“The final directive for living together in ethnic harmony. ”
Yep. “Myanmar Naing-ngan” with “naing-ngan” I believe coming from “let-net naing-ngan” which means something like “collection of tributary states conquered by arms.”
Also they haven’t **just** changed the name of the country.
I can remember people talking about Myanmar food, Myanmar language, I speak Myanmarese, or “Myanmar people” each wearing approved national costumes and dancing in a circle in the government staged national unity event, but not smiling. In short, name changing is not just name changing, it’s also changing and regimenting the way that people think about things. All a little bit too much for us westerners who like our pancakes dripping with irony.
LSS: “political and sociological world-view of the Patani Muslim population” > You seem to know a lot about what these Patani Muslims think. What is this knowledge based on in terms of research or reading? Any chance of seeing a substantive article on this authored by you?
“trans-national ‘Islamic studies'” > Can you please provide a few sources, preferably by members of this field who have done substantial field research in southern Thailand? (This is a real request, since I am not familiar with that literature.)
I really look forward to reading a well-crafted and clearly argued review of McCargo’s book written by LSS and contributed to New Mandala (or any major academic journal). You should not keep your apparently superior knowledge about the problems in the South all to yourself. As I have mentioned in my earlier post, there is a number of people doing prolonged field work in the South. None of them, as far as I know, has any substantial background in Islamic Studies. They often cannot even enter Muslim (and often even Buddhist) villages, because the situation is too dangerous, and few researchers would want to endanger their lives. Thus, the entire discourse on these problems might well benefit from your well-substantiated input.
I have read in a different article that a peace deal had been brokered by Col. Ner Dah and Dr. Timothy.
I understand that Dr. Timothy is now in hiding, in fear for his life, and that Col. Ner Dah is trying to get in front of this.
When Bleming was in Burma, he pointedly asked the colonel about it, and Ner Dah denied having anything to do with the defections, or anything to do with the peace council.
But as Bell stated, Ner Dah has yet to make an official statement.
I’m really glad that Jack Slade was able to hook up with Bleming and go into Burma for himself. The nay sayers were coming out of the proverbial woodwork to slam Bleming.
Slade has gone a long way towards refuting the slanders leveled at Bleming.
There seems to be a certain amount of competition between the various NGO groups working to assist the Karens. There’s a limited amount of money to go around, and all of them want a piece of it.
I whole-heartedly agree with Jack Slade that there shouldn’t be any sort of tentative peace. Either win, or throw in your cards and accept the fate the SPDC has in store for you. I’ve said it before – as long as the guerrillas stay in the field, they can never be defeated. The only way they’ll lose is to quit.
The U.S. Govt is giving assistance to the Shan State Army (SSA), in the way of supplies and Special Forces personnel. This is no secret, as it has been widely reported.
Yet for reasons that have never been divulged, the U.S. Govt. won’t assist the KNLA in the same manner.
If the U.S. would assist and coordinate the various factions opposing the SPDC, it wouldn’t take long before the generals were swinging from lamp posts. But as long as the various groups are squabbling with each other, they’re unable to mount a united front.
I believe that part of this lies in the fact that they don’t trust the KNU, and additionally they’re afraid that Burma will Balkanize. The position of the U.S. Govt. is that Burma remain whole, and not break up into small independent tribal areas, eternally at war with each other.
Anyway, that’s my take on the situation.
Democratus: Well, I suppose I should expand on what I mean “these days”. I am talking about the last 10 or more years. Think back to some of his writings in the 70s and 80s on Thai politics which I think are excellent. I blogged on him just being a lackey a couple of years ago – see here. Chai-anan was defending Thaksin in 2005 and then well Sondhi L jumped ship and he followed his patron. I just find the whole thing quite sad.
Alas, I think Thorn is right. The war is not over. The royalists now think they are in a battle to the death, and I suspect they’ll stop at nothing. Such bloody mindedness will mean that the opponents will be equally tough. Thailand is in trouble because the royalists refuse to accept that others should have a role in determining the country’s directions.
