Not sure whether Chermsak Pinthong’s following comments can be seen as “humorous” (from Naew Na newspaper, July 4, 2011, p. 3).
1) If Yingluck had not been the younger sister of Thaksin, but would have had solely to rely on her own, would she have wanted to stand in this election, and announced that she wanted to be the prime minister? Not long before the election, she had said in an interview that she had no interest whatsoever to enter politics.
2) If Yingluck had not been the younger sister of Thaksin, but would have solely relied on her own attributes, experiences, knowledge, capability, and achievements in her life, if she had entered the PTP announcing that she wanted to run for an MP seat, and wanted to be prime minister of Thailand, would the chairperson and the executive board of the party have been willing to make her the candidate of PTP, or not? Considering only her personal capabilities is she sufficiently well prepared or not?
It is indeed surprising how many people, including Thai journalists, still adhere to the idea that BKK is a “traditional stronghold” of the Democrats. In fact, they have only won high numbers of seats when the Bangkok voters saw no better electoral option around. Therefore, when the Prachakorn Thai, Phalang Dharma, and then the TRT were around, the Democrats fared poorly in BKK.
-the doctrine of respondeat superior — this establishes the notion of “vicarious liability” where a [b]master is responsible for the illegal conduct of their servant. The relationship is what creates the liability. It dispenses with the element of actus reus in the same way strict liability dispenses with the element of mens rea.[/b] Officers of a corporation can be punished by imprisonment only if the corporation has been held “criminally liable” first, the officer has been found guilty of malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance by their corporation, and (unless stated otherwise in statute) the officer causes, requests, commands, or in any way authorizes the illegal act to be committed.
So according to the doctrine of respondeat superior (as explained above), a master has a duty to stop his ‘servants’ for committing a criminal wrong. [b]He might not be liable for the wrong which his servant commits if he does not know about it. But once he knows that his servant has done something wrong, he has the duty to stop his servant from committing a wrong immediately. [/b] Failure to stop his servant from committing a wrong means the master will be held responsible for the crimes his servants committed.
Now, we know that the army killed the protesters. This is indeed a criminal wrong. So the master of the army would be responsible for their wrong, according to the doctrine of respondeat superior.
I used to think Thailand could learn a thing or two from North Korea about running a decent personality cult.
Then after spending a few evenings watching the Thai royal news, I began to have second thoughts, and Yingluck’s election campaign convinced me. This is one area in which Thailand is second to none! If Julia wants to be re-elected, she should have her ambassador to Thailand seek out Yingluck’s campaign manager immediately. Under free trade agreement provisions, of course.
“Only a properly constituted and empowered fact finding commission could do that. And given the Thai record in the wake of similar incidents, particularly October 1973, October 1976 and May 1992, I’m not hopeful this will happen, even under a Phuea Thai government.”
that is exactly what I am saying.
Maybe with more jest, but given that we are talking about lives taken, perhaps I should not be joking about these very serious issues.
I just can’t help myself with the simplifications of the questions when, “an impartial, competently conducted investigation to determine, as far as possible, the cause of death of each and every victim and the person(s) responsible. ” has never occurred in Thailand. And mind you, I didn’t make the question up, I am simply repeating the question the government in waiting has been asking when they were in Opposition.
But given the political realities, I am hopeful that berating the questions back to them will create the nuance (from mindful people such as yourself) required for such an investigation.
So while you find my questioning unhelpful… I find it that it is the best thing that should happen. So I suppose that is where we are different.
You asked “Who ordered the killing of 91 people in Rajprasong?” Your question is based on an inaccurate assumption.
There were in fact two major incidents of violence in April-May last years, the first at Khok Wua in which 26 people were killed, and the second at Pratchprasong in which 42 people died. There were also 23 deaths elsewhere.
During the first incident it is apparent that the army came under sufficiently heavy fire to suffer 5 men killed and a number of others wounded, several severely, while in the second incident only 1 soldier was killed, and friendly fire was a possible cause. It is also probable that the majority, but not all, of the 21 civilians killed at Khok Wua and the 41 civilians killed at Ratchaprasong died as a result of military gunfire.
My point is that what is required is an impartial, competently conducted investigation to determine, as far as possible, the cause of death of each and every victim and the person(s) responsible. Questions based in inaccurate assumptions, like “Who ordered the killing of 91 people in Rajprasong?” when the total killed there was 42, and the partial retraction “Whatever the deal, 91 people died”, will not advance the search for truth and are less than helpful.
