Gen Chaovalit Appointed As Supreme Commander Of People's Army Of Thailand

[hammered]

Interesting to see Panlop and Sae Daeng being criticised by Jatuporn and also by the leftists of which Jatuporn certainly isnt one. Jatuporn certainly doesnt like anyone taking possession of what he sees as his gang. The men of action like Sae Daeng are also quite popular with certain groups of street level red supporters.

[Insight]

"Of course, the spectacle of allowing a personality like Khittiya to engage the government and public

could be classic misdirection while the real plans for destabilizing the country are occurring behind-the-scenes."

These stupid statements kind of belie any pretense of being a front for a more logical game plan,

because to be proper disinformation they must appear to be be LOGICAL plans,

not just stupidly treasonous ideas from loose canons.

Think you're being a tad harsh animatic. As hammered pointed out previously the red side played the PR game very well, in stark contrast to the govt, therefore such assumptions about misdirection are reasonable.

Recently, though, it all seems to be falling apart for them. I personally believe this can be attributed to the departure of a certain lady in Thaksin's life, who was perhaps responsible for a lot more of Thaksin's success than she usually receives credit for.

[animatic]

"Of course, the spectacle of allowing a personality like Khittiya to engage the government and public

could be classic misdirection while the real plans for destabilizing the country are occurring behind-the-scenes."

These stupid statements kind of belie any pretense of being a front for a more logical game plan,

because to be proper disinformation they must appear to be be LOGICAL plans,

not just stupidly treasonous ideas from loose canons.

Think you're being a tad harsh animatic. As hammered pointed out previously the red side played the PR game very well, in stark contrast to the govt, therefore such assumptions about misdirection are reasonable.

Recently, though, it all seems to be falling apart for them. I personally believe this can be attributed to the departure of a certain lady in Thaksin's life, who was perhaps responsible for a lot more of Thaksin's success than she usually receives credit for.

Basically recently is a fairly long period.

I suspect Potjamins departure is part of this,

but more likely his professional PR team is depleted because it cost to much,

and he thinks to save money, and assuage his ego by thinking HE can now do it himself.

Which would explain many of the recent missteps... amateur work more often than not.

Since it is reported that Pallop and Sea Dung visited Thakins in Dubai, then likely his western PR team

was not in on those meetings and this last rash of idiocy was cooked up between the 3 of them,

not even consulting Chavalit about his 'promotion'....

Thew Rerd side once played the PR game will but then again, not recently.

"Recently, though, it all seems to be falling apart for them."

disorganized, not on the same page, emotionally driven, and over reaching,

all things typical of Thaksin himself when under too much stress...

[fnprop]

When a group of private citizens form a private army it is not necessarily illegal. Militias etc. are somewhat acceptable.

When a group of private citizens form a private army with the intent to overthrow the government it is called treason. Said army would be immediately put down.

Exactly the same line espoused by King George III a couple of hundred years ago. Didn't quite work out to his satisfaction then, did it?

[Ricardo]

When a group of private citizens form a private army it is not necessarily illegal. Militias etc. are somewhat acceptable.

When a group of private citizens form a private army with the intent to overthrow the government it is called treason. Said army would be immediately put down.

Exactly the same line espoused by King George III a couple of hundred years ago. Didn't quite work out to his satisfaction then, did it?

Erm ... he too was somewhat 'challenged' in the 'sanity department', if I recall correctly my school history-lessons ?

And yes, those headlines from the cover of 'Voice of Thaksin' are indeed pretty-extreme, for someone who likes to claim that he is only promoting peaceful change.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Ricardo

[otherstuff1957]

I think Thaksin is thinking more recent examples than 1776.

Here's the cover of the December 'Voice of Thaksin':

And here is what is inside:

[hammered]

I see that Jatuporn is now grovelling to Panlop after thinking he was allowed to insult the man. I wonder what brought about that sudden change. Not a phonbe call from Dubai I guess.

