Thailand Under Threat Within And Without?

[churchill]

From http://www.upiasia.com/Politics/2009/07/31...d_without/1453/

Nakhonratchasima, Thailand — “From abroad they surround Thailand, from the countryside they surround the cities.”

This was the remark of angry media baron Sondhi Limthongkul on ASTV recently, describing what he perceives as efforts by enemies of the monarchy to gang up against the royal family and destroy its image.

Sondhi’s remarks about being surrounded reflect his personal frustration at not being able to silence opposition to the way things have traditionally been run in the country. Sondhi believes that destruction of the nation and the imminent collapse of Thai society will result should the public not conform to his version of how to pay homage to the king.

Many who publicly oppose this view are either in jail, facing jail or have fled to other countries. Many others are quietly critical – those whom Sondhi and others would say are not “real Thais” – and believe that two paradigm shifts are needed: first, a shift away from false adoration of an illusion created by powerful interests, and secondly, a shift away from trying to put in prison or bring social disgrace on everyone whose opinions differ from those of the fundamental traditionalist hardliners.

Sondhi is also understandably frustrated at the lack of meaningful arrests over his attempted assassination last April. Some of the police involved have been identified, but not those in higher positions who apparently instructed them.

This is not unusual in Thailand. The higher-ups that order such killings or massacres are usually forgiven or pardoned – they are never cited by name, and never really punished. They don’t feel remorse, either. There is no need to. All they need to do is to issue denials on one hand and warnings on the other. This has been the Thai Way for a long, long time.

Thailand’s so-called divisiveness is more a reflection of wrongful interests attempting to circumvent needed change than it is a phenomenon created by those who wish ill to the monarchy, the country or the people. Many Thais are fed up, ashamed, fearful or apathetic to the extent that they do or say little or nothing political, let alone maliciously using the monarchy to promote their personal interests.

Charging people, Thai or foreign, with five, ten or more years in prison for violating the country’s “lese majeste” laws might be legal, but from a human and civil rights view it cannot be justified. Those who support it vociferously are only prolonging class separation and hatred of new ideas.

The Thai monarchy can be loved and protected without enforcing rules of social behavior from early childhood on. Such regimentation is not democratic and cannot be justified with the words, “We are different.”

It is difficult to overcome centuries of authoritarian control and institute civil rights-based democracy in Thailand, as has been observed time and time again. But ever since former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra came to the stage, people have been asking questions about taboo subjects and even taking taboo positions.

When the leadership saw that this was beginning to snowball, they began to fight back with legitimate and illegitimate means. The Thai government has closed or blocked in excess of 16,000 websites, to the surprise and shock of free speech advocates. Many of these blockages and shutdowns occurred without legal documentation, in the interest of “national security” – though without any proof to justify this.

Unless the Thai state’s claims pertaining to national security are challenged in the courts by a concerted effort of honest and committed people determined to achieve justice in the kingdom, the misuse of this term – to intimidate, coerce, inhibit, criminally charge and imprison people – will continue ad infinitum.

[redscouse]

I think it unfair to tarnish all non yellow shirts with being anti monarchy. I heard yesterday the Government basically saying if you have signed the petition to pardon Thaksin then you are against the monarchy, they made it so black and white, they are also saying they will be checking signatures, so basically the person who signed or who wanted to sign now fears lesse majesty as the government are accusing them of being anti monarchy.. Can they not just accept that people do support the monarchy and also support Thaksin, supporting these two things do not make one negate the other. It is an attempt by the government to scare people away from the red shirts by using the monarchy, whilst accusing the red shirts of using the monarchy. The hypocrisy in this country never ceases to amaze me, constantly accusing others of doing what you are doing yourself in the hope that they do not notice you are doing the exact same thing.

[Jingthing]

. Can they not just accept that people do support the monarchy and also support Thaksin, supporting these two things do not make one negate the other.

That isn't entirely clear. A dictator for life model with a PM as dear leader would not exactly be pro monarchy, now would it? Surely you don't believe Thaksin is really pro democracy, do you? In my view many of the signers have been duped and certainly should not be held legally liable for signing. The leader is the thing, go after the TOP. So in some ways I agre with you, but that doesn't mean this petition is not extremely inappropriate.