Bangkok Pundit: What on earth do you mean? Chai-Anan has been Sondhi’s buddy and sidekick for years. He’s the brains in the operation. Sondhi provides the money and cunning. Remeber that they both went over to Thaksin initially. Chai-Anan is a bit of a whore when it comes to serving governments. But when Sondhi left, Chai-Anan was close behind. Chai-Anan has always been a royalist, so even if they weren’t buddies, they’d team up to face alleged republicanism.
Sorry about the temperamental filtering of comments. Over the past few days some of my own comments have even been eaten by the cyber-goats (even this comment here was taken for spam…). Please accept my apologies for the frustration any delays or disappearances cause. We receive heaps of spam comments each day (over half a million since we first installed the filter!) and the program that keeps them off our screens is an imperfect way of stopping the deluge. It sometimes catches legitimate comments by mistake. Such is the logic of the machine.
In particular, comments that include hyperlinks often get taken for spam. But sometimes there appears to be no reason for the filtering…
If your comments are not displaying as usual (with the “in moderation” prompt) then please let me know. I am always happy to retrieve those that the filter has taken by accident.
Thanks for your patience – the relevant LSS comment is now up online for the debate to continue.
“The attack on General Prem Tinsulanont…this phenomena signals the movement of those who oppose the monarchy. They are not Marxist, but they want to establish a republic.”
The last time the “Union of Burma” held sway most of the areas that are now “Special” (although they may not be for much longer depending on how one reads the proposed constitution) were in rebellion. At about the same time that those battles were postponed, and the various ceasefires declared, “Myanmar” also officially came on the scene. Calling the junta’s government “the Myanmar government” does, in this context, seem relatively unproblematic. Perhaps it just means that “Myanmar” will always have a particular aftertaste and that some future “Burmese government” will see fit to get rid of the word from official parlance, or, alternatively, that they will actively improve its image. For the moment, it is what the generals call the country they control and by using it to refer to their government (and not the country) a distinction is drawn between official discursive interventions and the other voices that swirl around.
But the name of the country is even more problematic when it is taken, like you do, in the context of the areas that are currently called “Special”. Some would, of course, prefer to see them as Kachinland, Shanland, etc. “Burma” isn’t always, as you suggest, the be all and end all. But, in the meantime most of my friends and associates who come from these places tend to go with “Burma”, at least in English, and “Bamar” or some variation in their vernacular. And in Jinghpaw, for example, it is not uncommon to refer to “Myen Asuya” (the “Myanmar government”…but asoya/asuya is a Burmese word too…so it does get complicated quickly…). But using “Myen Asuya” is a bit like what I am doing in English. “Myanmar” is, as we know, supposed to be the post-colonial panacea for the generals. The final directive for living together in ethnic harmony. What was that t-shirt I once put up on NM: “Happyland Myanmar”?
But maybe this is all a distraction and perhaps your “Democratic Republic of…” intervention makes most sense. Bonus points if anyone gets that through a peer review process. Maybe the best strategy is just to be upfront about it: perhaps the title could be something like – “Bringing the Democratic People’s Republic to Burma/Myanmar/etc: An exploration of place names and politics on the global periphery”. New Mandala would be happy to host a working paper. I’m sure anyone taking on this challenge would get loads of helpful comments and suggestions…
Here’s the link to the full transcript (there’re also MP3 files) of the speeches at last Friday rally by the 5 PAD leaders. The part about the alledged movement to change the system of government (i.e. republicanism) is very disturbing indeed. http://www.manager.co.th/Home/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000048775
See also the latest article by Chai-anan Samutthavanit. http://www.manager.co.th/Daily/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000049004
Remember he’s the one who first suggested the use of “Article 7”. In this new article, Chai-anan in effect suggests that a new coup is probably necessary. He of course doesn’t say as much, but the implication is clear (I think in his mind too). For the so-called “Half-Democracy” (р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Ыр╣Др╕Хр╕вр╕Др╕гр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Гр╕Ъ – sorry I couldn’t think of a good translation of the term) can only be implemented by overthrowing the current system of choosing government by elections.
