With yesterday’s expiry of the ban on the 111 Thai Rak Thai executives (commonly known as บ้านเลขที่ 111: house no. 111) Thai politics enters a new phase. Some of the big Thai Rak Thai party names who may be catapulted back to public prominence include Surakiart Sathirathai, Chaturon Chaisaeng, Pongthep Thepkanjana and Varathep Rattanakorn.
Their return to formal politics may, in time, be seen as the moment when a line was finally drawn under the post-coup confrontation that has rolled now for more than half a decade. Something ended with the expiry of the ban. And something new now begins.
An earlier radio report on these issues is available here. It features former Thai Rak Thai Party executive and Deputy Prime Minister Pongthep Thepkanjana, as well as Bunaraj Smutharaks, from the Democrat Party.
I have always wondered why no TRT executive has gone to jail for the electoral fraud conviction of Thaksin’s TRT that triggered the 111 TRT executives ban?
But on Wednesday May 29th, ” . . . Gen Thammarak Issarangkura na Ayuthaya, a former deputy leader of the dissolved Thai Rak Thai Party, was on Wednesday sentenced by the Criminal Court to three years and four months in jail for electoral fraud. . .”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/295761/thammarak-jailed-for-election-fraud
So my next question is: What about Thaksin – shouldn’t he be jailed too for this electoral crime?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Interesting times indeed.
The dissolving of political parties (every party except the Democrats) and banning of their executives through “judicial activism” was one of the most daft and destructive trends in Thailand’s post-coup politics.
There were some good, experienced politicians (well as good and experienced as anyone in the Democrats that is) in TRT, and emasculating the opposition by removing generations of experience from the lower house has done little to benefit anyone.
Chaturon was one of the only cabinet members who would regularly face down Thaksin (notably over Tak Bai and the War on Drugs), survive and continue to play a key role in the party. Borwornsak Uwano has complemented him for this.
Let’s hope that any of those that return focus on initiating positive and pragmatic economic and social policies that are both sustainable and equitable.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
A better question is if only this guy (Thammarak) is guilty, why the entire 111 members of the party’s executive committee is banned for five years? What kind of constitution is this ?
Next question, when Pheu Thai won landslide victory in July 2011 elections and secures majority in parliament and now wants to amend the constitution, why the opposition democrat party is so unhappy to the point of its female MP trying to remove and hide the House Speaker’s chair yesterday ?
Will this scene below ever happen in the UK parliament, for instance?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Thanks TU,
That’s some great footage. The first comment reads: “if she wanted a chair why didn’t she go to IKEA?”.
Although, to be fair, crazy stuff happens in parliaments in many countries. Non-Australian readers of NM may not yet have seen the extraordinary effort by senior members of Australia’s opposition to flee parliament yesterday. The footage is here.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Gregg #2
The dissolving of political parties (every party except the Democrats) and banning of their executives through “judicial activism” was one of the most daft and destructive trends in Thailand’s post-coup politics
Article 66 of the Political Party Act (in effect prior to the 2006 coup) includes provisions for party dissolution and members being banned.
Article 66:
The Constitutional Court may issue an order dissolving a political party which has carried out any of the following:
(1) an act which overthrows the democratic regime of government with the King as Head or an attempt to gain the administrative power of the State by unconstitutional means;
(2) an act which may be adverse to the democratic regime of Government with the King as Head of the State under the Constitution;
(3) an act which may endanger the security of the State, or may be contrary to law or public order or good morals.
The case against the TRT recommencing dissolution was forwarded by the EC to the Office of Attorney General on June 22 2006. This was followed days later by a similar recommendation against the Democratic Party. The concept of party dissolution in Thailand goes back some time and cannot be blamed solely on the 2006 coup.
Worth noting that the tactic has not died out even today as the DSI is now recommending the Democratic Party be dissolved because they accepted a flood relief donation last year from a partially owned government corporation.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It is article 237 which was added to the 2006 constitution that is the key issue though:
“Any candidate in an election, who has committed, created or supported any person to commit any act in violation of the Organic Act on Election of Members of the House of Representatives and the Taking of Office of Senators or orders and announcements of the Election Commission, causing the election not to be proceeded in an honest and fair manner, shall be deprived of his or her voting rights in accordance with the Organic Act on Election of Members of the House of Representatives and the Taking of Office of Senators.”
“If any such act of person under paragraph one appears to have convincing evidence that the leader or an executive member of his or her political party has acknowledged or ignored that action or has known of the act but failed to prevent or rectify it in order to ensure an honest and fair election, that political party is assumed to have sought to gain power in state administration by means other than what is provided in Section 68 of the Constitution, and in case the Constitutional Court consequently orders its dissolution, the voting rights of its leader and executive board members shall be revoked for a period of 5 years as from the date of issuance of the party dissolution order.“
It’s ridiculous that every party but one was dissolved as all parties buy votes and engage in other nefarious activities. But article 237 is the most pernicious of additions. I spoke to a number or legal/human rights analysts about this and while they said they couldn’t guarantee that Thailand was the only country to have such a law, they did all say that had themselves never heard of such a law being used elsewhere.
It’s daft and infantile. I’m sure that you would agree John.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Nich: Trying to escape parliament (as in that video @ #4) is not in the same league as essentially attacking the speaker and physically trying to prevent parliament operating.
I’ll leave aside the Nazi salutes and assume that that is how the Democrat Party protests in parliament.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
This Democrat MP, Rangsima, has been well known for her at times bizarre verbal actions in the House. Now she has acted even more strangly. Can hardly wait for her next move…
There are a number of things I could add to the point of party dissolution, but at this time, I am still too scandalized by what Rangsima did. Meanwhile, for those interested in the CC ruling against the dissolution of the Democrat Party, they might click the following link
http://www.eajlg.org/article/decision-constitutional-court-kingdom-thailand-ruling-no152553
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It’s ridiculous that every party but one was dissolved as all parties buy votes and engage in other nefarious activities
4 out of the 6 political parties represented in Parliament in 2008 were banned. Sanoh’s Phracharaj and it’s one MP seat was not.
they did all say that had themselves never heard of such a law being used elsewhere.
I think many countries have dissolution laws for various transgressions. Korea comes to mind first.
From a quick Google check the following quote from the Korean Constitution comes up:
If purposes and acts of a political party go against the democratic basic order, the government can bring the case to the Constitutional Court, and the party is dissolved by the decision of the Constitutional Court.”
I believe the Unified Progressive Party is being investigated right now with dissolution expected due to rigging of primary elections.
Sounds vaguely familiar.
I don’t think Thailand is unique in this approach, though saying so certainly sounds good and appeals to a certain political leaning.
It’s daft and infantile. I’m sure that you would agree John
I would not use “daft and infantile” to describe Article 237 or Article 66 of the Political Party Act, but instead would characterize as them both as too open for abuse and an overreaction and an incorrect solution to an ongoing, well acknowledged problem with Thai political parties and their leadership. But maybe that is because I try to keep the hyperbole and demagoguery to a minimum when discussing Thai politics.
You were said party dissolution and bannings was a product of the 2006 coup and I was showing that even before the 2007 constitution is was being used as political tool open to abuse. Who knows what would have happened if the Constitutional Court had had a chance to rule on the EC recommendations made 3 months before the coup for dissolution of both the TRT and Democratic Party for their behavior in the 2006 election?
Certainly the fact that a TRT deputy leader paid somebody to change the EC’s database could be considered “contrary to law or public order or good morals” as defined in the Political Party Act. I think this goes a bit beyond paying people to run (or not) in an election.
There is actually a theory that strict political party law such a in Thailand and Korea are counterproductive as they tend to force the behavior underground and make criminals out of politicians just trying to raise money or win elections in what is often a normal manner.
But my central point remains the saying things like “daft and infantile”, “nowhere else in the world has party dissolutions”, “dissolutions are a product of the 2006 coup” are not productive, intelligent discussion or debate. You are engaging in what might be referred to as Andrewspoonerisms.
I do agree that the 2008 dissolution cases contributed to the ongoing political conflicts and show how such laws can be counterproductive to the development of democratic processes. I just think they can be discussed in a rational, fact based manner.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The “Democrat” Party Thailand is disgraceful in this attack on the Speaker in the Parliament which was obviously coordinated with the PAD/Yellow threats and attacks going on simultaneously outside the Parliament. Clearly their hope is to create enough “illusion of chaos” to nudge the Thai military into a coup and once again take power via the military route, all, of course with complete backing from Thailand’s assorted “royals” and their comical frontmen, Sondhi and Chamlong.
And what about the millions of Thai citizens who voted in the present Parliament and government in the recent election? In the view of the “Democrat” Party Thailand, since they have, can and never will actually win a nationwide election, elections and the supposed will of the voters have no meaning and are of no consequence. What counts is the one vote at the top of the pyramid and the state-of-mind of the person who has the power and position to give the green-light for the next coup.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
That the Democrats are allied, once again, with the neo-fascists in the PAD, is no great surprise. That they are encouraging a violent storming of parliament as Rangsima did on TV yesterday, reveals themselves as unfit for any kind of office.
Thankfully, the Thai electorate have already deduced how unfit the Dems are and reduced, in the last election, the number of MPs they hold. The Dems’ recent behaviour is also likely to reduce their electoral power further in any coming election.
And here is the main reason why the Dems are never dissolved – they are not a threat to the “dual state”. In fact they are supporters and beneficiaries of it and are unlikely to have the kind of popular mandate that actually creates a threat to the “amart.”