Edited August 3, 2009 by Jingthing

[redscouse]

. Can they not just accept that people do support the monarchy and also support Thaksin, supporting these two things do not make one negate the other.

That isn't entirely clear. A dictator for life model with a PM as dear leader would not exactly be pro monarchy, now would it? Surely you don't believe Thaksin is really pro democracy, do you?

has he ever said he is not pro democracy? Surely the PAD are the ones against one man one vote despite their name. But my point was not about Thaksin, my point was about the public being accused of anti monarchy sentiments for believing in a particular political figure rather than what that political figure believes. My wife voted Thai rak Thai but is also a royalist, it is possible. Is it possible to ask for a pardon considering how minor the offence was and still be Royalist? I think it is and I think it is unfair for the government to question your loyalties based on this matter.

Oh and as a reminder, the red in my name refers to my football, I have no political affiliations in Thailand

Sorry I saw you edited after I posted so my quote is not your new post in full

Edited August 3, 2009 by redscouse

[Jingthing]

has he ever said he is not pro democracy?

YES! When he was in POWER! Now he using that tact to get sympathy from the west and to sugar coat his corrupt movement. This man is not to believed.

"Democracy is not my goal"

PRIME MINISTER (NOW CRIMINAL FUGITIVE) THAKSIN

2003

Edited August 3, 2009 by Jingthing

[redscouse]

has he ever said he is not pro democracy?

YES! When he was in POWER! Now he using that tact to get sympathy from the west and to sugar coat his corrupt movement. This man is not to believed.

"Democracy is not my goal"

THAKSIN

Fair enough, no need to shout, it was just a question

[verydumbubba]

It is only his opinion

Bubba

[john b good]

has he ever said he is not pro democracy?

YES! When he was in POWER! Now he using that tact to get sympathy from the west and to sugar coat his corrupt movement. This man is not to believed.

"Democracy is not my goal"

PRIME MINISTER (NOW CRIMINAL FUGITIVE) THAKSIN

2003

Let me repeat my self. The man is one of the worst despots in recent history.

If he had the following (and the power) of Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet to name a few he would go down in history with the likes of Ghenis Khan.

He is a megalomaniac the likes never seen before in Thailand.

And whilst you listen to the "we have never been colonised" rantings who have they got to thank for that.

If it hadn't been for the allied forces, sake would be the national drink in the realm.

[givenall]

has he ever said he is not pro democracy?

YES! When he was in POWER! Now he using that tact to get sympathy from the west and to sugar coat his corrupt movement. This man is not to believed.

"Democracy is not my goal"

THAKSIN

Fair enough, no need to shout, it was just a question

I think we have talked about Thaksin enough and have positively established that he is a fugitive, a criminal and a thief and will not stop from doing anything to get his way and money, including lie, depiction like a con man will do, so let’s not try to pretend he is anyone other than what is obvious

[verydumbubba]

I have a Fatboy

Bubba

sake would be the national drink in the realm.

[redscouse]

has he ever said he is not pro democracy?

YES! When he was in POWER! Now he using that tact to get sympathy from the west and to sugar coat his corrupt movement. This man is not to believed.

"Democracy is not my goal"

THAKSIN

Fair enough, no need to shout, it was just a question

I think we have talked about Thaksin enough and have positively established that he is a fugitive, a criminal and a thief and will not stop from doing anything to get his way and money, including lie, depiction like a con man will do, so let's not try to pretend he is anyone other than what is obvious

I think you forgot to include 'elected' in your list. Cue comments about vote buying etc as though nobody else does it, Thai politics stinks whichever side of the fence you sit on.

Like I say I am not a supporter or a non supporter of Thaksin, but I have a question that I hope people can answer putting bias aside, lets see.

Was Thailand a more stable, better performing country with Thaksin in charge than it has been since the coup to remove him?