I liked that article. Nicholas you say : But for the country as a whole, and here I mean the full territory (including all the Special Regions, and the areas where there is still ongoing civil war), it makes the most sense to still say “Burma”. But weren’t all the ‘special regions’ still “special” when Myanmar was officially named Burma? Or does this acknowledge too much that Burma would fragment into a Yugoslavia type situation — and academics holding that to be a standard would only serve to confuse things further away from the Ivory Tower? Maybe I do not know enough of the history to comment, but I would think that there would be no simple way to determine what a sovereign state is to be named until it’s people have determined it – so Myanmar can hardly be legitimate on those grounds – can Burma? Did the people in the region at the time believe Burma to be their “state?”
Personally, I think referring to Burma as the Democratic Republic of Myanmar is best. Like The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, the Democratic Republic of Congo – it seems most states prefaced by “Democratic Republic” are the complete opposite — so why not make it a standard? Very Derrida. (although perhaps not so much the case in the Congo now touch wood..)
Bangkok Pundit: I found the quote in the political summary news in issue 11005 of April 27, p. 13. Unfortunately, neither Matichon nor NewsCenter carry the entire bloc, but leave out the last five sections. So, here is the typed text:
In fact, the last phrase, which I did not include in my rough treanslation, makes matters even worse, because it shows that the speaker does not care about what the consequences of any confrontations might be.
Thank you J. Slade.
For those who’ve been involved the dispaced people in Burma for some time, we can get quite passionate when someone seems to be threatening their support. I’m sure Bleming does mean well, he’s just misinformed. His commander friend has been mixed up in this “limited peace” affair for some time. http://www.irrawaddymedia.com/article.php?art_id=6687
Ner Dah, we hope you turn away from this SPDC trap and stand selflessly in the defense of your people–like a true Karen leader.
Mr. Bleming, while you’re here, I hope you get the chance to meet the folks of FBR, CIDKP and other bigger organizations to get a clearer undertanding of how best to help. Thank you, sir, that you care.
Grasshopper: Relativist drivel can be used to justify all kinds of human rights abuses. Those Burmese suffocated to death should have known better. They have heard of abuses before. So should those Tak Bai protesters. They know the Thai military are a pack of murdering bastards, so they should have known better and gone home and watched TV.
Mission seems to be far from accomplished, but it seems that this soldier is doing more harm than good to Thaksin in the present.
It posed some articles reflecting the inherent conflict in PPP (attacking Chalerm Yoobamrung).
It’s also the point of attack for those who want to use lèse majesté law against Thaksin (some articles contain “sensitive” content). I think this is the main reason why it has to go offline.
I think it’s just obsolete for Thaksin. He is back to Thailand, and can communicate directly to his supporters (through Pongthep). That’s why he got rid of it.
For the mission, I don’t think it’ll be over this year; it might goes on until they all dead. Thank god these people don’t have capable children.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
DFID man in Burma
“The final directive for living together in ethnic harmony. ”
Yep. “Myanmar Naing-ngan” with “naing-ngan” I believe coming from “let-net naing-ngan” which means something like “collection of tributary states conquered by arms.”
Also they haven’t **just** changed the name of the country.
I can remember people talking about Myanmar food, Myanmar language, I speak Myanmarese, or “Myanmar people” each wearing approved national costumes and dancing in a circle in the government staged national unity event, but not smiling. In short, name changing is not just name changing, it’s also changing and regimenting the way that people think about things. All a little bit too much for us westerners who like our pancakes dripping with irony.
An unwinnable war?
LSS: “political and sociological world-view of the Patani Muslim population” > You seem to know a lot about what these Patani Muslims think. What is this knowledge based on in terms of research or reading? Any chance of seeing a substantive article on this authored by you?
“trans-national ‘Islamic studies'” > Can you please provide a few sources, preferably by members of this field who have done substantial field research in southern Thailand? (This is a real request, since I am not familiar with that literature.)
I really look forward to reading a well-crafted and clearly argued review of McCargo’s book written by LSS and contributed to New Mandala (or any major academic journal). You should not keep your apparently superior knowledge about the problems in the South all to yourself. As I have mentioned in my earlier post, there is a number of people doing prolonged field work in the South. None of them, as far as I know, has any substantial background in Islamic Studies. They often cannot even enter Muslim (and often even Buddhist) villages, because the situation is too dangerous, and few researchers would want to endanger their lives. Thus, the entire discourse on these problems might well benefit from your well-substantiated input.
