| Inside Scoop | Breaking News | Video | Blog Index | Participate | Humor | |
| Politics | Economics | New Media | Travel and Lifestyle | Technology | Education | Green Living |
Some of the links have already been blocked and the government has already threatened to take action against those who report on it so won't link to the article or the full transcript. Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was hoping mad and quickly released a statement criticising the headline and the lead. He stated:
The part of the interview where Thaksin refers to the Crown Prince shining is:
BP: Not sure there is too much wrong with this. Then on the talk of reform, Thaksin states:
BP: The above section is what has led to varied translations in the Thai media and has been made a focus - see Matichon.Thaksin seems to be worried that "reform of monarchy" will be equated with "overthrow the monarchy", but from the transcript you can't draw that conclusion. The differences from what Thaksin said are not that great. It is not a distortion, but a small change of words can change the meaning slightly which is part of the problem. When Abhisit came to power there was talk of providing clear guidelines about lese majeste cases as the Foreign Ministry stated just a few weeks ago:
BP: So talk of reform although still keeping a constitutional monarchy is not okay? Bangkok Governor's interview with Der Spiegel though has not attracted the same attention although one could say it was equally controversial in parts with talk of HM's role in politics. Thaksin's problem in the interview seems related to his comments about the Crown Prince although as AP notes he offered praise for the Crown Prince throughout:
BP: Actually, it was this open support for the Crown Prince that BP found more interesting... On the political fallout, these things are hard to judge. One can't poll, but as The Nation notes:
BP: Translations have also popped up online. The article has gone viral. Many will find it inappropriate that there is any talk of the institution, but am not so sure this interview is that damaging politically given discussions over such issues are much more widespread nowdays although this will depend on how accurate translations that spread are. There is an immediate effect of unease of what Thaksin said, but once translations circulate up-country am not so sure that many will be that offended. Democrat reaction has been typical ranging from Abhisit being relatively calm to his spokesman Thepthai stating that punishment for stating such things is beheading for 7 generations (โฆษกมาร์ค ชี้ แม้ว สุดชั่วจาบจ้วงเบื้องสูงรุนแรงต้องประหาร 7 ชั่วโคตร).
Related StoriesTrade with Vietnam to reach $3bn (story by Indianomics) The trouble with Oiwan (story by An American Professor in China) Tammy says Women Ends Up with Diamonds, Men with Used Condoms (story by Thai Intelligent News) A Talk with the Mafia about Thai National Security (story by Thai Intelligent News) Watching Out for Foreign Media Who Serve Thaksin (story by Bangkok Pundit) Honey Lee Interview (story by Korea Beat) Comments
This interview is not a direct attack on the King like the one he gave Financial Times that the King was aware of the coup before hand. In this interview the transcript did not directly support the headline, "Ousted Thai leader Thaksin Shinawatra calls for ‘shining’ new age after King’s death" but there are Thaksin's words in the interview from which AsiaTimes can use to construct such a heading. Apparently Thaksin did not insist on final approval power over the heading of the AsiaTimes article. It reflects general crudeness and carelessness of the man. If people believe that Thaksin is a republican, trying to end the monarchy in Thailand, this interview and his FT interview would tend to support their belief, because the heading can be read to reflect Thaksin's ill will toward the King who is in fragile health. This type of behavior is analogous to digging his own grave. It is worse than being used by Hun Sen from cambodia to provoke his own motherland.
Veharachan, name me the newspaper that gives its interviewees approval over their own headlines.
Veharachan: The transcript of the Financial Times interview also did not support the headline that the king knew of the coup! Today, as with the FT article and the recent rumours incident (regarding the stock market), people are confusing and conflating the elements of each incident. People confuse the rumours themselves (which no one has ever reported, to my knowledge) with the reports that 'rumours caused the stock selloff'. The report was entirely accurate, even if the alleged rumours were completely false. Today, there is the Times interview and there is the Times article that quotes from the interview. The article gives a far different impression of what Thaksin actually said than the interview transcript does. This is really frustrating to watch people mix up what was actually said with what was reported about what was said. Of course, there are some who do that on purpose to mislead others, but individuals need to think for themselves -- and think carefully and critically.
The interview make a strong point in separating action of palace circle on pretext of the King. It is actually a provocative piece. And to avoid people talk about this, the Dem spin this around so wonderfully. Scream LM and heap loads of BS on it, as a diversion. Now, no one even notice the idea. And Thaksin, as usual, fumble up and issue a declamation statement. He should have taken it like a man and stress the point, but alas. The guy got a media suicide wish or something?
BKK Lawyer: PLease go back to read the article again......"But in an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Thaksin claimed the king had been briefed by leading generals and privy councillors about their plans to remove the polarising former prime minister ahead of the 2006 coup..." Thaksin relied on General Punlop (of all people) who did not have any first hand information.
V - That is the lead again. Thaksin's words "Gen Surayud, Gen Prem [Tinsulanonda, the senior member of the privy council] and another privy councillor went to have an audience with his majesty the king and told his majesty that they will do a favour for him by getting me because I am not loyal to the king," Mr Thaksin said. "That started the whole process." Getting me does not equal coup.
It is a sad situation when it has to be called REFORM when you only want "The constitutional monarchy must be strictly abided by". Meaning to follow the existing laws. Only in countries like Thailand this would be called REFORM. To act like you are supposed to, by the book. 3rd world countries are all the same.
BP: The issue is whether Thaksin's interview with Financial Times support the heading that The King was aware of the coup. I think that interview corresponds to the heading more than this Timesonline interview calling for "shining new age after the King' death". Thaksin's apology confirms my hunch that he did not have a chance to approve the whole article including the lead. This interview compounds his poor decision to play Hun Sen's game. The two incidents exposed him further as a man of poor judgment.
To me all the pussyfooting/backtracking around the monarchy is just more of the same old B-S- that comes with Thailand, but the alleged assassination request by Privy Councillor Surayud in most countries would be a controversial and very serious issue, but apparently no one seems to even care about that????.
While Thaksin didn't call for a "shining new age" directly, he made it perfectly clear that the change in inner circle is necessary to advance democracy, and it could only happen after the King's death. The "shining" phrase was simply a vote of confidence in Crown Prince's abilities, but it is perfectly justifiable to fuse these two ideas together. |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||