Sanctions against Burma’s junta might not work in the last decades but it is not true at all that sanctions affect ordinary people. Everyone in Burma and anyone who has been living in Burma for at least three to five years realize that how the businesses are running. What Burma’s junta need is a comprehensive sanctions adopted by UNSC.
To Land of Snarls: Although you did not mention your name, your comment is simply trying to response with few immoral and unethical language. It is unbelievable that you don’t even understand a simple English regarding my comment on Dr. Win Maung’s. For me, Theingi is nothing and ‘jealousy’ is for junta’s generals and its supporters, may be like you, who are afraid to show up with a name. It’s a shame. Beware that your head is agreed with your body. I hope you’ve seen chopped-off heads in ’88 uprising.
Re: Grasshopper Search for ‘Schwartz’ and ‘Israel’ or ‘Semite’ on this site, and tell me why several times you bring up Israel? I did the search and I found 1 and only 1 other reference to Israel. 1 is not several. If you’re going to spout bullshit, Grasshoper, then be prepared for people to call your bluff. Is it too late to mention that Awzar Thi was the first person to write the name of said country in this thread?
But if nothing else in my response, at least answer me this, for what reason of yours was it to digress from the original point of Somchai’s dissapearance to refuting what sort of man he was?
Because his legacy is being appropriated by certain forces whose goals I am in opposition with. In short, among certain circles, Mr. Neelaphaijit’s dissapearance has entered the propaganda machine to justify the violent seperatist goals of the Southern insurgency. I’m sorry that this is an inconvenient truth, but it’s truth nonetheless. Now, I am of the opinion that, while alive, certain aspects of Mr. Neelaphaijit’s work, either wittingly or unwittingly, also supported the goals of the insurgency. Likewise, Awzar Thi’s panegyric, either wittingly or unwittingly, feeds into the same propaganda machine. Of course, if those Thai police officers weren’t stupid, corrupt, and evil-hearted enough to make him into a shaheed, there would have been nothing to feed into the propaganda machine in the first place!
It is because of this appropration that I am uncomfortable with Awzar Thi’s uncritical praise of his work. I think that this is what Bangkok Pundit is getting at as well, but he had the wisdom to realize that in today’s climate, openly criticizing a man like Mr. Neelaphajit’s work without tons of disqualifers tends to get one labeled an “Islamophobe”. I hope this answers your question.
Because you are a Buddhist with a Palestinian cousin, you seem to think that your words are more justified? That’s a plea to reason that as you have more vested interest in this whole issue than me, that I should butt out. Yes, at least when you accuse me of being an Islamophobe and/or a pro-Zionist zealot. As for having a more vested interest than you, while there are many parallels with this case that I could draw with my cousin, I’m not at liberty to discuss many of them because his life is currently in danger. So while, I wouldn’t say I have a more vested interest, this might hit a little closer to home to me than to you.
Of course my spluttering replies here, and previously, are probably not adequate to convey any logical reason in order for you to retract what you have said, but I don’t have time to make more of this than a rant.
Just what is it that you want me to retract? Let me ask you this; if a human rights attorney in Colombia offered to defend, pro bono, suspected FARC members, and he did this again and again [either out of a sense they were innocent or out of sympathy for FARC’s cause], wouldn’t it be likely that he would eventually be known as “the FARC lawyer”? When talking in abstracts, this point is not so controversial, it is only when real-life personalities enter the equation that the point becomes clouded. In sum, I express my uncomfortableness with lionizing Mr. Neelaphaijit because, I feel that there are human rights defenders in Thailand, even in the South, whose work doesn’t have as many uncomfortable questions as his does.
jonfernquest continues to say that there are all manner of good things that come to pass frfom EWC-Thailand connections. But that is not the point of Plate’s piece. He says that too. He asks other questions. Plate does well to ask these questions of EWC and of the royalists. Let’s see more of this questioning in the mainstream media.
LSS: You end your comment with “Sincerely” — would have “Jokingly” or “Defensively” not be more to the point? First, just relax. Second, if you are sure of your data, analysis, and judgment, please put together 10 pages of systematic text deconstructing the image of Somchai. That would be a lot more worthwhile than to get worked up about some criticism that is based on what you have said yourself. I don’t like if ordinary human beings are put on pedestals and then worshipped, be it Pridi, Puay, the “October People”, the king, or Somchai. And be careful with using words…
If Mr.Neelaphaijit sincerely believed those men were innocent, then I am within my rights to consider him naive; if he defended them, either knowing they committed the crime or merely out of anti-Israeli/anti-Zionist sentiment, then I am within my rights to consider his choice to defend them morally repugnant. Either way, I feel his canonization to be in error.
You are correct when you earlier stated that an acquittal does not establish innocence. An acquittal demonstrates there was not enough admissible evidence to establish the elements of the offence.
How do you even know the accused were guilty? If you are somehow in the possession of evidence perhaps you should send to the Thai authorities. I wasn’t in the court room and have only news reports about the case, but the news reports point out there was a stunning lack of evidence tying one of the Iranians to the crime scene as mentioned by the Supreme Court. If he was really in the truck, the police could have dusted it for fingerprints or other forensic evidence in the truck. There was also a body found in the truck. If you think the court judgment was somehow wrong you should state so.
You can consider him naive, but what if he really thought he/they were not guilty of the offences they were accused of?
