April 2007 - Ousted PM Thaksin states his intention to Manchester City football club. Meanwhile the build up to the party dissolution trail gains anticipation.
May: Friends and students ask me about Thaksin buying Man City. I tell them I think it won't happen because the junta do no need Thaksin building a fan base in the UK, especially with the anti-coup protests gaining momentum over here. It would be a political and face loss for the junta and I predict they will make steps to make the cash purchase impossible.
June: Thai Rak Thai are disbanded (midnight, May 30th). Sondhi (Junta leader but not PM) forgets that he is even meant to pretend he is not pulling strings and instantly suggests amnesty for some TRT players. He later backs down when people point out how ludicrous the idea is. Anti coup protests gain in numbers and attention.
Saturday 9th June: Anti coup protests, with suspected help from ousted politicians - attract about ten thousand. This number is enough to raise concern.
Sunday 10th June: PM Surayud makes a TV speech lambasting Thaksin directly for the first time ever and talking about rule of law.
Monday 11th June: AEC freeze Thaksin's assets . Thaksin is ncensed enough to suggest returning to Thailand and entering politics (which he is banned from doing like al other TRT members).. It's his last desperate roll of the dice as he senses the end game coming. Junta call his bluff and say "He's welcome to come home but we can't guarantee his safety". Thaksin later changes his mind.
The games continue as the end draws near............
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Monday, June 11, 2007
Open letter to my hero of censorship
Dear Sitthichai, head of Thailand's Ministry of Information Technology
I write to you today to offer my most sincere thanks to you and your esteemed team at the MICT and my huge gratitude for your services to my family and the entire nation.
I saw in yesterday's Nation newspaper that some sad, misguided young people actually held a demonstration at your office concerning the nature of your work. These people are clearly uneducated and ungrateful of your selfless deeds for Thailand.
After all, when you took over the post of MICT chief a couple of years ago, you did so for the good of all people. OK , so you weren't actually chosen by the people, you were chosen by the men who took power with tanks and guns, but hey, you knew that you could do the job right? Popular democracy is over rated anyway.
See, that's the problem with people nowadays, they aren't very good at making decisions for themselves, they are just so damn busy trying to get by on minimum wages (Thank goodness you earn at least a thousand times more than that, you need to eat to keep up your good work!) and they sometimes really don't know what's for the best. People like that need a little guidance in their thoughts and moral decisiveness.
And that's where you come in. As soon as your were appointed you followed in the work of your predecessor and very clearly laid out your policy: you would censor sites that were either not suitable for the family, insulting to Thailand or "a threat to national security".
Now as a family man myself, your first target means a lot to me. I'm truly grateful that you have taken the burden from me - a responsible father - and decided on my behalf what it is that my son (and therefore his father too) is allowed to see on the internet.
That's something these ungrateful protesters can't comprehend - can't they see that you and your team of five unelected colleagues are that selfless that you have taken away the pressure and pain of personal choice from every parent in Thailand and placed it onto your own shoulders?
And are they truly that short sighted that they don't fathom all the time they would have spent communicating with their siblings, they can now spend watching soap operas on any of the five TV channels? (Each and every one owned by your buddies in the army and therefore also the government)
You replace inconveniences like freedom of speech and thought with the blessing of censorship and your chosen form of (non) reality and how do we thank you? With protests!!! You bestow upon us this gift of wholesome moral purity from above and how do we respond? With complaints!!!! I feel so ashamed.
Those others just don't follow your master plan. Only the strongest minds can encompass your ideals to wash the minds of Thai people by letting them know that there are NO true criticisms of Thailand or the junta! There are NO Thai people who take pictures of themselves naked! These things only exist in foreign countries! That's why all foreign criticisms are hypocritical! You said so yourself. Your verisimilitude is humbling to lesser mortals such as me.
Those common people clearly don't appreciate your work rate either. Web statistics say you gentlemen now block over seventeen thousand web sites and that number increases by ninety a month. Now that's at least three new sites a day. You sure must spend a lot of time examining these sites and deciding if they should be banned. I wager you donate countless hours of your time meticulously examining graphical images. After all, you said yourself that pornography accounts for many of the sites you expurgate from view.
It must be so strenuous for your nearly all male team to spend so much perusing sickening sites with naked women, all in the name of national interest. I bet you have to take a lot of bathroom breaks just to muster the will to carry on. I'm certain none of those anti - MICT parasites stopped to mull over your ordeal before they proceeded on their silly protest motion.
But my admiration doesn't stop there. Not only am I in awe of your actions, I am subjugated by your words. Each time you speak, my mind is filled by bewilderment at your thoughts and difference. Just two months ago you explained that your ministry was now only blocking about "sixteen sites" and you were "more democratic than the previous administration even though we are unelected".
Sir, I sat down and I thought, and thought and thought. Yet try as I might, my tiny cerebellum could not muster an answer to such a simple question: If you are blocking more websites than the last MICT - which you are - then how could you be more democratic? I strained to apprehend your deeper meaning, but I couldn't. Just as I was beginning to forgive my own insolence, another question hit me : If you are blocking only ninety sites a month, why has the number of blocked sites increased by about ten thousand since May 2006?
I simply can't answer these questions, but that's why I'm not in your place. I am a fool, a fool who is fortunate to have you here to police my thoughts. After all, who am I to question the MICT? I'm so stupid, I still enjoy web surfing.
You meanwhile, have better things to do. You told The Nation that you feel the internet "Is not an exciting tool" and you only "check e-mails" and nothing more. It's only right that someone with such high ideals that they have no interest in the web should be responsible for monitoring and making decision for fifty million plus people who love to use it.
But those fifty million people need safety. We all need to feel safe and no respectable group working for the country would think any other way. That's why your heroic squad have taken the time to block any sites which "threaten national security". I must confess I wasn't exactly sure what this phrase meant, but luckily the papers were generous enough to report on MICT activities so I managed to learn a little. The MICT defines a "threat to national security" as a university web forum, a blog , a web site for parties that try to take power via free elections , people's groups , authors and of course Google Youtube!
It's yet another example of the difference in our greatness. There I was, with my public school education, thinking that 'threats to national security' meant agenda such as North Korea, nuclear armaments and global warming. And yet all this time the real danger to the mighty military government was a bunch of bespectacled university geeks, a writer with a pen and a few computer nerd bloggers! In other words, anyone so damn petty they had the nerve to complain that you guys took power by force and not through elections! (Honestly, some people just look for things to complain about don't they?)
Forgive my mistake and please be assured it will never happen again, I now understand that a full list of "threats to national security" should be declared at your discretion only. Wretches such as I will only waste it.