[senshusband]

Pardon my ignorance, but is Chaovalit the same as the author of the autobiography of "The Last Executioner"? I don't have the book with me now, but was thinking the the name sounded familiar. I hope the are not even close to the same people as I really enjoyed reading that book and had a desire to meet that man. I thought it would be nice to hear about the stories of his youth around the old Air force bases. Is this the same person?

[animatic]

Jockeying for position or groveling for his very life.

I imagine a truly mean ass SOB like Panllop could really pull

some hurt down on a simple loud-mouthed bully like Jatuporn.

Two years of compulsory service wouldn't prepare one for the call

from a pissed off and insulted type like Panlop saying... well one can guess.

Loss of non-critical body parts comes to mind...

[otherstuff1957]

Pardon my ignorance, but is Chaovalit the same as the author of the autobiography of "The Last Executioner"? I don't have the book with me now, but was thinking the the name sounded familiar. I hope the are not even close to the same people as I really enjoyed reading that book and had a desire to meet that man. I thought it would be nice to hear about the stories of his youth around the old Air force bases. Is this the same person?

Don't worry,they are definitely two different people.

[wayfarer108]

I think the January 2010 cover of Voice of Taksin is more telling - headline 'Taksin Returns' with a photo of a statue of King Taksin the Great.

[Ricardo]

For that cover-picture, could they not have found a statue of Supreme Commander (PATsy) Chavalit, in some martial posture ?

[Meridian007]

I think the January 2010 cover of Voice of Taksin is more telling - headline 'Taksin Returns' with a photo of a statue of King Taksin the Great.

Isn't that a form of Lese Majeste? To imply that Thaksin would be coming back to Thailand as a king is surely an insult to Thai Monarchy. I'm constantly amazed at what the reds are getting away with.

[h90]

I think the January 2010 cover of Voice of Taksin is more telling - headline 'Taksin Returns' with a photo of a statue of King Taksin the Great.

Isn't that a form of Lese Majeste? To imply that Thaksin would be coming back to Thailand as a king is surely an insult to Thai Monarchy. I'm constantly amazed at what the reds are getting away with.

There were many similar things, which we shall not discuss.....

that is only 1 out of 1000 cases. Sometimes I think they do it with purpose to get a Lese Majeste law suit, so they can cry international about the lack of freedom in Thailand.

[Insight]

There were many similar things, which we shall not discuss.....

that is only 1 out of 1000 cases. Sometimes I think they do it with purpose to get a Lese Majeste law suit, so they can cry international about the lack of freedom in Thailand.

Bingo.

But just like the govt were more than happy to let Sae Daeng shoot his mouth off, it also seems like they have no problems letting self-absorbed nonsense like this go to print, offending every Thai national who picks up a copy - an interesting spectator sport with the recent edition over the weekend, I might add.

I wonder if when Thaksin realises his credibility is barely hanging by a thread he'll start blaming the government for not censoring this warped rubbish?

[cdnvic]

One post in bad taste deleted.

[johncitizen]

Question for the red-shirt sympathisers and Thaksin apologists:

* Do you seriously believe that Thailand will remain a democracy if Thaksin manages to reinstall himself as 'leader'?

Er... remain?

I think you will find that Thaksin was the only PM ever to be elected twice. And I don't recall any election taking place since the Yellows started pissing in their own pool.

[jdinasia]

Question for the red-shirt sympathisers and Thaksin apologists:

* Do you seriously believe that Thailand will remain a democracy if Thaksin manages to reinstall himself as 'leader'?

Er... remain?

I think you will find that Thaksin was the only PM ever to be elected twice. And I don't recall any election taking place since the Yellows started pissing in their own pool.

Hmmm sorry. We can't help you if you don't remember elections, particularly those in 2007. I think I will also find that Thaksin is the only PM to have 2 of his parties dissolved for election fraud

[johncitizen]

er... which the PPP won? and were then thrown out by yet another yellow-military collaboration? i remember that well, as a matter of fact.

