘ordinary’ (which is to say non-intellectual I suppose) red shirts than someone like Somsak Jeamteerasakul. Somsak seems to have a following (and quite some following I might add) amongst a more urbane overtly intellectual group than Ji attracts. Both groups have some crossover and I’m pretty much judging this pretty much by Facebook, which isn’t the best gauge. Obviously I don’t really know what your average red would think when confronted with Ji’s views but I’d actually be surprised if they were too shocked, and I think more people than you think would perhaps support Ji’s manifesto.
As for the RCM51 throwbacks, I think red leaders should’ve strongly condemned them for bringing red shirts as a whole into disrepute over something which is of absolutely no concern to the vast majority of red shirts. Gay pride parades are not a red shirt issue, red shirts are no more homophobic than the general population and there are many, many gay red shirts.
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
James Alex – 154
Gay pride parades are not a red shirt issue, red shirts are no more homophobic than the general population and there are many, many gay red shirts.
And yet James Alex where were these gay red shirts when the homophobic attacks outside Prem’s house were going on a couple of years back? Were they still in the closet?
Quality comment or not?
1 
2
LesAbbey – 155
When the UDD was protesting infront of Prem’s house (they weren’t wearing Red then) there were not as many diverse group of people in the UDD then comparing to what they are now. CM51 group was radical but if you follow the red a bit seriously, not trough the mainstream media anyway, you should’ve know that CM51 is pretty much dissolved and there are many more group formed afterward. This was because CM51 was too radical so many people just left the group. If you want to meet a gay red shirt I will gladly introduce you to some, the one that I know are very well off and actually are part of BKK elite societyl
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
James Alex – c154
I’m open to correction on this, but I doubt that Ji was in full unfettered anti-monarchy republican flow (as seen from him since) when on a “red stage addressing thousands of reds” in early 2009. It’s difficult to imagine expression of those views not triggering strong reactions from many quarters.
I certainly wish that the overall red leadership had come out unequivocally to at least distance themselves from and better actually condemn CM51′s bizarre “it’s not Lanna” anti-gay actions (actually it was mainly anti a march to promote HIV awareness that included a high proportion of gays). That said, I don’t find the lack of full-on condemnation all that surprising for such a diverse and still maturing movement that has so many leaders/co-leaders and is still struggling to achieve/maintain cohesion. I think it also fits in with a general Thai tendency to want to overlook many inconvenient realities.
Likewise, it just strikes me as patently absurd to expect that disparate gay red-shirts would somehow instantly coalesce in a concerted move to block homophobic references to Prem. The stark political reality is that there was/is such a scale of heartfelt resentment of Prem and all his works that it would take a brave (and perfect) soul to try and say “Oh, but we shouldn’t mention that this great upstanding medal-bedecked authority figure is actually an old queen”. Difficult to imagine that this element of opposing Prem would happen now in a politically more mature situation (e.g. in the west – at least the non-Catholic west), but not surprising here. It ain’t pretty and I dislike it – but it is reality.
That still-developing movements in such a fraught situation are not perfectly PC is hardly breaking news is it?
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
James Alex is right. Ji Ungkaporn is irrelevant. He is a lecturer with very strong socialist views (not necessarily anything wrong with that) who has hitched his wagon to the red-shirts. He will unhitch at a later date.
He is also a ‘dial a quote’ person for some sections of the foreign press who have not lived through the worst of a Thaksin government.
Of course there are red-shirts who do not support Thaksin, but the point is they are SILENT.
Similarly while the gay protests are a little irrelevant they are a reminder that the red shirts in the main do not have any political maturity, because the majority of their voters have not gone through a full education.
This is something foreigners in Thailand may learn to their cost. But its not about us.
Could end up a little bit Orwellian.
Quality comment or not?
3 
7
“LesAbbey”:
“And yet James Alex where were these gay red shirts when the homophobic attacks outside Prem’s house were going on a couple of years back? Were they still in the closet?”
That is all a bit of a strawman being built up here – CM51 protested against the gay march, therefore the Red Shirts must be a bigoted intolerant movement.
Sorry, but no.
I got many images of Katoey Red Shirts, some of them very active, others who join in on occasions. Also one of the most radical speakers on Daeng Siam stages (formerly part of the Saturday Group, and at Sanam Luang stages) is quite openly queer, and has since years excelled in insulting Prem along the gender lines, in most outrageous ways.
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
“Andrew D”:
“He is also a ‘dial a quote’ person for some sections of the foreign press who have not lived through the worst of a Thaksin government.”
A bit of a cryptic sentence. What does that mean, please?
This member of the foreign press here has lived through the worst of many successive governments here, but what “the worst” is for some, does not mean the same for others.
For many long time journos who have found their own little arrangements with the system Chuan was “the best”, status quo was nice, easy dinners with the elites, don’t rock the boat and have a ball. What a lifestyle.
For many Thai villagers and lower class urbanites it was “the worst” – great speeches at Bangkok’s microphones, yet no budgets trickled through to village level. Chuan 2 allowed drug economy to take over the communities, families destroyed, etc.