Speaking of waste, I saw your comments at a computer exhibition recently where you stated that "Foreign technology simply takes money away from Thais. To be truly proud, we should build computers ourselves".
I was shocked to hear this. So shocked in fact I threw out every foreign object in my house. My TV (Taiwanese) , my PS2 (Japanese) , my fridge (Korean) , my car (bloody Japs again!) , all the fruit in my fridge (except the pineapples, they grow here right?) , my cell phone (Where the hell are Nokia from anyway?) and pretty much everything else in the house except the noodles! Hell, once I'm done typing this I'll throw my laptop away! If it ain't built in Thailand we should be ashamed to use it! Thank god your logic is here to help your countrymen progress.
I know you are a busy man Mr Sittichai - there's always some evil web site showing naked Thai women that you need to carefully examine to save your country - but I want to ask you one humble favour.
You see, I'm English and my wife is Thai Chinese (you know, that mixed race bunch that control most of the rich business sector) and we have a child.
Henceforth, my son is half English. Have you been to England? That's a big Thai community out there, maybe you remember a sizeable group of them protesting outside the Thai embassy about you guys after the coup?
I know we're good friends and all. We gave you David Beckham and Harry Potter and you gave us some of the greatest food and holiday spots in the world. We live and play together in good and positive spirit. But still some things are just different.
England has some crazy ideas. For one, there's little censorship because the government actually believes people should think for themselves. They cite some nonsense statistics showing that critical thinking is mutual to academic development and progress and, consequently, a nation's well being. Governments are so weak that they actually get punished for corruption and the people are so stubborn and cynical, they don't accept blatant lies from those in power. The army is so backwards it believes all the same nonsense about national security as I did (You remember, right? terrorists, bombs and missiles and stuff) and stays out of politics.
In short, English people don't like being told what the fuck they can and can't do or think. They are so primitive, I'm absolutely certain if you guys tried to do in England what you did here, every English citizen would go outside, find a soldier and shove his gun so far up his backside he'd be spitting bullets for a year. That's just the way we are.
And that's my fear. My son is both English and Thai. He has both passports, both citizenships, both languages and both mindsets. He's not alone of course. So many inter marriages these days means we have a whole little platoon of these hybrids!
Now think about that fact for a minute, isn't that scary? These kids are all Thai, they love Thailand and its people, but they also have that cynical western streak that says "Who are you to tell me what to think?!".
And that brings me to my dream, or should I say my nightmare? See, I have this vision that my son will grow up to love Thailand but will learn something from me about politicians , oppressors, liars, crooks and cheats. I harbour this deep fear that he'll become educated in a free thinking, critical culture and then return to Thailand to begin his twisted ideas of democracy, progress, freedom of speech and liberty. And what then would become of our saviours? Our mental mentors and our thought control specialists like you?
What if they held you all responsible for what you've done? What if my son was one of those who stood up and marched against you guys - regardless of how hard you oppressed their right to vote and how much blood you shed like you did in 1992 ?
What if he was one of those who told you to stick your bullshit,pusillanimous, hypocritical, dishonest , pedantic , oppressive, cowardly, undemocratic , patronising , fake , duplicitous, self important , discriminatory , outmoded , medieval , dictatorial, totalitarian , arrogant , smug , deceitful , insulting , libellous censorship up your fat, ugly, middle aged arses?
What would become of the nation's personal saviours then? We'd be lost in a sea of young, modern - thinking Thais and half Thais working in a progressive political environment. And if I do my job as badly as I fear, my son would be so dumb he would even resist awarding himself all the dubious perks and directorships that you guys did! He'd be content to put that money towards those working class peasants who caused you all these headaches in the first place!!!!!
So I feel I must ask you - please keep up the censorship. I fear what might happen otherwise, or heaven forbid............ maybe it will happen regardless?
So for one last time Mr Sittichair of MICT, ignore those whining ungrateful morons on the streets. You have done a great job by selflessly taking the burden of logic, decision and critical thinking away from over fifty million people.
From one Buddhist to another - may you get everything you deserve for your actions.
Yours sincerely,
A lesser mind
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand
T
I write to you today to offer my most sincere thanks to you and your esteemed team at the MICT and my huge gratitude for your services to my family and the entire nation.
I saw in yesterday's Nation newspaper that some sad, misguided young people actually held a demonstration at your office concerning the nature of your work. These people are clearly uneducated and ungrateful of your selfless deeds for Thailand.
After all, when you took over the post of MICT chief a couple of years ago, you did so for the good of all people. OK , so you weren't actually chosen by the people, you were chosen by the men who took power with tanks and guns, but hey, you knew that you could do the job right? Popular democracy is over rated anyway.
See, that's the problem with people nowadays, they aren't very good at making decisions for themselves, they are just so damn busy trying to get by on minimum wages (Thank goodness you earn at least a thousand times more than that, you need to eat to keep up your good work!) and they sometimes really don't know what's for the best. People like that need a little guidance in their thoughts and moral decisiveness.
And that's where you come in. As soon as your were appointed you followed in the work of your predecessor and very clearly laid out your policy: you would censor sites that were either not suitable for the family, insulting to Thailand or "a threat to national security".
Now as a family man myself, your first target means a lot to me. I'm truly grateful that you have taken the burden from me - a responsible father - and decided on my behalf what it is that my son (and therefore his father too) is allowed to see on the internet.
That's something these ungrateful protesters can't comprehend - can't they see that you and your team of five unelected colleagues are that selfless that you have taken away the pressure and pain of personal choice from every parent in Thailand and placed it onto your own shoulders?
And are they truly that short sighted that they don't fathom all the time they would have spent communicating with their siblings, they can now spend watching soap operas on any of the five TV channels? (Each and every one owned by your buddies in the army and therefore also the government)
You replace inconveniences like freedom of speech and thought with the blessing of censorship and your chosen form of (non) reality and how do we thank you? With protests!!! You bestow upon us this gift of wholesome moral purity from above and how do we respond? With complaints!!!! I feel so ashamed.
Those others just don't follow your master plan. Only the strongest minds can encompass your ideals to wash the minds of Thai people by letting them know that there are NO true criticisms of Thailand or the junta! There are NO Thai people who take pictures of themselves naked! These things only exist in foreign countries! That's why all foreign criticisms are hypocritical! You said so yourself. Your verisimilitude is humbling to lesser mortals such as me.
