I don’t think this movement can be ‘successful’ as the details now are quite different from the latest May incident. Thai people eventually don’t prefer to see ‘unrest’ or ‘disturbing’ situation.
The movement has to show that it’s the ‘truly’ pro-democracy.
It has become increasingly clear to me that unless we somehow take both Thaksin and the military leaders out of the political equation, we won’t begin to shake off the political malaise that has been haunting us both before and after the coup last September.
Educate might have been the wrong word – Substitute ‘wisdom’, but can you teach wisdom?
It’s a simple message really:
Once a politician shows their true colors, kick them out (don’t keep rewarding them with your vote – search for a better one).
It’s not only the rural masses who threw away their electoral power, I also am disappointed in those TRT politicians who rolled over to Thaksin instead of standing up to him.
I am not sure about the label “academic positions.” That a genuinly political position is voiced by an academic does not make his or her position academic; it remains political.
I know something about finance after being a personal financial advisor for a good period of time:
The difference between 80% and 60% is 20%. Still don’t believe me? Ok, let me put it another way.
Thaksin owns 60% of a company, which is a majority vote. Except that he has another 20% in nominee shares taking his real interest in the company to 80%, which means he has a majority vote by an extra 20%. This is clearly irritating to the Thai authorities, and is seen as against public interest.
I would think the PAD will be back out on the street protesting against this abuse of public trust. He has clearly manipulated the public by concealing 20% in nominee accounts, thereby hiding his true interest in a company he already has majority control over.
The Hmong supported the Laos Royal Army who was overthrowned by the communist. I doubt that if Vang Pao had succeeded the Hmong would be running the government. From what I gathered Vang Pao had connections in Laos who were not Hmong and from my guess they might of been other supporters of the royal family who are opposes the communist reign.
So, the less education people have the more moral they are. The elite are beyond help and education (or the education system has made them as they are) and someone must save the poor from an education system that doesn’t work? Why not just give them political rights without all the elitist clap trap? Oh yes, that was tried and it failed too. Where to now nganadeeleg?
“…give sweeping powers to the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) to handle ”new forms of threats” to the country…The bill, when enacted, would provide an alternative to the Executive Decree on Public Administration in Emergency Situations, which is seen by critics as being too harsh, the source said.”
Interventions might also become more discrete and invisible. A lot simply does not get reported in the news especially at the provincial level. A lot of what Thaksin did wasn’t revealed for years after it happened, like the strange rice loans/price supports that were actually subsidies. In the end this whole thing will probably be seen as a big contest between different elite factions with non-transparency being a critical control variable in the whole game.
The sufficiency nonsense will continue because the military-installed and backed government has just allocated 7-8 billion baht to SE projects.
The view that the SE is about moderation is laughable because it simply means being moderate with what you’ve got. Read the Thai version of Hello or the Tatler to see how the rich are adopting the SE. If you’ve got a lot, you can live moderately at your level of wealth. If you are poor, make do. Not sure you can see this anywhere except in the propaganda on the TV in Thailand, where OTOP projects are relabeled as SE.
And the sick bit is that the wealthiest family in Thailand is promoting this notion. Keep those masses down!
“…in recent weeks and months there has been a series of further clampdowns on visas for foreigners wishing to visit, work and live in Thailand…”
What I noticed in Chiang Rai and Phayao was the outright theft of foreign teachers’ salaries recently. The contract signed is never given to the teacher because it would constitute proof of a whole slew of nefarious “non-sufficient economy” corruptions of education.
For instance, hiring a Phillipino teacher for 15,000 and pocketing the rest of the 25,000 salary you’ve been alloted to pay for a western teacher or cutting pay retroactively from 25, 000 to 15,000 for instance, and pocketing the rest, or just informing the teacher long after they’ve been hired that they are now a “volunteer”.
“Sufficiency economy” whatever they decide it should mean, should include HONESTY and TELLING THE TRUTH.
I really pity these poor teachers who on the one hand are lectured about being members of an honourable “calling” with high standards and on the other hand are blatantly and shamelessly stolen from. The profession of teaching, as far as westerners is concerned, is reduced to missionaries, tourists, kids on their school break or pedophiles and other sorts of sexual deviants with a sexual interest in their students.
When word of this sort of educational practice gets out, recruitment will be hard indeed. Of course, they would lecture me that I’m just another Farang who doesn’t understand Thailand, but the last time I read my Buddhist scriptures this sort of dishonesty was sinful. Pretending it doesn’t happen, likewise sinful whether they are stealing from a Farang or not.
No real surprise: this is just the latest signpost in the post-coup ascendancy of ISOC.
