Conspiracy Theories: Half May Be Worth Your Attention: Thai Talk

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Conspiracy theories: Half may be worth your attention

Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- All kinds of conspiracy theories have sprung up regarding the upcoming censure debate against the government. And if you are a news junkie, you tend to either believe all of them or reject them outright as rubbish.

But even the worst cynic would have to admit that, in Thai politics, you can't dismiss all the bizarre theories woven around political manipulations that take place behind the scenes.

It's a very subtle political game on both sides of the fence. The opposition is trying to undermine the government's credibility with a frontal censure motion. The government is hitting back with a draft-dodging charge against the opposition leader.

And in the middle of the political battle is the war between two retired generals on opposing sides of the political spectrum. This is creating a new round of fear of a confrontation between those for and against Thaksin Shinawatra.

It's the old showdown all over again.

The opposition, led by the Democrat Party, has tendered its new no-confidence motion targetting Premier Yingluck and a few other Cabinet members. The debate is scheduled for November 25-26.

If timing is everything in politics, the date for a new anti-government rally, the signing by Defence Minister Sukampol Suwannathat of a document that strips Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva of his military rank, and a second rally called by Pitak Siam Group leader General Boonlert Kaewprasit carry very special significance indeed.

As soon as the opposition submitted the censure motion to the Parliament speaker, Pheu Thai MPs said they would ask the Constitutional Court to rule on whether Abhisit, having been stripped of his military rank, could legitimately be proposed as an alternative premier under the constitutional clause governing censure debate.

Some ruling party members have already called upon Abhisit to show his "sense of responsibility" by quitting as MP - which means the no-confidence debate against the premier would effectively be neutralised.

That, in simple terms, means the government is countering the opposition's move with a pre-emptive strike.

The defence minister said he signed the paper to strip Abhisit of his military rank because a committee set up to investigate him had confirmed that the opposition leader had falsified military registration documents when applying for a job as a lecturer at Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy. The lecturing job, in turn, allowed him to be exempted from military conscription back in 1987.

Abhisit has said he will seek a judicial review of the defence minister's action against him.

The Democrats inevitably see this as an attempt by the government to discredit their leader, in the hope of considerably weakening the case against the premier. The government retaliated by arguing that the two incidents weren't related to each other - and that the Abhisit case had been on the drawing board long before the censure motion was mooted.

Of course, if you read between the lines, there could be some truth in both sides of the contention. But under the prevailing political mood, facts don't really matter; you are either with one of them and against the other, regardless of what the issue is or what arguments are used to back it up.

Now, retired general Boonlert has called a second rally against the government on November 24, after the first one a few weeks ago produced a bigger-than-expected turnout of protesters. This time around, he says, he hopes one million people will turn up to call for the ouster of the government.

Almost immediately, another retired general, Chaisith Shinnawatra, a former Army chief, gathered his former classmates from the Army Cadet School to declare in a press conference that they would assemble people to hold a counter-rally against General Boonlert's gathering.

Will the censure debate take place?

The answer is yes.

Will Abhisit resign as MP?

Definitely not.

Will Premier Yingluck answer the strongly-worded accusations against her? Yes, she will, but with the support of an army of eloquent MPs led by her deputy, Chalerm Yoobamrung, who will also be staging his own "counter-censure" debate against the Democrats. The premier will demonstrate how adept she is at delegating difficult tasks.

Will General Boonlert's protesters and General Chaisith's anti-protest protesters clash? Not likely. The two in fact are old chums and have probably been negotiating the logistics of the rallies on the phone. Both groups will of course stage shows of force. But they won't collide.

Will anything change as a result?

The answer is: Are you kidding?

-- The Nation 2012-11- 22

[lizardtongue]

Suthichai Yoon is a candidate for Master Mind answering questions on the 'Bloody Obvious'

[Ricardo]

A perfectly-normal censure-debate must be part of some conspiracy, rather than just politics-as-it-should-be, giving the opportunity for the Opposition to raise problems & the Government to respond ?

[Thai at Heart]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

[Moruya]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Problem?

