red shirt regional protest leaders (р╣Бр╕Бр╕Щр╕Щр╕│) are being picked off and murdered one by one, latest victims 60 year old from Sisaket Province named Mr Sawat Duangmani (р╕кр╕зр╕▓р╕Ч р╕Фр╕зр╕Зр╕бр╕Ур╕╡) was found murdered two days ago, stangled by his phakama (cloth) and his body dumped in Chonburi with hands tied behind his back. Then 26 year old Mr Sakkarin Kongkaew (р╕ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕┤р╕Щр╕Чр╕гр╣М р╕Бр╕нр╕Зр╣Бр╕Бр╣Йр╕з, or “р╕нр╣Йр╕зр╕Щ р╕Ър╕▒р╕зр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣И”), shot as he was driving his car. The current time is incomparable in scale and ruthlessness to anything in Thailand before, based on annhilating political opposition and civic protest against the state. Does anyone out there care? All I read about from academic colleagues is well, it is not comparable to October ’76 (?) Is that right?
Actually we have become colour blind. In my view it is worse and the failure to see this is worrying: How is it then, we may ask, can the death of so many people in a time of high technology when the whole world could see what the military and its parastatal mercenaries were doing, could these deaths of the Red Shirts be rendered invisible, insignificant, even worthless? None among the demonstrators initially thought they would be indiscriminately killed by the state apparatus in this context where the actions of the state could be seen by the world. So they were not middleclass (in the making) intellectuals as in the 1970s -does that make the event less significant? During 14 October 1973 (77 officially killed) and 6 October 1976 (45 officially killed) students and intellectuals lost their lives for much the same thing; a call for popular democracy and the overthrow of the authoritarian state. From 10 April until 20 May 2010 there were an (under-) estimated 88 persons killed – some now saying this is 90, and hundreds still missing; so why no outcry from human rights orgs? Because, I would suggest, most of these folk are seen as the subaltern, especially peasants, and their brown sun-baked bodies rendered valueless in the elite-middleclass discourse on the interpretation of a directed democracy. In one high class women’s magazine a highly derogatory comment was made in a letter referring to the Red Shirts as a group of “foot cleaning-rags” (р╕Юр╕зр╕Бр╕Ьр╣Йр╕▓р╣Ар╕Кр╣Зр╕Фр╣Ар╕Чр╣Йр╕▓), implying that the subaltern should stay down under the elite’s feet. The categories of person based on class are more clearly divided post crackdown as elites gather the moral high ground and the Red Shirts further deprecated by urban bourgeoisie. Derogatory comments were made to the Red Shirts as being “buffaloes”; relegated not just to the lowest level of the human order but to the animal world. The protest was simply discredited by the urban elites concerned with their own power and interests. It is not just colour blindness not to see this- but absolute blindness. So are we gonna now move on from the state initiated ploy to create distraction focussing on Thaksin to real matters at hand? some maybe…
Pluem is so elite he hates Thai middle classes with his gut.
He hates they dare to stand up to big money and demand rights and accountability. Meddlesome calamity, ingrates who leech of the wealth created by the likes of Pluem and talk as if they can survive on their own and know everything.
If only they’d shut up the really smart capitalists who are a true blessing to this country with their wits, skills and money, would fix Thailand in no time.
After all, who can take better care of the country’s poor and bridge the gap than the country’s rich? They didn’t become rich for nothing, you know, they have proven themselves and they are so rich they won’t need to steal anymore.
All they need in return is love and loyalty from the poor.
Abhisit hopes that with the start of World Cup today, people will be less interested in politics and he can easily push his road-map easily among the populace, who receive one-sided news from the govt only. (People Channel TV and community radios still closed while State of Emergency is not lifted yet, at least not until 7 July).
However, Mark will be disappointed coz’ at least there is one person that will continue to talk about politics and no soccer at all. This guy is Khun Pleum from this station:
In the above footage, Pleum talked about several double standards including the dissolution case of the democrat party.
Pleum Natakorn is younger than Mark in age but education-wise, he is not to be taken for granted though he is not from Oxford. As for his English, Pleum speaks American, instead of British English. Pleum is also a Mom Luang if you know what that means while Abhisit’s ancestors migrated from Vietnam. So Abhisit apologists in this forum, you better watch out.
The conflict between developers and civil groups is one that has been played out many times in the past, particularity well documented in rapidly industrializing Great Britain in the last century.