I’ve also been following Korn’s tweets as he claims that the act that led to the PAD protests will financially benefit Thaksin and Yingluck.
What Korn fails to state is that the Thai legislative process is bicameral. Surely any act has to go before the Senate for approval, amendment or rejection? So why the Dems alliance with the neo-fascists? Anyone would think they share the same anti-democratic interests.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
John
All good points. Perhaps I should have made more explicit the fact that the people I spoke to at HRW/AI/ICJ [this was about four years back] said they could not confirm outright but had no personal knowledge of any other country which had a law where political parties could be dissolved and the entire executive banned, due to the actions of a single member of the executive. They said the criminal code has all the legal legislature necessary to deal with these criminal acts. A special laws was neither necessary nor productive.
Please do pull me up if I again descend into cutlery-induced invective.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Vichai N, hmm, if you jailed all the corrupt politicians then who would be left? Of course there would be new faces coming forth, inspired, eloquent and enthusiastic to have their turn to rape and pillage the national treasury.
But…What changes? What progress is achieved? What difference does it make? Being evangelical about politics generally is as useful as choosing between a Honda or Toyota, same outcome with a different fascia.
The bigger the government and bureaucracy then the more people that are involved in corruption and theft, if for no other reason that is a rational for minimal government and public service.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Amusing cliche question (#13) but only repeats Thaksin’s b/s lament – the others too are corrupt. I won’t even ask Mr. Damage to substantiate because he couldn’t.
But thanks for the compliment ‘evangelical’. I like it.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I had an interesting but brief twitter exchange with Bangkok Pundit today.
I asked him “do you think we’re seeing the old 2006-style anti-Thaksin alliance of PAD/Dems and politicised human rights NGOs re-emerging?”
He replied
“No. PAD crowd yesterday was 3k ( The Nation). In 06, they got 100K+. Back then, intellectual opinion was very anti-TS. Nowadays, there is great diversity in intellectual and NGO opinion & would estimate running 50/50″
This is a big improvement since the days when both HRW and Amnesty were openly/secretly supporting the 2006 coup and/or the PAD.
I hope this time that HRW’s Sunai Phasuk manages to keep his “anti-Thaksin activism” in check and just report on events in an impartial fashion without skewing facts, figures or maintaining secret support for the army.
However, the recent and very curious incident of Phasuk/HRW and the Democrat Party simultaneously releasing statements bemoaning the fact the Pheu Thai government had actually begun to investigate the army for May 2012 was certainly eyebrow raising and didn’t go unnoticed.
But, will the old alliance re-emerge? In my view, some, like Phsauk, are likely to remain “active”. Others may be having second thoughts as they see the actions of the Dems in parliament and the neo-fascist rabble of the PAD re-emerge onto Bangkok’s streets.
One result of the Dem/PAD’s recent actions could be to push the broad coalition of the Red Shirts, progressives and Pheu Thai back together as they realise the reactionary forces arrayed against them.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew,
Have you confused the threads. It was the one on LM which you were using to attack AI/HRW in order to try and paint PTP in a favourable light. You never answered why you thought Chiranuch’s sentencing the other day was “lenient” and why you asked if PTP should be praised for such leniency, when HRW, Google and other people concerned with free speech were condemning the sentence and the chilling precedent which it set.
Again why the personal attack on Sunai/HRW? You were already shown in the other thread to have selectively quoted from the Wikileaks cables in a fairly crude attempt to smear these NGOs for your propaganda purposes. In the above context, does Sunai/HRW really play a catalytic or leading role in the PAD/Dem alliance?
Remember the Feb 2012 statement from 2012 when HRW said pre-trial detention for red shirts on LM charges was being used as a form of punishment. That release compared the case of yellow shirt leader Sondhi Lim who was charged and bailed on the same day. HRW pointed out the double standards here. An odd thing to do for a group which you allege are pro-PAD stooges, no?
Why are you trying to shift focus from key actors such as the Democrats/PAD and the call by some Dems to support the PAD. — a move which demands and deserves staunch criticism — on to NGOs? Or how about discussing how the return of the 111 banned politicians will likely affect the current situation, which is what the thread is about?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The democrat MPs did it again yesterday (31 May) for the second day in a row.
After trying to remove House Speaker Somsak’s chair earlier, these MP’s again focused their attacks on Somsak by throwing books and paper documents at him to the point that police had to escort him out.
Meanwhile, Chirayu Huangsap, a first-time Pheu Thai MP and former tv broadcaster, was grabbed in the neck and strangled by democrat MP Thanee Theuksuban (familiar family name?) after Chirayu tried to record the book-throwing incident with his hand-phone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjsErJye804
Question now is why these people who call themselves democrats are so desperate at this stage ? What will happen today on the third day?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#17 “Meanwhile, Chirayu Huangsap, a first-time Pheu Thai MP and former tv broadcaster, was grabbed in the neck and strangled by democrat MP Thanee Theuksuban (familiar family name?) after Chirayu tried to record the book-throwing incident with his hand-phone.”
TU, the video clip shows nothing of the sort. You see Thani rush after him, grab him by putting his hand up against his throat, turning him around and saying something to him. Thani has removed his hand from Chirayu’s body before anyone else gets there. Contact is made for about a second.
Is this acceptable behaviour for an MP to conduct within the house? Absolutely not. Should he be sanctioned for it? Sure. (In the UK such contact could constitute common assault.) But is it strangulation? Not at all.
Andrew Spooner made a very similar claim on his Facebook page: “Thai ‘Democrat’ Party MP (they’ve just allied themselves to neo-fascist group) attempts to strangle government MP”
http://twitpic.com/9rc6bt
If you check out the above-linked freeze-frame, it does look more convincing that Thani is engaged in an act of violence, but as the video clip shows, this is not the case.
Given the heated situation at the moment, it is worth reporting incidents accurately. Otherwise, you may end up with one side and their supporters accusing the other of attempted murder. Tempers would fray. Anger would spill over further. Where would that lead us all?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Grabbing a fellow MP by the throat (as both sources show) is disgraceful. The intent seems clear and it hardly requires words to explain or justify what has been done.
The Democrat Party seems to have a number of MPs who have now committed assaults on fellow MPs over the past 2-3 days. As I understand it, they can’t be sanctioned while MPs, except by parliament. I wonder what the Democrat Party would do if parliament were to sanction such thuggish action by its members.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Greg, #18
The video clip was made from behind Chirayu and Thanee (related to Suthep Theuksuban) but another clip made from the front showed that Thanee indeed did strangle Chirayu albeit for a few seconds. Check this site: http://www.thaienews.blogspot.com/
I also don’t think anyone would die with a two-second strangulation and I am amused with your choice of words “attempted murder”.
Why did Thanee do that? What is wrong with filming anything in the House? Chuwit does it all the time and proudly showed his pen camera.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I hope the assembled leaders from government and business at the WEF in Bangkok watch this disgusting performance by the anti-democratic royalist-backed Thailand Democrat party and their PAD/Yellow/Sondhi/Chamlong stooges and finally understand what is at stake in Thailand. To go forward per the will of the majority of the Thai electorate and people or to remain mired in the royalist entitled privileged past of impunity, military coups and contempt for all things democratic, all people who work for a living and all people with darker skin tone.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Grabbing a fellow MP by the throat (as both sources show) is disgraceful.”
Absolutely.
“The intent seems clear and it hardly requires words to explain or justify what has been done.”
Both sources state the intent was to strangulate, that directly implies that Thanee intended to either kill or cause serious damage to Chirayu by the act of strangulation, which is the prevention of blood flow to the brain by compressing/closing off the carotid arteries.
Neither clip shows that at all. So the claim is false. It shows Thanee placing his hand on Chirayu’s upper chest and throat, stopping him from walking away and turning him around while saying/shouting something at him.
You see no force applied to his throat and Thanee removes his hand from that position before other parties intervene. No one needed to separate the two in order to stop Thanee for “grabbing” Chirayu’s throat. That makes it very hard to argue there was clear intent to cause physical damage.
Why not focus on the facts: that Thanee’s behaviour was deplorable and unjustifiable, as was the behaviour of the rest of the Democrat MPs involved in the scrum?
Unfortunately, given that MPs can be prime suspects in a murder cases and still not forced to be questioned under caution by police, or arrested for their suspected offence because of parliamentary immunity, the chances of any sanction against the MPs who have acted like pugnacious schoolboys over the past few days are slim indeed.
This highlights one of the key problems in Thailand — no general rule of law, and an impartial and selective application of law which generally benefits the rich and powerful, be they Thaksin Shinawattra, Newin Chidchob or Suthep Thaugsuban.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Ralph K
Spot on.
The person on this thread trying to apologise and explain away such actions was also guilty of being an Abhisit/Dem fanboy during the 2010 massacre and was also one of the loudest voices, at that time, trying to defend the use of soldiers against unarmed civilians. Here’s a comment by him from a year back defending poor likkle Mark after I’d dared to question the use of the word “Grace” to describe Abhisit http://bit.ly/L7qUAq (original article here http://bit.ly/jDAjvD)
It’s also self-evident that grabbing someone by the throat is an attempt to strangle them and is an incredibly dangerous thing to do as it is actually quite easy to crush someone’s windpipe. Why didn’t Suthep’s brother Tani (yep, that’s right) grab his PT counterpart on the arm or the shoulder? As other pics show Tani begins his attack from behind (favourite, cowardly Dem Party tactic), uses his forearm against the throat at first and then swings around until he is throttling the PT MP’s with his hand. http://twitpic.com/9ri6nn.
