jayboy

Censorship is hiding the unknown to prevent the public from knowing it,

not endlessly reiterating what is common knowledge to all.

As I said most people can recognise intellectual dishonesty when they see it.The comment above is a good example.

OR taking something out of context to prove and inverse point.

As in THIS example.

But the example I gave had a very clear context.Anyone can see what it was.

Censorship is hiding the unknown to prevent the public from knowing it,

not endlessly reiterating what is common knowledge to all.

As I said most people can recognise intellectual dishonesty when they see it.The comment above is a good example.

Bangkok Post published the AFP content as well, but they edited the last part out. maybe someone at the Post didn't liked the sentence : "Thaksin remains a deeply divisive figure in Thailand; he enjoys wide support from the country's largely rural poor but is a hate figure for powerful Bangkok-based cliques in the palace, military and bureaucracy."

Censorship in action.

There is a reference to it that makes it counter to LM laws,

and also totally redundant for most all living in Thailand anyway.

Is this actually 'NEWS' to anyone in Thailand... I think not.

It's not like they are hiding/censoring something everyone DOESN'T know...

Let me get this right.You are saying that censorship is not censorship if everyone knows anyway that it is the truth that is being censored.

What a tangled knot we weave when first we practice to deceive.I think most people recognise intellectual dishonesty when they see it.

Still for all the self regarding prattle of expatriates with too much time on their hands on this forum, there is an unstoppable debate -albeit muted - going on in the country at large.And that can't be censored.

When PAD asked for royal intervention back in 2006, they did it according to the Consitution, Article 7. There was a debate whether it was applicable or not but at least they were trying to act consitutionally, I don't see any comparison with Thaksin who first instigated a revolution and then "urged" the palace to stop the ensuiing violence.

There are several steps involved here - the committee monitoring the news makes a decision first (that's where we are now, at the begining), then the committee passes its decision to the police. Police needs an official translation from the Foreign Ministry, not the committee itself. Then the police makes its own decision and passes the case along to the courts.

Also even English speakers here disagree on the words Thaksin used in that interview, surely the police needs an official translation because they are not going to debate Englsih meanings of urge vs demand in Thai courts.

Yeah, yeah...I'm not sure the bureaucratic rigmarole is of much interest.The point is the whole process is a collossal waste of time, and almost certainly highly politicised.If there's evidence of Thaksin -unsuccessfully - instigating revolution, then he should be prosecuted (as should those who - successfully - authorised, and participated in illegal criminal coups).Oh no wait, the latter already pardoned themselves.

Late last year, Thaksin was refused entry to the UK. "My briefing quite rightly said he has been charged with fraud," said the Immigration Minister Phil Woolas. "He is not a desirable person."

The Immigration Ministers in Hong Kong, UAE, Nicaragua, Liberia, Montenegro, ad infinitum could learn a lot from the British one.

Do you mean making fraudulent expense claims for nail polish and womens shoes?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...ail-polish.html

They might very well split voters between Democrats and their own candidates and thus allow a third party win instead, ie 30% Dem. 30% PAD, 40% PTP.

30% PAD !!!!!

In your dreams

But it would be fun, from a schadenfreude point of view, to see them contest national elections.

all sides need to recognise that the yellow and red represent huge bodies of national opinion, and cannot just be dismissed or expected to fade away.

Oh they will, given certain conditions, they will, both of them.

Yellows have already melted away, there's only one issue that might bring them back - amnesty for Thaksin. If that condition is met, you won't see yellows anymore, except for reunion parties.

And reds are in the process of dissolving, too. Songkran riots blew the wind out of their sails, now it's only die hard nuts and rabid leaders left.

If Abhisit manages to confine red leaders to fighting in parliament, you won't see red rallies on the streets.

Even red supporters have realised that they've been drafted into politicians, not people's war. When will our "progressive" analysts see it, too?

There's no class struggle here, no farmers vs urbanites, no poor against middle classes, no "rift" that pitches people against each other. All those reasons were made up by leftist academics ala Giles to justify drawing their salaries..

Oddly enough I would like you to be right.. but I don't think this struggle can be so easily drained of ideological content.(I am assuming your comment about leftist academics was facetious: fair enough, I'm facetious all the time).Of course you are right about politicians exploiting the situation, on both sides I suggest.The key point surely is to confine the conflict to the maximum extent possible to the parliamentary arena.This in turn requires some kind of national consensus.

As an aside I wonder how much influence progressive analysts really have.Certainly there does seem to be some kind of agitprop campaign going on but isn't it just full of sound and fury signifying not very much.Don't forget there is a parallel propaganda campaign, often publicly financed, for an outdated feudal view of Thailand rather reminiscent of sixteenth century England.Shakespeare said " Take but degree away (effectively meaning don't agitate about your lowly position and respect one's social superiors) and hark what dischord follows."

There's no reconciliation on the horizon.

The only way forward is to let red menace die its own death, and the leaders should be jailed, if you really want peace and quiet. If they are let free, there's always a chance they'd disrupt the meetings even without public wide support, it's not illegal, per se, they'd do it just for kicks, to annoy Democrats.