[Thai at Heart]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Problem?

If as a newspaper you keep printing conspiracy theories with no corroboration, take opinion pieces with no corroboration, make stories with only "sources said", never bother to follow up on stories, never dig, never discover, then people will eventually take maybe 50% of your stories seriously.

Discount 50% of the conspiracy theories? So what the nation does is print them all with 50% accuracy? Brilliant. What it must be to call a few mates, get a bit of a tip off, write a piece with no secondary corroboration, present it to the editor, bam, published. Buggar it if it turns out to have been complete gossit with zero evidence to back it up.

Now someone from the nation is telling me to discount 50% of conspiracy theories.

That means, on average 25% of the Nation's stories might be seriously researched

I guess it depends if you want to be considered a NEWSpaper or a GOSSIP mag.

Edited November 22, 2012 by Thai at Heart

[Moruya]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Problem?

If as a newspaper you keep printing conspiracy theories with no corroboration, take opinion pieces with no corroboration, make stories with only "sources said", never bother to follow up on stories, never dig, never discover, then people will eventually take maybe 50% of your stories seriously.

Discount 50% of the conspiracy theories? So what the nation does is print them all with 50% accuracy? Brilliant. What it must be to call a few mates, get a bit of a tip off, write a piece with no secondary corroboration, present it to the editor, bam, published. Buggar it if it turns out to have been complete gossit with zero evidence to back it up.

Now someone from the nation is telling me to discount 50% of conspiracy theories.

That means, on average 25% of the Nation's stories might be seriously researched

I guess it depends if you want to be considered a NEWSpaper or a GOSSIP mag.

Read the headline

[TomTao]

Will anything change as a result?

The answer is: Are you kidding?

These two lines sum it all up nicely, gave me a bit of a chuckle too.

[just_another_guy]

Sounds a lot like current American national politics as of late. Kind of like the T-shirt...SAME SAME BUT DIFFERENT-----or should it be different but same same.

Edited November 22, 2012 by just_another_guy

[hellodolly]

Well when all the smoke is cleared the only thing that might change is Abhist will be striped of his milatary rank and made to repay the money. This is not saying he is guilty but lets face it. The whole thing was dreamed up investagated tried and convicted by the same party who is under a justified attack by Abhist.

I had to laugh at this line I think it was a mis print.

"The premier will demonstrate how adept she is at delegating difficult tasks."

I believe they meant

The premier will demonstrate how adept she is at delegating evading difficult tasks.

Probably have a helicopter with no head lights.

Edited November 22, 2012 by hellodolly

[DocHolliday]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Opinions are an essential part of journalism.

I read "opinions" in NYT, Washington Post, SF Chronicle, Huffington Post, WSJ, Bloomberg and and and.

What's the point? It's a part of almost any publication. Journalists have an opinion like you and me.

[Thai at Heart]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Opinions are an essential part of journalism

I read "opinions" in NYT, Washington Post, SF Chronicle, Huffington Post, WSJ, Bloomberg and and and.

What's the point? It's a part of almost any publication. Journalists have an opinion like you and me.

Opinion pieces are ok, but, when we are told, so and so says that xxxk protestors are going to come to Bangkok. Does anyone have any more independent insight than what that person states. When we are told that Abhisit case is going to the Constitution court, has anyone got an independent lawyers opinion on what may or may not happen.

We have thousands of pieces of anecdotal evidence that are touted as fact in Thailand. Corruption here, payments there, discussions here, and the media does absolutely NOTHING to even attempt to uncover more on the story beyond what is parroted out of official lines. We have had a story that 160 bh baht was moved out of the country. Someone says yes, someone says no, both with a massive political bias behind their statement. Has the nation dug anywhere to find out if there was even a shred of truth to any of it? That is journalism.

Putting the accusation the front page, and then waiting for the opposition to refute it, and then discussing it with absolutely no evidence other than that provided by the accuser and the denier is work ANYONE can do. Anyone got any inside track to a bank employee, anyone got any inside track to anyone in the Finance ministry, anyone got the where with all to actually call the money laundering organisation in Hong Kong and speak to them themselves? Nope. We wait from the rebuttal from the government to say, "We have no evidence of this". Of course they aren't going to admit it.