Ah, and let's not talk about election fraud or the decisions made by Thailand's infamous Supreme Court. After all, it's against board rules.

[Ricardo]

er... which the PPP won? and were then thrown out by yet another yellow-military collaboration? i remember that well, as a matter of fact.

Ah, and let's not talk about election fraud or the decisions made by Thailand's infamous Supreme Court. After all, it's against board rules.

er ... which the PPP didn't win, but as the largest single minority-party, they were able/allowed to form a coalition-government, which went on to govern under two different PMs, until the party was dissolved for electoral-corruption (let's DO talk about it !) and their coalition collapsed.

Yep, I remember them, too.

[jdinasia]

er... which the PPP won? and were then thrown out by yet another yellow-military collaboration? i remember that well, as a matter of fact.

Ah, and let's not talk about election fraud or the decisions made by Thailand's infamous Supreme Court. After all, it's against board rules.

er ... which the PPP didn't win, but as the largest single minority-party, they were able/allowed to form a coalition-government, which went on to govern under two different PMs, until the party was dissolved for electoral-corruption (let's DO talk about it !) and their coalition collapsed.

Yep, I remember them, too.

Hmmm I remember it well too ... strangely johncitizen had forgotten about it. Oh wait .. not strange after all is it? election .... election ... dissolve parliament to try to save TRT and self ... failed election ... coup ... TRT dissolved .... election where PPP doesn't get 50% .. samak knocked out but could return ... Thaksin picks Somchai instead ... PPP dissolved .... Newin and company choose different sides .... Dems take office ....

edit to underline the forgotten election --- the one that contrary to johncitizen's claim .. PPP didn't win

Edited February 8, 2010 by jdinasia

[animatic]

er... which the PPP won? and were then thrown out by yet another yellow-military collaboration? i remember that well, as a matter of fact.

Ah, and let's not talk about election fraud or the decisions made by Thailand's infamous Supreme Court. After all, it's against board rules.

er ... which the PPP didn't win, but as the largest single minority-party, they were able/allowed to form a coalition-government, which went on to govern under two different PMs, until the party was dissolved for electoral-corruption (let's DO talk about it !) and their coalition collapsed.

Yep, I remember them, too.

Hmmm I remember it well too ... strangely johncitizen had forgotten about it. Oh wait .. not strange after all is it? election .... election ... dissolve parliament to try to save TRT and self ... failed election ... coup ... TRT dissolved .... election where PPP doesn't get 50% .. samak knocked out but could return ... Thaksin picks Somchai instead ... PPP dissolved .... Newin and company choose different sides .... Dems take office ....

Yes, correctly remembered, and synopsized by JD too.

It seems election fraud convictions is just an excuse to TRY and say

'any laws broken don't count if your side loses in court'.

Infamous logic from a runaway loser,

who can't come back and do his time.

Edited February 8, 2010 by animatic

[Meridian007]

Hmmm I remember it well too ... strangely johncitizen had forgotten about it. Oh wait .. not strange after all is it? election .... election ... dissolve parliament to try to save TRT and self ... failed election ... coup ... TRT dissolved .... election where PPP doesn't get 50% .. samak knocked out but could return ... Thaksin picks Somchai instead ... PPP dissolved .... Newin and company choose different sides .... Dems take office ....

edit to underline the forgotten election --- the one that contrary to johncitizen's claim .. PPP didn't win

Okay! Can we just link to JDinasia's post whenever anyone comes on blowing hot air about the "unelected government"? This explains it clearly and concisely, and I get tired of these posts from people who don't understand parliamentary elections, (maybe because they don't have them in their country). The only thing I would change is to put it into bullet form to make it easier to read. Coalition governments are something that evidently many people have no knowledge of.