Only a properly constituted and empowered fact finding commission could do that. And given the Thai record in the wake of similar incidents, particularly October 1973, October 1976 and May 1992, I’m not hopeful this will happen, even under a Phuea Thai government.
Democrats really showed that they alarmingly lack any sort of leadership skills and even the ability to think strategically.
They show the same alarming lack of vision/skill/masterplan with running the country as well.
Given that corruption is the same, no wonder PTP got a mandate!
Having said that, I hope the Democrats revamp themselves fully and become a party that can actually act to meet the needs of the people. Their failure to do so makes them just as culpable as the government to reign in and abuse power.
See how PTP played in the Opposition? No matter what levers of the state the BJT and Dem did, they still won a mandate! That’s the Dem challenge, and its now proven that it doesn’t matter what media/airwaves/etc. etc. etc. you own and run, if you run well, and you are capable, people will vote for you. Simply being ‘good’ and ineffective is not needed.
I’ve read your comment maybe about 20 times, maybe you are trying to tell me something?
Or do you simply enjoy restating what I am stating to include more specifics and semantics?
Or rather, what is your point exactly?
Mine is simple if you haven’t got it; I will spell it out.
For all the talk here about accountability, deaths, justice etc. etc., I am saying that there is no difference, especially if a backdoor deal has been made. I don’t believe Lese Majeste will be reduced, just reused to benefit another political group.
Having said that, let’s note the positives (since I feel you’re quite nitty gritty on details)
The people have spoken, they would rather ‘their’ dictator who takes action and does things rather than a do-gooder who does zilch. I find that 5 years after the coup (the same amount of time Thaksin was in power), that the peasants return to him constantly is less about Thaksin now and more about a message to those who are in power. This is my reading of the outcome, there will be hundreds (if not thousands more), and given that each of us has our own ability to perceive than perhaps millions and millions more readings are available! Probably why I wasn’t so bothered about spelling it out exactly. And in case you get all shocked, the term peasants here is used as a metaphor. And not as in I met her for lunch either.
Given the current situation, and the fact that (ideally) the new government would not want to really delve into any investigation that would blame anybody, especially those on their side who played a part in seriously upping the ante, that we are just going to have more of the same.
With that scenario, will the Red Shirts, given that they were the majority of the people who lost their lives, still pressure this government for the seemingly lost Truth? See: my concern is less the government and more about what people will do.
So now, we will know if the Red Shirt is independent or not. Or rather, will it be found out that it’s just another patronage network biding the needs of its master. Now, I point no accusations here, I don’t know if it is or is not. Jim Taylor says it is independent and self-sustaining, Les Abbey says it is a patronage network. I’m letting the factors of time + action tell me.
The question I ask, and why I ask is because I’m one of those dudes who (in Thai political terms) like effective Opposition politics and threw my hand in to the very clean dude who did 4 times better than expected. If you’re shocked at why he is very clean… then I say he has had more people bathe him than I can possibly imagine!
Having said that, and given that this question was raised throughout by Phuea Thai and by extension the Red Shirt movement; I would like this new 4 seat opposition ask the same, since unlike the other parties involved, they really were not involved.
I’m waiting for Yingluck to sign a deal with Citra or Ponds.
The TV commercial writes itself: montage of the PM campaigning upcountry, hours in the hot sun — how does she maintain that light-skin patrician appearance?
Cut to PM in her smartly appointed bathroom, smiling as she applies the cream.
VO: “Citra cream. So you can appeal to the poor, without actually looking like them.”
I don’t recall anyone being found guilty of the deaths in October 1973 , October 1976, May 1992 or Tak Bai in 2004, let alone the “war on drugs”, Khrue Seh Mosque, or the War to Liberate the State of Pattani (sorry, the campaign to suppress the separatist insurgency). I’m not expecting anything different from Yingluck, but we can at least try to keep published accounts of what happened as accurate as possible.
Abhisit’s government did nothing to find accountability or to isolate the factors (usually it is a series of mistakes) that lead to the unfortunate killings of people, soldiers, and reporters. (Mostly people who are/were red shirt supporters though).
A Facebook post says, “Now, what if all yellow-minded Malaysians around the world decide to host rallies in stadia where they live. That would be quite a statement, wouldn’t it?”
We need this guy on the Bersih 2.0 global organising committee.
