Thai Junta Chief Calls For Emergency Rule In Bangkok

[sriracha john]

Army officers hit back at 'bias in the ranks'

By Wassana Nanuam

Officers who happened to be pre-cadet classmates of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in Class 10 at the Armed Forces Academy Preparatory School will file a suit with the Administrative Court against their "unfair" transfers in March by the Council for National Security (CNS).

They were all moved from key positions in the armed forces to inactive positions in the off-season military reshuffle engineered last month by CNS chairman and army chief Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin and CNS vice chairman and air force chief ACM Chalit Pukpasuk.

They say the transfers were discriminatory because professional and outstanding officers were moved to inferior positions only because they were from Class 10.

They argue the reshuffle was aimed at giving the CNS absolute control over the armed forces as they promoted their own men to important and command positions.

The officers plan to collectively petition the Administrative Court.

"We are filing a lawsuit to seek justice from the Administrative Court because we were transferred unfairly," said one member of the group, who asked not to be named.

"If we remain silent, the CNS will continue doing this. We are aiming at justice and fair transfers for officers from every class, not only for the CNS officers."

Another Class 10 member said the CNS claimed it was protecting itself from the old power clique, but the reshuffle should have been fair instead of rewarding only officers with links to the CNS.

"Impartial and professional officers were also transferred because the CNS is not sure who they favour. This is not fair either," he said. The protesting officers say some Class 10 members had truly earned the important positions they held prior to the reshuffle.

However, the CNS claimed they had progressed because of their links to Mr Thaksin. The CNS feared these officers would side with Mr Thaksin, so they were all transferred.

This had undermined morale and caused divisions, the protesting officers said.

In the March reshuffle, air force assistant chief ACM Sukampol Suwannathat was sidelined as an air force expert and deputy chief of the joint staff Gen Pornchai Kranlert became an expert at the Supreme Command.

"Serious mistakes normally justify such transfers but we were moved only because we are friends of Mr Thaksin. Is this our fault? What do you fear?" said another Class 10 member.

"The only way we can fight this is through legal channels. We pin our hopes on the justice system," said the key Class 10 figure

Source Bangkok post

Step by step piece by piece Thaksin is attempting to reassemble his power.

Will class ten support all those overlooked by the Thaksin regime for promotion while that regime was busy promoting untalented sycpophants over talented officers? I dont think so. I wonder what they have to say about Gen Anupong being one of the top 3 generals in the country. He is class ten. It is just politics. The former Thaksin regime servitors are trying to say they did nothing wrong ever and are just being picked on. That is the theme coming out now from PTV, class ten, Thaksin himself, TRT itself, Thammarak (hic hic), Yuth "dooyen" etc etc ad nauseum. A brutal power struggle that will do the country no good, not that these characters care about the country anyway. Why not put the class ten offciers tied to Thaksins boots back in power then they can have their own coup and bring back his mightiness Mr. T and then everything will be wonderful and everyone will be so happy, then they can have a war against sombody or something again and get back to offing and locking up all their politcal opponents while turning a blind eye to what their own mafia get up to and stuffing the courts, police and any other institution with their own cronies. Thailand really needs to move on with something new and not just get embroiled in a pro and anti Thaksin and his regime war. Sadly it seems this outcome is not allowed.

Even MORE Thaksinistas are expelled...

RESHUFFLE ENDORSED

Latest shake-up another blow to officers linked to Thaksin

The latest police reshuffle, involving 97 senior officers from the levels of commander to deputy commissioner, was endorsed by the Police Commission yesterday. The shake-up, which saw some key posts in important divisions and bureaus replaced, dealt another blow to officers linked to ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Those transferred to inactive posts at the Royal Thai Police Office were former deputy police chief Pol Gen Priewpan Damapong, Mr Thaksin's brother-in-law; Provincial Police Bureau 5 deputy commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Chamnong Kaewsiri; Central Investigation Bureau deputy commissioner Pol Lt-Gen Chaiwat Chotima; and Special Police Branch 3 commander Atthakrit Thareechat who formerly headed a squad of police guarding Mr Thaksin.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/19Apr2007_news12.php

Edited April 19, 2007 by sriracha john

[hammered]

Every vote is a sale, every voter is a customer. You need clever marketing, capable sales force, convincing advertising (policies), and no competitors.

With that statement, you have summed up the nature of party politics in all modern democracies. And the alternative is....?

Interesting point. It is also ironic that as we discuss how democracy will work (or not as the case may be) in Thailand, in the west the numbers voting decreases and governments seem more and more riddled with corruption ( or at least charges of such and convenient immunities or statutes of limitations that conveniently expire). As we discuss how politicains can get closer to the people or manipulate them in Thailand, it seems in the west parties particularly in the 2 party systems are seen as not representing people at all. If the west after hundreds of years of representative democracy only ends up with voter apathy, massive corruption and parties set to serve big business or other big interests not to mention governments only too happy to start legally questionable wars that are not supported by their own people in most cases, then what hope does Thailand have of achieving the ideal that maybe we are expecting? The other day a politican in Thailand - it may have been Abhisit, I'm not sure - said that Thailand had to move ahead with the best it could get or fall apart indicating that the total erradication of TRT influences could not be achieved and equally the sudden end of corruption and vote buying would also not come to an end. Maybe as the situation gets messier and more complex and the consequences of either side playing for a total victory becomes more apparent that attitude will come to prevail, and hopefully there will be no need for emergency rule.

[blaze]

Every vote is a sale, every voter is a customer. You need clever marketing, capable sales force, convincing advertising (policies), and no competitors.

With that statement, you have summed up the nature of party politics in all modern democracies. And the alternative is....?