In fact, the Nation is not unique in this.

We have had months and months of street protests from all sides. How many times did a reporter from any media march into the crowd and get an opinion from the crowd why they are there? We have had 1000 accusations that people have been paid to go to protests. Anyone from the media ever managed to PROVE anything. So, it transforms itself into fact on the laws of probability irrespective of proof. The media ends up becoming a mouth piece solely for the "leaders" of the conversation.

In another instance, we are told that the farmers aren't receiving their full payment and the middle men are creaming it. Has any publication or TV channel actually bothered to get in the car and drive up country and ASK a farmer what his experience is? If it's happened I haven't seen it. the most important industry in the country for the poor is shrouded in absolute secrecy.

So, as you see, in my opinion, until the media actually gets off its ass and does some work, it ends up being some kind of quasi-managed media country. Accusations fly from one publication, denials are made, and then the story dies.

[Buchholz]

The defence minister said he signed the paper to strip Abhisit of his military rank because a committee set up to investigate him had confirmed that the opposition leader had falsified military registration documents when applying for a job as a lecturer at Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy. The lecturing job, in turn, allowed him to be exempted from military conscription back in 1987.

Well when all the smoke is cleared the only thing that might change is Abhist will be striped of his milatary rank and made to repay the money. This is not saying he is guilty but lets face it. The whole thing was dreamed up investagated tried and convicted by the same party who is under a justified attack by Abhist.

The editorial OP was apparently several days ago... as it didn't include this update from 3 days ago.

Today it seems Defence Minister Sukampol is holding his decision to strip Abhisit of his rank in abeyance for an additional 10 days in order for Abhisit to present documentation to the panel he appointed.

If the documents are approved, then he would fully rescind his rank-stripping order.

The 10 days runs until Nov. 26, which is after the censure debate.

.

Edited November 22, 2012 by Buchholz

[Moruya]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Opinions are an essential part of journalism

I read "opinions" in NYT, Washington Post, SF Chronicle, Huffington Post, WSJ, Bloomberg and and and.

What's the point? It's a part of almost any publication. Journalists have an opinion like you and me.

Opinion pieces are ok, but, when we are told, so and so says that xxxk protestors are going to come to Bangkok. Does anyone have any more independent insight than what that person states. When we are told that Abhisit case is going to the Constitution court, has anyone got an independent lawyers opinion on what may or may not happen.

We have thousands of pieces of anecdotal evidence that are touted as fact in Thailand. Corruption here, payments there, discussions here, and the media does absolutely NOTHING to even attempt to uncover more on the story beyond what is parroted out of official lines. We have had a story that 160 bh baht was moved out of the country. Someone says yes, someone says no, both with a massive political bias behind their statement. Has the nation dug anywhere to find out if there was even a shred of truth to any of it? That is journalism.

Putting the accusation the front page, and then waiting for the opposition to refute it, and then discussing it with absolutely no evidence other than that provided by the accuser and the denier is work ANYONE can do. Anyone got any inside track to a bank employee, anyone got any inside track to anyone in the Finance ministry, anyone got the where with all to actually call the money laundering organisation in Hong Kong and speak to them themselves? Nope. We wait from the rebuttal from the government to say, "We have no evidence of this". Of course they aren't going to admit it.

In fact, the Nation is not unique in this.

We have had months and months of street protests from all sides. How many times did a reporter from any media march into the crowd and get an opinion from the crowd why they are there? We have had 1000 accusations that people have been paid to go to protests. Anyone from the media ever managed to PROVE anything. So, it transforms itself into fact on the laws of probability irrespective of proof. The media ends up becoming a mouth piece solely for the "leaders" of the conversation.