Those common people clearly don't appreciate your work rate either. Web statistics say you gentlemen now block over seventeen thousand web sites and that number increases by ninety a month. Now that's at least three new sites a day. You sure must spend a lot of time examining these sites and deciding if they should be banned. I wager you donate countless hours of your time meticulously examining graphical images. After all, you said yourself that pornography accounts for many of the sites you expurgate from view.
It must be so strenuous for your nearly all male team to spend so much perusing sickening sites with naked women, all in the name of national interest. I bet you have to take a lot of bathroom breaks just to muster the will to carry on. I'm certain none of those anti - MICT parasites stopped to mull over your ordeal before they proceeded on their silly protest motion.
But my admiration doesn't stop there. Not only am I in awe of your actions, I am subjugated by your words. Each time you speak, my mind is filled by bewilderment at your thoughts and difference. Just two months ago you explained that your ministry was now only blocking about "sixteen sites" and you were "more democratic than the previous administration even though we are unelected".
Sir, I sat down and I thought, and thought and thought. Yet try as I might, my tiny cerebellum could not muster an answer to such a simple question: If you are blocking more websites than the last MICT - which you are - then how could you be more democratic? I strained to apprehend your deeper meaning, but I couldn't. Just as I was beginning to forgive my own insolence, another question hit me : If you are blocking only ninety sites a month, why has the number of blocked sites increased by about ten thousand since May 2006?
I simply can't answer these questions, but that's why I'm not in your place. I am a fool, a fool who is fortunate to have you here to police my thoughts. After all, who am I to question the MICT? I'm so stupid, I still enjoy web surfing.
You meanwhile, have better things to do. You told The Nation that you feel the internet "Is not an exciting tool" and you only "check e-mails" and nothing more. It's only right that someone with such high ideals that they have no interest in the web should be responsible for monitoring and making decision for fifty million plus people who love to use it.
But those fifty million people need safety. We all need to feel safe and no respectable group working for the country would think any other way. That's why your heroic squad have taken the time to block any sites which "threaten national security". I must confess I wasn't exactly sure what this phrase meant, but luckily the papers were generous enough to report on MICT activities so I managed to learn a little. The MICT defines a "threat to national security" as a university web forum, a blog , a web site for parties that try to take power via free elections , people's groups , authors and of course Google Youtube!
It's yet another example of the difference in our greatness. There I was, with my public school education, thinking that 'threats to national security' meant agenda such as North Korea, nuclear armaments and global warming. And yet all this time the real danger to the mighty military government was a bunch of bespectacled university geeks, a writer with a pen and a few computer nerd bloggers! In other words, anyone so damn petty they had the nerve to complain that you guys took power by force and not through elections! (Honestly, some people just look for things to complain about don't they?)
Forgive my mistake and please be assured it will never happen again, I now understand that a full list of "threats to national security" should be declared at your discretion only. Wretches such as I will only waste it.
Speaking of waste, I saw your comments at a computer exhibition recently where you stated that "Foreign technology simply takes money away from Thais. To be truly proud, we should build computers ourselves".
I was shocked to hear this. So shocked in fact I threw out every foreign object in my house. My TV (Taiwanese) , my PS2 (Japanese) , my fridge (Korean) , my car (bloody Japs again!) , all the fruit in my fridge (except the pineapples, they grow here right?) , my cell phone (Where the hell are Nokia from anyway?) and pretty much everything else in the house except the noodles! Hell, once I'm done typing this I'll throw my laptop away! If it ain't built in Thailand we should be ashamed to use it! Thank god your logic is here to help your countrymen progress.
I know you are a busy man Mr Sittichai - there's always some evil web site showing naked Thai women that you need to carefully examine to save your country - but I want to ask you one humble favour.
You see, I'm English and my wife is Thai Chinese (you know, that mixed race bunch that control most of the rich business sector) and we have a child.
Henceforth, my son is half English. Have you been to England? That's a big Thai community out there, maybe you remember a sizeable group of them protesting outside the Thai embassy about you guys after the coup?
I know we're good friends and all. We gave you David Beckham and Harry Potter and you gave us some of the greatest food and holiday spots in the world. We live and play together in good and positive spirit. But still some things are just different.
England has some crazy ideas. For one, there's little censorship because the government actually believes people should think for themselves. They cite some nonsense statistics showing that critical thinking is mutual to academic development and progress and, consequently, a nation's well being. Governments are so weak that they actually get punished for corruption and the people are so stubborn and cynical, they don't accept blatant lies from those in power. The army is so backwards it believes all the same nonsense about national security as I did (You remember, right? terrorists, bombs and missiles and stuff) and stays out of politics.
In short, English people don't like being told what the fuck they can and can't do or think. They are so primitive, I'm absolutely certain if you guys tried to do in England what you did here, every English citizen would go outside, find a soldier and shove his gun so far up his backside he'd be spitting bullets for a year. That's just the way we are.
And that's my fear. My son is both English and Thai. He has both passports, both citizenships, both languages and both mindsets. He's not alone of course. So many inter marriages these days means we have a whole little platoon of these hybrids!
Now think about that fact for a minute, isn't that scary? These kids are all Thai, they love Thailand and its people, but they also have that cynical western streak that says "Who are you to tell me what to think?!".
And that brings me to my dream, or should I say my nightmare? See, I have this vision that my son will grow up to love Thailand but will learn something from me about politicians , oppressors, liars, crooks and cheats. I harbour this deep fear that he'll become educated in a free thinking, critical culture and then return to Thailand to begin his twisted ideas of democracy, progress, freedom of speech and liberty. And what then would become of our saviours? Our mental mentors and our thought control specialists like you?
What if they held you all responsible for what you've done? What if my son was one of those who stood up and marched against you guys - regardless of how hard you oppressed their right to vote and how much blood you shed like you did in 1992 ?
What if he was one of those who told you to stick your bullshit,pusillanimous, hypocritical, dishonest , pedantic , oppressive, cowardly, undemocratic , patronising , fake , duplicitous, self important , discriminatory , outmoded , medieval , dictatorial, totalitarian , arrogant , smug , deceitful , insulting , libellous censorship up your fat, ugly, middle aged arses?
What would become of the nation's personal saviours then? We'd be lost in a sea of young, modern - thinking Thais and half Thais working in a progressive political environment. And if I do my job as badly as I fear, my son would be so dumb he would even resist awarding himself all the dubious perks and directorships that you guys did! He'd be content to put that money towards those working class peasants who caused you all these headaches in the first place!!!!!
So I feel I must ask you - please keep up the censorship. I fear what might happen otherwise, or heaven forbid............ maybe it will happen regardless?
So for one last time Mr Sittichair of MICT, ignore those whining ungrateful morons on the streets. You have done a great job by selflessly taking the burden of logic, decision and critical thinking away from over fifty million people.