Its really about control of the “commons.”
Dictionary.net describes “commons” as “a pasture subject to common use,” and that aptly describes how much of the land and forest in Laos and Thailand is traditionally used.
For example, any land near the village that is not under production is fair game for the pasturing of cattle and water buffalo. Anyone can bring their animals to feed there and pick fruit that falls from the trees on that land. This includes fields, forest and the unworkable strips and margins of land along roads and streams.
Resource developers tend to ignore long standing traditions and claim total control over the land. In addition, many of their projects actually remove land from “commons” use.
Production of Eucalyptus trees is a good example. The effects of commercial tree production in Thailand has significantly changed the way of life in many villages, as land is removed from public use.
In a culture based to a large extent on foraging and public grazing land for livestock, this has caused a certain amount of hardship, particularity among the old and the poor who do not own significant amounts of land.
Sadly, the results of many of these development projects has been to bring wealth to a few, while bringing great harm to the society in which they operate.
Well, about the violence, although some may put the blame to UDD leaders for not stepping back while had a chance. I found they had some reason, not from Thaksin or hard liners.
The reason is, those protesters were “willing” to fight on, despite they were well aware of danger lining ahead. When one has nothing to lose, one will fight till dead.
is an example of the mother of sacrificed medical nurse, Kate, who was shot at the temple, vowed not to give up finding the truth. She is willing to fight till die, to find responsibility from whoever involved.
Another sample of retired police general Vasit Dejkunchorn’s insight and musings written in December 2008.
”but studying overseas and reading foreign publications may cause some Thais to believe books written by foreign academics who don’t really know Thailand or cause them to be in a dreamy state/absent-minded about what is written such as the criticism we see now. Especially since knowing that some Thais who studied overseas have been making reference to the “higher authorities” and state that foreign newspapers know or understand what is happening in the background of Thailand now. I have seen the feeble-mindedness/retardation of farangs spread to Thais and so it is necessary I give my thoughts on this issue].
A few hours ago, I sat down to add to Steve’s comments above – 47, but after a long day and my constant doubt that things will ever get better here, decided against it.
I was going to say something about the govt. education budget being a waste of time and money and that Abhisit’s vision noted in Steve’s post would never come to anything. Not because it is Abhisit’s vision, but that, frankly, I’ve heard it all before from previous PM’s etc. and that Thai teachers and the Thai education system in general is beyond hope.
I was then going to set out a couple of ideas to address the education mess in Thailand. Model, trial schools, doing away with exams/ tests, student centred learning, interactive project work etc. etc.
Then I read Tench’s post, followed the link and read the full piece from Bangkok Pundit.
I have no more desire to try to understand or to try to contribute to a country whose leaders utter such drivel, and who have knowingly consigned their own people to a form of modern slavery, a life of fear and ignorance and, ultimately a life with no hope.
The 1.5 billion baht Khem Kang budget is good, but the problem is that education doesn’t exist in a bubble outside of society. It’s very difficult to foster creative thought inside a classroom if it’s being discouraged outside of it.
“If [you] are not aware and believe that foreign academics know Thailand the King better and believe them then this means that the education you received from within Thailand and abroad is worthless. It doesn’t help as your mind is becoming degenerate, it is in decline, or you are abnormal/unhinged. Those who are relatives or friends of such a person should take them to seek treatement.”
For each announcement like that you can minus a bit from the Khem Kang budget.
This seems to be a list of persons arrested and charged under the Criminal Procedure Code for violations of emergency laws because they are being held in custody in formal places of detention such as prisons and juvenile centres. By law, those who are detained under the Emergency Decree have to be placed in informal places of detention such as army and police camps. That’s why the list doesn’t include the red shirt leaders as they are being held under the Emergency Decree.
Bangkokpost reported the other day that Thailand’s UN ambassador told the UN Human Rights Council that there are 16 persons who are being held under the Emergency Decree while the rest had been released.
Aurthurson, its been reported in the press that those arrested for violating the curfew have been given 1-2 month suspended sentences (ie. released on probation). As for your comment that some sentences had come quickly, be aware that the red leaders have also not been sentenced same as the PAD leaders. This includes their alleged crimes commited during the ASEAN summit, attack of PM at Ministry of Interior and Songkran riots of last year.
