jayboy

^ ^ Not included in the above broadcast is whether foreign ex-pats living in Thailand are eligible to enlist.

.

Which army - the Thais or the Cambodians?

Look, you can spin this to your heart's content but nobody's fooled.The Cambodians under Hun Sen are a childish and emotional bunch, but the prime responsibility for the troubles on the border lie with reactionary Thai generals.Their motivation has been discussed in detail before.They have essentially told Kasit and Abhisit to get lost.They are a law to themselves - greedy, corrupt, shortsighted and incompetent.They say their actions are to protect the country and its key institutions.The truth is they are dragging them all down.

So...the Thais and Khmer mirror one another, yes?

In a way yes but the Thais are meant to be the grownups.

What is happening is a skirmish. The reds are trying to lay down an activist network which will go ballistic once there is the realisation that they are not going to win the election and the ballot is junked. They will cry fake before the ballot. The polls are already telling Thaksin bad news and the dumping of the old PTP leadership in favour of moving in the hard reds is an indication of one part of the preparation already under way. Somyos will be a part of the jigsaw. Those who are splitting are doing so because they know what's going on. The state is using various tactics to nip the red preparations in the bud. In short Thaksin wants to have another go at bringing down the establishment in his favour and the election is his sling-shot (so he thinks). Those such as Somyos will be scheming that Thaksin is being forced to move to the left (don't laugh) and therefore opening up the opportunity for a revolution. What he doesn't appreciate is that he is the donkey and Thaksin is the jockey and not vice versa.

It just happened!

My argument is intact, your attack on it is in ashes on the killing floor (comme d'habitude / as usual).[/i]

I suggest we allow others to be the judge of that.

Somehow I doubt you would accept my judgment in this

Actually I would, although I suspect I know what it would be.What's always refreshing is when a member with a long history of peddling one particular view comes up with something new and interesting, or even a recognition that nobody has a monopoly of wisdom , that nobody is totally evil (or totally virtuous) and that there are shades of grey.Sometimes it happens.

My argument is intact, your attack on it is in ashes on the killing floor (comme d'habitude / as usual).[/i]

I suggest we allow others to be the judge of that.

It's about revolutionary context. And for the proposed extensions beyond them.

It's just lefty agitprop nonsense which is ignored - or at least tolerated - in most civilised democratic countries (ie excepting North Korea, China etc) just as is the reactionary cheerleading for repression which others are associated.

In the examples you give (actually pretty harmless anyway) there's actually nothing directly linking Somyos although as usual you have found him guilty in advance.

K. Somyos as editor / publisher can be directly linked and made responsable for the contents of the magazine he publishes.

As for the 'lefty agitprop nonsense which is ignored' you probably mean 'which should be ignored' even if it's published in the Voice of Taksin

The problem is, it is not being ignored by it's target audience. IF it were just some far left students trying on their professors Socialism 103 class arguments on for size with their fellow students, you are right, it likely wouldn't me bothered with. But this is clearly part of a concerted Red Faction effort to bring down central pillars of Thai society, that MOST of Thai society is behind 100%. Yes, as said above if ANYONE in Thailand was guilty of blatant LM it's this smiling fool.

Either way, he is under indictment and fund raising goal or not,

he is not allowed to leave the country.

Not much more can be said on his detention.

And in your reply you unwittingly destroy your own argument.You rightly say Thai society is 100% behind the central pillars.So why propagate and then implement laws (usually on ridiculously inadequate evidence) which undermine them? I should also point out that public discussion about reasonable reform, (specifically the need to end exploitation for political ends by opportunists such as Thaksin, Prayuth and even Abhisit) is not LM.

^ ^ Not included in the above broadcast is whether foreign ex-pats living in Thailand are eligible to enlist.

.

Which army - the Thais or the Cambodians?

Look, you can spin this to your heart's content but nobody's fooled.The Cambodians under Hun Sen are a childish and emotional bunch, but the prime responsibility for the troubles on the border lie with reactionary Thai generals.Their motivation has been discussed in detail before.They have essentially told Kasit and Abhisit to get lost.They are a law to themselves - greedy, corrupt, shortsighted and incompetent.They say their actions are to protect the country and its key institutions.The truth is they are dragging them all down.

It's about revolutionary context. And for the proposed extensions beyond them.

It's just lefty agitprop nonsense which is ignored - or at least tolerated - in most civilised democratic countries (ie excepting North Korea, China etc) just as is the reactionary cheerleading for repression which others are associated.

In the examples you give (actually pretty harmless anyway) there's actually nothing directly linking Somyos although as usual you have found him guilty in advance.

As only too predictable the military cheerleaders slander Human Rights Watch (which has a distinguished and non-partisan record), and speculate dishonestly about LM.