Tnx, bro. I remember a baby girl in her father’s arms, some years back, shouting “Reformasi!” as I drove away. From the mouths of babes then. For all the babes now.
Is it just history or a warning of what is to come? Human Rights Watch does seem to have its problems with Thai governments of various persuasions. This is from a 2005 Wikileaks cable.
On February 24, 2005, Brad Adams, executive director of the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch (HRW), gave a press conference at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand (FCCT). Adams pulled no punches and summarized the trend in human rights in Thailand as “clearly and unambiguously negative.” He noted this as a particular disappointment after the optimism generated following Thailand’s adoption of the 1997 Constitution, which contained many provisions for improved civil and democratic rights for the Thai people. He said the first four-year Thaksin administration had seen a gradual erosion of democratic gains from the previous Chuan Leekpai administration. Adams, commenting negatively on a recently announced security zoning plan for the three Muslim majority provinces in Thailand’s deep South (Ref A), stated that PM Thaksin needs to move from “CEO mode to listening mode.”
That piece about the erosion of democratic gains from the Chuan government and the disappointment that the improvements of the 1997 Constitution didn’t really see the light of day rings very true.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
Not sure whether Chermsak Pinthong’s following comments can be seen as “humorous” (from Naew Na newspaper, July 4, 2011, p. 3).
1) If Yingluck had not been the younger sister of Thaksin, but would have had solely to rely on her own, would she have wanted to stand in this election, and announced that she wanted to be the prime minister? Not long before the election, she had said in an interview that she had no interest whatsoever to enter politics.
2) If Yingluck had not been the younger sister of Thaksin, but would have solely relied on her own attributes, experiences, knowledge, capability, and achievements in her life, if she had entered the PTP announcing that she wanted to run for an MP seat, and wanted to be prime minister of Thailand, would the chairperson and the executive board of the party have been willing to make her the candidate of PTP, or not? Considering only her personal capabilities is she sufficiently well prepared or not?
The Democrats in Bangkok
It is indeed surprising how many people, including Thai journalists, still adhere to the idea that BKK is a “traditional stronghold” of the Democrats. In fact, they have only won high numbers of seats when the Bangkok voters saw no better electoral option around. Therefore, when the Prachakorn Thai, Phalang Dharma, and then the TRT were around, the Democrats fared poorly in BKK.
The Democrats in Bangkok
What was the turnout in Bangkok? Normally it is much lower – about 60% – than the national average.
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra
@Dickie asked: “who ordered the killing, and who are the person responsible for it?”
As to your first question, no one actually knows who ordered it.
I can, however, answer you on the second question: who is responsible?
This is the rule of criminal complicity:
http://www.drtomoconnor.com/3010/3010lect03.htm
-the doctrine of respondeat superior — this establishes the notion of “vicarious liability” where a [b]master is responsible for the illegal conduct of their servant. The relationship is what creates the liability. It dispenses with the element of actus reus in the same way strict liability dispenses with the element of mens rea.[/b] Officers of a corporation can be punished by imprisonment only if the corporation has been held “criminally liable” first, the officer has been found guilty of malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance by their corporation, and (unless stated otherwise in statute) the officer causes, requests, commands, or in any way authorizes the illegal act to be committed.
So according to the doctrine of respondeat superior (as explained above), a master has a duty to stop his ‘servants’ for committing a criminal wrong. [b]He might not be liable for the wrong which his servant commits if he does not know about it. But once he knows that his servant has done something wrong, he has the duty to stop his servant from committing a wrong immediately. [/b] Failure to stop his servant from committing a wrong means the master will be held responsible for the crimes his servants committed.
Now, we know that the army killed the protesters. This is indeed a criminal wrong. So the master of the army would be responsible for their wrong, according to the doctrine of respondeat superior.
Now, who is the Head of Thai Armed Forces?
Thai Constitutional 2007:
http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/2007/1.html
Section 10 of the 2007 Constitution clearly states who is the Head of Thai Armed Forces. Look it up, if you want to know who is responsible 😉
The Democrats in Bangkok
Are their any data available on how different age groups voted?
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
I used to think Thailand could learn a thing or two from North Korea about running a decent personality cult.
Then after spending a few evenings watching the Thai royal news, I began to have second thoughts, and Yingluck’s election campaign convinced me. This is one area in which Thailand is second to none! If Julia wants to be re-elected, she should have her ambassador to Thailand seek out Yingluck’s campaign manager immediately. Under free trade agreement provisions, of course.