It was good of Dr. Tyrell to make us look back to the 70s. If we do not learn from history we will repeat the mistakes. Even more interesting was when she spoke about the killings of activist-farmers in the North back then. She could have mentioned the accusation that was common many years ago, before Thaksin became prime minister, that his mother was responsible for one of those when a local schoolteacher was assassinated leading a demonstration to stop a land-grab of some village common land. I wonder if the two men on the motorcycle with the weapons were tahan prahn?
Sorry that I didn’t answer your question in 84 properly, my reason being that I’m not really interesting in “what time frame Abhisit should use” since our whole argument was that whether the time frame was too short or too long, I think 1 to 3 months is reasonable, you disagreed so I accept your argument, however we both agreed that he shouldn’t dissolve the house. That’s why I just want to cut short our argument there since I want to talk more about the big picture, but if you want to know my answer to your comment no 78 then here is my 2 cent.
If the government quits amidst an intense security situation, is there a precedent?
Looking back in 2006, Thaksin was actually decided to step down and dissolve the house, he was acting as a caretaker, the protester doesn’t quite please and keep protest until the coup, so yes there’s a precedent to that. However, looking back there’s not military intervention, Thaksin never try to disperse the protest. Thaksin never brought in tanks or armed soldiers unlike Abhisit nor with Samak, Somchai, or even Surayuth. We have to admitted that before the event of 10th April crackdown, the protest was relatively peaceful but not until the government attempt to crack down on the protest on the 10th that the situation becoming more intense.
Anyhow, no matter what time frame it is, I still think that its doesn’t matter much if the whole governing system is so broken.
Today, during a Q&A session with foreign journalists, Abhisit made it clear that he is not going to reconcile with Thaksin and those working for him but try to reach to ordinary people instead.
Thaksin’s lawyer insists that no reconciliation is possible unless the govt deals with Thaksin himself.
The whole exercise is pointless, I, like FredKorat, believe that ordinary people are already reasonably reconciled with each other.
Abhisit’s efforts will never satisfy Thaksin’s minions and they will always scream that the country is deeply divided.
Hopefully the people will get some side benefits like equal opportunities, moves to bridge income gap or more general development in Isan/North.
What exactly are you trying to say about the second stop on the road map after sincerity?You raise nothing new here.
The author also talks about disposing of greed of the “elite” and about sharing wealth, how exactly does he propose to make that happen?
What other models are there of effective redistribution of wealth that would apply in a developing country? Nigeria?
At some point some people will need to accept that it is a fact of life that poor people usually end up working for rich people.
Thailand is a capitalist country, a system in which there are winners and losers. A system which rewards those who make the most of the opportunities that are presented to them, which in turn benefits the entire Nation in the form of tax revenue and development.
In short, greed should be encouraged, so long as its tempered by social responsibility.
What Thailand needs to do is present more opportunities to those who need them and educate them so that they can learn to recognise these for what they are, and give them the skills, know how and wherewithal to capitalise on them, and the intelligence and integrity to do so in a way that is socially sustainable,
What it should not do is penalise those who have already worked out how to do this themselves.
Certainly the sentencing of some has come very quickly, especially when compared to the completed lack of any punishment for the PAD leaders who seized Government House or the airports.
Flash! This just in… the PAD and The Regime are… the same people!
The PAD will NEVER be held accountable for ANYTHING. At least not by this regime. The PAD were just doing “what had to be done”.
The Regime clearly is a rogue outfit and must be recognized as such. Positing the possibility of symmetric treatment by this “government” of its behavior and that of the “terrorist” opposition unduly dignifies The Regime. They are street/gutter fighters whose crimes are great enough that they can afford an Oxonian frontman. They can rule by the gun alone.
My compliments on finding a very Thai way to deal with a very Thai issue. That said, I still wonder how many Thai in your position would find it possible to follow your example – would they be regarded as “not playing the game”?
JohnH (#46)
I showed the Straits Times version of that article to two Thai graduate friends of mine. Both grinned and neither was surprised. One gave me the example of his high school teacher reciting the point that “Thailand is #3 in the league table of developing nations”. When asked the (we might think natural) question as to which nations are #1 and #2, he was unable to answer and dismissed it as irrelevant.
On the point of 95% of school directors failing the tests, I’m less surprised. While the situation isn’t unknown outside Thailand, it seems almost endemic here that such people are appointed at best on the basis of seniority (as in longevity) and more usually of connections – as opposed to skill/expertise or anything related to “success”.
