Abhisit went on to say he is actually the first prime minister in Thailand to state that the lese majeste law can be abused… He is also in the process of getting together some academics… Moreover, he is doing the same with the Computer Crime Act…
Abhisit then argued that he is determined to bring back justice by bringing other cases, such as that of Somchai Nilabhihit, back to investigation.
He said… “so please stop trying to drag the monarchy to the political conflict…
But lese majeste is still actively being abused, Khun Angkhana Nilabhihit’s WGJP group was raided by the military a few days afte Abhisit’d popped in for a photo-op, the crack down on Prachatai came days after he said such a thing would not happen.
He said that his intention is also to bring back the charge to the army general who is associated with the Takbai incident…
One Thai female then asked why the PAD leaders are still free even though they broke every rule of law in shutting down the airport… He said, “they (the police) are now in the process of issuing the warrant for the case of occupying Government House… So I expect the action to be taken very soon”.
No one thinks that the PAD are going to charged for their reign of terror, they rescheduled their own arraignment for goodness sake!, certainly no military officers will be charged for anything, unless it is some sort of tit for tat retribution among the military themselves.
So the question on Abhisit is : Cynic or Dupe? Is he “just” an accomplished liar, a la Barak Obama, or does he really believe that he holds power in Thailand?
“I’m not worried about people wanting to protect democracy… what is not understood is that in true liberal democracy, all governments have limited power. The idea of democracy is just the majority rule means unlimited power is misleading”.
Of course that’s been the aim of the PAD all along, to emasculate elected government and to put power in the hands of those “appointed” by… self-appointed I guess.
One of the audience members then asked about the inhumane treatment of the Rohingya by the Thai army. Abhisit said… “I asked the media who asked about these allegations for evidence so I can investigate further. They have not responded”.
Translation : “That’s off the front page. We got away with it.”
Finally, one man from Taiwan asked how Abhisit would ensure that the military role and power is reduced and ensure that there will not be a coup again. Abhisit responded to this by saying that he thinks military power in Thai politics has already been declining.
The military buget has more than doubled since their coup and spending for “security” increases daily. The ISOC is wielding more power daily even as we speak. Of course Abhisit is the nominal head of the ISOC, so we’ve nothing to worry about there. He’s a Democrat. Dupe or Cynic?
No problem reaching prachatai.com, the Thai and English version load just fine on True BKK.
Btw, http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ can be helpful if you suspect a 404 error page is not genuine.
One small point: the Thai media widely reported that Abhisit retorted, when Ji said he didn’t run away, something like “So why are you here?” (if you claim you didn’t run), and portrayed it as a triumph by Abhisit. Listen to the video (also the report above – see the 12th paragraph from bottom) it’s clear that this is false.
When I mentioned my difficulty of posting foreign news on Pantip after the coup that means now–under Aphisit government also. But then again, many people have been able to post some foreign news on Pantip, so I’m ok. Maybe me banning comes from the fact that I was one of a grassroot people who wrote for an anti-coup book, and that ban is still on me.
Anyway, I have no hard evidence to go against your claims nor I believe in all what you have said. I came here just to read quality works and comments that are quite rare in Thailand. I may disagree with you, but I do respect your opinion.
By the way, I would love to see you dig into the reprisal under Aphisit’s government by yourself also, the same way you did with Thaksin. Please don’t just ask in this webboard. Who knows, you may be surprised. What will you say if Aphisit government uses the lese majestic law against those who disagree with it politically even though the arguments have nothing to do with the palace?
I used to buy The Nation and Bangkok Post every day, and no longer read them since they failed to report two sides of stories. It seems to me though, that they don’t report news, they just write what they want the Thai politic to be.
To correct the frequent innaccuracy appearing here; St John’s College did not invite the Prime Minister for the talk, it was Oxfod’s International Relations Society. St Johns College Auditorium was merely used as the venue.
What was he trying to achieve? It hardly matters what he was *trying* to achieve; what he has *actually* done in most people’s minds (in Thailand), I believe, is align himself with Thaksin, Chalerm and the crew from Kwam Jing Wan Nee.
It’s all very well for him to talk about a grass-roots movement. But the red shirts are not, any more than the PAD is a movement of nice little old ladies. Just as the little old ladies were bamboozled by Sondhi et al, so have the “grass roots” been bamboozled by a bunch of utterly cynical old-style pols.
He’s backing the wrong horse and in the process doing himself and his manifesto huge damage.