[Ferwert]

All you Farangs who I constantly accuse of being duped and "led-around-by-the-nose" by the agenized Thai media, I sincerely suggest you carefully consider the contents of the article Churchill put up at the beginning of this thread. It is worth a careful re-read, and dont let the visceral intransigent Thaksin-haters on this board discount it. I notice their vitriol is particularly shrill in this thread. This kind of in-depth article reasoning and historically supportive data must be very challenging to them. This is the most thoughtful, in-depth article you will read that is contrary to the agenized media that so dominates your source of Thai political news. Here is a powerful alternative for you, thx. to Churchill. You wont read too many articles with such thoughtfullness and is one of the best alternatives you will read, to the agenda of your daily English language media.

Edited August 3, 2009 by Ferwert

[Bangyai]

From http://www.upiasia.com/Politics/2009/07/31...d_without/1453/

Nakhonratchasima, Thailand — "From abroad they surround Thailand, from the countryside they surround the cities."

This was the remark of angry media baron Sondhi Limthongkul on ASTV recently, describing what he perceives as efforts by enemies of the monarchy to gang up against the royal family and destroy its image.

Sondhis a fine one to talk. Lets not forget he was given a 3 year jail sentance for dragging the monarchy into politics :

http://www.bangkokpost.com/election2007/26..._261207_04.html

[samran]

I think you forgot to include 'elected' in your list. Cue comments about vote buying etc as though nobody else does it, Thai politics stinks whichever side of the fence you sit on.

Like I say I am not a supporter or a non supporter of Thaksin, but I have a question that I hope people can answer putting bias aside, lets see.

Was Thailand a more stable, better performing country with Thaksin in charge than it has been since the coup to remove him?

read up on your history a little bit more.

He wasn't an elected anything at the time of the coup. All he was was a caretaker PM who had refused to call elections for 6 months leading up to the coup, cause if he called them, he'd lose, again.

The local village chief had more democratic legitimacy than he did.

[john b good]

I think you forgot to include 'elected' in your list. Cue comments about vote buying etc as though nobody else does it, Thai politics stinks whichever side of the fence you sit on.

Like I say I am not a supporter or a non supporter of Thaksin, but I have a question that I hope people can answer putting bias aside, lets see.

Was Thailand a more stable, better performing country with Thaksin in charge than it has been since the coup to remove him?

read up on your history a little bit more.

He wasn't an elected anything at the time of the coup. All he was was a caretaker PM who had refused to call elections for 6 months leading up to the coup, cause if he called them, he'd lose, again.

The local village chief had more democratic legitimacy than he did.

"Here here"

Thaksin never did one single thing for Thailand. He was personably reponsible for the deaths of well over 4,000 people "all in he name of drug suppression"

He is not nor ever was to be trusted. One only needs to look at the square faced man to realise he is about as trustworthy as a used car salesman.

I told my wife that what ever the bag of slime offered in money in buying votes I would double it and for her and all her family as well.

The trouble is here in the realm despots appeal to the uneducated masses (who make up the majority) Offer someone a bar of candy and he is your friend for life.

And there are no shortage of examples are there.

And the most sickening thing is to have to listen to some corrupt Thai say "oh my friend general this or general that"

Thailand with an army that would collectively be unable to defend Phuket has more generals than the US of A.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Mario2008

[KevinBloodyWilson]

A predictable and understandable railing against Thaksin, he was a 24ct asshol_e and I don't honestly see how anyone could deny that. But he was a product of the Thai system.

And...

he was the people's choice, for good or ill, for good reasons or bad.

If we really believe in Democracy, we cannot then say "I believe in democracy but we shouldn't allow *him* to be the people's choice". To do so is hypocritical. Thais must be allowed to develop along their own path and be allowed and encouraged to adopt a democracy, which is certainly not what they have at the moment. What they have is a feudal system with a sakdina social structure and a manipulative and pernicious propagandising machine. In fact, fwiw, I believe that Thailand is very close to being Burma but without having the balls to say so.