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra
#45
“Only a properly constituted and empowered fact finding commission could do that. And given the Thai record in the wake of similar incidents, particularly October 1973, October 1976 and May 1992, I’m not hopeful this will happen, even under a Phuea Thai government.”
that is exactly what I am saying.
Maybe with more jest, but given that we are talking about lives taken, perhaps I should not be joking about these very serious issues.
I just can’t help myself with the simplifications of the questions when, “an impartial, competently conducted investigation to determine, as far as possible, the cause of death of each and every victim and the person(s) responsible. ” has never occurred in Thailand. And mind you, I didn’t make the question up, I am simply repeating the question the government in waiting has been asking when they were in Opposition.
But given the political realities, I am hopeful that berating the questions back to them will create the nuance (from mindful people such as yourself) required for such an investigation.
So while you find my questioning unhelpful… I find it that it is the best thing that should happen. So I suppose that is where we are different.
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra
Dickie Simpkins # 44.
You asked “Who ordered the killing of 91 people in Rajprasong?” Your question is based on an inaccurate assumption.
There were in fact two major incidents of violence in April-May last years, the first at Khok Wua in which 26 people were killed, and the second at Pratchprasong in which 42 people died. There were also 23 deaths elsewhere.
During the first incident it is apparent that the army came under sufficiently heavy fire to suffer 5 men killed and a number of others wounded, several severely, while in the second incident only 1 soldier was killed, and friendly fire was a possible cause. It is also probable that the majority, but not all, of the 21 civilians killed at Khok Wua and the 41 civilians killed at Ratchaprasong died as a result of military gunfire.
My point is that what is required is an impartial, competently conducted investigation to determine, as far as possible, the cause of death of each and every victim and the person(s) responsible. Questions based in inaccurate assumptions, like “Who ordered the killing of 91 people in Rajprasong?” when the total killed there was 42, and the partial retraction “Whatever the deal, 91 people died”, will not advance the search for truth and are less than helpful.
Only a properly constituted and empowered fact finding commission could do that. And given the Thai record in the wake of similar incidents, particularly October 1973, October 1976 and May 1992, I’m not hopeful this will happen, even under a Phuea Thai government.
The Democrats in Bangkok
Agreed Les,
Democrats really showed that they alarmingly lack any sort of leadership skills and even the ability to think strategically.
They show the same alarming lack of vision/skill/masterplan with running the country as well.
Given that corruption is the same, no wonder PTP got a mandate!
Having said that, I hope the Democrats revamp themselves fully and become a party that can actually act to meet the needs of the people. Their failure to do so makes them just as culpable as the government to reign in and abuse power.
See how PTP played in the Opposition? No matter what levers of the state the BJT and Dem did, they still won a mandate! That’s the Dem challenge, and its now proven that it doesn’t matter what media/airwaves/etc. etc. etc. you own and run, if you run well, and you are capable, people will vote for you. Simply being ‘good’ and ineffective is not needed.
The Democrats in Bangkok
The difference a year made. I suspect some in the Democrat Party are ruing they didn’t go to the polls in November last year.
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra
Seh Fah #42
My point exactly, no change in the game.
I’ve read your comment maybe about 20 times, maybe you are trying to tell me something?
Or do you simply enjoy restating what I am stating to include more specifics and semantics?
Or rather, what is your point exactly?
Mine is simple if you haven’t got it; I will spell it out.
For all the talk here about accountability, deaths, justice etc. etc., I am saying that there is no difference, especially if a backdoor deal has been made. I don’t believe Lese Majeste will be reduced, just reused to benefit another political group.
Having said that, let’s note the positives (since I feel you’re quite nitty gritty on details)
The people have spoken, they would rather ‘their’ dictator who takes action and does things rather than a do-gooder who does zilch. I find that 5 years after the coup (the same amount of time Thaksin was in power), that the peasants return to him constantly is less about Thaksin now and more about a message to those who are in power. This is my reading of the outcome, there will be hundreds (if not thousands more), and given that each of us has our own ability to perceive than perhaps millions and millions more readings are available! Probably why I wasn’t so bothered about spelling it out exactly. And in case you get all shocked, the term peasants here is used as a metaphor. And not as in I met her for lunch either.
Given the current situation, and the fact that (ideally) the new government would not want to really delve into any investigation that would blame anybody, especially those on their side who played a part in seriously upping the ante, that we are just going to have more of the same.
