Comments

  1. Naphat says:

    Khun Vichai – I think you have the wrong idea. Neither myself nor Polo nor I think anyone in this forum condones these extrajudicial killings. It was repugnant and it was a crime.

    What I wanted to point out is that, unlike the problems Thaksin has with corruption, at no point did he make what he was trying to do with the war on drugs any secret. He promoted this war and used it to win votes. Most, not all, of the Bangkok middle class supported the policy back then (see here – 84.2%!). The King praised it in his 2003 speech, as Patiwat pointed out in his comments here. I’m not trying to “make… believe” anything, I think these are facts on how people felt back then.

    Of course, if something is popular that doesn’t mean it’s right and just. What bothers me is the sense of hypocrisy I feel – the same middle class people who supported the war back then are now calling for Thaksin’s scalp for human rights violations and justifying the coup on grounds of Thaksin’s abuse of human rights. Where was the opposition to these crime back then, when it would have really mattered to the victims?

    I’m a bit pessimistic that the Surayud government will be able to sort all this out. The new press release from the AHRC make a point we can perhaps discuss:

    “This [state officers flouting the rule of law] is as much a characteristic of the present government of Thailand as it was of the former. It is also as much a characteristic of the army as it is of the police. The current regime took power illegally, but can rely upon its orders being carried out, just as the former government gave illegal orders with the same assurance.”

  2. jeru says:

    I still do not understand what Naphat’s
    (December 5th, 2006 at 6:00 pm) point was.

    Naphat probably can say the same thing for Hitler or Pinochet – – when the murders were going on their citizens at that time appear to have generally approved.

    But monstrous crimes like extrajudicial killings of defenseless villagers-suspects, or, executions of Southern Muslim prisoners just won’t go away and these crimes will continue to haunt the Nation until justice is served – – justice is served to Thaksin.

  3. Vichai N. says:

    The thing we should remember is Toxin Shinawatra ‘poisoned’ Thai Democracy.

    “In the toxicology world, dose makes the poison.” What that means is that nearly every creature in the world is exposed to toxic substances from air, water or even nutrition we feed on. But such toxic substance is in such minuscule quantity as to be harmless.

    Such is the case too with Thai democracy since the 1997 constitution when there were corruption here and there, isolated vote-buying, police & military abuses too, and politicians making ‘honest mistakes’; but the dosage were minute, unsystematic and not widespread as to be un-toxic and harmless to Thai democracy.

    But with the advent of Toxin Shinawatra, there was deliberate, widespread and systematic dosage increase (assets concealed by honest mistakes , extrajudicial killings, conflict of interest, subverting of checks & balances, abuse/killings of Southern Muslim prisoners, divisive politics, nepotism and cronyism, mega-corruption, mega-vote buying, refusal to submit to accountability, illegal elections and election cheating, tax finagling by highest ranking public officials) that made Toxin Shinawatra’s venom lethal to Thai Democracy.

    Toxin Shinawatra poisoned to death Thai democracy. General Sonthi intervened to retrieve Thai democracy, purge democracy of its toxins, and to return Thai democracy to the Thai people hopefully this time strengthened with anti-toxins against similar toxic threats and dangers of recent past.

  4. Vichai N. says:

    I dub thee Anon Thaksin’s running dog because Anon you defend Thaksin’s corrupt kleptocracy and Thaksin’s extrajudicial ways.

    Anon you graduated from one of Thailand’s preeminent institution and you actually took the Thammasart oath to protect the Nation, the King, Religion and the Constitution . . so why in the hell are you still carrying out this love affair with that kleptocrat Thaksin Shinawatra? Thaksin Shinawatra was the very enemy you took your oath at Thammsart for.

    Now write 20 formal letters of apology to the Thammasart rector as your act of contrition and next time take a worthy aka instead of your sneaky name ‘Anon’.

  5. Vichai N. says:

    The extrajudicial rampage of Thaksin Shinawatra goes right at the core of what convictions a person carry. It was murder people, it was mass murder of the innocents. There was no demagoguery, there are no tricks. Everybody in this forum understand what extrajudicial murder is . . and it was carried out against thousands of innocents during Thaksin’s anti ya ba campaign.

