Anti-thaksin Camp Vows To Launch Counter-campaign

[seonai]

The PAD support the anti Thaksin policies and plans for a better Thailand and I totally support them as opposed to the TRT supporters. Unfortuanately the Thai public, (as with the British public) are uneducated about voting so we can't expect a clear vote...

[younghusband]

In PAD terms "the people" does not mean khon tamaddah. It means the "feudal elite" and refers to their self-interests.

What <deleted>!

Have you seen the people at PAD rallies? I put some pictures on this board myself but Asdo, I think, posted hundreds of them.

"Feudal elites" squatting on a hundred baht plastic mats in the sun for hours.

There was MASSIVE support for PAD all across the political board, including the ever elusive elites. Uncle Prachai donated quite a bit, too, I guess. That doesn't make him, or anyone else, the owner of the movement. They just jump on "me too" bandwagon.

The real ownership lies with the people, not any particular group or individuals. No one, including Sondhi or other nominal leaders, has any power in PAD unless it's supported by the public at large. They can start rallies, sure, but no one will come just to listen to them. People are moved by their internal motivation to "do the right thing for the country", not by public speeches. That's why I don't think PAD leaders will get anywhere at the moment. There's no public support for protests yet.

I hope it doesn't offend you but this is a very sensible post with which I (almost) fully agree.There has to be a sense in which any political movement catches the spirit of the time. and this is not the moment for a PAD revival for a wide variety of reasons which most intelligent people would be able to deduce very easily.Bismarck. the great German statesman, said that genius was like hearing the distant hooves of the horse of history, and catching the stirrups as the horse galloped by.To an extent Sondhi and co did catch that moment before the coup, but the conditions simply don't exist now not least because there is no "big issue".Doesn't mean by the way that informed decent middle class opinion shouldn't watch Samak like a hawk and speak up when he crosses the line (though I frankly find it hard to get worked up at transfers of officials who were too eager to embrace the coup makers).

[chownah]

It could be that history repeats itself - 2006 was 1973's triumph of democracy, now comes 1976. Samak and Chalerm are in place and country folks are ready to come to Bangkok to confront the middle classes in the name of their saviour.

While this might seem like an appropriate analogy when viewed superficially, I think that it is better to take a deeper look at what the political climate was like in 1976.

Laos in 1976 had a communist gov't created by the Pathet Lao who worked in opposition to the US and its influence to gain control of the gov't in 1975.

Cambodia in 1976 had a communist gov't called the Khmer Rouge which was running amok and slaughtering countless of hundreds of thousands of its own citizens and foreigners living there too (specifically Vietnamese but other too I think).

Vietnam in July of 1976 saw the collapse of the gov't of the South and its consolidation with the communist gov't of the north as a result of the defeat of US forces and their evacuation of the country.

So.....Thailand 1976.....the communist party was gaining popularity...fighting between communists and gov't forces was happening in isolated rural places.....within the last year it saw its two neighbors to the east defeat the US and install communist governments (and in the case of Cambodia a particularly nasty one) and in early 1976 (April I think) their major/only ally (the US) in thwarting the spread of what was seen as imperialistic communism (probably a good evaluation at the time) lost its long struggle to thwart the spread of communism in South Vietnam and completely withdraw from the arena...

I dare say that the idea that a communist insurgency might wash over the country and obliterate Thai society was not considered to be extreme at the time...infact it was a real threat.......in October the students who were seen (and probably rightly so) as left wing communist sympathizers or actually communists....were massacred...and thier leaders exiled.

Now....compare this to what is happening today.....a bunch of rich Thai politicos are fighting over gov't funds and power.......hardly seems like the situation in 1976 is analgous today... does it?

Chownah

P.S. I want to be very very very clear that I am in no way tring to make excuses for what was a travesty to humanity....what happened was a cold blooded massacre of human beings who were exercising their inate rights....there is no excuse for what happend....I'm only trying to help people understand how it came about and that really the situation then is not so similar to what is happening now.

Chownah

Edited March 6, 2008 by chownah

[Prakanong]

The PAD support the anti Thaksin policies and plans for a better Thailand and I totally support them as opposed to the TRT supporters. Unfortuanately the Thai public, (as with the British public) are uneducated about voting so we can't expect a clear vote...

