YOu seem to want to undermine what is said against the King by pointing out that since we have no first-hand knowledge of events (ie we weren’t there), but then you remark:
“what King Bhumibol did 18 years ago, if you will open your mind, has only purpose to stop the blood situation cos he has to try to stop the situation, bring society back in peace and yes he has to wait till the time is ripped enough for all the sectors in Thailand feel that they are stucked in the situation and want it to stop.”
and:
“Last is I dont [kn]ow much knowledge you have about Thailand or Thai society or culture or our history, if you realise that you dont know much enough, please think twice before your give your opinion.”
The first of these comments is demolished by your own argument – unless of course you were privy to the Kings preparations? It is in fact just a regurgitation of the pernicious and all-pervasive propaganda that this king has subjected Thais to, or allowed them to be subjected to in his name. Perhaps you need to throw of the yoke of your Pavlovian conditioning before lecturing others on how not to think.
The second comment is the usual refrain “if you aren’t Thai, you can’t understand Thailand’. This is of course complete nonsense, and in fact the boot may very well be on the other foot entirely to the extent that if you are Thai you arguably cannot view events in Thailand objectively, due to the cradle-to-the-grave conditioning that happens there.
No I’m sure we all appreciate that as a conditioned Thai, you feel very uncomfortable having the illusion broken, this is basis psychology. I’m sure you feel very insecure thinking that the king, whom you have all regarded as your daddy and the ‘heart and soul of all [proper] Thais” (inserted word is mine), is in fact a very weak man whose only objective in 60+ years on the throne has been to restore the monarchy in Thailand to its former glory.
I’ m sure we all understand this, but please, if you have always been inside the goldfish bowl looking out, try not to lecture people on what it’s like outside looking in, because you are bound to get it wrong.
The bottom line is this, as reported in SMH, the Thai king got sniffy with Thaksin because in his first term of office, Thaksin did more for the poor Thai people than the king had done in 60 years. Simply put, the King saw his own adulation being transferred to someone else. That (of course) was just not on and it had to be stopped.
The sooner Thais stop regarding the Thai King as some kind of benevolent deity and see him for what he is, the better. If you have any doubts as to what the king really thinks of his people, read the disgraceful book he wrote – notionally about his dog but really about ‘his’ people. This is just one long metaphor about the behaviour he expects from his Thai subjects, and the relationship between himself and them. It is an interesting and very revealing read, but I imagine you haven’t read it yet, because you are evidently not outraged. Might be the conditioning again though…
Being a pacifist, leftist labour voter more or less from birth I have always seen Alex Downer as a twerp.
However RN Englands comment is quite encouraging, perhaps Aust parliament MPs do have democratic principles and Alex is reflecting these. Stephen Smith as the FM has a “broader picture” to consider.
I assume the “broader picture” is the US alliance, particularly the military and intelligence (spooks) alliance.
The US military and spooks have deep links into Thailand, from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodian War days (ooopppss was there a Laos War and who supported the Khmer Rouge?) and now secret renditions for the valuable political tool called the War on Terror admitted in the US but still denied in Thailand.
So Stephen Smith no doubt has been advised by his Canberra desk spooks to support the Thai military and their puppet government, and like a good little intelligence community servant has done their bidding.
I wonder if Stephen has an opportunity to realise that the ideals of democracy are actually an even bigger picture than the evil machinations of the military forces of the world and Barack Obama might value Stephens support in loosening the US military grip on Thailand and other similar situations in so many other countries.
I just note for the record that the best way to forecast future “trouble spots” is to identify where the US is interfering now (blowback). So, Australia beware!
you’re avoiding the question :
re.
“burning of several Big C department stores, which are of course where cheaper goods are sold for those who are a lot poorer than Central World shoppers.”
Why would the Reds be burning their own supporters shopping malls ?
Stephen Stewart #33 :
Re :
1) “Maybe it is trashing someone when they are down, which is typical media behavior.
2) “Or maybe they are pushing back against this law that is inconsistent with modern democracy.”
You are more correct about the latter than the former.
