[…] 11 party-list candidates and won a sensational four-seat-mandate, mostly because of his unique straight-talking, no-nonsense, in-your-face style, but also partly thanks to protest votes – especially from the youth. Right from the onset, […]
If it isn’t it’s just a bunch of words on a computer screen.
Sorry to disagree again.
If this were not authentic, it would have been the first known case of fabricating names of people in the royal family at this very high level. For, even though the four brothers are no longer officially “royals”, their actual “closeness” to the highest level of royal echelon in terms of blood tie, and the content of the letter, would have made such “fabrication” a very significant and very interesting phenomenon. It certainly wouldn’t be just “a bunch of words on a computer”.
So I still cannot see the problem of putting this up in public, provided that NM makes it quite clear that its authenticity is still in some doubt. It could help provoke feedback that could make the authenticity clearer.
Either real or not, it’s still very interesting that such letter appears at this point in time (notice the date of the letter too – a day after the CP’s birthday, this could hardly be coincidental).
If it’s not real, the fact that some body had the audacity to do this for the very first time is also something to ponder.
Jesse: “You will not appear to be high scholar until you use high vocabs that English speakers have to look up the meaning in the dictionary themselves.”
Yes, got that – no right/wrong sharp line in itself but IMHO the KISS concept will still work well even in highly academic documents. After all, it is to your audience and not to yourself you’d want to deliver your message.
Andrew Spooner. I don’t see anything particularly postmodern or nihilistic about interpreting the meaning of something. Are you suggesting that social, political and cultural processes are driven only by facts or on claims/perceptions that are factual? That’s a very different world to the one I live in.
On people being put in prison for decades. Are you suggesting that New Mandala has not done enough on this issue? If so, suggestions about what more we could do would be very welcome. (Try googling “lese majeste Thailand”.)
On peer review (in your earlier comment). Nich Farrelly and I (and our guest contributors) regularly expose our work to a global community of peers for very public review and critique. Unlike most academic review processes, our mistakes are made very public. I note that some bloggers on Thailand feature “Comments for this page are closed” on their posts.
On the authenticity of the letter. So far, all the information I have received suggests that the letter is authentic and is considered to be so by very senior figures in Thailand. Of course, doubt remains and we are very happy to publish competing claims about the letter.
I havn’t see any mention of “lower” court in the article, where did you get that from? Furthermore, the senior Munich court certainly has no authority over the “international” matter, its like you are asking Srisaket court to impound President Obama’s position car (whether the car belong to the president or the USA government is another matter), the Srisaket’s court just dont have the power.
Btw, you should take notes that it was the Thai side who didn’t pay the debt.
Toni @26 seems correct in saying that neurofibromatosis is an autosomal dominant disorder, which means it’s caused by a mutant gene and occurs even if the mutant gene is inherited from only one parent. See this definition at http://www.medilexicon.com/medicaldictionary.php?t=60073.
So if a child has it, it’s likely that at least one parent has the disorder. But if a person has the disorder, does it have to be obvious to others, as Toni suggests? I don’t know. Maybe one can conceal the disorder, yet still raise suspicions about one’s health by traveling frequently to unannounced destinations.
You’re not interested in “empirical veracity”. Or, what is commonly known as “fact”.
I find this kind of intellectual sophistry both nihilistic and absurdly relativist.
Yes, you can draw meaning from any text, words etc and authenticity can, via the convoluted route of post-modern theory, be reduced to another mere signifier.
But here we’re dealing with political realities, people being put in prison for decades if they say the wrong thing about the Thai royal family and being on the end of very nasty hate campaigns etc.
Is the authenticity of that experience another signifier to be reduced by post-modern sophistry by the academics at New Mandala?
Really guys, you’re going to have to do better than this.
If the letter is real it is significant.
If it isn’t it’s just a bunch of words on a computer screen.
The only thing that then gives it any meaning is your imagination.
SMS or text messaging is unencrypted and can be easily intercepted by the authorities. ‘They’ love the increase in mobile telephony as it increases their ability to oppress.
Truth is that anyone could have produced this “letter” and I am a bit amazed it is up on this site.