Interesting point. It is also ironic that as we discuss how democracy will work (or not as the case may be) in Thailand, in the west the numbers voting decreases and governments seem more and more riddled with corruption ( or at least charges of such and convenient immunities or statutes of limitations that conveniently expire). As we discuss how politicains can get closer to the people or manipulate them in Thailand, it seems in the west parties particularly in the 2 party systems are seen as not representing people at all. If the west after hundreds of years of representative democracy only ends up with voter apathy, massive corruption and parties set to serve big business or other big interests not to mention governments only too happy to start legally questionable wars that are not supported by their own people in most cases, then what hope does Thailand have of achieving the ideal that maybe we are expecting? The other day a politican in Thailand - it may have been Abhisit, I'm not sure - said that Thailand had to move ahead with the best it could get or fall apart indicating that the total erradication of TRT influences could not be achieved and equally the sudden end of corruption and vote buying would also not come to an end. Maybe as the situation gets messier and more complex and the consequences of either side playing for a total victory becomes more apparent that attitude will come to prevail, and hopefully there will be no need for emergency rule.

The total erradication of the TRT influence will occur with the total erradication of poverty in Thailand. Even if Thaksin had never been born- the stresses in a country as divided economically as Thailand will eventually take on a political dimension- whether that is accomodated through ballots or the polling booth is the big question right now.

If the poor, as some have suggested, were never attracted to TRT and only supported them because they paid for votes, then there is no real threat to the status quo. Another Banharn or Thaksin can come in and buy their way into power but essentially the rich will prosper on the backs of the poor. Corruption didn't begin with Thaksin and it won't end and as long as those with clout -including the Bangkok middle class are prospering- things will go on just fine thankyou.

IF however, the poor are now looking and more significantly EXPECTING political parties to significantly improve the material quality of their lives- all this emphasis on Thaksin and TRT is a red herring. They will create their 'savior'.

It won't be this election- I'm sure- but in ten years, if democracy is allowed to function, a guy from say- Nakhon Sri Tammarat, with class rather than regional affiliations- with roots in the village- capable of explaining (accurately or even inaccurately) in short speeches the causes of Thai poverty- offering the kind of populist or Socialist programs that we currently associate with the TRT- minus the cronyism and the attached baggage of being one of the countries wealthiest hucksters- if that guy is heard- the status quo will change.

Unless of course the constitution has a proviso that would permit the army to intervene should the population show signs of stress- as determined by... the army.

The Thai poor are no different than poor anywhere in the world. For only so long can the social and cultural structures that keep them 'in their place' be maintained.

Even Suryuth has said that the greatest threat facing Thailand is not the south, not drugs, not even TRT- it is the gap between the rich and poor.

[hammered]

Every vote is a sale, every voter is a customer. You need clever marketing, capable sales force, convincing advertising (policies), and no competitors.

With that statement, you have summed up the nature of party politics in all modern democracies. And the alternative is....?

Interesting point. It is also ironic that as we discuss how democracy will work (or not as the case may be) in Thailand, in the west the numbers voting decreases and governments seem more and more riddled with corruption ( or at least charges of such and convenient immunities or statutes of limitations that conveniently expire). As we discuss how politicains can get closer to the people or manipulate them in Thailand, it seems in the west parties particularly in the 2 party systems are seen as not representing people at all. If the west after hundreds of years of representative democracy only ends up with voter apathy, massive corruption and parties set to serve big business or other big interests not to mention governments only too happy to start legally questionable wars that are not supported by their own people in most cases, then what hope does Thailand have of achieving the ideal that maybe we are expecting? The other day a politican in Thailand - it may have been Abhisit, I'm not sure - said that Thailand had to move ahead with the best it could get or fall apart indicating that the total erradication of TRT influences could not be achieved and equally the sudden end of corruption and vote buying would also not come to an end. Maybe as the situation gets messier and more complex and the consequences of either side playing for a total victory becomes more apparent that attitude will come to prevail, and hopefully there will be no need for emergency rule.

The total erradication of the TRT influence will occur with the total erradication of poverty in Thailand. Even if Thaksin had never been born- the stresses in a country as divided economically as Thailand will eventually take on a political dimension- whether that is accomodated through ballots or the polling booth is the big question right now.

If the poor, as some have suggested, were never attracted to TRT and only supported them because they paid for votes, then there is no real threat to the status quo. Another Banharn or Thaksin can come in and buy their way into power but essentially the rich will prosper on the backs of the poor. Corruption didn't begin with Thaksin and it won't end and as long as those with clout -including the Bangkok middle class are prospering- things will go on just fine thankyou.

IF however, the poor are now looking and more significantly EXPECTING political parties to significantly improve the material quality of their lives- all this emphasis on Thaksin and TRT is a red herring. They will create their 'savior'.

It won't be this election- I'm sure- but in ten years, if democracy is allowed to function, a guy from say- Nakhon Sri Tammarat, with class rather than regional affiliations- with roots in the village- capable of explaining (accurately or even inaccurately) in short speeches the causes of Thai poverty- offering the kind of populist or Socialist programs that we currently associate with the TRT- minus the cronyism and the attached baggage of being one of the countries wealthiest hucksters- if that guy is heard- the status quo will change.

Unless of course the constitution has a proviso that would permit the army to intervene should the population show signs of stress- as determined by... the army.

The Thai poor are no different than poor anywhere in the world. For only so long can the social and cultural structures that keep them 'in their place' be maintained.

Even Suryuth has said that the greatest threat facing Thailand is not the south, not drugs, not even TRT- it is the gap between the rich and poor.