And where is the odious Abhisit? Why isn’t he leading his troops from the front? There was a photo on the equally odious Sirochoke “Wallpaper” Sopha’s FB page of Mark sitting in an office, reclining on a chair, looking creepy, entitled “Ready for War”. The Ice Cream Gang* are back and desperate, once again, to attack Thai democracy and possibly slaughter a few Red Shirts and readily-demonised “Thaksinites” along the way.
Personally, I am hoping (I’m usually over-optimistic about stuff like this) that the ICC do investigate Mark. There is certainly a case against him and it would certainly be an opportunity to fully and independently investigate such issues as who the Black Shirts really were. A few journalists observing events and a HRW report put together by someone who is clearly politicised, don’t cut it – the issue needs to be fully looked into. I mean who would oppose or seek to stymie an independent investigation of the kind the ICC are capable of? And given the almost universal acknowledgement that Thai system is “bust” whose interest would it serve to stop such an investigation?
On a side note there are two other points to raise about the Dems’ recent shenanigans. First up, a few days back their website mysteriously went down – the story is that they’ve allegedly been caught taking dodgy donations once again. This might explain, to a degree, why they’re looking for leverage.
Also there’s the story of Dem MP Kanchit who is wanted for questioning in relation to the gangland style execution of a PT staffer (I think) who had 6 bullets pumped into him at a gas/petrol station. The incident was caught on camera and the police aren’t looking for any other suspects is my understanding. Kanchit is hiding behind his MP immunity but could still be expelled by the party – why haven’t Mark and the Dems taken any action in a case where obvious criminality has occurred? We can also imagine the media/NGO/Sunai Phasuk activity that would be occurring if a PT MP had gunned down a Dem Party person in similar circumstances.
*The Ice Cream Gang was the nickname given by the Army to Abhisit and his gang of whiny acolytes in Camp 11. Apparently, while eager to sign off on any act of Army brutality, they just sat around looking vacant and eating ice cream.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Greg, my comment was: “The intent seems clear and it hardly requires words to explain or justify what has been done.” That was my opinion after watching the video. I still don’t see the point of trying to argue about it. If someone lunges at you and tries to or does grab your throat, you know the intent is not good.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Am following some Western media reporting of the recent round of PAD/Dem actions.
Not one makes any attempt to describe the PAD’s neo-fascist and anti-democratic political agenda.
Not one describes the routine use of racist hate-speech by the PAD.
I’m also waiting for HRW and Amnesty to use an accurate form of words to describe the PAD’s politics and to condemn the PAD’s call for fascism.
Or will Amnesty staffers be releasing pro-PAD statements again as they did in 2008? Or are Sunai Phasuk and HRW already going around the embassies making clear their support for any coup and what committed anti-Pheu Thai activists they are?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Okay, this is dangerously going off thread, but to respond to yet more of Andrew’s willful misrepresentations of fact.
“The person on this thread trying to apologise and explain away such actions [by Thanee]”
I said it was wrong and that he should be sanctioned for it. I merely pointed out the fact that it is clear from the video that he was not strangling Chirayu. The video speaks for itself.
“The person … was also guilty of being an Abhisit/Dem fanboy during the 2010 massacre and was also one of the loudest voices, at that time, trying to defend the use of soldiers against unarmed civilians.”
I’m neither a Democrat nor a fanboy of Abhisit. Furthermore, I did not realise that this was even an offence once could be guilty of.
As for, “was one of the loudest voices, at that time, trying to defend the use of soldiers against unarmed civilians.”
You’re really outdoing yourself with your outright lies here, Andrew. Well done, slap yourself on the back. Move along.
As for my comment, “More rhetoric-filled drivel from Spooner who continues his one-eyed exploration of Thai politics…” this was not because you attacked Abhisit, it was in fact because your attack was “rhetoric-filled drivel… [a] one-eyed exploration of Thai politics.”
I stand by that statement today. In fact, I would add to it. Back in 2010/11, you were promoting yourself as pro-UDD/red shirt and stated that you were not pro-Thaksin/PTP. You stated how you had previously criticised Thaksin on TeakDoor as evidence of this. Yet since then your analyses has shifted away from defending/promotion the red shirts to focus on support for the PTP, and on occasion Thaksin and Robert Amsterdam.
Your jumping to the defence of the “lenient” sentence that Chiranuch received this week speaks volumes as to the above assertion.
I guess I would have to now more accurately describe your communications as poorly written, badly constructed, agenda driven propaganda.
Your refusal to answer straight, direct questions about issues you raise in your articles and the bias of your writing, compounded with the selective quoting of people and misrepresenting of facts, which you have been called out on this week alone by Giles, Nick, Orinoco, myself serve to reinforce this point.
Your above description of the “throttling” that never took place is another fine example of your sensationalistic misrepresentations.
As I have already stated, Thanee’s actions are deplorable and unjustified. You can see from the freeze-frames and the video that he turns Chirayu so he can shout something at him. Not right. Not nice. Not throttling.
Chirayu hasn’t even raised his right arm to push Thanee away, neither has he tried to dig his chin into his chest which is a natural reflex/flinch response to a strangle- or choke-hold. That would imply there is no crushing force. As the video clip shows the whole incident lasted for about one second.
Anyway Andrew, I’m sure you will be content continuing to weave your webs of deceit. Your myopia has obviously progressed to such an advanced stage that you cannot even see the most glaring of holes in your arguments.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
On the topic of Nicholas’ thread, who do people see as the members of the banned 111 MPs who can now return to politics as offering the greatest opportunity in terms of their potential to develop meaningful policy. Personally, I hope Chaturon will have some significant input. He has proven himself to be a man of integrity (for a politician) and had a lot of good ideas about education back in the day.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
One hopes to see the day when Vichai. N appears to throttle Kramden, or vice-versa.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Ralph can do it himself (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pjacobs13/4015500199/)
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Not much more appropriate for the NM gang to be going at it than the MP’s, but maybe even less physically dangerous. As I said in another discussion, hope that Nick Nostitz is thereabouts making his impressions.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
” . . . and independently investigate such issues as who the Black Shirts really were . . .” Spooner now boldly loudly muses.
But naaaaaah, says Yingluck/Thaksin and the whole PTP, who btw each individually deserve to be throttled. Because ‘Thaksin . . . oops Unity . . . first before justice’. But as expected, the fervently anti-Thaksin camp, will have none of it. (I repeat that Abhisit, Gen. Prayut, PAD leaders Sonthi/Chamlong, and, many within the Red Shirts were/are embracing the call to open themselves to public inquiry relating to the May2010 tragedy. Except Thaksin/Yingluck and PTP, and Spooner/Pundit say yeah, ok?
Did Spooner and BangkokPundit (who is strangely absorbed these days in the tedious bookkeeper-like tasks of polls and more polls . . . about Yingluck usually) just recently say, or suggest, that the anti-Thaksin elements had diminished, softened, or ‘intellectually enlightened’? Yet the thai parliamentarians are now at each others throats . . .
After the May2010 Thaksin-sponsored (as confessed by the late Gen. Khattiya) Black Shirts rampage of M79 grenade launcher, assault rifles and arson attacks, my anger/dislike for Thaksin . . . both steeled and ossified. What gave Spooner/BangkokPundit that ridiculous idea about many anti-Thaksins now getting more accommodative to Thaksin?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Do it soon Ralph!
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Chaturon integrity? What fantasy world are we living in over there Greg? The last thing any Thai politician has is integrity
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Be interesting to see how Dems supporters present on this thread will be able to weasel their way out of this one.
The facts are that the PAD are once again calling for the destruction of democracy and have shown a willingness to use violence to achieve that end. The Democrat Party, led by “Graceful” Mark, are their loyal allies and backers, realising they have no chance of ever winning an election again. The PAD have, of course, been described as neo-fascist by the Asian Human Rights Commission and several prominent scholars. I think that is an apt description.
Apparently, for some, this entire situation points to some unfathomable Thai-style complexity and if you condemn the Dems/PAD for attempting to destroy democracy and putting forth a neo-fascist political agenda you are somehow “not telling it like it is” or are exhibiting some kind of “false consciousness” or lacking the kind of “understanding” present only in the selected few. What arrogant nonsense.
The PAD are fascists.
The Dems are supporting them.
There’s not much to equivocate or pontificate about there and not much that’s too difficult to understand.
Let’s not forget as well that LM charges, including Jiew’s, skyrocketed under the Dems.
And let’s remind ourselves that unlike Jiew, the likes of Da Torpedo remain buried alive in a Thai prison, completely ignored by Amnesty, the foreign media and the moral bankrupts who seek, on this thread, to defend, once again, the Dems/PAD.
This is what Amnesty International ‘s Zawacki said about Da Torpedo in 2009 – http://bit.ly/ihgMrC
“But she [Da Torpedo] also—and this is very much the view of the MFA [Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs], including of my most trusted and respected contact there—was rather reckless in her language and either advocated violence against the king or came very close to doing so.”
As clear an admission of collusion with a Dem Party govt official as you could imagine. To do so when considering the level of support you should give a political prisoner who has been subject to the most brutal conditions is despicable.