There's also a chance that Thaksin withdraws all funding and support and Jatuporn and Co will start charting a new course of their own and it turns out to be less disrupting. I think there's a good chance that without funds they'll cease their political activities altogether.

And, leaving aside my sarcasm of an earlier post, the kind of zero sum game mindset illustrated above - if shared by the Thai political class (and I'm by no means sure that it is) demonstrates that the country could be on the road to even further chaos.I think most people agree that the forces pitched against each other don't have the overwhelming strength that will ultimately win the day.I'm putting this perhaps too simply but all sides need to recognise that the yellow and red represent huge bodies of national opinion, and cannot just be dismissed or expected to fade away.That's why compromise and reconciliation is needed and why our much maligned PM is looking to calm the country down, including amending the junta's rigged constitution.

Incidentally peace and quiet are not a sine qua non for a healthy democracy.North Korea has "peace and quiet."

Of course there will always be those who rant incoherently and angrily on about the red menace, or for that matter the yellow menace.But anyone who has a nodding acquaintance with history will know that what's happening now in Thailand is not that unusual.It can be "sorted" but it will involve a shift in the balance of power and resources (though not nearly as much as some of the red leadership would like).That's another lesson of history particularly when there are Whiggish figures like Abhisit around.

Thailand loses. Thank you, red thugs.

Chain reaction... Phuket Film Festival has been canceled too - sad - sad - sad

Another blow for Thailand.I can see the red thaksinocrats chanting victory while the credibility of their country is sinking.Sad

Yes to both posts. The Red Shirts have ruined hopes of reconciliation with their continual, non-reconciliation rhetoric.

I agree.It must be particularly disappointing for those like you who have consistently loooked for compromise and reconciliation.

. . anyway, bizarre is that even such letters to the editors of that unreliable newspaper got posted here.

Care to explain why it's bizarre? The Nation's not perfect but it has its strengths.

A useful rule of thumb is that foreigners writing letters to the English language press tend to be nutcases or bores (What am I going to do without BBC Entertainment, yawn yawn).In this instance I thought Mr George Morgan's letter was admirable,non ranting, knowledgeable and well argued backed by a genuine and justified moral outrage.I have no idea who he is but the way we write -or post- reveals so much about ourselves, more than many would be comfortable with - but most aren't self aware enough to know.

<< deliberately provocative flame snipped>>

It's good to remember the thread title... Give Peace A Chance

Always happy to give peace a chance on my side.

Actually, your friend is a bit more amusing. Your moderator-deleted flames preempt your getting a deserving reply.

So to sum up you're unable to justify your slur on Bangkok Pundit. I assume that the problem is simply that you dislike its editorial line.Best to say so rather than accuse it of being "loose with the truth"

As to the deletion of part of my post by moderators I'm sorry if I unwittingly caused offence.I didn't think it was a flame but I always accept moderators judgement - as no doubt you do in respect of several of your flames deleted over the last few weeks.

The day that non-accountable bloggers, especially ones so loose with the truth as bangkok pundit often is, are considered a "recognized news source", as requested for by Admin, is the day they close down Reuters.

For those not familiar with Bangkok Pundit I should point out that it is not and doesn't claim to be a news source

< reactionary personal flaming snipped >

I agree bangkok pundit is not a "recognized news source"

Do try and keep up.Nobody ever suggested BP is a news source.But I would be interested to know what you mean by BP being "loose with the truth".Examples please.

If you simply mean you don't agree with the broad editorial line, that's fine - but you shouldn't imply lack of honesty (unless of course you have examples -see above).

If you would me to explain why your use of the word "reactionary" doesn't make much sense in the context you used it, feel free to PM.

Finally, sorry to interrupt your interesting and witty exchange with Tilt.

The day that non-accountable bloggers, especially ones so loose with the truth as bangkok pundit often is, are considered a "recognized news source", as requested for by Admin, is the day they close down Reuters.

For those not familiar with Bangkok Pundit I should point out that it is not and doesn't claim to be a news source although it has probably the best set of links to news sources available.Unlike some other forums there is no self censorship apart from where respecting Thai law is concerned.Its editorial line is broadly pro-Red and anti-PAD/elite but would probably feel uncomfortable with my simplistic summary.However BP has condemned excesses and foolishness wherever they occur.

PAD zealots hate BP because it encorages full and open discussion,

Are Bangkok Bank executives marching in front lines of White rallies?

I expect them, as any other business, to financially support both sides from time to time, depending on prevailing winds, and I expect them to stay away from any public rallies.

So, why are they mentioned in this thread exactly?

Exactly, especially your 2nd para.I don't see why this is controversial at all and (with all due respect to SBK) certainly not defamatory.

I see there are people in this movement who contributed to the crisis themselves but I don't hear them owning up to it.

Ad Carabao, for example, old Thaksin supporter and a red shirt - what has he got to say for that part of his biography?