Interesting points again. It will be hard for an ordinary guy (a Chavez or Morales) to rise to the top as the elite continue to ensure thast the degree requirement is maintained for MPs and nobody seems to criticize this requirement that actively excludes most citizens from even running for parliament. That aside as the country changes I do expect more of what you say although personally I do not see the country being there yet, and yes the distribution of wealth is horrendous in Thailand. We should also identify what we mean by the poor. At the moment they are divided by a well fostered regionalism that suits their local and national politicos. Then there are the rural and urban poor. These groups do not necessarily have the same wants, needs and issues. The urbanization of Thailand is something that few politicians seem to spend any time thinking about but if they get organized and can overcome the you vote where you are registered on your tabien bahn rules this group could command some power especially being very close to the major politcal center(s). The rural poor are large in number but so seperated by distance and still limited by their access to information. This makes it hard for them to organize as a group. Even now we see a whole plethora of farners groups some of whom work together for a while and some of whom despise each other and many of the groups sadly are more politcal fronts than real farmers groups. Taking the rural poor (or for that matter the urban poor) as a whole they could achieve a lot more if they were united even though for example the demands of one crop rice farmers, fruit farmers and fishermen may not exactly totally mesh. Indeed it is about them organising themselves rather than being oprganized by others which will see them achieve more imho. Whatever our opinions of the changes happening we certainly live at an interesting time in Thailand.

[Old Man River]

The country is completely and utterly divided and in pieces.

If Thaksin is out of people's minds, they all, and I mean all, including opposing politicians, will quickly find a common ground and return to "business as usual".

A year ago, I made a very similar statement on TV. Things were simpler then. You were either for Thaksin or against him. Now things are much more complicated because he has been physically removed, but remains on people's minds. There are many in Bangkok that see him returning and being re-elected (although he is still not favored).

People, whose opinions I respect tell me they cannot remember Thailand being this fragmented and disjointed. Where is it all going to lead?

[blaze]

Every vote is a sale, every voter is a customer. You need clever marketing, capable sales force, convincing advertising (policies), and no competitors.

With that statement, you have summed up the nature of party politics in all modern democracies. And the alternative is....?

Interesting point. It is also ironic that as we discuss how democracy will work (or not as the case may be) in Thailand, in the west the numbers voting decreases and governments seem more and more riddled with corruption ( or at least charges of such and convenient immunities or statutes of limitations that conveniently expire). As we discuss how politicains can get closer to the people or manipulate them in Thailand, it seems in the west parties particularly in the 2 party systems are seen as not representing people at all. If the west after hundreds of years of representative democracy only ends up with voter apathy, massive corruption and parties set to serve big business or other big interests not to mention governments only too happy to start legally questionable wars that are not supported by their own people in most cases, then what hope does Thailand have of achieving the ideal that maybe we are expecting? The other day a politican in Thailand - it may have been Abhisit, I'm not sure - said that Thailand had to move ahead with the best it could get or fall apart indicating that the total erradication of TRT influences could not be achieved and equally the sudden end of corruption and vote buying would also not come to an end. Maybe as the situation gets messier and more complex and the consequences of either side playing for a total victory becomes more apparent that attitude will come to prevail, and hopefully there will be no need for emergency rule.

The total erradication of the TRT influence will occur with the total erradication of poverty in Thailand. Even if Thaksin had never been born- the stresses in a country as divided economically as Thailand will eventually take on a political dimension- whether that is accomodated through ballots or the polling booth is the big question right now.

If the poor, as some have suggested, were never attracted to TRT and only supported them because they paid for votes, then there is no real threat to the status quo. Another Banharn or Thaksin can come in and buy their way into power but essentially the rich will prosper on the backs of the poor. Corruption didn't begin with Thaksin and it won't end and as long as those with clout -including the Bangkok middle class are prospering- things will go on just fine thankyou.

IF however, the poor are now looking and more significantly EXPECTING political parties to significantly improve the material quality of their lives- all this emphasis on Thaksin and TRT is a red herring. They will create their 'savior'.

It won't be this election- I'm sure- but in ten years, if democracy is allowed to function, a guy from say- Nakhon Sri Tammarat, with class rather than regional affiliations- with roots in the village- capable of explaining (accurately or even inaccurately) in short speeches the causes of Thai poverty- offering the kind of populist or Socialist programs that we currently associate with the TRT- minus the cronyism and the attached baggage of being one of the countries wealthiest hucksters- if that guy is heard- the status quo will change.

Unless of course the constitution has a proviso that would permit the army to intervene should the population show signs of stress- as determined by... the army.

The Thai poor are no different than poor anywhere in the world. For only so long can the social and cultural structures that keep them 'in their place' be maintained.

Even Suryuth has said that the greatest threat facing Thailand is not the south, not drugs, not even TRT- it is the gap between the rich and poor.

Interesting points again. It will be hard for an ordinary guy (a Chavez or Morales) to rise to the top as the elite continue to ensure thast the degree requirement is maintained for MPs and nobody seems to criticize this requirement that actively excludes most citizens from even running for parliament. That aside as the country changes I do expect more of what you say although personally I do not see the country being there yet, and yes the distribution of wealth is horrendous in Thailand. We should also identify what we mean by the poor. At the moment they are divided by a well fostered regionalism that suits their local and national politicos. Then there are the rural and urban poor. These groups do not necessarily have the same wants, needs and issues. The urbanization of Thailand is something that few politicians seem to spend any time thinking about but if they get organized and can overcome the you vote where you are registered on your tabien bahn rules this group could command some power especially being very close to the major politcal center(s). The rural poor are large in number but so seperated by distance and still limited by their access to information. This makes it hard for them to organize as a group. Even now we see a whole plethora of farners groups some of whom work together for a while and some of whom despise each other and many of the groups sadly are more politcal fronts than real farmers groups. Taking the rural poor (or for that matter the urban poor) as a whole they could achieve a lot more if they were united even though for example the demands of one crop rice farmers, fruit farmers and fishermen may not exactly totally mesh. Indeed it is about them organising themselves rather than being oprganized by others which will see them achieve more imho. Whatever our opinions of the changes happening we certainly live at an interesting time in Thailand.

I agree hammered, that there is a long way to go- but I also recall a UN report earlier this year as saying the highest level of political awareness in Thailand was in the North East- Bankok came out dismally. (Which isn't surprising when some media pundits and so called academics think that what we have now is a variant of democracy).

I can't help but wonder how the people in Issan must regard the fact that regardless of who they elect, the middle class minority in Bangkok, backed by the army- can just boot them out at will. And for how long they will accept that fact.