For you to be punching with “When one uses language like, “In Somchai is Thailand…” It is clear that I cannot engage in a rational discussion for that is not the language of analysis, but of wided-eyed rapture feed by the ecstasy of [unwarrented] moral superiority.” Will lead me to say that hory ol’ chestnut ‘it takes one to know one’. But if nothing else in my response, at least answer me this, for what reason of yours was it to digress from the original point of Somchai’s dissapearance to refuting what sort of man he was? Pleading to an international audience on how they should percieve someone? Why? Do you have fears about discriminatory cultural protection? If so, how Buddhist of you!
Universal human rights do not exist outside liberal frameworks for idolatrous secularism. However, I believe that in reaction to the ludicrous notion of terrorism, the ludicrous notion of human rights is necessary because without it, there would only be victors justice which is what you have articulated throughout #3. The only reason in victors justice on such a large scale is that of ideological righteousness, which is also what you have alluded in #1 by asking “If Mr. Neelaphaijit is to be celebrated for his taking cases pro bono, then one must ask, cui bono?”. The reasons for are so many that you cannot be so uninformed as to be asking for whom without some level of facetiousness towards culturally protective justice. It is quite ironic then that you accuse me of debasing human rights when the words within the 3rd generation of rights are quite capable of doing it for you!
…and this is where you refuse to answer the question I posit in my first comment, if Mr. Neelaphaijit and his Muslim Lawyers Club of Thailand offer pro bono services, then it implies that he and the other lawyers who take up such cases do so for parties they feel some sympathy for.
This is a statement re-iterated from your original question which has nothing to do with the original point of the blog post. It implies that you have a position on whether or not Somchai’s sympathy was a good appropriate sympathy or, for you, a bad inappropriate sympathy. As you confirm by saying ‘Either way, I feel his canonization to be in error’, what canonization?! and also ‘Unfortunately, in my opinion, many times in his career Mr. Neelaphaijit was fighting the good fight for bad men.’ The good fight for bad men? What does your value of good and bad have to do with a fight, and more significantly, the dissapearance of Somchai?
Now let’s be honest here, many of Mr. Neelaphaijit’s clients were not naif schoolboys ; are not plotting to blow up embassies, “separatist activities,” and “arson attacks” acts of terrorism? Would not the defendants in such cases be referred to as “accused terrorists”? Even acknowledging the massive corruption that exists in the Thai judicial system, I find it hard to believe that the defendants were chosen at random.
“Now let’s be honest here”, I love that. It’s like you assume this is a club where you preech for your honesty (which has digressed from the point of the original entry) to be accepted over what course of action can be taken now… ‘acts of terrorism?’ What is the question mark for? Sure the defendents weren’t chosen at random — why are you suggesting otherwise? It seems as though you have guarded yourself against the argument of the victim, which you have expressed here “Again, I ask cui bono? Who benefits? How was the defense of three Iranians who plotted to bomb the Israeli embassy a “human rights” issue?” It prompted me to take a line that was quite patronizing because your words subvert what is practicable and pure about justice and instead emphasise your own values, whatever they are.
Furthermore, I ask indignantly, you are surprised and ask for evidence to substantiate my belief that your words are laced? Search for ‘Schwartz’ and ‘Israel’ or ‘Semite’ on this site, and tell me why several times you bring up Israel? Most of the time I have no idea what Israel has to do with posts here on New Mandala. OK, it can be used as a comparitive because you know the details, but sometimes your use is far from topical.. It’s a connection lost one me if I am not sarcastic or faceitious about connecting Israel to everything. It’s got nothing to do with your last name, which I thought was an alias, as on your other site you are ‘Dr Mycroft’?
Because you are a Buddhist with a Palestinian cousin, you seem to think that your words are more justified? That’s a plea to reason that as you have more vested interest in this whole issue than me, that I should butt out. It’s got nothing to do with with whether I am right or wrong, and attempts to cloud my comments. I feel that to highlight Kymlicka’s argument, that to leave ones culture and assimilate into a new one is much harder than it appears in these times of high travel and superficial multiculturalism, is necessary here. If you have managed to do that, I sincerely congratulate you.
Of course my spluttering replies here, and previously, are probably not adequate to convey any logical reason in order for you to retract what you have said, but I don’t have time to make more of this than a rant.
Their Noble Lords, who included two former Chancellors of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson and Norman Lamont, generally agreed with my view that sanctions had proved to be totally ineffective, and so they issued a firm recommendation to the British Government to review their policy and consider whether it was sensible to continue.
The British Government later said they didn’t agree, but gave no good reason why. There was then a debate in the House of Lords, which gave the Noble Lords the opportunity to let off steam, but at the end of the day, despite all the evidence presented to them, the British Government did not change course.
Wow, I don’t even know even where to begin. I read the link you provided, and while interesting, I don’t see how it’s particularly germane to the current discussion. One criticism I would have with the Silverman piece is that, in a legal sense, I would consider terrorism to be akin to piracy and privateering (based on the level of nation-state support given to the group. MILF would be closer to pirates; whereas Iran-supported Hezbollah would be closer to privateers). There already exist long standing legal precedent on how to deal with pirates and privateers; i.e., pirates are charged as domestic criminals and privateers are treated as prisoners of war.
As for human rights and dignity, what I find absolutely ironic in the example that we are arguing is that Iran, along with the other member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference have refused to recognize your much vaunted UDHR, instead subscribing to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). As the former Iranian representive to the UN, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, stated, “[the UDHR is] a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition”, which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.”
If my comments concerning Mr. Neelaphaijit seem provocative, that is only in contrast to Awzar Thi’s florid praise, confusing him for Gandhi or Martin Luther King. (Both of whom have lost their “sacred cow” status, just as Mr. Neelaphaijit, who at best was a 3rd-string “Gandhi,” will in time, and can be viewed upon critically without being immediately labled as a “Hinduphobe” or “rascist”.) I would elaborate on my criticism of Mr. Neelaphaijit, and connect my points with Bangkok Pundit’s, but somehow I don’t think you are in the mood for that discussion.