For a serious analysis there is an excellent editorial in the other paper today pointing out that there are plenty of real problems for Thai politicians to concentrate on and that LM statements have almost zero support from the Thai people.

General Prayuth's actions are disgraceful, and his tenure will hopefully be short.Frankly he should have been sacked already.

What's not helpful are illegal radio stations broadcasts, irregardless of content, interfering with the transmissions of legal radio stations.

You should have read the Human Rights Watch report quoted above.The ISOC's action is scandalous.Why were only Red Shirt stations targeted?

Do you really need to ask that question?

Not really.But it's important to expose lies and hypocrisy and the efforts of a greedy, corrupt and frightened elite to cheat the Thai people in the forthcoming election.The irony is that the manipulation and deceit probably isn't necessary - since most credible observers expect the re-election of the existing government, the elite's choice.

What's not helpful are illegal radio stations broadcasts, irregardless of content, interfering with the transmissions of legal radio stations.

You should have read the Human Rights Watch report quoted above.The ISOC's action is scandalous.Why were only Red Shirt stations targeted?

Yes,well done the powers that be, the radio stations could have been a major hinderance in the upcoming elections.

They are a hindrance to the legal radio stations that have a license and to their listeners.

complaints from local residents about the illegal radio stations' frequencies interfering with regular radio broadcasts

Not a very helpful post.What's new?

The political partisanship shown by ISOC is exposed by the recent Human Rights Watch statement which ,inter alia, points out that of the hundreds of unlicensed community radio stations only those associated with Red Shirts have been targeted.However the military cheer leaders spin it, this is political interference in the pre-election period which should be roundly condemned although it's part of a larger pattern.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/04/27/thailand-authorities-silence-red-shirt-community-radios

Well I will agree with you on one thing .. They are not in the same class. Abhisit is certainly linked into "the Thai establishment" and Giles U. obviously isn't. The fact that you skipped the content of the post and made assumptions about me (the poster) instead tells volumes

Again you fail to appreciate nuance.I never said Giles was part of the Thai establishment: I said that he would be regarded by the Thai upper class as "one of us" - in the way that the late leftwinger Paul Foot (of Private Eye) while constantly goading the British establishment was for reasons of background seen as "one of us." An American might make the same case for Gore Vidal.

But I agree this is probably not a common topic of conversation among lower middle class Sino-Thai urbanites.

1) Who here is Jayboy characterizing as a "foreign military cheerleader"?

and

2) Does anyone believe that Giles U. would be considered "one of us" by the "establishment Thai world"? When Giles has been so vocally anti-establishment?

and

3) Why would Thailand owe Giles anything for the work of his father? (That statement is absolutely stunning!)

!.No explanation needed.The evidence is clear and out there.This isn't the first time you have asked this question..must be preying on your mind

2.You are obviously unfamiliar with the nuances of upper class Thailand.At St John's Oxford a few years ago Abhisit was perfectly happy to debate with Giles in a reasonable way.They have a lot in common - both upper middle class Anglophiles.Abhisit came off best by the way.

3.Thailand doesn't owe Giles for Dr Puey's enormous contribution except perhaps a mild indulgence, rather in the way Randolph Churchill was indulged by the British establishment.But I agree there are limits on this

1) Nothing is "preying on my mind" and imho your characterization of other unnamed posters as "foreign military cheerleaders" does need explanation, but that is simply my opinion.

2) Your anecdotal evidence of how 2 classmates got along being indicative of how Giles is perceived by "the Thai establishment" just doesn't make sense. 2 guys in the same school with similar backgrounds debated amicably certainly doesn't extend to either of them being "one of us" in the eyes of the Thai establishment.

3) Trying to make a case that Thailand owes anything to Giles certainly explains why Giles is PNG in Thailand, now doesn't it

They are not class mates.

Everything you say suggests to me you are remote from the Thai establishment, or even a rudimentary knowledge of the way it operates.

1) Who here is Jayboy characterizing as a "foreign military cheerleader"?

and

2) Does anyone believe that Giles U. would be considered "one of us" by the "establishment Thai world"? When Giles has been so vocally anti-establishment?

and

3) Why would Thailand owe Giles anything for the work of his father? (That statement is absolutely stunning!)

!.No explanation needed.The evidence is clear and out there.This isn't the first time you have asked this question..must be preying on your mind

2.You are obviously unfamiliar with the nuances of upper class Thailand.At St John's Oxford a few years ago Abhisit was perfectly happy to debate with Giles in a reasonable way.They have a lot in common - both upper middle class Anglophiles.Abhisit came off best by the way.