Patrick Krup #36, I don’t denounce St John’s, Oxford for the invitation. I congratulate them. The best we can do is to get these people out into the open. What a great title for a talk by Mark Vejj! The problem with the dysfunctionality of politics and much else that goes on in Thai society is that it is hidden or taboo and no questions can be asked. Let’s hope the press will cover it well, and we’ll have access to recordings (especially Q & A), as we did with Giles’ speech. Prachatai English have a nice little collection of photos. This sort of stuff does eventually filter through to those who need it & give them the confidence to begin to participate in discussion.
Your description of Thaksin’s enemies is good, & may equally be applied to his friends. That’s why there is a need for open, inclusive & vigorous discussion. Easier outside of Thailand at present, but there are some glimmers of hope.
I am Ravin Thambapillai- The President of The International Relations Society who hosted the event.
Firstly, it seems clear that, whichever side of the argument you stand upon- Mr Abhisit Vijjejeva’s views need to be heard. If you disagree with them, because without their being heard they will never be defeated, and if you agree with them, because without being heard they will never gain the leigitimacy they deserve.
This is not to be compard with inviting discredited fascist historians and marginal unimportant politicians. Whoever you are, if you follow Thai politics you will realise that Abhisit’s views are extremely important and need to be understood.
My personal reaction to the talk was quite positive. Some of the answers to Prof Ungpakhorn’s questions appeared unconvincing, however, Lee Jones you must agree that this is a politician hamstrung in many different ways. To expect him to totally abandon pragmatism in favour of principles that have no hope of fruition and in doing so to abandon hope for the good he might do, is a strong ethical position, that not many, apart perhaps from some Kantians, would take.
The Prime Minister was very honest at least about the fact that Thailand is not, currently, in ideal shape. His role as Prime Minister is to try to improve that, given the framework in which he must operate. The role of Prof Ungpakhorn may well be to try to redfine the framework but in his criticism of the King he has thus far failed to resonate with the Thai people and until he does so the Abhisit will, of course, oppose him. In order for him to be able to do so, a frank exchange of opinions is necessary.
I was very glad to see Prof Ungpakhorn at the event and was prepared to go to extreme length to ensure this, however ultimately this was not necessary as from my personal discussion with the Prime Minister I can say he was happy to confront the views of the protestors and the Professor in person. I am therefore absolutely certain that the International Relations Society made an impeccable decision in inviting him and feel that everyone, including Ungpakhorn, benefitted from the event.
I asked Mr. Jones to cite an instance where the Abhisit government has censored criticism of itself in the news media. Your problems with the coup government are irrelevant to that.
As for Sondhi under Thaksin – until mid 2005 his media outlets were praising Thaksin. As soon he criticized Thaksin on his television show it was removed from the air. When he took his show to the parks, on more than one occasion thugs were organized to intimidate the audience, but the security forces, turning against Thaksin by then, intervened.
I’ve personally seen Thaksin threaten a foreign journalist. And under Thaksin, two journalist from FEER were arrested and threaten with deportation under a bogus lese majeste charge, which was eventually dropped after HM intervened.
According to every group that monitors press freedom, Thailand’s press freedom declined drastically under Thaksin. Check the Freedom House on that.
When Thaksin was the height of his popularity, he had an easier time buying off or intimidating the press. Starting in about 2005, when he could no longer deliver economic “miracles” in the face rising oil prices, and his popularity began to decline, he could no longer keep certain media outlets under his thumb. It’s not like he didn’t try.
Great column in the Bangkok Post today by Voranai Vanijaka. Basically, he takes apart what Jones and Parry wrote and makes them look like the shallow, out-of-touch, pompous and dishonest people they are. And in doing so, Khun Voranai also blasts holes in most of the arguments put forth by the critics on this thread. The Times would do better to hire Khun Voranai as its foreign editor.
Funny how none of the critics here have chosen to comment now that Giles confronted Abhisit at Oxford, and after Abhisit answered Giles, the audience applauded the Thai Prime Minister.
One of the more absurd charges in Thai politics is that elections are “bought”. Apparently there are two ways in which this can be done.
The cruder way is to give voters token items, like topping up phone cards. Given that voting in Thailand is conducted by secret ballot (and from what I’ve seen the process is quite transparent), there is no effective way to monitor how someone who has received such a benefit has voted. As a candidate in the last national election suggested: If someone offers you something for your vote, take it, and then vote however you want.
The other way is to tell people what policies you will support, i.e. what people in the West would call campaign promises. By this criterion all elections in democracies involve “vote buying.” How are Thais to decide how to vote if they can’t find out the policies the candidates will support?