When one turns to the question of just who is going to teach the teachers in order to drive the necessary “upgrade” (surely not the benighted farang?), the process – if it ever gets under way – looks set to take at least a generation rather than a few years.
Still, not to worry – we have Abhisit’s declared intention to make Thailand “a creative ASEAN hub”* by 2012 – and “These [creative] products will bring about sustainable development and allow Thailand to be a country of thinkers”…..
Dr Tyrell Haberkorn clearly states that the currently accepted violation of Human Rights on all sides must come to an end and I could not agree more. As a supporter of the Red cause, but not of it’s current means, I would reiterate that the movement must entirely annul its association from the leadership sect which advocates the use of violence.
RS supporters/leaders — from Giles Ungpakorn to Thaksin Shinawatra — need a gut check about being complicit with or tolerating/consenting/initiating any acts of violence. The ‘life’ of the RS movement critically depends upon it — especially if it hopes to necessarily broaden its base of support.
A peaceful demonstration will gain traction without violence IF large enough; 100,000+ protesters satisfies this threshold. It has now been proven that the RS leadership has unnecessarily lead this movement into a wall. Until this fact is acknowledged by the people at large, the violence will continue and any perceived inroads gained will only be superficial.
As for governments, this one, like all others, are merely institutionalized strongmen given the legal authority to use force. As such, actions speak louder than words. “There is nothing to fear but fear itself”, and the Thai government should try to govern itself accordingly.
I have always maintained that the Reds could not take any step, forward or back, without the say so of Thaksin. That happened during the Rachaprasong riots-rebellion, when the Reds leadership had to scuttle peace negotiations with PM Abhisit’s government because of Thaksin’s say so . . . and that led to the crackdown.
Again: ” . . .The opposition has dismissed Abhisit’s (reconciliation) plan as little more than a bid to win popularity by his ruling Democrat party, saying reconciliation without Thaksin would not bring lasting peace.”
How to find the middle ground indeed Mr. Neptunian if your favored Reds could not get over their obsession with their patron/paymaster Thaksin Shinawatra?
I’m sorry, Tarrin, but again I don’t understand what your comments have to do with what I actually said. I do wonder if LesAbbey is right. If I do not follow the “logic” or “reasoning” of a particular tradition, sliding from topic to topic in the “right” way, then something goes wrong. For example, comments in reply to me try to force me to slide from topic to topic in the “right” way.
Isn’t there a more general logic where we can discuss what I really said? Isn’t there a way to talk about a limited topic without sliding onto another one? Why is that not interesting enough? Why, when I point out a gritty fact, is the fact not interesting enough and the reply ends up being about sliding away from the gritty fact, sliding towards the more sweeping propositions of the “party line” and “tradition”? We should question this.
I’m not saying I necessarily disagree with you on this or that point. But I am questioning why your replies to my gritty facts always end up not talking about those particular gritty facts. It’s a bit weird, isn’t it?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
red shirt regional protest leaders (р╣Бр╕Бр╕Щр╕Щр╕│) are being picked off and murdered one by one, latest victims 60 year old from Sisaket Province named Mr Sawat Duangmani (р╕кр╕зр╕▓р╕Ч р╕Фр╕зр╕Зр╕бр╕Ур╕╡) was found murdered two days ago, stangled by his phakama (cloth) and his body dumped in Chonburi with hands tied behind his back. Then 26 year old Mr Sakkarin Kongkaew (р╕ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕┤р╕Щр╕Чр╕гр╣М р╕Бр╕нр╕Зр╣Бр╕Бр╣Йр╕з, or “р╕нр╣Йр╕зр╕Щ р╕Ър╕▒р╕зр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣И”), shot as he was driving his car. The current time is incomparable in scale and ruthlessness to anything in Thailand before, based on annhilating political opposition and civic protest against the state. Does anyone out there care? All I read about from academic colleagues is well, it is not comparable to October ’76 (?) Is that right?