This is what the people of Thailand are up against. Human rights organisations colluding with human rights abusers. So-called “journalists” making excuses for massacres and physical violence in Parliament while failing utterly to provide accurate descriptions of what is actually going on. They do this whilst hiding behind carefully constructed conceits such as “it’s too complex” (isn’t everywhere?) or “we have to be impartial” (no, you have to tell the truth).
All political conflicts are complex by their very definition whether they are in established democracies or burgeoning ones. But guiding principles are not. Mealymouthed excuses no longer cut it I’m afraid. You’re either opposed to the explicit fascism of the PAD/Dems or you’re not.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#33 Unincensed
“What fantasy world are we living in over there Greg? The last thing any Thai politician has is integrity”
Andrew, thats why he said
“He has proven himself to be a man of integrity (for a politician)”
Notice the brackets… Now do pay attention.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Unincensed,
One of the constant themes of the royalist/military/bureaucratic ascendancy that has ruled Thailand for many years is that all politicians are by their very nature corrupt and that one must rely on “good men” to save the country from their evil ways. What that really means is that parliamentary democracy which by its very nature is peopled by politicians is obviously and incorrigibly corrupt. And that the “good men” who are far too pure to go through the messy business of actually getting elected are the only ones who can be trusted.
Of course, politicians can be corrupt and in Thailand there are corrupt politicians, even more so than elsewhere because the idea of parliamentary politics is painted as something only the corrupt would become involved in . A self-fulfilling prophecy in some ways. You only have so much time to make your bundle before the “good men” come in and throw you out.
But the “good men” get on the boards of big and small companies at least as much as the politicians.
But rather than just accepting this conventional truth of corrupt politicians and accusing others of living in a fantasy, you need to make the case for what you say. You need to proceed from some sort of testable evidence of Chaturon’s corruption, rather than a simple axiom that Chaturon is a politician, therefore he is corrupt. Otherwise, it is simply not fair and not convincing. Stating a premise does not make it true.
Speaking personally, Chaturon impressed me as he did Greg Lowe during the Thaksin government. I’m sure he’s not a saint but rather than just saying he’s a politician and therefore evil, why not point us to his actual corrupt activity. Give some evidence not just axioms.
I may be wrong though. He is, of course, associated with “Evil Incarnate: Corrupt to the Core” (A PAD sign with a squarehead picture I saw in the Nation Tonight) so he may be just a minion of the Evil One.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
About the integrity of Chaturon Chaisaeng – Exceptions confirm the rule – rough translation of the German proverb:
Ausnahmen bestätigen die Regel
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#34 Andrew Spooner
“Be interesting to see how Dems supporters present on this thread will be able to weasel their way out of this one.”
Are there any?…. ooops … sorry…… Bloody fascists…. They are everywhere!
“Apparently, for some, this entire situation points to some unfathomable Thai-style complexity and if you condemn the Dems/PAD for attempting to destroy democracy and putting forth a neo-fascist political agenda you are somehow “not telling it like it is” or are exhibiting some kind of “false consciousness” or lacking the kind of “understanding” present only in the selected few. What arrogant nonsense.”
Or just talking insane hysterical bollocks?
“The PAD are fascists.”
Not strictly speaking…. Although both they and the UDD employ fascistic method.
“There’s not much to equivocate or pontificate about there and not much that’s too difficult to understand.”
Damn right… And you should quite clearly pontificate appropriately along those lines without a hint of equivocation…. Oh yes!
“Let’s not forget as well that LM charges, including Jiew’s, skyrocketed under the Dems.”
And lets not also forget how sympathetic PT are to remedying this terrible trend.
“And let’s remind ourselves that unlike Jiew, the likes of Da Torpedo remain buried alive in a Thai prison, completely ignored by Amnesty, the foreign media and the moral bankrupts who seek, on this thread, to defend, once again, the Dems/PAD.”
Right on! And the moral bankrupts who ignore or cheer on more of the same from the present PT government…. (Popularly elected with the power to turn these trends around).
“This is what the people of Thailand are up against. Human rights organisations colluding with human rights abusers. So-called “journalists” making excuses for massacres and physical violence in Parliament while failing utterly to provide accurate descriptions of what is actually going on. They do this whilst hiding behind carefully constructed conceits such as “it’s too complex” (isn’t everywhere?) or “we have to be impartial” (no, you have to tell the truth).”
I call on the popularly elected government to change this and stick it to these bastatrds!
“All political conflicts are complex by their very definition”
Er…. Spooner… You might want to rethink this one for the boss… You don’t do ‘complex’… You just do ‘vitriol’ and ‘slogan’…. Keep within your limits sunshine…. Oh fraternal fighter for ‘freedom’!…..
“You’re either opposed to the explicit fascism of the PAD/Dems or you’re not”
Zig heil! Shpooner ish der Furher Gezeintunhumpt!…………..
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Just when the masses were about to ditch Thaksin, the PAD+DEMs screw up an reinvigorate the red base with their political theatre.
A Democrat MP assults and commits battery upon a government MP on camera with the nation as witness.
Dozens of opposition MPs rush the speaker to demand that the government not carry out its mandates (reconciliation and bringing Thaksin back).
Anyone who believed Mark back in 2010 when he said that he would ‘allow’ an election’in six months if the Reds stood down has to know see that Mark heads a Political Party that is a disgrace among parties that claim to be democratic, a laughing stock.
Who remembers when a Thai Politician was vetted to head the UN? That will not occur again anytime in the near future.
Burma proceeds towards democracy and why not Thailand. Because of the undemocratic nature of the party that falsely claims the title Democrat Party.
And the Padocrats invert the 1%-99% figures to proclaim an Occupy Movement where the 1% want to occupy the space of the 99%ers. It would be funny except it will end badly.
I am embarrassed to admit that once I held the Democrat Party in esteem, identified myself as a supporter. Never again. I may hate Thaksin, but I hate destroyers of Democracy even more.
Thaksin for all his faults, did respect the ballot box. Unlike Mark, the coup leaders, and his Democrat Party.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
QUOTE Andrew, thats why he said
“He has proven himself to be a man of integrity (for a politician)”
Notice the brackets… Now do pay attention. UNQUOTE
It was noticed. A couple of brackets don’t really do anything to dispel the seeming hallucination, however.
QUOTE One of the constant themes of the royalist/military/bureaucratic ascendancy that has ruled Thailand for many years is that all politicians are by their very nature corrupt and that one must rely on “good men” to save the country from their evil ways. What that really means is that parliamentary democracy which by its very nature is peopled by politicians is obviously and incorrigibly corrupt. And that the “good men” who are far too pure to go through the messy business of actually getting elected are the only ones who can be trusted. UNQUOTE
I’m doubting Chaturon’s integrity. You brought up the corruption and Devil Incarnate stuff yourself. The problem with Chaturon is that he was nurtured by the very same royalist system you describe – which, to my way of thinking, is totally lacking in integrity for the very same reasons you mention. Since most Thai politicians are self-proclaimed royalists, it is precisely their weasel way in hiding behind an apparently unassailable institution that renders them lacking in almost any integrity – in my view.
Think about how anyone is proved corrupt in this country. Well it almost never happens anyway – since the legal system (regardless of side) makes sure that the case is unsolvable. In that sort of climate, the ordinary unalligned bystander can NEVER prove guilt. So how can we deal with this. My approach to such slimy politics is to treat all politics here as highly suspect, with the onus always being on politicians to prove their innocence. Until such time as Chaturon is capable of telling me why he has spent so many years supporting the party of extra-judicial murder, CEO-style politics (with its ability to stifle any dissent not driven by its own money-grabbing agenda) and (yes) blind loyalty to the royalty , I see no reason to believe he is a man of integrity. So no voodoo stuff here. Just a belief that when I can never prove guilt, the onus is always on them to show me why I might be wrong. Chaturon’s protestations of innocence have so far been extremely feeble, to say the least.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Reincarnation works unincensed. Try it.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Be interesting to see how Dems supporters present on this thread will be able to weasel their way out of this one.”
Who are the Dems? Certainly not me.
Did you redact info in the Zawacki email, Andrew? If so, one has to be pretty suspicious of your motives given your selective/misrepresentative treatment of Wikileaks quotes on the LM thread.
Also what does the quote prove? It shows Ben has as source in the MFA. As a human rights NGO one would hole and expect Amnesty would have trusted sources here and elsewhere. It shows no bias because of that source. What the quote does show is that because Da Torpedo advocated or came close to advocating violence the she could not be considered a prisoner of conscience by AI. This has been AI policy from year one. People engaged in violence or armed struggle will not be considered prisoners of conscience by AI, though the rights group can still campaign on their behalf on other issues. Some people have problems with this policy, but it is central policy and nothing to do with Zawacki or Thailand in particular.
It is interesting that you ratchet up your attack on this thread http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/2447 where Zackawi explains why AI would not host or be part of a human rights event with Robert Amsterdam, Taksin’s paid political lobbyist. The reasons are clear, rational and fair.
Out of interest Andrew, is defending/supporting Robert Amsterdam also part of your as yet unspecified agenda.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sorry, forgot to post the quote/email from AI which you only quoted in part. So it’s important people see the quote in its full context.
Furthermore, how do you know the MFA contact was a Democrat official? Isn’t entirely possible they were/are a civil servant? They could well still be there under PTP.
Be interested to hear people’s thoughts on this.
