RE: Jim Taylor. Interesting to hear you criticising CNN for being scared of upsetting the “regime”.
There seems to be a growing campaign amoungst young hiso thais on facebook vilifying the CNN reporting for being pro-red shirt.
I’m not making any opinion either way but quoting the letter:
Dear Sirs/Madams,
Recently, CNN Thailand Correspondents Dan Rivers and Sarah Snider have made me seriously reconsider your agency as a source for reliable and accurate unbiased news. As of this writing, over thousands of CNN’s viewers have already begun to question the accuracy and dependability of its reporting as regards events in Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, etc., in addition to Bangkok.
As a first-rate global news agency, CNN has an inherent professional duty to deliver all sides of the truth to the global public who have faithfully and sincerely placed their trust and reliance in you. Your news network, by its longtime transnational presence and extensive reach, has been put in a position of trust and care; CNN’s journalists, reporters, and researchers have a collective responsibility to follow the journalist’s code and ethics to deliver and present facts from all facets of the story, not merely one-sided, shallow and sensational half-truths. The magnitude of harm or potential extent of damage that erroneous and fallacious news reporting can cause to (and exacerbate), not only a country’s internal state of affairs, economic well-being, and general international perception, but also the real lives and livelihood of the innocent and voiceless people of that nation, is enormous. CNN should not negligently discard its duty of care to the international populace by reporting single-sided or unverified facts and distorted truths drawn from superficial research, or display/distribute biased images which capture only one side of the actual event.
Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider have NOT done their best under these life-threatening circumstances because many other foreign correspondents have done better. All of Mr. Rivers and Ms. Sniders’ quotes and statements seem to have been solely taken from the anti-government protest leaders or their followers/sympathizers. Yet, all details about the government’s position have come from secondary resources. No direct interviews with government officials have been shown; no interviews or witness statements from ordinary Bangkok residents or civilians unaffiliated with the protesters, particularly those who have been harassed by or suffered at the hands of the protesters, have been circulated.
Why the discrepancy in source of information? Why the failure to report all of the government’s previous numerous attempts to negotiate or invitations for protesters to go home? Why no broadcasts shown of the myriad ways the red protesters have terrorized and harmed innocent civilians by burning their shops, enclosing burning tyres around apartment buildings, shooting glass marbles at civilians from high altitudes, attacking civilians in their cars, and worst of all, obstructing paramedics and ambulances carrying civilians injured by M79 grenade blasts during the Silom incident of April 24, 2010, thereby resulting in the sole civilian casualty? The entire timeline of events that have forced the government to take this difficult stance has been hugely and callously ignored in deference to the red ‘underdogs’.
Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider’s choice of sensational vocabulary and terminology in every newscast or news report, and choice of images to broadcast, has resulted in law-abiding soldiers and the heavily-pressured Thai government being painted in a negative, harsh, and oppressive light, whereas the genuinely violent and law-breaking arm of the anti-government protesters – who are directly responsible for overt acts of aggression not only against armed soldiers but also against helpless, unarmed civilians and law-abiding apolitical residents of this once blooming metropolis (and whose actions under American law would by now be classified as terrorist activities) – are portrayed as righteous freedom fighters deserving of worldwide sympathy and support. This has mislead the various international Human Rights watchdogs to believe the Thai government are sending trigger-happy soldiers out to ruthlessly murder unarmed civilians without just cause.
As a current resident of “war zone” Bangkok who has experienced the effect of the Red protests first hand and is living in a state of constant terror and anxiety as to whether her family, friends, and home would get bombed or attacked by the hardcore anti-government vigilantes/paramilitary forces – I appeal to CNN’s professional integrity to critically investigate and scrutinize the misinformed news reporting of your above-named correspondents. If they are incapable of obtaining genuine, authentic facts from any other source except the Red Protest leaders and red-sympathizing Thai translators or acquaintances, or from fellow non-Thai-speaking journalists who are similarly ignorant of Thai language, culture, history, and society, then perhaps CNN should consider reassigning field correspondents to Thailand.
I implore and urge you to please take serious action to correct or reverse the grave injustice that has been done to the Thai nation, her government, and the majority of law-abiding Thai citizens and expatriate residents by having endorsed and widely circulated poorly researched and misrepresented news coverage of the current ongoing political unrest and escalating violence in Thailand.
Copies of this open letter have also been distributed to other local as well as international news media and social networks for public information. Please feel free to contact me further should you require any additional concrete and reputable evidence in substantiation and corroboration of my complaints and claims stated hereinabove.
