Talk:2006 Thailand coup d'état/Archive 1
CNN and BCC have their coverage blocked whenever they mention thailand. Channel 4 news (ITN) has said that the constitution there has been suspended and the parliament dissolved.Even the Thai version of this article is surprisingly active. The tv stations were some of the first buildings they took over when the coup began.
This is a significant article of pretty good quality (tons of references, very NPOV so far), and GAs and FAs usually have introductions of 2-3 paragraphs, summarizing all key elements of the article. I am going to Siam this afternoon but I don t expect to see any thing..
It is downloaded in Wiki with a CC licence. You won t learn about that through thai media, because they are themselves censored and are limited in what they can say. --SmellyCat 17:21, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Should we replace it with given the coup order no.5 and announcement no.
Also based on 1991-1992, we can expect the junta to play an ongoing political role, which - once we figure out what the heck their formal name in english is - we can then expand on in either the CDR/DRC/ACR/whatever article. Roger jg 04:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC) I have removed that sentence and tidied up the section.
This is not China as written elsewhere. Adam 02:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Here s something thats usable in the article, from the Sydney Morning Herald: Thaksin s Thai Rak Thai party was expected to win a re-run tentatively scheduled for late November, increasing pressure on his opponents in the military and the old establishment to resort to removing him by force. Very straight forward.
Adam 05:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Concerning references used in this article (and elsewhere), please be advised that the news articles at www.bangkokpost.com and www.bangkokpost.net expire after just one day. This is a proof that information is allowed to circulate relatively freely.
WAS 4.250 13:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC) The following is inaccurate: As of 15:35, foreign news channels CNN, BBC, CNBC, NHK and Bloomberg remained blacked out by the sole cable operator, UBC. I think that the reason the estimates vary is because people just counted at one snapshot in time.
Especially if they are the journalist interpretation such as In fact, such is the faith that the Thai people have in their monarch that many believe if the king did intervene, it was obviously the best course of action to take. That s unfactual and self-serving. All Thai news programmes were also cancelled under orders from the military. I work at the Bangkok Post and was watching local news programs on the morning of the 20th.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/23/opinion/opinion_30014428.php Roger jg 18:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Channel 7 news was just on tv now. So, I highly doubt that they actually have spoken to the king and if they really did I doubt that the king did approve their actions.
Let me remind you that he did appoint Thaksin as the Prime Minister after 2005 elections, even though he gave disapproval speeches about Thaksin s government many times in the first four years. All very spooky.
Patiwat 08:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC) in the section day two it says: Thaksin s brother-in-law Somchai Wongsawat, who is permanent secretary of the Justice Ministry . By the way, it seems increasingly obvious to me that the coup was instigated and organised by Prem, acting with at least the tacit approval of the King.
Adam 07:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC) He said he had not been asked. Everybody who protested or held a hunger strike or has shown something on tv that was not allowed was arrested.
We should try to maintain an NPOV, so don t limit it to just the anti-Thaksin crowd. Of course there is no evidence unless Newin and Yongyuth confirm the story but I believe that it should be part of the article. I created an article on the Finland Plot to fill a contextual hole on events leading up to the coup.
Iorek85 02:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC) The way the protest is currently presented in the article let s suppose that Thai people in their majority want to protest against the coup. From a political point of view, it does not make sense to censor the internet as website are always accessible, if not directly, with a proxy.
Behavior should count in this article as more important than the words used by the people involved in the power struggle. While they might sound, they re not a concrete, undeniable evidence.
This could do serious harm to peoples reputations - an extreme example of which would be the NPKC s 1991 accusation that Chatichai was protecting the plotters who tried to assassinate the Queen. 00:30 in Bangkok.
Humanoid 08:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC) Patiwat Teh Nation article does not say that there is 100 protesters. but those words by impartial observers must count for more than words used as weapons by the participants.
Adam 08:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC) They support the coup because they hate Thaksin, and telling themselves that the King wanted the coup helps them feel better about it Adam 09:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC) No way. There is no protest from the farmers because thought they supported Thaksin they are not politically organised and their support was mainly anchored in his large handouts.
in the morning. All the King did was appointing Sonthi as the chief of the CDRM (not Prime Minister, either.) Of course, one may assume that this means He supports the coup.
-- RayBirks 00:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC) And what is the copyright status of that photo? Adam 00:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Can anyone find what time this started, how quickly it ended, etc.? 72.75.39.85 01:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I was reading this and I still don t really know what the PM did and why the military is staging a coup. You are completely free to object to this opinion or express your views in my talk page.