It’s time the legislation banning vote buying was rescinded, and especially the provision allowing dissolution of whole executives and political parties for allegedly violating it.
A Thai happened to come here and able to underand English says:
Then the same thing can be said during Thaksin era, how could you say that Thaksin keep the medias under his thumbs, when Sondhi could move freely and almost all the medias go against him?
I’m a member at Pantip, after the coup, I tried to post foreign news about Thailand, news that Thai medias wouldn’t dare to print. My first few posts went well, after that all of them were blocked. Sometimes, I spent hours translating news, but couldn’t post. That happened around the same time where other anti-coup members with quality mind were banned from the site. Is this freedom of speech? You can say that it’s under the judgment of Pantip, but if you have good judgement, you should know what the answer is.
Quote:”A time when people are hunkered down in the political fox holes like now, is probably the least likely time to get reform in LM.”
‘
i don’t see how the attempt to reform this law can make things worse. if it is not reformed now, it would probably stay the same forever and always exploited as a political tool. Yes LM law is an issue for Thai people to decide , I’m Thai myself but I don’t think an ordinary Thai can voice an honest opinion abt it due to ‘you-know-what’. Besides, for those who feel this law is fine, are they saying that because they have been programmed to see it as such from birth? There is a higly unequal power relations between those who support this law (who are often in the position of power or ally themself with those in power), and those who want it reformed to enable it to truly function to protect the prestige of the monarchy. No Thai can deny this if they are honest enough. As such, i think it;s crucial for those who want the law reformed to gain support from the international community.
Somchit is down-playing the potential impact on Laos. It’s short-sighted to see that Laos is on another planet that is not going to be affect with those on the planet Earth…doesn’t it makes you wonder why a person of his position could make such a statement.
It may not have significant affects to the people who are in remote areas that do not rely on industrially produced goods (i.e. electricity)….but obviously it will affec those who now needed those industrialized goods to survive.
hmmm…..why is the current government of Laos letting other nations depleting its natural resources (i.e. gold, copper, etc…)???
Poor Lee Jones seems a callow fellow. Richard Lloyd Parry at 29 above is a seasoned man and he has delivered the goods that poor Lee Jones is caught equivocating over :
The charmer making a mess of his country But Mr Abhisit’s charm should not be a distraction from ugly truths about what is happening in Thailand. In the past four years, it has gone from being one of the most free and stable countries of South-East Asia to one of its most chaotic and divided. Writers, academics and journalists have been imprisoned or hounded into exile for harmless comment on Thailand’s monarchy. Helpless boat people have been chased out to sea to their deaths. Democratically elected governments have been forced out, first by the army and then by the power of the mob.
All of this has been done with the approval – sometimes passive, sometimes explicit – of the nice Mr Abhisit. The title of his talk at St John’s tomorrow, “Taking on the Challenges of Democracy”, could not be more appropriate, for Thailand’s leader is indeed democratically challenged. Rarely since the days of Dr Faustus has a gifted and promising man achieved power through such grubby and disreputable means.
Since Mr Abhisit became the leader of the Democrat Party in 2005, there have been two general elections in Thailand. He boycotted the first one in 2006, which was won, for the third time in a row, by the man at the centre of 21st-century Thai politics, Thaksin Shinawatra. His next electoral test came in 2007, when he was defeated decisively. The greatest “challenge” of democracy for Mr Abhisit has been as simple as that – whenever they have been given a chance to elect him, Thai voters have chosen someone else.
I think that if Abhisit is not to speak it is probably by his own choice.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Abhisit’s talk in Oxford: From the inside
Abhisit went on to say he is actually the first prime minister in Thailand to state that the lese majeste law can be abused… He is also in the process of getting together some academics… Moreover, he is doing the same with the Computer Crime Act…
Abhisit then argued that he is determined to bring back justice by bringing other cases, such as that of Somchai Nilabhihit, back to investigation.
He said… “so please stop trying to drag the monarchy to the political conflict…
But lese majeste is still actively being abused, Khun Angkhana Nilabhihit’s WGJP group was raided by the military a few days afte Abhisit’d popped in for a photo-op, the crack down on Prachatai came days after he said such a thing would not happen.
He said that his intention is also to bring back the charge to the army general who is associated with the Takbai incident…
One Thai female then asked why the PAD leaders are still free even though they broke every rule of law in shutting down the airport… He said, “they (the police) are now in the process of issuing the warrant for the case of occupying Government House… So I expect the action to be taken very soon”.
