We’re believe that “The Invisible hands” are Privy councilor “Prem Tinsulanonda” and his military’s subordinate
But “Ai Hea Sung Kha” be accused to the “Centre for the Administration of Peace and Order” (in thai ; р╕ир╕н.р╕гр╕к , р╕ир╕н.р╕Й) that have Aphisit (ex-PM, Suthep (ex-MP, Anupong (ex-Commander-in-Cheif), Tarid (DSI Head) and some of Judge that have close connection with Prem Tinsulanonda as members that sign the order to let the Royal Thai Army begin the Crackdown with the Red Shirt Protester last year
Some of Red Shirt who anti-monarchy are use that word to accuse to the higher than Privy councilor rank but most of the red shirt are not followed that
I just note that previous attempts to control and limit the military were, except for Thaksins failed attempt to intervene in the military reshuffle list, not under the authority of a democratically elected government
and they did not involve parliament voting in the requirement for the military to be subject to Thai civilian legal processes
a few court cases would reduce officer numbers and reduce the attractiveness of military careers
[Note: the case has not been heard yet. Charges have been laid but, as far as I know, no-one has been convicted. See this report. AW]
HMM (22). A very interesting court case in Australia has ended with the conviction and imprisonment of directors and senior executives of a company affiliated with the Reserve Bank of Australia (!) for bribing officials in Malaysia. The bribes were paid to secure a contract for the company to produce plastic bank notes for Malaysia. I think this case has wide ramifications for Australian companies dealing with many countries. It may put Australia at a trade disadvantage, but frankly, I think Australia is rich enough to show some moral leadership here. It puts Australia in a good position to press for less corruption in world trade, to the benefit of fair traders in places like Thailand who would otherwise be screwed by their own people.
The answer is “The unconstitutional power and The invisible hands”.
In 2006, before the September coup, there was an attempt to assassinate former PM.Dr.Thaksin Shinawatara. A couple days later, Thaksin said there was unconstitional power trying to topple him and his cabinet.
In 2008, not long after the 2007 election, former PM.Samak Sunthornvej said there was “The invisible hands” trying to prevent him from forming the coalition cabinet.
Up to now, these two news never attracted the media. No one even talk about this publicly. I don’t know why all the mainstream media in the country keep silent. If these happened in western country, things might have been very different, possibly, the country can turn into fire.
In my opinion, we’ve to verify the truth who is “The invisible hands”? How the “Unconstitutional Power” work?, if we want to get out of the divisive country. The election on 3 July indicated(demarcated) the country has been totally divided into 2 parts ie the north, north eastern, the central and part of Bangkok for the red and the south and the major part of Bangkok for the yellow.
We can compare the political situation in Thailand to a critical patient, without knowing the detailed and exact information from signs, symptoms, investigations, the physician can’t get the correct diagnosis and finally the patient wouldn’t get proper treatment. Unfortunately for Thailand, no one wants to reveal the truth or in other word the truth can’t be spoken out in the country. How can we solve the problem without knowing exactly what was happening?
Yes, it was September 19th, 2010, indeed. The chorus began right after Sombat unsuccessfully tried to persuade the crowd to move the protest to Wat Pratum when they began to block Rajaprasong intersection (i have a hilarious photo of a disheveled, overwhelmed and helpless Sombat sitting with police trying to sort the mess out).
Additionally, that day the hundreds of quite shocking graffiti were written on the street and especially on the construction wall of Central World.
The historical importance of this day cannot be underestimated, especially the organic manner in which all this occurred, without any organization at all, no leaders (Sombat may have been the symbolic figure that said he will come, and who this way drew Red Shirts there, but he was in no way in control of anything there).
I would prefer to see Australia playing by Thai rules, bribes and all. Plus minor inconveniences like visa runs to Port Moresby every three months for Thai visitors to Australia, no Thai ownership of Australian land, etc. All in the name of equality and reciprocity, of course.
The answer is “The unconstitutional power and The invisible hands”.
In 2006, before the September coup, there was an attempt to assassinate former PM.Dr.Thaksin Shinawatara. A couple days later, Thaksin said there was unconstitional power trying to topple him and his cabinet.
In 2008, not long after the 2007 election, former PM.Samak Sunthornvej said there was “The invisible hands” trying to prevent him from forming the coalition cabinet.