So the poor ignorant general public are all wrong and voting for the wrong reasons.

OK - lets go that route. How educated should you be - lets take it to the extreme and say you should have a political science undergrad degree (from at least on of the old Uni's) at least to participate and vote in politics - I get my vote

That is quite an arrogant attitude - in the UK cae I suppose its the Labour Govt you do not like as people vote for other than what you want?

Its a very peurile and naive political argument.

Edited March 6, 2008 by Prakanong

[Insight]

From the impression I get amongst the people I know, nobody wants proverbially "rock the boat" by taking to streets just yet. Any sign that Thaksin will walk away scott-free, however, will be met with anger that really hasn't cooled since he was last outed.

Predicting PAD do not have support based on the apathy of the anti-Thaksin crowd is misguided.

[Plus]

There's a sentiment against meddling with judicial process, and from that point of view Samak's transfers look exactly like an attempt at whitewash. Still, not many people are concerned with Thaksin getting his money back. That issue alone won't be able to mobilise wide support.

Protests will start only when it appears more like a power grab attempt rather than defensive strategy.

I also think Taksin has washed his hands off politics, at least in the medium term, I think he used PPP not to govern the country but to protect himself. Once that is achieved Samak will be no his own and Thaksin wno't sponsor the next elections.

I might be wrong, though. The alternative will be disastrous for the country.

[Prakanong]

It could be that history repeats itself - 2006 was 1973's triumph of democracy, now comes 1976. Samak and Chalerm are in place and country folks are ready to come to Bangkok to confront the middle classes in the name of their saviour.

While this might seem like an appropriate analogy when viewed superficially, I think that it is better to take a deeper look at what the political climate was like in 1976.

Laos in 1976 had a communist gov't created by the Pathet Lao who worked in opposition to the US and its influence to gain control of the gov't in 1975.

Cambodia in 1976 had a communist gov't called the Khmer Rouge which was running amok and slaughtering countless of hundreds of thousands of its own citizens and foreigners living there too (specifically Vietnamese but other too I think).

Vietnam in July of 1976 saw the collapse of the gov't of the South and its consolidation with the communist gov't of the north as a result of the defeat of US forces and their evacuation of the country.

So.....Thailand 1976.....the communist party was gaining popularity...fighting between communists and gov't forces was happening in isolated rural places.....within the last year it saw its two neighbors to the east defeat the US and install communist governments (and in the case of Cambodia a particularly nasty one) and in early 1976 (April I think) their major/only ally (the US) in thwarting the spread of what was seen as imperialistic communism (probably a good evaluation at the time) lost its long struggle to thwart the spread of communism in South Vietnam and completely withdraw from the arena...

I dare say that the idea that a communist insurgency might wash over the country and obliterate Thai society was not considered to be extreme at the time...infact it was a real threat.......in October the students who were seen (and probably rightly so) as left wing communist sympathizers or actually communists....were massacred...and thier leaders exiled.

Now....compare this to what is happening today.....a bunch of rich Thai politicos are fighting over gov't funds and power.......hardly seems like the situation in 1976 is analgous today... does it?

Chownah

P.S. I want to be very very very clear that I am in no way tring to make excuses for what was a travesty to humanity....what happened was a cold blooded massacre of human beings who were exercising their inate rights....there is no excuse for what happend....I'm only trying to help people understand how it came about and that really the situation then is not so similar to what is happening now.

Chownah

The analogy he made just does not stand - 2006 a truimph for democracy - by the barrel of a tank?

Anyway a couple of minor points

Vietnam in the south fell in April 1975 - about a week after the KR took power in Cambodia.

And you are correct in 1976 there was a great fear of communism in the country. The Monarchy in Laos had just been overthrown the previous year I think it was. The USA had abandoned SE Asia after having its arse kicked in Vietnam - the Thai's probably still believed the domino theory.

Then let us not forget the vested interests some of whom we can discuss and others not. The military and others who benefitted from the troubles in vietnam through US support would use anything to cling to power and keep their faces in the trough.

The CPT of Thailand was attracting support and the army could not defeat it in its stronghold - it was joined by many who were not communists who had to flee also.