Even the co-ordinator of the PAD (whose name escapes me) said a couple of days ago that the middle class in Bangkok felt they had been economically ignored by Thaksin and that's why they flocked to the PAD rallies. (which was a pretty alarming statement given that some would say that the success of the PAD was due to the inheirently high moral standards of the Bkk middle class and their abhorance of corrupt government- As if!) And the taxi drivers, construction workers that I have talked to understand that fact perfectly well. They don't show anger at it (as one could expect in, say, Pinochet's Chile- but then- that wouldn't be the Thai way. But they are aware.

At the same time, we can not forget the organizational skills that disaffected Thais can muster- only have to look back at the communist encampments that survived for so long in the south as well as the north and northeast and where organization and communication were essential. Things can happen quickly once the ball gets rolling. Even in Thailand.

I recall that in 92, one of the explanations for the ferocity of the soldiers against the demonstrators was that the units had come from Issan- and those young farm boys were just itching for a chance to kick some middle class ass. I doubt that there is much more love given what has transpired this year.

Edited April 19, 2007 by blaze

[Mid]

[hammered]

The country is completely and utterly divided and in pieces.

If Thaksin is out of people's minds, they all, and I mean all, including opposing politicians, will quickly find a common ground and return to "business as usual".

A year ago, I made a very similar statement on TV. Things were simpler then. You were either for Thaksin or against him. Now things are much more complicated because he has been physically removed, but remains on people's minds. There are many in Bangkok that see him returning and being re-elected (although he is still not favored).

People, whose opinions I respect tell me they cannot remember Thailand being this fragmented and disjointed. Where is it all going to lead?

Personally I try to stay positive but virtually every Thai person I know thinks the situation will inevitably end up in violence. What worries me is if so many think that way it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Right now there is one big event that we cant really discuss that we definitely do not want to see.

[Plus]

I think that resentment of Isanese towards Bangkokians is also overrated, I suspect it was TRT idea initially - to rally support in the countryside aganst PAD. If you tell this time and time again, people will start to believe.

This kind of propaganda simply divides the country and should be sensored, or there WILL be consequenses. This isn't some rant against corrupt politicians or policies - this is inciting hatred between two very large groups of people.

Bangkok middle classes (not only Bangkok, btw, all urban middle classes) are not some special, highly moral, people. Their standards are not consistent. They overwhelmingly voted Samak for the governor once, for example. In 2005 they voted TRT because they were promised underground trains everywhere, and they believed it, like total idiots.

PAD was a phenomenon, they were able to rally people around principles they don't usually hold very dear.

[blaze]

PAD was a phenomenon, they were able to rally people around principles they don't usually hold very dear.

like financial self-interest?

[Plus]

Financial self interest? I don't think so. Even Sondhi didn't get his payoff after the coup. PAD did it for the higher principles.

Or you could see it another way - middle management discontent with upper management screwing the company. You could try to buy them off, but even Thaksin had no idea how. What could he offer middle classes they can't get themselves? Tax breaks - they don't pay too much anyway. Loans? They had twenty offers a day in the mailboxes.

That's the inherent strength of the middle classes - they don't have any significant self interest in politics. Poor need money and upper classes need to protect their turf. Middle classes are detached, they have more objective views.

[blaze]

Financial self interest? I don't think so. Even Sondhi didn't get his payoff after the coup. PAD did it for the higher principles.

Or you could see it another way - middle management discontent with upper management screwing the company. You could try to buy them off, but even Thaksin had no idea how. What could he offer middle classes they can't get themselves? Tax breaks - they don't pay too much anyway. Loans? They had twenty offers a day in the mailboxes.

That's the inherent strength of the middle classes - they don't have any significant self interest in politics. Poor need money and upper classes need to protect their turf. Middle classes are detached, they have more objective views.

The Thai middle class is as avaricious and venal as they come and you know that. Cars aren't cheap. Uni for the kids costs money. We hear about the debt load of the poor- what about the debt load of the middle class?

When I mentioned financial self-interest- I am paraphrasing what the co-ordinator of the PAD said- that the middle class felt that their financial position was hurt or at least threatened by the TRT- of course- somebody has to pay for those 'populist' programs- if it was really a point of principle, they would have taken to Sanam Luang when they should have- after the Const Court cleared Thaksin for concealment of assets- or after the drug wars- but they didn't- not until they realized that Thaksin's focus was on improving the lot of the great unwashed.

Someday, it may finally be understood that the tipping point was not the assets concealment. It was not the idiotic hair brained approach to the South. The tipping point was Roi Et. The resentment had been simmering, but with Roi Et, Thaksin declared his consituency- and that was the last straw.

Edited April 19, 2007 by blaze

[Plus]

There were people who said that middle classes didn't get as much from Thaksin as other groups - poor and super rich, but it is insignificant issue, IMO. To say that they were angered by Thaksin improving the lot of the great unwashed is too far fetched.

Tirayuth Boonme predicted middle class uprising early in 2005 and I thought - <deleted>, middle classes have no political consciousness anymore, they won't protest against Thaksin. Yet it happened, and on exactly the same grounds Tirayuth predicted - anger at runaway corruption.

Roi Et was a stupid reality show, Thaksin's ways of solving problems were laughable - give money and order government officials to say "yes sir". It failed spectacularly. Middle classes saw it for what it was - communist style presentation of a dear leader bonding with happy people, just for show. Yes, it inspired some, maybe even many, just like any communist propaganda, but the sceptics were absolutely convinced that Thaksin is out there to rip off people, not help them. I was myself curious as to how Thaksin would play it out, maybe he WAS for real. Nah, didn't work at all.

[blaze]

There were people who said that middle classes didn't get as much from Thaksin as other groups - poor and super rich, but it is insignificant issue, IMO. To say that they were angered by Thaksin improving the lot of the great unwashed is too far fetched.