Thomas Bleming in the news
I have read in a different article that a peace deal had been brokered by Col. Ner Dah and Dr. Timothy.
I understand that Dr. Timothy is now in hiding, in fear for his life, and that Col. Ner Dah is trying to get in front of this.
When Bleming was in Burma, he pointedly asked the colonel about it, and Ner Dah denied having anything to do with the defections, or anything to do with the peace council.
But as Bell stated, Ner Dah has yet to make an official statement.
I’m really glad that Jack Slade was able to hook up with Bleming and go into Burma for himself. The nay sayers were coming out of the proverbial woodwork to slam Bleming.
Slade has gone a long way towards refuting the slanders leveled at Bleming.
There seems to be a certain amount of competition between the various NGO groups working to assist the Karens. There’s a limited amount of money to go around, and all of them want a piece of it.
I whole-heartedly agree with Jack Slade that there shouldn’t be any sort of tentative peace. Either win, or throw in your cards and accept the fate the SPDC has in store for you. I’ve said it before – as long as the guerrillas stay in the field, they can never be defeated. The only way they’ll lose is to quit.
The U.S. Govt is giving assistance to the Shan State Army (SSA), in the way of supplies and Special Forces personnel. This is no secret, as it has been widely reported.
Yet for reasons that have never been divulged, the U.S. Govt. won’t assist the KNLA in the same manner.
If the U.S. would assist and coordinate the various factions opposing the SPDC, it wouldn’t take long before the generals were swinging from lamp posts. But as long as the various groups are squabbling with each other, they’re unable to mount a united front.
I believe that part of this lies in the fact that they don’t trust the KNU, and additionally they’re afraid that Burma will Balkanize. The position of the U.S. Govt. is that Burma remain whole, and not break up into small independent tribal areas, eternally at war with each other.
Anyway, that’s my take on the situation.
Perhaps we’ll soon meet, Mr. Slade.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Democratus: Well, I suppose I should expand on what I mean “these days”. I am talking about the last 10 or more years. Think back to some of his writings in the 70s and 80s on Thai politics which I think are excellent. I blogged on him just being a lackey a couple of years ago – see here. Chai-anan was defending Thaksin in 2005 and then well Sondhi L jumped ship and he followed his patron. I just find the whole thing quite sad.
An unwinnable war?
I agree with your analysis LSS – Islam is a motivating, guiding and unifying force in the conflict.
http://hi-thaksin.net/
Alas, I think Thorn is right. The war is not over. The royalists now think they are in a battle to the death, and I suspect they’ll stop at nothing. Such bloody mindedness will mean that the opponents will be equally tough. Thailand is in trouble because the royalists refuse to accept that others should have a role in determining the country’s directions.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Bangkok Pundit: What on earth do you mean? Chai-Anan has been Sondhi’s buddy and sidekick for years. He’s the brains in the operation. Sondhi provides the money and cunning. Remeber that they both went over to Thaksin initially. Chai-Anan is a bit of a whore when it comes to serving governments. But when Sondhi left, Chai-Anan was close behind. Chai-Anan has always been a royalist, so even if they weren’t buddies, they’d team up to face alleged republicanism.
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Srithanonchai: Thanks very much. The Manager article that Somsak posts has more, but it is only a partial transcript.
What has become of Chai-anan? He is just a Sondhi L lackey these days.
Playing the market in rice – an update
[…] Mandala mentions the ongoing debate in Thailand about the extent to which farmers will benefit from high rice […]
An unwinnable war?
LSS and Srithanonchai, and others,
Sorry about the temperamental filtering of comments. Over the past few days some of my own comments have even been eaten by the cyber-goats (even this comment here was taken for spam…). Please accept my apologies for the frustration any delays or disappearances cause. We receive heaps of spam comments each day (over half a million since we first installed the filter!) and the program that keeps them off our screens is an imperfect way of stopping the deluge. It sometimes catches legitimate comments by mistake. Such is the logic of the machine.
In particular, comments that include hyperlinks often get taken for spam. But sometimes there appears to be no reason for the filtering…
If your comments are not displaying as usual (with the “in moderation” prompt) then please let me know. I am always happy to retrieve those that the filter has taken by accident.