Kev

[Garry9999]

All you Farangs who I constantly accuse of being duped and "led-around-by-the-nose" by the agenized Thai media, I sincerely suggest you carefully consider the contents of the article Churchill put up at the beginning of this thread. It is worth a careful re-read, and dont let the visceral intransigent Thaksin-haters on this board discount it. I notice their vitriol is particularly shrill in this thread. This kind of in-depth article reasoning and historically supportive data must be very challenging to them. This is the most thoughtful, in-depth article you will read that is contrary to the agenized media that so dominates your source of Thai political news. Here is a powerful alternative for you, thx. to Churchill. You wont read too many articles with such thoughtfullness and is one of the best alternatives you will read, to the agenda of your daily English language media.

Ferwert, You are absolutely right, but I fear your advise will not be taken.

[Garry9999]

I think you forgot to include 'elected' in your list. Cue comments about vote buying etc as though nobody else does it, Thai politics stinks whichever side of the fence you sit on.

Like I say I am not a supporter or a non supporter of Thaksin, but I have a question that I hope people can answer putting bias aside, lets see.

Was Thailand a more stable, better performing country with Thaksin in charge than it has been since the coup to remove him?

read up on your history a little bit more.

He wasn't an elected anything at the time of the coup. All he was was a caretaker PM who had refused to call elections for 6 months leading up to the coup, cause if he called them, he'd lose, again.

The local village chief had more democratic legitimacy than he did.

2001 - Thai Rak Thai won the legislative election of 2001 by a landslide margin over the ruling Democrat Party.

2005 - In the legislative election on February 6, 2005, Thai Rak Thai won an even bigger majority with 60.7% of the popular vote.

2006 - In the invalid elections of April 2006, Thai Rak Thai won 61.6% of the vote and 460 out of 500 seats, the rest remaining vacant due to boycotting by the opposition parties.

2006 - The 2006 Thailand coup d'état took place on Tuesday 19 September 2006, when the Royal Thai Army staged a coup d'état against the elected government of caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

2006/7 - After General Sonthi overthrew the government of Thaksin Shinawatra, he soon afterwards appointed Surayud as Prime Minister, The Council for National Security was the name of the military regime that governed Thailand following the 2006 coupe . A Permanent Constitution for the Kingdom of Thailand was drafted by a committee established by the military junta that abrogated the previous 1997 Constitution. On August 19, 2007, a referendum was held in which 59.3% of the voters voted in favour of the constitution. The current constitution succeeded the former supreme law of Thailand, the 2006 Interim Constitution.

The 2007 Thai general elections were held on 23 December. This was the first legislative election after the 2006 coup d'état. The Peoples Power Party (PPP), a reincarnation of Thai Rak Thai managed to win 226 out of 480 of the MP seats, close to controlling the majority in the House of Representatives. The Democrat Party came in a distant second with 166 seats.

2008 - Following the Constitutional Court of Thailand's removal of prime minister Samak Sundaravej in 2008 for vested interests by taking a salary from a cooking show while in the seat of PM, Abhisit lost the National Assembly vote for Prime Minister by 163 votes to 298 for Somchai Wongsawat, ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra's brother in law

On 2 December 2008, the Constitutional Court banned the three government parties for election fraud, including the PPP, thus dissolved the governing coalition and paving the way for a Democrat-led government.

After the PPP was dissolved, many MPs defected to the Democrat side thus forging a new alliance. The enlarged Democrat-led coalition was able to endorse Abhisit as Prime Minister. Abhisit became Prime Minister after winning a special vote in parliament on 15 December 2008.

[Plus]

Many who publicly oppose this view are either in jail, facing jail or have fled to other countries.

What a <deleted>!

They got in trouble for publicly offending the monarchy, not for having opposing views.

And just how many is many? Out of all Thai with "opposing views", how many have been charged with LM? Five or six?

But ever since former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra came to the stage, people have been asking questions about taboo subjects and even taking taboo positions.

Don't remember one single question in all his five years in power on the monarchy issue, and Thaksin has introduced many other taboos and anyone asking questions about them was facing complete destruction. Some were even killed.