First, my resignation to the eternal spectres of corruption and ineptness in all Thai governments is a simple reflection of the truth. And a truth that very unfortunately has a real and everyday impact on the good and honest people – the majority – of Thailand.
For your consideration: A colleague of mine was recently asked to pay a bribe of 30, ooo Baht to get her son into the school of her choice. She doesn’t have the money, and more importantly, was outraged by such a demand. She knows it to be morally wrong both as a person and a practicing Buddhist. She thought long and hard about this, and after much soul searching and realising that to give her son a ‘chance in life’ and with the odds somewhat stacked against the state education system reforming in her or her son’s lifetime, she sought help from a person of influence.
A phonecall was made and her son has now been admitted to that school, without any money passing under the table.
Believe me when I say this situation caused her – and still does – considerable personal distress.
What a choice, pay the money or seek patronage from a person of influence?
So, I do not see why you take exception to my original comments, nor do I understand why you choose to dismiss these very real problems as unimportant with your patronising and dismissive use of the word ”relative”.
Relative to whom exactly, and how?
Second, unfortunately, my reading(s) of Thai history have not yet revealed those positive changes in Thai society to which you allude, nor do I see any real and positive changes in the way Thailand has been working for the betterment and empowerment of her people over these many years of democracy.
Good that you’ve drawn attention to that Boston Globe photo showing a protester letting off what is obviously a home-made firework – the same as you can see at many rural Thai festivals, particularly New Year and Loy Kratong.
Perhaps you and others (including the unfortunate Col Sansern*) would now like to compare it with the widely-promoted “Red protester firing M79” clip. Notice any similarities? Or will we now be asked to believe that the Globe pic actually shows a sawn-off bazooka?
* Still, what can one expect from an organisation that featured a graphic of circuitry found in the GT200 nVidia computer gaming chip as part of its defence of the famously technology-free GT200 bomb detector?
Not off-the-point at all. My quick answer, and this may differ slightly from Andrew’s, is that vote buying and other efforts to demonstrate patronage credibility have been a longstanding part of Thai politics in (I’d guess) every province. Every political party that can afford to pork barrel or curry favour will do so. Thaksin’s popular (and “populist”) policies are the exemplar. This is unremarkable; it happens almost everywhere, with varying degrees of sophistication/transparency. And electoral imperatives in Thai society almost guarantee that effective political leaders will distribute resources (or plan to distribute resources) to their supporters (or key constituencies thereof).
Such efforts to demonstrate skill as patrons, as a Thai voter would describe the situation, clearly influenced the outcomes of the recent elections (like the 2005 one) that I have watched closely. Former Prime Minister Thaksin proved more adept in the challenging “game” of Thai politics; but that doesn’t imply that he was the only one playing.
Hope that at least partly answers your two questions.
Abhisit went to the funeral of a terrorist blown up by his own car full of bombs at the last big PAD demo. Now the King and Queen sponsor the funeral of someone who was mad and bad enough to boast that he was behind several murders. What hope is there for the rule of law in Thailand under a ruling class like this?
RL, excellent point. And just to be clear, “royal patronage” refers to the use of royally bestowed Fai Phraratchathan (р╣Др╕Яр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕Щ – cremation fire). It’s also de rigeur for policemen and soldiers who die on duty.
[…] anonymous writer warns about the tactic of the government to label protesters as terrorists The deaths of score protesters that night somehow were presented as proof of “terrorists” and […]
let’s not forget that the Thai people themselves chose to believe in the divinity of their higher authority. that his benevolence and wisdom would forever keep their nation united and out of the hands of tyrants.
they blame poor education, distorted history and oppression by the elite as a reason for their political apathy which has resulted in the underdeveloped democracy that we see now.
pointing fingers and casting blame seems to be more important than looking for solutions and finding ways to not continue making the same mistakes.
now, as they approach the end of an era, Thai people are seeing that they are on their own and will have to find solutions to clean up the mess they are now in.
This question relates to the full article from which the posted quote was taken, so I aplogise if it appears I’m off the point. I would, nevertheless, argue that the issue I’m raising is important.
Is it your position that vote buying and corruption are no longer (or never were) a problem in rural Thailand, and do not influence electoral outcomes?
@Leeykiyun #44. If that guy is really pointing a replica pistol over the barricade at armed troops, I am not sure if he is one of the guys we want running the country when this is all over.