From one Buddhist to another - may you get everything you deserve for your actions.
Yours sincerely,
A lesser mind
Freedom Against Censorship Thailand
T
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Top brass and low logic
An article citing a previous topic from my blog - top brass and their reliance on ancient forms of nonsense.
Credit to Bangkok Post 9/6/07 for this one:
So does this mean those who correctly foretold that Thaksin would be overthrown are also "gifted"? That's a lot of gifted people!
Credit to Bangkok Post 9/6/07 for this one:
Democrat party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva yesterday warned key members of the Council for National Security (CNS) not to base any of their political decisions on superstitious beliefs. Mr Abhisit said people could not be expected to accept key decisions made by the ruling military council if they were based on such irrationality.
This is the best plus for Abhisit I've ever seen. Even billionaire Thaksin was known to make use of fortune tellers and Shaman.
His comments were in response to reports that CNS chairman Gen Sonthi Boonyaratkalin and other members of the military were heading to Chiang Mai today to consult renowned fortune teller Varin Buaviratlert. They reportedly want the fortune teller to perform magical rites to change the country's destiny following rising political tensions.
However Gen Sonthi denied the rumour, saying he was only meeting with the fortune teller for a meal.
The reports coincided with rumours that Khunying Potjaman Shinawatra, wife of deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, also plans to visit the same fortune teller today at his house in the Sukhito housing estate.
And indeed she did. The most powerful people in politics are basing their futures on a quack science that doesn't work, has never ever provided any useful or accurate information and has failed numerous scientific tests because it is not real.
A reliable source close to Mr Varin said today was a special Saturday with certain stars gaining strength, making it appropriate for a rite to avert bad luck.
Mr Abhisit said he did not know if the reports were true or not, but stressed that the coup makers should base their decisions on logic, not superstition.
It is normal for people in a confused state to turn to something or someone they can rely on, Mr Abhisit said. But to solve problems that affect the majority, all sides should use their brains and consciousness to find solutions, the Democrat leader added.
Commenting on reports of a possible change of prime minister, Mr Abhisit said there must be sound reasons for such a move. Decisions made by those in power must be explainable, he said. If any were driven by superstitious beliefs, no one would accept them, he warned.
A source said Khunying Potjaman, one of Mr Varin's regular clients, arrived at Chiang Mai airport at 11.30am yesterday. She briefly visited her Green Valley residence before heading for Doi Suthep to pay homage to Buddha relics at Wat Phrathat Doi Suthep. She is reportedly scheduled to visit him at his house today.
However, a close aide to Mr Varin denied that the military men of the CNS wanted him to perform a sueb duang chata (life prolonging) ceremony for them. The CNS leaders simply wanted to visit the fortune teller, the aide said.
Mr Varin gained Gen Sonthi's trust and became his personal seer after he correctly foretold Gen Sonthi's appointment as army chief. The fortune teller also previously correctly foretold that Gen Chaisit Shinawatra and Gen Prawit Wongsuwan, Gen Sonthi's predecessors, would clinch the top army job.
So does this mean those who correctly foretold that Thaksin would be overthrown are also "gifted"? That's a lot of gifted people!
Before the Sept 19 coup, he also predicted that Gen Sonthi would lead a coup, citing that the army chief, in a previous life, had been a close aide of the late King Taksin the Great. He also predicted that Gen Sonthi would become prime minister. No comment.
Mr Varin formerly served as a rural teacher in government service, a source said. After leaving his teaching job, he reportedly met a hermit while travelling through the jungles in Chiang Mai's Chiang Dao district.
The hermit told him he possessed a 3,000-year old hermit's spirit, which gave him the powers of prediction.
Did it also include one ring to rule them all?
He then took up fortune-telling, his clients being mainly businessmen and military officers.
Sunday, June 03, 2007
They think it's all over, is it now?
“Thai Rak Thai have damaged society. They acted not for the people but for power”
Court judge.
Politics, like football, is all about opinions. No opinions = no politics, the equation is simple. The pitfall of this of course is that strong opinions drag us into the quicksand of human nature in denying and ignoring facts and arguments that simply don’t fit our belief system. It’s a well observed fact that far right wing politics and politicians often have an underlying element of fear in many of their policies. Such fear - whether well founded or not - frequently leads to rejection and denial of truths.
So we all know it’s rare to find a balanced judgment on hot political issues of the moment, and when discussing the finale to the dissolution trial of Thai Rak Thai and The Democrats, it’s even harder. The Nation will undoubtedly trumpet TRT’s downfall and its subsequent hammer blow to Thaksin. Bangkok Pundit will diligently document the facts and frequently look to the hypocrisy of the junta, and rightly so. Thailand Jumped the Shark will scan the faults in The Nation's reporting and numerous Thai political groups (not parties) will simply cry foul over TRT being punished.
How you see justice and truth depends on where you are standing. Touching it requires one to walk through a minefield of hearsay, polemicism, and outright falsification. For that alone, the Constitutional Court should be commended. The verdicts were due at 3am, the final decision was announced shortly before midnight. The nine hours in between involved a marathon outline and verdict read in installments by the judges. It’s to the immense credit of the judges that for all objections and foul cries after the verdict, few have pointed to discrepancies or choice interpretations of the law. The judges took each point and accusation and discussed it in detail. It was far too technical for a farang like me to follow the language (BangkokPundit played a good role here), but I’ve yet to meet or read from a Thai who had a problem with the verdict.
The Democrats have been exonerated. The courts examined the complaints - including suggestions that they “framed” Thaksin or damaged democracy by encouraging a “no vote” campaign - and dismissed them as well within the boundaries of free speech. Accusations suggesting Democrats hired small parties to defame TRT were also dismissed.
Around the same time as this verdict, it was also announced that three minor parties would be dissolved for having forged documents (in the case of the Progressive Democrat Party) or engaging in other dishonest practices, such as in the case of Pattana Chart Thai (not to be confused with Chart Thai).
The TRT verdict then began. It seemed like the verdict would never end. I watched Channel Three - with its English summaries running at the bottom of the screen, but I couldn’t stay awake. I awoke the next day to the news that TRT had been dissolved.The party that seemed like an unstoppable political juggernaut just a few years ago had met its fate.
And what’s more, the court enforced a rule that party executives are banned from politics for five years. Whilst many expected trouble at this verdict, the response was relatively well maintained. Few incidents occurred.