With that scenario, will the Red Shirts, given that they were the majority of the people who lost their lives, still pressure this government for the seemingly lost Truth? See: my concern is less the government and more about what people will do.
So now, we will know if the Red Shirt is independent or not. Or rather, will it be found out that it’s just another patronage network biding the needs of its master. Now, I point no accusations here, I don’t know if it is or is not. Jim Taylor says it is independent and self-sustaining, Les Abbey says it is a patronage network. I’m letting the factors of time + action tell me.
The question I ask, and why I ask is because I’m one of those dudes who (in Thai political terms) like effective Opposition politics and threw my hand in to the very clean dude who did 4 times better than expected. If you’re shocked at why he is very clean… then I say he has had more people bathe him than I can possibly imagine!
Having said that, and given that this question was raised throughout by Phuea Thai and by extension the Red Shirt movement; I would like this new 4 seat opposition ask the same, since unlike the other parties involved, they really were not involved.
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
R. N. England – 2
Making a sleazy deal with the oppressors of the Thai people is much easier and more profitable than the task of national liberation.
Ho ho ho or 555.
Didn’t take long did it RN? First of many I suspect.
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
I’m waiting for Yingluck to sign a deal with Citra or Ponds.
The TV commercial writes itself: montage of the PM campaigning upcountry, hours in the hot sun — how does she maintain that light-skin patrician appearance?
Cut to PM in her smartly appointed bathroom, smiling as she applies the cream.
VO: “Citra cream. So you can appeal to the poor, without actually looking like them.”
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra
Dickie Simkins # 42.
I don’t recall anyone being found guilty of the deaths in October 1973 , October 1976, May 1992 or Tak Bai in 2004, let alone the “war on drugs”, Khrue Seh Mosque, or the War to Liberate the State of Pattani (sorry, the campaign to suppress the separatist insurgency). I’m not expecting anything different from Yingluck, but we can at least try to keep published accounts of what happened as accurate as possible.
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
Yinglak’s former high-school teacher notes that she “carried the sign in leading the athletes during sports day”. Could be useful …
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
‘Pyongyang patter’ might be mistaken for something else, since HMTK’s Sufficiency Economy’s closest parallel is North Korea’s concept of “juche”
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra
Seh #41
Whatever the deal, 91 people died.
Abhisit’s government did nothing to find accountability or to isolate the factors (usually it is a series of mistakes) that lead to the unfortunate killings of people, soldiers, and reporters. (Mostly people who are/were red shirt supporters though).
Will Yingluck be any better?
Or is more of the same just the name of the game?
Yingluck Shinawatra: The lighter side
I love the pointed jab
http://notthenation.com/2011/07/army-thaksin-pleased-with-successful-illusion-of-difference/
Making a sleazy deal with the oppressors of the Thai people is much easier and more profitable than the task of national liberation.
UMNO – Malaysia’s scourge
A Facebook post says, “Now, what if all yellow-minded Malaysians around the world decide to host rallies in stadia where they live. That would be quite a statement, wouldn’t it?”
We need this guy on the Bersih 2.0 global organising committee.
Tnx, bro. I remember a baby girl in her father’s arms, some years back, shouting “Reformasi!” as I drove away. From the mouths of babes then. For all the babes now.
More on Marshall’s Thai Story
Is it just history or a warning of what is to come? Human Rights Watch does seem to have its problems with Thai governments of various persuasions. This is from a 2005 Wikileaks cable.
http://www.zenjournalist.com/2011/06/05bangkok1454/
On February 24, 2005, Brad Adams, executive director of the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch (HRW), gave a press conference at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand (FCCT). Adams pulled no punches and summarized the trend in human rights in Thailand as “clearly and unambiguously negative.” He noted this as a particular disappointment after the optimism generated following Thailand’s adoption of the 1997 Constitution, which contained many provisions for improved civil and democratic rights for the Thai people. He said the first four-year Thaksin administration had seen a gradual erosion of democratic gains from the previous Chuan Leekpai administration. Adams, commenting negatively on a recently announced security zoning plan for the three Muslim majority provinces in Thailand’s deep South (Ref A), stated that PM Thaksin needs to move from “CEO mode to listening mode.”
That piece about the erosion of democratic gains from the Chuan government and the disappointment that the improvements of the 1997 Constitution didn’t really see the light of day rings very true.