And with the future so fixedly pre-determined and obvious to all those with eyes to see, what is the point of commenting at all?
This notion that nothing changes in Thailand, nothing has changed in Thailand, and therefore nothing will change in Thailand is belied by what is happening now, not to mention a cursory reading of Thai history.
No doubt corruption will continue to be rife and the poor will always be with us, but neither corruption nor poverty are absolutes.
“Everything is relative,” another well-worn cliche, comes to mind.
Or, given the Thai cultural connection to water, maybe ““No man ever steps in the same river twice” would be more apt.
I wouldn’t put too much stock in this, to be honest. Royal patronage for high-ranking military personnel (phon tri / Maj. Gen. upwards) has always been, from my understanding of things, de rigeur. It is less an expression of sympathy per se, but seems — to this Thai citizen at least — an attempt to appear neutral to the public eye. To NOT sponsor Seh Daeng’s funeral would have stoked further charges of partisanship.
Royal patronage and royal attendance resonate on very different registers in the public discourse; the former seems rote, whereas the latter is often interpreted as extraordinary, a direct expression of support. (Witness the political furore over royal attendance at various funerals over the years, the most recent being Rom Klao’s.)
[…] anonymous writer warns about the tactic of the government to label protesters as terrorists The deaths of score protesters that night somehow were presented as proof of “terrorists” and […]
No matter the outcome of this, the concern must now be on education. Improving the teachers, the school facilities, and the curriculum, as well as, more focus on analytical skills , allowing students to present and defend their views freely.
One argument I often heard from PAD supporters is that Thaksin boasts about giving each child a laptop (to them, a populist scheme), but Mr. Ahbisit “gave” 15-year free education.
My thought is this : Laptop = open access, the whole world is open to him. Although some adult supervision is needed and this will support in-class room learning. But very dangerous to the existing regime. 15-year free edu: Yes, should be a given rights to every citizen . At present, no focus on the quality; teachers are poorly trained; books and the lesson are very outdated. Why else would the govt. spents so much money on “Tutor Channel” and from what I see are geared to the middle class who support them, as it’s aired on True Vision, a paid cable TV.
Nice work Nick, you are a brave man. The world and the nation of Thailand need impartial professionals like you on the ground to get the facts out.
The Thai government controlled media is relentlessly repeating the spiel that the red terrorists are snipering their fellow protesters, yet for some inexplicable reason these terrorist snipers have thus far found it impossible to take down a single one of the thousands of government soldiers who surround them and are officially there to kill them. Anyone delusional enough to accept this type of spin would also accept the statement that the current nightmare is fantastic for Thai tourism and for national cohesion.
There is no doubt that both sides are to blame for bringing the confrontation to a head. However with the reds offering to negotiate without pre condition and the Abbhisit regime refusing all negotiations but clearly willing to kill as many civilians as required to win an outright victory, the true extremists in this conflict are beginning to be exposed.
With near total state control over the Thai media for the past several years it may take some time for the reality on the ground as discussed by Nick and many other impartial media sources to reach the masses, but the writing of history is a patient process and Abhissits actions will be recorded accurately in the Thai history books sooner or later. I just wish Abbhisit and the elites behind him could see today how they will be remembered.
The Thai media is not free. It is mostly the propaganda machine of the Yellows (that being the PAD/PC/Democrats/Army).
And yet now the Yellows are complaining like mad about the coverage of CNN/BBC and others because it is not agreeing to their lies and propaganda being pumped within Thailand.
How disgusting are these people, to remove free and fair media within the country, to spout lies, photoshopped photo’s, tampered video’s and then, with all this propaganda going on, they then complain over the coverage from CNN and BBC.
Sick people, sick country. The sooner that this government is kicked out, the sooner the PC is disbanded and the sooner real democracy returns the better.
Did you see the comments today from the ruling “Democrat Party” ? They said that as the death count was not over 500 then so far things are going better than expected.
These people are disgusting ! Abhisit and cronies are nothing more than dictators now, murderers who need to be tried and convicted in International Courts.
This would be a good point to reminisce about Nick’s previous on-the-spot raportages on seminal political events in Thailand, including his eye witness account in NM of the Somchai government’s use of high explosive tear gas grenades to disperse protestors at the Parliament building in October 2008 that left one woman dead and several maimed for life. At the end of the article Nick concluded in favour of the use of lethal force by the police to enforce law and order thus:
“What some people seem to forget is the basic situation: the law was with the police, and not with the PAD.”