It is difficult to overstate the pent-up rage and resentment against the LM laws in “Thailand” now – especially among frustrated intellectuals, but now also much of the general “Thai” population.
If Abhisit genuinely wants reconciliation rather than still further polarisation, resulting eventually in the inevitable break-up of “Thailand”, he could make a good start by asking the King to pardon Thakor Suwicha, who has apologised and already served a disgustingly brutal sentence.
Interesting concept polyphemus. I would hope that if your hypothetical situation were the case in Australia, that the general population would accept the results of three consecutive democratic elections and not force the aboriginal majority to march on Canberra to fight for their democratic rights in the first place.
I do agree though the Thai elite do look upon the Isaan / Lanna national majority in a way comparable to the white Australia and stolen generation policy makers looked upon other cultures in their day.
Evidence of this can be seen by the fact that the Pad have an official objective to amend the constitution so that that the majority of parliamentary seats are appointed rather than elected. Their publicly stated reason for striving toward this objective is that the majority of Thais (the Isaan / Lanna majority) who oppose elitism, lack the intelligence and moral ettiquet required to choose viable leaders for the nation. (in other words the Thai majority can not be relied upon to choose the leadership the minority prefers)
This would be the equivalent of a white Australian minority attempting to force the aboriginal majority to accept a return to White Australia and Stolen Generation policies. If we look at it through the paradign you suggest, it’s easy to see why a general uprising is in progress across thailand.
I lived in Chiang Mai in May 1992, and while I can’t speak as to what was happening in the rest of Thailand, I can say my experience tends to support Portman. I don’t know about the Thai language papers, but the Bangkok Post and the Nation continued publishing during that time. The Post would have huge sections of the paper with solid black blocks, letting you know that there were stories the military wouldn’t let them print. The Nation simply ignored the restrictions and printed the stories in full. On a purely symbolic level, the blacked out sections of the Post were more eloquent than the Nation’s stories.
I went to the daily protests held out at CMU, and as Portman noted, the faxes were flowing fast and furious and were shared with the crowd. If I remember correctly, the German embassy sent quite a few faxes. I addition, people were watching all the CNN reports, which in those days were actually pretty good, and there were plenty of tapes being made and distributed to people who didn’t have direct access to CNN and other international news sources. Maybe there wasn’t any Twitter, but I can’t remember anyone thinking the Communists were running amok destroying Bangkok.
Of course, I’m not sure how relevant all this is to the current situation, but just thought it might be of some historical interest.
I think you’ll find Australians have a well-developed sense of our own hypocracy. We will decide whose side to take once it’s clear who the winners will be.
1. Military: р╕зр╕Зр╕ир╣Мр╣Ар╕Чр╕зр╕▒р╕Н р╕Ър╕╣р╕гр╕Юр╕▓р╕Юр╕вр╕▒р╕▒р╕Др╕Жр╣М
Wongtawan and Burapapayak factions are the current military establishment in power. The main function of these two units is to be the Queen’s body guards.The Queen directly commands these two units. They carried out the order against the Red Shirts.
In this new context where the Thai military is under the direct command of the Queen, can we still consider the Thai military as an powerful independent entity like in the past?
2. Monarch Asset: р╕Чр╕гр╕▒р╕Юр╕вр╣Мр╕кр╕┤р╕Щр╕кр╣Ир╕зр╕Щр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣М
The burned down Central World building is the property of the King’s Assets which is rented to the Central Company. The monarchy has been operating a profitable businesses in the prime location of Bangkok. Why don’t the monarchy pay property tax and income tax from the profits like everyone else?
3. The Existing Political Structure: Patron-Client Power Structure
The sniper that took Seh Daeng’s life was hidden inside the high-rise of the Dusit Thani Hotel building. It is a public knowledge that the owner of Dusit Thani Hotel, Lady Chanat Piyaoui, is one of the Queen’s close confidant.