On Tue, 1/9/09, Benjamin.Zawacki@amnesty.org
; wrote:
From: Benjamin.Zawacki@amnesty.org ;
Subject: Re: Da Torpido 18 years imprisoned
NAME REDACTED
Date: Tuesday, 1 September, 2009, 11:16 PM
NAME REDACTED,
PART OF CORRESPONDENCE REDACTED HERE
But she [Da Torpedo] also—and this is very much the view of the MFA [Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs], including of my most trusted and respected contact there—was rather reckless in her language and either advocated violence against the king or came very close to doing so. I’m thinking in particular of the final lines on Russia and Nepal, right next to urging people to resist and fight. And I’m told that this is what really did it for her. 18 years is far too much, but she would have run the risk of a (shorter) sentence elsewhere for this, and so is not, as such, a POC [Prisoner of Conscience]. That is why AI is reluctant to take up her case.
PART OF CORRESPONDENCE REDACTED HERE
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#36 tom hoy
Good comment and sage advice, but I do have a further question based on your premiss – how do we deal with the politicians who are corrupt (and I would hypothesize that is a large percentage)?
The ‘good’ men will always win if we cannot find a way to deal with the excuse they have to intervene and ‘save’ us. I believe that is the very crux of the issue. We have to find a mechanism to make it unacceptable to be corrupt, just as it is entirely unacceptable for the ‘good’ men to intervene. We have to stop giving them the excuse. I see no serious attempt to actually rid Thai politics of the scourge of corruption – ever.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The human rights worker who sent me the Amnesty email I pasted in above told me this about Ben Zawacki.
That Zawacki, when he made that decision, only relied on an MFA translation of Da Torpedo’s words.
That Zawacki, when he made that decision, spoke/read little or no Thai himself.
When Zawacki was challenged by the human rights worker and offered a different, independent translation of Da Torpedo’s speech he refused, point blank, to consider it or any other translation.
Zawacki was ONLY interested in his MFA contact. At that point the MFA was headed up by none other than the arch PAD fanatic, Kasit.
There is actually a huge contention over whether Da’s words were “violent” and several very highly regarded sources I’ve spoken to have all said that there is enough ambiguity to raise real concerns over Zawacki’s failure to investigate further.
Given Zawacki’s other pro-royalist comments it’s pretty easy to deduce his position. That he works for an organisation that seeks funds from the public whilst claiming to defend human rights impartially makes him, in my opinion, not fit for his position.
As for Zawacki’s dubious claim the Da’s words would get a prison sentence elsewhere – what nonsense. Yesterday, here in the UK, I listened to a song by “Class War” directed at the British Royal family called “Royal Funerals” which calls for guillotines, rebellion etc. (Just to be clear I’m not defending the position taken in that song. Listening to and then referencing something doesn’t mean you agree with it). It invokes a far more violent set of images than Da T ever came close to. It will, of course, be ignored by the authorities. There won;t be any “short sentences” or even an arrest.
Once again I return to the point that the Thai people have to face even Western human rights workers taking the side of human rights abusers.
The unprincipled and conniving irony of that situation is encapsulated perfectly by Chris Coles two excellent “noir” paintings entitled “NGO Guy in the Bangkok Night” and “Enthralled Farang in the Land of Smiles”. Now I know who Chris based these portraits on – can anyone guess?
http://bangkok-noir.blogspot.com/2012/01/noir-ngo-guy-in-bangkok-night.html
http://bangkok-noir.blogspot.com/2012/01/engtralled-farang-in-land-of-smiles.html
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The world of Bangkok conspiracy theories and rumours is always of interest but, of course, a large pinch of salt is always needed. And, to counter these “rumours” theres nothing like the facts.
In April 2011 Robert Amsterdam was denied the opportunity to speak to AI Malaysia about his application to the International Criminal Court regarding the Bangkok Massacre 2010. From the human rights activists I spoke to at the time they said that Ben Zawacki and Donna Guest – Amnesty International International Secretariat staffers – both intervened in a very heavy handed and almost bullying way to prevent Amsterdam from speaking.
So incensed were many members of this SE Asia human rights’ community that they wrote a lengthy letter attacking AI. 70 people signed the letter and New Mandala published it here -
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/04/29/open-letter-amnesty-international-in-thailand/
What was not revealed at the time was that the anger, particularly of Malaysian activists, was not just because of Zawacki/Guest’s stance on RA but also that they told Malaysia AI not to make comments about Burma as well. Strange but true. (If only they’d mentioned it at the time – Zawacki’s faltering reputation would have completely collapsed).
Zawacki and Guest are both, as stated, employees of AI’s International Secretariat. AI IS is a private company and not an NGO or a charity. Their listing in the UK Companies House website is here – http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/11e2e5a9bc0bbdd4b2447ac292c17772/compdetails
This private company, AI IS, has previously attempted to hide huge payoffs to two former staff members (http://bit.ly/fOzGUJ US$1.37million in total, US$800k to one staffer) and certainly acted in a less than scrupulous fashion when they tried to cover the story up. AI IS also control, commercially, the AI brand and own copyright to the name, the symbol and all merchandise. These are Zawacki’s employees – a private profit-making company, rooted in a culture of capitalism with all the self-interest that goes with that. Personally I find it odd that’s seldom mentioned in connection with AI but hey, what do I know when there are $800K golden handshakes going around? (I can;t say with any certainty, but I would be utterly amazed if Thaksin’s payment to Robert Amsterdam came anywhere close to this colossal amount – at least Thaksin’s money isn’t raised under the false premise of being for “human rights” work).
No matter. AI still do some very worthwhile work and should be applauded for that. But should that then mean that employees of this private company be absolved of criticism?
The reaction to Zawacki and Guest’s bullying had, actually, been preceded by this missive from Zawacki to New Mandala here > http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/04/27/amnesty-international-and-robert-amsterdam/ (The discussion that follows Zawacki’s statement is very instructive).
In this “statement” Zawacki attempts to explain why someone such as Robert Amsterdam should not be allowed to explain to AI members in Malaysia the basis of his case to the International Criminal Court. What was Zawacki so afraid of? He claimed, at that time, that Amnesty “remain neutral, objective, and impartial” and that, somehow, because Amsterdam was employed by someone with an interest in Thai politics that meant that he wouldn’t be allowed to put his case. Of course, by this point, Zawacki had been speaking privately to the Abhisit government for months and actually admitted that to me in a phone-call when he said that such private discussions where the “best way to do things.” Was Zawacki seriously suggesting that Abhisit’s Democrats were above politics?
Later, Zawacki’s impartiality was demolished as I revealed he’d been taking tips from parts of the Democrat Party government on who to give Prisoner of Conscious (PoC) status to – in this instance Da Torpedo. Even in the email I’d gotten hold of Zawacki completely fails to mention that Da Torpedo had never had anything approaching a fair trial, that her trial had been held in secret and that she’d never been allowed to test the evidence against her. For Zawacki all that mattered was that his MFA source had told him Da T was “violent” and that similar acts would put her in prison in other countries. Therefore Zawacki abandoned Da Torpedo to her fate in an appalling act of cowardice for which he has consistently refused to answer for or explain.
Given the events of the last few days it seems like Thais are having to face another tough phase in the struggle for democracy. Yet, given how utterly compromised and biased organisations such as Amnesty in Thailand have become, how can these same ordinary Thais rely on these organisations to give a fair representation to the international community? Quite simply, they can’t. When AI speak to an unelected, unmandated Democrat govt, a govt that was forced through terrible violence on the Thai people, they claim it’s evidence of their “impartiality”. Yet, at the same time, any attempt to speak to the legal counsel of the Red Shirts is considered as “biased.”
Such unprincipled and abject posturing might fit into the world view of the PAD, Democrat Party and the various persons passing themselves off as “impartial journalists” in Bangkok but it doesn’t wash and doesn’t stand up to proper scrutiny outside of the confines of the Sukhumvit ghetto. If Zawacki – and his coup-loving colleague, HRW’s Sunai Phasuk – were employed by a private company with more scruples they’d be out on their ear. Let’s hope one day they are and HRW/AI’s deserved reputation for good work can be re-established in Thailand.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Apologies the link for AI IS Companies House listing is bust – try this one
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/ea2ced6df564c81eab04eff0a0abcef7/compdetails
Or look at Companies House and search for company number 01606776 here -
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/de6ceeae24d3bbf3da86ad2bd46cce44/wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo.
Other details about the private company which employs Ben Zawacki can be found here and also shows that the company is cash rich with several UK£million in the bank (they need it for those nice US$800k golden handshakes!).
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/01606776
Strangely there is no mention of AI IS anywhere on their website (http://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are) actually being a private company called Amnesty International Limited even though the address, website and phone number all match between the company listing and AI IS itself. Why the secrecy? Are they embarrassed?
Ultimately, to a large extent, it doesn’t matter, but it does mean that they are not some completely impartial and unbiased organisation that isn’t governed by self-interest (especially when there’s the possibility of a US$800k golden handshake at some point).
Zawacki is an employee of a private company – nothing more, nothing less.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#43 Andrew Spooner
Long posts Andrew, the gist of which seem to be that you are very keen on Robert Amsderdam and not very keen at all on Amnesty International…. Curious priorities, but each to his own.
This intrigued me “Quite simply, they can’t. When AI speak to an unelected, unmandated Democrat govt, a govt that was forced through terrible violence on the Thai people, they claim it’s evidence of their “impartiality”. ”
Well that democrat government, unmandated or not, is now history as, most likely, is the chaotic and directionless Democrat Party.