Tirayuth Boonme predicted middle class uprising early in 2005 and I thought - <deleted>, middle classes have no political consciousness anymore, they won't protest against Thaksin. Yet it happened, and on exactly the same grounds Tirayuth predicted - anger at runaway corruption.

Roi Et was a stupid reality show, Thaksin's ways of solving problems were laughable - give money and order government officials to say "yes sir". It failed spectacularly. Middle classes saw it for what it was - communist style presentation of a dear leader bonding with happy people, just for show. Yes, it inspired some, maybe even many, just like any communist propaganda, but the sceptics were absolutely convinced that Thaksin is out there to rip off people, not help them. I was myself curious as to how Thaksin would play it out, maybe he WAS for real. Nah, didn't work at all.

Again, the source of the statement about middle class resentment because they weren't invited to the dinner is none other than the co-ordinator of the PAD. (Probably one of the more impolitic statements ever made. ).

Totally agree about Roi Et. But had he performed a similar function with parents lining up to learn how to buy an SUV with nothing down or how to use a particular tax loophole to their advantage or learning how to put a second mortgage on a house they can't afford in the first place - would it have been so scorned? (Ok- the poor would have resented it).

[Plus]

Thaksin's solutions would have been "Here's 20k for the set of new wheels for your Fortuner" and "Henchman Watsyoname, extend the free loan to this family for another ten years".

It obviously won't work. I thing his stategy was "we can't fool all the people all the time, only some, and they are the ones we need to concentrate on". Some people NEED to believe in saviours on white horses, Thaksin became one for them.

Re. PAD demonstrators motives - why do you give so much importance to that statement? It doesn't collaborate with other sources and facts.

If financial self interest was so important, why none of the hundreds of speakers at the rallies talked about it?

At most they mentioned that populist policies are funded by middle class tax payers, but it isn't even true - middle classes don't contribute much in taxes, most are on 10% rate or less.

I do not deny that statement, I simply doubt it's overarching validity - that PAD rallies were driven by financial self interests. That is some kind of Freudian subconsciousness as in public it appeared directly opposite.

Can you find an exact quote to have a closer look?

[John K]

State of emergency still possible: Sonthi

Council for National Security (CNS) chief General Sonthi Boonyaratglin Thursday did not rule out ordering a state of emergency if politics turns turbulent this month and next.

"April and May will be a political turning point because the public will see concrete results from our four main policies," he said.

Sonthi said corruption cases under Assets Examination Committee and the National Counter Corruption Commission investigation would be wrapped up.

There will be an Election Tribunal decision in cases of electoral fraud, too.

Some political groups will protest decisions in these cases and try to discredit the government and erode confidence in the CNS, he said.

"Their goal is to create political unrest and claim the government and the CNS have failed to run the country."

He added the government must keep a "watchful eye" on the political temperature this month and next. "The government will have to impose a state of emergency if the situation forces it."

He predicted politics would cool after May. Sonthi argued the country's economy was strong and said exports rose over the past quarter and imports continued to drop.

He said the country was witnessing a slower growth rate "because every one is aware of the sufficiency economy".

"Every one should feel at ease [about the economy]. People have money but they aren't spending it. This makes it look as if the economy is contracting. But it is not. Every one is exercising the sufficiency philosophy," he said.

The Nation

[hammered]

Financial self interest? I don't think so. Even Sondhi didn't get his payoff after the coup. PAD did it for the higher principles.

Or you could see it another way - middle management discontent with upper management screwing the company. You could try to buy them off, but even Thaksin had no idea how. What could he offer middle classes they can't get themselves? Tax breaks - they don't pay too much anyway. Loans? They had twenty offers a day in the mailboxes.

That's the inherent strength of the middle classes - they don't have any significant self interest in politics. Poor need money and upper classes need to protect their turf. Middle classes are detached, they have more objective views.

The Thai middle class is as avaricious and venal as they come and you know that. Cars aren't cheap. Uni for the kids costs money. We hear about the debt load of the poor- what about the debt load of the middle class?

When I mentioned financial self-interest- I am paraphrasing what the co-ordinator of the PAD said- that the middle class felt that their financial position was hurt or at least threatened by the TRT- of course- somebody has to pay for those 'populist' programs- if it was really a point of principle, they would have taken to Sanam Luang when they should have- after the Const Court cleared Thaksin for concealment of assets- or after the drug wars- but they didn't- not until they realized that Thaksin's focus was on improving the lot of the great unwashed.

Someday, it may finally be understood that the tipping point was not the assets concealment. It was not the idiotic hair brained approach to the South. The tipping point was Roi Et. The resentment had been simmering, but with Roi Et, Thaksin declared his consituency- and that was the last straw.

Something that gets missed a lot is that someone has to pay for populist programs. That means tax. The middle class are the most taxed group in Thailand. The poor pay little to no tax beyond VAT. The rich use connections to avoid tax or use loopholes. This leaves the burden of taxation on the middle class who are not the richest class. The middle clases turned against Mr. T on mass when it came out he was not paying tax on huge deals. Whether this was legal or not was not the point. The point was that the head of the government was launching taxation based policies en masse and yet was seen as not being willing to even contribute himself.

Of course there is spin. The TRT spin is the Bangkok middle classes hate the Isaan and stop nice TRT from delivering projects and cash and making more of farmers land available as collateral. If Mr. T and his friends had been paying a little more in tax and not been changing laws to avoid it they may have found a lot less opposition in the middle classes. Sorry up to now I have fallen into the common trap of referring to them as ther Bangkok middle classes when actually they are spread around the country. The Bangkok spin is that we opposed Mr. T becasue of some ethical reason. Probably the only peoople opposing Mr.T on ethical grounds were the members of the poor communities that turned out against him on the rallies. Interestigly neither Mr. T nor his opponents tried to blame the elite group from which they and a lot of their allies hail.