Reading the posts, many of you are falling into the same simplistic trap that the govt. , the reds and virtually all of Thai society do, which is..find blame! In the fractured society which is Thailand, there is enough blame to go round a thousand fold. If we talk about natural justice and an equitable society, look elsewhere. So here is my 2 cents worth having lived and worked here for years. Thai thinking is deeply linked to the monarchy and a heirarchical society. Thinking skills are not strong in Thai schools or universities and the notion of challenging conventional wisdom is not encouraged or particularly valued. Where are the angry young uni protestors?…no, its the old and poor on the streets. Some argue that an unofficial policy has existed by all colours of govt. for years limiting access to good education particularly for the rural poor. In other words the last thing the powers that be want is an educated, thinking polulation. Having said that, Thais (and I have many good Thai friends) abhor displays of anger in everyday life, their cultural mores deny expression of many emotions and as a consequence they are not as skilled as others at dealing with a range of emotions publicly. I think this is why we see so often the emotional zero or 100, with a lack of a range of responses in between. Politically, this has manifested in a number of ways. Firstly, the involvement of the palace in defusing public disquiet, secondly, the use of coups and various other mechanisms and ploys to get rid of a govt. In other words, when the going gets tough, rather than allowing robust and transparent checks and balances to work, Thailand has always opted for the ‘easy’ way out with coups, rigged elections by virtually all sides and a suppression of the real issues. So where will this go now?
That is the question on every person’s lips..for me…I don’t know.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
RE: Jim Taylor. Interesting to hear you criticising CNN for being scared of upsetting the “regime”.
There seems to be a growing campaign amoungst young hiso thais on facebook vilifying the CNN reporting for being pro-red shirt.
I’m not making any opinion either way but quoting the letter:
Dear Sirs/Madams,
Recently, CNN Thailand Correspondents Dan Rivers and Sarah Snider have made me seriously reconsider your agency as a source for reliable and accurate unbiased news. As of this writing, over thousands of CNN’s viewers have already begun to question the accuracy and dependability of its reporting as regards events in Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, etc., in addition to Bangkok.
As a first-rate global news agency, CNN has an inherent professional duty to deliver all sides of the truth to the global public who have faithfully and sincerely placed their trust and reliance in you. Your news network, by its longtime transnational presence and extensive reach, has been put in a position of trust and care; CNN’s journalists, reporters, and researchers have a collective responsibility to follow the journalist’s code and ethics to deliver and present facts from all facets of the story, not merely one-sided, shallow and sensational half-truths. The magnitude of harm or potential extent of damage that erroneous and fallacious news reporting can cause to (and exacerbate), not only a country’s internal state of affairs, economic well-being, and general international perception, but also the real lives and livelihood of the innocent and voiceless people of that nation, is enormous. CNN should not negligently discard its duty of care to the international populace by reporting single-sided or unverified facts and distorted truths drawn from superficial research, or display/distribute biased images which capture only one side of the actual event.
Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider have NOT done their best under these life-threatening circumstances because many other foreign correspondents have done better. All of Mr. Rivers and Ms. Sniders’ quotes and statements seem to have been solely taken from the anti-government protest leaders or their followers/sympathizers. Yet, all details about the government’s position have come from secondary resources. No direct interviews with government officials have been shown; no interviews or witness statements from ordinary Bangkok residents or civilians unaffiliated with the protesters, particularly those who have been harassed by or suffered at the hands of the protesters, have been circulated.
Why the discrepancy in source of information? Why the failure to report all of the government’s previous numerous attempts to negotiate or invitations for protesters to go home? Why no broadcasts shown of the myriad ways the red protesters have terrorized and harmed innocent civilians by burning their shops, enclosing burning tyres around apartment buildings, shooting glass marbles at civilians from high altitudes, attacking civilians in their cars, and worst of all, obstructing paramedics and ambulances carrying civilians injured by M79 grenade blasts during the Silom incident of April 24, 2010, thereby resulting in the sole civilian casualty? The entire timeline of events that have forced the government to take this difficult stance has been hugely and callously ignored in deference to the red ‘underdogs’.
Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider’s choice of sensational vocabulary and terminology in every newscast or news report, and choice of images to broadcast, has resulted in law-abiding soldiers and the heavily-pressured Thai government being painted in a negative, harsh, and oppressive light, whereas the genuinely violent and law-breaking arm of the anti-government protesters – who are directly responsible for overt acts of aggression not only against armed soldiers but also against helpless, unarmed civilians and law-abiding apolitical residents of this once blooming metropolis (and whose actions under American law would by now be classified as terrorist activities) – are portrayed as righteous freedom fighters deserving of worldwide sympathy and support. This has mislead the various international Human Rights watchdogs to believe the Thai government are sending trigger-happy soldiers out to ruthlessly murder unarmed civilians without just cause.
As a current resident of “war zone” Bangkok who has experienced the effect of the Red protests first hand and is living in a state of constant terror and anxiety as to whether her family, friends, and home would get bombed or attacked by the hardcore anti-government vigilantes/paramilitary forces – I appeal to CNN’s professional integrity to critically investigate and scrutinize the misinformed news reporting of your above-named correspondents. If they are incapable of obtaining genuine, authentic facts from any other source except the Red Protest leaders and red-sympathizing Thai translators or acquaintances, or from fellow non-Thai-speaking journalists who are similarly ignorant of Thai language, culture, history, and society, then perhaps CNN should consider reassigning field correspondents to Thailand.
I implore and urge you to please take serious action to correct or reverse the grave injustice that has been done to the Thai nation, her government, and the majority of law-abiding Thai citizens and expatriate residents by having endorsed and widely circulated poorly researched and misrepresented news coverage of the current ongoing political unrest and escalating violence in Thailand.
Copies of this open letter have also been distributed to other local as well as international news media and social networks for public information. Please feel free to contact me further should you require any additional concrete and reputable evidence in substantiation and corroboration of my complaints and claims stated hereinabove.
Thank you.
Yours faithfully,
Napas Na Pombejra, B.A., LL.B. (Lond.)
link to article
A large list of weblinks is given for reporting that is said to be less biased.
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
Emjay,
First, my resignation to the eternal spectres of corruption and ineptness in all Thai governments is a simple reflection of the truth. And a truth that very unfortunately has a real and everyday impact on the good and honest people – the majority – of Thailand.
For your consideration: A colleague of mine was recently asked to pay a bribe of 30, ooo Baht to get her son into the school of her choice. She doesn’t have the money, and more importantly, was outraged by such a demand. She knows it to be morally wrong both as a person and a practicing Buddhist. She thought long and hard about this, and after much soul searching and realising that to give her son a ‘chance in life’ and with the odds somewhat stacked against the state education system reforming in her or her son’s lifetime, she sought help from a person of influence.
A phonecall was made and her son has now been admitted to that school, without any money passing under the table.
Believe me when I say this situation caused her – and still does – considerable personal distress.
What a choice, pay the money or seek patronage from a person of influence?
So, I do not see why you take exception to my original comments, nor do I understand why you choose to dismiss these very real problems as unimportant with your patronising and dismissive use of the word ”relative”.
Relative to whom exactly, and how?
Second, unfortunately, my reading(s) of Thai history have not yet revealed those positive changes in Thai society to which you allude, nor do I see any real and positive changes in the way Thailand has been working for the betterment and empowerment of her people over these many years of democracy.
Perhaps you could enlighten me.
Day 5 – how much longer?
Nok (46)
Good that you’ve drawn attention to that Boston Globe photo showing a protester letting off what is obviously a home-made firework – the same as you can see at many rural Thai festivals, particularly New Year and Loy Kratong.
Perhaps you and others (including the unfortunate Col Sansern*) would now like to compare it with the widely-promoted “Red protester firing M79” clip. Notice any similarities? Or will we now be asked to believe that the Globe pic actually shows a sawn-off bazooka?
* Still, what can one expect from an organisation that featured a graphic of circuitry found in the GT200 nVidia computer gaming chip as part of its defence of the famously technology-free GT200 bomb detector?
Too many eggs in the royal basket
Thanks Nigel,
Not off-the-point at all. My quick answer, and this may differ slightly from Andrew’s, is that vote buying and other efforts to demonstrate patronage credibility have been a longstanding part of Thai politics in (I’d guess) every province. Every political party that can afford to pork barrel or curry favour will do so. Thaksin’s popular (and “populist”) policies are the exemplar. This is unremarkable; it happens almost everywhere, with varying degrees of sophistication/transparency. And electoral imperatives in Thai society almost guarantee that effective political leaders will distribute resources (or plan to distribute resources) to their supporters (or key constituencies thereof).
