New Government

[Wiresok]

Since hiring PR firms in 2006 Thaksin has paid $920,000 a year to Barbour Griffith, $300,000 to Edelman Public Relations and $80,000 to Baker Botts.

The government SHOULD pay attention to people who spend so much for smearing Thailand's reputation in international media.

LOL

Thailand reputation well and truly dumped already globally, and in the international media.

Remember,

Armed PAD paramilitaries...

Anti government terrorists...

PAD fascists...

terrorist organisation...

Are you really saying Taxin has some payroll responsible for this.

Yes the government should pay attention to people responsible for dumping thai reputation in international community !!

[Wiresok]

Why does this government pay too much attention to Khun Thaksin?

You might equally ask, why did the previous two governments also pay too much attention to him, flying to visit him or phoning him for his views on every decision ?

Some might say, because he is a very wise & very rich man, who cares only for his country and its people, putting them ahead of his own personal interests. Others might suspect that there are other reasons.

What I know is Khun Thaksin has the brain, knows how to make money and gave the poor Thais better lives. He is not someone who hugged terrorist Sondhi and now is planning to borrow farang money.

If they let Khun Thaksin run Thailand, the elite will lose their power. Very easy to spot this. A man with big family name often talks on tv and will be minister of some kinds with Democ Rat Party. Under Khun Thaksin's time, this man will not have a chance.

If Democ Rat is good & suitable for being the government as they claim, just forget Khun Thaksin and try to go through this crisis. Freezing his money. Canceling his Diplomat passport. Cutting his rank. What next? When will they stop? Until he has his last underpants?

I really doubt that Thaksin has as big a brain as he is credited with. A big square head, yes, but probably full of muscle. He has made far too many stupid mistakes to be considered clever. I'm sure that we would all be paying far less attention to him if he had have taken his money, kept his mouth shut and lived a life of luxury somewhere. Unfortunately for him and us, he is a power hungry megalomaniac who will never be satisfied with enough money and control. Trying to forget him is like trying to forget you have a cobra living under your bed that will come out and bite you one day. It must be dealt with sooner rather than later.

OOps for the earlier post.

The military appointed government are following orders.

They pursue taxin because they are not allowed to pursue the PAD.

Whatever happens about taxin, the thai cobra remains where it has always been...under the bed of thai democracy.

Yes it needs its head cutting off.

[Steve2UK]

I'm sure Boranut and Kobsak can use google just as well as you, Steve. I'm also sure they have other sources of information.

Just because you can't google it doesn't mean they made the story up. They talked about very recent jobs, btw, they specifically mentioned Thaksin's reaction to Abhisit's PMship.

So we go round and round. They should be able to use Google (and, actually, rather more than that - but no matter) - simple to check but, apparently, they didn't. Two senior Democrats make specific claims - which are contradicted by readily available facts. I would also expect people in their position to have other sources of information - though there's no evidence to show that they do; if they do - what is it and when can we expect them to produce it? Surely, it would be a great nail to hammer into Thaksin's coffin? A media "smear campaign" is by definition about publicity - i.e. the results must be visible........ where are they? What "very recent jobs" - with whom and leading to what?

Where was Thaksin's reaction to Abhisit's PMship? An answer to someone's question? An interview? A press release or announcement through his spokesman? If any of those - what does it prove? Just that Thaksin doesn't approve of the process or (presumably?) the man - hardly a surprise. Is that a reason to assume "dubious reasons" (i.e the result of a Thaksin PR smear operation) behind the publication of any story involving Thailand that doesn't include praise for the Thai system and the current government? Self-evidently, it isn't.

Back last August, Abhisit himself "voiced concern that Thaksin would mount a publicity campaign to smear the country by citing issues relating to justice and safety in order to boost the chance for him and his family to secure asylum" ( http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/...0822-83679.html ). Entirely reasonable thing for him to say - and a world away from claiming that it's actually happening - as you and Khun's Boranut and Korbsak do. I'm not making any claims - they are and you are. I have just asked for evidence to support those specific claims. If it needs saying again, without some evidence your opinion (however often repeated and re-worded or even echoed by others) is no more than just....... an opinion.

You may be happy to take the unsupported claims of two opposed politicians at face value and as prima facie evidence - after all, you already believe it and want (need?) it to be true. Objectively - what is there? Supposition and (maybe?) assumed guilt by association......... it just doesn't stand up as an argument let alone a case.

[Steve2UK]

Steve, some missing current PR references:

Thanks - I've already seen them a while ago but, while interesting as references (if only for background), they don't actually add anything by way of facts to support the claims I have been questioning.

The "Building a Better Future" site is maybe a more current "reference" than you realise - in that it now contains a long "Blog" contribution from Thaksin dated 6 January 2009 - did you see it? He certainly makes himself sound good and like he's knowledgeable about the poor in SE Asia - particularly the rural poor. Nothing about politics past or present, courts, hidden hands etc - though plenty of stuff referring glowingly to his policies while in government; otherwise only what you would expect given the stated purpose of the foundation. Still, I expect some will be able to have their usual fun cherry-picking some quotes for a good mock. Do I think there's at least a double purpose in promoting himself as a "Mr Nice Guy" for the poor? Sure I do - same as there was while he was running TRT and getting elected with popular/populist policies.

But (you knew there had to be one) - self-promotion isn't smearing Thailand, is it?

Thankfully, no-one (not even any of the usual suspects) has come out to accuse me of being a Thaksin-lover simply because I'm querying some of the un-proven claims made against him in general and about aspects the supposed PR smear campaign in particular. Frankly, IMO, there is so much clear-cut evidence to condemn the guy it's really beyond me why so many expend so much effort and creativity to conjure up even more stuff that is anything but clear-cut.

That stuff compares more closely to urban legends than to any kind of fact. Somebody says that somebody said that redshirts burst into Grandma Niam's sick-room and verbally abused her. Did it actually happen? I don't know - nor do you. If no journo or cop checks first-hand with the hospital staff, we still won't know - but the story will go on being quoted as "fact" regardless. Until it's verified, it's on a par with alien abduction stories - and absolutely no offence intended to the memory of Grandma Niam.

Similarly, enough people suggesting "causal" links between Moon/Thaksin and The Economist articles often enough in enough places (e.g. here, the press and your own website) will give that notion too an air of validity - though actually there hasn't been any evidence that is even slightly more than circumstantial to back the claim. Not about The Economist or any other publication that has had similar accusations levelled at them here. Now, if one saw an identifiable pattern of more Thailand-critical articles starting to appear in publications which also received advertising income from a Thaksin (or even Thaksin-connected) organisation, I would say there could be grounds for suspicion - though no more than that. Certainly not "fact" status.

You've no doubt seen the line “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it....". Nearly everyone attributes it to Goebbels; ironically no-one has ever been able to find an instance of him saying it - it's an urban legend in itself.

BTW, there is a small (but rather meatless) bone for Plus on the "Building a Better Future" site. It mentions that the foundation was launched last November with a half-page ad in the Financial Times and in the Wall Street Journal (Asia). Curiously, no mention of The Economist - one would have thought that Moon might have got a really good rate if your/Plus' version of his "pull" there holds any water. With the best will in the world, I can't see the income from a half-page ad in one regional edition being sufficient to sway the editorial judgement of the WSJ - even if they would ever consider putting their reputation at risk by doing so. Perhaps it goes without saying that the same surely applies to The Economist, Sydney Morning Herald, IHT etc etc.

[samgrowth]

I do not see anything wrong by using a PR company.

It is just like putting up an ad in the newpaper.