Abhisit says he's not worried by 2010 crackdown criminal charges

[khunken]

I can't claim to be 'a lickspittle for the military' or a 'proto fascist' but applaud Pi Sek for his opinion on Ji Ungaporn's writings.

I know Ji (not very well though) and he is an honourable man. But not long ago some of the red shirt fascist supporters were claiming that Abhisit is not Thai because of his birthplace & dual nationality. Pi Sek is using the same argument about Ji and his running away from Lese Majeste charges to reside in the UK as well as his dislike (verging on hatred) for the monarchy here does have some justification.

Coming from a republic, I don't normally have a lot of regard for monarchies as such but living in Thailand has made me aware of the enormous respect & love that Thais have for their King. I respect that.

I don't respect arrogance which is why I'm not directly responding to the 'Proto Fascist' (the most idiotic term I've seen on Thaivisa) accuser.

Of course there's more of the usual belittling of Abhisit in case he might just be braver, cleaner & far less of an arrogant prick than DL in Dubai. He is right to have confidence in the law which doesn't need any 'allowed to be' type of interference, typical of conspiracy theorists.

Anybody's position is set out in many posts.It is is probably for others to assess how craven one is to reactionary forces in Thailand.

The redshirts who branded Abhisit as non Thai are as stupidly wrongheaded as those that label Acharn Giles as non Thai.Odd that the person you defend didn't mention the Abhisit case.

You may not like the term proto fascist or even understand what it means, but it's a perfectly fair label.

No, anyone's posts, no matter how numerous, do not tell everything about that person's opinion. Many of the posts are setting out a contrary position to a post they regard as on a scale from wrongheaded to downright stupid. Labelling someone as a 'proto fascist' or 'military lickspittle' comes close to flaming (particularly the latter) and far too often displays substituting name-calling for honest debate. Neither of your labels are fair, nor is 'craven to reactionary forces'.

Those sort of pathetic terms are a relic of the cold war which is all but over except for small groups (both hard right & hard left) who haven't yet grown out of it.

I don't dislike the 'proto fascist' term - I just have a laugh every time I see it.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[khunken]

Just to clarify -

1) I said Ji Ungpakorn is not Thai "any more" - as in, he was, now he's not. I was not referring to his mother's farang DNA nor his education at Durham University, SOAS and wherever it was that he got his other degree in England; I was referring to Thais loving Thailand and HM The King. FYI I am a farang-born Thai-nationalised caucasian, which makes it hard for me to play the race card here!

2) I, as an inherent fascist myself (I am happy to explain this, but it's rather off-topic and very long-winded) and a vocal critic of democracy, consider "proto-fascist" to be a rather silly term; but I suppose if there was ever an opportunity to use it, then jayboy has found an appropriate one.

Of course, even though I think he's a traitor, I think that Giles does have one or two endearing qualities. Such as the conviction in his belief that social change is needed (which is why he sometimes stretches the truth/tells outright lies) and his abhorrence of the use of violence to put points across.

The problem with labelling someone a traitor under such draconian lese majeste laws as there are in Thailand, is that by definition to even get involved in discussing or defending anyone's position is a complete non-starter.

I don't think he's a traitor. I think he's entitled to his opinion and it's fine if the vast majority don't agree with him.

Hope I didn't offend anyone??????

No offence from me. But you're wrong in that Lese Majeste can be debated as can discussing individuals accused as long as you don't quote what they are alleged to have said.

Many have expressed an opinion on LM (including me - that it needs drastic amendment or scrapping) and HM the King has also spoken against it. What Ji Ungaporn has done is gone much further (not quotable here) in his writings and it is this that causes the traitor label to be used. I 'm not supporting it but I can understand why many Thais (naturalised ones too!) who have seen his work feel that way.

[Thereisnoif]

Of course he knows he is untouchable

[whybother]

Of course he knows he is untouchable

If he was so untouchable, he wouldn't have been charged.

[Thereisnoif]

Of course he knows he is untouchable

If he was so untouchable, he wouldn't have been charged.

What a dumb reply.

How many above the law Hiso's on either side of the political divide in this country have been charged with all sorts of crimes but have never had to spend more than an hour in a police station, let alone one night in a prison cell ?

[whybother]

Of course he knows he is untouchable

If he was so untouchable, he wouldn't have been charged.

What a dumb reply.

How many above the law Hiso's on either side of the political divide in this country have been charged with all sorts of crimes but have never had to spend more than an hour in a police station, let alone one night in a prison cell ?

I think you need to look up the definition of "untouchable".