    Whether it was popular or not is beside the point. Thaksin Shinawatra deliberately carried out a crime against humanity with that horrific anti-drugs extrajudicial murderous rampage.

    Now I ask the direct question to all the people in this forum: Was it wrong? Was it repugrant? Was it a crime?

    Polo and Naphat would want you to believe it was all over, the Thai people approved, it was the popular thing to do. Maybe they should now listen to the families of the victims as they slowly come out to pour their grief and anguish at their loss.

    I am surprised Polo and Naphat are angry at me. They should be condemning Thaksin Shinawatra instead of humble Vichai N. for those extrajudicial murders of thousands. Hey I have not killed anyone!

  6. […] See Australians and Laos – Part 1┬ […]

  7. Naphat says:

    Khun Vichai – I find it surprising that you were only ‘suspicious’ (back then) that something was fishy regarding the war on drugs. Both Thaksin and then Interior Minister Wan Noor spoke publicly on the shoot to kill policy and in fact publicized their tough crackdown to the nation. Complaints from international human rights groups from that far back (as well as the government’s rebuttal) were given pretty prominent coverage in the press.

    The fact was that most people were aware and the majority (sadly) supported this war on drugs. Polo is right – no one got upset back then at Thaksin.

  8. polo says:

    Vichai: one of the rhetorical tricks of extremist fascist demagogues like Hitler, Mao, Rush Limbaugh and George W. Bush, and apparently your self, is that when someone doesn’t in the last 10 seconds condemn rape or theft or murder, the demagogue immediately says “So you support rape and theft and murder”. If someone doesn’t in the last 10 seconds say “I love my country” your type immeduately says, “So, you hate your country.”
    Kind of silly, but it worked for a few years for George Bush. and the others. Just doesn’t work anymore. I’m surprised to run into it here. I suppose its best to ignore you from here on out.

  9. Vichai N. says:

    Polo this is about personal convictions: you wholeheartedly approve of Thaksin’s extrajudicial murders but I vigorously oppose it. During 2003 when the killings started I was suspicious but I was not sure. I believe the urban middle class, the palace, the military and the rurals even would just about be in the same suspicious-but-not-sure opinion on the matter.

    But today you and I are no longer suspicious. Both of us are damn sure Thaksin carried out those horriic extrajudicial executions of drug suspects, in clear violation not only of the rule of law, but ialso n clear violation off human rights and our sense of decency. It was totally repugrant to extrajudicially murder thousands of defenseless villagers during Y2003 anti-drugs campaign. I find it even more repugrant that Polo you can applaud those murders.

  10. nganadeeleg says:

    I can understand Vichai’s passion given the general pro Thaksin slant of many on this site.

    There is a distinct lack of criticism from the pro democracy, anti coup commentators which seems to suggest they are pro Thaksin.

    It is understandable that vested interests come into play, but those who are genuinely pro democracy should be concerned at why Thaksin continues to be supported when he was such a divisive leader (not to mention greedy, corrupt, with questionable morals particularly in relation to ordering/condoning extra-judicail killings etc).

  11. Bystander says:

    I’m saying this again but Vichai N, you’re really stereotyping people way out of context. It must seem to you that people who disagree with you must come from the same mold, share every exact same beliefs, and miserably misguided in every way possible. It’s getting old, and you don’t have any persuasive power whatsoever. Why don’t you try to do something more creative?

  12. anon says:

    Vichai, why do you insist on looking at the world through Thaksin-colored glasses? You’re hatred of the man is disgusting. Was your father killed in the War on Drugs or something?

    I really don’t give a damn about Thaksin. My beef is with Chamlong. He betrayed the spirit of Santi Asoke in his quest for personal control.

  13. polo says:

    Vichai: you tell me, just when did the urban middle class get upset about Thaksin’s murder campaign? They were silent about it until 2006. So was the palace. So was the military. So were you.