In another instance, we are told that the farmers aren't receiving their full payment and the middle men are creaming it. Has any publication or TV channel actually bothered to get in the car and drive up country and ASK a farmer what his experience is? If it's happened I haven't seen it. the most important industry in the country for the poor is shrouded in absolute secrecy.

So, as you see, in my opinion, until the media actually gets off its ass and does some work, it ends up being some kind of quasi-managed media country. Accusations fly from one publication, denials are made, and then the story dies.

The BP did an exposé interviewing a range of farmers.

[timewilltell]

Yes - and then the story dies. Every story dies especially if it involves corruption and some high power officials. Every story dies because there is zip all interest in freedom of speech here and every paper is afraid to publish. The Thai way is to pretend everything is rosy, make a lot of smoke to cover up any damning truth and hope it will all go away or everyone will jsut be so confused as to what is really going on they give up. This is Thai culture so do not insult it by expecting anything to be done to make things be transparent - it just doesn't help the corrupt stay in power. They will keep blowing smoke.

[Thai at Heart]

Considering that the nation reports Tittle tattle, pure opinion and rumour as news all the time, maybe they should realise they are part of the problem

Opinions are an essential part of journalism

I read "opinions" in NYT, Washington Post, SF Chronicle, Huffington Post, WSJ, Bloomberg and and and.

What's the point? It's a part of almost any publication. Journalists have an opinion like you and me.

Opinion pieces are ok, but, when we are told, so and so says that xxxk protestors are going to come to Bangkok. Does anyone have any more independent insight than what that person states. When we are told that Abhisit case is going to the Constitution court, has anyone got an independent lawyers opinion on what may or may not happen.

We have thousands of pieces of anecdotal evidence that are touted as fact in Thailand. Corruption here, payments there, discussions here, and the media does absolutely NOTHING to even attempt to uncover more on the story beyond what is parroted out of official lines. We have had a story that 160 bh baht was moved out of the country. Someone says yes, someone says no, both with a massive political bias behind their statement. Has the nation dug anywhere to find out if there was even a shred of truth to any of it? That is journalism.

Putting the accusation the front page, and then waiting for the opposition to refute it, and then discussing it with absolutely no evidence other than that provided by the accuser and the denier is work ANYONE can do. Anyone got any inside track to a bank employee, anyone got any inside track to anyone in the Finance ministry, anyone got the where with all to actually call the money laundering organisation in Hong Kong and speak to them themselves? Nope. We wait from the rebuttal from the government to say, "We have no evidence of this". Of course they aren't going to admit it.

In fact, the Nation is not unique in this.

We have had months and months of street protests from all sides. How many times did a reporter from any media march into the crowd and get an opinion from the crowd why they are there? We have had 1000 accusations that people have been paid to go to protests. Anyone from the media ever managed to PROVE anything. So, it transforms itself into fact on the laws of probability irrespective of proof. The media ends up becoming a mouth piece solely for the "leaders" of the conversation.

In another instance, we are told that the farmers aren't receiving their full payment and the middle men are creaming it. Has any publication or TV channel actually bothered to get in the car and drive up country and ASK a farmer what his experience is? If it's happened I haven't seen it. the most important industry in the country for the poor is shrouded in absolute secrecy.

So, as you see, in my opinion, until the media actually gets off its ass and does some work, it ends up being some kind of quasi-managed media country. Accusations fly from one publication, denials are made, and then the story dies.

The BP did an exposé interviewing a range of farmers.

I read the one article, there were some horrific statistics in there, not least that there is an AUTOMATIC deduction of 30% in some areas for moisture and foreign materials (i.e. husk). This is absolutely horrific, but no one bothered to notice the fact that essentially, the farmer is subsidizing the millers yield. So the price is not 15,000 baht, it is 15,000 - 30%. Not withstanding the fact, that most of the by products from the process can be sold anyway.

This would be like the government mandating the price for oranges at 1000 baht, and the juice manufacturers going out and saying ah, but I have to deduct 500 baht for the peel and pith because I lose it in process. The price is for paddy rice, not paddy rice minus the husk, and yet, despite that jumping off the page, it went completely over the head of the journalist.