A number of those "From the forest" were with Thaksin were they not when he was first elected - maybe they thought that was the flowering of Democracy after wht they had been through in the 70's.

[Plus]

It could be that history repeats itself - 2006 was 1973's triumph of democracy, now comes 1976. Samak and Chalerm are in place and country folks are ready to come to Bangkok to confront the middle classes in the name of their saviour.

While this might seem like an appropriate analogy when viewed superficially, I think that it is better to take a deeper look at what the political climate was like in 1976.

Yeah, if you want to destroy the beauty of comparison with thousands of distracting details.

1976 saw not only crashing of allegedly pro-communist students but a general reverse of democratic trends started three years earlier. Thaksin was ousted after popular uprising in 2006, sneaks back in 2008. Don't forget that main thrust of student demonstration was the return of Thanom, too.

PAD will take to the streets to protest against Thaksin, while upcoutry folks will be fighting the ideological battles. In 1976 it was protecting royalty from communism, now it's protecting democracy from coup loving Bangkokians.

[Plus]

2006 a truimph for democracy - by the barrel of a tank?

Or you could say it was when Thaskin promised not to take PMship after the trip to Hua Hin. He even left the country, just like Thanom and co (they resigned on advice of the King), PAD went quiet, but then Thaksin returned and resumed life as normal as nothing had happened. That's when the coup came in.

[Prakanong]

2006 a truimph for democracy - by the barrel of a tank?

Or you could say it was when Thaskin promised not to take PMship after the trip to Hua Hin. He even left the country, just like Thanom and co (they resigned on advice of the King), PAD went quiet, but then Thaksin returned and resumed life as normal as nothing had happened. That's when the coup came in.

I think its a pretty weak case to compare 2006 with 1976, PAD with the Students and Thaksin with Thanom - just my opinion.

[Plus]

I think its a pretty weak case to compare 2006 with 1976, PAD with the Students and Thaksin with Thanom - just my opinion.

Why? Both 1973 and 2006 popular uprising was led by middle classes and educated people. Both Thaskin and Thanom ruled the country like a personal fiefdom.

[chownah]

Anyway a couple of minor points

Vietnam in the south fell in April 1975 - about a week after the KR took power in Cambodia.

Thanks for the correction.

Chownah

[Prakanong]

Anyway a couple of minor points

Vietnam in the south fell in April 1975 - about a week after the KR took power in Cambodia.

Thanks for the correction.

Chownah

Miss Saigon is my favourite musical ;-)

Back on subject - I really wish there was more to read about Thailand in this era but there are gaps in the history etc through choice of the Thai's that will probably never see the light of day.

I do hope there is more published about the current era though and the recent conference at Thammasat recently might be a watershed.

[chownah]

Anyway a couple of minor points

Vietnam in the south fell in April 1975 - about a week after the KR took power in Cambodia.

Thanks for the correction.

Chownah

Miss Saigon is my favourite musical ;-)

Back on subject - I really wish there was more to read about Thailand in this era but there are gaps in the history etc through choice of the Thai's that will probably never see the light of day.

I do hope there is more published about the current era though and the recent conference at Thammasat recently might be a watershed.

Do you mean that Samak's ridiculous comments on the number of victims might have actually been a catalyst for bringing more information to light about the massacre?...I mused once before that maybe he knew full well how controversial his comments would be and it was an attempt to focus attention on just exactly what did happen and who all was involved in that he figured that it would benefit him by having a tendency to clear his name of direct involvement........could this have been his intent?....should we thank Samak for focusing the nation on this dark chapter of Thai history?....inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

[Prakanong]

I do not think Samak had or has any intention of wanting anything about 1976 surfacing.

He is a right wing royalist after all and that is the main reason he was chosen as the proxy.

[traveller5000]

Do you mean that Samak's ridiculous comments on the number of victims might have actually been a catalyst for bringing more information to light about the massacre?...I mused once before that maybe he knew full well how controversial his comments would be and it was an attempt to focus attention on just exactly what did happen and who all was involved in that he figured that it would benefit him by having a tendency to clear his name of direct involvement........could this have been his intent?....should we thank Samak for focusing the nation on this dark chapter of Thai history?....inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

But at what expense to him? As you say it makes him look ridiculous. Or in my own words, it makes him look like a foolish, shameless, lying baboon. Samak doesn't strike me as the self-sacrificing type.