[ThaiOats]

I'd like to quote some of the replies given to my own post regarding Giles's view but unfortunately I'm participating from an iPhone. Not to derail the topic too far off track, I just wanted to point out that his analysis shouldn't be thrown out because he believes LM should be amended. That aside, he is clearly pointing out that PTP is swindling the red shirts and that they are being fooled.

I also believe that deals have been struck between the military and PTP. If every force gangs up on the Democrats, they're hoping that something will stick. As for setting a precedent and holding Thaksin accountable for the Tak Bai incident, I'm sure they can weasel out of that later IF Abhisit and Suthep are found guilty. For all we know, if the court finds them not guilty, PTP may mobilize the reds again.

I watched a 'rally' of red shirts in Suphan Buri the other day on DNN and it's nothing but brainwashing. While she (the speech giver) goes on working up the emotional hatred for the democrats and sympathy for Thaksin, little does she, or her listeners, know that the Red perspective should be more inline with Giles. Which is important to disseminate Giles's view because if the Red Shirts are brainwashed not to listen to the Democrats, maybe they would listen to their own side. This whole case against Abhisit is either a farce or if it sticks, the Red's idea of democracy is down the drain as power is given back to the military.

[jayboy]

Just to clarify -

1) I said Ji Ungpakorn is not Thai "any more" - as in, he was, now he's not. I was not referring to his mother's farang DNA nor his education at Durham University, SOAS and wherever it was that he got his other degree in England; I was referring to Thais loving Thailand and HM The King. FYI I am a farang-born Thai-nationalised caucasian, which makes it hard for me to play the race card here!

2) I, as an inherent fascist myself (I am happy to explain this, but it's rather off-topic and very long-winded) and a vocal critic of democracy, consider "proto-fascist" to be a rather silly term; but I suppose if there was ever an opportunity to use it, then jayboy has found an appropriate one.

Of course, even though I think he's a traitor, I think that Giles does have one or two endearing qualities. Such as the conviction in his belief that social change is needed (which is why he sometimes stretches the truth/tells outright lies) and his abhorrence of the use of violence to put points across.

The problem with labelling someone a traitor under such draconian lese majeste laws as there are in Thailand, is that by definition to even get involved in discussing or defending anyone's position is a complete non-starter.

I don't think he's a traitor. I think he's entitled to his opinion and it's fine if the vast majority don't agree with him.

Hope I didn't offend anyone??????

No offence from me. But you're wrong in that Lese Majeste can be debated as can discussing individuals accused as long as you don't quote what they are alleged to have said.

Many have expressed an opinion on LM (including me - that it needs drastic amendment or scrapping) and HM the King has also spoken against it. What Ji Ungaporn has done is gone much further (not quotable here) in his writings and it is this that causes the traitor label to be used. I 'm not supporting it but I can understand why many Thais (naturalised ones too!) who have seen his work feel that way.

There is no general adverse reaction to Giles from most Thais for the simple reason that 90 % have never heard of him.Those that have heard of him will associate his name primarily with his very distinguished father.

Giles is in many ways a rather tedious lefty but he's no traitor.Those who label him as such need to rethink what's important and what's not.

[Thereisnoif]

Just to clarify -

1) I said Ji Ungpakorn is not Thai "any more" - as in, he was, now he's not. I was not referring to his mother's farang DNA nor his education at Durham University, SOAS and wherever it was that he got his other degree in England; I was referring to Thais loving Thailand and HM The King. FYI I am a farang-born Thai-nationalised caucasian, which makes it hard for me to play the race card here!

2) I, as an inherent fascist myself (I am happy to explain this, but it's rather off-topic and very long-winded) and a vocal critic of democracy, consider "proto-fascist" to be a rather silly term; but I suppose if there was ever an opportunity to use it, then jayboy has found an appropriate one.

Of course, even though I think he's a traitor, I think that Giles does have one or two endearing qualities. Such as the conviction in his belief that social change is needed (which is why he sometimes stretches the truth/tells outright lies) and his abhorrence of the use of violence to put points across.

The problem with labelling someone a traitor under such draconian lese majeste laws as there are in Thailand, is that by definition to even get involved in discussing or defending anyone's position is a complete non-starter.

I don't think he's a traitor. I think he's entitled to his opinion and it's fine if the vast majority don't agree with him.

Hope I didn't offend anyone??????

No offence from me. But you're wrong in that Lese Majeste can be debated as can discussing individuals accused as long as you don't quote what they are alleged to have said.