Finally, for someone who is worried that he or she “will be labled an anti-Semite,” I find it absolutely amazing that you would use a term like “semitic elitism.” Just what the hell are you implying? A phrase like that is right from the same page as J├╝dische Physik, “lazy negroes,” and the “inscrutible China-man”. Then again, I didn’t see too many New Mandalaians express their outrage at Jopha’s use of the slur “heeb,” so I guess hostility toward things semitic is just part of the atmosphere here at NM. I won’t hold it against you though, for I feel you are currently speaking ab irato. Besides, even though I do have Arab and Berber blood in my veins, much more of my DNA hails from Uttar Pradesh, Ghana, and China, by way of Trinidad and Tobago.
The only certainty about sanctions over the last 20 years is that they simply haven’t worked. Sure, the generals are angry, but that hasn’t made them buckle and bend. They are today even more stubborn, more recalcitrant and more hard-line than ever before. All because of sanctions. You don’t need to have a Ph.D in economics, nor even to be an expert on sanctions to see that. If a policy isn’t working, something else needs to be tried. But Western Governments are stuck because Daw Suu Kyi can’t and won’t change her mind. And because of that the generals won’t talk to her. It is all a vicious circle, and those who suffer are the Burmese people.
Nay Yu #5: “My answer will be ‘No, sanctions so far do not affect ordinary people of Burma’. It is not a personal opinion but the outcome of an analysis on sanctions and empirical results of Burma’s political economy under the military junta.”
Yes, well that all looks very impressive, but you give no information to back it up. So ultimately it’s hollow & meaningless.
Your bitchy remarks on Ma Thanegi’s language skills are as irrelevant as you say these skills are.
” …and he should not say so as Theingi if it is for the only reason of going back to Burma as he is getting old in a foreign land.” (What does this mean? ) Looks like your English skills could do with a bit of brushing up – are you, perhaps, jealous?
Had I known this thread would be policed for ideological thoughtcrime, I would have not expressed my views. I apologize for adding disharmony to the New Mandala hive-mind. From the florid language Awzar Thi uses in his eulogy of the man, it is evident that far from a forced disapperance, Awzar Thi believes that March 12th, 2004 marks the date of Somchai’s apotheosis, when he ascended to heaven upon a winged horse.
When one uses language like, “In Somchai is Thailand…” It is clear that I cannot engage in a rational discussion for that is not the language of analysis, but of wided-eyed rapture feed by the ecstasy of [unwarrented] moral superiority. Thus, my final contribution to this discussion is to repeat what I said before: I am outraged that in all likelihood some Thai police officers abducted and murdered an innocent man, yet let’s not make Mr. Neelaphaijit more than what he was; at best, he was a good-hearted man whose naivety caused his sense of justice to be manipulated by more nefarious forces, at worst, he was a servant of the blood-soaked Southern insurgents, using his reputation as a human rights defender to garner sympathy for their cases.
Re: Srithanonchai
I defy you to provide any evidence based on what I have wrote that I bear ill-will to any one group as a whole; otherwise I would kindly ask that you retract your statement and apologize for such an ugly insinuation.
Re: Grasshopper
Ditto as to my comments to Srithanonchai. Furthermore, I find your contribution to this thread odd, as I remember being “disgusted” at your comments on a previous thread concerning Burma, where you argued that “universal human rights” do not exist. Why the change of heart?
And quite honestly, I have no idea what you are going on about concerning Israel, the UDHR, and the DoD. In my post, the word only came up as I was using the example of the Iranian bombs who happened to target the embassy of said country. I mean, where do you come off saying that I “bring Israel into everything?” Did you just notice that my last name was Schwartz and start frothing at the mouth? If it makes you feel any better, you can always call me Abu Ali, my Palestinian cousin, Jamal does. (He too is a lawyer, who defended Palestinian land rights against the claims of Israeli settlers. After the start of the second Intifada, he was forced to divorce his Jewish wife out of concerns of safety, and now lives in exile in Europe as he refused to take sides in the whole Fatah vs. Hamas struggle and ended up making enemies of both.) Considering that I am Buddhist, I don’t understand why you would think that I have any allegance to “Zionism,” perhaps you could explain that one to me.
Missing Lawyer Somchai
Angkhana Neelaphaichit delivers a statement at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, on the fourth anniversary of the disappearance of her husband, Somchai, on Wednesday
While this statement is read, I am at the United Nations’ Human Rights Council session in Geneva, Switzerland, to present a report on the human rights situation in Thailand and also to report on the latest developments and obstacles in the investigation of the disappearance of Mr Somchai Neelapaichit, which was taken up by the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGED) four years ago.
“The first trial implicating five police officers in the disappearance of Somchai Neelapaichit, who were charged with coercion and robbery, ended two years ago and the First Court’s verdict stated that there was a police officer together with another three to five persons who forced Somchai into a car before he disappeared on March 12, 2004.
“This court case is now under the consideration of the Court of Appeal. The Department of Special Investigations has been in charge of investigating the case and pressing further charges. In addition, the DSI has requested that the Office of the National Counter Corruption Commission investigate police officers who were allegedly torturing Somchai’s clients in January 2004.
“It is believed that Somchai was abducted because of his complaint against the torture allegations.
“The present government of Samak Sundaravej sacked Mr Sunai Manomai-udom and appointed Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong as acting director of the Department of Special Investigations, and Police General Sombat Amornwiwat as an advisor to the Ministry of Justice. Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong stated in an interview to the media that he will give priority to the Somchai Neelapaichit case.