Given that the junta hasn t threatened to investigate any plot to overthrow the monarchy, I don t think the Finland Plot will be detailed any further. THE KING ORDERED THE COURT TO SETTLE THE POLITICAL CONFLICT, LOOKED FORWARD TO A CLEAN ELECTION, AND DIDN T WANT TO APPOINT AND UNELECTED PRIME MINISTER.
That Bangkok Post article that claims that there were only 20 protesters and that police were not present are lying. Please check it again.
L@7-r 20:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC) good to know someone felt like leaving a huge picture of their genitals on this current event page was a worthy exercise of their time. it shows some source for stockbroking speculation.80.57.242.54 02:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)80.57.242.54 02:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I don t think anyone knows exactly why the military staged the coup, and it is not our job to speculate on that matter.
Who knows, maybe civil warNFAN3 11:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)NFAN3 Two Thai friends have told me by email that the general belief in Bkk is that the King ordered the coup, which everyone in Bkk approves of. When they said the same thing on tv, they actually showed video footage of it.
They re not asking media to censor it, they _are_ in control of it. -- User:Humanoid 2006 September 22, 17:44 GMT User:Humanoid I believe that if properly summarised by a third partie Patiwat ? this article could reconcile our diverging positions.
Orderinchaos78 19:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Wouldn t this article be better placed at 2006 Thailand military coup d état, as I don t remember any other coups this year? --MZMcBride 20:22, 19 September 2006 (UTC) The Thai government site has gone down this evening (link.) I should expect some kind of declaration to come up here if it comes back online, otherwise it ll stay down. But lets not include interview comments by random people on the street.
If he says nothing that will be taken as an endorsement of the coup. Police was present recording the whole thing so that they could arrest people later.
Adam 09:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC) I think it should be clear that censorship is very loose and that there is a good dose of self-censorship as I indicated initially both at www.thaivisa.com and pantip.com. It would be misleading people to believe that these site are being censored when they have adopted a policy of self-censoring, whatever the reason. 19sept is available at blogger.com (I assume it is the same)Roger jg 09:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC) It does not make sense to talk about TV censorship in a section called internet censorship especially that TV censorship is already discussed elsewhere. Adam 11:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC) What can one expect from a person who tolerates the split infinitive? (shudder).
Patiwat 12:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Whose reactions to note (besides official government or NGO statements) of in the article? I d suggest editorial opinions of key publications, former senators/MPs, and academics. It is censorship and control.
Also, if you do a traceroute, you will see that the server hosting www.bangkokpost.net is located outside of thailand. Humanoid 21:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC) how and why is this current event listed in there, and how do i remove it from the categorization? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kleinheero (talk • contribs). Calling attention to this again.
Adam 00:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Good wordk - any photo which is clearly free of copyright is welcome. At least this is how it is now refered to in The Bangkok Post today.
Information should be shown that all juntas accuse the incumbents of insulting the royal honor and that the many previous charges of lese-majeste thrown at Thaksin have been highly contentious. Guys and gals, is this interpretation of WP:LIVING correct? Patiwat 08:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC) This article is about the coup, not about Thaksin. 124.121.96.104 23:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) The Prime Minister will be speaking at the UN later today, or did he speak (already)?..well, he certainly will be making statements now(!)..should be something to watch for comment..
I see two problems with that. David Watson 05:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC) It is typical in politics to lie.
Tevildo 22:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I think Thailand coup d etat, 2006 would be better, but I agree that September and military are redundant. Patiwat 01:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC) I saw video footage of the protest on CNN from outside of thailand many times.
I have my opinion on the matter but I keep it for myself. Other pictures may be a probleme but not this one! Roger jg 09:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC) The soldier s picture is also available on the BBC website http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/5362602.stm and is form an Austin Arensberg.
Should we put that under thaskin s article? Should we create a 2006 Thailand after the coup article? suggestions Roger jg 09:31, 23 September 2006 (UTC) The article notes that Taiwan s Ministry of Forgein Affiars admonished nations visiting Thailand for security and no more reactions about this coup d état. , citing 外交部提醒近日計畫赴泰國人注意安全 The translation sounds harsh, but just doesn t sound right. Therefore, although I think referencing the Bangkok Post is still good practice for Thailand-related articles, I highly recommend avoiding using direct links to the Bangkok Post online (or at least the links should be replaced after they become obsolete).
The article cited is no longer online and I can t even find this in the article database. But in it s current form the article is unbalanced and does not reflect the true nature of the protest qualitatively and quantitatively.
