The US is behind all political turmoil in Thailand

The US has been behind all the political turmoil in Thailand, including violence in the south, coups, the burning of the country, etc., to create instability so that it can install its military bases to block China’s influence, said Dr Thianchai Wongchaisuwan, a self-styled analyst of global trends and a staunch supporter of the People’s Alliance for Democracy.

On 3 Feb, Thianchai, whose penname ‘Yuk Sri-ariya’ means ‘utopian era’, said in a programme on ASTV that the US so dreaded the expanding power of China that it wanted to block it.

Once the US had a military exercise near North Korea’s borders ‘in a bid to have some bombs land on North Korea’, but when retaliated against, the US condemned North Korea for attacking South Korea.  The US tactically said that Japan and South Korea had to cooperate to counter North Korea, hoping that China would give support to North Korea.  But China, seeing through the game, remained neutral and told South Korea and Japan that the only way to prevent a North Korean nuclear attack was to build an alliance among them.  China was successful and the US failed, he said.

Southeast Asia is another strategic area of contention between China and the US.  Thailand, once a key strategic base for the US in fighting the Vietnam War, would be used by the US as the fore line to counter China, he worried.

When the US invaded Iraq, the Thaksin government did not initially send troops to join the allied forces [but later did].  However, after the US had won the war, Thaksin went to the US and, after shaking hands, the US called Thailand a non-NATO ally, he said.

‘We just sent our troops to Iraq like every country did.  How could this be special, if there’s nothing more than this?  So I think that this must have to do with the issue of getting rid of terrorists, to which the US was giving so much importance.  I have followed this issue and have been suspicious that the killings in the south are the result,’ he said.

In the incident at Krue Se mosque [a massacre of Muslims in Pattani in 2004], despite an order from Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyut, then Deputy Prime Minister of the Thaksin Shinawatra government, a general [Gen Panlop Pinmanee, then Deputy Director of the Internal Security Operations Command] ordered military troops to attack the insurgents allegedly hiding inside the mosque.  A CNN camera crew broadcast this incident to the world, and shortly afterwards the US Vice President announced that the US was ready to send its forces to help Thailand fight against terrorists, he said.

He suspected that the US was behind the coup on 19 Sept 2006, because two generals who had closely worked with the US, including [Gen Pallop], had ‘clearly been with yellow shirts’.  And they were influential in ISOC, whose personnel were the first to start an operation against Thaksin, he said.

He believed that the US had employed a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy.  For example, in Libya, the US, after overthrowing Gaddafi, has not supported any group to rule and let them fight on, because as long as the Libyans continue to fight, they have to buy weapons from the US and the US has wanted to occupy the oil fields in the country.  In Kosovo, the US instigated Muslims to clash with Christians so that it could install a military base there, he said.

Dubai, where Thaksin has been based, is connected to Saudi Arabia which is close to the US.  A news outlet in Singapore has repeatedly propagated news about red shirts in support of Thaksin, he said.

When the red shirts ‘torched the country’, a general [Gen Pallop] was recruited to draw up the plans with Thaksin and Seh Daeng [Gen Khattiya Sawasdiphol].  This general, who had been with the yellow shirts, suddenly switched sides for unclear reasons, but this was for certain a special military operation.  Then appeared the men in black, who, according to intelligence, were mercenaries based in Ratchaburi and Kanchanaburi under the control of the CIA.

It was hard to believe that Thaksin did not realize that the red shirts, even with the help of the men in black, could never defeat the military.  What they could do at best was to create riots in the hope that many people would be killed, so that the government would have to resign and the US could enter Thailand under the guise of the UN, to oversee the general elections, he said.

The US does not give full support to Thaksin, however.  If Thaksin can secure power, the US would turn to support Thaksin’s opposition instead.  The US wants Thailand because Thailand is the best front against China, which has already encroached upon Burma and Laos.  He viewed the conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia as another possible case in which the US wanted a war to erupt so that it could sell arms and intervene in the name of the UN.

Referring to former Rector of Thammasat University Charnvit Kasetsiri’s support of Nitirat’s proposed amendments to Article 112 of the Criminal Code, he said that Cornell University in the US had been a major hub of bright international students, including Charnvit.      