No one thinks that the PAD are going to charged for their reign of terror, they rescheduled their own arraignment for goodness sake!, certainly no military officers will be charged for anything, unless it is some sort of tit for tat retribution among the military themselves.
So the question on Abhisit is : Cynic or Dupe? Is he “just” an accomplished liar, a la Barak Obama, or does he really believe that he holds power in Thailand?
“I’m not worried about people wanting to protect democracy… what is not understood is that in true liberal democracy, all governments have limited power. The idea of democracy is just the majority rule means unlimited power is misleading”.
Of course that’s been the aim of the PAD all along, to emasculate elected government and to put power in the hands of those “appointed” by… self-appointed I guess.
One of the audience members then asked about the inhumane treatment of the Rohingya by the Thai army. Abhisit said… “I asked the media who asked about these allegations for evidence so I can investigate further. They have not responded”.
Translation : “That’s off the front page. We got away with it.”
Finally, one man from Taiwan asked how Abhisit would ensure that the military role and power is reduced and ensure that there will not be a coup again. Abhisit responded to this by saying that he thinks military power in Thai politics has already been declining.
The military buget has more than doubled since their coup and spending for “security” increases daily. The ISOC is wielding more power daily even as we speak. Of course Abhisit is the nominal head of the ISOC, so we’ve nothing to worry about there. He’s a Democrat. Dupe or Cynic?
Lese majeste-related web pages blocked in Thailand?
No problem reaching prachatai.com, the Thai and English version load just fine on True BKK.
Btw, http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ can be helpful if you suspect a 404 error page is not genuine.
Abhisit’s talk in Oxford: From the inside
Somebody has put up a video clip of part of Abhisit-Ji QA at YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-fsOdpVFsw
(The link comes from this post at Prachatai webboard: http://www.prachataiwebboard.com/webboard/wbtopic.php?id=784650 )
One small point: the Thai media widely reported that Abhisit retorted, when Ji said he didn’t run away, something like “So why are you here?” (if you claim you didn’t run), and portrayed it as a triumph by Abhisit. Listen to the video (also the report above – see the 12th paragraph from bottom) it’s clear that this is false.
Abhisit’s talk in Oxford: From the inside
Thank you, a fantastic report.
Abhisit’s talk in Oxford: From the inside
A good job of making excuses and prevarication.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
The Careful Observer,
When I mentioned my difficulty of posting foreign news on Pantip after the coup that means now–under Aphisit government also. But then again, many people have been able to post some foreign news on Pantip, so I’m ok. Maybe me banning comes from the fact that I was one of a grassroot people who wrote for an anti-coup book, and that ban is still on me.
Anyway, I have no hard evidence to go against your claims nor I believe in all what you have said. I came here just to read quality works and comments that are quite rare in Thailand. I may disagree with you, but I do respect your opinion.
By the way, I would love to see you dig into the reprisal under Aphisit’s government by yourself also, the same way you did with Thaksin. Please don’t just ask in this webboard. Who knows, you may be surprised. What will you say if Aphisit government uses the lese majestic law against those who disagree with it politically even though the arguments have nothing to do with the palace?
I used to buy The Nation and Bangkok Post every day, and no longer read them since they failed to report two sides of stories. It seems to me though, that they don’t report news, they just write what they want the Thai politic to be.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
To correct the frequent innaccuracy appearing here; St John’s College did not invite the Prime Minister for the talk, it was Oxfod’s International Relations Society. St Johns College Auditorium was merely used as the venue.
Special interview: Giles Ungpakorn, part 2
Have to say I was very disappointed to read that Aj. Ji greeted Abhisit yesterday (Mar 14) wearing a red shirt and waving a foot clapper ( http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/13370/abhisit-vows-progress-on-democracy ).
What was he trying to achieve? It hardly matters what he was *trying* to achieve; what he has *actually* done in most people’s minds (in Thailand), I believe, is align himself with Thaksin, Chalerm and the crew from Kwam Jing Wan Nee.
It’s all very well for him to talk about a grass-roots movement. But the red shirts are not, any more than the PAD is a movement of nice little old ladies. Just as the little old ladies were bamboozled by Sondhi et al, so have the “grass roots” been bamboozled by a bunch of utterly cynical old-style pols.
He’s backing the wrong horse and in the process doing himself and his manifesto huge damage.
Or did the Bangkok Post make this up? Doubt it.
Lese majeste-related web pages blocked in Thailand?
I am now unable to reach prachathai.com. The RSS feed fails to load. It does not respond to a ping.