The latter should hopefully be any day now, or later if/when Thaksin announces that he s not giving up. Lots of civil rights are suspended.
And a few days ago, General Prem had an audience with the King at the same time the tanks started rolling out of Lopburi. I deleted it. ah, nvm.
82.2.135.152 18:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I have several video clips of coup representation declaring the coup, captured from Thai TV. Is it cooperation when people only cooperate because a gun is held to their head? I have removed this text from the opinion poll section: Given the high amount of censorship and control of media, people remain skeptical of the results. I did this for the following reasons: - There was no source for this claim.
Is that the same as the Thai Rath? Bolivian Unicyclist 23:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I have noted that the Bangkok newspaper websites are functioning as normal. It will be a different story out in the sticks, but the Bkk elite don t care what they think.
Orderinchaos78 20:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Military coup d état? Is there any other sort? I think September 2006 Thailand coup d état would be better. If you have tracable information about it fine otherwise keep the discussion for the bar tonight! Roger jg 08:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Patiwat, you so-called facts are just speculations from social critics.
They seem to be getting away with defying the martial law on their english publication. Is that not so? I mean the coud d etat happened happened today.
At least during Thaksin s regime we can openly criticize him and even yelling Get Out! . However what matters is that we should stop all that extra load of work by already blocking this page for non-users only.
Adam 03:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Post it here and we will give you an opinion. Adam 08:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Do I need any other ground to criticise them on other than that they are ugly? They are very ugly, and don t belong in an encyclopaedia.
Censorship has existed in thailand for a long time before the coup, and people have learned to watch what they post to avoid legal action by the police. Humanoid 10:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC) SmellyCat, you mention that In the article it seems like the most terrible things are happening in Thailand without CNN or such being allowed to broadcast about it. Could you point out what made you make this inference? Patiwat 15:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Sonthi originally stated that Defense Minister Thammasak was detained.
Anyone know what license it would be? I think they arenot copyrighted because Thai constitution has been suspended. If the military say, We removed Thaksin because he was corrupt, that is relevant.
It says it all. Don’t get me wrong, the are people who support Thaksin and there are people who oppose the coup and I contributed to the article by referencing some of these protesters. Just because some people manage to get around the censorship, it does not mean that there is no censorship.
underexpose 19:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Can someone please redraft most of the second half of the Day Two commentary - it s a rip-off from an Australian news website. This is a right wing coup against a populist party led by a man who was not even running in the next election, so the coup is not against him but against the will of the people as expressed in the next election.
TJ0513 18:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC) BBC News 24 has just reported that the King is to meet with the Army chiefs to discuss government but it has not yet updated its site. after coup = illegal to criticize the king, illegal to criticize the coup, illegal to criticize the military, illegal to criticize the junta government, and many more people are getting arrested for criticism.
A blatant exemple can be found in former TRT Bangkok MP Mongkol Kimsoonjan who said that Thai Rak Thai might be disbanded even if Thaksin returned to Thailand and that for him if there are two choices, I may choose the Democrat Party because it is more popular than others in Bangkok . The coup is in fact an anti-democracy act by definition.
Remember what happened to Constantine II of Greece. I ve been scanning thai tv channels all day to see if they would mention the protest, and I have not seen any mention of it yet, but the military did interrupt ALL channels at 3 pm to deliver a message, so it looks like the military still has the control and power to interrupt all tv signals in order to deliver their own messages.
Yes, there is an issue by the ARC asking a journalist to control the content of the news. DTRY 11:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC) If the King opposes the coup he can always go on TV and say so.
Adam 06:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Surakiart Sathirathai is also listed as a DPM of Thailand. Would it be wrong for me to just delete news like this? Because my friends in Thailand say something very different.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by SmellyCat (talk • contribs) 08:10, September 21, 2006 (UTC). Can we clarify whether newspapers appeared as normal on the day of the coup and on subsequent days? Is there obvious censorship of print media? Are opinions critical of the coup being published? Are Thaksin s statements being reported? And on another matter, where is Mr Abhisit? Has he said anything? Adam 09:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Are the Thai-language papers supporting the coup? What about the provincial press? What did Abhisit say? Adam 10:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC) It seems that after the king s endorsement of the coup the ARC was then refered as CDR.
Looks like computer-translation at work. No arrest has been made no far regarding press censorship.
I am not for or against any side here; but I think it will present a good (and balanced) point of view in Bangkokian s reaction to the coup. In a power struggle words are used as weapons.