I don’t think this is the case.
For, even though the four brothers are no longer officially royals, to fabricate their names still constitutes quite high a risk, if not legally, at least extra-legally, especially since the content of the letter deals with their father (not to mention their grand parents). The possibility that this could happen is in fact very narrow. (One should also note that, all these years, as far as I can remember, there has never been a single known case of fabricating the names of members of the Thai royal family, at this high up in the echelon, no matter that they are having no titles at this point in time.) Moreover, the content of the letter seems very authentic too.
But, of course, like everyone else, I cannot give an absolute guaranty of the letter’s authenticity either.
However, when I received the letter via email earlier this week, I actually put it up on my facebook, with passages heavily censored. (I showed only the first, forth and fifth paragraphs of the letter.)
I also told my readers (apart from the points I made above) that the content of letter, the part that I censored, could be said to have been contradicted, at least somewhat, by a passage in a WikiLeaks cable, 05BANGKOK868, dated 2 February 2005, paragraph (9). In the cable – which for legal safety reason I can only say vaguely here – there is testimony by Chirayu (the CPB’s Director) that there had been, at least once, some contact, or more accurately some initiation of contact, and that there was some offer of financial help. (Please see the details for yourself.)
Now, even this apparent contradiction could not be said to constitutes decisive proof of the letter’s fabrication, for there could be a possible explanation for it (the mother could have kept the contact secret from the children, for instance).
So, having informed my readers of all the uncertainty about the truth of this letter, I nevertheless put it up, for similar reason I understand why NM put it up here, namely, it is quite interesting in the context of the current political upheaval in the country, although I of course could not have written an extended analysis like ajarn Andrew Walker did on another post. (I also thought that, by putting up the letter, I might have provoked some feedbacks as to its authenticity. There were in fact one or two messages to me, giving some further info which is quite interesting but which I could not go into details here.)
In the end, though, after a day or two, I decided to “remove” my post on this letter from my facebook, given my own legal and political situations, and given that the version I could put up had to be heavily censored anyway.
Yes, you and I live on different planet. On my planet, we have news of CP and his wife visiting Orlando and Thai people there. They were on daily Royal family news period.
“What made you believe that Thais don’t need detailed news or cables to educate them? This is insulting.”
If “[t]he crown prince … travelled to Florida regularly to visit his ex wife and their sons”, why would it be neccessary for “… their youngest sister [to] transfer them money”?
You mixed up the two points I tried to make though. The visit by CP to Florida was to inform that his sons and ex-wife were not forgotten.
The point about the princess is to suggest that it is even more impossible for them to not receiving any kind of support, let alone from his own sister. And to inform you further, she does have a lot of money / access to fund. During Chinese new year alone when she visited China Town, she was given jewelry and diamonds. And now she is on diplomatic mission in Europe and a designer. Having said these, I still doubt that they receive no support whatsoever!
Portman – Agree. It was the final nail in the coffin, but successive Thai govts (and also the bureaucrats) had been nailing the other nails.
Good point about financing.
The risk from doing business with the Thai govt in a the public-private partnership project is so great that the premium you would have to charge means that you will then likely be investigated for overcharging (ie corruption that the figure was so high). Get large payment up front and never set foot in Thailand seems only solution….
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Letter to Thailand
@ Jesse & Ritikrai
Fully agree with both of you.
Crown Prince’s family update?
wow ANU has become Tabloid. I don’t want my tax to be spent by this bunch of ‘academics’. A lot to say about your centre folks!
Chuvit on the streets
[…] 11 party-list candidates and won a sensational four-seat-mandate, mostly because of his unique straight-talking, no-nonsense, in-your-face style, but also partly thanks to protest votes – especially from the youth. Right from the onset, […]
Crown Prince’s family update?
It appears that about 50% of neurofibromatosis cases are not inherited, but spontaneous mutations.
So it is by no means a necessity that one of the parents has the condition as well.
sources:
wikipedia
Centre for Genetics Education, Australia
Neurofibromatosis in monozygotic twins: a case report of spontaneous mutation
Letter to Thailand
Andrew Spooner writes (my emphasis):
If the letter is real it is significant.