Up to now, these two news never attracted the media. No one even talk about this publicly. I don’t know why all the mainstream media in the country keep silent. If these happened in western country, things might have been very different, possibly, the country can turn into fire.
In my opinion, we’ve to verify the truth who is “The invisible hands”? How the “Unconstitutional Power” work?, if we want to get out of the divisive country. The election on 3 July indicated(demarcated) the country has been totally divided into 2 parts ie the north, north eastern, the central and part of Bangkok for the red and the south and the major part of Bangkok for the yellow.
We can compare the political situation in Thailand to a critical patient, without knowing the detailed and exact information from signs, symptoms, investigations the physician can’t get the correct diagnosis and finally the patient wouldn’t get proper treatment. Unfortunately for Thailand, no one wants to reveal the truth or in other word the truth can’t be spoken out in the country. How can we solve the problem without knowing exactly what was happening?
Johns initial comment seems to have been missed. John asks ” Do I take it that Australian investors must pay tribute/bribes to wealthy Thai patrons in order to do business or is this all conveniently kept under the table so as not to expose real core issues as to why Thailand can not reform its facade of a democracy.”
Thailand’s internal politics are a matter for Thais. But as John points out Australia has a free trade agreement with Thailand – which has almost exclusively benefitted Thailand – Australia’s exports to Thailand are about the same as before the FTA while Thailand’s exports are three times greater. I am happy for Thailand that the FTA has led to more jobs – but Thai consumers miss out from cheaper Australian goods and services.
From personal experience there is no doubt that extensive (but smiling) corruption underpins business in Thailand. Considerable difficulties in taking legal action even for flagrant contract breaches in Thailand means that who you know means more than legal accountability. This kind of environment promotes corruption. Australian exporters and investors (unless a major company) have far fewer legal remedies in Thailand than those available to Thais in Australia.
These ‘non-tariff barriers’ in Thailand seemd to be ignored by Australian FTA negotiators. Rather than just criticising Thia political processes, a more practical way of helping Thailand would be to try to use the FTA to improve legal remedies for investors in Thailand. Making it clear that the economic merits counts for more than family etc affiliations would help to raise standards – which is also likely to have a flow-on effect on politics in the longer term.
Interesting! I just checked my Thai-English dictionary and it seems that ‘hia’ isn’t exactly ‘iguana’, but it is ‘monitor lizard’ like you said. Thank you for the correction, I appreciate it 🙂
I was wrong. A friend has reminded me that the first time that the Red Shirts shouted “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в р╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕Жр╣Ир╕▓” was actually one rally earlier, i.e. on the 19 September 2010 (the coup anniversary and the first after the May crackdown), the 10 October rally I mentioned above was the second after this one. My apology to readers and thanks to the friend.
I am aware of at least two previous attempts to reform the military, both initiated by senior commanders and both failures.
In 1985 General Arthit Kamlangek tried to reduce the number of generals by making all Supreme Command positions secondary appointments. For example, the army commander was concurrently the supreme commander, while the navy and air force commanders were concurrently the deputy commanders. This reduced Supreme Command to little more than a committee of army, navy and air force commanders that met increasingly infrequently.
When General Chawalit became supreme commander/army commander in 1986, he re-established the supreme command positions as separate appointments, transferred generals he didn’t trust to Supreme Command, and filled the newly-created vacancies with men more to his liking.
In 1992 General Wimon Wongwanit, the army commander, tried to reduce the number of officers, especially generals, by introducing different retiring ages for different ranks i.e. 5-star generals at 60, 4-star generals at 58, lieutenant generals at 56, major generals at 54, special colonels (equivalent to brigadier generals) at 52, and every other commissioned officer at 50. In an army where every military academy graduate could expect to be promoted to major general at age 55 at the latest, and every commissioned officer to serve until age 60, this proposal provoked fierce opposition and Wimon failed to push it through.
It will be interesting to see if Yingluck/Thaksin have any better luck. Their best bet would be a smaller, better paid and more professional officer corps, and a smaller inventory of properly maintained arms and equipment, but I doubt it’s achievable.
Just after the coup in 2006 I attended a memorable lecture by Professor Thongchai Winichakul in London (as reported here) where the audience was confronted by the complexities of “king-making” in the Thai scheme. As I recall, Thongchai intimated that competition over “king-making” duties should not be taken to imply that the outcome is contested. Nor can it be taken as guaranteed that the outcome is clear-cut.