It is all a question of perspective, and in some ways the most irrelevant perspectives are sprouted in posh sub-urban elite Mu-Bans or Sukhumvit’s penthouses – lots of “full education” to be found there, and almost complete lack of common sense.
Quality comment or not?
7 
2
Nick Nostitz – 159
Nick I’m not quite sure what your defense of the homophobic attacks on Prem is. Is it if you are gay you are then allowed to make them?
Quality comment or not?
2 
1
c159
Nick….. correct about the “straw man” part – it has become an all-too-familiar gambit (along with all the innuendo and disingenuous/loaded questions) from some here.
Just one observation (seeing as PC is in the air): I think “queer” isn’t really considered acceptable except when used by someone who is openly gay – and usually in gay company. Rather like it being OK for blacks to say “nigger” in black company.
That quibble aside, it’s good to have your informed input on this – even though it won’t stop some from creatively using whatever stick they can find to poke into what they so plainly want to attack.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Jakrapop and Mingkwan has also been subject ridicule based their perceived sexual orientation. One side is not different than the other.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Laeh Hoyt – 163
Thank you, I didn’t know that. Where was this done? In the press or at PAD rallies?
It’s a shame that a country which has a very relaxed attitude to people’s sexuality should be dragged into this.
Quality comment or not?
1 
1
Thanks to all for responding to my comment about the Gay Pride march. I made this to illustrate the need to engage with the Red Shirts. I think most of us need not a “complete education”, a rather silly notion, but judging from his comments about Chuan 2 as Nick clearly has had, a “left education” and if we need it so do people in Thailand who have had a thoroughly McCarthyite schooling. So I think Ji’s advice is spot on.
On the other matter I addressed, I would value some feedback, namely how to disarm the military.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“SteveCM”:
Being PC has never been one of my strengths
“LesAbbey”:
I have neither excused nor attacked what you perceive as homophobic attacks (and i will not go into a discussion what may be a homophobic attack, and what is just poking into perceived weakpoints of one’s opponent in not very PC ways of expression).
I have attacked the use of building strawmen in order to score points. The anti-gay march protest by CM51 has happened (and that one i do consider quite clearly homophobic), but i have pointed out that this is does not make the Red Shirt movement a homophobic movement, especially because this march was at the time criticized widely under Red Shirts (unfortunately not publicly on stages though), as well as CM51 is also under Red Shirts quite disputed as well.
Given Thai society’s well known and widespread fluidity in gender identification and orientation i would say that it is quite difficult, if not impossible, for any movement here to be homophobic.
Quality comment or not?
5 
0
Attempting to tar the whole red shirt movement as homophobic on the strength of the actions of a small (if loud) minority group is plainly ridiculous. Not all Redshirts are rednecks: it is a large and diverse movement with all sorts of fringe groups. Likewise, it is equally unfair to suggest that just because it is “perfectly possible to be a red shirt and anti Taksin”[#143] that the movement as a whole cares more about democratic ideals than the fortunes of it’s leaders.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Nick Nostitz: There is nothing cryptic about ‘dial a quote’. When journalists use this expression they refer to a person, who has knowledge on a certain subject, who will provide the right quote to fit their agenda. In that respect Ji can be found all over The Times and Guardian in the UK and also elsewhere – but he is just a ‘talking head’.
Your comments about Chuan are way off as is your contempt for people who live in post suburban villages or Sukhumvit pent-houses, which does not include me.
Anyway it looks like a change of government lets see how things develop.
Long live the proletariat! The real one.
Quality comment or not?
4 
1
Andrew D, I don’t see how getting a ‘full education’ is going to make someone ‘politically mature’. I’ve seen doctors & teachers who were disinterested in politics or believe in the hype of Abhisit. Doctors who believe in Spiritual ghost & Lecturers with multiple Phds who believed in Ajaarn Ghuu – The infamous conman.
Fact is, Thai education doesn’t boost your intellect, it boost your income & social standings. Political maturity? Not much, if at all.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
LesAbbey,
Primarily in the media. If I recall correctly, Mingkwan was portrayed in political cartoons last year wearing a dress.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Hi NM commenters: let’s stick to updates and commentary on the election tonight. You can rake over the older issues another time. AW
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
For all those who want to view the raw cables, I am building a full archive here: http://www.zenjournalist.com/2011/07/index-of-leaked-u-s-cables-on-thailand/
It will take about 10 days to have everything online, but by the end of today day there should be an almost full set of 2004, 2005 and 2006 cables. The exception is cables on the South: they need special care to redact and I will do the ‘political’ cables first. But everything will be online by late next week.
Best regards.
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
Andrew Marshall – 172
Many thanks Andrew.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Some more thoughts on the cables. I just dipped my toe into Andrew Marshall’s archive and I fear my work will suffer as there are some real gems. It’s not just information we never knew from behind the diplomatic curtain, it’s information we should know but barely remember. (Maybe younger brains don’t forget quite as much as mine.)
It’s like having a ‘best of’ music album, except in this case it’s the best of the news archives. Let’s take one little example from 2005 that’s close to the top and I just opened.