I wonder if the military haven’t just made a fool of Abhisit, the nominal PM, again but this time shut prachatai.com down in earnest.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
Patrick Krup #36, I don’t denounce St John’s, Oxford for the invitation. I congratulate them. The best we can do is to get these people out into the open. What a great title for a talk by Mark Vejj! The problem with the dysfunctionality of politics and much else that goes on in Thai society is that it is hidden or taboo and no questions can be asked. Let’s hope the press will cover it well, and we’ll have access to recordings (especially Q & A), as we did with Giles’ speech. Prachatai English have a nice little collection of photos. This sort of stuff does eventually filter through to those who need it & give them the confidence to begin to participate in discussion.
Your description of Thaksin’s enemies is good, & may equally be applied to his friends. That’s why there is a need for open, inclusive & vigorous discussion. Easier outside of Thailand at present, but there are some glimmers of hope.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
I am Ravin Thambapillai- The President of The International Relations Society who hosted the event.
Firstly, it seems clear that, whichever side of the argument you stand upon- Mr Abhisit Vijjejeva’s views need to be heard. If you disagree with them, because without their being heard they will never be defeated, and if you agree with them, because without being heard they will never gain the leigitimacy they deserve.
This is not to be compard with inviting discredited fascist historians and marginal unimportant politicians. Whoever you are, if you follow Thai politics you will realise that Abhisit’s views are extremely important and need to be understood.
My personal reaction to the talk was quite positive. Some of the answers to Prof Ungpakhorn’s questions appeared unconvincing, however, Lee Jones you must agree that this is a politician hamstrung in many different ways. To expect him to totally abandon pragmatism in favour of principles that have no hope of fruition and in doing so to abandon hope for the good he might do, is a strong ethical position, that not many, apart perhaps from some Kantians, would take.
The Prime Minister was very honest at least about the fact that Thailand is not, currently, in ideal shape. His role as Prime Minister is to try to improve that, given the framework in which he must operate. The role of Prof Ungpakhorn may well be to try to redfine the framework but in his criticism of the King he has thus far failed to resonate with the Thai people and until he does so the Abhisit will, of course, oppose him. In order for him to be able to do so, a frank exchange of opinions is necessary.
I was very glad to see Prof Ungpakhorn at the event and was prepared to go to extreme length to ensure this, however ultimately this was not necessary as from my personal discussion with the Prime Minister I can say he was happy to confront the views of the protestors and the Professor in person. I am therefore absolutely certain that the International Relations Society made an impeccable decision in inviting him and feel that everyone, including Ungpakhorn, benefitted from the event.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
Dear A Thai,
I asked Mr. Jones to cite an instance where the Abhisit government has censored criticism of itself in the news media. Your problems with the coup government are irrelevant to that.
As for Sondhi under Thaksin – until mid 2005 his media outlets were praising Thaksin. As soon he criticized Thaksin on his television show it was removed from the air. When he took his show to the parks, on more than one occasion thugs were organized to intimidate the audience, but the security forces, turning against Thaksin by then, intervened.
I’ve personally seen Thaksin threaten a foreign journalist. And under Thaksin, two journalist from FEER were arrested and threaten with deportation under a bogus lese majeste charge, which was eventually dropped after HM intervened.
According to every group that monitors press freedom, Thailand’s press freedom declined drastically under Thaksin. Check the Freedom House on that.
When Thaksin was the height of his popularity, he had an easier time buying off or intimidating the press. Starting in about 2005, when he could no longer deliver economic “miracles” in the face rising oil prices, and his popularity began to decline, he could no longer keep certain media outlets under his thumb. It’s not like he didn’t try.
Great column in the Bangkok Post today by Voranai Vanijaka. Basically, he takes apart what Jones and Parry wrote and makes them look like the shallow, out-of-touch, pompous and dishonest people they are. And in doing so, Khun Voranai also blasts holes in most of the arguments put forth by the critics on this thread. The Times would do better to hire Khun Voranai as its foreign editor.
Funny how none of the critics here have chosen to comment now that Giles confronted Abhisit at Oxford, and after Abhisit answered Giles, the audience applauded the Thai Prime Minister.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
One of the more absurd charges in Thai politics is that elections are “bought”. Apparently there are two ways in which this can be done.
The cruder way is to give voters token items, like topping up phone cards. Given that voting in Thailand is conducted by secret ballot (and from what I’ve seen the process is quite transparent), there is no effective way to monitor how someone who has received such a benefit has voted. As a candidate in the last national election suggested: If someone offers you something for your vote, take it, and then vote however you want.