Perhaps this is a matter for New Mandala readers to consider in more detail. If we understand the “king-making” component of the 2006 coup as a serious issue how does it look with almost five years’ worth of hindsight? Can we presume that Thaksin and other elite players have the same attitudes that they held so many years ago? There has been a torrent of water under the bridge in other respects. Is the issue of “king-making” the same?
P.S. The “р╣Др╕нр╣Й” in the title of that video put up by the uploader was not actually shouted by the reds in the video. Have to listen to the shout itself: “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в ordered the killing, р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в gets out.”
I also think that Mark’s interpretation is closer to the actual severity of the word “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в”. Also this word (‘hia’) literally means ‘iguana’, but it is the word of severe profanity (yes, similar to the f*** word in English). In Thai culture, Thais belief that iguana (hia) is an animal which can cause bankruptcy, extreme bad luck, and a divided family. Thus, if one is called ‘hia’, that means they are the lowest of the low creature.
If you talk to any red shirt, they will tell you that they believe there are two people who ordered the massacre. The Reds call these two ‘mysterious’ persons who ordered the 2010 massacre “р╣Др╕нр╣Йр╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕вр╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕Жр╣Ир╕▓ & р╕нр╕╡р╕лр╣Ир╕▓р╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕вр╕┤р╕З” (Ai Hia Sung Kha & E-Haar Sung Ying), which, to literally translate to English, “Mr. Iguana Orders Killing & Mrs.(or Miss) Cholera Orders Shooting”.
Ai = “Mr.” but it is a very impolite way of calling someone “Mr”.
Hia = Iguana
Sung = Orders
Kha = Killing
E = “Mrs or Miss”, but it’s a very impolite way of calling someone Mrs/Miss
Haar = Cholera
Sung = Orders
Ying = Shooting
“р╣Др╕нр╣Йр╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в” is also a crucial code among those who won’t refer to their opponents by name.
Among the Red Shirts, and in the specific context of THIS sentence, “opponent” here should be in the singular, as they are quite unanimous what particular person they mean. The sentence itself is not some generic insult; it has specific meaning, often being chanted in rhyme with another sentence, “р╕нр╕╡р╕лр╣Ир╕▓ ordered the shooting”; also referring to a(nother) particular person.
It was first chanted by thousands of Red Shirts at Ratchaprasong intersection on 10 October 2010 and has been very popular among the Red Shirts ever since. Here’s the video of that quite historic moment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQUC1tosf4Q Notice that on that occasion the sentence wass slightly different: р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в ordered the killing (without the “р╣Др╕нр╣Й”) and it was followed by another sentence “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в get out”, later dropped out in popularity and replaced by the “р╕нр╕╡р╕лр╣Ир╕▓ ordered the shooting”, which was added at later rallies not long afterward.
Don’t ask me who the persons in the sentence(s) are. I don’t know. I never chanted the sentence(s). 🙂
isnt the biggest challenge for Yingluck the need to control and remove the legal impunity of the military?
the military should be weakened by the decay in reverence for the monarchy over the last couple of years and even more so when the King is not available as a symbol
but Yingluck and the government will need all the authority of the mass of the people assisted by the strength and charisma of Thaksin to achieve any significant reform of the military
I believe Thaksin is fully appraised of this and respect his judgement in applying pressure with and through his sister for the good of Thailand
somehow I dont believe he will place his wealth or even personal power in the way of achieving real progress for Thailand
There are rumours that after CP becomes Rama X one of his top priorities will be to replace General Prem as chief privy councillor, perhaps with Thaksin.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Who ordered the killing?