ISOC was success under Prem’s leadership and played an important role in the downfall of the CPT (it also bombed hilltribe villages and burned people alive, but that’s another matter).
But in the post-Prem era, ISOC was humiliated after its Deputy Director General Pallop Pinmanee disobeyed direct orders from the Minister of Defence and ordered the massacre at Krue Sae Mosque. Thaksin immediately reassigned Pallop to Bangkok. Pallop’s driver was then found in front of Thaksin’s house with a massive bomb in his car. Pallop was fired, but the junta stopped the investigation after the coup and released all the suspects.
Thaksin planned a major restructuring of ISOC just prior to the coup. Good thing Prem stopped him in time. Under the junta, ISOC is now headed by the CNS President (rather than the PM, as in the past) and it’s powers increased several times, this current draft bill being only the latest increase.
There’s no real evidence that ISOC has actually improved Thailand’s national security. It allowed the Bangkok bombings to occur (even though the government admitted it knew that terrorism was likely to occur in Bangkok during the time). The situation in the south has gotten worse. Just about the only program ISOC can point to as being a success is it’s plan to produce Jatukham Rammathep amulets and give them away to Buddhists in Yala.
It had been known for quite a while that the miliatary had been considering setting up ISOC as a super-government. What seems to be shocking is:
1) The cabinet approved it
2) The law looks more restrictive than even the paranoid feared. The army can do anything, without asking or telling anyone and is immune from review or proescution by the courts.
This certainly makes any accusation of Thaksin being a dictator appear to be a joke.
Seriously: I’m in the same boat as you and just glean my information from the usual sources.
From what I can see these latest charges are technical breaches, and are probably of no real consequence, as you suggest.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with them pursuing him on whatever they can get him on, because he is likely to have been very smart with the big stuff – remember they only got Al Capone on Tax evasion!
Also remember he was very lucky to have survived the 2001 asset concealment case.
You raise some good points about the emotional reactions to Thaksin – I think it’s his arrogance & ‘winner take all’ attitude that makes him such a divisive character.
He is nether a saint nor the devil, but IMO he has attributes which make him not a suitable person for PM.
(maybe I just have higher ideals than the average voter)
I would have liked to have seen more of the ‘good’ TRT politicians stand up to him and try to moderate his worst behavior, but it seems that was beyond them.
They seem to have rolled over and gone along with him – I’m not sure why?
Possibly because he was bankrolling the party, or they were outnumbered by the ‘bad’ politicians, or they saw his popularity as personal and not necessarily related to TRT policies.
1) I know a fair bit about finance and there isn’t typically a significant difference between 60 and 80% ownership, except a greater claim on dividends. However, the article does imply that there may be corporate laws that require a 75% vote on certain important issues.
2) Concealing assets is by itself a crime, if I understand correctly, although not “let’s have a coup” level of criminal.
3) I, and many people, have a nuanced view of Thaksin. He was clearly the most popular prime minister in Thai history and it seems hard to deny that he was good for the poor. I don’t know that one can document that he was more corrupt than Chavalit or Banharn, if you use equal time period for comparison. I do think he became corrupted by power, overran checks and balances and seemed willing to bend the law when he needed to.
4) i have no problem with Thaksin being prosecuted (and even jailed) for his crimes, but to pretend they are measurably worse than what other politicians and the army itself has done in the past is to wander into the subjective.
5) Does anyone else think this is the most important news of the day (week, month, year)?
Nganadeeleg , use of nominees has always been a legal grey zone in Thailand.
When the junta wanted to punish Temasek for buying Shin Corp using nominees (Pong Sarasin and Cedar/Kularb), the only way it could do so was to rule that nominee shareholdings were equivalent to direct shareholdings. Of course, this hurt more than Temasek – Thai nominees of foreign shareholders owned a quarter of all shares on the SET.
At the time of Thaksin’s asset disclosure, the traditional interpretation of nominees still held (i.e., that if Thaksin or his family didn’t directly hold stock in a company, he didn’t own it). Of course, the junta can always order the courts to make an ex post facto ruling, like it did with the TRT ban.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss 
Football and the freeze
Oh…why don’t you just trace his past back to see how he becomes like this??? very simple…
Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship protests, Bangkok
I don’t think this movement can be ‘successful’ as the details now are quite different from the latest May incident. Thai people eventually don’t prefer to see ‘unrest’ or ‘disturbing’ situation.
The movement has to show that it’s the ‘truly’ pro-democracy.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
Looks like Suthichai Yoon is a 4. I’m as surprised as you are!
Take Thaksin and generals out of political equation
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/06/21/opinion/opinion_30037409.php
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
Try again – perhaps they will be wiser next time.