“In commemoration of Somchai’s disappearance four years ago, I would like to make the following appeal to the Thai government and the DSI:
“1. To request that the Thai government and the DSI be sincere in bringing justice to this case and prosecuting the wrongdoers, including high-ranking police officers, as it is my belief that his enforced disappearance is a heinous crime against humanity.
“2. To request that the DSI be courageous and to call Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra, former prime minister of Thailand, to give testimony as a witness in this case. Information has been received that a close colleague of Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra went to search for information and a picture of Mr Somchai Neelapaichit at the Government Identification Information Centre. In addition, Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin, himself, stated in an interview to all media on January 13, 2006, the day after the verdict of the First Court, that he knows “that Somchai has passed away because evidence suggests so…”
“As Thaksin was prime minister at that time, this interview must be credible and he must have had enough evidence before saying this.
“3. Contained in the verdict of the First Court, the testimony of a plaintiff witness reveals that “…Police Major General Krisada Phankongchuen received information from Police Lieutenant Colonel Wannaphong Kotcharath that Police Lieutenant Colonel Charnchai Likhitkhanthasorn had met with a known group of people in front of the Crime Suppression Unit, who informed him that they were going to abduct a corrupt lawyer. Later, Police Lieutenant Colonel Charnchai informed Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong about this information…”
“Therefore, Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong, who is now the acting director of the DSI, has the responsibility to clarify whether he knew of Somchai Neelapaichit’s disappearance.
“4. To request that the DSI be very careful in this case and to try to compile strong evidence so that the wrongdoers will be prosecuted. The DSI should not hurry to pursue the case in court without relevant and strong evidence. A lack of strong evidence means that the real culprits will not be prosecuted, or that innocent people will be punished for crimes they did not commit.
“5. To request that the Thai government ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, in order to guarantee the safety and protection of everyone from enforced disappearance.
“I strongly believe that the success of the Somchai Neelapaichit case will be determined by the sincerity of the government and the effectiveness of the DSI. Of particular concern is the fact that Police General Sombat Amornwiwat, who was the former supervisor of the five accused persons standing trial in the case before, is now an advisor to the Ministry of Justice. “At the same time, I would like to give my support to every officer who works under the rule of law and tries to bring to justice those people who have either committed crimes or give shelter to human rights violators.
“Lastly, I would like to thank my Thai sisters and brothers who continue to give warm support while facing these obstacles to justice.
“I and my family are constantly receiving friendship from various people in society. This gives me the strength to keep fighting for justice.
Thank you.
Again, I ask cui bono? Who benefits? How was the defense of three Iranians who plotted to bomb the Israeli embassy a “human rights” issue?
In 1997 there were some terrorism laws! (here are some examples: http://www.nesl.edu/intljournal/VOL4/CS.HTM) Wow, Ok, since we have that established – do you think terrorism laws were defined enough in United Nations statutes to protect a persons human dignity? I didn’t think so either – hence, there is a human rights lawyer, who ensures that whatever ‘justice’ happens to those three persons is acceptable to those little dot points made within the declaration!
Your question was infinitely limited to start questioning anyones ability to start handling a truth, because obviously the truths contained within your vague words were so loaded with semitic elitism that I have had to keep reading this over and over to make sure that I am not mis-judging what you have written, and to refine my expressions of outrage.
Awzar: In case you haven’t seen it, courtesy of Thai Rath, the head of DSI is quoted as saying that next week there should be good news (р╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓р╕Ир╕░р╕бр╕╡р╕Вр╣Ир╕▓р╕зр╕Фр╕╡) in the case as good progress has been made (р╕бр╕╡р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Др╕╖р╕Ър╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕Бр╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щ). He says they are trying to prove that Somchai is dead.
Sources report that the evidence that will be discussed next week is about the location of where the “bad people” killed him.
BP: Do they have proof of a body/his death? (which is what has been holding them back)
Upon reading all of this again, I have to say I agree with what Srithinonchai and Bangkok Pundit have written as responses. Without doubt I shall soon be labeled an anti-Semite because foolishly I took the bait, and I am ashamed to have lowered myself to respond to such an egregiously ignorant comment with as much credit and repetitiveness as I have.
LSS, this post is to do with Thai police rather than any connotation and connection you make between terrorism and the mafia justice. Your words written here which have taken this whole issue out of context utterly disgust me.
At the beginning of the constitutional convention in Burma over a decade ago there were many references, comparisons, and emulation of Indonesia under Suharto, but that didn’t last for long since Suharto didn’t survive long after the 1997 crisis.
The big differences between Thailand and Burma are: 1. openness to the outside world, and 2. the speed at which change takes place.
Last week the current government in Thailand was already talking about changing the new constitution after having been elected only a few months ago.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Interview with Burma’s Ma Thanegi
Sanctions against Burma’s junta might not work in the last decades but it is not true at all that sanctions affect ordinary people. Everyone in Burma and anyone who has been living in Burma for at least three to five years realize that how the businesses are running. What Burma’s junta need is a comprehensive sanctions adopted by UNSC.
Interview with Burma’s Ma Thanegi
To Land of Snarls: Although you did not mention your name, your comment is simply trying to response with few immoral and unethical language. It is unbelievable that you don’t even understand a simple English regarding my comment on Dr. Win Maung’s. For me, Theingi is nothing and ‘jealousy’ is for junta’s generals and its supporters, may be like you, who are afraid to show up with a name. It’s a shame. Beware that your head is agreed with your body. I hope you’ve seen chopped-off heads in ’88 uprising.