If it isn’t it’s just a bunch of words on a computer screen.
Sorry to disagree again.
If this were not authentic, it would have been the first known case of fabricating names of people in the royal family at this very high level. For, even though the four brothers are no longer officially “royals”, their actual “closeness” to the highest level of royal echelon in terms of blood tie, and the content of the letter, would have made such “fabrication” a very significant and very interesting phenomenon. It certainly wouldn’t be just “a bunch of words on a computer”.
So I still cannot see the problem of putting this up in public, provided that NM makes it quite clear that its authenticity is still in some doubt. It could help provoke feedback that could make the authenticity clearer.
Either real or not, it’s still very interesting that such letter appears at this point in time (notice the date of the letter too – a day after the CP’s birthday, this could hardly be coincidental).
If it’s not real, the fact that some body had the audacity to do this for the very first time is also something to ponder.
Letter to Thailand
Yes, got that – no right/wrong sharp line in itself but IMHO the KISS concept will still work well even in highly academic documents. After all, it is to your audience and not to yourself you’d want to deliver your message.
Crown Prince’s family update?
The other temple that “They” visited is Watnavaram Buddhist Temple in Sanford, Florida. This is where she currently lives.
Letter to Thailand
Ritikrai
You will not appear to be high scholar until you use high vocabs that English speakers have to look up the meaning in the dictionary themselves.
Letter to Thailand
I am not sure about the so called “very senior figure in Thailand”, but I believe my own 2 eyes when I saw them together in Orlando.
Letter to Thailand
Andrew Spooner. I don’t see anything particularly postmodern or nihilistic about interpreting the meaning of something. Are you suggesting that social, political and cultural processes are driven only by facts or on claims/perceptions that are factual? That’s a very different world to the one I live in.
On people being put in prison for decades. Are you suggesting that New Mandala has not done enough on this issue? If so, suggestions about what more we could do would be very welcome. (Try googling “lese majeste Thailand”.)
On peer review (in your earlier comment). Nich Farrelly and I (and our guest contributors) regularly expose our work to a global community of peers for very public review and critique. Unlike most academic review processes, our mistakes are made very public. I note that some bloggers on Thailand feature “Comments for this page are closed” on their posts.
On the authenticity of the letter. So far, all the information I have received suggests that the letter is authentic and is considered to be so by very senior figures in Thailand. Of course, doubt remains and we are very happy to publish competing claims about the letter.
Letter to Thailand
This article would have been more enjoyable to read if it was written with simpler English.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Sam – 242
I havn’t see any mention of “lower” court in the article, where did you get that from? Furthermore, the senior Munich court certainly has no authority over the “international” matter, its like you are asking Srisaket court to impound President Obama’s position car (whether the car belong to the president or the USA government is another matter), the Srisaket’s court just dont have the power.
Btw, you should take notes that it was the Thai side who didn’t pay the debt.
Crown Prince’s family update?
Toni @26 seems correct in saying that neurofibromatosis is an autosomal dominant disorder, which means it’s caused by a mutant gene and occurs even if the mutant gene is inherited from only one parent. See this definition at http://www.medilexicon.com/medicaldictionary.php?t=60073.
So if a child has it, it’s likely that at least one parent has the disorder. But if a person has the disorder, does it have to be obvious to others, as Toni suggests? I don’t know. Maybe one can conceal the disorder, yet still raise suspicions about one’s health by traveling frequently to unannounced destinations.
Letter to Thailand
Oh dear.
You’re not interested in “empirical veracity”. Or, what is commonly known as “fact”.
I find this kind of intellectual sophistry both nihilistic and absurdly relativist.
Yes, you can draw meaning from any text, words etc and authenticity can, via the convoluted route of post-modern theory, be reduced to another mere signifier.
But here we’re dealing with political realities, people being put in prison for decades if they say the wrong thing about the Thai royal family and being on the end of very nasty hate campaigns etc.
Is the authenticity of that experience another signifier to be reduced by post-modern sophistry by the academics at New Mandala?
Really guys, you’re going to have to do better than this.