Actually we have become colour blind. In my view it is worse and the failure to see this is worrying: How is it then, we may ask, can the death of so many people in a time of high technology when the whole world could see what the military and its parastatal mercenaries were doing, could these deaths of the Red Shirts be rendered invisible, insignificant, even worthless? None among the demonstrators initially thought they would be indiscriminately killed by the state apparatus in this context where the actions of the state could be seen by the world. So they were not middleclass (in the making) intellectuals as in the 1970s -does that make the event less significant? During 14 October 1973 (77 officially killed) and 6 October 1976 (45 officially killed) students and intellectuals lost their lives for much the same thing; a call for popular democracy and the overthrow of the authoritarian state. From 10 April until 20 May 2010 there were an (under-) estimated 88 persons killed – some now saying this is 90, and hundreds still missing; so why no outcry from human rights orgs? Because, I would suggest, most of these folk are seen as the subaltern, especially peasants, and their brown sun-baked bodies rendered valueless in the elite-middleclass discourse on the interpretation of a directed democracy. In one high class women’s magazine a highly derogatory comment was made in a letter referring to the Red Shirts as a group of “foot cleaning-rags” (р╕Юр╕зр╕Бр╕Ьр╣Йр╕▓р╣Ар╕Кр╣Зр╕Фр╣Ар╕Чр╣Йр╕▓), implying that the subaltern should stay down under the elite’s feet. The categories of person based on class are more clearly divided post crackdown as elites gather the moral high ground and the Red Shirts further deprecated by urban bourgeoisie. Derogatory comments were made to the Red Shirts as being “buffaloes”; relegated not just to the lowest level of the human order but to the animal world. The protest was simply discredited by the urban elites concerned with their own power and interests. It is not just colour blindness not to see this- but absolute blindness. So are we gonna now move on from the state initiated ploy to create distraction focussing on Thaksin to real matters at hand? some maybe…
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Pluem is so elite he hates Thai middle classes with his gut.
He hates they dare to stand up to big money and demand rights and accountability. Meddlesome calamity, ingrates who leech of the wealth created by the likes of Pluem and talk as if they can survive on their own and know everything.
If only they’d shut up the really smart capitalists who are a true blessing to this country with their wits, skills and money, would fix Thailand in no time.
After all, who can take better care of the country’s poor and bridge the gap than the country’s rich? They didn’t become rich for nothing, you know, they have proven themselves and they are so rich they won’t need to steal anymore.
All they need in return is love and loyalty from the poor.
Welcome Thaksin 2.0
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Abhisit hopes that with the start of World Cup today, people will be less interested in politics and he can easily push his road-map easily among the populace, who receive one-sided news from the govt only. (People Channel TV and community radios still closed while State of Emergency is not lifted yet, at least not until 7 July).
However, Mark will be disappointed coz’ at least there is one person that will continue to talk about politics and no soccer at all. This guy is Khun Pleum from this station:
http://www.voicetv.co.th/content/15185/
In the above footage, Pleum talked about several double standards including the dissolution case of the democrat party.
Pleum Natakorn is younger than Mark in age but education-wise, he is not to be taken for granted though he is not from Oxford. As for his English, Pleum speaks American, instead of British English. Pleum is also a Mom Luang if you know what that means while Abhisit’s ancestors migrated from Vietnam. So Abhisit apologists in this forum, you better watch out.
Lao development debates in the news
Kong Lee
The conflict between developers and civil groups is one that has been played out many times in the past, particularity well documented in rapidly industrializing Great Britain in the last century.
Its really about control of the “commons.”
Dictionary.net describes “commons” as “a pasture subject to common use,” and that aptly describes how much of the land and forest in Laos and Thailand is traditionally used.
For example, any land near the village that is not under production is fair game for the pasturing of cattle and water buffalo. Anyone can bring their animals to feed there and pick fruit that falls from the trees on that land. This includes fields, forest and the unworkable strips and margins of land along roads and streams.
Resource developers tend to ignore long standing traditions and claim total control over the land. In addition, many of their projects actually remove land from “commons” use.
Production of Eucalyptus trees is a good example. The effects of commercial tree production in Thailand has significantly changed the way of life in many villages, as land is removed from public use.
In a culture based to a large extent on foraging and public grazing land for livestock, this has caused a certain amount of hardship, particularity among the old and the poor who do not own significant amounts of land.
Sadly, the results of many of these development projects has been to bring wealth to a few, while bringing great harm to the society in which they operate.
Thailand in crisis – Episode 3
Thank you again for this video.
Well, about the violence, although some may put the blame to UDD leaders for not stepping back while had a chance. I found they had some reason, not from Thaksin or hard liners.