Nice try chownah, but your "theory " doesn't add up.

[chownah]

Do you mean that Samak's ridiculous comments on the number of victims might have actually been a catalyst for bringing more information to light about the massacre?...I mused once before that maybe he knew full well how controversial his comments would be and it was an attempt to focus attention on just exactly what did happen and who all was involved in that he figured that it would benefit him by having a tendency to clear his name of direct involvement........could this have been his intent?....should we thank Samak for focusing the nation on this dark chapter of Thai history?....inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

But at what expense to him? As you say it makes him look ridiculous. Or in my own words, it makes him look like a foolish, shameless, lying baboon. Samak doesn't strike me as the self-sacrificing type.

Nice try chownah, but your "theory " doesn't add up.

Well then....I don't see how Samak could have gotten to where he is today if he was JUST a foolish, shameless, lying baboon....seems like he would be smart enough to know that his comments would raise a furor....it seems pretty obvious to everyone else so I guess it would be obvious to him. What do you think his motive was?....fact is that it did focus attention on the massacre...again, this is not a surprise that it would do that....seems like he might have known that too.....so what IS the story?...inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

[traveller5000]

Do you mean that Samak's ridiculous comments on the number of victims might have actually been a catalyst for bringing more information to light about the massacre?...I mused once before that maybe he knew full well how controversial his comments would be and it was an attempt to focus attention on just exactly what did happen and who all was involved in that he figured that it would benefit him by having a tendency to clear his name of direct involvement........could this have been his intent?....should we thank Samak for focusing the nation on this dark chapter of Thai history?....inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

But at what expense to him? As you say it makes him look ridiculous. Or in my own words, it makes him look like a foolish, shameless, lying baboon. Samak doesn't strike me as the self-sacrificing type.

Nice try chownah, but your "theory " doesn't add up.

Well then....I don't see how Samak could have gotten to where he is today if he was JUST a foolish, shameless, lying baboon....seems like he would be smart enough to know that his comments would raise a furor....it seems pretty obvious to everyone else so I guess it would be obvious to him. What do you think his motive was?....fact is that it did focus attention on the massacre...again, this is not a surprise that it would do that....seems like he might have known that too.....so what IS the story?...inquiring minds want to know.

Chownah

It certainly wasn't intelligence that got him where he is today. It was simply because Thaksin backed him. And for that matter, if Thaksin had have backed a dog faced baboon to be the PM, a dog faced baboon would have probably received 35% of the votes, and would be jumping around the halls and swinging off the chandeliers of parliament house as we speak.

If I recall, a poll was done recently about preferred PM, and Samak got a very low percentage with Thaksin coming out on top.

As for his motive, you have asked this question once before in another thread and I have answered it (made a guess). At this time I don't know what his motive is.

[Tony Clifton]

There's a sentiment against meddling with judicial process, and from that point of view Samak's transfers look exactly like an attempt at whitewash. Still, not many people are concerned with Thaksin getting his money back. That issue alone won't be able to mobilise wide support.

Protests will start only when it appears more like a power grab attempt rather than defensive strategy.

I also think Taksin has washed his hands off politics, at least in the medium term, I think he used PPP not to govern the country but to protect himself. Once that is achieved Samak will be no his own and Thaksin wno't sponsor the next elections.

I might be wrong, though. The alternative will be disastrous for the country.

I think he has not washed his hands of politics at all. Look at how many meetings went on in China and Hong Kong with ex and present cabinet members, sometimes disguised under Thai Golf Association, more meetings in London, many but still not all not all exposed by the media. There were dozens and dozens of these meetings abroad while Thaksin was in exile.

The PPP and election victory was nothing but a master key to get back into the country. Now that he is back and that he has surrounded himself with a security team, I guarantee you that even if more arrests warrant were issued today, no one would dare approach him and his security team, not even the police, especially after he got the last police chief fired and installed a friendly one. He will not show up in court on March 12, someone else will and he will use his old method of delaying and delaying, buying more time until he is again in full control of the country and doing it very openly for everyone to see until all cases are somehow dropped. Even if the courts found him guilty and ordered his arrest and incarceration, no one would dare face his security team in order to arrest him as there would definitely be chaos.