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
Re: Grasshopper
Search for ‘Schwartz’ and ‘Israel’ or ‘Semite’ on this site, and tell me why several times you bring up Israel?
I did the search and I found 1 and only 1 other reference to Israel. 1 is not several. If you’re going to spout bullshit, Grasshoper, then be prepared for people to call your bluff. Is it too late to mention that Awzar Thi was the first person to write the name of said country in this thread?
But if nothing else in my response, at least answer me this, for what reason of yours was it to digress from the original point of Somchai’s dissapearance to refuting what sort of man he was?
Because his legacy is being appropriated by certain forces whose goals I am in opposition with. In short, among certain circles, Mr. Neelaphaijit’s dissapearance has entered the propaganda machine to justify the violent seperatist goals of the Southern insurgency. I’m sorry that this is an inconvenient truth, but it’s truth nonetheless. Now, I am of the opinion that, while alive, certain aspects of Mr. Neelaphaijit’s work, either wittingly or unwittingly, also supported the goals of the insurgency. Likewise, Awzar Thi’s panegyric, either wittingly or unwittingly, feeds into the same propaganda machine. Of course, if those Thai police officers weren’t stupid, corrupt, and evil-hearted enough to make him into a shaheed, there would have been nothing to feed into the propaganda machine in the first place!
It is because of this appropration that I am uncomfortable with Awzar Thi’s uncritical praise of his work. I think that this is what Bangkok Pundit is getting at as well, but he had the wisdom to realize that in today’s climate, openly criticizing a man like Mr. Neelaphajit’s work without tons of disqualifers tends to get one labeled an “Islamophobe”. I hope this answers your question.
Because you are a Buddhist with a Palestinian cousin, you seem to think that your words are more justified? That’s a plea to reason that as you have more vested interest in this whole issue than me, that I should butt out. Yes, at least when you accuse me of being an Islamophobe and/or a pro-Zionist zealot. As for having a more vested interest than you, while there are many parallels with this case that I could draw with my cousin, I’m not at liberty to discuss many of them because his life is currently in danger. So while, I wouldn’t say I have a more vested interest, this might hit a little closer to home to me than to you.
Of course my spluttering replies here, and previously, are probably not adequate to convey any logical reason in order for you to retract what you have said, but I don’t have time to make more of this than a rant.
Just what is it that you want me to retract? Let me ask you this; if a human rights attorney in Colombia offered to defend, pro bono, suspected FARC members, and he did this again and again [either out of a sense they were innocent or out of sympathy for FARC’s cause], wouldn’t it be likely that he would eventually be known as “the FARC lawyer”? When talking in abstracts, this point is not so controversial, it is only when real-life personalities enter the equation that the point becomes clouded. In sum, I express my uncomfortableness with lionizing Mr. Neelaphaijit because, I feel that there are human rights defenders in Thailand, even in the South, whose work doesn’t have as many uncomfortable questions as his does.
By the way, I didn’t appreciate finding the severed horse head in my bed this morning.
Manau festival at Laiza
Does anyone know if those concrete “tusks”, if that is what they are, are symbolic of the elephant tusks of the Ginsi Duwa?
Tom Plate on the East-West Center’s royal event
jonfernquest continues to say that there are all manner of good things that come to pass frfom EWC-Thailand connections. But that is not the point of Plate’s piece. He says that too. He asks other questions. Plate does well to ask these questions of EWC and of the royalists. Let’s see more of this questioning in the mainstream media.
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
LSS: You end your comment with “Sincerely” — would have “Jokingly” or “Defensively” not be more to the point? First, just relax. Second, if you are sure of your data, analysis, and judgment, please put together 10 pages of systematic text deconstructing the image of Somchai. That would be a lot more worthwhile than to get worked up about some criticism that is based on what you have said yourself. I don’t like if ordinary human beings are put on pedestals and then worshipped, be it Pridi, Puay, the “October People”, the king, or Somchai. And be careful with using words…
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
LSS:
If Mr.Neelaphaijit sincerely believed those men were innocent, then I am within my rights to consider him naive; if he defended them, either knowing they committed the crime or merely out of anti-Israeli/anti-Zionist sentiment, then I am within my rights to consider his choice to defend them morally repugnant. Either way, I feel his canonization to be in error.
You are correct when you earlier stated that an acquittal does not establish innocence. An acquittal demonstrates there was not enough admissible evidence to establish the elements of the offence.
How do you even know the accused were guilty? If you are somehow in the possession of evidence perhaps you should send to the Thai authorities. I wasn’t in the court room and have only news reports about the case, but the news reports point out there was a stunning lack of evidence tying one of the Iranians to the crime scene as mentioned by the Supreme Court. If he was really in the truck, the police could have dusted it for fingerprints or other forensic evidence in the truck. There was also a body found in the truck. If you think the court judgment was somehow wrong you should state so.
You can consider him naive, but what if he really thought he/they were not guilty of the offences they were accused of?
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
LSS,
Thanks for responding.
For you to be punching with “When one uses language like, “In Somchai is Thailand…” It is clear that I cannot engage in a rational discussion for that is not the language of analysis, but of wided-eyed rapture feed by the ecstasy of [unwarrented] moral superiority.” Will lead me to say that hory ol’ chestnut ‘it takes one to know one’. But if nothing else in my response, at least answer me this, for what reason of yours was it to digress from the original point of Somchai’s dissapearance to refuting what sort of man he was? Pleading to an international audience on how they should percieve someone? Why? Do you have fears about discriminatory cultural protection? If so, how Buddhist of you!