If the letter is real it is significant.
If it isn’t it’s just a bunch of words on a computer screen.
The only thing that then gives it any meaning is your imagination.
Mobile telephony in Burma
SMS or text messaging is unencrypted and can be easily intercepted by the authorities. ‘They’ love the increase in mobile telephony as it increases their ability to oppress.
Crown Prince’s family update?
Andrew Spooner writes (emphasis mine):
Truth is that anyone could have produced this “letter” and I am a bit amazed it is up on this site.
I don’t think this is the case.
For, even though the four brothers are no longer officially royals, to fabricate their names still constitutes quite high a risk, if not legally, at least extra-legally, especially since the content of the letter deals with their father (not to mention their grand parents). The possibility that this could happen is in fact very narrow. (One should also note that, all these years, as far as I can remember, there has never been a single known case of fabricating the names of members of the Thai royal family, at this high up in the echelon, no matter that they are having no titles at this point in time.) Moreover, the content of the letter seems very authentic too.
But, of course, like everyone else, I cannot give an absolute guaranty of the letter’s authenticity either.
However, when I received the letter via email earlier this week, I actually put it up on my facebook, with passages heavily censored. (I showed only the first, forth and fifth paragraphs of the letter.)
I also told my readers (apart from the points I made above) that the content of letter, the part that I censored, could be said to have been contradicted, at least somewhat, by a passage in a WikiLeaks cable, 05BANGKOK868, dated 2 February 2005, paragraph (9). In the cable – which for legal safety reason I can only say vaguely here – there is testimony by Chirayu (the CPB’s Director) that there had been, at least once, some contact, or more accurately some initiation of contact, and that there was some offer of financial help. (Please see the details for yourself.)
Now, even this apparent contradiction could not be said to constitutes decisive proof of the letter’s fabrication, for there could be a possible explanation for it (the mother could have kept the contact secret from the children, for instance).
So, having informed my readers of all the uncertainty about the truth of this letter, I nevertheless put it up, for similar reason I understand why NM put it up here, namely, it is quite interesting in the context of the current political upheaval in the country, although I of course could not have written an extended analysis like ajarn Andrew Walker did on another post. (I also thought that, by putting up the letter, I might have provoked some feedbacks as to its authenticity. There were in fact one or two messages to me, giving some further info which is quite interesting but which I could not go into details here.)
In the end, though, after a day or two, I decided to “remove” my post on this letter from my facebook, given my own legal and political situations, and given that the version I could put up had to be heavily censored anyway.
Crown Prince’s family update?
Mooyong (shredded pork)
Yes, you and I live on different planet. On my planet, we have news of CP and his wife visiting Orlando and Thai people there. They were on daily Royal family news period.
“What made you believe that Thais don’t need detailed news or cables to educate them? This is insulting.”
Excuse me ??
Crown Prince’s family update?
John W
If “[t]he crown prince … travelled to Florida regularly to visit his ex wife and their sons”, why would it be neccessary for “… their youngest sister [to] transfer them money”?
You mixed up the two points I tried to make though. The visit by CP to Florida was to inform that his sons and ex-wife were not forgotten.
The point about the princess is to suggest that it is even more impossible for them to not receiving any kind of support, let alone from his own sister. And to inform you further, she does have a lot of money / access to fund. During Chinese new year alone when she visited China Town, she was given jewelry and diamonds. And now she is on diplomatic mission in Europe and a designer. Having said these, I still doubt that they receive no support whatsoever!
Letter to Thailand
“Some may think that the thought of a highly Westernised and Western-educated Thai, living abroad, becoming king is absurd…”
Anyone can remind us where were present king, his deceased brother, his grandfather, uncles who were all kings of Thailand at some point, educated ?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Portman – Agree. It was the final nail in the coffin, but successive Thai govts (and also the bureaucrats) had been nailing the other nails.
Good point about financing.
The risk from doing business with the Thai govt in a the public-private partnership project is so great that the premium you would have to charge means that you will then likely be investigated for overcharging (ie corruption that the figure was so high). Get large payment up front and never set foot in Thailand seems only solution….