р╕Бр╕ер╕╕р╣Ир╕бр╕Фр╕╕р╕кр╕┤р╕Хр╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕╡р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Чр╣Ир╕▓р╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕лр╕Нр╕┤р╕Зр╕Кр╕Щр╕▒р╕Хр╕Цр╣М р╕Ыр╕┤р╕вр╕░р╕нр╕╕р╕в р╣Ар╕Ир╣Йр╕▓р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╣Вр╕гр╕Зр╣Бр╕гр╕бр╕Фр╕╕р╕кр╕┤р╕Хр╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕╡
My main issue is the Queen is the main player yet she has no formal political title to take any responsibility. Furthermore, the lese majeste law prohibits and punishes the discussion of the key player. Aphisit is only the de jure while the Queen is the de facto power behind the scene.
It would be a waste of time to discuss about Aphisit because he has never been a decision maker.
Mikeize, you wrote “If you recall, the protesters are demanding ELECTIONS. They are not demanding the installation of one or all of the protest leaders. ”
They were offered elections in November but turned them down. Whatever fears they may have had regarding the charges against them they should have acted in the best interests of their supporters and their own aims and accepted Abhisit’s offer.
Brilliant Jim Taylor – re. Wallons in Belgium.
Have you got a reference, footnote, anything like that for this ?
Kasit publicly claimed at the FCCT that he supported the Belgium model for Thailand.
Would be good to see how he responds to
to what you say about Wallons, if you can cite details.
Chris Beale 78
I would simply say they were not targets of opportunity (unlike Central World)
Nattakorn is the darling conspiracy theorist for the chattering classes. He is also a poor movie actor. Incidentally it has been also proved that Lee Harvey Oswald fired the 2 fatal bullets and there was no gunman on the grassy knoll. A mundane answer, but true.
I expect to be flamed for this and probably not printed but just to play devils advocate and provoke some thought for you Eureka Stockaders please consider the following alternate perspective.
Supposing Australia had a large population of aboriginals in its hinterland who considered themselves politically disenfranchised and took over (then looted and burnt) the commercial areas of a major australian city, what would be the perspective/reaction of a) the white government, b) the white population of that city.
Having experienced the white australian perspective of aboriginal australians myself I hear very similar answers from australians and bangkokians.
This may allow you to understand more clearly the attitudes of the Chinese-Thai elite who “colonised” Thailand in the last three centuries.
“Be careful when you look into the abyss…”
Thousands of pictures showing soldiers killing unarmed Red Shirts but still some folk cannot see the truths. Take
Gordon Duguid, US GOvt Department Spokesman statement yesterday at a Press Briefing in Washington DC:
QUOTE “We are encouraged by the actions of the Red Shirt leaders who have surrendered to law enforcement agencies and support their call to supporters to return home peacefully. However, we are deeply concerned that Red Shirt supporters have engaged in arson targeting the electricity infrastructure and media outlets and have attacked individual journalists. We condemn such behavior and call on UDD leaders and affiliated opposition politicians to urge their supporters to stop such acts. We remain very concerned about the situation in Thailand and we will continue to monitor those events closely.”UNQUOTE
It is deplorable. These are not legitimate “Law enforcement agencies”. How can we even assume Red Shirts killed anyone as we now know there were contests between factions in the army. Saedaeng knew too much and was killed for this. So one journalist gets shot from an unknown entity and the media all of sudden shout moral outrage and blame the Reds! This was the issue: It was never a level playing field so how can both share the same responsibilities? It is like the elephant and mouse (sheer numbers are not enough against a well armed fascist state)
But note: Wallons in Belgium refuse to sell arms to the illegitimate Thai state!
I hope they are going to discuss the possibility – still somewhat remote, but now certainly an increased possibility – that Isaarn and Lanna are starting to break away from “Thailand”, just as Pattani is doing, though there’s no Isaarn or Lanna desire to secede from Siam.
More Facts Please #22
Re.
“And as final words here, I would like to tell you that non-Thaksin votes (or the non-Red shirt) are not merely those in Bangkok, they are among the other “poor” and other “weak” in the rural Thailand, too, if you like. And we are happy and believe in this government, like we used to be with Thaksin’s–in his first term.”
So why not have an election now ?
Or why not have an election BEFORE this violence started ?
Abhisit made a major misjudgement here – he quite possibly could have won enough seats to form another government, even some in Lanna and perhaps Isaarn.