3.Thailand doesn't owe Giles for Dr Puey's enormous contribution except perhaps a mild indulgence, rather in the way Randolph Churchill was indulged by the British establishment.But I agree there are limits on this

Giles Ungpakorn is neither naive or an idealist. He is a Trotskyist and formerly a member of a group in Thailand which failed to build any lasting support in the Thai working class. Now just a big mouth. Unlike the Stalinist Thai CP which believes in a popular front but in practice completely subordinates itself to Thaksin's interests, Giles now criticises Thaksin. Big deal. This would be part of the mantra of 'unconditional but not uncritical' support for Thaksin and his reds. Not that any one really cares, but the so-called left doesn't know whether it is coming or going. Not to be confused with the forum Che T-shirt wearers who run a mile from socialist organisation but like the idea of foreign 'adventure' and 'revolt'. Petty-bourgeois dilettantes the lot of them.

How strange that you should resort to Trotskyite jargon - "petty - bourgeois dilettantes" !!

Surely he is both naive and an idealist, and I would add a pain in the neck too.He has no social skills or charisma.

You say he criticises Thaksin now, but he has always done so.I don't think he has any traction in Thailand at all.

I tend to agree he is a slightly absurd figure, not helped by a whining Kenneth Williams type voice.

And yet and yet.There is a kind of mad integrity in the man.Thailand should be able to contain this kind of man, without necessarily taking him too seriously.His father of course by any reasonable measure (intellect, competence, moral purpose, visionary) was the outstanding Thai of the post WW2 era.Thailand owes Giles some indulgence for this fact alone.

http://www.nectec.or.th/users/htk/dr-puey/

(Actually in the establishment Thai world - which I doubt the foreign military cheerleaders fully understand - they don't move in those circles - Giles would be regarded as an irritating lefty but definitely "one of us".

I'm sure that Donald Trump will assist you and like minded geniuses in your quest for the truth about Obama's academic record although to educated foreigners he and Bill Clinton are the most intellectually gifted US presidents in living memory.

On the subject of Trump I have to admit to sharing Hugo Rifkind's (The Times) thought below:

"Personally, I'd like to see a certificate that proves Donald Trump grew his own hair and didn't scrape it up off the floor of a dog boutique."

This thread is about Thailand and fake degrees. It is not about the current or former Prime Minister.

Comments about the authenticity of their degrees, their English skills etc. are off-topic.

Please stay on topic.

But, Scott, I'm desperate now to know who/what Jayboy's "good authority" is. Don't leave us in suspense, please.

Actually, an MA Oxon is always awarded on application and payment of a fee after some time following grant of the Bachelor's degree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Arts_(Oxbridge_and_Dublin)

A slight sense of humour failure in the house.As Xangsamhua points out the Oxford M.A is automatic (assuming one applies for it and the cheque doesn't bounce) after the B.A (which is of course subject to examination).One doesn't even to turn up for the M.A although there is a ceremony in the Sheldonian Theatre for those bothered.

I have it on good authority that Khun Abhisit took no examination at all for his M.A at Oxford University, and in fact received it on payment of a fee.

Are the PAD not aware that it takes 2 to tango ? Just demand Thai troops be removed from the border and all will be well , are they not aware the locals lived in harmony for many a long year ? Once the conflict is dispersed . locals will most likely go back to the way things were before the glory seekers jumped in the preserve the borders of the kingdom .

Oh , excuse me , I forgot the most important factor FACE

As if Face isn't an issue for Cambodia in this?

I don't think face is the major issue here, often the intellectually vapid way foreigners account for situations in Asia they don't understand.

The important factors here are the reactionary position of the Thai army, the vested interests it is linked with including the appalling PAD together with its Thai and foreign camp followers.

Ah .... "intellectually vapid way foreigners account for situations in Asia they don't understand" ... certainly seems like a little more "characterizations of other posters"

But it IS nice of Jayboy to leave out the Cambodians entirely, and to overlook any other potential issues

I have no brief for the Cambodians or their thuggish leader, Hun Sen.

However no amount of distraction from the small band of military cheerleaders can avoid the truth that Thailand has been internationally shamed by its military and weak government.

Are the PAD not aware that it takes 2 to tango ? Just demand Thai troops be removed from the border and all will be well , are they not aware the locals lived in harmony for many a long year ? Once the conflict is dispersed . locals will most likely go back to the way things were before the glory seekers jumped in the preserve the borders of the kingdom .

Oh , excuse me , I forgot the most important factor FACE

As if Face isn't an issue for Cambodia in this?

I don't think face is the major issue here, often the intellectually vapid way foreigners account for situations in Asia they don't understand.

The important factors here are the reactionary position of the Thai army, the vested interests it is linked with including the appalling PAD together with its Thai and foreign camp followers.