May I remind some editor that this is not the place to discuss Thaksin s wrongdoing or the reality of such and such allegation against Thaksin or the Army. That s why many sites for thailand practice what looks like self-censorship, because if they didn t, their site would be shut down, and they could face prosecution.
Amazing accomplishment for an encyclopedia. Worth watching?--*smb 20:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC) The article speaks of to the Thairat Daily.
I think NPOV requires us to not just state these accusations, but to show the perspective of the accused as well, and include any appropriate appropriate information that would be sympathetic to the accused. For instance, the junta accuses Thaksin s government of corruption. He can t deny that he might be asked, because he doesn t know.
If it started with 30 people, grew to 100 at its peak, and then shrunk back down to 20 near the end, the actual numbers of protesters should not include just a count at one point in time, but the total number of people that participated, even if for a brief moment. If there is no evidence or verifiable repport it has nothing to do here.
Needs sorting out..Roger jg 15:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC) from the article: I think there a milltary bases there and it doesn t say anything about the U.S. That statement was MADE BY CDRM NOT THE KING.
Foreign news outlet can broadcast live video. Or maybe just in the hotels? What does it mean when a channel is taken of the air, but still be able to broadcast? Again what about this news: As of 15:35, foreign news channels CNN, BBC, CNBC, NHK and Bloomberg remained blacked out by the sole cable operator, UBC.
See for guidelines, which suggest that an article of this size needs a 3-4 paragraph intro. The behavior of replacing an election they were going to lose with a coup speaks louder than words about a coup to restore democracy .
The junta is making some harsh accusations about the former government. 2) We have never seen what the King said to the junta leaders, even though they promised us that it would be coming soon since 3 a.m.
Evon more so if he swears in the junta s nominee as Prime Minister. It s unbelievable.
Anyway, I am going to put your first photo in the article in place of the existing one which we don t know the origin of. MojoTas 03:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC) this site has pictures, can we use them or do we not have the right licensing? ~Rangeley (talk) 20:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Use of Bangkok Post Front Page: I believe it is fair use to have the front page.
someone else got rid of it. --underexpose 22:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Check the CC licence on flickr.
Roger jg 09:44, 23 September 2006 (UTC) I found an internet article from CNN that claims over 100 protesters exactly as I previously said I heard on tv. Since CNN is the only one with video footage, making it possible for them to pause and count carefully, as well as proving the number they claim, I think we should conclude that there were over 100 protesters and leave it at that.
All Thai news programmes were also cancelled under orders from the military. A source of this news was included, however the link does not work. (Ahnaf 10:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)) According to this page there are only 38 native thai speakers on wikipedia.
There is chain of command here starting from HM the King who endorsed the coup, the military junta and its motives for the coup in a royal decree, down one level to the CDRM who run the show and down to those who obey the orders. And most of foreign news reporters get it wrong that the King released a statement ordering Thai people to obey the CDRM.
Adam 12:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Could I suggest merging the paragraph starting On the morning of Wednesday, 20 September, the websites of the leading .. with the restriction to human right paragraph? Then moving the restriction to human right new paragraph in the heading Criticisms of the coup but renaiming it immediate consequences of the coup Also moving Human Right Group into Reaction Roger jg 14:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC) The info about the huger striker is still presented 3 times. I will remove the note should press censonship occurs in the future.
Adam 11:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC) As per Wikipedia policy, let the facts speak for themselves, and only note speculation when it is published by someone else s. We should agree on what to do with this Roger jg 08:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC) http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/read.php?newsid=30014256 The Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy (CDRM) yesterday asked the local press to report its name in full and to exercise self-censorship on political news in order to foster social unity.
The note is put there to show how the military considers internet censorship less important because only a very small percentage of thai people actually have internet access in their homes. It appears to have largely been a non-event at the current time (not really that surprising, it would have been exceptionally foolish of the DCRC to try and stop it) but still probably should be mentioned http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/23/headlines/headlines_30014455.php Of course this is from the Nation in Thailand so potentially they ve underestimated the turnout or missed details which reflected poorly on the DCRC but no indications as yet..
-- User:Humanoid 2006 September 22, 17:30 GMT Your claim that 19sept.org was moved to 19sept.blogspot.com is false. It d be nice if someone familiar with this could write out an explanation? --71.200.61.10 02:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC) al jazeera has a timeline link with last year s events: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F9E2C9FC-29F6-4443-A916-36D2FEB7FB6B.htm.
This time it s no different. The last President was President Megawati but the current one is President Yudhoyono.