Universal human rights do not exist outside liberal frameworks for idolatrous secularism. However, I believe that in reaction to the ludicrous notion of terrorism, the ludicrous notion of human rights is necessary because without it, there would only be victors justice which is what you have articulated throughout #3. The only reason in victors justice on such a large scale is that of ideological righteousness, which is also what you have alluded in #1 by asking “If Mr. Neelaphaijit is to be celebrated for his taking cases pro bono, then one must ask, cui bono?”. The reasons for are so many that you cannot be so uninformed as to be asking for whom without some level of facetiousness towards culturally protective justice. It is quite ironic then that you accuse me of debasing human rights when the words within the 3rd generation of rights are quite capable of doing it for you!
…and this is where you refuse to answer the question I posit in my first comment, if Mr. Neelaphaijit and his Muslim Lawyers Club of Thailand offer pro bono services, then it implies that he and the other lawyers who take up such cases do so for parties they feel some sympathy for.
This is a statement re-iterated from your original question which has nothing to do with the original point of the blog post. It implies that you have a position on whether or not Somchai’s sympathy was a good appropriate sympathy or, for you, a bad inappropriate sympathy. As you confirm by saying ‘Either way, I feel his canonization to be in error’, what canonization?! and also ‘Unfortunately, in my opinion, many times in his career Mr. Neelaphaijit was fighting the good fight for bad men.’ The good fight for bad men? What does your value of good and bad have to do with a fight, and more significantly, the dissapearance of Somchai?
Now let’s be honest here, many of Mr. Neelaphaijit’s clients were not naif schoolboys ; are not plotting to blow up embassies, “separatist activities,” and “arson attacks” acts of terrorism? Would not the defendants in such cases be referred to as “accused terrorists”? Even acknowledging the massive corruption that exists in the Thai judicial system, I find it hard to believe that the defendants were chosen at random.
“Now let’s be honest here”, I love that. It’s like you assume this is a club where you preech for your honesty (which has digressed from the point of the original entry) to be accepted over what course of action can be taken now… ‘acts of terrorism?’ What is the question mark for? Sure the defendents weren’t chosen at random — why are you suggesting otherwise? It seems as though you have guarded yourself against the argument of the victim, which you have expressed here “Again, I ask cui bono? Who benefits? How was the defense of three Iranians who plotted to bomb the Israeli embassy a “human rights” issue?” It prompted me to take a line that was quite patronizing because your words subvert what is practicable and pure about justice and instead emphasise your own values, whatever they are.
Furthermore, I ask indignantly, you are surprised and ask for evidence to substantiate my belief that your words are laced? Search for ‘Schwartz’ and ‘Israel’ or ‘Semite’ on this site, and tell me why several times you bring up Israel? Most of the time I have no idea what Israel has to do with posts here on New Mandala. OK, it can be used as a comparitive because you know the details, but sometimes your use is far from topical.. It’s a connection lost one me if I am not sarcastic or faceitious about connecting Israel to everything. It’s got nothing to do with your last name, which I thought was an alias, as on your other site you are ‘Dr Mycroft’?
Because you are a Buddhist with a Palestinian cousin, you seem to think that your words are more justified? That’s a plea to reason that as you have more vested interest in this whole issue than me, that I should butt out. It’s got nothing to do with with whether I am right or wrong, and attempts to cloud my comments. I feel that to highlight Kymlicka’s argument, that to leave ones culture and assimilate into a new one is much harder than it appears in these times of high travel and superficial multiculturalism, is necessary here. If you have managed to do that, I sincerely congratulate you.
Of course my spluttering replies here, and previously, are probably not adequate to convey any logical reason in order for you to retract what you have said, but I don’t have time to make more of this than a rant.
Interview with Burma’s Ma Thanegi
In 2006 I gave written evidence on sanctions against Burma to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee. See:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldeconaf/96/96we15.htm
Their Noble Lords, who included two former Chancellors of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson and Norman Lamont, generally agreed with my view that sanctions had proved to be totally ineffective, and so they issued a firm recommendation to the British Government to review their policy and consider whether it was sensible to continue.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldeconaf/96/9607.htm
The British Government later said they didn’t agree, but gave no good reason why. There was then a debate in the House of Lords, which gave the Noble Lords the opportunity to let off steam, but at the end of the day, despite all the evidence presented to them, the British Government did not change course.
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
Re: Grasshopper post # 10
Wow, I don’t even know even where to begin. I read the link you provided, and while interesting, I don’t see how it’s particularly germane to the current discussion. One criticism I would have with the Silverman piece is that, in a legal sense, I would consider terrorism to be akin to piracy and privateering (based on the level of nation-state support given to the group. MILF would be closer to pirates; whereas Iran-supported Hezbollah would be closer to privateers). There already exist long standing legal precedent on how to deal with pirates and privateers; i.e., pirates are charged as domestic criminals and privateers are treated as prisoners of war.
As for human rights and dignity, what I find absolutely ironic in the example that we are arguing is that Iran, along with the other member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference have refused to recognize your much vaunted UDHR, instead subscribing to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). As the former Iranian representive to the UN, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, stated, “[the UDHR is] a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition”, which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.”
If my comments concerning Mr. Neelaphaijit seem provocative, that is only in contrast to Awzar Thi’s florid praise, confusing him for Gandhi or Martin Luther King. (Both of whom have lost their “sacred cow” status, just as Mr. Neelaphaijit, who at best was a 3rd-string “Gandhi,” will in time, and can be viewed upon critically without being immediately labled as a “Hinduphobe” or “rascist”.) I would elaborate on my criticism of Mr. Neelaphaijit, and connect my points with Bangkok Pundit’s, but somehow I don’t think you are in the mood for that discussion.
