Monday, August 27, 2007

General Prem Gives Blessing to Incompetent, Corrupt Coup Maker General Saprang

Prem said to prefer Saprang to head army


Bangkok Post

Gen Prem felt Gen Saprang and Gen Anupong both deserved to head the army because both had ''risked their lives'' seizing power in the Sept 19 coup.

Man, oh man, do we live in a Bizarro World!

Only in a truly screwed up Bizarro World would we have the head of the Privy Council giving his blessing to two generals who overthrew the legal government, and say, believe it or not, that because they were criminals, they deserved to lead the army.


Unknown said...

This Prem caracter is in quite interesting position. One moment he is the right hand of King, the other he is just meek private person/ex-mil.

Just recently some misguided individuals voiced that no one should oppose Prem because he is almost King himself. But that could never be, because if he was next to King, and King is supposed to be out of politics then how he could be making this kind of public comments.

Haha, this is joke. Prem is as near royalty you can be in Thailand, atleast the respect he gets. There is no denying. The public opinion is strongly thinkinkin' so too (look all the posters and things at 2bangkok on how he is posted as the poster boy for as-near-to-royalty-as-you-can-ever-be). SO, is this kind of public acceptance to the coup or not from royal family? If not, then why the hell King lets Prem give out these blurbs knowing how he is in public viewed as untouchable? Makes me crazy.

The Prem is real chameleont, he is what ever suits best. I bet now he is making these again as private ex-military, not connected to royal family at all...

Ahh, the amazing abilities of the ruling class to wash their hands and keep them nicely clean...

Anonymous said...

Thai political comedy can be entertaining.

Thaksin gave his 'blessing' to Samak S. to be his proxy to assume PPP leadership.

Prem gave his 'blessing' to Gen. Saprang and Gen. Anuphong as qualified to be Army Chief.

So Fonzi you have 'deconstructed' the Prem blessing. Why don't you deconstruct too the Thaksin blessing?

BTW Fonzi you kept on insisting that Thaksin was NOT responsible for the extrajudicial killings during 2003-05 while he was PM. And YET it was only Thaksin's square face, plus his cheering Interior Minister, who wished to take credit and glamor for the 'extreme' measures during the anti-drugs. Surely somebody MUST have given the shoot-to-kill orders and the accompanying changes in the rules to facilitate more kills. We do know Thaksin Shinawatra is a detailed results oriented and weekly follow-ups micro-manager.

Why don't you 'deconstruct' what happened during the extrajudicial rampage in 2003-05 Fonzi? Maybe it will test your deconstructing s-kills to the limit Fonzi with this assignment instead of your vehemence directed at Nation (because Nation led the calls for the Thaksin ouster).

Both you Fonzi the Shark, and Bangkok Pundit are soooo obvious in your evasive efforts to NOT 'deconstruct' (Fonzi) or NOT 'Fisk' (Bangkok Pundit) WHO was responsible for the extrajudicial killings during the 2003-05 anti-yaa baa.

If I label you Fonzi and Bangkok Pundit both as BOUGHT by Thaksin, you can both appreciate why.

Fonzi said...


You are a real piece of work. First of all, I never said Thaksin was not guilty of what you accuse him of.

Go through the entire blog and find me a place where I said Thaksin is innocent or defended his reign of power.

He could be guilty of everything you say, and a lot worse, but, guess what, Matty, there is no hard evidence or smoking gun that proves Thaksin is a criminal. And there is certainly not enough evidence to justify a coup. Thaksin was not Hitler or a Stalin or Fidel Castro.
We had a constitution and it wasn't used. We had a free press and it wasn't used. We had an election scheduled for October and it wasn't used.

There were many ways of getting rid of Thaksin legally, but you and your yellow shirted buddies chose the easy(and illegal) way out, which makes you just as bad if not worse than Thaksin. Does being a criminal justify ousting an alleged criminal? You cry about the victims of the drug war, yet you care nothing about 65 millions Thais who were disenfranchised by an unelected and unaccountable military junta, which is made of its own group of criminals, like Surayud(murderer of 91), Panlop (murderer in the South), Saprang (propaganda slush fund, embezzling funds other agencies and giving to the army, taking jaunts to Europe and running AoT and TOT into the ground)

You and your buddies can't seem to reconcile this contradiction in your position.

And that is the point I have been making all along.

And my beef with The Nation is that it has been on the anti-Thaksin bandwagon for five years, no doubt about it, yet it hasn't published one investigative report outlining Thaksin's criminal empire. You even admitted this yourself.

Seriously, I have been closely reading The Nation for the life of this blog. It never publishes any facts. Doesn't this disturb you?

The Nation represents Thailand to the outside world and it shamelessly prints lies and innuendos instead of chasing down the stories.. And you cry because I am the only one complaining about it. I think more people should be complaining.

Instead of attacking me, why not attack The Nation for not printing all the reports it supposedly sat on while Thaksin was in power. Why hasn't The Nation interviewed the victims of Thaksin;s drug wars? Why hasn't The Nation interviewed all the cops that were forced to follow Thaksin's shoot to kill orders during the drug war? Why hasn't The Nation asked why no victims sued Thaksin for violating their constitutional rights?

Matty, you are a smart guy most of the time, so how come you are not asking these questions also of the Thai media? Why aren't you encouraging them to prove Thaksin's guilt like I am?

I am just a blogger who get 100 hits a day. I have no power. Bangkok Pundit has no power. New Mandala has no power. What is your obsession with going after those with no power when you refuse to go after the Thai media, which doesn't even support your anti-Thaksin tirades with facts.

Unknown said...

Just thinkin' loudly after watching The Daily Show with Jon Steward. 23th of August he interviews Lt. Colonel John Nagl from Pentagon. On military mixing with politics, most ppl know how military should act when it comes to political topics..As Steward's way of speaking before asking a question shows "It is not appropriate to get into political questions but...bla bla bla"

hobby said...

A few points to remember:

1. The Bangkok Post article does not seem to contain any direct quotes from Prem, but rather it refers to a 'source'.

2. After the coup had occurred, the King endorsed it in the interest of finding stability after all the turmoil.

3. Choosing other than Saprang or Anupong would be going against the natural seniority order. Saprang is due to to retire in one year, which would make way for Anupong to take over then.
Supporting such a succession plan can also be seen to be promoting stability (which we know the King desires)

This is not an endorsement of Saprang, Anupong or Prem, but rather an explanation of why such a succession plan can be seen as plausible.