I admire the way you make tremendous efforts in justifying the Red Shirts, the way you try to figure out all the reasons on earth favoring the validity of the Red Shirts. Now, with only half the efforts, will you refrain from for a while from being tilted towards the “poor”, the “weak”, and search into the facts that have been left out, about how these protesters got to come to Bangkok in the first place. Are you aware of how “canvassers” in rural Thailand operate? Do you know how the figure of “one million protesters” come about, in relation to the number of MPs from Pheu Thai party and the number of protesters each MP was to gather for the protest? Do you have any idea why this final showdown of the protest started soon after the verdict to confiscate Thaksin’s Baht 40 billion and not sooner? etc. I respect all your efforts to analyse the Thai politics so intelligently. But like all researches, it all hinges on the data, the info, the facts—the thoroughness of all these input for analysis. As for the ligitimacy of Red Shirts’s claim on bringing back Thaksin regime, mind you, Thaksin’s party beat the runner up with only few hundreds of thousand votes at the ballot, not like millions and millions of votes as it looks. And the rest of the votes went to all the coalition in this present government. (I would have joined any protests myself if this coalition government came into office with less votes than Thaksin’s (or ex-Thaksin party, if you like). If I were not let down by the way many “good” people always seem to side with the so- called “oppressed”, I would shed light on how Thaksin got all his MPs under his wing; on how his party, which won 200 something seats (out of 400+) in his outset of his office grew to absolute majority of 300+ at the end of his first term—with no election in between! Curious, right? And I would further elaborate on how the number of political parties diminished while his seats in the parliament grew…. and so on, which brought him the absolute power that absolutely corrupted.
And as final words here, I would like to tell you that non-Thaksin votes (or the non-Red shirt) are not merely those in Bangkok, they are among the other “poor” and other “weak” in the rural Thailand, too, if you like. And we are happy and believe in this government, like we used to be with Thaksin’s—in his first term.
Hope this might add to your data base for further research and analysis. Thanks.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
20 May 1992
@Rattawit:
YOu seem to want to undermine what is said against the King by pointing out that since we have no first-hand knowledge of events (ie we weren’t there), but then you remark:
“what King Bhumibol did 18 years ago, if you will open your mind, has only purpose to stop the blood situation cos he has to try to stop the situation, bring society back in peace and yes he has to wait till the time is ripped enough for all the sectors in Thailand feel that they are stucked in the situation and want it to stop.”
and:
“Last is I dont [kn]ow much knowledge you have about Thailand or Thai society or culture or our history, if you realise that you dont know much enough, please think twice before your give your opinion.”
The first of these comments is demolished by your own argument – unless of course you were privy to the Kings preparations? It is in fact just a regurgitation of the pernicious and all-pervasive propaganda that this king has subjected Thais to, or allowed them to be subjected to in his name. Perhaps you need to throw of the yoke of your Pavlovian conditioning before lecturing others on how not to think.
The second comment is the usual refrain “if you aren’t Thai, you can’t understand Thailand’. This is of course complete nonsense, and in fact the boot may very well be on the other foot entirely to the extent that if you are Thai you arguably cannot view events in Thailand objectively, due to the cradle-to-the-grave conditioning that happens there.
No I’m sure we all appreciate that as a conditioned Thai, you feel very uncomfortable having the illusion broken, this is basis psychology. I’m sure you feel very insecure thinking that the king, whom you have all regarded as your daddy and the ‘heart and soul of all [proper] Thais” (inserted word is mine), is in fact a very weak man whose only objective in 60+ years on the throne has been to restore the monarchy in Thailand to its former glory.
I’ m sure we all understand this, but please, if you have always been inside the goldfish bowl looking out, try not to lecture people on what it’s like outside looking in, because you are bound to get it wrong.
The bottom line is this, as reported in SMH, the Thai king got sniffy with Thaksin because in his first term of office, Thaksin did more for the poor Thai people than the king had done in 60 years. Simply put, the King saw his own adulation being transferred to someone else. That (of course) was just not on and it had to be stopped.