[zzaa09]

I think it unfair to tarnish all non yellow shirts with being anti monarchy. I heard yesterday the Government basically saying if you have signed the petition to pardon Thaksin then you are against the monarchy, they made it so black and white, they are also saying they will be checking signatures, so basically the person who signed or who wanted to sign now fears lesse majesty as the government are accusing them of being anti monarchy.. Can they not just accept that people do support the monarchy and also support Thaksin, supporting these two things do not make one negate the other. It is an attempt by the government to scare people away from the red shirts by using the monarchy, whilst accusing the red shirts of using the monarchy. The hypocrisy in this country never ceases to amaze me, constantly accusing others of doing what you are doing yourself in the hope that they do not notice you are doing the exact same thing.

This deepest set archetypal presence should be in question, since there isn't such a beast as standard black and white. Being associated with "RED" political identity doesn't automatically qualify as being disrespectful towards the Thai Monarchy or even distant relations cast upon as 'Pro-Thaksin'. As being "YELLOW" guarantees a cozy relationship with said traditional higher classes. I find both disrespectful of Thai society. Both have visions of an illusional power-base of influence. Either gives a rat's ass about the general well-being of Thai civilisation. Yet it goes on.....circles of punditry {Thai/Farang/Whomever} add to the most distinct advocacy that there is a true and genuine difference of political and social identity. No there is not. The distractions are easy for those whom are easily distracted. Holding firmly to beliefs that are fabricated for you. There isn't a segragated political scheme here that isn't really homogenous.

[zzaa09]

All you Farangs who I constantly accuse of being duped and "led-around-by-the-nose" by the agenized Thai media, I sincerely suggest you carefully consider the contents of the article Churchill put up at the beginning of this thread. It is worth a careful re-read, and dont let the visceral intransigent Thaksin-haters on this board discount it. I notice their vitriol is particularly shrill in this thread. This kind of in-depth article reasoning and historically supportive data must be very challenging to them. This is the most thoughtful, in-depth article you will read that is contrary to the agenized media that so dominates your source of Thai political news. Here is a powerful alternative for you, thx. to Churchill. You wont read too many articles with such thoughtfullness and is one of the best alternatives you will read, to the agenda of your daily English language media.

You still don't get it, Ferwart. Your obvious limited exposure and experience to alternative sources of info is typical. There is a wealth of such different media quite available - just because you're not aware of it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And most certainly, considering only 'English' and 'Farang'-based sources doesn't guarantee anything. Your connective tissue and surfaced innocence is mightedly predictable as to those whom pretend to know......and usually just blow smoke. Your concern for Thai {which I suspect is bogus} issues is touching and quite charming, forgetting what really has manifested such terror and change.

[Datsun240Z]

" A country needs to be ruled by it's own people " ....

[zzaa09]

I think you forgot to include 'elected' in your list. Cue comments about vote buying etc as though nobody else does it, Thai politics stinks whichever side of the fence you sit on.

Like I say I am not a supporter or a non supporter of Thaksin, but I have a question that I hope people can answer putting bias aside, lets see.

Was Thailand a more stable, better performing country with Thaksin in charge than it has been since the coup to remove him?

read up on your history a little bit more.

Whose historic perspective? Any particular bent in mind?

[NanLaew]

I told my wife that what ever the bag of slime offered in money in buying votes I would double it and for her and all her family as well.

The trouble is here in the realm despots appeal to the uneducated masses (who make up the majority) Offer someone a bar of candy and he is your friend for life.

OMG john... you actually BOUGHT the votes of your wife & family on behalf of the Dems.

Were they all going to vote the way of the 'uneducated' otherwise? The horror...

Up here in Isaan, it's sotam, laarp & lots of lao khao and not candy btw. I guess only Thaksin really new how to get inside our pants. You lot are utterly hopeless.

How typically, despotically Thai you have become. I won't mention how corrupt as that goes with the territory. Pot calling kettle, etc.

PS. Can you claim back that vote purchase on your taxes?

Edited August 3, 2009 by NanLaew

[zzaa09]

" A country needs to be ruled by it's own people " ....

Correct. As opposed to defacto resident 'foreigners' whom seem to know better....