There is now a new government with a huge popular majority…. And in all your obsessive ramblings and attacks on the party that lost the election and some NGO or other…. You never really explain why or how more pressure should be applied to this elected government, in place now, concerning their avowed support for 112 and their huge keenness to absolve all parties of legal responsibilty for the events of the last five years in order to bring Thanksin Shinawatra back to Thailand. Why is that? Why are you obsessing about trivialities rather than addressing the main issues with regards to the elected government of the day?… Or do you have an interest in attempting to distract attention from the real issues that actually matter?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
For anyone who’s interested I’ve written a piece about the international media’s refusal to accurately report the PAD’s political agenda here –
http://bit.ly/JE5d5W
Maybe people are scared of them? Or maybe some people’s anti-Thaksin activism and position has pushed them towards accepting neo-fascism as normal?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan/Orinoco
“You never really explain why or how more pressure should be applied to this elected government, in place now, concerning their avowed support for 112″
I dunno, I think helping to get questions raised in the UK Houses of Parliament on the subject (while not epoch changing) as I did after the death of Ah Kong, is a darn site more of an effort to hold this government to account than taking photos of temples or commenting under a false name on a blog.
To be honest Dan, I think you’re actually quite a gifted photograph. Although, personally, I also think reducing Thailand to one continual flow of Buddhist imagery has a touch of Orientalism about it.
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2012/05/17/lese-majeste-makes-it-to-uk-parliament/
http://www.danwhite.org/Temples_of_Thailand_Extracts.pdf
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#46 Andrew Spooner
Another dreadful piece of writing from Andrew Spooner…..
The PAD don’t matter. Their behaviour the other day was appalling but Sonthi Lim and all the other tired faces have only very minimal (although fanatical) support…. They are nothing.
What is your interest in trying to big up the PAD as a ‘bogey man’ rather than address the issue of how the government of the day deals with the real issues at hand? Why are you doing this?
Why don’t you post on the present government and how they are addressing the real issues of 112, the betrayal of the progressive wing of the Red Shirt movement and the ‘amnesty’ that only one man wants that inherently reinforces the reality of ‘impunity’ by absolving all those with power whilst ignoring those who don’t….. many of whom are now pushing up the daisies and singing along with the choir invisibule?….
Impunity in Thailand these days is re branded as ‘reconciliation’….. Andrew why are you inanely blogging about the PAD rather than those who have the power to change things for the better and are not doing that?…. Who is pulling your strings?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan
“Why are you inanely blogging about the PAD rather than those who have the power to change things for the better and are not doing that?”
You mean the Constitutional Court? The Senate? The Army?
Or do you think democracy functions in Thailand the same way as it does in other democracies, that all functions of state are under elected civilian control and that executive power resides in the elected lower house and cabinet only?
As for the PAD – I think they’re “bigging” themselves up well-enough without my help and being ably assisted by their allies in the Democrat Party while doing so. To attempt to pass off last weeks antics as meaningless seems very odd. Why would you want to do that?
You’ve got my article a bit wrong though – it’s more a critique of the media reporting of the PAD than the PAD themselves. Don’t you think its interesting that not one major Bangkok-based media outlet mentioned even the PAD’s own threats to “destroy democracy’? I do.
What I can’t figure out though is why you’d think that is evidence of some kind of conspiracy though. It’s just a blog post with a relatively small readership. It’s not that important. And surely it would be more insidious if I was working for an international media outlet that claims to be impartial, broadcasting around the world, with an audience of millions, and not mentioning glaring, very visible and important facts?
There are a ton of problems and issues about the “reconciliation” plan and the “amnesty”. However, from how I understand it, any “deal” securing that is now dead in the water.
The shenanigans at the constitutional court now seems to be the most pressing and urgent issue facing Thai democracy. Many are claiming a “judicial coup” is being rolled out. Nitirat, Chaturon and various others are already highlighting the courts actions as being very problematic.
Chaturon is quoted in the BKK Post as saying
“I would like to suggest that parliament disobey the Constitution Court’s order, which is illegitimate, and go ahead and hold a joint sitting to vote on the bill in the third reading.”
Parliament standing up to the constitutional court would be a direct threat to the amaart. If they do this we’re into new territory and anything can happen.
Any thoughts on that?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
With regard to the comments about Amnesty International being a private company not a charity, this seems to be based either on a lack of knowledge of English and Welsh law or perhaps a willful distortion.
Under statute in England and Wales, there is no legal body known as a charity. However legal bodies can have charitable status and are often referred to as charities. Normally they are trusts, which have applied to the Charity Commission for charitable status, but they can also be limited companies.
A quick check of the Charity Commission’s website shows Amnesty International Charity Limited is registered as having charitable status under registration number 294230. Plenty of information can be found about them on the website including the annual accounts that are required to be submitted to the Charity Commission.
It is also possible to find the same information about the related Amnesty International UK Section Charitable Trust (registration number 1051681). It is noticeable that only the Trust is recorded as having employees.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#52 Andrew Spooner
“Don’t you think its interesting that not one major Bangkok-based media outlet mentioned even the PAD’s own threats to “destroy democracy’? I do.”
All media outlets have devoted an awful lot of coverage to the PAD over the years. No one has enough space in every news report to publish a thesis on the rounded complexities of each and every player each time they are mentioned.
“What I can’t figure out though is why you’d think that is evidence of some kind of conspiracy though.”
Where did I use the word conspiracy?
“It’s not that important. ”
Indeed its not.
“and surely it would be more insidious if I was working for an international media outlet”
Not much chance of that unless your writing and powers of analysis improve I am afraid.
” an international media outlet that claims to be impartial, broadcasting around the world, with an audience of millions, and not mentioning glaring, very visible and important facts?
Every single one of them? All the time? In all reports? Its seems like the only people who criticize the international media as much as you are the PAD…. And they really hate the international media.
“Parliament standing up to the constitutional court would be a direct threat to the amaart. If they do this we’re into new territory and anything can happen.”
Sure….. But why do you still refuse to address the questions about the government of the day and their pressing for all crimes (including those of the leaders of the PAD) to be forgotten? Or their statements on 112?… Do you defend the statements of Chalerm Yubamrung or, indeed, the fact that he is in office in the first place?
Any thoughts on that?
# 50 Andrew Spooner
” I also think reducing Thailand to one continual flow of Buddhist imagery has a touch of Orientalism about it.”
Reducing Thailand?…. What an absurd thing to write. These things are called ‘commissions’ or ‘work’….Work is something we do to earn a living. Writers and photographers do ‘assignments’. They are not always statements of vision. I could equally criticize you for writing endless cuddly reviews of boutique hotels…. But I don’t do it because it happens to be the work you do to put rice on the table and I also have admiration for your cutting edge and in depth analysis of soft furnishings…. Stuff you write for money presumably. What relevance does any of this comment this have to do with the government of the day, the constitutional court or any of the issues in hand?… Your red herrings are geting ever more surreal Andrew.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Owen Thomas
I don’t think you understand how Amnesty works.
It is split into different parts and entities.
Amnesty International International Secretariat (AI IS), who Zawacki works for, is a private company.
I called them and asked them – you can do the same – and then checked their listing on Companies House and the other company information available online that I pasted in above.
AI IS was set up as a private company to commercially protect the copyright of the AI branding and to allow it to make profit to fund the work of Zawacki et al (and presumably to finance US$800k golden handshakes).
AI IS also have the power to push around local national entities of AI as they get to deem who or who isn’t part of AI. Hence Zawacki/Guest riding into town and bullying AI Malaysia.
So AI UK, as you correctly point out IS a charity. But Zawacki doesn;t work for them. He works for AI IS.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan
“No one has enough space in every news report to publish a thesis on the rounded complexities of each and every player each time they are mentioned.”
Here you go
“The PAD openly espouse a political programme that seeks to “destroy democracy”.”
12 words.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#56 Andrew Spooner
“Here you go
“The PAD openly espouse a political programme that seeks to “destroy democracy”.”
Are you seriously suggesting that all media organisations put this in as a compulsory caveat every time the PAD are mentioned?…. Why?…. Have you ever actually worked in a news organisation?…. Do you know just what a naive and ridiculous suggestion this is?….. Whilst I agree roughly with your definition of the aims of the PAD, news organisations would then have to have a philosophically defined of what ‘democracy’ is and indeed whether there is actually a ‘democracy’ in place for the PAD to destroy….
This not the way grown ups report the news. It’s infantile student nonsense and it is also deeply patronising towards the general public….. London Borough of la la land…….
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan
“Are you seriously suggesting that all media organisations put this in as a compulsory caveat every time the PAD are mentioned?”
No, I’m suggesting that in some way that the international media accurately portray the PAD’s politics. They don’t.
If they don’t want to use the PAD’s own words as a reference point they could also reference the esteemed Asian Human Rights Commission who said
“Some commentators and opponents of the alliance [PAD] have described its agenda as fascist. This is not an exaggeration.”
I also find your idea that if the international media include some mention of the PAD’s fascism that “news organisations would then have to have a philosophically defined of what ‘democracy’ is” a bit strange.
Are you suggesting that international news organisations and journalists working in Thailand don’t actually already know what democracy is?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Owen Thomas
Couple more articles about Amnesty here.
The first looks at Amnesty’s decision not to recognise staff members who are members of the trade union, UNITE.
This article states –
“Union members at the International Secretariat in London have been given three months to agree these new terms or face derecognition.”
