Thread: Thai elections 2011-Thai PM sets stage for tough election

^^^^^ Post 1221 (Bettyboo)
MrT was a Thai politician, a poor one, and leaned against the press; considering who owned/owns the press it was a direct battle: a voted in politican vs the army/blueblood controlled press.

Unless one knows these facts about the Press/media as you correctly state Bettyboo, one can easily conclude that it was an onslaught against a free and impartial Media. I was one of those and condemned Mr. Thaksin roundly at the time.

It was only later, that I realized what he was up against...namely an orchestrated demonization campaign by political enemies who could not defeat him via Electoral Democracy. A campaign that has functioned unabatedly to this day, and has ensnared many linguistically challenged farangs who have very limited alternate sources of information other than the State Media.

The coup that followed was simply an extension of this campaign IMHO.

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

^#1223 what TH and Buksida keep ignoring is the historic reality of media in Thailand:

It was set up by Kings and ministries under the control of Kings and bluebloods, folks with names such as Si Ayyutuya, etc... When Kings such as Rama V and Rama VII worked towards stopping corruption, and encouraging/demanding accountability and visibility, other bluebloods and the army panicked (their fiefdoms were under threat), finally taking control of the country themselves in the 1930's; media was always a political tool controlled by the army/bluebloods and used for their sole political purposes. It continued in this way until MrT's time (perhaps it opened up a little under Chuan too, I'm not sure on that one, maybe somebody with good info can explain one way or the other; not propaganda, but actual historic truths please...) when a small percentage of the media (still under 10%) became owned by people other than the bluebloods/army, and these folk had different agendas - of course, this was their crime, and why we have the current problems; the bluebloods/army refuse to give up total control of the nation... MrT is the biggest red herring in the world of politics...

Media is controlled throughout the world. Rupert Murdoch has one of the biggest news companies there is. Most news companies are beholden to restrictions/special interests/corporate or government pressure. Welcome to how democracy actually works! (check out the Ryan Giggs Twitter scandal recently and the gagging orders the UK allows for all and sundry as an example of how a democracy works nowadays).

Get over it. Use your brain and learn about how things really are.

However, you may want to read this....you know who owned Shin Corp, right? This report from 2005. It agrees with some of what you have written, but is a timely reminder of what Thaksin's Thailand was really like....

Oh and btw, 24 companies that Thaksin owned is not a small percentage. As it says "totally dominated" I'd suggest you might want to rethink your comments. However, I suspect you will forget about this and will be spewing forth the same diatribe again soon.

Article 19: Freedom of expression

"A new media monopoly is also emerging between the commercial and government sectors, as media concessions are issued to Shin Corp and other businesses close to senior politicians, thereby defeating the purpose of the constitutional reforms. Shin Corp has totally dominated all sectors of the commercial media in Thailand, as it owns 24 companies running telecommunications, television, radio, internet, satellite and other communications throughout the country, and even into neighbouring Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar."

And just a little more....

"Threats against journalists and independent media have increased. Since the 2003 ‘war on drugs? many journalists in Thailand have narrowed their reporting in response to overt and covert government threats. Reporters who criticised the government campaign at that time were accused of being in the payment of drug dealers. Editors of newspapers and magazines have also expressed fears over the loss of millions of dollars of advertising fees from companies connected to the government, particularly the Prime Minister. As a consequence, self-censorship is being practiced more widely. Broadcast media programme managers, producers and hosts are reported threatened against critical reporting of the government, by way of warnings in person and writing to be more ‘cooperative? During late 2004, executives of radio stations were reportedly warned not to say anything negative about the escalating violence in the south. At least one radio host was taken off the air after the Supreme Command, which owns the frequency, told the radio media to exercise extreme caution in reporting security and political issues. Community radio stations have been shut down and are closely monitored. Numerous warnings were also issued, and raids conducted, in relation to distribution of video footage of the killings in Narathiwat in October 2004, which were announced as being a threat to national security, in accordance with section 116 of the Penal Code."

Here's the main page...just in case you need a further reminder of what things were like...as you appear to have forgotten....

unar_hrc_th_2005

CONTENTS

Preamble
Scope
Article 2: Effecting rights under the Covenant
Article 6: Right to life
Article 7: Freedom from torture
Article 9: Right to liberty and security
Article 14: Right to fair trial
Articles 16 & 26: Recognition and equality before the law
Article 19: Freedom of expression
Recommendations
-----
Annex 1: Targeted killings of environmentalists
Annex 2: Letter by the AHRC to the Ombudsman pertaining to refusal to investigate case of alleged torture
Annex 3: Extracts from Prime Minister’s Orders Nos 29 & 30/2546 to launch the ‘war on drugs’
Annex 4: Killings of alleged drug dealers during 2003
Annex 5: Partial list of persons reported killed during the ‘war on drugs’
Annex 6: Letter by the ALRC to the High Commissioner for Human Rights requesting international role after mass killing in Narathiwat
Annex 7: Letter by the AHRC to the Minister of Justice regarding grave cases of torture and the need to ratify the Convention against Torture
Annex 8: Letter by the AHRC to the Minister of Justice regarding the disappearance of Mr Somchai Neelaphaijit and need for a law to prohibit forced disappearances
Annex 9: Petition by the AHRC to His Majesty the King of Thailand regarding forced disappearance of Mr Somchai Neelaphaijit
Annex 10: Letter by the ALRC to the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture regarding gross acts of torture by the Royal Thai Police
Annex 11: Letter by the AHRC to the Minister of Justice regarding further grave acts of torture and the need to ratify the Convention against Torture
Annex 12: Letter by the AHRC to the Minister of Justice regarding institutionalised torture and the need to ratify the Convention against Torture
Annex 13: Letter by the AHRC to the Minister of Justice regarding defective policing and public defenders in Thailand
Annex 14: Killings of Burmese migrants
-----
OTHER RELATED SPECIAL REPORTS BY AHRC/ALRC