In expanding its power, the US has also extended its intellectual domination and manipulated those students’ thoughts, using Charles Darwin’s Evolution Theory which dismisses ‘old things as backward and authoritarian.’

Works on Southeast Asian history produced by Cornell scholars have always been about wars between this king and that, making them look authoritarian and barbarian.  These people like to read ‘The Face of Thai Feudalism’ by Jitr Bhumisak, who was brilliant but very pessimistic, showing only negative aspects of the monarchy, he said.

Thianchai himself graduated from Binghamton University in the US.


This piece by Thianchai is so

This piece by Thianchai is so retarded and dumb, it could only have been written in collaboration with Tony Cartalucci, aka LandDestroyer. Or perhaps NotTheNation satirical website fooled the MANAGER into running it.

It is catered to the ASTV

It is catered to the ASTV audience. That makes sense.

Pretty bizarre, I have to

Pretty bizarre, I have to say. If he donned a red shirt & adjusted his ideology accordingly, he could be Jatuporn!

Oh my God!!! It all makes

Oh my God!!! It all makes sense now!! I'm a banana you know.

Ladies and gentlemen, shall

Ladies and gentlemen, shall we keep an academic approach, please? Your comments are starting to sound similar to Tony's. For as much as I dislike Manager and everything it stands for, I have to admit there are some truths in what Thianchai said. If commentators here decided to automatically dismiss as bullshit every piece of information coming from a supposed "enemy", well, then what's the difference between Prachatai and Land Destroyer?

1 of 2 Some morsels of truth,

1 of 2
Some morsels of truth, or something similar to it, are present. Yet assuming that connections and relationships matter across the board is not exactly academic or analytical. Having spent nearly two decades in Saudi Aramco's Government Affairs organization, I have seen a lot of correspondence, documents and files others do not even know exist. As well, having witnessed what matters in Saudi Arabia (keeping the elites safe from fundamentalist coups and not relationships with the west per se), meaning keeping the oil money flowing, the close relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia is a two-edged sword in more ways that you can skin a cat. As well, despite its so-called intelligence networks, the US flubbed more than once, but certainly with establishing a base within the kingdom.
I am not sure whether Thaksin's strategy at the time was to do the impossible - defeat the military - or make a real ugly mess that the military could never distance itself from. The latter is more plausible if we credit Thaksin with that kind of strategic finesse. But misjudgment seems the rule of the day in Thaksin and ant-Thaksin circles, making a huge contribution to the current state of affairs. Thaksin suffered an Alexander the Great debacle in thinking that the world he knew was smaller than it actually was. For its part, the traditionalist/nationalist circles have also erred in assuming that they could eliminate Thaksin's threat by previously-workable methods. 2012 is a different world than 1932 or 1992. Image and information is currently controllable for state benefit but in the longer term something has to give. In a bit over three months 111 TRT politicians will re-enter the political field. Phya Thai players who have been useful in the past but can't hack it in the coming months will be rewarded and set aside.

FGA: "1 of 2 Some morsels of

FGA: "1 of 2 Some morsels of truth". Roughtly what I had in mind yes. And yes: your comment is more or less what I had in mind when I mentioned "academic approach".

Don't waste time. Dude is

Don't waste time. Dude is SCHIZO. The whole cult is SCHIZO.

I think it odd the onslaught

I think it odd the onslaught of insults against this article. The biggest problem about it all is IMO it is a total HODGEPODGE of ideas and facts and paranoid thinking all tossed into the same stew and presto: out comes whatever suits them.

There are some facts though, and the US is definitely a major player. However as the military itself stated publicly the US embassy was kept abreast by the generals in the weeks leading up to the 2006 coup. Now if the US was kept abreast, the US was dabbling and not averse to the coup.

We all know the US is a bad apple in world affairs and a BIG bad apple at that.

While it’s true that the US

While it’s true that the US wants counteract a growing Chinese influence in the region, I find it ridiculous that they would want to destabilize a relatively good ally like Thailand to do so. On the contrary, I believe the US prefers a stronger, more reliable Thailand to help counter China militarily.