I’m a member of red shirt in thailand
We’re believe that “The Invisible hands” are Privy councilor “Prem Tinsulanonda” and his military’s subordinate
But “Ai Hea Sung Kha” be accused to the “Centre for the Administration of Peace and Order” (in thai ; р╕ир╕н.р╕гр╕к , р╕ир╕н.р╕Й) that have Aphisit (ex-PM, Suthep (ex-MP, Anupong (ex-Commander-in-Cheif), Tarid (DSI Head) and some of Judge that have close connection with Prem Tinsulanonda as members that sign the order to let the Royal Thai Army begin the Crackdown with the Red Shirt Protester last year
Some of Red Shirt who anti-monarchy are use that word to accuse to the higher than Privy councilor rank but most of the red shirt are not followed that
Thailand’s precarious politics
Seh Fah #21
I just note that previous attempts to control and limit the military were, except for Thaksins failed attempt to intervene in the military reshuffle list, not under the authority of a democratically elected government
and they did not involve parliament voting in the requirement for the military to be subject to Thai civilian legal processes
a few court cases would reduce officer numbers and reduce the attractiveness of military careers
Thailand’s precarious politics
[Note: the case has not been heard yet. Charges have been laid but, as far as I know, no-one has been convicted. See this report. AW]
HMM (22). A very interesting court case in Australia has ended with the conviction and imprisonment of directors and senior executives of a company affiliated with the Reserve Bank of Australia (!) for bribing officials in Malaysia. The bribes were paid to secure a contract for the company to produce plastic bank notes for Malaysia. I think this case has wide ramifications for Australian companies dealing with many countries. It may put Australia at a trade disadvantage, but frankly, I think Australia is rich enough to show some moral leadership here. It puts Australia in a good position to press for less corruption in world trade, to the benefit of fair traders in places like Thailand who would otherwise be screwed by their own people.
Who ordered the killing?
The answer is “The unconstitutional power and The invisible hands”.
In 2006, before the September coup, there was an attempt to assassinate former PM.Dr.Thaksin Shinawatara. A couple days later, Thaksin said there was unconstitional power trying to topple him and his cabinet.
In 2008, not long after the 2007 election, former PM.Samak Sunthornvej said there was “The invisible hands” trying to prevent him from forming the coalition cabinet.
Up to now, these two news never attracted the media. No one even talk about this publicly. I don’t know why all the mainstream media in the country keep silent. If these happened in western country, things might have been very different, possibly, the country can turn into fire.
In my opinion, we’ve to verify the truth who is “The invisible hands”? How the “Unconstitutional Power” work?, if we want to get out of the divisive country. The election on 3 July indicated(demarcated) the country has been totally divided into 2 parts ie the north, north eastern, the central and part of Bangkok for the red and the south and the major part of Bangkok for the yellow.
We can compare the political situation in Thailand to a critical patient, without knowing the detailed and exact information from signs, symptoms, investigations, the physician can’t get the correct diagnosis and finally the patient wouldn’t get proper treatment. Unfortunately for Thailand, no one wants to reveal the truth or in other word the truth can’t be spoken out in the country. How can we solve the problem without knowing exactly what was happening?
Who ordered the killing?
“Somsak Jeamteerasakul”:
Yes, it was September 19th, 2010, indeed. The chorus began right after Sombat unsuccessfully tried to persuade the crowd to move the protest to Wat Pratum when they began to block Rajaprasong intersection (i have a hilarious photo of a disheveled, overwhelmed and helpless Sombat sitting with police trying to sort the mess out).
Additionally, that day the hundreds of quite shocking graffiti were written on the street and especially on the construction wall of Central World.
The historical importance of this day cannot be underestimated, especially the organic manner in which all this occurred, without any organization at all, no leaders (Sombat may have been the symbolic figure that said he will come, and who this way drew Red Shirts there, but he was in no way in control of anything there).
Thailand’s precarious politics
HMMM # 22
I would prefer to see Australia playing by Thai rules, bribes and all. Plus minor inconveniences like visa runs to Port Moresby every three months for Thai visitors to Australia, no Thai ownership of Australian land, etc. All in the name of equality and reciprocity, of course.
Who ordered the killing?
The answer is “The unconstitutional power and The invisible hands”.
In 2006, before the September coup, there was an attempt to assassinate former PM.Dr.Thaksin Shinawatara. A couple days later, Thaksin said there was unconstitional power trying to topple him and his cabinet.
In 2008, not long after the 2007 election, former PM.Samak Sunthornvej said there was “The invisible hands” trying to prevent him from forming the coalition cabinet.
Up to now, these two news never attracted the media. No one even talk about this publicly. I don’t know why all the mainstream media in the country keep silent. If these happened in western country, things might have been very different, possibly, the country can turn into fire.
In my opinion, we’ve to verify the truth who is “The invisible hands”? How the “Unconstitutional Power” work?, if we want to get out of the divisive country. The election on 3 July indicated(demarcated) the country has been totally divided into 2 parts ie the north, north eastern, the central and part of Bangkok for the red and the south and the major part of Bangkok for the yellow.