Such efforts to demonstrate skill as patrons, as a Thai voter would describe the situation, clearly influenced the outcomes of the recent elections (like the 2005 one) that I have watched closely. Former Prime Minister Thaksin proved more adept in the challenging “game” of Thai politics; but that doesn’t imply that he was the only one playing.
Hope that at least partly answers your two questions.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
Abhisit went to the funeral of a terrorist blown up by his own car full of bombs at the last big PAD demo. Now the King and Queen sponsor the funeral of someone who was mad and bad enough to boast that he was behind several murders. What hope is there for the rule of law in Thailand under a ruling class like this?
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
RL, excellent point. And just to be clear, “royal patronage” refers to the use of royally bestowed Fai Phraratchathan (р╣Др╕Яр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕Щ – cremation fire). It’s also de rigeur for policemen and soldiers who die on duty.
Bangkok: This is a massacre
[…] anonymous writer warns about the tactic of the government to label protesters as terrorists The deaths of score protesters that night somehow were presented as proof of “terrorists” and […]
Too many eggs in the royal basket
let’s not forget that the Thai people themselves chose to believe in the divinity of their higher authority. that his benevolence and wisdom would forever keep their nation united and out of the hands of tyrants.
they blame poor education, distorted history and oppression by the elite as a reason for their political apathy which has resulted in the underdeveloped democracy that we see now.
pointing fingers and casting blame seems to be more important than looking for solutions and finding ways to not continue making the same mistakes.
now, as they approach the end of an era, Thai people are seeing that they are on their own and will have to find solutions to clean up the mess they are now in.
Too many eggs in the royal basket
Nich/Andrew,
This question relates to the full article from which the posted quote was taken, so I aplogise if it appears I’m off the point. I would, nevertheless, argue that the issue I’m raising is important.
Is it your position that vote buying and corruption are no longer (or never were) a problem in rural Thailand, and do not influence electoral outcomes?
Day 5 – how much longer?
@Leeykiyun #44. If that guy is really pointing a replica pistol over the barricade at armed troops, I am not sure if he is one of the guys we want running the country when this is all over.
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
John H:
“And so it goes on.”
And with the future so fixedly pre-determined and obvious to all those with eyes to see, what is the point of commenting at all?
This notion that nothing changes in Thailand, nothing has changed in Thailand, and therefore nothing will change in Thailand is belied by what is happening now, not to mention a cursory reading of Thai history.
No doubt corruption will continue to be rife and the poor will always be with us, but neither corruption nor poverty are absolutes.
“Everything is relative,” another well-worn cliche, comes to mind.
Or, given the Thai cultural connection to water, maybe ““No man ever steps in the same river twice” would be more apt.
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
I wouldn’t put too much stock in this, to be honest. Royal patronage for high-ranking military personnel (phon tri / Maj. Gen. upwards) has always been, from my understanding of things, de rigeur. It is less an expression of sympathy per se, but seems — to this Thai citizen at least — an attempt to appear neutral to the public eye. To NOT sponsor Seh Daeng’s funeral would have stoked further charges of partisanship.
Royal patronage and royal attendance resonate on very different registers in the public discourse; the former seems rote, whereas the latter is often interpreted as extraordinary, a direct expression of support. (Witness the political furore over royal attendance at various funerals over the years, the most recent being Rom Klao’s.)
Bangkok: This is a massacre
[…] anonymous writer warns about the tactic of the government to label protesters as terrorists The deaths of score protesters that night somehow were presented as proof of “terrorists” and […]
Day 5 – how much longer?
No matter the outcome of this, the concern must now be on education. Improving the teachers, the school facilities, and the curriculum, as well as, more focus on analytical skills , allowing students to present and defend their views freely.
One argument I often heard from PAD supporters is that Thaksin boasts about giving each child a laptop (to them, a populist scheme), but Mr. Ahbisit “gave” 15-year free education.
My thought is this : Laptop = open access, the whole world is open to him. Although some adult supervision is needed and this will support in-class room learning. But very dangerous to the existing regime. 15-year free edu: Yes, should be a given rights to every citizen . At present, no focus on the quality; teachers are poorly trained; books and the lesson are very outdated. Why else would the govt. spents so much money on “Tutor Channel” and from what I see are geared to the middle class who support them, as it’s aired on True Vision, a paid cable TV.
Interview with Nick Nostitz
Nice work Nick, you are a brave man. The world and the nation of Thailand need impartial professionals like you on the ground to get the facts out.