The reason is, those protesters were “willing” to fight on, despite they were well aware of danger lining ahead. When one has nothing to lose, one will fight till dead.
In this news from Khao Sod (Thai)
http://www.khaosod.co.th/view_news.php?newsid=TUROd01ERXdNekV4TURZMU13PT0=§ionid=TURNd01RPT0=&day=TWpBeE1DMHdOaTB4TVE9PQ==
is an example of the mother of sacrificed medical nurse, Kate, who was shot at the temple, vowed not to give up finding the truth. She is willing to fight till die, to find responsibility from whoever involved.
Another news is this,
http://www.khaosod.co.th/view_newsonline.php?newsid=TVRJM05qSTBNekUwTWc9PQ==
two suspects (red shirts)are chained up to hospital bed, where they are being treated from gunshot wounds. That is violating human right, isn’t it?
Abhisit had a live speech broadcasting recently, begging Thai people not to “hate” each other.
The funny thing is, they put all blame to Thaksin. They say, if Thaksin stop, everything stops.
I have heard this since before the 2006 coup, those of his rivals, always said, the southern violence would stop, if Thaksin stepped down.
How comes the government ask its people not to hate, while the government doesn’t “like” its people?
An essay on “the dismal state of Thai education”
Thanks Tench,
Another sample of retired police general Vasit Dejkunchorn’s insight and musings written in December 2008.
”but studying overseas and reading foreign publications may cause some Thais to believe books written by foreign academics who don’t really know Thailand or cause them to be in a dreamy state/absent-minded about what is written such as the criticism we see now. Especially since knowing that some Thais who studied overseas have been making reference to the “higher authorities” and state that foreign newspapers know or understand what is happening in the background of Thailand now. I have seen the feeble-mindedness/retardation of farangs spread to Thais and so it is necessary I give my thoughts on this issue].
A few hours ago, I sat down to add to Steve’s comments above – 47, but after a long day and my constant doubt that things will ever get better here, decided against it.
I was going to say something about the govt. education budget being a waste of time and money and that Abhisit’s vision noted in Steve’s post would never come to anything. Not because it is Abhisit’s vision, but that, frankly, I’ve heard it all before from previous PM’s etc. and that Thai teachers and the Thai education system in general is beyond hope.
I was then going to set out a couple of ideas to address the education mess in Thailand. Model, trial schools, doing away with exams/ tests, student centred learning, interactive project work etc. etc.
Then I read Tench’s post, followed the link and read the full piece from Bangkok Pundit.
I have no more desire to try to understand or to try to contribute to a country whose leaders utter such drivel, and who have knowingly consigned their own people to a form of modern slavery, a life of fear and ignorance and, ultimately a life with no hope.
An essay on “the dismal state of Thai education”
The 1.5 billion baht Khem Kang budget is good, but the problem is that education doesn’t exist in a bubble outside of society. It’s very difficult to foster creative thought inside a classroom if it’s being discouraged outside of it.
The MCIT blocking-websites budget is?
Or from retired police general Vasit Dejkunchorn, aide to the King on the subject of LM (full text of article at Bangkok Pundit, http://us.asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pundit-blog/2008/12/those-foreigners-and-their-foreign.html)
“If [you] are not aware and believe that foreign academics know Thailand the King better and believe them then this means that the education you received from within Thailand and abroad is worthless. It doesn’t help as your mind is becoming degenerate, it is in decline, or you are abnormal/unhinged. Those who are relatives or friends of such a person should take them to seek treatement.”
For each announcement like that you can minus a bit from the Khem Kang budget.
Information about detainees and places of detention released by the Royal Thai Police
This seems to be a list of persons arrested and charged under the Criminal Procedure Code for violations of emergency laws because they are being held in custody in formal places of detention such as prisons and juvenile centres. By law, those who are detained under the Emergency Decree have to be placed in informal places of detention such as army and police camps. That’s why the list doesn’t include the red shirt leaders as they are being held under the Emergency Decree.
Bangkokpost reported the other day that Thailand’s UN ambassador told the UN Human Rights Council that there are 16 persons who are being held under the Emergency Decree while the rest had been released.
Aurthurson, its been reported in the press that those arrested for violating the curfew have been given 1-2 month suspended sentences (ie. released on probation). As for your comment that some sentences had come quickly, be aware that the red leaders have also not been sentenced same as the PAD leaders. This includes their alleged crimes commited during the ASEAN summit, attack of PM at Ministry of Interior and Songkran riots of last year.