The sooner Thais stop regarding the Thai King as some kind of benevolent deity and see him for what he is, the better. If you have any doubts as to what the king really thinks of his people, read the disgraceful book he wrote – notionally about his dog but really about ‘his’ people. This is just one long metaphor about the behaviour he expects from his Thai subjects, and the relationship between himself and them. It is an interesting and very revealing read, but I imagine you haven’t read it yet, because you are evidently not outraged. Might be the conditioning again though…
Former Australian Foreign Minister calls for new election in Thailand
Being a pacifist, leftist labour voter more or less from birth I have always seen Alex Downer as a twerp.
However RN Englands comment is quite encouraging, perhaps Aust parliament MPs do have democratic principles and Alex is reflecting these. Stephen Smith as the FM has a “broader picture” to consider.
I assume the “broader picture” is the US alliance, particularly the military and intelligence (spooks) alliance.
The US military and spooks have deep links into Thailand, from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodian War days (ooopppss was there a Laos War and who supported the Khmer Rouge?) and now secret renditions for the valuable political tool called the War on Terror admitted in the US but still denied in Thailand.
So Stephen Smith no doubt has been advised by his Canberra desk spooks to support the Thai military and their puppet government, and like a good little intelligence community servant has done their bidding.
I wonder if Stephen has an opportunity to realise that the ideals of democracy are actually an even bigger picture than the evil machinations of the military forces of the world and Barack Obama might value Stephens support in loosening the US military grip on Thailand and other similar situations in so many other countries.
I just note for the record that the best way to forecast future “trouble spots” is to identify where the US is interfering now (blowback). So, Australia beware!
Burning, curfew
Polyphemus @79 :
you’re avoiding the question :
re.
“burning of several Big C department stores, which are of course where cheaper goods are sold for those who are a lot poorer than Central World shoppers.”
Why would the Reds be burning their own supporters shopping malls ?
London discussion of Thailand’s political turmoil
Chris B. for Walloons, check: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_yyEg-MlpKVo/S_VtcDUuMPI/AAAAAAAAk6U/sYC368Z4F8E/s1600/Untitled.jpg
(hopefully it is fully accesible!
20 May 1992
Stephen Stewart #33 :
Re :
1) “Maybe it is trashing someone when they are down, which is typical media behavior.
2) “Or maybe they are pushing back against this law that is inconsistent with modern democracy.”
You are more correct about the latter than the former.
It is difficult to overstate the pent-up rage and resentment against the LM laws in “Thailand” now – especially among frustrated intellectuals, but now also much of the general “Thai” population.
If Abhisit genuinely wants reconciliation rather than still further polarisation, resulting eventually in the inevitable break-up of “Thailand”, he could make a good start by asking the King to pardon Thakor Suwicha, who has apologised and already served a disgustingly brutal sentence.
Former Australian Foreign Minister calls for new election in Thailand
Interesting concept polyphemus. I would hope that if your hypothetical situation were the case in Australia, that the general population would accept the results of three consecutive democratic elections and not force the aboriginal majority to march on Canberra to fight for their democratic rights in the first place.
I do agree though the Thai elite do look upon the Isaan / Lanna national majority in a way comparable to the white Australia and stolen generation policy makers looked upon other cultures in their day.
Evidence of this can be seen by the fact that the Pad have an official objective to amend the constitution so that that the majority of parliamentary seats are appointed rather than elected. Their publicly stated reason for striving toward this objective is that the majority of Thais (the Isaan / Lanna majority) who oppose elitism, lack the intelligence and moral ettiquet required to choose viable leaders for the nation. (in other words the Thai majority can not be relied upon to choose the leadership the minority prefers)
This would be the equivalent of a white Australian minority attempting to force the aboriginal majority to accept a return to White Australia and Stolen Generation policies. If we look at it through the paradign you suggest, it’s easy to see why a general uprising is in progress across thailand.
Chaos, curfew and confusion
BKK Lawyer
I lived in Chiang Mai in May 1992, and while I can’t speak as to what was happening in the rest of Thailand, I can say my experience tends to support Portman. I don’t know about the Thai language papers, but the Bangkok Post and the Nation continued publishing during that time. The Post would have huge sections of the paper with solid black blocks, letting you know that there were stories the military wouldn’t let them print. The Nation simply ignored the restrictions and printed the stories in full. On a purely symbolic level, the blacked out sections of the Post were more eloquent than the Nation’s stories.