Educate might have been the wrong word – Substitute ‘wisdom’, but can you teach wisdom?
It’s a simple message really:
Once a politician shows their true colors, kick them out (don’t keep rewarding them with your vote – search for a better one).
It’s not only the rural masses who threw away their electoral power, I also am disappointed in those TRT politicians who rolled over to Thaksin instead of standing up to him.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
I am not sure about the label “academic positions.” That a genuinly political position is voiced by an academic does not make his or her position academic; it remains political.
Thaksin come home!
I know something about finance after being a personal financial advisor for a good period of time:
The difference between 80% and 60% is 20%. Still don’t believe me? Ok, let me put it another way.
Thaksin owns 60% of a company, which is a majority vote. Except that he has another 20% in nominee shares taking his real interest in the company to 80%, which means he has a majority vote by an extra 20%. This is clearly irritating to the Thai authorities, and is seen as against public interest.
I would think the PAD will be back out on the street protesting against this abuse of public trust. He has clearly manipulated the public by concealing 20% in nominee accounts, thereby hiding his true interest in a company he already has majority control over.
Dasterdly!
Stranger than fiction?
The Hmong supported the Laos Royal Army who was overthrowned by the communist. I doubt that if Vang Pao had succeeded the Hmong would be running the government. From what I gathered Vang Pao had connections in Laos who were not Hmong and from my guess they might of been other supporters of the royal family who are opposes the communist reign.
Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship protests, Bangkok
Can we truly say they are “growing” anti government protests?
Reasonableness, moderation and inanity
“Anything, Anytime, Anywhere, Professionally”
— the corporate motto of former CIA-front Air America.
Those words have been in my mind a lot recently, as I read news of the latest debacle concerning the brave Hmong resistance.
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
So, the less education people have the more moral they are. The elite are beyond help and education (or the education system has made them as they are) and someone must save the poor from an education system that doesn’t work? Why not just give them political rights without all the elitist clap trap? Oh yes, that was tried and it failed too. Where to now nganadeeleg?
“Thailand – a national security state”
“…give sweeping powers to the Internal Security Operations Command (Isoc) to handle ”new forms of threats” to the country…The bill, when enacted, would provide an alternative to the Executive Decree on Public Administration in Emergency Situations, which is seen by critics as being too harsh, the source said.”
Interventions might also become more discrete and invisible. A lot simply does not get reported in the news especially at the provincial level. A lot of what Thaksin did wasn’t revealed for years after it happened, like the strange rice loans/price supports that were actually subsidies. In the end this whole thing will probably be seen as a big contest between different elite factions with non-transparency being a critical control variable in the whole game.
The sufficiency fig leaf
The sufficiency nonsense will continue because the military-installed and backed government has just allocated 7-8 billion baht to SE projects.
The view that the SE is about moderation is laughable because it simply means being moderate with what you’ve got. Read the Thai version of Hello or the Tatler to see how the rich are adopting the SE. If you’ve got a lot, you can live moderately at your level of wealth. If you are poor, make do. Not sure you can see this anywhere except in the propaganda on the TV in Thailand, where OTOP projects are relabeled as SE.
And the sick bit is that the wealthiest family in Thailand is promoting this notion. Keep those masses down!
Sufficiently out of tune
“…in recent weeks and months there has been a series of further clampdowns on visas for foreigners wishing to visit, work and live in Thailand…”
What I noticed in Chiang Rai and Phayao was the outright theft of foreign teachers’ salaries recently. The contract signed is never given to the teacher because it would constitute proof of a whole slew of nefarious “non-sufficient economy” corruptions of education.
For instance, hiring a Phillipino teacher for 15,000 and pocketing the rest of the 25,000 salary you’ve been alloted to pay for a western teacher or cutting pay retroactively from 25, 000 to 15,000 for instance, and pocketing the rest, or just informing the teacher long after they’ve been hired that they are now a “volunteer”.
“Sufficiency economy” whatever they decide it should mean, should include HONESTY and TELLING THE TRUTH.
I really pity these poor teachers who on the one hand are lectured about being members of an honourable “calling” with high standards and on the other hand are blatantly and shamelessly stolen from. The profession of teaching, as far as westerners is concerned, is reduced to missionaries, tourists, kids on their school break or pedophiles and other sorts of sexual deviants with a sexual interest in their students.
When word of this sort of educational practice gets out, recruitment will be hard indeed. Of course, they would lecture me that I’m just another Farang who doesn’t understand Thailand, but the last time I read my Buddhist scriptures this sort of dishonesty was sinful. Pretending it doesn’t happen, likewise sinful whether they are stealing from a Farang or not.