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/amnesty_international_threaten.aspx
So AI utilise campaigns for workers’ rights when you using it as leverage to raise funds (that then get used to make US$800k golden handshakes that they try to cover up) but not in their own backyard. Nice.
The second relates to AI IS’s lack of charitable status and that it is, in fact, a limited company -
http://www.civilsociety.co.uk/finance/news/content/8390/charity_commission_has_no_jurisdiction_over_board_members_payment_from_amnesty
It states very very clearly –
“The Charity Commission has said it has no jurisdiction over Amnesty International making a valedictory payment of £530,000 to its former secretary general – now a Charity Commission board member – because the part of Amnesty that made the payment is not a charity. A spokeswoman said that as Amnesty International Ltd, which employed Irene Khan, is not a charity, the regulator has no interest.”
Yay! Trebles all round!
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#58 Andrew Spooner
“Are you suggesting that international news organisations and journalists working in Thailand don’t actually already know what democracy is?”
Andrew you appear to be chasing your own tail again…..
The realities of the PAD’s agenda are pretty well known…. And the media don’t seem to be particularly shy of echoing that….. You want them to use the word ‘fascist’ or ‘fascism’ every time the Yellow bellies are mentioned?….. Well although the PAD are pretty fascistic, news organisations are not student common rooms peopled by angry student activists or clones of Rik from the Young Ones…. They have responsibilities and guidelines however loathsome the political players are that they report on….
Do you think that every time the UDD are mentioned one should say ‘Supporters of Thaksin Shinawatra,internationally condemned for serial human rights abuses when in power’?….. I mean it would all get a bit long winded wouldn’t it?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan
There’s nothing journalistically partial about reporting a “protest” movement’s own self-confessed, self-publicised political platform in shorthand form using their own form or words of that of a respected organisation such as the AHRC.
Here is an article about Golden Dawn in Greece who are constantly referred to as “neo-Nazi” by news organisations.
http://www.latitudenews.com/story/greece-neo-nazis-golden-dawn/
Plenty of brave journalists representing international news organisations have been able to accurately inform the public of Golden Dawn’s politics – why can’t they do that in Thailand?
In the Reuters’ article I link to in my piece here http://bit.ly/JE5d5W about the recent PAD protests Reuters spend two paragraphs and 68words of the piece laying out the PAD’s politics yet fail, completely, to mention the PAD’s self-confessed programme of wanting to destroy democracy or that noted voices such as they AHRC describe them as fascist.
It seems to me like a deliberate omission.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#61 Andrew Spooner
“accurately inform the public ”
In 1982 Mrs Thatcher took the BBC to task for referring to British Forces about to engage Argentinian forces in the Falkland Islands (Las Malvinas) as ‘British Forces’….. She would have preferred the BBC to refer to them as ‘Our boys’….. Obviously the BBC did not bow to the pressure since it was absurd and intimidatory…. Nor should they have done
You, in the same way although from avastly more lowly position, lambast the international media for not writing the reports as you wish them to be written and to echo the views you hold regarding the PAD…. I actually largely share your assessment of the aims of the PAD…. But I do not hold with politicians or their lobbyists or cheerleaders strong arming media organisations into spin… You, quite clearly, are an activist blogger and not a journalist (as you have admitted previously)…. So your position makes some kind of cyclical sense in activist terms…. It also makes absolute cyclical sense for news journalists doing a job of work to comepletely ignore you and your ilk…. As they did with pressure from Mrs Thatcher’s conservative party in 1982.
You quite clearly think differently….. As you may remember Mrs Thatcher at that time was in a precarious position. In the 1983 election she won a landslide political victory. She then took on the National Union of Mineworkers and destroyed them largely….. I supported the mineworkers despite Mrs Thatcher’s astronomical electoral success…. I guess you didn’t…. What with you immense reverence for people winning lots of votes in polled elections, whoever the demagogue is who won them ……
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
And Andrew, in your linked piece it says this of Golden Dawn, “But its rhetoric is anti-Semitic, anti-Roma and anti-immigrant.”…… In a European context describing a European party these parallels have some direct resonance with regards to the policies of Fascist parties of the mid 20ieth Century and far right groups across Europe today….. The shared history being European in a European context.
The PAD, although they are very sinister, are not anti semitic particularly, nor is immigration a major issue and nor do they advocate the persecution of Roma….. This is Asia…. They are violent, deeply nationalistic and xenophobic. Having said that, no responsible news desk would use these very European references to an Asian situation and an Asian political group on the news pages as you, a European, would wish them to be used…. It’s fairly imperialistic, simplistic, euro centric and absurd for you to expect news organisations to impose European definitions and European historical political pigeon-holing on Asian people and an Asian situation on the news pages…..
Oped and analysis perhaps…. But that is not what you, incredibly naively, seem to be requesting they do….. You want the Spooner spin on the news pages….. Loopy quite frankly.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan
The links between Thai-style fascism and 1930s Japanese-style statism/fascism are historically explicit. Prem, Sarit etc fought with the Japanese, after all.
Anti-semitism, wasn’t as prevalent in Italian Fascism as it was German Nazism and Mussolini didn’t pass the anti-semitic Manifesto of Race until he’d been in power for 16years and under pressure from Hitler. Certainly Mussolini was an anti-Semite but Nazism was always a particular brand of fascism. Also PAD supporters have routinely expressed virulent racist and violent anti-Cambodian & anti-Burmese views (plus they spouted some pretty appalling anti-Semitic stuff directed at Robert Amsterdam – I’ve noticed some expats do the same).
No, I didn’t support Margaret Thatcher in way, shape or form and find your segue into that a bit odd. Luckily I moved to Norway at 19 and didn’t return until she’d gone. But I wouldn’t have supported a coup against her either or a neo-fascist mob storming the British parliament in an effort to destroy democracy.
Dan, you might find this odd but I’ve always said Thaksin should be opposed – but just by democratic means. In my view the solution to Thaksin was always more democracy, not less. I also think the casual way that so-called “liberal” anti-Thaksinites align themselves with neo-fascists to be a disgrace.
As for your “no responsible news desk would use these very European references to an Asian situation” – the AHRC are an exclusively Asian organisation and they had no problem calling the PAD fascist.
But there are plenty of other ways to describe the PAD. As I’ve mentioned several times before, why not just use the PAD’s own publicly proclaimed agenda? They’re the ones saying “we want to destroy democracy”, not me. If “fascism” is too complex and dirty a word for the international media why not go with something like this?
““The PAD openly espouse a political programme that seeks to “destroy democracy”.””
It’s not “spin” either – it’s the accurate reporting of the PAD’s own self-proclaimed political position or a reference to an analysis provided by one of the region’s most respected human rights’ organisations. And I can’t see any reason or rationalisation which would prevent the media doing that.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It’s a shame that this is important, because it is really boring.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew Spooner’s beginning a dozen comments with “Dan …” when no “Dan” appears in any comment header is getting tiresome – this is not how comments should appear on a respectable website – and I’m not blaming Andrew Spooner.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew
“I’ve always said Thaksin should be opposed – but just by democratic means.”
No you haven’t. In fact you’ve spent a great part of the last couple of weeks expressly avoiding explaining why you your focus has shifted from defending the red shirts to first defining Thaksin’s PTP.
“In my view the solution to Thaksin was always more democracy, not less.”
Agreed. The Dems got trounced in the last election. The Thai people clearly support Thaksin/PTP to at least they can’t stand the Dems so much that they will hold their nose and vote PTP.
But I guess the bigger problem is how this “more democracy” is going to appear out of the ether. The PAD certainly aren’t going to magic it up, neither is Thaksin/PTP. There’s no point spending time here going into all of the efforts Dr T took to weaken constitutional checks and balances and curtail the freedom of the press, but can you answer this:
– How does the unity/autonomy bill which has been put together by the power elite in Thailand to support their own vested interests (old amart/landed aristocracy/establishment/military and new amart/new money/industrialists etc) etc help deliver a new, improved democratic system? Thaksin, the army, Suthep, Abhisit etc… all will get off for whatever they hay have done scott free. The dead UDD protesters and their families will never see justice. Surely the holding of power to account should be a key demand for such a defender of democracy as yourself.
“I also think the casual way that so-called “liberal” anti-Thaksinites align themselves with neo-fascists to be a disgrace. ”
Your problem is you paint anyone who is strongly anti-Thaksin as a liberal, PAD-support or Abhisit fanboy. Quite pathetic really. In the real world it is possible for people to have complex views on a situation where they support neither side. It doesn’t have to be “two legs good, four legs bad” you know.
What is also curious is your odd attacks on NGOs, journalists and academics who don’t toe your ideological line. Why do you spend a lot of time doing this and virtually no time trying to hold the government of the day to account?
Jon Wright said: “Andrew Spooner’s beginning a dozen comments with “Dan …” when no “Dan” appears in any comment header is getting tiresome – this is not how comments should appear on a respectable website – and I’m not blaming Andrew Spooner.”
Jon, have you not noticed that AS uses about seven sock puppet identities on this and other threads. In general (90% of the time) these are used so he can discuss his ideas with himself and further his agenda. The use of anonymous IDs is fine when people want to comment on issues which may carry legal implications, of if they just want to remain anonymous. But it is pathetic and intellectually dishonest to do this all the time just to try and make it sound like some people agree with your given line of argument. It does perhaps explain why the poor chap is so confused.