Finally, for someone who is worried that he or she “will be labled an anti-Semite,” I find it absolutely amazing that you would use a term like “semitic elitism.” Just what the hell are you implying? A phrase like that is right from the same page as J├╝dische Physik, “lazy negroes,” and the “inscrutible China-man”. Then again, I didn’t see too many New Mandalaians express their outrage at Jopha’s use of the slur “heeb,” so I guess hostility toward things semitic is just part of the atmosphere here at NM. I won’t hold it against you though, for I feel you are currently speaking ab irato. Besides, even though I do have Arab and Berber blood in my veins, much more of my DNA hails from Uttar Pradesh, Ghana, and China, by way of Trinidad and Tobago.
Interview with Burma’s Ma Thanegi
The only certainty about sanctions over the last 20 years is that they simply haven’t worked. Sure, the generals are angry, but that hasn’t made them buckle and bend. They are today even more stubborn, more recalcitrant and more hard-line than ever before. All because of sanctions. You don’t need to have a Ph.D in economics, nor even to be an expert on sanctions to see that. If a policy isn’t working, something else needs to be tried. But Western Governments are stuck because Daw Suu Kyi can’t and won’t change her mind. And because of that the generals won’t talk to her. It is all a vicious circle, and those who suffer are the Burmese people.
Interview with Paul Handley
So this is how the thread ends?
Sorry to be so general-I know their is not much to be said to defend against my vague comments about culture.
And yes- It was me that posted the previous comments under the Pseudonym “carelus”.
klauskent
Interview with Burma’s Ma Thanegi
Nay Yu #5: “My answer will be ‘No, sanctions so far do not affect ordinary people of Burma’. It is not a personal opinion but the outcome of an analysis on sanctions and empirical results of Burma’s political economy under the military junta.”
Yes, well that all looks very impressive, but you give no information to back it up. So ultimately it’s hollow & meaningless.
Your bitchy remarks on Ma Thanegi’s language skills are as irrelevant as you say these skills are.
” …and he should not say so as Theingi if it is for the only reason of going back to Burma as he is getting old in a foreign land.” (What does this mean? ) Looks like your English skills could do with a bit of brushing up – are you, perhaps, jealous?
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
Re: Awzar Thi, et al.
Had I known this thread would be policed for ideological thoughtcrime, I would have not expressed my views. I apologize for adding disharmony to the New Mandala hive-mind. From the florid language Awzar Thi uses in his eulogy of the man, it is evident that far from a forced disapperance, Awzar Thi believes that March 12th, 2004 marks the date of Somchai’s apotheosis, when he ascended to heaven upon a winged horse.
When one uses language like, “In Somchai is Thailand…” It is clear that I cannot engage in a rational discussion for that is not the language of analysis, but of wided-eyed rapture feed by the ecstasy of [unwarrented] moral superiority. Thus, my final contribution to this discussion is to repeat what I said before: I am outraged that in all likelihood some Thai police officers abducted and murdered an innocent man, yet let’s not make Mr. Neelaphaijit more than what he was; at best, he was a good-hearted man whose naivety caused his sense of justice to be manipulated by more nefarious forces, at worst, he was a servant of the blood-soaked Southern insurgents, using his reputation as a human rights defender to garner sympathy for their cases.
Re: Srithanonchai
I defy you to provide any evidence based on what I have wrote that I bear ill-will to any one group as a whole; otherwise I would kindly ask that you retract your statement and apologize for such an ugly insinuation.
Re: Grasshopper
Ditto as to my comments to Srithanonchai. Furthermore, I find your contribution to this thread odd, as I remember being “disgusted” at your comments on a previous thread concerning Burma, where you argued that “universal human rights” do not exist. Why the change of heart?
And quite honestly, I have no idea what you are going on about concerning Israel, the UDHR, and the DoD. In my post, the word only came up as I was using the example of the Iranian bombs who happened to target the embassy of said country. I mean, where do you come off saying that I “bring Israel into everything?” Did you just notice that my last name was Schwartz and start frothing at the mouth? If it makes you feel any better, you can always call me Abu Ali, my Palestinian cousin, Jamal does. (He too is a lawyer, who defended Palestinian land rights against the claims of Israeli settlers. After the start of the second Intifada, he was forced to divorce his Jewish wife out of concerns of safety, and now lives in exile in Europe as he refused to take sides in the whole Fatah vs. Hamas struggle and ended up making enemies of both.) Considering that I am Buddhist, I don’t understand why you would think that I have any allegance to “Zionism,” perhaps you could explain that one to me.
Sincerely,
Lleij Samuel Schwartz
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
The Nation, 12 March 2008:
Missing Lawyer Somchai
Angkhana Neelaphaichit delivers a statement at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, on the fourth anniversary of the disappearance of her husband, Somchai, on Wednesday
While this statement is read, I am at the United Nations’ Human Rights Council session in Geneva, Switzerland, to present a report on the human rights situation in Thailand and also to report on the latest developments and obstacles in the investigation of the disappearance of Mr Somchai Neelapaichit, which was taken up by the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGED) four years ago.
“The first trial implicating five police officers in the disappearance of Somchai Neelapaichit, who were charged with coercion and robbery, ended two years ago and the First Court’s verdict stated that there was a police officer together with another three to five persons who forced Somchai into a car before he disappeared on March 12, 2004.
“This court case is now under the consideration of the Court of Appeal. The Department of Special Investigations has been in charge of investigating the case and pressing further charges. In addition, the DSI has requested that the Office of the National Counter Corruption Commission investigate police officers who were allegedly torturing Somchai’s clients in January 2004.