WAS 4.250 12:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC) No doubt there will be plenty of commentary of this kind in the coming days which you can quote in the reactions section. We never know..Roger jg 02:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC) There have been a lot of reactions from the US, by a lot of people, over several days, of varying severity, and ranging from general comments about their concern over the situation to specific comments like the review of foreign aid.
Roger jg 17:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC) It is not self-censorship if somebody is pointing a gun to your head and tells you to be careful what you say or else we ll shut your site down. You need to remember that what you see in english internet publications is not a reflection of what is shown in thai language publications and thai television.
One website has been shut down and I assume that this website did move to blogger to this address http://19sept.blogspot.com It is still possible to read the blog and there is not ACTIVE action taken by the Junta to close down or block access to this site or other. ABC (Australia) has come online and seems to view it as a positive development, as does Channel News Asia.
Do others agree? Adam 04:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC) PLEASE. Roger jg 04:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC) I just add a sentence about people supporting the coup refered from CNN.com.
friendliness as stated at BBC, where soldiers are happy and waving and taking photos etc, general public is not worried, etc. Could anyone check that? There is also the phone number, too.
AND BANGKOKIANS ELITES THINK IT S A GOOD IDEA. Patiwat is, as usual, trying to drag the king in the conflict. What s the deal? Patiwat 09:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC) The article states: General Sonthi would have learned from an intelligence report that Yongyuth Tiyapairat and Newin Chidchob were planning to organise a counter protest with the support of the Forestry Police armed with HK 33 rifles.. and references The Bangkok Post, September 20, 2006. It is difficult to verify this reference without knowing the article title.
The next day, he had an audience with the King, and a few hours later, appeared on TV, practically crying, saying that he wouldn t accept the Premiership. How should this section be organized? Patiwat 23:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC) There is an important opinion published in the Nation this morning http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/22/opinion/opinion_30014290.php where the author contend that Thaksin had plans to take over with his own military coup.
He appointed Thaksin since it was the will of the people, no matter wrong or right. It can be speculated from the video the coup claims to the be the proof of having spoken to the king.
Afterall, it was an official announcement by Sondhi, why shouldn t it be here??? Roger jg 08:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC) No one knows what will happen next. Naturally, we need commentators other than wikipedian editors to point to these facts and use words to discuss their relevance.
It can t became a running chronicle of Thai history. For an article of this length, a 1 paragraph introduction is not acceptable.
Also, CNN and BBC seems to broadcast anything they want. Even at the heyday of anti-thaskin demo, the number of protestors was relatively small compare to protest that can happen in the West. It is important to put things in perspective for the foreign reader.
Last night, when Thaksin was shown at the UN on CNN - the picture and sound were cut temporarily. A discussion about whether Thaksin was or was not corrupt is not relevant.
Does this make sense: once the CDR/DCR/ACR/whatever crystallizes, we put subsequent junta announcements/orders/trials/human-rights infractions in the new article. I think the most concern would be why the King hasn t responded yet, or maybe even the thai baht drop.
I assume Thailand has at least two DPMs then. Roger jg 04:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC) Thai page of this artivle, th:รัฐประหารในประเทศไทย พ.ศ.
Patiwat 14:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC) For the record, here is what some of the press is saying about the King s role: Patiwat 19:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I fail to see the point of speculation not based on evidence. Most of the reports have been sourced from the US or UK which are well behind the local timezone.
So, I don t think it s necessary, but you know, whatever. I accidentally deleted the thai flag, thinking it was the genitals, haha.
Although CNN considered the thai protest important enough to show on international tv. Again may I remind editors that this article is not the place to discuss the involvment and prior knwoledge of the King.
Glad that we can still get the BBC in this internet cafe! DudleyC, Koh Samui, Thailand. Patiwat 10:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC) An editor removed information in the introduction on the junta s arrests of Cabinet members and protestors, noting that the introduction should be concise.
They are free to do that in their own article Roger jg 16:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC) First report is in about the protect. >_< Spankmecold 22:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Assuming the coup is successful, we ll eventually have to ask ourselves what the outer boundaries of this article are.
Fingers crossed for Thailand! --kingboyk 10:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I would also like to add my congratulations on the comprehensive timetable in the implementation of the coup set out in the article and the insight it gives into the mechanics of a Coup.It is the most all encompassing article I have read abot the Coup stated in a very factual way.203.56.245.123 02:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC) By far the best coverage I have found anywhere on the Internet, and I have been looking fairly hard. This material is not copyrighted and there is even a possibility when downloading the Pix to indicate it comes from a newspaper front page.