Thailand in crisis – Episode 3
It was good of Dr. Tyrell to make us look back to the 70s. If we do not learn from history we will repeat the mistakes. Even more interesting was when she spoke about the killings of activist-farmers in the North back then. She could have mentioned the accusation that was common many years ago, before Thaksin became prime minister, that his mother was responsible for one of those when a local schoolteacher was assassinated leading a demonstration to stop a land-grab of some village common land. I wonder if the two men on the motorcycle with the weapons were tahan prahn?
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Ben – 86
Sorry that I didn’t answer your question in 84 properly, my reason being that I’m not really interesting in “what time frame Abhisit should use” since our whole argument was that whether the time frame was too short or too long, I think 1 to 3 months is reasonable, you disagreed so I accept your argument, however we both agreed that he shouldn’t dissolve the house. That’s why I just want to cut short our argument there since I want to talk more about the big picture, but if you want to know my answer to your comment no 78 then here is my 2 cent.
If the government quits amidst an intense security situation, is there a precedent?
Looking back in 2006, Thaksin was actually decided to step down and dissolve the house, he was acting as a caretaker, the protester doesn’t quite please and keep protest until the coup, so yes there’s a precedent to that. However, looking back there’s not military intervention, Thaksin never try to disperse the protest. Thaksin never brought in tanks or armed soldiers unlike Abhisit nor with Samak, Somchai, or even Surayuth. We have to admitted that before the event of 10th April crackdown, the protest was relatively peaceful but not until the government attempt to crack down on the protest on the 10th that the situation becoming more intense.
Anyhow, no matter what time frame it is, I still think that its doesn’t matter much if the whole governing system is so broken.
Reconciliation: climbing the mountain
Today, during a Q&A session with foreign journalists, Abhisit made it clear that he is not going to reconcile with Thaksin and those working for him but try to reach to ordinary people instead.
Thaksin’s lawyer insists that no reconciliation is possible unless the govt deals with Thaksin himself.
The whole exercise is pointless, I, like FredKorat, believe that ordinary people are already reasonably reconciled with each other.
Abhisit’s efforts will never satisfy Thaksin’s minions and they will always scream that the country is deeply divided.
Hopefully the people will get some side benefits like equal opportunities, moves to bridge income gap or more general development in Isan/North.
Reconciliation: climbing the mountain
A very weak “roadmap”. If I dare use that term.
What exactly are you trying to say about the second stop on the road map after sincerity?You raise nothing new here.
The author also talks about disposing of greed of the “elite” and about sharing wealth, how exactly does he propose to make that happen?
What other models are there of effective redistribution of wealth that would apply in a developing country? Nigeria?
At some point some people will need to accept that it is a fact of life that poor people usually end up working for rich people.
Thailand is a capitalist country, a system in which there are winners and losers. A system which rewards those who make the most of the opportunities that are presented to them, which in turn benefits the entire Nation in the form of tax revenue and development.
In short, greed should be encouraged, so long as its tempered by social responsibility.
What Thailand needs to do is present more opportunities to those who need them and educate them so that they can learn to recognise these for what they are, and give them the skills, know how and wherewithal to capitalise on them, and the intelligence and integrity to do so in a way that is socially sustainable,
What it should not do is penalise those who have already worked out how to do this themselves.
Information about detainees and places of detention released by the Royal Thai Police
Certainly the sentencing of some has come very quickly, especially when compared to the completed lack of any punishment for the PAD leaders who seized Government House or the airports.
Flash! This just in… the PAD and The Regime are… the same people!
The PAD will NEVER be held accountable for ANYTHING. At least not by this regime. The PAD were just doing “what had to be done”.
The Regime clearly is a rogue outfit and must be recognized as such. Positing the possibility of symmetric treatment by this “government” of its behavior and that of the “terrorist” opposition unduly dignifies The Regime. They are street/gutter fighters whose crimes are great enough that they can afford an Oxonian frontman. They can rule by the gun alone.
An essay on “the dismal state of Thai education”
michael (#45)
My compliments on finding a very Thai way to deal with a very Thai issue. That said, I still wonder how many Thai in your position would find it possible to follow your example – would they be regarded as “not playing the game”?