The only people able to arrest Thaksin from now on are the army boys and that's called coup#2, and that's exactly why the coward has now surrounded himself with a security team. There will have to be bloodshed for him to let go of politics, it may even be his own once his security team is mowed down by military equipment.

Sounds crazy? No crazier than the extent of his hunger revenge, more power and control.

I don't call him the Little Emperor for nothing.

Edited March 6, 2008 by Tony Clifton

[younghusband]

The only people able to arrest Thaksin from now on are the army boys and that's called coup#2, and that's exactly why the coward has now surrounded himself with a security team. There will have to be bloodshed for him to let go of politics, it may even be his own once his security team is mowed down by military equipment.

Sounds crazy?

Since you ask, yes I am afraid you do.Barking mad in fact.

[jumnien]

I have to agree with Chownah. Samak's comment on the military killings of 1976 was a well-choreographed successful move to bring shame to the military and those who backed the coup while publicly appearing to support them. A lot of the anti-Thaksin forces bit at it and the military is hiding in the shadows.

[Prakanong]

The only people able to arrest Thaksin from now on are the army boys and that's called coup#2, and that's exactly why the coward has now surrounded himself with a security team. There will have to be bloodshed for him to let go of politics, it may even be his own once his security team is mowed down by military equipment.

Sounds crazy?

Since you ask, yes I am afraid you do.Barking mad in fact.

Rather paranoid I must say.

[Prakanong]

I have to agree with Chownah. Samak's comment on the military killings of 1976 was a well-choreographed successful move to bring shame to the military and those who backed the coup while publicly appearing to support them. A lot of the anti-Thaksin forces bit at it and the military is hiding in the shadows.

I really do not see Samak as that sophisticated.

Did he have previous knowledge of the questions to be asked?

[Tony Clifton]

The only people able to arrest Thaksin from now on are the army boys and that's called coup#2, and that's exactly why the coward has now surrounded himself with a security team. There will have to be bloodshed for him to let go of politics, it may even be his own once his security team is mowed down by military equipment.

Sounds crazy?

Since you ask, yes I am afraid you do.Barking mad in fact.

Rather paranoid I must say.

I still haven't surrounded myself with a security team.

[plachon]

I have to agree with Chownah. Samak's comment on the military killings of 1976 was a well-choreographed successful move to bring shame to the military and those who backed the coup while publicly appearing to support them. A lot of the anti-Thaksin forces bit at it and the military is hiding in the shadows.

I really do not see Samak as that sophisticated.

Did he have previous knowledge of the questions to be asked?

I would guess not. In fact, he seemed visibly taken aback that a young farang reporter, and a woman of all things (I'm sure it flashed through his evil mind to ask if she had sinful sex last night) should be asking him questions related to events that happened over 30 years ago. That's why he kept on asking her her age towards the end and wouldn't let the interview finished until he'd tried to extract an answer from her, which in his simple mind thought would clinch it that she could not possibly have any idea of what happened back then.

So, no, he was prepared to answer questions about the recent past and was probably hoping he could steer the interview round to his culinary skills and how his govt would soon be laying plans for bringing in 45 million tourists a year and how marvelous the LOS is, etc. He was not expecting any questions about 6 and 14 Oct; Black May or the Southern massacres, I'm sure. And he answered them in the only way he knows how - bareface lies - which is true to form for the guy. Chownah's "inquiring mind" would like to endow him with redeeming qualities that do not match his biography.

He's a boar, pure and simple.

[Prakanong]

"I still haven't surrounded myself with a security team. "

Well given the position Thaksin was once in ie PM and that there was a coup etc I think it is perfectly rational for him to have a secirity team.

As you should well know almost any puu yai in Thailand has bodyguards never mind the richest (or close to it).

Even in the likes of the UK an ex-PM has a security detail.

[chevykanteve]

There's a sentiment against meddling with judicial process, and from that point of view Samak's transfers look exactly like an attempt at whitewash. Still, not many people are concerned with Thaksin getting his money back. That issue alone won't be able to mobilise wide support.

Protests will start only when it appears more like a power grab attempt rather than defensive strategy.