It must have been breaking news. Yet, they think it s loyal to make a coup and suspend the best, most democratic, people s Constitution. The worst thing is, the middle-to-upper class and the intellectual elite of Bangkok are agreeing with it.
I say all this to say that this article should not report words as if they were truth. The article might interest many editors of this article, so have a look, please.
whatever that is ? 131.215.7.233 18:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Anyone got a usable license photo of Bangkokian handing out flowers or food to soldier? It s been show in Thai television a lot recently. Adam 09:42, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Patiwat is correct that we should not present accusations as anything more than accusations.
Does this mean the military leadership intends to stay in power? I would like someone to comment this, and potentialy change it. The former has been promised to happen in 2 weeks, but I wont waste my breath.
I ve had the World Service on. You cannot publish views critical of the coup in thailand now, it is the law.
Given the additional justification for using CNN s number given above (they have video footage to prove it), I ll modify the article to just say over 100 . Since Sonthi had assured that he will set up a civilian government and return the power to the people quickly, it might be better to let him do it.
Please do not add those horrible purple quotation marks: I will delete them. Due weight considerations also mean well sourced responses to the allegations (and not original research by us to respond to the allegations) should also be included.
I plan to upload them to my blog. Read *hence I could get elected whatever my political conviction*.
Sam Hayes 10:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I agree with Sam Hayes. But I wholeheartedly agree with him that: Thaksin is bad, a coup is a lot worse. O.K., sorry about the rant.
having milltary bases and what they were doing with them during the coup.---Scott3 Talk Contributions Count: 950+ 18:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Are there any US troops statying at Thai bases? -- Dudtz 9/21/06 6:08 I would have thought Junta was used to described more when the military enter a longer term of governance. Why trying to involve the king and event suggest that he had control over the coup if there is no evidence? I think the last paragraph of this section is trying to say far to much and is borderline POV.Roger jg 05:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC) When a paragraphe starts with However, if one consider from another point of view. This is called a Point of View (POV) and goes against Wiki policies.
The following implies that it is still being blocked: and blacked out all local and international news broadcasts in Thailand. (Jonfernquest 11:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)) As of 17:18 Thai time today, BBC World is still off the air, though CNN is back on. A clarification is clearly requiered about who can see what !Roger jg 11:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC) I have reverted back the note that information has been allowed to spread relatively freely. Accept TV station which owned by the army, private media are still able to operatate.
Someone recently changed this to say that he is in hiding - no reference was given. Note that they could if they wished, since they do it for porn-sites.
All other people making estimates don t have video footage to back up their estimates. - I think the term people is vague in this context.
But I do think he gave indications that he wouldn t oppose it. And as for the note about tv censorship in the internet section, it is just a note, not a discussion.
Don t write encyclopedia entry from speculations, guys. My own pet theory: they got scolded badly and don t want to show it to the public after they ve declared loyalty to the King .
Nil Einne 17:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Was the 19 September Network against Coup d Etat petition signing at Paragon the same event as the 100 people dressed in black in front of Siam Center? It wasn t so clear from the media reports, so I m including both for now in the article. Humanoid 21:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC) Also, the number of protesters at the same time surely varied over time.
The facts in this case show that after the April elections, Thaksin confidently publicly declared victory. Free picture can be found at NowPublic.com if this particular one is a problem It s interesting seeing who stacks up with what at the moment - it s quite clear that the BBC opposes the coup.
And indeed he has not opposed it. I think that arrests of political prisoners is certainly something that deserves mentioning in the intro.
I myself still wish the King should scold Sonthi and told him to go back to the barracks quickly, however. And here are some non-factual speculations of my own: So, unless we heard any actual word from the King, I will stand firmly on my case. And found the next line there is a sentence saying people against the coup reference from a website that sounds suspiciuos (at least to me :) http://www.geocities.com/defendthaiconstitution/home.html seems like the hoax to me.
Plus, the king is usually stay at Hua-hin not Bangkok. It is commonly done on other website such as the BBC.
15 years of Democratic development went down the drain. Please specify.
--underexpose 15:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC) It is not cooperation. If others speculate about it, we can of course quote them.
If, however, the events were reported prior to 17:00 GMT, then we can correctly say the 19th. I donot see it as a censorship, just yet, because the wording of the issue is asking for cooperation rather than an order .
Thaksin s brother-in-law no longer holds that position. I also hate when people are citing loyalty to the King to promote their petty cause, since in the long run it will only hurt the King himself.
Not the same thing. No mention was made of the protest at all.