There are many, even in the PAD movement, who were originally Thaksin supporters.Over time it became very difficult to continue support for all the very well rehearsed reasons.However bringing the Thai rural majority into a sense of ownership and self belief remains a significant achievement, regardless of what went wrong afterwards.Listening to Khun Korn recently, he could almost be echoing the early Thaksin platform.In a sense Thaksin though seemingly destroyed personally has won the game in the sense of shaping the political environment.One doesn't need to be a political scientist to see which way things are going in this country.

There's nothing to apologise for in supporting the red or yellow side, unless directing or participating in violence.

And as always, leaving aside the criminality, one reflects on the stunning stupidity of the coup.

If charges against Manas were not laid five years ago, how is it Abhisit's fault for not bringing it up now? He's got a lot on his plate as it is. Kru Sue killings are mostly history, those pages are unlikely to be revisited, ever.

Drug killings, however, are continuing to be investigated, and that's what this thread is about, as SJ reminded us several times.

The thread is actually about bringing Thaksin to account, and the Krue Sue killings are certainly part of that subject.The fact that no charges have been levied against the military for that and other crimes in the South speaks volumes about Abhisit's very difficult position.Bottom line is that under the current dispensation (and under Thaksin for that matter) the Thai military will do what the hel_l they like and will never be punished notwithstanding the gravity of their crimes.Even on the drug killings, do you seriously believe the establishment will allow that to be followed through with charges against individuals? I'm sorry incidentally to see you apparently endorsing the line that the subject of the thread should be changed whenever the content is "awkward".

The "war on drugs" is one of the more fundamental reasons

why the reign of this man remains an intense thread to the

safety of this countries citizens and their freedom!

"It can be concluded that this was not much more and not less

the green light to eliminate economic competitors or simply

to scavange on accumulated wealth of ordinary people!

some sort of personal rewarding at random....

Reminds one of feudalistic rule....

Is the second paragraph a quotation from somewhere? If so could you please identify it.Thanks

Chang Noi's latest column from The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/05/04...on_30101903.php

blow up Thaksin's car. It's a joke

I think you mistakenly inserted a period in your text as the balderdash that was Thaksin's assassination attempt was, indeed, a laughable joke.

Thaksin meeting earlier this year in Hong Kong with General Pallop, who was accused of doing it, is confirmation of that nonsense.

Actually it's no such thing.Pallop had a motive.The fact that he subsequently mat the Great Satan in HK is neither here nor there.

I wonder when FM Kasit is going to admit that his comments at the Asia Society in NY on the likely assasin/s were a bit naive.Don't hold your breath.

No, that probably includes those parts of the South where a small group of redshirt protesters had to get police protection. The UDD will find no sympathy in the upper and middle South and I think you will find that even in the lower South, Thaksin is not a popular man. I would imagine most of the Muslims from the deep South remember Tak Bai quite well.

Not just Muslims from the deep South but all concerned people.Still I understand Khun Abhisit is pushing the military high command hard for the officers responsible for the massacre to be brought to book.

Let's hope the wheels of justice move as quickly as when that running dog Samak was brought low for cooking a few recipes on TV.

Look at this guy in Bangkok. PAD and the blues are known for having slingshots, not the reds.

You mean to say this guy is attacking reds? He surely has lost his mind as I can count about a dozen red shirts BEHIND him. He's shooting in the wrong direction!

Nice one!

Still despite the shrieks of outrage from the zealots on both sides, neither the yellows nor the reds have come anywhere close to the ripping up of Paris pavements during the 1968 "evenements", not to say the Brixton disturbances or poll tax riots in UK.Fact is the violence on both sides though deplorable has been very contained thanks to cool heads in Thai security forces, and dare I say it an innate sense that Thais despite their differences are all part of the same family.OK some foreign creeps - normally safely squatting behind a laptop - called for a Ratchaburi hospital approach, i.e massacre (on one side only, naturally) but nobody paid any attention to these losers.I say all credit to the Thais on this one.

They have way to many profitable business interests not to keep a toe in these waters.

Agreed, and they will not burn their boats with any of the major Thai factions, including Thaksin.

Neither PAD nor their enemies outside Red think of PAD as any allies of the elite. And this interview confirms it.

One day perhaps even Jonathan might understand it...

It seems to be open season on Jonathan Head, not only from dim farang nonentities but also from people like Sumet Jumsai who had a engagingly barmy stab at him in The Nation the other day.Interestingly Andrew Drummond, who regrettably I was recently rather rude about, pointed out that JH is streets ahead in insight and knowledge compared with other correspondents.But I can't be bothered to talk further about this.Only zealots would deny JH is a superb journalist, and it's pointless engaging a discission with these people.Basic problem was that JH pointed out incisively and openly the huge division in Thai society and the reasons for it.

Returning to the point, it was a fascinating interview with Sondhi with many amusing ironies.I draw a somewhat different conclusion which is to suggest that the PAD having served their purpose will be marginalised very quickly if the elite has its way.Does anybody really think the people who control the country approved of the yellow mob, other than a useful way of crushing the Great Satan? These people were used as Mao used the cultural revolution.