In the last day or so there has been a discussion on the new PT goverment’s attitude to the lese majestie law. In the cable linked below we see what their attitude was just after they had won a previous election.
http://www.zenjournalist.com/2011/06/05bangkok1774/
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Les: Thanks for that reminder.
I’m not sure what was the most despicable act – The Democrats bringing the monarchy into politics (and, as usual, trying to benefit from it), or the TRT candidate foolishly trying to use the LM laws to get back at them.
Do you recall whether the original public speeches from which the quotes came from could be considered ‘political’ in any way?
http://www.zenjournalist.com/2011/06/05bangkok1774/
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
Just a question: how come there is no fanfare over the release of Part 3? Everybody was jumping over themselves with the first two parts, but it has all gone very quiet.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
kgg
I was wondering the same thing myself. I’ve just finished the 3rd part and it’s good. Much of focuses on the bad smell around the king’s role in the death of Ananda, and Andrew provides some very interesting insight into William Stevenson’s book “The Revolutionary King”. Like the first two parts, this latest tranche is less about giving us something new or ‘groundbreaking’ and more about providing a well-researched and intelligently written account of the more informed and independent debates to date. I hope Andrew turns all four parts into a book; there’s a space on my bookshelf for it.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
kgg
I wonder how much the long wait since the second part contributed to the lack of fanfare? The first two parts were pumped out pretty quickly, followed by quite a number of broken promises to watch this space “in the next few days”! I can speak for myself in giving up some weeks ago.
Rule #1 for a journalist, Andrew (and you should know this, as much as I do): If you’re going to promise to deliver on a deadline…then make sure you meet it.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
kgg #176 Let me hold your hand there kgg and lead you through the
scary world of google.com. Part 3 is not yet released but if you wish to
read a rough draft it can be found on Andrew’s own web site at:
http://www.zenjournalist.com/
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Its very humorous how you ” journalis” view Thailand from a zoo visitor point of view. What you want is very badly how Thailand should be. You guys are saying the same things as the first Portuguese that landed. Some kings are well celebrated some are not….this one happeneds to be……if some of these comments are made in front of my face?…I probably muay thia elbow you in the face….just for fun…….and no I wasn’t forced or tricked into loving the king……most thais never have nor never will fully trust the civilian government.
Quality comment or not?
3 
11
It is very humorous when someone like “siam i am” comes along with a spleen in need of venting but can’t come up with one item of real criticism and then speaks for most Thais while being nasty and uncivil. Siam you ain’t.
Quality comment or not?
6 
2
“……if some of these comments are made in front of my face?…I probably muay thia elbow you in the face….just for fun…….and no I wasn’t forced or tricked into loving the king”
It is so ironic that you claim you were not forced to love the King, yet you said that if someone makes a comment that they do not love the King, you will “muay thai” them in the face. How contradictory and sad this is. This just proves your assertion completely wrong that Thais are not “FORCED” to love the King.
And you don’t have to thank me for correcting your misspelling of “Muay Thai”. It is my pleasure.
And how can you be sure that you have not been tricked into loving this King? Why there is a law forbidding anyone to say something which is not fawning about him? Why there is a law to imprison people who speak negatively of him? How do you ever know that every good thing you hear about him is true, when there is a law to forbid and jail you when you speak otherwise (not to mention that the King himself is the one who signs and gives assent to this law having effect)?
“……most thais never have nor never will fully trust the civilian government.”
Really? Can you prove this? Can you read people’s minds? Have you conducted a poll, asking all Thais whether they trust a democratically elected government or they don’t?
Do not make any assertion if you cannot prove them, or if you have never made an attempt to prove it.
Quality comment or not?
5 
3
Funny “I am Siam” mentioned the Portuguese. Only yesterday I was talking to a friend about the way here in Thailand, so-called developers routinely destroy all trees before they build and then encroach on as much public space as possible with high concrete fences to boot. Perhaps later they will import some over-sized trees at great expense which possibly were stolen from the forest to fit their dream.
In Portugal I was told 30% of land in any development must be devoted to greenery.
I would bet you our King, who is of course European even though born in America, and also our Siamese Queen who every year calls upon folk to conserve the forests would be so happy if the Portuguese rule applied here.
If “I am Siam” is so enamored of the King he might be more loyal by trying out his Muay Thai skills on some greedy developer.
As for his claim that Thai folk distrust civilian governments, that certainly concords with what I hear. The general opinion is appears to be that politicians are totally self serving ( see Andrew Marshall’s recent review of the new book on Bhumipol).
The question then becomes would we prefer Military governments or are we at heart basically anarchist wanting to live in self managed communities?
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
siam i am – 180
Its very humorous how you ” journalis” view Thailand from a zoo visitor point of view.
Honestly, I think Thailand is not so much better than a zoo.
What you want is very badly how Thailand should be.
Are you saying Thailand is “good” now??…..
Really, could you be a bit “civilized” when you posted here, you are embarrassing every Thais here.
Quality comment or not?
2 
2