  14. […] Royal affiliation and cyber wristbands by Nicholas Farrelly @New Mandala […]

  15. Vichai N. says:

    Anon you are even more pissed than Republican that Thaksin the Mother of Corruption had been booted out of Thailand. But taking your anger on that devout ascetic Chamlong would be futile. Whereas Anon you worship a corrupt, Chamlong’s life had been dedicated to the people. Where is the personal greed Anon you maliciously impugn on Chamlong.

    Maybe Anon you should stay anonymous. You are just one malicious poster with spite in your heart because your master Thaksin had been completely disgraced.

    You should find another master Anon . . . there are still a lot of corrupt left . . remnants of TRT. Newin perhaps?

  16. anon says:

    After the Rector of Thammasat University became a running dog to the junta and its puppet parliament, I stopped paying my dues to the Thammasat Economics Association and refused to make any contributions to University activities.

    When I graduated from Thammasat, all students made an oath: they would project the Nation, the King, Religion, and the Constitution. When the Rector became a puppet of the junta that wripped up the Constitution, he lost my respect forever. He’s just another academic, and Thammasat is just another school.

  17. anon says:

    Chamlong was NOT a servant of his people – he did everything for his own power. Now that he’s rebranded himself as Mr. Anti-Thaksin, we might have fond memories of him.

    But during the 90’s when he was the boss at Phalang Dharma, the power struggles between him and the other factions was sickening. The reason Chamlong took in Thaksin wasn’t because he was so fond of Thaksin, but because he needed someone with deep pockets to offset the influence of his Santi Asoke faction against the faction of Boonchu Rojanasathien. The party was always a mess, sometimes supporting government policies (that didn’t make sense), sometimes supporting opposition ideas (that didn’t make sense either). It was a party of whores and power hungry ascetics. Being a long-time Santi Asoke man and a firm believer that the spirit of Buddhism must be turned into a political system that works, it really makes me sad every time I think about how Chamlong’s personal greed and mismanagement wrecked the party.

  18. […] Last week Antonella Diana’s post on cross border rubber investment provided us with a close-up insight into China-Laos economic integration. Today a useful article in The Nation provides a broader perspective on Laos’ economic relations with its neighbours. The article, by Pavin Chachavalpongpun, provides a useful overview of the role of both China and Vietnam in Lao economic development. Refreshingly the article does not rely on the old clichés of a vulnerable Laos being overrun by expansive neighbours: But in this tug of war [for influence in Laos] between China and Vietnam, Laos is not at all passive. Taking the costs and benefits into consideration, Laos is more than willing to play one power against the other. At the end of the day, Laos is opening up to the outside world. It needs foreign aid and investment to boost the economy, to create jobs and to raise living standards. […]

  19. Vichai N. says:

    Polo your source of truth is Handly and Walker and you will bury your head in the sand while you cry for Thaksin? Amazing polo? You were the same guy who said Thaksin was equally amazing shooting defenseless suspects then reading their rights after they were dead on the ground.

    What could be that middle class’ gravy train you alluded at? Or were you lamenting in fact for Thaksin’s/TRT’s gravy train that just got derailed by General Sonthi?

  20. Glenn Smith says:

    [pour le fran├зais, voir ci-après…]

    A recent publication contains anthropological studies done on a Laotian community following its arrival in France at the beginning of the 1980s in and around Paris, France. The articles are in French, but that shouldn’t deter the Laos expert… For the time being, the book can be downloaded free of charge at: http://www.conflictrecovery.org/. Scroll down and after “New Publications” click on the link “LIPI Conflict Program Publications” and on that page on the book “Ethnicity/Ethnicité.”

    Pleasant reading,
    Glenn

    Une recente publication contient des études anthropologiques faits sur une communauté laotienne ├а son arrivé en France au début des années 80, dans la région parisienne. Le livre peut ├кtre téléchargé en entier et gratuitement pour l’instant sur le site: http://www.conflictrecovery.org/. Après ‘New Publications’ cliquez sur ‘LIPI Conflict Program Publications’ et ensuite sur le livre ‘Ethnicity/Ethnicité’.

    Bonne lecture,
    Glenn