I went to the daily protests held out at CMU, and as Portman noted, the faxes were flowing fast and furious and were shared with the crowd. If I remember correctly, the German embassy sent quite a few faxes. I addition, people were watching all the CNN reports, which in those days were actually pretty good, and there were plenty of tapes being made and distributed to people who didn’t have direct access to CNN and other international news sources. Maybe there wasn’t any Twitter, but I can’t remember anyone thinking the Communists were running amok destroying Bangkok.
Of course, I’m not sure how relevant all this is to the current situation, but just thought it might be of some historical interest.
Former Australian Foreign Minister calls for new election in Thailand
polyphemus (21)
I think you’ll find Australians have a well-developed sense of our own hypocracy. We will decide whose side to take once it’s clear who the winners will be.
London discussion of Thailand’s political turmoil
I would like to ask three questions.
1. Military: р╕зр╕Зр╕ир╣Мр╣Ар╕Чр╕зр╕▒р╕Н р╕Ър╕╣р╕гр╕Юр╕▓р╕Юр╕вр╕▒р╕▒р╕Др╕Жр╣М
Wongtawan and Burapapayak factions are the current military establishment in power. The main function of these two units is to be the Queen’s body guards.The Queen directly commands these two units. They carried out the order against the Red Shirts.
In this new context where the Thai military is under the direct command of the Queen, can we still consider the Thai military as an powerful independent entity like in the past?
2. Monarch Asset: р╕Чр╕гр╕▒р╕Юр╕вр╣Мр╕кр╕┤р╕Щр╕кр╣Ир╕зр╕Щр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣М
The burned down Central World building is the property of the King’s Assets which is rented to the Central Company. The monarchy has been operating a profitable businesses in the prime location of Bangkok. Why don’t the monarchy pay property tax and income tax from the profits like everyone else?
“р╣Ар╕зр╕┤р╕ер╕Фр╣Мр╣Ар╕Чр╕гр╕Фр╣Ар╕Лр╣Зр╕Щр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М” р╣Ар╕гр╕┤р╣Ир╕бр╕Бр╣Ир╕нр╕кр╕гр╣Йр╕▓р╕Зр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╣Ир╕н р╕Ю.р╕и. 2525 р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╣Ар╕Ыр╕┤р╕Фр╕Фр╕│р╣Ар╕Щр╕┤р╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╣Ир╕н р╕Ю.р╕и. 2532 р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Бр╕нр╕Ър╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕вр╕лр╣Йр╕▓р╕Зр╕кр╕гр╕гр╕Юр╕кр╕┤р╕Щр╕Др╣Йр╕▓р╣Ар╕Лр╣Зр╕Щ р╣Бр╕ер╕░ р╕нр╕┤р╣Ар╕Лр╕Хр╕▒р╕Щ р╣Вр╕Фр╕вр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕йр╕▒р╕Ч р╕зр╕▒р╕Зр╣Ар╕Юр╕Кр╕гр╕Ър╕╣р╕гр╕Ур╣М р╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕бр╕▓р╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕йр╕▒р╕Ч р╕зр╕▒р╕Зр╣Ар╕Юр╕Кр╕гр╕Ър╕╣р╕гр╕Ур╣М р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕кр╕Ър╕Ыр╕▒р╕Нр╕лр╕▓р╕Чр╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕Зр╕┤р╕Щ р╣Др╕бр╣Ир╕кр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕гр╕Цр╕Бр╣Ир╕нр╕кр╕гр╣Йр╕▓р╕Зр╣Вр╕гр╕Зр╣Бр╕гр╕бр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕нр╕▓р╕Др╕▓р╕гр╕кр╕│р╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╣Ар╕кр╕гр╣Зр╕Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Й р╕кр╕│р╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╕Чр╕гр╕▒р╕Юр╕вр╣Мр╕кр╕┤р╕Щр╕кр╣Ир╕зр╕Щр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕Ир╕╢р╕Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╕┤р╕Фр╣Вр╕нр╕Бр╕▓р╕кр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕йр╕▒р╕Чр╕нр╕╖р╣Ир╕Щр╣Ар╕Вр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕╣р╕е р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕лр╕▓р╕гр╕ир╕╣р╕Щр╕вр╣Мр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Др╣Йр╕▓р╣Бр╕Чр╕Щ
р╕Ыр╕▒р╕Ир╕Ир╕╕р╕Ър╕▒р╕Щр╣Вр╕Др╕гр╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕лр╕▓р╕гр╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╣Вр╕Фр╕в р╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕йр╕▒р╕Ч р╣Ар╕Лр╣Зр╕Щр╕Чр╕гр╕▒р╕ер╕Юр╕▒р╕Тр╕Щр╕▓
3. The Existing Political Structure: Patron-Client Power Structure
The sniper that took Seh Daeng’s life was hidden inside the high-rise of the Dusit Thani Hotel building. It is a public knowledge that the owner of Dusit Thani Hotel, Lady Chanat Piyaoui, is one of the Queen’s close confidant.