To try and turn the whole thing into a battle between the "poor" of the Isaan and North against the Bangkok middle classes and the Southerners (and by the way some of the southern fishing communities are amongst the poorest in all of Thailand is simplistic and wrong and just pandering to spin that actually amazingly comes from both sides. For a start there are also a central and eastern region that have a very large proportion of the country's population. Then in Bangkok and to a lot lesser extent the south it is possible to find Mr. T admirers. In the north and I believe to a lesser degree the Isaan it is possible to find Mr. T detractors. Even in the annulled election with unofficial figures it seems in one northern province the no vote exceeded the TRT vote and in many others it was closer than TRT wanted although I add the proviso that no official numbers were ever released. In the last set of BKK local elections TRT still polled reasonably well.

[sriracha john]

PTV bosses apply to use Sanam Luang next Friday

Representatives from banned PTV yesterday sought permission from city authorities to use Sanam Luang for a fourth public rally next Friday.

PTV manager Aree Krainara submitted the request to Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) spokesman Chanin Roongsaeng.

Aree said the PTV rally would focus on the draft constitution and he hoped more people would attend. Previous PTV rallies at Sanam Luang attracted only a few thousand.

Chanin said the permanent secretary of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration was authorised to permit the use of public places like Sanam Luang, but the authority needed to ascertain if the assembly was lawful and publicly beneficial.

Bangkok Governor Apirak Kosayodhin said the city would make sure the rally followed the law.

"The assembly must comply with the law and the debate should not involve a third party," he said.

- The Nation

[blaze]

Financial self interest? I don't think so. Even Sondhi didn't get his payoff after the coup. PAD did it for the higher principles.

Or you could see it another way - middle management discontent with upper management screwing the company. You could try to buy them off, but even Thaksin had no idea how. What could he offer middle classes they can't get themselves? Tax breaks - they don't pay too much anyway. Loans? They had twenty offers a day in the mailboxes.

That's the inherent strength of the middle classes - they don't have any significant self interest in politics. Poor need money and upper classes need to protect their turf. Middle classes are detached, they have more objective views.

The Thai middle class is as avaricious and venal as they come and you know that. Cars aren't cheap. Uni for the kids costs money. We hear about the debt load of the poor- what about the debt load of the middle class?

When I mentioned financial self-interest- I am paraphrasing what the co-ordinator of the PAD said- that the middle class felt that their financial position was hurt or at least threatened by the TRT- of course- somebody has to pay for those 'populist' programs- if it was really a point of principle, they would have taken to Sanam Luang when they should have- after the Const Court cleared Thaksin for concealment of assets- or after the drug wars- but they didn't- not until they realized that Thaksin's focus was on improving the lot of the great unwashed.

Someday, it may finally be understood that the tipping point was not the assets concealment. It was not the idiotic hair brained approach to the South. The tipping point was Roi Et. The resentment had been simmering, but with Roi Et, Thaksin declared his consituency- and that was the last straw.

Something that gets missed a lot is that someone has to pay for populist programs. That means tax. The middle class are the most taxed group in Thailand. The poor pay little to no tax beyond VAT. The rich use connections to avoid tax or use loopholes. This leaves the burden of taxation on the middle class who are not the richest class. The middle clases turned against Mr. T on mass when it came out he was not paying tax on huge deals. Whether this was legal or not was not the point. The point was that the head of the government was launching taxation based policies en masse and yet was seen as not being willing to even contribute himself.

Of course there is spin. The TRT spin is the Bangkok middle classes hate the Isaan and stop nice TRT from delivering projects and cash and making more of farmers land available as collateral. If Mr. T and his friends had been paying a little more in tax and not been changing laws to avoid it they may have found a lot less opposition in the middle classes. Sorry up to now I have fallen into the common trap of referring to them as ther Bangkok middle classes when actually they are spread around the country. The Bangkok spin is that we opposed Mr. T becasue of some ethical reason. Probably the only peoople opposing Mr.T on ethical grounds were the members of the poor communities that turned out against him on the rallies. Interestigly neither Mr. T nor his opponents tried to blame the elite group from which they and a lot of their allies hail.

To try and turn the whole thing into a battle between the "poor" of the Isaan and North against the Bangkok middle classes and the Southerners (and by the way some of the southern fishing communities are amongst the poorest in all of Thailand is simplistic and wrong and just pandering to spin that actually amazingly comes from both sides. For a start there are also a central and eastern region that have a very large proportion of the country's population. Then in Bangkok and to a lot lesser extent the south it is possible to find Mr. T admirers. In the north and I believe to a lesser degree the Isaan it is possible to find Mr. T detractors. Even in the annulled election with unofficial figures it seems in one northern province the no vote exceeded the TRT vote and in many others it was closer than TRT wanted although I add the proviso that no official numbers were ever released. In the last set of BKK local elections TRT still polled reasonably well.

I think we are saying pretty much the same thing. The enthusiam of the middle class for the PAD was fostered by its feelings of having to foot the bill for a range of programs it neither understood nor cared about. And I'm sure you too have heard the complaints that if Thaksin wanted to help the poor, why didn't he help them out of his own pocket. (implying: not MY pocket- we hear this in the west too when polititians pledge public (read middle class) tax money for public- (read anti-poverty) programs.

How then do you explain the hostility of the third group- the old elites- represented by the coffe-klatch old blue hair/blood khunyings that Thaksin failed so miserably to appease? And by those like Saprong with strong ties to the old aristocracy?

As you suggest- in Thailand- as in many countries- the very rich don't pay taxes. (remember that Helmsley woman? "Only the poor pay taxes" she scoffed). Was it the classic tension between old money and new money?

If he had the support of the blue bloods- could he have 'pulled it off?'. So many questions- was the hostility of the army really due to his shake up of the upper ranks? What is the relationship of the army to the old elites?

Did they see in the coup a hope for ridding their beloved Kingdom of that messy little bugbear called democracy, once and for all, thus securing their positions of power and priviledge? I honestly don't know- and appreciate your views.

[John K]

Well that leaves out PTV / TRT they have a bit of a rough time with following the law. I guess we can wait for the arrogance flair up again.