[quote=Buksida;1768291]

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by SteveCM

Khunying Puangthong Ketu-angkura, 62, reaffirms that the old Thai saying of “ตบหน้าเสียห้าร้อย” (paying a 500 baht fine for slapping) is still in fashion, and that it is worth every single baht just to humiliate one’s nemesis.

Khunying face slapper

The drama ended at a police station. The khunying admitted the slapping incident. She paid a 500 baht fine and walked out of the police station.

Don't think I'd be getting of with B500 fine for slapping.

But then you are not one of the Amart SteveCM.

This lady is.

She hates the PT and everyone associated with it.

She is the wife of someone equivelant to what we in Canada would call a Deputy Minister. In other words, the top Government Official/Civil servant, directly reporting to the Minister - a political person. The top non-political bureaucrat reporting to the first political level Minister.

Apparently she also has acquired this level simply through the association with her husband of that level. I dont understand this last thing, but is what I was told.

"I think that's even funnier than when Calgary said PT had ideology." Quote from Buksida, Post#1234

I don't recall saying that, but my comments may have been vague in that regard.

I know I have been harping away on all those smaller so-called parties not having an ideology and thereby cannot be considered political parties at all.

But you are correct on one score, questioning if the two major parties have an ideology. Frankly, I could not position them on the Political Spectrum based on their ideology. Perhaps the reason for that is they don't have an ideology.

So what does separate them? Probably the most obvious is that one of them is the chosen political vehicle of the Oligarchy, Amart, etc., whereas the PT is not.

Which is ideology to a degree.

It can be argued that this Amart is rooted in ultra-conservative, military political roots, moving it to the far right of the Political Spectrum, with the PT to the left of that somewhere.

Certainly this fabricated border dust-up is reflective of a far right ideological mindset.

Originally Posted by Calgary

Apparently she also has acquired this level simply through the association with her husband of that level. I dont understand this last thing, but is what I was told.

Previously civil servants would be given Royal titles as they advanced through the bureaucracy, much the same as in the UK where a senior Civil Servant can expect a Knighthood on retirement. The wife of a titled Civil Servant was given the title Khunying or Than phuying. The old civil service titles were, from least to most senior, Kun, Luang, Pra, Praya, Chao Praya, Somdetch Chao Praya (very rare). The wife of a civil servant with any of these titles was automatically titled Khunying or Than Phuying. Civil service titles were abolished after the abolition of the absolute Monarchy but, for some reason, the female titles were retained. Wives of Civil Servants are still given titles according to what their husband's rank would have been under the old system. The King, or his representative, awards these female titles to woman who have served the monarchy, the state or society in general in some useful capacity and to the wives of senior senior civil servants at a ceremony every year.

In the case you quote, where it seems the husband is the head of a division of the Civil Service (equivalent to a Permanent Secretary in the UK civil service), the title he would have been awarded under the old system would have been Praya or Chao Praya.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Media is controlled throughout the world. Rupert Murdoch has one of the biggest news companies there is. Most news companies are beholden to restrictions/special interests/corporate or government pressure. Welcome to how democracy actually works! (check out the Ryan Giggs Twitter scandal recently and the gagging orders the UK allows for all and sundry as an example of how a democracy works nowadays).

This is why people ridicule you, SD. I generally support you, and I understand that you post media articles from a biased media, which does not make you the source of the articles, just the messenger (a willing one?). But, in this case you are spinning, it is the type of example that you come out with from time to time that betrays a limited understanding.

Let me explain for you:

Rupert Murdocu is a business man who is not part of the old elite system of Britain or anywhere else. He, or somebody like him, could never succeed in Thailand for this very reason. He would be demonized by a tiny majority who maintain control over the media and the nation.

Rubert Murdoch does not control the army and shoot people.

Rupert Murdoch is not part of a family dynasty that has been controlling the media since it was first established.

Rupert Murdoch controls quite a large percentage of media in the UK, but if you do not agree with him then you are not arrested and put in prison, as in Thailand - see the recent Thammasat history professor who upset the army genera and how the army general has silenced him...

One could go on, but your point is embarrassing, frankly.

One inetersting point you made is about media being "beholden to government restrictions/special interests/corporate or government pressures... welcome to how democracies work." & I agree.

But, it is not how Thailand works. The media is owned/controlled by the government/bluebloods, the restrictions are both legal and forceful (army/DSI/ISOC) both of which are controlled by the army/bluebloods, government pressures are army/blueblood pressures. This is how Thailand works, and it is not democracy, it is a small group who own control the media. Thank you for pointing out how their power extends to controlling the law, government and all strong pressure bodies (ministry of culture, minstry of spying, ISOC, CRES, ministry of education, etc) internal to the country as well.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Get over it. Use your brain and learn about how things really are.

You may want to reconsider these words now the context has been outlined for you... To be honest SD, even though I generally support you, this post is incredible; either naive or blatantly spinning.