• 
• 

Published on August 3, 2007

Re: "Thaksin book lands author in hot water", News, August 2.

Why do I see the omnipresent hand of Thaksin behind Channel 5 reporter Lieutenant Sunisa Lertpakawat's book "Thaksin, Where are you?"? Does Sunisa really want us to believe that a poorly paid officer would sink Bt100,000 of her own funds to go to London if Thaksin had twice denied her interview request?

If he sponsored her trip, Thaksin has again proven himself as a public-relations master. For a mere Bt100,000 he's put himself, and his book, in the headlines and lead stories of every newspaper and TV station - and the longer the Army probe into Sunisa's going absent without leave takes, and the harsher her punishment is, the longer he'll be in the limelight.

General Sonthi Boonyaratglin should not dance to Thaksin's tune. It's good that the general has said that he's not going to ban the book (in the first place that right belongs to the courts, not to him). Surely an Army chief has more to concern himself with than the case of a lieutenant going AWOL. Kick the case to where it belongs, deep down in the hierarchy of the Army's disciplinary system.

Deal with the lieutenant swiftly, without fear or favour - and while we're at it, how about a report on how the Army's lethargic investigations into the excessive use of violence at Krue Se, and the deaths at Tak Bai, are coming along? Aren't those killings on a gross scale infinitely more important to seeing justice done than Sunisa's absence from work?

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------

Thais the big losers in trade disputes with US

Re: "Americans stacking the deck led to collapse of Thai-US free-trade talks", Letters, August 1.

I found the letter from Prathip Gidrangsri to be interesting. First, to describe Thaksin as a "close pal" to US President George W Bush is absurd. Linking "free trade" or the US reaction to the ousting of Thaksin to some personal relationship between the two leaders gives both Thaksin and Thailand a status which does not exist. A great trade imbalance does exist and has existed for years. The US reaction to both is by law.

 Who will lose if sanctions are imposed for blatantly ignoring copyright protection? Certainly not the US.

Aids merely serves as a stocking horse for many more important issues under the now dead free-trade agreement. Degenerating down to personal attacks against the former and current US ambassadors will change none of this. One suspects the former ambassador being selected had more to do with his knowing the country than anything else.

In the end there will be a price to be paid and it will not be paid by the US consumer or, to any great extent, by US business. Thais will pay it and, if that is a fight Thailand can win, it should pursue that course. But when the backslapping and childish chortling is over, this one will not be undone with a secret handshake in the backroom, which is probably what the desire to meet in confidence would have accomplished anyway. It is the US consumer and US Congress who the "secret" negotiations were meant to keep pacified, not the Thais.

If one wanted to really gain sympathy for the Aids crisis there are many exemplary Thai programmes to point to. Pointing to women and unborn children would have certainly helped the cause. Even the actions the Thai government has taken could be easily resolved in Thailand's favour. It was not really about any of these things, but simply about stealing the property and ideas of others and calling them your own.

"This was more than Thais could take"? Actually that sentence holds the crux of the problem. The US is merely asking by what special right are Thais taking the property of others? How much Thais can take will be determined if and when serious sanctions are imposed.

Major Mark A Smith, (Retired)

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------

Charter passage would be a victory for armed forces

The next phase of the "reorganisation" of our democracy will be the referendum on the draft constitution. The junta handpicked the Constitution Drafting Assembly, installed right-wing Colonel Prasong Soonsiri as its head, with the specific task of drafting a constitution which would prevent the return of Thaksin or his imitators to rise to the top post. One such instrument is in the section regarding the Senate. Half the Senate will now be appointed by seven judges and bureaucrats, effectively empowering them with approximately 4.5 million popular votes to choose whomever they want. The new houses will consist of 555 elected representatives chosen by 40 million or so voters and 75 chosen by seven.

It is likely that the draft will be voted in by the referendum. The armed forces are being told in no subtle way to vote for it. The campaign to inform the public of the referendum has adopted the colour green, as if to encourage a green light for the draft. The Thaksin-haters will vote for anything seen as anti-Thaksin; the enemy of my enemy is my friend kind of mentality. Thai Rak Thai supporters are so fragmented with their leaders shackled and gagged that their campaign will be ineffective against the government public-relations machine aiming to "inform" the rural masses of the new draft constitution.

The biggest victor of the passage of the new constitution will be the military. In executing this ingenious master plan, it has managed to restore its former glory, exorcising its tarnished past, and plug itself into the political system - that plus a hefty rise in military spending and secret funds. We will see the return of the days when reporters hounded the Army chief for political sound-bites and the days of weak coalition governments whose main focus will be playing the political survival game instead of running the country with coup rumours every few months.

In other words: welcome back to the 1980s.

Salin Pinkayan

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------

Choice of censored words says much on ICT policy

When my Internet copy of Le Monde, one of the world's foremost newspapers, was censored by the Information and Communications Technology Ministry, I made allowances and gave the benefit of the doubt to a censorship system using too small a net mesh to filter news undesirable to those who control what is considered suitable for Thai viewers.

However, on Wednesday, I encountered censorship that has become more explicit in its apology. Following a news item on occupation by Chechen fighters of a school in Beslan and the subsequent storming of the school by Russian army units in which 332 persons died, including 186 children, I encountered the following censorship message (translated from the Thai): "Please excuse TOT, an organisation of Thai people, for blocking this site since its contents could be disturbing and unacceptable to Thai people."

The wonder of it is that the title of the video clip was in Russian. However, the clip was associated with an article entitled "The truth about Beslan". As it is unlikely that "Beslan", the name of a remote village, is on the TOT list of unacceptable Internet headings, one must assume that the objectionable reference is "truth". This makes sense in these days of flagrant repression.

Danthong Breen

Chairman, Union for Civil Liberty

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------------

Health-conscious readers appreciate vegan diet info

Re: "Food alarmist turns reader off his lunch", Letters, August 1.

No John Arnone, I have not run for cover as a result of the "great milk debacle". Actually several people wrote letters supporting me for exposing the dangers of milk.

I realise Arnone does not give a hoot about how what he eats effects his health - just as he doesn't care about how smoking effects his health or the health of those around him. But I believe most readers have enough sense to be concerned about heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other diet-related illnesses, which kill millions of people every year, including children. Arnone asked me why I don't show more concern about famine. But I can't think of a better way of fighting famine than to promote vegetarianism, since just 10 per cent of the food that is fed to livestock would be enough food to end starvation.

 And finally I'd like to know what Arnone is doing to end "famine, crime, natural catastrophes" etc. His only cause seems to be his "right" to blow smoke in everybody's faces.

Eric Bahrt

Chon Buri

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com