Now allow me to put my neck out and say something really unfashionable: justice has been served - legally and poetically. Firstly, the evidence against TRT was damming. The evidence against The Democrats was cooked up in a pathetic response to balance the charges and allow both parties to be let off. Judges spent weeks sifting through files, documents , witness reports and argumentation to actually detect and deliberate raw facts. When this happened, TRT was doomed.
Poetically, the response from each party in the fiasco speaks volumes. Three days before the trial verdict, Chaturon Chaisang - caretaker leader of TRT - announced there would be a protest on Thursday , with his close allies at PTV using “students as security guards”. The day before the verdict he announced “If the party is dissolved, we will register again under the same party name”. No hint of remorse, not a whisper of care or concern for the country and its problems. The closest to the latter was a remark “We will continue to propagate the populist policies made by Mr. Thaksin” in a desperate attempt to continue selling under the name of the banned Mr. Thaksin. After the verdict? Chaturon said “This ruling came from those who took power, even though that power came from the barrel of a gun”. Err….sorry Chaturon, the ruling actually came from judges, not the junta. Sure they might have been lobbied but they actually obeyed the law, unlike the same court when they cleared your founder Thaksin of asset concealment charges where one judge later admitted he regretted ignoring the law and clearing Thaksin.
Whether such arrogance and lack of remorse goes over the head of the rural masses that follow TRT or if they don’t hear it, I have no idea. Likewise, the fact that the courts abided by the rule of law and gave a legal, clear and concise verdict has not been mentioned by anyone at TRT. Their response has been akin to a spoilt child who refuses to accept his punishment, more on that in a moment.
For The Democrats, the story was different. Abhisit promised before the veridct to “continue working for the Democrats as long as I can still breathe, even if they cease to exist as a political party”. And “I believe we will be cleared because we are innocent” After the verdict, Abhisit declared simply “Let’s turn our victory into Thailand’s victory”.
Nobody is foolish enough to think of Abhisit or The Democrats as angelic, and indeed they made many mistakes during their own reign, but the sheer fact they are at least trying to show they care went a long way with me.
But this is politics, and there’s always fallout. So after the verdict , what do you think happened? A show of repentance? A plan amongst politicians to take note of the law in future? Nope, no fairy tales here people. The ban on TRT politicians created a huge scramble for the power (and money) void left behind with immediate announcements for a “TRT group” with suggested leaders including the well known incompetent, allegedly corrupt, undoubtedly hidiously fat and sickeningly arrogant Chavalit Yongchaiyudh (Wikipedia have spared you the horror of a photo) amongst other equally desirable names.
The fact that such people belonged to different parties - with supposedly different ideals - and displayed impotence and highly questionable behavior even in their better years matters not. The policy of money is all that matters for such ‘old ginger’ politicians.
For that reason alone, I hope The Democrats win the next election. The jury is still out (no pun intended) on Abhisit, but he is at least a new breed of politician. Western educated, young, no military connections and actually fluent in things such as policies that extend beyond “directorships for me” (To be fair, Thaksin also had most of these qualities) and a clean record and lack of arrogance.
The alternative is that this brave step for the better taken by the constitutional court, simply opens the door for Dark Age rulers to return once again.
Monday, May 28, 2007
Countdown to a big decision
Wednesday 30th May is likely to play pivotal role in the future of Thai politics, and Thailand as a whole. So great is the tension that even HM The King has made a speech voicing concern and requesting calm.
I shall elucidate, but first let me explain that the story I am about to tell - like all the greatest dramas - has many turning points, sub plots and twists. Usually I try and enlighten on all these but for reasons of time, clarity and lack of internet access, I shall eschew this style and keep right to the point.
Also note that for these same reasons, I cannot check on facts and have to rely on my own personal memory for this article. It's likely some names, dates and sequences of events are inaccurate. I apologise for this and will revise the story as soon as possible. In the meantime, the story is still crucial reading for understanding the situation that is currently reaching a climax.
During the anti-Thaksin protests last year, the rat-faced one himself decided to dissolve parliament and call a general election in an audacious effort to clear himself of all wrongdoing. The major opposition parties of Democrat and Chart Thai anticipated Thaksin's tactics and boldly boycotted the election. The thinking behind this was that it would vitiate any victory by Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party.
However, the Bangkokians still wanted an outlet for their discontent at Thaksin and thus sprang a 'Vote: no vote' campaign. Since all Thais were constitutionally bound to vote, the campaign was designed to use that vote to express protest. The 'no vote' campaign gained momentum and indeed 'no vote' matched or came close to the TRT count in many constituencies. During this fiasco, Democrat secretary Suthep came forward and claimed he had solid evidence of TRT personnel bribing politicians of minor parties top run in the polls.
Why would they do this? Well, under Thai law a candidate must have twenty percent of the local vote to claim victory in any district if he is the only candidate. However, if TWO OR MORE candidates are contesting any district, it is simply a case of "the most votes wins" regardless of the overall percentage. Thus, TRT had a great need to find opposition in districts where the turnout was expected to be low.
Suthep came forward and presented a grainy but visible security video of a TRT member meeting a minor politician inside a major government building ( I think it was the Department of Defence but I can't recall) and presenting him with an envelope. The building had only very recently had security cameras installed and most people were unware of their presence.He also claimed to have a witness from another party who claimed to have been offered large cash sums to compete against TRT.
The TRT defence was of the standard one expects in Thai politics. The security video? "It wasn't me, I was wearing a different colour shirt that day" stated the TRT defendent (No this isn't a joke, if you were wondering) and the minor politician stated "The envelope I was handed contained a press release". A press release handed to him in secret by a rival politician? Hmmmmm................
And for the witness who claimed to have been offered bribes? She was kept in Suthep's home until she was taken by the Thai Police "for safety" and mysteriously reversed her statement later. The Thai Police, of course, were well under Thaksin's control.
The Democrats gathered more evidence and submitted it to the relevant bodies. Thus began problem number two. The 'relevant body' in question was the Election Commission, known as the EC. Set up under the 'people's constitution' of 1997, the EC were a supposedly independent body formed to crack down on vote buying and ensure fair elections. But, like almost every other control body, they became compromised by Thaksin's power and became part of the problem. Every complaint against TRT was ignored, rejected or simply delayed forever.
All was not lost though. The head of the EC investigative panel was no other than judge Nam Yimyen. Nam was one of the annoying few who simply insisted on pathetic practices such as integrity,the rule of law and even efficiency. Nam worked quickly and concluded charges should be pressed on TRT. The EC directors were displeased. They ordered Nam to "repeat" his investigations to which Nam replied "The answer is no. They know what's going on and so do I".