[Scott]

For God's Sake would some of you go back in your cave. Thaksin's name isn't even mentioned in this article.

[Garry9999]

All you Farangs who I constantly accuse of being duped and "led-around-by-the-nose" by the agenized Thai media, I sincerely suggest you carefully consider the contents of the article Churchill put up at the beginning of this thread. It is worth a careful re-read, and dont let the visceral intransigent Thaksin-haters on this board discount it. I notice their vitriol is particularly shrill in this thread. This kind of in-depth article reasoning and historically supportive data must be very challenging to them. This is the most thoughtful, in-depth article you will read that is contrary to the agenized media that so dominates your source of Thai political news. Here is a powerful alternative for you, thx. to Churchill. You wont read too many articles with such thoughtfullness and is one of the best alternatives you will read, to the agenda of your daily English language media.

You still don't get it, Ferwart. Your obvious limited exposure and experience to alternative sources of info is typical. There is a wealth of such different media quite available - just because you're not aware of it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And most certainly, considering only 'English' and 'Farang'-based sources doesn't guarantee anything. Your connective tissue and surfaced innocence is mightedly predictable as to those whom pretend to know......and usually just blow smoke. Your concern for Thai {which I suspect is bogus} issues is touching and quite charming, forgetting what really has manifested such terror and change.

I'm really not sure what your rant here is all about. Would you mind calming down a little and explain further.

[sassienie]

Touchy subject this.

Personally, I wouldn`t entertain it.

[pecker]

Thanks Churchill. You also did not mention that in the past, Sondhi and the yellow shirts have advocated against one-person one-vote in elections, and rather recommended appointed representatives to the parliament. Yellow shirts have complained of simple up-country folk being fooled by Thaksin and TRT and wasting their votes on him. This may be true, but it is the price of democracy. (Now there are complaints similar people have been fooled into signing the legally-flawed petition for Thaksin's clemency.)

Sondhi and the yellow shirts have now seen Thaksin's TRT and similar parties win three (valid) elections in a row in 2001, 2005 and 2007. Sondhi and the yellow shirts, (and Abhisit), know it is very hard for pro-Bangkok, elite or traditionally aligned parties to win government in democratic elections. Abhisit has tried to hang on to power for as long as he can, although he now might regret not calling for an election after the Songkran rioting, as his popularity was much higher then.

Yes, Thaksin, was in power whilst a heinous crackdown on suspected drug-traffickers ensued, and that understandably makes many people very hostile to him. But Thais seem to want democracy, and if the farmers, peasants, taxi drivers and workers outnumber the Bangkok middle-classes and elites, then you just need to do the maths. Thaksin politicised the red shirts/rural voters and they will not go away until they get an election, or there is a crackdown/coup by the military, (and the military are not in a hurry after their 2006 coup caused as many problems as it solved.)

Sorry I'm talking too much about Thaksin like others, but I wanted to concentrate on Sondhi and the yellow shirts.

PS. TO EVERYONE - read lots of great stuff on wikipedia on Thai politics, 2005-2006 Thailand crises, 2008-2009 Thailand crises, yellow shirts, red shirts, Thaksin, Sondhi. No one in Thai politics is pure. And the country is in its democratic infancy. Also great to hear of other good sites to read too. (Questions about validity of Thaksin's convictions on wikipedia.)

[Miggins]

. Can they not just accept that people do support the monarchy and also support Thaksin, supporting these two things do not make one negate the other.

That isn't entirely clear. A dictator for life model with a PM as dear leader would not exactly be pro monarchy, now would it? Surely you don't believe Thaksin is really pro democracy, do you? In my view many of the signers have been duped and certainly should not be held legally liable for signing. The leader is the thing, go after the TOP. So in some ways I agre with you, but that doesn't mean this petition is not extremely inappropriate.

Truth be told, they don't want democracy, that's why they are unable to process straight forward thought and responsibilities - the Dictator takes away all of the need for reckoning.

They are like children, they need a discipline that keeps them in line! Try and give them free thought and speech and they are to be honest "buggerred"

If no one tells them what to do or think......what do they do? they are a lost cause!