Now, were the court proceedings against TRT that forced them out, fair and equal to what would be done against any other party? That I think is debatable, and as the Democrats are now in court over their election funding, I guess we'll see how it goes. (Although I'm sure that those who are anti-government will scream foul when only those individuals involved at the time, most of whom are no longer in the current government, are punished)

I don't think any of them are angels, but I think we need to keep enough of the politicians strong so that the military doesn't just roll in to power. (or at least end up overtly in power, I think they'll always have some influence)

Edited February 8, 2010 by Meridian007

[animatic]

election ....

election ...

dissolve parliament to try to save TRT and self ...

failed election ...

coup ...

TRT dissolved ....

election where PPP doesn't get 50% ..

samak knocked out but could return ...

Thaksin picks Somchai instead ...

PPP dissolved ....

Newin and company choose different sides ....

Dems take office ....

PTP proves incompetent

PTP crank Redshirts up several notches

Black Songkran

Redshirts proved violent

Thaksin proven liar internationally

Army remains unprovocable

Abhisit grows a pair

Attempted petition

Grand march, and nothing happens

Petition is back away from

Aniversary and assorted warnings

but NSA proves a disincentive to violence.

ASEAN meeting sans shirts proves successful

Abhisit travels and world likes him

Conviction imminent

Coalition insurrection attempted

Coalition insurrection turns into cash negotiation

Red rallies wander about

No new election called until current Ministers of Parliaments terms expire.

Edited February 8, 2010 by animatic

[johncitizen]

er... which the PPP won? and were then thrown out by yet another yellow-military collaboration? i remember that well, as a matter of fact.

Ah, and let's not talk about election fraud or the decisions made by Thailand's infamous Supreme Court. After all, it's against board rules.

er ... which the PPP didn't win, but as the largest single minority-party, they were able/allowed to form a coalition-government, which went on to govern under two different PMs, until the party was dissolved for electoral-corruption (let's DO talk about it !) and their coalition collapsed.

Yep, I remember them, too.

Hmmm I remember it well too ... strangely johncitizen had forgotten about it. Oh wait .. not strange after all is it? election .... election ... dissolve parliament to try to save TRT and self ... failed election ... coup ... TRT dissolved .... election where PPP doesn't get 50% .. samak knocked out but could return ... Thaksin picks Somchai instead ... PPP dissolved .... Newin and company choose different sides .... Dems take office ....

edit to underline the forgotten election --- the one that contrary to johncitizen's claim .. PPP didn't win

Let's revisit your neat little timeline for a moment:

2001 Election- TRT wins 40.6% of the votes, defeating Chuan Leepkai's Democrats with only 26.6% of the votes. This is known as a landslide victory. Thaksin goes on to serve the only full four year term for a PM in Thai history.

2005 Election- TRT and Thaksin returned to power, the first time in Thai history this has ever happened. (Perhaps this is due to the fact that anyone else who came along that threatened the conservative establishment were ousted in military takeovers. Has Thailand turned over a new leaf?) He was also returned with an even greater majority, at 60.7% to the Democrats 18.3% //flame deleted by Admin// This is in despite of all the atrocities that Thaksin is said to be responsible for, demonstrating that either the opposition failed to criticize or take the TRT to account for them, or they were actually approved of by the Thai people.

2006 Election- In response to mass protests and accusations of corruption, Thaksin calls for snap general elections. This is unlike the current Democrat government, whose apparent spokesman Suthep maintains are "not ready" to hold general elections, presumably in the spirit of "New Democracy." Nevertheless, TRT is returned to power AGAIN, with an almost exact same result. The election is boycotted by three major parties, but this made little difference to the TRT's support (it only increased by 1.7%). It follows that the TRT won the election not because of the support of people who would have otherwise voted for the boycotters, but through the support of the same people who voted for them at the last election.

It is interesting to note that on February 25, Abhisit appeared to be ready for an election and was measuring himself for the PM's seat... but the very next day announced that he and the Democrats would be boycotting the election which they were clearly going to lose anyway. It is also around this time that rumors started to circulate that the military was planning a coup to oust Thaksin. What a strange coincidence!