Thanks for your patience – the relevant LSS comment is now up online for the debate to continue.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
An unwinnable war?
re: Srithanonchai
For the past couple of days, I’ve been trying to respond to you, but the web browser keeps eating my posts. Perhaps I can e-mail it to you?
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Note also that Chai-anan insists quite categorically that there’s a movement to install a republic :
р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Вр╕Ир╕бр╕Хр╕╡ р╕Юр╕е.р╕н.р╣Ар╕Ыр╕гр╕б р╕Хр╕┤р╕Ур╕кр╕╣р╕ер╕▓р╕Щр╕Щр╕Чр╣М…..р╕Ыр╕гр╕▓р╕Бр╕Пр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕кр╣Ир╕нр╣Бр╕зр╕зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕Др╕ер╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Щр╣Др╕лр╕зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕ер╕╕р╣Ир╕бр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕Хр╣Йр╕▓р╕Щр╕кр╕Цр╕▓р╕Ър╕▒р╕Щр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Гр╕Кр╣Ир╕Юр╕зр╕Бр╕бр╕▓р╕гр╣Мр╕Бр╕Лр╕┤р╕кр╕Хр╣Мр╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Юр╕зр╕Бр╕гр╕╡р╕Ыр╕▒р╕Ър╕ер╕┤р╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ р╕Др╕╖р╕нр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Хр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕кр╕Цр╕▓р╕Ыр╕Щр╕▓р╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕нр╕Ър╕кр╕▓р╕Шр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╕гр╕▒р╕Р
“The attack on General Prem Tinsulanont…this phenomena signals the movement of those who oppose the monarchy. They are not Marxist, but they want to establish a republic.”
Ministers at the Arunachal Pradesh Manau
Thanks Sondita,
Great to hear from you. I have your e-mail address and will be in touch.
Thanks for stopping by.
Best wishes,
Nicholas
DFID man in Burma
Thanks Grasshopper,
Interesting points.
The last time the “Union of Burma” held sway most of the areas that are now “Special” (although they may not be for much longer depending on how one reads the proposed constitution) were in rebellion. At about the same time that those battles were postponed, and the various ceasefires declared, “Myanmar” also officially came on the scene. Calling the junta’s government “the Myanmar government” does, in this context, seem relatively unproblematic. Perhaps it just means that “Myanmar” will always have a particular aftertaste and that some future “Burmese government” will see fit to get rid of the word from official parlance, or, alternatively, that they will actively improve its image. For the moment, it is what the generals call the country they control and by using it to refer to their government (and not the country) a distinction is drawn between official discursive interventions and the other voices that swirl around.
But the name of the country is even more problematic when it is taken, like you do, in the context of the areas that are currently called “Special”. Some would, of course, prefer to see them as Kachinland, Shanland, etc. “Burma” isn’t always, as you suggest, the be all and end all. But, in the meantime most of my friends and associates who come from these places tend to go with “Burma”, at least in English, and “Bamar” or some variation in their vernacular. And in Jinghpaw, for example, it is not uncommon to refer to “Myen Asuya” (the “Myanmar government”…but asoya/asuya is a Burmese word too…so it does get complicated quickly…). But using “Myen Asuya” is a bit like what I am doing in English. “Myanmar” is, as we know, supposed to be the post-colonial panacea for the generals. The final directive for living together in ethnic harmony. What was that t-shirt I once put up on NM: “Happyland Myanmar”?
But maybe this is all a distraction and perhaps your “Democratic Republic of…” intervention makes most sense. Bonus points if anyone gets that through a peer review process. Maybe the best strategy is just to be upfront about it: perhaps the title could be something like – “Bringing the Democratic People’s Republic to Burma/Myanmar/etc: An exploration of place names and politics on the global periphery”. New Mandala would be happy to host a working paper. I’m sure anyone taking on this challenge would get loads of helpful comments and suggestions…
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Here’s the link to the full transcript (there’re also MP3 files) of the speeches at last Friday rally by the 5 PAD leaders. The part about the alledged movement to change the system of government (i.e. republicanism) is very disturbing indeed.
http://www.manager.co.th/Home/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000048775
See also the latest article by Chai-anan Samutthavanit.
http://www.manager.co.th/Daily/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000049004
Remember he’s the one who first suggested the use of “Article 7”. In this new article, Chai-anan in effect suggests that a new coup is probably necessary. He of course doesn’t say as much, but the implication is clear (I think in his mind too). For the so-called “Half-Democracy” (р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Ыр╣Др╕Хр╕вр╕Др╕гр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Гр╕Ъ – sorry I couldn’t think of a good translation of the term) can only be implemented by overthrowing the current system of choosing government by elections.