By now, all the media had become aware of the case and seen the pictures. The EC were robbed of their usual stalling tactics, they tried one more delay by asking a different authority to press charges on their behalf, but it didn't work. They reluctantly agreed to press charges against their "golden geese" of TRT.
TRT had a response though. The EC had the power to recommend charges but the actual body responsible was the Office Attorney general, known as the OAG. Thaksin had a plan. The day before the OAG was due to announce charges,Thaksin met with the head. Now, both parties denied the issue of pending charges that would destroy Thaksin's empire even arouse during the chat. The conversation was solely about the problems in the south, they said. No conflict of interests in a private meeting between the head of a party and the head of the body responsible for that party's fate the day before judgement then? Of course not.
By curious co-incidence, the next day it transpired that not only would TRT be charged, the Democrats would too. The later facing charges for encouraging an "unconstituional no vote campaign" and bribing minor parties to claim that TRT had bribed them! A book of more than four hundred pages of evidence was submitted to the EC. The same EC that dragged its feet for weeks for weeks over charging TRT, decided to charge the Democrats within six hours of receiving the four hundred pages of detailed evidence.
More fallout was to follow. The five head members of the EC faced court themselves for abuse of power that ultimately resulted in the election being annulled. The sheer arrogance, childishness and utter lack of remorse shown by the remaining four members of this time would take a blog in itself. Suffice to say some of their comments were sickening. (Still, the annulment must have disappointed the sole non - TRT politician who made parliament, the small time guy from a small time party was set to be named as the official opposition all by himself!)
The two cases went to court, with many predicting that the real reason for the sudden charge of the Democrats was to appease Democrat supporters when TRT were let off. To let two parties "off" seemed fair, never mind the fact that the solid evidence was against TRT.
Then the coup happened and the whole picture changed. Suddenly TRT didn't have control over all the independent bodies. The bungling old junta needed a way to neutralise their younger and smarter foes who were looking for their power and money back. For all the martial law and media censorship, the remaining TRT factions still had communication and manipulation over the North Easter masses. The Democrats - being the oldest active party in Thailand - had their methods too. As the "Dad's Army" junta reached an astounding level of incompetence and ignorance, the tensions grew. It became more and more obvious that a hammer blow was needed from one side. The constitutional judges repeatedly denied that they were being lobbied, but more and more warnings of tension and troubles to come eminted from various sectors of the press and the military.
The verdict is set for Wednesday. This week, HM The King gave a speech to judges appealing for them to rely on the rule of law. His speech should help to ease some tensions. To their credit - though I suspect they may have received a few 'friendly warnings' from the junta - both TRT and Democrat heads have appealed for calm, though both have also lobbied in the press.
Make no mistake, this is huge. We are talking dissolution of the longest running political party and the party that swept to power just a few years ago and still has huge support from easily manipulated members of Thai society of whom some are prone to use violence and have done so before. The army admitted this week that some "sections had reached Bangkok although we tried to block them".
The best case scenario is that the strong police presence and the appeals for calm pay off. Supporters of any dissolved parties accept what happened and the politicians will jump ship to the next cash cow.
The worst case? I don't like to dwell on it. The class tensions were exposed in Bangkok during the Thaksin protests when the mainly middle class protested and the mainly "lower" class accepted donations to travel to Bangkok and in some cases physically assaulted the opposition. Given the existing tensions and the army's long documented incompetence and willingness to use violence to control the crowds, well, let's just hope it doesn't happen.
Either way, we'll know on Wednesday.
I shall elucidate, but first let me explain that the story I am about to tell - like all the greatest dramas - has many turning points, sub plots and twists. Usually I try and enlighten on all these but for reasons of time, clarity and lack of internet access, I shall eschew this style and keep right to the point.
Also note that for these same reasons, I cannot check on facts and have to rely on my own personal memory for this article. It's likely some names, dates and sequences of events are inaccurate. I apologise for this and will revise the story as soon as possible. In the meantime, the story is still crucial reading for understanding the situation that is currently reaching a climax.
During the anti-Thaksin protests last year, the rat-faced one himself decided to dissolve parliament and call a general election in an audacious effort to clear himself of all wrongdoing. The major opposition parties of Democrat and Chart Thai anticipated Thaksin's tactics and boldly boycotted the election. The thinking behind this was that it would vitiate any victory by Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party.
However, the Bangkokians still wanted an outlet for their discontent at Thaksin and thus sprang a 'Vote: no vote' campaign. Since all Thais were constitutionally bound to vote, the campaign was designed to use that vote to express protest. The 'no vote' campaign gained momentum and indeed 'no vote' matched or came close to the TRT count in many constituencies. During this fiasco, Democrat secretary Suthep came forward and claimed he had solid evidence of TRT personnel bribing politicians of minor parties top run in the polls.
Why would they do this? Well, under Thai law a candidate must have twenty percent of the local vote to claim victory in any district if he is the only candidate. However, if TWO OR MORE candidates are contesting any district, it is simply a case of "the most votes wins" regardless of the overall percentage. Thus, TRT had a great need to find opposition in districts where the turnout was expected to be low.
Suthep came forward and presented a grainy but visible security video of a TRT member meeting a minor politician inside a major government building ( I think it was the Department of Defence but I can't recall) and presenting him with an envelope. The building had only very recently had security cameras installed and most people were unware of their presence.He also claimed to have a witness from another party who claimed to have been offered large cash sums to compete against TRT.
The TRT defence was of the standard one expects in Thai politics. The security video? "It wasn't me, I was wearing a different colour shirt that day" stated the TRT defendent (No this isn't a joke, if you were wondering) and the minor politician stated "The envelope I was handed contained a press release". A press release handed to him in secret by a rival politician? Hmmmmm................
And for the witness who claimed to have been offered bribes? She was kept in Suthep's home until she was taken by the Thai Police "for safety" and mysteriously reversed her statement later. The Thai Police, of course, were well under Thaksin's control.
The Democrats gathered more evidence and submitted it to the relevant bodies. Thus began problem number two. The 'relevant body' in question was the Election Commission, known as the EC. Set up under the 'people's constitution' of 1997, the EC were a supposedly independent body formed to crack down on vote buying and ensure fair elections. But, like almost every other control body, they became compromised by Thaksin's power and became part of the problem. Every complaint against TRT was ignored, rejected or simply delayed forever.
All was not lost though. The head of the EC investigative panel was no other than judge Nam Yimyen. Nam was one of the annoying few who simply insisted on pathetic practices such as integrity,the rule of law and even efficiency. Nam worked quickly and concluded charges should be pressed on TRT. The EC directors were displeased. They ordered Nam to "repeat" his investigations to which Nam replied "The answer is no. They know what's going on and so do I".