2006 election nullified by Supreme Court- The PAD also alleged that the election was undemocratic due to the fact that voters faced away from the public instead of toward them. This also happens to be the way where we vote in Australia, the notoriously undemocratic nation that I come from. Despite this, Thailand's trusty Supreme Court declared this setup to have played into TRT's favor, and so the 2006 election was nullified. A new election was to be held in October. This would be the first of several actions by the Supreme Court that would nullify otherwise legitimate victories by the Reds and play into the hands of the conservative elite.

2006 Coup- Well, it turns out we didn't need an election anyway, because when one thinks democracy isn't working, one fixes it with a military coup. The military assumed total control over the media, with soldiers sitting in the control rooms of every television and radio station in the country. More than 300 radio stations are shut down, and many hundreds more would be shut down over the years to come. The previous government either flees or is arrested. Gatherings and movements of more than 5 people were banned almost until the end of the year, as were all political activities. This is one of many military interventions that the successful and vibrant Thai democracy has experienced since 1932, when ordinary people started having a say in the running of the country.

The coupmakers (self-styled the Council for National Security) pledged to hold elections by October 2007. In the running for the positions of PM included privy councilors, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (hmmm) and the governor of the Bank of Thailand- but the CNS insisted that it would remain in place even after the new government was set up. Er, for democracies sake. Polls taken by some of the more independent sources reported that 49% of Thai's would still vote for the TRT, (remember, this is just the people who would vote TRT, not those who disapproved of the coup) and in response the junta prevented the release of any more polls seen as critical of the coup.

For some reason, yellow supporters are fond of referring to this coup as "the bloodless coup." You may be right- because the people that were kidnapped during the anti-coup demonstrations in the days afterwards were simply never seen heard from again.

TRT dissolved- Because as the saying goes, "If you can't beat them, join them, or declare them illegal and ban them from politics." Strike two for the Supreme Court. The Democrat party, also accused of corruption and political malfeasance, was acquitted of all charges. Note that all the Supreme Court judges had been handpicked by the military. Which is renown for its political neutrality, especially when it comes to the TRT and Thaksin.

PPP elected- The PPP was formed in 1997, with Somchai as its head. After the TRT was dissolved, many of its members shifted to the PPP, which soon became seen as a de-facto TRT. This was exemplified by the fact that it kicked ass in the 2007 election, despite the media, courts, electoral commission and many other important players remaining solely in the hands of the military-conservative cabal, and the fact that the military had installed a dodgy constitution. And the fact that the CNS had publicly accused the PPP of lese majeste prior to the election.

PPP dissolved- But wait! Here come the cavalry/Supreme Court, in the way of the PAD, who stage violent protests and cause the nation massive political and economic damage by seizing the airports, and the Supreme Court who, breaking with a decidedly pro-yellow tradition, dissolve the... oh wait...

The only cavalry that weren't present were from the military itself, who decided that the yellow uprising, for some reason, wasn't a threat to national security, and ordered the government not to do anything about it. Strange.

Newin and Co. jump ship- Ah yes, Newin, who was personally responsible for the lions share of the corruption committed during the TRT's rule, sees the writing on the wall and crosses the floor. With friends like those, who needs enemies!

And the rest, as they say, is history. Hot air you say? Forgive me, that is probably because of the fire that is burning up in my stomach every time I hear one of you smug conservative-when-you-want-to-be yellow-shirt wearing folks spout your trite yellow-washed version of history and claim to have democracy on your side when you defend and promote one of the most hypocritical, corrupt and ineffective regimes that exists in the world today.

When I first came to Thailand I stayed as neutral as I could, mainly because I didn't feel I knew enough about Thai politics to comment. But it doesn't take many blocked websites, shut down radio stations, censored web posts, emergency decrees or disappeared protesters to see which side has the moral high ground.