We can compare the political situation in Thailand to a critical patient, without knowing the detailed and exact information from signs, symptoms, investigations the physician can’t get the correct diagnosis and finally the patient wouldn’t get proper treatment. Unfortunately for Thailand, no one wants to reveal the truth or in other word the truth can’t be spoken out in the country. How can we solve the problem without knowing exactly what was happening?
Who ordered the killing?
Which killing? We have a few to chose from. Unfortunately, from both major sides of politics.
Thailand’s precarious politics
Johns initial comment seems to have been missed. John asks ” Do I take it that Australian investors must pay tribute/bribes to wealthy Thai patrons in order to do business or is this all conveniently kept under the table so as not to expose real core issues as to why Thailand can not reform its facade of a democracy.”
Thailand’s internal politics are a matter for Thais. But as John points out Australia has a free trade agreement with Thailand – which has almost exclusively benefitted Thailand – Australia’s exports to Thailand are about the same as before the FTA while Thailand’s exports are three times greater. I am happy for Thailand that the FTA has led to more jobs – but Thai consumers miss out from cheaper Australian goods and services.
From personal experience there is no doubt that extensive (but smiling) corruption underpins business in Thailand. Considerable difficulties in taking legal action even for flagrant contract breaches in Thailand means that who you know means more than legal accountability. This kind of environment promotes corruption. Australian exporters and investors (unless a major company) have far fewer legal remedies in Thailand than those available to Thais in Australia.
These ‘non-tariff barriers’ in Thailand seemd to be ignored by Australian FTA negotiators. Rather than just criticising Thia political processes, a more practical way of helping Thailand would be to try to use the FTA to improve legal remedies for investors in Thailand. Making it clear that the economic merits counts for more than family etc affiliations would help to raise standards – which is also likely to have a flow-on effect on politics in the longer term.
Who ordered the killing?
@Seh Fah said: “hia – monitor lizard, water monitor; shitty, rotten.”
Interesting! I just checked my Thai-English dictionary and it seems that ‘hia’ isn’t exactly ‘iguana’, but it is ‘monitor lizard’ like you said. Thank you for the correction, I appreciate it 🙂
Who ordered the killing?
I was wrong. A friend has reminded me that the first time that the Red Shirts shouted “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в р╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕Жр╣Ир╕▓” was actually one rally earlier, i.e. on the 19 September 2010 (the coup anniversary and the first after the May crackdown), the 10 October rally I mentioned above was the second after this one. My apology to readers and thanks to the friend.
Here’s the video of that (correct) historic moment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78tZJfWs1WU&feature=player_embedded#at=11
Thailand’s precarious politics
David Brown #19.
I am aware of at least two previous attempts to reform the military, both initiated by senior commanders and both failures.
In 1985 General Arthit Kamlangek tried to reduce the number of generals by making all Supreme Command positions secondary appointments. For example, the army commander was concurrently the supreme commander, while the navy and air force commanders were concurrently the deputy commanders. This reduced Supreme Command to little more than a committee of army, navy and air force commanders that met increasingly infrequently.
When General Chawalit became supreme commander/army commander in 1986, he re-established the supreme command positions as separate appointments, transferred generals he didn’t trust to Supreme Command, and filled the newly-created vacancies with men more to his liking.
In 1992 General Wimon Wongwanit, the army commander, tried to reduce the number of officers, especially generals, by introducing different retiring ages for different ranks i.e. 5-star generals at 60, 4-star generals at 58, lieutenant generals at 56, major generals at 54, special colonels (equivalent to brigadier generals) at 52, and every other commissioned officer at 50. In an army where every military academy graduate could expect to be promoted to major general at age 55 at the latest, and every commissioned officer to serve until age 60, this proposal provoked fierce opposition and Wimon failed to push it through.
It will be interesting to see if Yingluck/Thaksin have any better luck. Their best bet would be a smaller, better paid and more professional officer corps, and a smaller inventory of properly maintained arms and equipment, but I doubt it’s achievable.
Who ordered the killing?
CT #5
The Domnern-Sathienpong Thai-English Dictionary, 4th Edition, offers the following definitions:
hia – monitor lizard, water monitor; shitty, rotten.
ha – a spirit held responsible for plagues.
The Haas Thai-English Student’s Dictionary has:
hia – water monitor (regared as a creature of ill-omen).
ha – a spirit believed to be responsible for cholera, plague, rinderpest, anthrax; cholera, plague, rinderpest, anthrax.