[Jai Dee]

CNS to join Cabinet meeting to clarify security situation

The Royal Thai Army Commander-in-Chief and Council for National Security (CNS) Chairman, Gen. Sonthi Boonyaratglin, will join the next Cabinet meeting to explain the actual security situation of Thailand to the Cabinet members.

Gen. Sonthi says he had a talk with Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on the meeting between the Cabinet and CNS members. He says the meeting will not be a regular Cabinet meeting since the topics of discussion will be related to national security, not national administration.

Gen. Sonthi says the CNS will inform the security situation of the country to the security-related ministers at the meeting. He says the joint meeting between the CNS and the Cabinet does not imply that the CNS will interfere with the government’s work.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

Members of the anti-coup September 19 Group eat a cake during a protest against the new constitution outside Parliament yesterday, to satirise what they describe as benefit-sharing among groups standing to gain from the current political structure.

Source: The Nation - 20 April 2007

[hammered]

Financial self interest? I don't think so. Even Sondhi didn't get his payoff after the coup. PAD did it for the higher principles.

Or you could see it another way - middle management discontent with upper management screwing the company. You could try to buy them off, but even Thaksin had no idea how. What could he offer middle classes they can't get themselves? Tax breaks - they don't pay too much anyway. Loans? They had twenty offers a day in the mailboxes.

That's the inherent strength of the middle classes - they don't have any significant self interest in politics. Poor need money and upper classes need to protect their turf. Middle classes are detached, they have more objective views.

The Thai middle class is as avaricious and venal as they come and you know that. Cars aren't cheap. Uni for the kids costs money. We hear about the debt load of the poor- what about the debt load of the middle class?

When I mentioned financial self-interest- I am paraphrasing what the co-ordinator of the PAD said- that the middle class felt that their financial position was hurt or at least threatened by the TRT- of course- somebody has to pay for those 'populist' programs- if it was really a point of principle, they would have taken to Sanam Luang when they should have- after the Const Court cleared Thaksin for concealment of assets- or after the drug wars- but they didn't- not until they realized that Thaksin's focus was on improving the lot of the great unwashed.

Someday, it may finally be understood that the tipping point was not the assets concealment. It was not the idiotic hair brained approach to the South. The tipping point was Roi Et. The resentment had been simmering, but with Roi Et, Thaksin declared his consituency- and that was the last straw.

Something that gets missed a lot is that someone has to pay for populist programs. That means tax. The middle class are the most taxed group in Thailand. The poor pay little to no tax beyond VAT. The rich use connections to avoid tax or use loopholes. This leaves the burden of taxation on the middle class who are not the richest class. The middle clases turned against Mr. T on mass when it came out he was not paying tax on huge deals. Whether this was legal or not was not the point. The point was that the head of the government was launching taxation based policies en masse and yet was seen as not being willing to even contribute himself.

Of course there is spin. The TRT spin is the Bangkok middle classes hate the Isaan and stop nice TRT from delivering projects and cash and making more of farmers land available as collateral. If Mr. T and his friends had been paying a little more in tax and not been changing laws to avoid it they may have found a lot less opposition in the middle classes. Sorry up to now I have fallen into the common trap of referring to them as ther Bangkok middle classes when actually they are spread around the country. The Bangkok spin is that we opposed Mr. T becasue of some ethical reason. Probably the only peoople opposing Mr.T on ethical grounds were the members of the poor communities that turned out against him on the rallies. Interestigly neither Mr. T nor his opponents tried to blame the elite group from which they and a lot of their allies hail.

To try and turn the whole thing into a battle between the "poor" of the Isaan and North against the Bangkok middle classes and the Southerners (and by the way some of the southern fishing communities are amongst the poorest in all of Thailand is simplistic and wrong and just pandering to spin that actually amazingly comes from both sides. For a start there are also a central and eastern region that have a very large proportion of the country's population. Then in Bangkok and to a lot lesser extent the south it is possible to find Mr. T admirers. In the north and I believe to a lesser degree the Isaan it is possible to find Mr. T detractors. Even in the annulled election with unofficial figures it seems in one northern province the no vote exceeded the TRT vote and in many others it was closer than TRT wanted although I add the proviso that no official numbers were ever released. In the last set of BKK local elections TRT still polled reasonably well.

I think we are saying pretty much the same thing. The enthusiam of the middle class for the PAD was fostered by its feelings of having to foot the bill for a range of programs it neither understood nor cared about. And I'm sure you too have heard the complaints that if Thaksin wanted to help the poor, why didn't he help them out of his own pocket. (implying: not MY pocket- we hear this in the west too when polititians pledge public (read middle class) tax money for public- (read anti-poverty) programs.

How then do you explain the hostility of the third group- the old elites- represented by the coffe-klatch old blue hair/blood khunyings that Thaksin failed so miserably to appease? And by those like Saprong with strong ties to the old aristocracy?

As you suggest- in Thailand- as in many countries- the very rich don't pay taxes. (remember that Helmsley woman? "Only the poor pay taxes" she scoffed). Was it the classic tension between old money and new money?

If he had the support of the blue bloods- could he have 'pulled it off?'. So many questions- was the hostility of the army really due to his shake up of the upper ranks? What is the relationship of the army to the old elites?

Did they see in the coup a hope for ridding their beloved Kingdom of that messy little bugbear called democracy, once and for all, thus securing their positions of power and priviledge? I honestly don't know- and appreciate your views.

I dont really see it as a struggle about democracy or the lack of it or at least between Mr. T and the other side. That I see as more a struggle for who will control the limited form of democracy they will respectively allow. Nobody on these sides really wants to empower the masses from whatever region or even the middle classes for that matter.

At one point Mr. T had th support of the blue bloods I would guess but at some point lost it. Looking at TRT shows quite a lot of change of who was in and who was out over time. Maybe it was all as simple as it became too filled with the powerful to keep them all happy.