The Thai government controlled media is relentlessly repeating the spiel that the red terrorists are snipering their fellow protesters, yet for some inexplicable reason these terrorist snipers have thus far found it impossible to take down a single one of the thousands of government soldiers who surround them and are officially there to kill them. Anyone delusional enough to accept this type of spin would also accept the statement that the current nightmare is fantastic for Thai tourism and for national cohesion.
There is no doubt that both sides are to blame for bringing the confrontation to a head. However with the reds offering to negotiate without pre condition and the Abbhisit regime refusing all negotiations but clearly willing to kill as many civilians as required to win an outright victory, the true extremists in this conflict are beginning to be exposed.
With near total state control over the Thai media for the past several years it may take some time for the reality on the ground as discussed by Nick and many other impartial media sources to reach the masses, but the writing of history is a patient process and Abhissits actions will be recorded accurately in the Thai history books sooner or later. I just wish Abbhisit and the elites behind him could see today how they will be remembered.
Interview with Nick Nostitz
@Portman.
Ropey Chinese Tear Gas canisters that happened (not intended) by accident to kill someone is different to :
Using live ammo and snipers to shoot people in the head and kill them.
Earlier it was accidental by the police against the PAD, this time its intentional to kill by the Democrats/Army/Bhumjaitai/Coalition partners.
Using the Police is correct and is in line with the law.
Using the Army and snipers and live ammo to kill is in line with brutal dictatorships who change and abuse the law to suit their needs.
Interview with Nick Nostitz
The Thai media is not free. It is mostly the propaganda machine of the Yellows (that being the PAD/PC/Democrats/Army).
And yet now the Yellows are complaining like mad about the coverage of CNN/BBC and others because it is not agreeing to their lies and propaganda being pumped within Thailand.
How disgusting are these people, to remove free and fair media within the country, to spout lies, photoshopped photo’s, tampered video’s and then, with all this propaganda going on, they then complain over the coverage from CNN and BBC.
Sick people, sick country. The sooner that this government is kicked out, the sooner the PC is disbanded and the sooner real democracy returns the better.
Did you see the comments today from the ruling “Democrat Party” ? They said that as the death count was not over 500 then so far things are going better than expected.
These people are disgusting ! Abhisit and cronies are nothing more than dictators now, murderers who need to be tried and convicted in International Courts.
Interview with Nick Nostitz
This would be a good point to reminisce about Nick’s previous on-the-spot raportages on seminal political events in Thailand, including his eye witness account in NM of the Somchai government’s use of high explosive tear gas grenades to disperse protestors at the Parliament building in October 2008 that left one woman dead and several maimed for life. At the end of the article Nick concluded in favour of the use of lethal force by the police to enforce law and order thus:
“What some people seem to forget is the basic situation: the law was with the police, and not with the PAD.”
Royal sponsorship for “terrorist” funeral
@ #12
Sae-Dang’s daugther is a PAD member.
Day 5 – how much longer?
Reading the posts, many of you are falling into the same simplistic trap that the govt. , the reds and virtually all of Thai society do, which is..find blame! In the fractured society which is Thailand, there is enough blame to go round a thousand fold. If we talk about natural justice and an equitable society, look elsewhere. So here is my 2 cents worth having lived and worked here for years. Thai thinking is deeply linked to the monarchy and a heirarchical society. Thinking skills are not strong in Thai schools or universities and the notion of challenging conventional wisdom is not encouraged or particularly valued. Where are the angry young uni protestors?…no, its the old and poor on the streets. Some argue that an unofficial policy has existed by all colours of govt. for years limiting access to good education particularly for the rural poor. In other words the last thing the powers that be want is an educated, thinking polulation. Having said that, Thais (and I have many good Thai friends) abhor displays of anger in everyday life, their cultural mores deny expression of many emotions and as a consequence they are not as skilled as others at dealing with a range of emotions publicly. I think this is why we see so often the emotional zero or 100, with a lack of a range of responses in between. Politically, this has manifested in a number of ways. Firstly, the involvement of the palace in defusing public disquiet, secondly, the use of coups and various other mechanisms and ploys to get rid of a govt. In other words, when the going gets tough, rather than allowing robust and transparent checks and balances to work, Thailand has always opted for the ‘easy’ way out with coups, rigged elections by virtually all sides and a suppression of the real issues. So where will this go now?
That is the question on every person’s lips..for me…I don’t know.