The insurgency in the South, “burning” of Thailand, CIA men in black, etc… are just more PAD anti-American delusions. The US has lots of faults, and it is a big, bad player in the world, but even so, it is not responsible for every bad thing that happens in Thailand.

I suppose it may be possible that the US was behind the coup in a mistaken belief that it would politically stabilize the country, although there doesn’t seem to be any evidence for that. The leaked embassy documents seemed to show a marked indifference by a woefully inept US ambassador. When I think of Ralph Boyce, I am reminded of April Glaspie, the former ambassador to Iraq in 1990. Her incompetence cost the US trillions of dollars of debt and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

New York Times article

New York Times article titled, "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings," stated:

"A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington."

The article would also add, regarding the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED):

"The Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department. "

So clearly the "Arab Spring" was a premeditated region-wide political destabilization complemented by covert and overt military support - a large scale implementation of the US policy paper, "Which Path to Persia?" produced by the Fortune 500 -funded Brookings Institute.

Then you have to ask yourself, who is NED, the US State Department, the corporate-media, and Washington/London's lobbyists supporting throughout Southeast Asia? Clearly the answer is Prachatai, Thaksin, UDD, Nitirat, in Thailand, Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, and Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysia.

It is normal to seek the benefit of the doubt for the United States - a great nation with exceptional people and a magnificent history of real contributions to the world as a whole. Unfortunately the last century has seen a creeping Wall Street and London assert itself over the destiny of America and its people and has resulted in the sort of meddling ADMITTED TO by the New York Times above and examined extensively throughout my research.


Yes, do read the article

Yes, do read the article ( and see how TC draws conspiricist conclusions from an article that says something rather different. It seems very odd to simply ignore the billions of US dollars that went to supporting the militaries behind the regimes.

After you read the NYT

After you read the NYT article, then read what the NYT doesn't tell you, that the US State Department prepared and trained activists YEARS in advance, that armies of activists were trained outside of their respective countries, equipped and funded before being sent back.

Of course they will say "we didn't start the uprisings" but clearly they did, clearly they supported them, clearly they ensured they were successful. And yes, please note the BILLIONS the US gave to the militaries of nations they eventually overthrow and installed leaders more to their liking, proving that military support plays more of a role of getting closer to a nation's tactical capabilities, co-opting officers, and even co-opting an army's ability to operate self-sufficiently (you can't defeat an enemy you depend on for your existence.)

Albert, I seriously question the intellectual prowess of anyone who accepts a news report at face value without doing additional research and ensuring all conclusions you decide to "go with" are founded in verified, documented evidence. I have provided such additional research for you in the link above.

But TC it was you who sent us

But TC it was you who sent us to the NYT because you there was evidence for your claims there. Now you tell us that that article is not the evidence, only the bits you want to use. I suspect that is because the NYT contains facts and interpretations that would refute the conspiracy nonsense you fabricate. So you want everyone to "research" in the same way you do. Read the bits that confirm your view, but not the bits that contradict it. That's not research, that's concocting a story.

The NYT admits that the "Arab

The NYT admits that the "Arab Spring" was funded and supported by the US - which means that the collective corporate media lied when they claimed it took the US by surprise and was not in their interests.

Research the organizations listed by the NYT and see that the US trained some of them up to 2 years before the Arab Spring, this is admitted on the US State Department's "" which listed the Egyptian April 6 leaders as attendees to their NYC US State Dept. sponsored summit in 2008.

The NYT tries to make it still as if these were spontaneous uprising and the US simply helped them along, that it was "democracy promotion" when all you have to do is look at the history of NED, the people involved and even the direct after effects of the "Arab Spring" to see this is a complete lie.

The most telling of these lies are: "No one doubts that the Arab uprisings are home grown, rather than resulting from “foreign influence,” as alleged by some Middle Eastern leaders."

The uprising in Tunisia was also fully funded and backed by the US well in advance and was led by the now current president, Moncef who was harbored by the West for 2 DECADES while his "NGO" was funded and supported to the hilt by US money. Hardly "home grown."