By now, all the media had become aware of the case and seen the pictures. The EC were robbed of their usual stalling tactics, they tried one more delay by asking a different authority to press charges on their behalf, but it didn't work. They reluctantly agreed to press charges against their "golden geese" of TRT.
TRT had a response though. The EC had the power to recommend charges but the actual body responsible was the Office Attorney general, known as the OAG. Thaksin had a plan. The day before the OAG was due to announce charges,Thaksin met with the head. Now, both parties denied the issue of pending charges that would destroy Thaksin's empire even arouse during the chat. The conversation was solely about the problems in the south, they said. No conflict of interests in a private meeting between the head of a party and the head of the body responsible for that party's fate the day before judgement then? Of course not.
By curious co-incidence, the next day it transpired that not only would TRT be charged, the Democrats would too. The later facing charges for encouraging an "unconstituional no vote campaign" and bribing minor parties to claim that TRT had bribed them! A book of more than four hundred pages of evidence was submitted to the EC. The same EC that dragged its feet for weeks for weeks over charging TRT, decided to charge the Democrats within six hours of receiving the four hundred pages of detailed evidence.
More fallout was to follow. The five head members of the EC faced court themselves for abuse of power that ultimately resulted in the election being annulled. The sheer arrogance, childishness and utter lack of remorse shown by the remaining four members of this time would take a blog in itself. Suffice to say some of their comments were sickening. (Still, the annulment must have disappointed the sole non - TRT politician who made parliament, the small time guy from a small time party was set to be named as the official opposition all by himself!)
The two cases went to court, with many predicting that the real reason for the sudden charge of the Democrats was to appease Democrat supporters when TRT were let off. To let two parties "off" seemed fair, never mind the fact that the solid evidence was against TRT.
Then the coup happened and the whole picture changed. Suddenly TRT didn't have control over all the independent bodies. The bungling old junta needed a way to neutralise their younger and smarter foes who were looking for their power and money back. For all the martial law and media censorship, the remaining TRT factions still had communication and manipulation over the North Easter masses. The Democrats - being the oldest active party in Thailand - had their methods too. As the "Dad's Army" junta reached an astounding level of incompetence and ignorance, the tensions grew. It became more and more obvious that a hammer blow was needed from one side. The constitutional judges repeatedly denied that they were being lobbied, but more and more warnings of tension and troubles to come eminted from various sectors of the press and the military.
The verdict is set for Wednesday. This week, HM The King gave a speech to judges appealing for them to rely on the rule of law. His speech should help to ease some tensions. To their credit - though I suspect they may have received a few 'friendly warnings' from the junta - both TRT and Democrat heads have appealed for calm, though both have also lobbied in the press.
Make no mistake, this is huge. We are talking dissolution of the longest running political party and the party that swept to power just a few years ago and still has huge support from easily manipulated members of Thai society of whom some are prone to use violence and have done so before. The army admitted this week that some "sections had reached Bangkok although we tried to block them".
The best case scenario is that the strong police presence and the appeals for calm pay off. Supporters of any dissolved parties accept what happened and the politicians will jump ship to the next cash cow.
The worst case? I don't like to dwell on it. The class tensions were exposed in Bangkok during the Thaksin protests when the mainly middle class protested and the mainly "lower" class accepted donations to travel to Bangkok and in some cases physically assaulted the opposition. Given the existing tensions and the army's long documented incompetence and willingness to use violence to control the crowds, well, let's just hope it doesn't happen.
Either way, we'll know on Wednesday.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Test
The junta have taken the next logical step towards freedom meltdown by blocking some blogger domains.
Watch this space, if it doesn't get blocked.
Watch this space, if it doesn't get blocked.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Political football
No sooner had my own footballing heart been ripped out by Southampton beating Derby on the night only to lose on penalties in the CCC play offs, then The Nation Thailand reports that Thaksin Shiniwat is closing in on a take over of Manchester City football club. Reports state Thaksin enjoyed a VIP tour of the club and 'due diligence' is close to being completed.
On the face of it, this is just another rich man taking over a football club for fun. Certainly that's what most City fans will see anyway. However, dig a little deeper and a few questions present themselves.
1) Thaksin knows nothing about football and has never shown much interest. Why does he want to do this?
Whilst other tycoons have shown willingness to lose millions, they have been keen supporters of the sport. A few years ago when Thaksin displayed a strong interest in Liverpool FC, he was asked to name his favourite players. Thaksin responded "Owen and Gerrard, but I admire many others". In other words, he could only name two England players, he had no idea of the names of any other players of a team he professed to support and was interested in buying. He couldn't name the goalkeepers (Reyna and Dudek) the other strikers (I think it was Cisse at the time?) or any defenders (Hypia for one).
Likewise, when rumours of a purchase of Fulham were widespread, Thaksin told the press: "I don't want to buy them anymore, they lost again last week" This is the sort of flippant remark one expects from someone who knows nothing about football. The fact that his supposed friend and fellow dubious tycoon Muhammed Al Fayed resisted the bid was not mentioned.
So the purchase of an -admittedly big - club in debt that is facing internal problems by a business man with no interest in football seems a little strange to say the least. It's worth noting that Thaksin's two previous attempts to buy football clubs happened to coincide with negative issues in his government. His blatant lies concerning bird flu were quickly forgotten when the issue of Liverpool purchase came up.
2) Why was Thaksin consulted on team affairs?
It is a pet hate of virtually any football fan when the chairman or owner of the club interferes in first team affairs. Credible reports from England have stated that Thaksin was consulted on the sacking of manager Stuart Pearce from Manchester City, and that Thaksin has stated he "wants a foreign manager". Now, given the facts we have already established regarding Thaksin's utter lack of footballing knowledge - how will the City fans react to his obstreperous comments on first team matters?
From the vantage point of an English fan who is also experienced in Thai politics , I can see an issue here already. Thaksin's remarks are designed to make him look a hero. He is probably aware of the City board looking for a big name foreign manager and he feels that few comments made on "wanting a foreign manager" will ensure that when the big name does arrive, he will be perceived as the hero who bought him in. It's the same tactic the won him so much support in Thailand's impoverished north east.
However, theres a potential culture clash on the horizon. Thaksin is used to making a big show of face and being seen as the man who pulls all the strings. English football fans however, are only too weary of businessmen trying to act like they know more than the manager. If Thaksin opens his mouth too much he will not be seen as the hero or the big boss, he will be seen as meddling in first team affairs, and he will draw strong rebuttals and antagonism from the fans. What's more, he won't be able to manipulate the press like he is used to.