Many have expressed an opinion on LM (including me - that it needs drastic amendment or scrapping) and HM the King has also spoken against it. What Ji Ungaporn has done is gone much further (not quotable here) in his writings and it is this that causes the traitor label to be used. I 'm not supporting it but I can understand why many Thais (naturalised ones too!) who have seen his work feel that way.

There is no general adverse reaction to Giles from most Thais for the simple reason that 90 % have never heard of him.Those that have heard of him will associate his name primarily with his very distinguished father.

Giles is in many ways a rather tedious lefty but he's no traitor.Those who label him as such need to rethink what's important and what's not.

What do 99 % of the Thai population know anyway ?

[Thai at Heart]

Just to clarify -

1) I said Ji Ungpakorn is not Thai "any more" - as in, he was, now he's not. I was not referring to his mother's farang DNA nor his education at Durham University, SOAS and wherever it was that he got his other degree in England; I was referring to Thais loving Thailand and HM The King. FYI I am a farang-born Thai-nationalised caucasian, which makes it hard for me to play the race card here!

2) I, as an inherent fascist myself (I am happy to explain this, but it's rather off-topic and very long-winded) and a vocal critic of democracy, consider "proto-fascist" to be a rather silly term; but I suppose if there was ever an opportunity to use it, then jayboy has found an appropriate one.

Of course, even though I think he's a traitor, I think that Giles does have one or two endearing qualities. Such as the conviction in his belief that social change is needed (which is why he sometimes stretches the truth/tells outright lies) and his abhorrence of the use of violence to put points across.

The problem with labelling someone a traitor under such draconian lese majeste laws as there are in Thailand, is that by definition to even get involved in discussing or defending anyone's position is a complete non-starter.

I don't think he's a traitor. I think he's entitled to his opinion and it's fine if the vast majority don't agree with him.

Hope I didn't offend anyone??????

No offence from me. But you're wrong in that Lese Majeste can be debated as can discussing individuals accused as long as you don't quote what they are alleged to have said.

Many have expressed an opinion on LM (including me - that it needs drastic amendment or scrapping) and HM the King has also spoken against it. What Ji Ungaporn has done is gone much further (not quotable here) in his writings and it is this that causes the traitor label to be used. I 'm not supporting it but I can understand why many Thais (naturalised ones too!) who have seen his work feel that way.

That's all good with me. He's a Republican.

Unless this debate comes out and the invulnerability of the system becomes part of Thailand it only serves to undermine the monarchy eventually.

I won't say more than that because it can't even get close to being debated.

Hope i didn't offend anyone?????

[acer98]

< < Moderator Deleted Post >>

"there's a fair argument they should not be charged with this offence", but we'll ignore that and say that if they get off it was because of the evil amart.

Agreed that removed post was very diversionary in its effort to deflect.

[arthurwait]

It would be like being scared of a 'knock knock' joke book.

[acer98]

Ji Ungpakorn is not really a Thai anymore though is he? Some put great stock in what he says - I'm afraid I don't and, besides that, I think he's a traitor to his country and especially his King (just pinning my colours to the mask in the interests of transparency). However, let's have a quick look at what he says (I've put numbers on them so that people can flame me easier):

1. "It was the army that overthrew the democratically elected government of Taksin Shinawat in 2006."

Yes, the army overthrew the government at the time. But it had not been 'democratically elected' - it had been dissolved. It was Thaksin who decided to stay on undemocratically, which is paramount to a coup. That's why many, including me, believe that the coup was necessary.

2. "Abhisit and Sutep were also centrally involved with Sutep having the formal position of “director”. However, it would have been impossible for these two civilian politicians to have had any real power over the military and to have ordered the military operations against the Red Shirts which resulted in nearly 90 deaths. The orders must have come from Prayut and Anupong and been approved by Abhisit and Sutep."

Given noone knows the actual orders given, just the internationally-accepted guidelines that the CRES laboured to emphasise they were following, it's pretty hard to agree with him here. We also know that Suthep was removed as 'director' and replaced with Gen. Anupong Paojinda following the 10 April carnage.

3. "All four are guilty of mass-murder."

See #2. I do not agree with him at all, for a number of reasons (not least of which is, if the orders were to kill on sight, we would have seen thousands killed). Besides, that's what trials are for (well, maybe not in the case of the military). However, changing his tune would probably attract a lot of criticism from the Red Shirt camp with whom he draws most of his support.

4. "In return for tolerating the election of the Pua Thai Government in 2011, the military will be absolved of any wrong-doing."