As the article is being constantly revised and updated, vandalism/bias will be easy to spot and remove. Others will point out that Thaksin is an arrogant, authoritarian, corrupt demagogue who brought this coup upon himself (and the Thai people) by his shameless behaviour, and those opinions can be quoted as well.
Has anyone else seen this? Patiwat 09:39, 22 September 2006 (UTC) We should ensure that the 19 September Network against Coup d Etat which name has sudenly poped up in several sections of the article understand this is not a soapbox to promote whatsoever opinions on the coup. They are NOT the same site, and they do not seem to be run by the same people.
Humanoid 08:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC) CNN has said that there were more than 100 protesters and showed video footage proving it. Obviously there will be a few more than this but I don t think there will be enough for a edit war to begin, especially as internet access is supposedly blocked/partially blocked in thailand.
This is just a suggestion. - DTRY 16:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC) I d like to suggest that editing this article should be blocked for non-users because we know that sooner or later there will be vandalism and editing and counter-editing between Thaksin and non-Thaksin supporters.
I scanned the King s article and the PM s and I got very little on the reasons why there s a coup.. Journo s opinions might be enlightening but only for what they are.
But of course that is your decision to make. Matatigre36 06:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Have there been any reports of action against TRT? Have its offices been occupied, its assets seized, its bank accounts frozen? And also what about companies associated with Thaksin, his family or cronies? Adam 07:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC) What exactly is the meaning of this? Foreign news channels, such as BBC World, CNN, CNBC and Bloomberg Television, were reported to have been taken off the air, although foreign broadcasters were still able to broadcast relatively freely from the Thai capital. All my Thai friends say that at least some, if not all, of those foreign news channels were available the whole time.
Shall we archive and start afresh? Roger jg 11:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC) . There is a separate web site where the Bangkok Post archives can be found, but it requires users to register for membership before gaining access to anything more than article summaries.
Adam 23:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Bangkok Post: Was this site intentionally taken down? I see an article about the coup on google news but can t get on the site.--Sappycynic 02:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Can anyone confirm which of the two the events have occurred on? I m in Perth (one hour ahead of Bangkok time) and the first I heard of it was on the BBC World Service at 01:30 my time (13:30 EDT; 17:30 GMT), i.e. Thai people will tend to respect this chain of command especially that it is headed by the King and as a consequence not want/need to protest. It must also be clear that protesters are not all pro-thaskin but people who oppose the military coup as a mean to get out of the deadlock.
Adam 10:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Your homepage is not set up for me to email you, and I m not posting my email address here. Patiwat 23:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Yes, this article can only be about the coup.
If there are other quotation formats available, let s use them. It seems I m the only few Thais who want Thaksin to go down Democratically - and absolutely hate this coup.
Adam 22:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I segmented the first few paragraphs above into topics for readability & access. People who protests about this coup is immediately thrown in jail.
Patiwat 04:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC) It was widely assumed by Thai analysts and the international media that the coup had the support of King Bhumibol Adulyadej. 131.215.7.233 04:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC) There is a huge chunk coming from the BBC website in the role of the king section which I am not fure is fully neede. Or, the junta accuses Thaksin of repeatedly insulting the King.
One can pretty much create a blog and criticise the coup as much as one wants and the Nation just published one article critical of the coup. We should simply state and source the charges and the rebuttles and let the details be wiki-linked to more appropriate articles.
I m not _talking_ about tv censorship in the internet section at length, I m only mentioning one tiny fact about it. 2549, has a big warning sign at the top, with a text warn the contributors about not to write anything that will effect the national (Thailand) security.
This is well known and recognised. The words are a smokescreen.
It s just a small short note. The first is that it is not necessarily true; the second is that it does not explain the nature of the protest. For a reader not familiar with Thailand it must be clear that in their large majority, The Thai people are welcoming the coup (Suan Dusit s poll and other news repports, or simply talk to people), even the pro-Thaskin supporters because it is a way to unlocked the political situation that has been deadlock for months.
Otherwise, if an official english language statement was made, that would be much preferred. You were not doing anything subservive.
Channel 7 news AGAIN only showed people taking pictures with the tanks and saying good things. Anybody know what happened to him? Given his positions, I guess he might also be at the UN meetings? Nil Einne 06:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I believe it would be useful to have the section on the future of the Thai goverment back in the article.
The bottom line is that there was hardly any effort to suppress news at all. The following is also inaccurate, television was blocked until roughly 9 to 10 in the morning the night after the coup. Eventually, this will need to be done for other sections, too.