DFID man in Burma
I liked that article. Nicholas you say : But for the country as a whole, and here I mean the full territory (including all the Special Regions, and the areas where there is still ongoing civil war), it makes the most sense to still say “Burma”. But weren’t all the ‘special regions’ still “special” when Myanmar was officially named Burma? Or does this acknowledge too much that Burma would fragment into a Yugoslavia type situation — and academics holding that to be a standard would only serve to confuse things further away from the Ivory Tower? Maybe I do not know enough of the history to comment, but I would think that there would be no simple way to determine what a sovereign state is to be named until it’s people have determined it – so Myanmar can hardly be legitimate on those grounds – can Burma? Did the people in the region at the time believe Burma to be their “state?”
Personally, I think referring to Burma as the Democratic Republic of Myanmar is best. Like The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, the Democratic Republic of Congo – it seems most states prefaced by “Democratic Republic” are the complete opposite — so why not make it a standard? Very Derrida. (although perhaps not so much the case in the Congo now touch wood..)
Taking a stand against lèse majesté
Bangkok Pundit: I found the quote in the political summary news in issue 11005 of April 27, p. 13. Unfortunately, neither Matichon nor NewsCenter carry the entire bloc, but leave out the last five sections. So, here is the typed text:
р╣Бр╕Бр╣Йр╕гр╕Шр╕Щ.”р╣Ар╕Юр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Хр╕▒р╕зр╣Ар╕нр╕З”р╕нр╕╡р╕Бр╕Ыр╕б р╕нр╕╕р╣Йр╕б”р╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕Бр╕п-р╕гр╕бр╕Х.” р╣Др╕бр╣Ир╕Юр╣Йр╕Щр╕к.р╕к.р╕Чр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Ыр╕╡40р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕лр╕ер╕╕р╕Ф
Source – р╣Ар╕зр╣Зр╕Ър╣Др╕Лр╕Хр╣Мр╕бр╕Хр╕┤р╕Кр╕Щ Saturday, Apr 26, 2008 09:22
‘р╕кр╕Щр╕Шр╕┤’ р╕ер╕▒р╣Ир╕Щр╕ир╕╢р╕Бр╣Гр╕лр╕Нр╣Ир╕Др╕гр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕кр╕╕р╕Фр╕Чр╣Йр╕▓р╕вр╕Цр╕нр╕вр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Й
р╣Ар╕зр╕ер╕▓ 21.40 р╕Щ. р╕Юр╕е.р╕Х. р╕Ир╕│р╕ер╕нр╕З р╕ир╕гр╕╡р╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З р╣Бр╕Бр╕Щр╕Щр╕│р╕Юр╕▒р╕Щр╕Шр╕бр╕┤р╕Хр╕г р╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щр╣Бр╕Цр╕ер╕Зр╕Ър╕Щр╣Ар╕зр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Др╕Щр╣Бр╕гр╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕зр╕┤р╕Бр╕др╕Фр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╣Бр╕Бр╣Йр╣Гр╕Щр╕кр╕ар╕▓р╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Й р╕Хр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕нр╕нр╕Бр╕бр╕▓р╣Бр╕Бр╣Йр╕Щр╕нр╕Бр╕кр╕ар╕▓ р╕Щ.р╕Х. р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕кр╕Зр╕Др╣М р╕кр╕╕р╣Ир╕Щр╕ир╕┤р╕гр╕┤ р╕Ър╕нр╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Чр╕╕р╕Бр╕Др╕гр╕▒р╣Йр╕Зр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕бр╕╡р╣Ар╕гр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕З р╕Чр╕лр╕▓р╕гр╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Юр╕▒р╕Щр╕Шр╕бр╕┤р╕Хр╕г р╣Гр╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Кр╕╕р╕бр╕Щр╕╕р╕бр╕Ыр╕╡ 2549 р╕бр╕╡р╕Чр╕лр╕▓р╕гр╕Кр╕╕р╕бр╕Щр╕╕р╕бр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Юр╕▒р╕Щр╕Шр╕бр╕┤р╕Хр╕гр╕бр╕▓р╕Б р╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕Зр╣Ар╕Др╕гр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Зр╣Бр╕Ър╕Ър╕бр╕▓ р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕Бр╣Зр╕бр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕Б р╣Бр╕бр╣Йр╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕Юр╕ер╕Бр╣Зр╕бр╕▓