3) How will the CNS react?
However much they try and play it off as "It's not our business " or "we don't care" , make no mistake , the CNS will not be happy about this. When the CNS staged its illegal coup, it justified itself by citing Thaksin's corruption and abuse of power and it very quickly gained the backing of HM The King. So strained have the ancient soldiers been that they were almost too busy to elect themselves as executives at various lucrative companies, award themselves a pay rise of double the permitted rate and censor any website or broadcast that was critical of them.
The junta have attempted to copy Thaksin's every step, such as hiring lobbying groups, launching populist schemes to win favour from the poor and running press campaigns all to no avail. Public approval is dropping daily and Thaksin Shiniwat being welcomes by locals in one of the world's trendiest cities (and in a nation with good relations with Thailand) will have them furrowing at the brow, however petty it may seem. And on that thought.........
4) What happens if Thaksin is sent to jail?
From this side of the world it's been hard for me to gauge just how aware and concerned the city fans are with Thaksin's dubious business dealings and forthcoming charges. The former is unlikely to bother them, Roman Abromvich was so popular with his money at Chelsea that few bothered to ask how the Russian businessmen with several close associates in jail or under charges came by his wealth.
However, it's probably no coincidence that the Assets Scrutiny Committee (see my previous blogs on these guys) confirmed they will press for charges against Thaksin for abuse of power concerning a land purchase while he was PM just a couple of days after the City purchase was disclosed. It's now distinctly possible that Thaksin could be sentenced to jail. What would happen then? Would he be allowed to remain owner of City under English or Thai law? What would the City fans make of it? How much would it cost him to buy his way out?
City fans - the real football fans of Manchester - if you're reading this, these are questions you need to be asking your board. What seems to be another tycoon looking to take a team to the top just for fun is probably too good to be true. Thaksin Shiniwat is not a football fan, he's a politician in exile, and he's currently using City in the mid game of political chess against his own country's military. What's more, the military have the backing of HM The King, they are unlikely to lose.
On the face of it, this is just another rich man taking over a football club for fun. Certainly that's what most City fans will see anyway. However, dig a little deeper and a few questions present themselves.
1) Thaksin knows nothing about football and has never shown much interest. Why does he want to do this?
Whilst other tycoons have shown willingness to lose millions, they have been keen supporters of the sport. A few years ago when Thaksin displayed a strong interest in Liverpool FC, he was asked to name his favourite players. Thaksin responded "Owen and Gerrard, but I admire many others". In other words, he could only name two England players, he had no idea of the names of any other players of a team he professed to support and was interested in buying. He couldn't name the goalkeepers (Reyna and Dudek) the other strikers (I think it was Cisse at the time?) or any defenders (Hypia for one).
Likewise, when rumours of a purchase of Fulham were widespread, Thaksin told the press: "I don't want to buy them anymore, they lost again last week" This is the sort of flippant remark one expects from someone who knows nothing about football. The fact that his supposed friend and fellow dubious tycoon Muhammed Al Fayed resisted the bid was not mentioned.
So the purchase of an -admittedly big - club in debt that is facing internal problems by a business man with no interest in football seems a little strange to say the least. It's worth noting that Thaksin's two previous attempts to buy football clubs happened to coincide with negative issues in his government. His blatant lies concerning bird flu were quickly forgotten when the issue of Liverpool purchase came up.
2) Why was Thaksin consulted on team affairs?
It is a pet hate of virtually any football fan when the chairman or owner of the club interferes in first team affairs. Credible reports from England have stated that Thaksin was consulted on the sacking of manager Stuart Pearce from Manchester City, and that Thaksin has stated he "wants a foreign manager". Now, given the facts we have already established regarding Thaksin's utter lack of footballing knowledge - how will the City fans react to his obstreperous comments on first team matters?
From the vantage point of an English fan who is also experienced in Thai politics , I can see an issue here already. Thaksin's remarks are designed to make him look a hero. He is probably aware of the City board looking for a big name foreign manager and he feels that few comments made on "wanting a foreign manager" will ensure that when the big name does arrive, he will be perceived as the hero who bought him in. It's the same tactic the won him so much support in Thailand's impoverished north east.
However, theres a potential culture clash on the horizon. Thaksin is used to making a big show of face and being seen as the man who pulls all the strings. English football fans however, are only too weary of businessmen trying to act like they know more than the manager. If Thaksin opens his mouth too much he will not be seen as the hero or the big boss, he will be seen as meddling in first team affairs, and he will draw strong rebuttals and antagonism from the fans. What's more, he won't be able to manipulate the press like he is used to.
3) How will the CNS react?
However much they try and play it off as "It's not our business " or "we don't care" , make no mistake , the CNS will not be happy about this. When the CNS staged its illegal coup, it justified itself by citing Thaksin's corruption and abuse of power and it very quickly gained the backing of HM The King. So strained have the ancient soldiers been that they were almost too busy to elect themselves as executives at various lucrative companies, award themselves a pay rise of double the permitted rate and censor any website or broadcast that was critical of them.
The junta have attempted to copy Thaksin's every step, such as hiring lobbying groups, launching populist schemes to win favour from the poor and running press campaigns all to no avail. Public approval is dropping daily and Thaksin Shiniwat being welcomes by locals in one of the world's trendiest cities (and in a nation with good relations with Thailand) will have them furrowing at the brow, however petty it may seem. And on that thought.........
4) What happens if Thaksin is sent to jail?
From this side of the world it's been hard for me to gauge just how aware and concerned the city fans are with Thaksin's dubious business dealings and forthcoming charges. The former is unlikely to bother them, Roman Abromvich was so popular with his money at Chelsea that few bothered to ask how the Russian businessmen with several close associates in jail or under charges came by his wealth.
However, it's probably no coincidence that the Assets Scrutiny Committee (see my previous blogs on these guys) confirmed they will press for charges against Thaksin for abuse of power concerning a land purchase while he was PM just a couple of days after the City purchase was disclosed. It's now distinctly possible that Thaksin could be sentenced to jail. What would happen then? Would he be allowed to remain owner of City under English or Thai law? What would the City fans make of it? How much would it cost him to buy his way out?
City fans - the real football fans of Manchester - if you're reading this, these are questions you need to be asking your board. What seems to be another tycoon looking to take a team to the top just for fun is probably too good to be true. Thaksin Shiniwat is not a football fan, he's a politician in exile, and he's currently using City in the mid game of political chess against his own country's military. What's more, the military have the backing of HM The King, they are unlikely to lose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