Then we are left with subjects we cannot discuss but which link to the questions you ask. There are still big issues outside of constiutions and governments. Funnily enough Chamlong may have been quite incisive with his comment that there will inevitably be more coups until true reform in Thailand has taken place. However, what Chamlong meant by reform may not be the shape reform actually comes in.

Oh I missed the Gen. Saprang question. It may just be that he comes over as a strong can do leader in a field without this right now. He has already established some links with the rural poor and has built on his network of links in the Northern region from the time he commanded the army there. Recent reports have him eevn linked to Yuth and his large powerful family. I dont much about where he is going but a strong leader with the right links can easily rise at a time of crisis. In some ways Saprang surprisingly has a bit of Mr. T in him - a straight talker who doesnt care what others think, a certain arrogance, and even populism. This could be quite dangerous imho

Edited April 20, 2007 by hammered

[Jai Dee]

PAD wants Cabinet to be proactive in solving problems of public organizations

Mr. Suriyasai Katasila, the Secretary-General of the Popular Campaign for Democracy, praises the Cabinet for listening to the ideas of various organizations from the public sector, and not only from the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD). However, he advises the Cabinet to seek more channels and opportunities to acknowledge the problems of public organizations because they have different demands.

Mr. Suriyasai says the PAD disagrees with the plan for representatives of public organizations to attend the Cabinet meeting because it would be inappropriate, and people may consider that the PAD has an influence on the government and the Council for National Security (CNS).

He says the PAD is only a social activist group, and the PAD leaders have always been giving direct and sincere suggestions to the government and public members. He says the PAD is always ready to have a discussion with the government for the benefits of the society. However, he remarks that actions need to be implemented as well.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 April 2007

[Jai Dee]

BMA needs time to consider PTV's request to hold its rally at Sanam Luang

The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) needs time to consider on whether it should allow PTV to use Sanam Luang for holding its rally or not.

Deputy Governor of Bangkok Wanlop Suwandee (วัลลภ สุวรรณดี) says BMA is considering details following PTV’s request to use Sanam Luang. However, he reminds BMA does not want to see any activity intended to cause conflicts to the country. He says it is necessary that BMA must acknowledge the purpose of the rally.

As for security measures, Mr. Wanlop says BMA has worked with Metropolitan Police and the first Army force to ensure security for people.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 April 2007

[Mid]

"April and May will be a political turning point because the public will see concrete results from our four main policies," he said.

and that's revealing a pretty picture , ...................... NOT

[Mid]

PAD wants Cabinet to be proactive in solving problems of public organizations

proactive

now theres a word they could use A LOT more ................

formatting edit

Edited April 20, 2007 by Mid

[hammered]

"April and May will be a political turning point because the public will see concrete results from our four main policies," he said.

and that's revealing a pretty picture , ...................... NOT

Phatra securities has an analysis that seems to agree:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/Business/20Apr2007_biz45.php

Phatra securities accurately assessed the political picture and were the first to warn investors that the Thaksin government would fall several months before it happened. It is probably worth keeping an eye on how this organization continues to asess government survivability etc as their track record is pretty good eevn if their reports remain a little low profile.

[Plus]

Just a bit on the taxes

Middle classes do not pay much, like I said not more that 10%. Personal tax is insignificant in Thailand anyway. Most tax is VAT, which is 7% flat, rich or poor, then come corporate taxes, then excise taxes on cars and alcohol and the likes.

I don't think personal taxes matter to middle classes at all. I don't think that the "we pay the tax, Thaksin spends it" argument made any sense at all.

Also PAD rallies didn't have car parks, you had to take public transport and walk if you wanted to attend. It's wrong to assume that PAD attracted SUV crowd. You could say they were better off than the farmers, but there were certainly not the "enjoing the good life" crowd, just urban people trying to make honest living.

Yes, they'd love to have underground trains, but their OWN plight didn't feature at all at their rallies. They rallied about selfless matters, they basically told Thaksin that he didn't own the country, that they represented the people.

To counter that Thaksin has organised rallies in his support. He claimed that they represented the people too, but it was only as long as he paid for all expenses and made sure no one gave a wrong interview to the media. 15 millions votes represented the people as well, as long as we ignore the canvassers, the PR, the friendly EC, and gullibility of poor farmers.

I just read about one episode from Ramayana. Rama, his wide Sita, and his brother Laksman were exiled and lived in the forest. One day they went hunting and Lakshman drew a protective circle around their dwelling and instructed Sita not to venture outside and not let anyone inside the circle. The Demon Ravana came and disguised himself as a sadhu - a monk. He sweettalked Sita to let him in and so he cheated the wife of God himself. The rest is history, Ravana kidnapped Sita and Rama went to Sri Lanka to save her. Similarly Thaksin dressed as a poor people's champion to gain their trust and to take advantage of them.

Yet some say it's politically incorrect to say that poor people can be cheated and if they didn't see through Thaksin's game, there was no game at all. <deleted>, they were taken for a ride, everybode can fall a victim to a clever ploy.

[Old Man River]

Also PAD rallies didn't have car parks, you had to take public transport and walk if you wanted to attend. It's wrong to assume that PAD attracted SUV crowd. You could say they were better off than the farmers, but there were certainly not the "enjoing the good life" crowd, just urban people trying to make honest living.

They rallied about selfless matters, they basically told Thaksin that he didn't own the country, that they represented the people.

Best to not generalize on the makeup of the people at the PAD rallies. The demonstrations were about selfless matters, by selfless people. I personally am aware of several of those selfless people who enjoy the good life (with SUV's, BM's, Benz's and more) who were marching in the general audience (i.e. not on stage). Some had been been community leaders several years ago and now held positions of high responsibility, but they totally disagreed with the direction Thaksin was taking. They came with their families and friends and their friend's families etc. The makeup of the PAD's demonstrations were good people who were concerned, regardless of socio economic status. You would be absolutely floored if you realized who some of those people were who demonstrated. They dressed so that they would not be recognized as they were present to represent themselves not their positions.