р╕Бр╕ер╕╕р╣Ир╕бр╕Фр╕╕р╕кр╕┤р╕Хр╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕╡р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Чр╣Ир╕▓р╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕лр╕Нр╕┤р╕Зр╕Кр╕Щр╕▒р╕Хр╕Цр╣М р╕Ыр╕┤р╕вр╕░р╕нр╕╕р╕в р╣Ар╕Ир╣Йр╕▓р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╣Вр╕гр╕Зр╣Бр╕гр╕бр╕Фр╕╕р╕кр╕┤р╕Хр╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕╡
My main issue is the Queen is the main player yet she has no formal political title to take any responsibility. Furthermore, the lese majeste law prohibits and punishes the discussion of the key player. Aphisit is only the de jure while the Queen is the de facto power behind the scene.
It would be a waste of time to discuss about Aphisit because he has never been a decision maker.
Burning, curfew
Mikeize, you wrote “If you recall, the protesters are demanding ELECTIONS. They are not demanding the installation of one or all of the protest leaders. ”
They were offered elections in November but turned them down. Whatever fears they may have had regarding the charges against them they should have acted in the best interests of their supporters and their own aims and accepted Abhisit’s offer.
London discussion of Thailand’s political turmoil
Brilliant Jim Taylor – re. Wallons in Belgium.
Have you got a reference, footnote, anything like that for this ?
Kasit publicly claimed at the FCCT that he supported the Belgium model for Thailand.
Would be good to see how he responds to
to what you say about Wallons, if you can cite details.
Burning, curfew
When envoys are sent with compliments in their mouths, it is a sign that the enemy wishes for a truce.
Sun Tzu
Ambassador Kriangsak in the SMH
Daniel Wolf 11
Not so hard to define. Thats been the SOP in Siam for the last 1000yrs+
Perhaps you should read “The Golden Bough”?
Burning, curfew
Chris Beale 78
I would simply say they were not targets of opportunity (unlike Central World)
Nattakorn is the darling conspiracy theorist for the chattering classes. He is also a poor movie actor. Incidentally it has been also proved that Lee Harvey Oswald fired the 2 fatal bullets and there was no gunman on the grassy knoll. A mundane answer, but true.
Former Australian Foreign Minister calls for new election in Thailand
I expect to be flamed for this and probably not printed but just to play devils advocate and provoke some thought for you Eureka Stockaders please consider the following alternate perspective.
Supposing Australia had a large population of aboriginals in its hinterland who considered themselves politically disenfranchised and took over (then looted and burnt) the commercial areas of a major australian city, what would be the perspective/reaction of a) the white government, b) the white population of that city.
Having experienced the white australian perspective of aboriginal australians myself I hear very similar answers from australians and bangkokians.
This may allow you to understand more clearly the attitudes of the Chinese-Thai elite who “colonised” Thailand in the last three centuries.