“р╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕кр╕бр╕▒р╕вр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕бр╕▒р╕Щр╣Ар╕лр╕┤р╕бр╣Ар╕Бр╕гр╕┤р╕бр╣Ар╕лр╕ер╕╖р╕нр╣Ар╕Бр╕┤р╕Щ р╕Др╕┤р╕Фр╕Ир╕░р╕Чр╕│р╕нр╕░р╣Др╕гр╣Бр╕вр╣Ир╣Ж р╕бр╕▒р╕Щр╕Бр╣Зр╕Чр╕│р╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕Чр╕╕р╕Бр╕зр╕▒р╕Щ р╣Ар╕Фр╕╡р╣Лр╕вр╕зр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕Ир╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Ир╕░р╕Чр╕│р╕ер╕▓р╕вр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Шр╕▓р╕Щр╕нр╕Зр╕Др╕бр╕Щр╕Хр╕гр╕╡р╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕з р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕бр╕▒р╕Щр╕Ир╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Чр╕│р╕ер╕▓р╕вр╕кр╕Цр╕▓р╕Ър╕▒р╕Щр╕кр╕╣р╕Зр╕кр╕╕р╕Фр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╣Бр╕Ьр╣Ир╕Щр╕Фр╕┤р╕Щр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щр╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕з р╕Фр╕▒р╕Зр╕Щр╕▒р╣Йр╕Щр╕Юр╕╡р╣Ир╕Щр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Хр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Юр╕гр╣Йр╕нр╕бр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Ир╕░р╕нр╕нр╕Бр╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕Хр╣Йр╕▓р╕Щ р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╣Др╕гр╕Бр╣Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ” р╕Юр╕е.р╕Х. р╕Ир╕│р╕ер╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕ер╣Ир╕▓р╕з
In fact, the last phrase, which I did not include in my rough treanslation, makes matters even worse, because it shows that the speaker does not care about what the consequences of any confrontations might be.
Thomas Bleming in the news
Thank you J. Slade.
For those who’ve been involved the dispaced people in Burma for some time, we can get quite passionate when someone seems to be threatening their support. I’m sure Bleming does mean well, he’s just misinformed. His commander friend has been mixed up in this “limited peace” affair for some time.
http://www.irrawaddymedia.com/article.php?art_id=6687
Ner Dah, we hope you turn away from this SPDC trap and stand selflessly in the defense of your people–like a true Karen leader.
Mr. Bleming, while you’re here, I hope you get the chance to meet the folks of FBR, CIDKP and other bigger organizations to get a clearer undertanding of how best to help. Thank you, sir, that you care.
Lèse majesté and the BBC
Grasshopper: Relativist drivel can be used to justify all kinds of human rights abuses. Those Burmese suffocated to death should have known better. They have heard of abuses before. So should those Tak Bai protesters. They know the Thai military are a pack of murdering bastards, so they should have known better and gone home and watched TV.
http://hi-thaksin.net/
Mission seems to be far from accomplished, but it seems that this soldier is doing more harm than good to Thaksin in the present.
It posed some articles reflecting the inherent conflict in PPP (attacking Chalerm Yoobamrung).
It’s also the point of attack for those who want to use lèse majesté law against Thaksin (some articles contain “sensitive” content). I think this is the main reason why it has to go offline.
I think it’s just obsolete for Thaksin. He is back to Thailand, and can communicate directly to his supporters (through Pongthep). That’s why he got rid of it.
For the mission, I don’t think it’ll be over this year; it might goes on until they all dead. Thank god these people don’t have capable children.