I highly doubt the military had the option of 'tolerating' or 'not tolerating' the election result. They just don't want to make waves with a power in Thailand that rivals or even surpasses the civilian government, especially when they have shown that power by kicking Thaksin out in the past (not to mention all the other coups).

5. "In the future Taksin will also be allowed to return to Thailand."

He is already. If the suggestion is that he will be able to return with legal impunity... maybe, it depends on how much civil strife it would cause.

6. "The lèse majesté law, which has been used against progressive Red Shirts, will also not be changed or abolished."

Correct, this has been made clear by Peua Thai since their election.

7. "In early 2012 Taksin made a speech in Cambodia where he said that he had no quarrel with the military and that his only opponents were the Democrat Party."

Thaksin has made a few speeches recently where the content of the speech is directly contradicted by the immediate actions of his Peua Thai underlings.

8a. "(The case against Abhisit and Sutep) is a “displacement activity” to create an image of a government which seeks to bring the killers of the Red Shirts to justice."

Well, obviously, as well as denigrating (one might say 'defaming') their political opponents.

8b. "...Abhisit and Sutep will never spend the rest of their lives in jail. If they did, it would create a precedent to bring Taksin to court for ordering the killings in the War on Drugs and at Tak Bai in the South."

Yes, there is that, but the prime reason that Abhisit and Suthep won't be going to jail is that there is no evidence that they ordered the unprovoked killing of civilians. See #2 and #3.

8c. "Secondly, having a case hanging over the heads of Abhisit and Sutep is a good bargaining counter in negotiations to bring Taksin back and amend the Constitution in favour of Pua Thai politicians."

Peua Thai may have thought they had a bargaining chip, but they don't... because the Democrat side are refusing to negotiate with regards to amnesty for anyone other than non-criminal protesters.

9. "There are no plans by the Pua Thai Party to amend the Constitution or re-draft a Constitution to bring about real democracy."

It has been made clear that aim of the constitution amendment/re-draft is to 'bring about real democracy' by invalidating the injustice of the coup, aka whitewashing Thaksin.

10. "The proposals of the Nitirat group of progressive law academics do not have Pua Thai support."

Correct. Not much to add to this, except it seems that the proposals of the Nitirat group do not have the support of anyone in politics.

11. "Importantly this bargaining counter will not upset the military as they and Pua Thai feel that Abhisit and Sutep can be used and abused."

See #4. The military can throw whatever tantrums they like, or not, at the end of the day.

<< Moderator Deleted Post >>

Wow! I expected to get flamed, but it surprises me that it was you that came back with the dismissive acerbity shown in your first paragraph. I thought you went to the 2nd best uni in England?

You have your opinion on "Giles", as do I. They're tantamount opposites... if you have read his English-language books, you will see that there is no way he cannot be deemed as a traitor to HM The King. Traitor to the country? Up for interpretation, you know where I stand and I know where you stand.

I actually agree with amendment to the lese majeste Laws (which Ji was charged with in the first place), or at least their review... but he decided to run from the trial because he didn't think it would be fair (since you bring up "usual reactionary tricks"...).

Anyway, thanks for the answer on point 1 - that it's BS It's a matter of opinion I suppose, my opinion is that Thaksin wasn't the legal, democratic or constitutional PM when he was ousted. This has been done to death already, those that agree agree and those who don't like to cite the controversy of the EC's decision mid-2006 and Abhisit's 'undemocratic' decision to boycott the April 2006 election on grounds that the election was not held democratically.

And thanks for explaining your stance on why Abhisit & Suthep won't be doing any jail time... although I thought whybother's comment summarised your position quite well! We can see that I consider the two to have a fairly strong legal stance in these charges, you dismiss that strong legal stance as irrelevant because they won't be charged because "the Thai Justice system will never be allowed".

And I, like you, think there needs to be a public inquiry as to why what happened happened. There was - Abhisit set it up, it came up with a detailed report fairly damning to both sides, and the report was basically ridiculed, suppressed and rejected by everyone involved (except the public, the media and the Democrats - none of whom were in any position to do anything about it!). Prior to that it was billed as the unbiased report everyone was waiting for, but it seems it didn't provide enough of a whitewash for everyone for the army, the Red Shirts and the pro-Thaksin side of the political sphere.

Thank you your well written and thorough reply.

[Thai at Heart]

Actually I am intruiged by " not Thai anymore", as qualifying his academic status versus these corrupt pieces of s**t on all sides of the political spectrum makes his opinion any less valid.

Incredible statement.

In 100 years time maybe he will be considered before his time.

Edited June 27, 2013 by Thai at Heart