“Be careful when you look into the abyss…”
London discussion of Thailand’s political turmoil
Thousands of pictures showing soldiers killing unarmed Red Shirts but still some folk cannot see the truths. Take
Gordon Duguid, US GOvt Department Spokesman statement yesterday at a Press Briefing in Washington DC:
QUOTE “We are encouraged by the actions of the Red Shirt leaders who have surrendered to law enforcement agencies and support their call to supporters to return home peacefully. However, we are deeply concerned that Red Shirt supporters have engaged in arson targeting the electricity infrastructure and media outlets and have attacked individual journalists. We condemn such behavior and call on UDD leaders and affiliated opposition politicians to urge their supporters to stop such acts. We remain very concerned about the situation in Thailand and we will continue to monitor those events closely.”UNQUOTE
It is deplorable. These are not legitimate “Law enforcement agencies”. How can we even assume Red Shirts killed anyone as we now know there were contests between factions in the army. Saedaeng knew too much and was killed for this. So one journalist gets shot from an unknown entity and the media all of sudden shout moral outrage and blame the Reds! This was the issue: It was never a level playing field so how can both share the same responsibilities? It is like the elephant and mouse (sheer numbers are not enough against a well armed fascist state)
But note: Wallons in Belgium refuse to sell arms to the illegitimate Thai state!
London discussion of Thailand’s political turmoil
I hope they are going to discuss the possibility – still somewhat remote, but now certainly an increased possibility – that Isaarn and Lanna are starting to break away from “Thailand”, just as Pattani is doing, though there’s no Isaarn or Lanna desire to secede from Siam.
Former Australian Foreign Minister calls for new election in Thailand
Well said Mr. Downer, well said indeed.
Commentary on roots of the Thai crisis
More Facts Please #22
Re.
“And as final words here, I would like to tell you that non-Thaksin votes (or the non-Red shirt) are not merely those in Bangkok, they are among the other “poor” and other “weak” in the rural Thailand, too, if you like. And we are happy and believe in this government, like we used to be with Thaksin’s–in his first term.”
So why not have an election now ?
Or why not have an election BEFORE this violence started ?
Abhisit made a major misjudgement here – he quite possibly could have won enough seats to form another government, even some in Lanna and perhaps Isaarn.
Commentary on roots of the Thai crisis
I admire the way you make tremendous efforts in justifying the Red Shirts, the way you try to figure out all the reasons on earth favoring the validity of the Red Shirts. Now, with only half the efforts, will you refrain from for a while from being tilted towards the “poor”, the “weak”, and search into the facts that have been left out, about how these protesters got to come to Bangkok in the first place. Are you aware of how “canvassers” in rural Thailand operate? Do you know how the figure of “one million protesters” come about, in relation to the number of MPs from Pheu Thai party and the number of protesters each MP was to gather for the protest? Do you have any idea why this final showdown of the protest started soon after the verdict to confiscate Thaksin’s Baht 40 billion and not sooner? etc. I respect all your efforts to analyse the Thai politics so intelligently. But like all researches, it all hinges on the data, the info, the facts—the thoroughness of all these input for analysis. As for the ligitimacy of Red Shirts’s claim on bringing back Thaksin regime, mind you, Thaksin’s party beat the runner up with only few hundreds of thousand votes at the ballot, not like millions and millions of votes as it looks. And the rest of the votes went to all the coalition in this present government. (I would have joined any protests myself if this coalition government came into office with less votes than Thaksin’s (or ex-Thaksin party, if you like). If I were not let down by the way many “good” people always seem to side with the so- called “oppressed”, I would shed light on how Thaksin got all his MPs under his wing; on how his party, which won 200 something seats (out of 400+) in his outset of his office grew to absolute majority of 300+ at the end of his first term—with no election in between! Curious, right? And I would further elaborate on how the number of political parties diminished while his seats in the parliament grew…. and so on, which brought him the absolute power that absolutely corrupted.
And as final words here, I would like to tell you that non-Thaksin votes (or the non-Red shirt) are not merely those in Bangkok, they are among the other “poor” and other “weak” in the rural Thailand, too, if you like. And we are happy and believe in this government, like we used to be with Thaksin’s—in his first term.
Hope this might add to your data base for further research and analysis. Thanks.