How far you have fallen for your moral compasses to have become so utterly broken.

[jdinasia]

You didn't revisit my timeline -- for I note that you conveniently left out Thaksin dissolving parliament and calling snap elections which failed.

Why did Thaksin do that? Well he already knew that TRT would be dissolved, so what was he hoping to accomplish? Saving TRT and protecting himself? It failed. His 2 major acts of the sale of his business (including changing the laws just to accomplish this) and dissolving parliament are what sunk Thailand into this mess. Anything else is just trying to shift the blame.

Ummm by the way your 2006 election results claims are fictitious .... 100% purely fiction.

Edited February 8, 2010 by jdinasia

[johncitizen]

Wiki dat <deleted>: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_general_...ion,_April_2006

Oh, and concerning the snap election

1. Doing so in a political crisis is a perfectly legitimate way of demonstrating that you have the peoples mandate. Which is kinda the aim of the game in a democracy. We have a similar mechanism in Australia, called a double dissolution.

2. The election was approved by the King.

3. The snap elections didn't fail. They were held, but the results were nullified by the Supreme Courts on the grounds that polling booths were improperly positioned, facing away from the public instead of toward. Even though, again, that is how things are done in Australia.

Edited February 8, 2010 by johncitizen

[nakachalet]

such a compassionate view on thai politics....

why keep on belaboring your own excellent point of view.... we can, can we not, just state our view, what we believe....

if some others do not agree with us.... let them also express their individual point of view for us to digest....

we all can live with that kind of presentation and argument....

there is no need to belabor our point regardless of how splendid it is.... imho

it is beginning to look childish.... is my personal point of view.... LOL

but you all can do what pleases you.... after all it is everyone's thaivisa.... cheers

Edited February 8, 2010 by nakachalet

[jdinasia]

Wiki dat <deleted>: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_general_...ion,_April_2006

Oh, and concerning the snap election

1. Doing so in a political crisis is a perfectly legitimate way of demonstrating that you have the peoples mandate. Which is kinda the aim of the game in a democracy. We have a similar mechanism in Australia, called a double dissolution.

2. The election was approved by the King.

3. The snap elections didn't fail. They were held, but the results were nullified by the Supreme Courts on the grounds that polling booths were improperly positioned, facing away from the public instead of toward. Even though, again, that is how things are done in Australia.

:-) Conveniently leaving out the 20% rule etc ..... The elections failed to seat a government. The snap elections were again ... just about Thaksin attempting and failing to cover his own ass specifically, and prevent the disbanding of TRT. Given the evidence against TRT the fact that they would be disbanded was a given. This is after years of Thaksin stifling the free press and attempting to weaken the checks and balances that were in place to keep democracy alive here.

re wiki ---- please take a look at the 'history' of that page You may be better served going to the source material.

[animatic]

Let's revisit your neat little timeline for a moment:

2001 Election- TRT wins 40.6% of the votes, defeating Chuan Leepkai's Democrats with only 26.6% of the votes. This is known as a landslide victory. Thaksin goes on to serve the only full four year term for a PM in Thai history.

100 - 40.6 = 59.4% of the voting population that did NOT vote for TRT.

During that 4 year term much of the rest of the country learns what

living under a tyrant is like. The following margin of victory is even smaller

and closer by far to the Dems percentages.

You say 60% but that figure includes his co-opted smaller parties;

Banharn, Sanoh, Newin etc. He renamed the other parties "Factions"

and listed them under TRTs umbrella. False flag figures; Why?

Any cursory observation of the Thai parliament at that time

showed these guys were still acting as their own political brokers.

They sold their vote BEFORE the election and allowed themselves

to be lumped together in to TRT like it was a party and not a coalition.

Semantcs and nothing more solid than that.

And this before the Temasek Sale

that gave all Thailand a black eye, and presaged Thaksins downfall for hubris.

Edited February 8, 2010 by animatic