Adam is right that A discussion about whether Thaksin was or was not corrupt is not relevant . There was a black out until about 10am.
This is an extremely active article, which should help prevent any vandalism from lasting. What is going on is a power struggle between one faction backed by the majority of thai people because of measures like increasing the minimum wage and another faction numerically in the minority yet holding the strings of power (royalty, military, money, religion (the buddhudists in Thailand)).
131.215.7.233 10:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I don t think the King ordered the coup either. -- User:Humanoid 2006 September 22, 17:35 GMT Here are the differences I can see so far: before coup = Illegal to criticize the king, but legal (but dangerous) to criticize the government, and legal to criticize coups as guaranteed by the 1997 constitution.
We still don t know the source of the photo of the soldier which is the article at present. - There does not seem to be Hight amount of censorship . --SmellyCat 15:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC) People means human beings.
Go to my homepage and email me from there at email this user. Adam 10:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC) As a Thai who loves BOTH the King AND Democracy, I won t believe one bit that he had ordered the coup. It is very suspicious indeed why: 1) the King is in Chitrada Palace in Bangkok instead of his usual Klai Kangvol Palace in Hua Hin.
Patiwat 05:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC) They probably meant warn rather than admonish and people rather than nations . Adam 05:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Goodness me - Thailand is not North Korea, even now.
Now there is hardly no control from teh junta over the internet. This is a dangerous course to take after 15 years of democracy.
What do you think? Patiwat 10:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC) The article is currently 7,800 words long (40-50,000 characters, depending on how they are counted), but the 1 paragraph introduction is only 100 words long. The same goes for the base members of the TRT who saw an opportunity to get elected if running under the TRT banner.
--Manop - TH 05:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC) I have started an article Pridiyathorn Devakula, since he is front-runner to be appointed PM. If that is what is happening, then clearly the count made at its peak is the closest to the total number of people.
Gazpacho 17:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC) This is inaccurate see The Nation http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/read.php?newsid=30014408 Roger jg 17:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC) And this http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/23/headlines/headlines_30014455.php Roger jg 18:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC) It seems that Thak s familly is still in BKK http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/09/23/headlines/headlines_30014454.php Roger jg 18:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC) The article is getting quite long, so I ve subbed off the International reactions section to its own article. Then many Thai people are not bothered with demonstration in general.
I refuse to believe it. Patiwat 10:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC) This is an impressive article, thank you very much for writing it.
Adam 03:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC) PS There can t be many countries where you can take photos of soldiers on the day after a coup without getting shot at or arrested. I suggest you delete it and replace it with the first of your two photos.
Does this conform to the Wikipedia policy ? -- 85.184.10.46 10:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC) I think the main contributors should all be happy with the state of the discussion. Adam 05:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Back to this topic, I think we can not continue adding info add libitum for the next two weeks, but I am not sure how to get out of this article and move onto the next one? Should we expand on the decision taken by the CRDM in the article about it? Where do we expand on the prostest/support to the coup? There are a few things to add about Thaksin and his familly.
Davidreid 03:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Lets agree, if at all possible, on how to translate some Thai terms used in the coup. I have an Indonesian friend called Dr Didi Sutono, who says In Indonesia I am Dr Didi and in the west I am Dr Sutono. But Indonesians are very inconsistent. If the 1991 coup was any sign, the junta will eventually appoint a civilian government, at which point the policies of the government can be placed in the biographical article on the Premier-to-be.
A reader who doesn t know any better might just take these accusations at face value and assume they are correct. Information (with references, of course) should also be shown that Thaksin s government reduced corruption during its years in power.
They show just running cars and no sign of Sujinda-Jumlong like kind of video. The name is important in relaying a right message and its shortened version might be misleading, CDCM spokesman Lt General Palangkun Klahan said. Roger jg 12:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia policy is to be very careful about NPOV and verifiability in articles concerning the lives of living people.
Lots of people especially in Bangkok support the coup, and there s almost no way to reverse the damage that was done. I was reading 19sept.blogspot.com before the 19sept.org domain name was even registered.
There doesn t seem to be any news about violence but it seems the government has lost control of Bankok at the least.--*smb 18:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC) I think something should be written on the.. Let s be honnest about it.
It is currently held by Charupong Ruangsuwan. Does anyone know if the papers are actually on the streets today? It is an unusual coup d etat that imposes no press censorship.
Using alleged as Roger jg suggests is how this is typically done. Until now this article has been free of POV and that is why it is good.
There is a _high_ amount of censorship.