JohnH (#46)
I showed the Straits Times version of that article to two Thai graduate friends of mine. Both grinned and neither was surprised. One gave me the example of his high school teacher reciting the point that “Thailand is #3 in the league table of developing nations”. When asked the (we might think natural) question as to which nations are #1 and #2, he was unable to answer and dismissed it as irrelevant.
On the point of 95% of school directors failing the tests, I’m less surprised. While the situation isn’t unknown outside Thailand, it seems almost endemic here that such people are appointed at best on the basis of seniority (as in longevity) and more usually of connections – as opposed to skill/expertise or anything related to “success”.
When one turns to the question of just who is going to teach the teachers in order to drive the necessary “upgrade” (surely not the benighted farang?), the process – if it ever gets under way – looks set to take at least a generation rather than a few years.
Still, not to worry – we have Abhisit’s declared intention to make Thailand “a creative ASEAN hub”* by 2012 – and “These [creative] products will bring about sustainable development and allow Thailand to be a country of thinkers”…..
* http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/economics/153006/pm-thailand-to-be-asean-industrial-hub
Thailand in crisis – Episode 3
Dr Tyrell Haberkorn clearly states that the currently accepted violation of Human Rights on all sides must come to an end and I could not agree more. As a supporter of the Red cause, but not of it’s current means, I would reiterate that the movement must entirely annul its association from the leadership sect which advocates the use of violence.
RS supporters/leaders — from Giles Ungpakorn to Thaksin Shinawatra — need a gut check about being complicit with or tolerating/consenting/initiating any acts of violence. The ‘life’ of the RS movement critically depends upon it — especially if it hopes to necessarily broaden its base of support.
A peaceful demonstration will gain traction without violence IF large enough; 100,000+ protesters satisfies this threshold. It has now been proven that the RS leadership has unnecessarily lead this movement into a wall. Until this fact is acknowledged by the people at large, the violence will continue and any perceived inroads gained will only be superficial.
As for governments, this one, like all others, are merely institutionalized strongmen given the legal authority to use force. As such, actions speak louder than words. “There is nothing to fear but fear itself”, and the Thai government should try to govern itself accordingly.
Reconciliation: climbing the mountain
[…] are various other conversations by peace experts on the necessary steps to resolve the Thai crisis, but true reconciliation must […]
Reconciliation: climbing the mountain
I have always maintained that the Reds could not take any step, forward or back, without the say so of Thaksin. That happened during the Rachaprasong riots-rebellion, when the Reds leadership had to scuttle peace negotiations with PM Abhisit’s government because of Thaksin’s say so . . . and that led to the crackdown.
Again: ” . . .The opposition has dismissed Abhisit’s (reconciliation) plan as little more than a bid to win popularity by his ruling Democrat party, saying reconciliation without Thaksin would not bring lasting peace.”
source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65912W20100610
How to find the middle ground indeed Mr. Neptunian if your favored Reds could not get over their obsession with their patron/paymaster Thaksin Shinawatra?
Violating human rights? Yes, indeed!
Tarrin // Jun 11, 2010 at 1:53 am
I’m sorry, Tarrin, but again I don’t understand what your comments have to do with what I actually said. I do wonder if LesAbbey is right. If I do not follow the “logic” or “reasoning” of a particular tradition, sliding from topic to topic in the “right” way, then something goes wrong. For example, comments in reply to me try to force me to slide from topic to topic in the “right” way.
Isn’t there a more general logic where we can discuss what I really said? Isn’t there a way to talk about a limited topic without sliding onto another one? Why is that not interesting enough? Why, when I point out a gritty fact, is the fact not interesting enough and the reply ends up being about sliding away from the gritty fact, sliding towards the more sweeping propositions of the “party line” and “tradition”? We should question this.
I’m not saying I necessarily disagree with you on this or that point. But I am questioning why your replies to my gritty facts always end up not talking about those particular gritty facts. It’s a bit weird, isn’t it?
Thailand in crisis – Episode 2
[…] For those who missed them, the video of episode 1 is available here and episode 2 is available here. A podcast of episode 3 is also available […]
Information about detainees and places of detention released by the Royal Thai Police
Veera, Nattawut, Weng, Adisorn, etc
so I presume none of those held by the army are included
presumably, as usual, there is no legal sanction available in Thailand to force army disclosure or accountability for anything…..