“It is believed that Somchai was abducted because of his complaint against the torture allegations.
“The present government of Samak Sundaravej sacked Mr Sunai Manomai-udom and appointed Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong as acting director of the Department of Special Investigations, and Police General Sombat Amornwiwat as an advisor to the Ministry of Justice. Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong stated in an interview to the media that he will give priority to the Somchai Neelapaichit case.
“In commemoration of Somchai’s disappearance four years ago, I would like to make the following appeal to the Thai government and the DSI:
“1. To request that the Thai government and the DSI be sincere in bringing justice to this case and prosecuting the wrongdoers, including high-ranking police officers, as it is my belief that his enforced disappearance is a heinous crime against humanity.
“2. To request that the DSI be courageous and to call Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra, former prime minister of Thailand, to give testimony as a witness in this case. Information has been received that a close colleague of Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra went to search for information and a picture of Mr Somchai Neelapaichit at the Government Identification Information Centre. In addition, Police Lieutenant Colonel Thaksin, himself, stated in an interview to all media on January 13, 2006, the day after the verdict of the First Court, that he knows “that Somchai has passed away because evidence suggests so…”
“As Thaksin was prime minister at that time, this interview must be credible and he must have had enough evidence before saying this.
“3. Contained in the verdict of the First Court, the testimony of a plaintiff witness reveals that “…Police Major General Krisada Phankongchuen received information from Police Lieutenant Colonel Wannaphong Kotcharath that Police Lieutenant Colonel Charnchai Likhitkhanthasorn had met with a known group of people in front of the Crime Suppression Unit, who informed him that they were going to abduct a corrupt lawyer. Later, Police Lieutenant Colonel Charnchai informed Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong about this information…”
“Therefore, Police Colonel Tawee Sodsong, who is now the acting director of the DSI, has the responsibility to clarify whether he knew of Somchai Neelapaichit’s disappearance.
“4. To request that the DSI be very careful in this case and to try to compile strong evidence so that the wrongdoers will be prosecuted. The DSI should not hurry to pursue the case in court without relevant and strong evidence. A lack of strong evidence means that the real culprits will not be prosecuted, or that innocent people will be punished for crimes they did not commit.
“5. To request that the Thai government ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, in order to guarantee the safety and protection of everyone from enforced disappearance.
“I strongly believe that the success of the Somchai Neelapaichit case will be determined by the sincerity of the government and the effectiveness of the DSI. Of particular concern is the fact that Police General Sombat Amornwiwat, who was the former supervisor of the five accused persons standing trial in the case before, is now an advisor to the Ministry of Justice. “At the same time, I would like to give my support to every officer who works under the rule of law and tries to bring to justice those people who have either committed crimes or give shelter to human rights violators.
“Lastly, I would like to thank my Thai sisters and brothers who continue to give warm support while facing these obstacles to justice.
“I and my family are constantly receiving friendship from various people in society. This gives me the strength to keep fighting for justice.
Thank you.
CONLAW301 with Brigadier Kyaw Hsan
An “advance unedited version” of Paulo Sergio Pinhero’s report on Burma to the Hman Rights Council can be found here
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/7session/reports.htm
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
I must write a better response to this.
Again, I ask cui bono? Who benefits? How was the defense of three Iranians who plotted to bomb the Israeli embassy a “human rights” issue?
In 1997 there were some terrorism laws! (here are some examples: http://www.nesl.edu/intljournal/VOL4/CS.HTM) Wow, Ok, since we have that established – do you think terrorism laws were defined enough in United Nations statutes to protect a persons human dignity? I didn’t think so either – hence, there is a human rights lawyer, who ensures that whatever ‘justice’ happens to those three persons is acceptable to those little dot points made within the declaration!
Your question was infinitely limited to start questioning anyones ability to start handling a truth, because obviously the truths contained within your vague words were so loaded with semitic elitism that I have had to keep reading this over and over to make sure that I am not mis-judging what you have written, and to refine my expressions of outrage.
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
Awzar: In case you haven’t seen it, courtesy of Thai Rath, the head of DSI is quoted as saying that next week there should be good news (р╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓р╕Ир╕░р╕бр╕╡р╕Вр╣Ир╕▓р╕зр╕Фр╕╡) in the case as good progress has been made (р╕бр╕╡р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Др╕╖р╕Ър╕лр╕Щр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕Бр╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щ). He says they are trying to prove that Somchai is dead.
Sources report that the evidence that will be discussed next week is about the location of where the “bad people” killed him.
BP: Do they have proof of a body/his death? (which is what has been holding them back)
The disappearance of Somchai Neelaphaijit
Upon reading all of this again, I have to say I agree with what Srithinonchai and Bangkok Pundit have written as responses. Without doubt I shall soon be labeled an anti-Semite because foolishly I took the bait, and I am ashamed to have lowered myself to respond to such an egregiously ignorant comment with as much credit and repetitiveness as I have.
LSS, this post is to do with Thai police rather than any connotation and connection you make between terrorism and the mafia justice. Your words written here which have taken this whole issue out of context utterly disgust me.
CONLAW301 with Brigadier Kyaw Hsan
At the beginning of the constitutional convention in Burma over a decade ago there were many references, comparisons, and emulation of Indonesia under Suharto, but that didn’t last for long since Suharto didn’t survive long after the 1997 crisis.
The big differences between Thailand and Burma are: 1. openness to the outside world, and 2. the speed at which change takes place.
Last week the current government in Thailand was already talking about changing the new constitution after having been elected only a few months ago.