Thailand has become something of a international example of dishonesty.Shame on the appalling Thai generals and shame on the weak kneed government, in thrall to reaction and

repression.

The Independent summarises the position well.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/the-ancient-temples-under-fire-in-an-ageold-conflict-2274773.html

The low-interest loan to Myanmar comes to mind, only $121 million, but since we're in Thailand to be seen as THB 3.63 billion :

"Thaksin was behind the decision to grant the low-interest loan from the Export-Import Bank of Thailand to Myanmar's government in 2004 to buy services and equipment from Shin Satellite, now Thaicom THCOM.BK, a unit of Shin Corp SHIN.BK, a telecoms firm then owned by his family."

http://in.reuters.co...K00301120100226

Rubbish.The Thai Exim bank exists to provide low interest loans to Thai exporters including the Shin Group.That is the whole point of its existence.Did Thaksin exert influence to secure Eximbank support? Probably, though the details are obscure.Nobody protested or resigned.Are there questions to be asked? Yes.Is it theft? No, of course not.

The loan was granted in 2004. At that time no-one was going to quoestion PM Thaksin's wheeling and dealing too loudly. Some reporters got defamation lawsuit slapped on them by our esteemed leader, claiming billions in damages.

When a PM induces a low-interest state loan to be granted in order for his company to profit, this may not legally constitute 'theft', but for ordinary people that doesn't matter. The country lost income due to 'low-interest loan', due to 'loan', a private company which just happened to be owned by 'amply rich' PM Thaksin profitted. No theft, but larceny on a grand sale?

In the reading of the assets forfeiture case .. the judges detailed many instances of corruption that benefitted Thaksin and cost the Thai people billions ... theft, by any other name would smell....

Again you haven't done enough research.Please provide the details to justify your case.I suspect the example you have in mind is the illegal lottery case where judges accused Thaksin of cheating the Thai taxpayer of billions. This is now accepted as completely incorrect:the steps the Thaksin government took were to benefit the Thai treasury.Sheer political vendetta in that case but perhaps you have some real evidence not just hearsay?

Hes a convicted criminal on the run whos stolen billions may just have bought him the leadership of this country in 2 months time!!!!! THAT IS the danger

Can you support your claim that Thaksin "stole billions" ?If you can please provide details.

The low-interest loan to Myanmar comes to mind, only $121 million, but since we're in Thailand to be seen as THB 3.63 billion :

"Thaksin was behind the decision to grant the low-interest loan from the Export-Import Bank of Thailand to Myanmar's government in 2004 to buy services and equipment from Shin Satellite, now Thaicom THCOM.BK, a unit of Shin Corp SHIN.BK, a telecoms firm then owned by his family."

http://in.reuters.com/article/2010/02/26/thailand-politics-thaksin-myanmar-idINBAK00301120100226

Rubbish.The Thai Exim bank exists to provide low interest loans to Thai exporters including the Shin Group.That is the whole point of its existence.Did Thaksin exert influence to secure Eximbank support? Probably, though the details are obscure.Nobody protested or resigned.Are there questions to be asked? Yes.Is it theft? No, of course not.

Jayboy - the following link is from the New York Times - his maid had 33 million baht in her account - his driver 117 million added to the land deals he cheaply put through to his wife and the illegal sale of Shincorp are tantamount to theft - back to the old red drawing board i suppose for you then?? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/22/world/asia/22thai.html

I'm sorry but you are completely off target.You have referred to the concealment of assets which although a serious offence is not theft.The sale of Shincorp was not illegal, though there were some tax complications (jury still out on that).The Siam Commercial Bank (check out the shareholders) was the main bank supporting and advising the deal.In any event being "tantamount to theft" is not theft.You have completely failed to make your case and your apparent ignorance of Thailand's corporate history is very evident.Even Thaksin's most powerful enemies don't accuse him of "theft".Do your research and be a bit more honest.There are enough offences Thaksin committed without having to invent ones.

There is a "fact" in the guy's post. Many HAVE been charged with LM. What is missing is any correlation to the Dems. The elections may in fact be drawing out people that are committing LM offenses as seen on April 10th in larger numbers.

How hard is it to watch your mouth and not imply something that would be a violation of the LM laws?

What you are missing is the growing consensus that the abuse of LM is a national disgrace, harming rather than protecting the institution it is designed to correct.

You make one speculative and in my view wrong headed assumption why LM accusations have accelerated in the pre election period.There is a more plausible explanation based on political opportunism on the part of the ruling elite and the military that backs it.

You make one speculative and in my view wrong headed assumption why LM charges have accelerated in the pre-election period. The most plausible explanation based on political reality is that there have been more actual LM offenses.

You repeat my comment, along with your original speculative assertion.That's not dialogue.