The other way is to tell people what policies you will support, i.e. what people in the West would call campaign promises. By this criterion all elections in democracies involve “vote buying.” How are Thais to decide how to vote if they can’t find out the policies the candidates will support?
It’s time the legislation banning vote buying was rescinded, and especially the provision allowing dissolution of whole executives and political parties for allegedly violating it.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
Mr Jones, Mr Parry et al :
Please read this one opinion from the local media; especially on the part regarding lese majeste.
Grateful for your further helpful opinions, if any, out of the predefined agenda.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/13382/intellectual-dishonesty
More support for lese majeste campaign
That’s 0.00000259568551 of the Thai population!
Congratulations.
Now, I guess, an international referendum to amend the Thai constitution?
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
The Careful Observer,
Then the same thing can be said during Thaksin era, how could you say that Thaksin keep the medias under his thumbs, when Sondhi could move freely and almost all the medias go against him?
I’m a member at Pantip, after the coup, I tried to post foreign news about Thailand, news that Thai medias wouldn’t dare to print. My first few posts went well, after that all of them were blocked. Sometimes, I spent hours translating news, but couldn’t post. That happened around the same time where other anti-coup members with quality mind were banned from the site. Is this freedom of speech? You can say that it’s under the judgment of Pantip, but if you have good judgement, you should know what the answer is.
Look at your own flaws before looking at others..
David Streckfuss on LM
Quote:”A time when people are hunkered down in the political fox holes like now, is probably the least likely time to get reform in LM.”
‘
i don’t see how the attempt to reform this law can make things worse. if it is not reformed now, it would probably stay the same forever and always exploited as a political tool. Yes LM law is an issue for Thai people to decide , I’m Thai myself but I don’t think an ordinary Thai can voice an honest opinion abt it due to ‘you-know-what’. Besides, for those who feel this law is fine, are they saying that because they have been programmed to see it as such from birth? There is a higly unequal power relations between those who support this law (who are often in the position of power or ally themself with those in power), and those who want it reformed to enable it to truly function to protect the prestige of the monarchy. No Thai can deny this if they are honest enough. As such, i think it;s crucial for those who want the law reformed to gain support from the international community.
Laos too poor to get any poorer
Somchit is down-playing the potential impact on Laos. It’s short-sighted to see that Laos is on another planet that is not going to be affect with those on the planet Earth…doesn’t it makes you wonder why a person of his position could make such a statement.
It may not have significant affects to the people who are in remote areas that do not rely on industrially produced goods (i.e. electricity)….but obviously it will affec those who now needed those industrialized goods to survive.
hmmm…..why is the current government of Laos letting other nations depleting its natural resources (i.e. gold, copper, etc…)???
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
Poor Lee Jones seems a callow fellow. Richard Lloyd Parry at 29 above is a seasoned man and he has delivered the goods that poor Lee Jones is caught equivocating over :
The charmer making a mess of his country
But Mr Abhisit’s charm should not be a distraction from ugly truths about what is happening in Thailand. In the past four years, it has gone from being one of the most free and stable countries of South-East Asia to one of its most chaotic and divided. Writers, academics and journalists have been imprisoned or hounded into exile for harmless comment on Thailand’s monarchy. Helpless boat people have been chased out to sea to their deaths. Democratically elected governments have been forced out, first by the army and then by the power of the mob.
All of this has been done with the approval – sometimes passive, sometimes explicit – of the nice Mr Abhisit. The title of his talk at St John’s tomorrow, “Taking on the Challenges of Democracy”, could not be more appropriate, for Thailand’s leader is indeed democratically challenged. Rarely since the days of Dr Faustus has a gifted and promising man achieved power through such grubby and disreputable means.
Since Mr Abhisit became the leader of the Democrat Party in 2005, there have been two general elections in Thailand. He boycotted the first one in 2006, which was won, for the third time in a row, by the man at the centre of 21st-century Thai politics, Thaksin Shinawatra. His next electoral test came in 2007, when he was defeated decisively. The greatest “challenge” of democracy for Mr Abhisit has been as simple as that – whenever they have been given a chance to elect him, Thai voters have chosen someone else.
I think that if Abhisit is not to speak it is probably by his own choice.
Lee Jones on Abhisit in Oxford
To careful observer
You would love to have some names, won’t you? Cut down on man hours and wasted effort, checking on wrong people.
BTW, in case some of you have forgotten, I think Abhisit appointed the owner of one of the biggest whorehouse in Bangkok as a Minister.