I also think Taksin has washed his hands off politics, at least in the medium term, I think he used PPP not to govern the country but to protect himself. Once that is achieved Samak will be no his own and Thaksin wno't sponsor the next elections.

I might be wrong, though. The alternative will be disastrous for the country.

I think he has not washed his hands of politics at all. Look at how many meetings went on in China and Hong Kong with ex and present cabinet members, sometimes disguised under Thai Golf Association, more meetings in London, many but still not all not all exposed by the media. There were dozens and dozens of these meetings abroad while Thaksin was in exile.

The PPP and election victory was nothing but a master key to get back into the country. Now that he is back and that he has surrounded himself with a security team, I guarantee you that even if more arrests warrant were issued today, no one would dare approach him and his security team, not even the police, especially after he got the last police chief fired and installed a friendly one. He will not show up in court on March 12, someone else will and he will use his old method of delaying and delaying, buying more time until he is again in full control of the country and doing it very openly for everyone to see until all cases are somehow dropped. Even if the courts found him guilty and ordered his arrest and incarceration, no one would dare face his security team in order to arrest him as there would definitely be chaos.

The only people able to arrest Thaksin from now on are the army boys and that's called coup#2, and that's exactly why the coward has now surrounded himself with a security team. There will have to be bloodshed for him to let go of politics, it may even be his own once his security team is mowed down by military equipment.

Sounds crazy? No crazier than the extent of his hunger revenge, more power and control.

I don't call him the Little Emperor for nothing.

You wish to know if it sounds crazy? In a word, YES.

Edited March 6, 2008 by chevykanteve

[Tony Clifton]

"I still haven't surrounded myself with a security team. "

Well given the position Thaksin was once in ie PM and that there was a coup etc I think it is perfectly rational for him to have a secirity team.

As you should well know almost any puu yai in Thailand has bodyguards never mind the richest (or close to it).

Even in the likes of the UK an ex-PM has a security detail.

If it is rational for him to have a heavy security team, was it rational on arrival to bunker into a hotel full of innocent people when he owns property all over the country? Is it rational to strut around on golf courses if his life is really in danger? He's about to come out of hiding after the oopplah of his arrival has died down a bit.

How about arriving at the airport with two football players and HIS ONLY SON?

Or maybe there was no danger at all and his whole thing with fearing for his life is but a lie to draw sympathy.

Or maybe there is real danger and he surrounds himself with human shields.

[Prakanong]

"I still haven't surrounded myself with a security team. "

Well given the position Thaksin was once in ie PM and that there was a coup etc I think it is perfectly rational for him to have a secirity team.

As you should well know almost any puu yai in Thailand has bodyguards never mind the richest (or close to it).

Even in the likes of the UK an ex-PM has a security detail.

If it is rational for him to have a heavy security team, was it rational on arrival to bunker into a hotel full of innocent people when he owns property all over the country? Is it rational to strut around on golf courses if his life is really in danger? He's about to come out of hiding after the oopplah of his arrival has died down a bit.

How about arriving at the airport with two football players and HIS ONLY SON?

Or maybe there was no danger at all and his whole thing with fearing for his life is but a lie to draw sympathy.

Or maybe there is real danger and he surrounds himself with human shields.

Come on then which one is it?

One minute you are saying because of his security detail it would take an army to get to him

The next you are saying the security is no good as he is seen in public and stays in a public hotel

I think you really do not know what you want to say?

[chevykanteve]

"I still haven't surrounded myself with a security team. "

Well given the position Thaksin was once in ie PM and that there was a coup etc I think it is perfectly rational for him to have a secirity team.

As you should well know almost any puu yai in Thailand has bodyguards never mind the richest (or close to it).

Even in the likes of the UK an ex-PM has a security detail.

If it is rational for him to have a heavy security team, was it rational on arrival to bunker into a hotel full of innocent people when he owns property all over the country? Is it rational to strut around on golf courses if his life is really in danger? He's about to come out of hiding after the oopplah of his arrival has died down a bit.

How about arriving at the airport with two football players and HIS ONLY SON?

Or maybe there was no danger at all and his whole thing with fearing for his life is but a lie to draw sympathy.

Or maybe there is real danger and he surrounds himself with human shields.

Yes of course, Tony..... Any sane person would realise that he surrounds himself with human shields.