Either way, the contempt expressed for two certain people, one male and one female, is palpable.
Thailand’s precarious politics
Thanks billyd and everyone,
Just after the coup in 2006 I attended a memorable lecture by Professor Thongchai Winichakul in London (as reported here) where the audience was confronted by the complexities of “king-making” in the Thai scheme. As I recall, Thongchai intimated that competition over “king-making” duties should not be taken to imply that the outcome is contested. Nor can it be taken as guaranteed that the outcome is clear-cut.
Perhaps this is a matter for New Mandala readers to consider in more detail. If we understand the “king-making” component of the 2006 coup as a serious issue how does it look with almost five years’ worth of hindsight? Can we presume that Thaksin and other elite players have the same attitudes that they held so many years ago? There has been a torrent of water under the bridge in other respects. Is the issue of “king-making” the same?
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Who ordered the killing?
P.S. The “р╣Др╕нр╣Й” in the title of that video put up by the uploader was not actually shouted by the reds in the video. Have to listen to the shout itself: “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в ordered the killing, р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в gets out.”
Who ordered the killing?
I also think that Mark’s interpretation is closer to the actual severity of the word “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в”. Also this word (‘hia’) literally means ‘iguana’, but it is the word of severe profanity (yes, similar to the f*** word in English). In Thai culture, Thais belief that iguana (hia) is an animal which can cause bankruptcy, extreme bad luck, and a divided family. Thus, if one is called ‘hia’, that means they are the lowest of the low creature.
If you talk to any red shirt, they will tell you that they believe there are two people who ordered the massacre. The Reds call these two ‘mysterious’ persons who ordered the 2010 massacre “р╣Др╕нр╣Йр╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕вр╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕Жр╣Ир╕▓ & р╕нр╕╡р╕лр╣Ир╕▓р╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕вр╕┤р╕З” (Ai Hia Sung Kha & E-Haar Sung Ying), which, to literally translate to English, “Mr. Iguana Orders Killing & Mrs.(or Miss) Cholera Orders Shooting”.
Ai = “Mr.” but it is a very impolite way of calling someone “Mr”.
Hia = Iguana
Sung = Orders
Kha = Killing
E = “Mrs or Miss”, but it’s a very impolite way of calling someone Mrs/Miss
Haar = Cholera
Sung = Orders
Ying = Shooting
Who ordered the killing?
“р╣Др╕нр╣Йр╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в” is also a crucial code among those who won’t refer to their opponents by name.
Among the Red Shirts, and in the specific context of THIS sentence, “opponent” here should be in the singular, as they are quite unanimous what particular person they mean. The sentence itself is not some generic insult; it has specific meaning, often being chanted in rhyme with another sentence, “р╕нр╕╡р╕лр╣Ир╕▓ ordered the shooting”; also referring to a(nother) particular person.
It was first chanted by thousands of Red Shirts at Ratchaprasong intersection on 10 October 2010 and has been very popular among the Red Shirts ever since. Here’s the video of that quite historic moment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQUC1tosf4Q Notice that on that occasion the sentence wass slightly different: р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в ordered the killing (without the “р╣Др╕нр╣Й”) and it was followed by another sentence “р╣Ар╕лр╕╡р╣Йр╕в get out”, later dropped out in popularity and replaced by the “р╕нр╕╡р╕лр╣Ир╕▓ ordered the shooting”, which was added at later rallies not long afterward.
Don’t ask me who the persons in the sentence(s) are. I don’t know. I never chanted the sentence(s). 🙂
Thailand’s precarious politics
isnt the biggest challenge for Yingluck the need to control and remove the legal impunity of the military?
the military should be weakened by the decay in reverence for the monarchy over the last couple of years and even more so when the King is not available as a symbol
but Yingluck and the government will need all the authority of the mass of the people assisted by the strength and charisma of Thaksin to achieve any significant reform of the military
I believe Thaksin is fully appraised of this and respect his judgement in applying pressure with and through his sister for the good of Thailand
somehow I dont believe he will place his wealth or even personal power in the way of achieving real progress for Thailand
Regional voting
[…] Chris Baker in a guest post at New Mandala with some […]
Thailand’s precarious politics
billyd #10
There are rumours that after CP becomes Rama X one of his top priorities will be to replace General Prem as chief privy councillor, perhaps with Thaksin.