Andrew, it is also notable that for some bizarre reason you dismiss
Dan as an orientalist who focuses on providing an endless stream of Buddhist imagery (that’s one book on temples), perhaps if you hadn’t had your head buried in “A Spartacist’s Guide to Agit-Prop: Junior School Level, Book 1″ you may have noticed he has been round the block a bit covering a broad range of issues from the Poll Tax Riots, Post-Saharto Indonesia and all the uprisings there, the Lebanon (I think), Afghanistan (Soviet era), post-KR Cambodia, Asian Tsunami and a bunch of other stuff.
Not that it really matters, but maybe he has a slightly broader perspective/experience than you would like to portray.
As for Thai fascism: “Also PAD supporters have routinely expressed virulent racist and violent anti-Cambodian & anti-Burmese views…” That’s despicable and undefendable. But there’s a lot of nascent racism and nationalism across the political spectrum here, all of which should be attacked.
I was talking about Newin Chidchob with a red shirt taxi driver. His response: “Newin mai chai khon Thai, khao pen khon khmen.” So anti-Cambodian feeling isn’t the exclusive preserve of the PAD. Sames goes for the Burmese, ethnic minorities and southerners.
What would be interesting would be to see how nationalism and racism are used and manipulated by most political parties and movements here. But clearly you wouldn’t be doing that as it doesn’t fit with your agenda.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
And you might add that OWWB keeps replying to posts addressed to Dan.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#64 Andrew Spooner
“But there are plenty of other ways to describe the PAD. As I’ve mentioned several times before, why not just use the PAD’s own publicly proclaimed agenda? They’re the ones saying “we want to destroy democracy”, not me. If “fascism” is too complex and dirty a word for the international media why not go with something like this?”
So now you are reneging on your insistence on the words fascist or fascism being used in describing the PAD on the news pages? …. Good……There are indeed plenty of other ways to ‘describe’ the PAD…. And those ways are often used, even if they don’t always get your seal of approval.
“It’s not “spin” either – it’s the accurate reporting of the PAD’s own self-proclaimed political position or a reference to an analysis provided by one of the region’s most respected human rights’ organisations.”
You approve of a human rights organisation?….. They must must be thrilled over at AHRC….. Is it an NGO?…. Are they ‘liberals’?…. Is a ‘Spooner Spring’ in progress?
#67 Greg Lowe (to Andrew Spooner)
“What is also curious is your odd attacks on NGOs, journalists and academics who don’t toe your ideological line. Why do you spend a lot of time doing this and virtually no time trying to hold the government of the day to account?”
The curious reality that launched a million words…… And then another million…. None of which answered the question…..
#66 John Wright
“Andrew Spooner’s beginning a dozen comments with “Dan …” when no “Dan” appears in any comment header is getting tiresome.”
Yes…. It’s a little tiresome, but not particularly offensive. Woof Woof has broad shoulders and can bare the abuse. As you may have realised someone was ‘cuckooing’ IDs on previous threads and then rabbiting away with abandon. This happened to three people…. Who does these kind of things?…. A buffoon quite clearly…. But the only surefire solution is to have been christened with a particularly silly name…. (Yours will take some work John)…. …. Pity New Mandala software doesn’t have a way to prevent this cuckooing of names, but they shouldn’t really have to be obliged to worry about it since it’s a childish abuse of the hospitality of the hard working moderators in the first place….
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew, an additional question.
We are all agreed (at least you and me are, anyway) that any use of racist language etc by the PAD is wrong and must be addressed, the same goes for the use of such language by any group or individual in any country.
Where, however, do you stand on the use of vile homophobic language? Where does this fit in your analysis? A case in point was the barrage of homophobic attacks that were launched against Gen Prem from the PAD stages. Jean-Marie le Pen would have been proud of such a repertoire of thuggish abuse, but where do you stand on this matter?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Ralph, #68
Quite.
Back to the original thread –
The next few days for Thailand could be critical vis a vis the constitutional court. If parliament does actually face down the court there are few options left for the amaart. The feeling that a judicial coup is rolling out seem palpable. But will they back it up with force if parliament ignore the court? And how would that use of force play out?
There are rumours that Yingluck could be arrested by the Army. That if a coup does occur then “democracy” will be “suspended” for quite a considerable amount of time. That this time any rebellion will be “crushed”.
I’ve always felt that Abhisit staying in situ as Dem Party leader was odd given what a failure he’s been. I guess they know that here’s someone who will get the job done, however brutal. Has he been promised his old job?
What seems pretty clear is that the court has not followed procedure. The speed at which it took the PAD/Dems petition was obviously co-ordinated with the Dems violence in parliament and the PAD attack. And who can forget the tapes of the judges pointing to corruption and gross malfeasance?
But if the court does back down, what then?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Nice to see yet another NM thread turned into an “OWWB/Greg Lowe tag-teaming Andrew Spooner” extravaganza. Soon NM will have reached the heights of the local webboards with anyone not toeing the anti-Thaksin/PT/UDD line getting gang-banged in the name of reasoned objectivity and a manly grip on reality.
I did a quick survey of news items coming up on Google using the search term “Thaksin” the other day. 6 out of 7 included the adjective “divisive” on first mention of his name; one used “controversial”. All referred to him as “exiled” rather than “fleeing political persecution” or even “self-exiled”. 6 out of 7 referred to his conviction on criminal charges. 4 added a little thumbnail sketch of his human rights abuses and/or corruption.
The same search, because all the items were about the kerfuffle in and at Government House, brought up mention of PAD, usually expanded to the full “People’s Alliance for Democracy”. 4 out of 7 mentioned their role in precipitating the coup that unseated Thaksin. 2 mentioned the occupations of Government House and the airports.
Trying to put myself in the place of a relatively uninformed (re: recent Thai history) reader, I found myself reading about an exiled convicted criminal whose corruption and human rights abuses had led to a coup brought on by the protests of a pro-democracy group. And now, because this exiled criminal abuser has managed to have a nepotistic government installed in his homeland, moves are afoot to have him brought home free of all charges. But the People’s Alliance for Democracy and the Democrat Party are having none of it. Yay forces for Democracy! Boo nepotistic criminal manipulator!
Andrew is spot on in his pointing out the distorting effects of the deliberate omission of clarifying adjectives and little thumbnail sketches of how incredibly meaningless the word “Democracy” is in association with either the PAD or the Dems. If there is room for the Thaksin mini-bio then there is room for one for PAD and the Dems. Please note that I have no problem with their characterizations of Thaksin.
And Andrrew, I strongly urge you to take the advice being offered in the name of balanced objectivity and start focusing on critiques of the PT administration in your articles.
Because God knows we just don’t get enough of those.
I would also like to point out that those like Greg, with their complex, nuanced views of Thai politics, which lead them to support neither side, do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time and type criticizing PT, the UDD, Thaksin, and people who accept the complexity, imperfection and all-round perfidiousness of Thai politics yet manage to come out with a clear preference for the “side” that they have determined is, however marginally, more likely to promote democratization in this country.
Strange, that.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Emjay
Thanks.
What I can say is that I’ve had a very interesting chat with some well-placed people and certain things are moving on how the international media report the PAD.
Secondly this is very interesting
http://asiancorrespondent.com/83758/thailands-democrat-party-to-monitor-media/
The Dems are now monitoring the media for comments deemed to “pro-govt”. Will this now extend to the foreign media as it did in 2010 with the kind of cyber-pogrom that was launched against Dan Rivers? Let’s wait and see.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Andrew Spooner”:
“Will this now extend to the foreign media… ?”
Yes, it will.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
…. Poor old foreign media…. If they’re not getting kicked in the grollies by apologists for Thaksin and Amsterdam, they’re getting ‘monitored’ and menaced by the sinister, yellow bellied hate-mongers….
If they piss off both parties then they are probably getting it about right……..
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dan
There’s a world of difference between the implied state-sanctioned intimidation of the Dems and a blogger writing a few words of criticism. Or are the foreign media in Thailand so thin-skinned they can’t handle someone like myself having a pop now and then?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Andrew Spooner – 55 &59
Thank you for your responses and I am quite happy to hold my hands up that I misunderstood which company you were talking about. Even if they are 15 months old, both articles are horrendous.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Is it normal procedure for courts to accept cases without any evidence? Is it normal procedure for constitutional courts to decide on the intent of a parliament before any law has even been passed?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
#78 Anonymouse
“and a blogger writing a few words of criticism.”
I didn’t say “a blogger”, nor did I specify one. I said, “apologists for Thaksin and Amsterdam”…… But if Andrew Spooner is comfortable voluntarily answering to that description, then then that is fine…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Owen Thomas #77
No problem.
What’s also interesting is that if AI IS were registered as a charity they’d have a statutory duty to be “impartial.”
As a private company they have no such obligation.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Loathe as I am to return to this thread I feel it is important to end it with a recent Reuters’ report on the PAD which states
“The Asian Human Rights Commission accused the group in 2008 of “fascist qualities” and said it posed “grave dangers” to Thai democracy”.
So much for me “not understanding” how the media works and all the shrill excuses from Dan, Greg etc about why it would be impossible to call a spade a spade.
This Reuters’ piece at least mentions a different viewpoint yet also misses the opportunity to publish the PAD’s own, avowed anti-democratic agenda. So, a good start, but ultimately disappointing.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/06/17/uk-thailand-politics-idUKBRE85G07L20120617
Quality comment or not?
0 
0