“Thailand – a national security state”
No real surprise: this is just the latest signpost in the post-coup ascendancy of ISOC.
ISOC was success under Prem’s leadership and played an important role in the downfall of the CPT (it also bombed hilltribe villages and burned people alive, but that’s another matter).
But in the post-Prem era, ISOC was humiliated after its Deputy Director General Pallop Pinmanee disobeyed direct orders from the Minister of Defence and ordered the massacre at Krue Sae Mosque. Thaksin immediately reassigned Pallop to Bangkok. Pallop’s driver was then found in front of Thaksin’s house with a massive bomb in his car. Pallop was fired, but the junta stopped the investigation after the coup and released all the suspects.
Thaksin planned a major restructuring of ISOC just prior to the coup. Good thing Prem stopped him in time. Under the junta, ISOC is now headed by the CNS President (rather than the PM, as in the past) and it’s powers increased several times, this current draft bill being only the latest increase.
There’s no real evidence that ISOC has actually improved Thailand’s national security. It allowed the Bangkok bombings to occur (even though the government admitted it knew that terrorism was likely to occur in Bangkok during the time). The situation in the south has gotten worse. Just about the only program ISOC can point to as being a success is it’s plan to produce Jatukham Rammathep amulets and give them away to Buddhists in Yala.
“Thailand – a national security state”
The AHRC has since last year warned about the resurgence of ISOC. It has been all but ignored by the mainstream press.
See for instance:
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2006statements/860/
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/944/
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/940/
“Thailand – a national security state”
It had been known for quite a while that the miliatary had been considering setting up ISOC as a super-government. What seems to be shocking is:
1) The cabinet approved it
2) The law looks more restrictive than even the paranoid feared. The army can do anything, without asking or telling anyone and is immune from review or proescution by the courts.
This certainly makes any accusation of Thaksin being a dictator appear to be a joke.
Thaksin come home!
Patiwat: Legal grey zone?
The Thaksin government had plenty of time to make the rules transparent.
Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink
Thaksin come home!
Seriously: I’m in the same boat as you and just glean my information from the usual sources.
From what I can see these latest charges are technical breaches, and are probably of no real consequence, as you suggest.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with them pursuing him on whatever they can get him on, because he is likely to have been very smart with the big stuff – remember they only got Al Capone on Tax evasion!
Also remember he was very lucky to have survived the 2001 asset concealment case.
You raise some good points about the emotional reactions to Thaksin – I think it’s his arrogance & ‘winner take all’ attitude that makes him such a divisive character.
He is nether a saint nor the devil, but IMO he has attributes which make him not a suitable person for PM.
(maybe I just have higher ideals than the average voter)
I would have liked to have seen more of the ‘good’ TRT politicians stand up to him and try to moderate his worst behavior, but it seems that was beyond them.
They seem to have rolled over and gone along with him – I’m not sure why?
Possibly because he was bankrolling the party, or they were outnumbered by the ‘bad’ politicians, or they saw his popularity as personal and not necessarily related to TRT policies.
Thaksin come home!
1) I know a fair bit about finance and there isn’t typically a significant difference between 60 and 80% ownership, except a greater claim on dividends. However, the article does imply that there may be corporate laws that require a 75% vote on certain important issues.
2) Concealing assets is by itself a crime, if I understand correctly, although not “let’s have a coup” level of criminal.
3) I, and many people, have a nuanced view of Thaksin. He was clearly the most popular prime minister in Thai history and it seems hard to deny that he was good for the poor. I don’t know that one can document that he was more corrupt than Chavalit or Banharn, if you use equal time period for comparison. I do think he became corrupted by power, overran checks and balances and seemed willing to bend the law when he needed to.
4) i have no problem with Thaksin being prosecuted (and even jailed) for his crimes, but to pretend they are measurably worse than what other politicians and the army itself has done in the past is to wander into the subjective.
5) Does anyone else think this is the most important news of the day (week, month, year)?
Cabinet approves security bill
http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/20Jun2007_news03.php
Thaksin come home!
Nganadeeleg , use of nominees has always been a legal grey zone in Thailand.
When the junta wanted to punish Temasek for buying Shin Corp using nominees (Pong Sarasin and Cedar/Kularb), the only way it could do so was to rule that nominee shareholdings were equivalent to direct shareholdings. Of course, this hurt more than Temasek – Thai nominees of foreign shareholders owned a quarter of all shares on the SET.
At the time of Thaksin’s asset disclosure, the traditional interpretation of nominees still held (i.e., that if Thaksin or his family didn’t directly hold stock in a company, he didn’t own it). Of course, the junta can always order the courts to make an ex post facto ruling, like it did with the TRT ban.