And all you have to do is look here in Thailand and see who these very same organizations are supporting - Prachatai, UDD, Thaksin, and now Nitirat. And yes, the US funded the armies of these nations only to stab them in the back - as the US policy makers say in their own papers, getting closer to the army allows them to co-opt officers and get a better assessment of their tactical posture. "Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer" one of those age old, enduring stratagems - easy to see if you are objective and open minded and not busy hammering reality into a shape that is soothing to your political whims.

Now I've just demonstrated to

Now I've just demonstrated to you that I am not picking "bits" from the article. I show you with documented, first-hand evidence where the NYT is telling the truth and where they are outright lying. You can check the background of Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, or Syria's uprisings and see very clearly the exact same story for each, with a long premeditated push by the West to trigger regime change in each nation, as well as the documented, premeditated steps they took through NED-funded NGOs (like Prachatai) to set the stage for what their corporate-media disingenuously portrayed as spontaneous uprisings.

Now you demonstrate with documented evidence that somehow did not train these activists years in advance, that the protest figure heads were not all cultivated and groomed and even sitting members of US corporate-financier think-tanks, organizations, and institutions, or that anything at all I've said has been "concocted."

Read the WHOLE NYT article and back it up with documented facts. EVEN the US State Department fully admits to training armies of activists before the "Arab Spring" directly contradicting the narrative that the US State Department itself attempted to foist upon the world claiming they were caught "off guard" by the protests.

Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated that the "US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments." The report went on to explain that the US "organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there." Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect." Or in other words, the "unexpected" "Arab Spring" the US spent years funding, preparing for, training & equipping mobs for...

It shows what absolute shameless, craven liars these people are and how little they think about you and your intelligence. I am spending my time to share this with you so you are not made a fool of.

So the entire rebuttal to the

So the entire rebuttal to the article above are personal attacks and name-calling.

Let's review the facts.

Prachatai is funded millions of baht a year by the US government & US corporate-funded foundations.

UDD openly admitted to consorting before the 2011 elections with the very same sponsors of Prachatai, as well as the US-ASEAN Business Council (Wall Street's 1% of the 1%)

Thaksin is backed by the largest corporate lobbyists on earth, many of which are involved DIRECTLY with organizations that support and/or fund Prachatai and the UDD.

Finally - Hillary Clinton - US Secretary of State, as well as many other US policy makers have openly declared their intentions of instituting an "American Pacific Century" and will do so by realigning ASEAN against China.

The US has spent the last year, 2011, destabilizing and overthrowing governments using the exact same sort of NED-funded organizations throughout the Arab World.

Again, my research contains direct links to primary sources - including the US State Department funded NED official website, Prachatai's About Us page, the US Senate's official archives, UDD's official website, Hillary Clinton's piece in Foreign Policy magazine, and many, many others.

Don't argue about me, or your personal emotions, NO ONE CARES, rather look at the evidence and argue about that in a rational, logical, objective manner, if it is within your intellectual abilities...

He suspected that the US was

He suspected that the US was behind the coup on 19 Sept 2006...

PPT has shown that Boyce was sympathetic to the coupsters... the US has been a supporter of Thai coups since 1946... but that doesn't mean they were the instigator. The Royal Thai Army loves to coup. That's what they do when they've been out of power for awhile and stuck with just the proceeds from drug dealing. It's party time! They just like the green light from the US... Boyce gave it to them.

What they could do at best was to create riots in the hope that many people would be killed, so that the government would have to resign and the US could enter Thailand under the guise of the UN, to oversee the general elections, he said.

The only rioters were those in uniform... gunning down people in the streets after Abhisit obligingly rubber stamped the military's order to do so. The UN in Thailand? I don't think so. But yeah, Thailand definitely needs international observers of, not overseers of, their elections. I'm sure that PT's victory was even larger than the official call.

The US does not give full support to Thaksin, however.

Huh? But.. but... the US was behind the coup that overthrew Thaksin, right? I guess you could call that less than full support...

In expanding its power, the US has also extended its intellectual domination and manipulated those students’ thoughts, using Charles Darwin’s Evolution Theory which dismisses ‘old things as backward and authoritarian.’

This sounds like Somchai Menyaem attacking New Mandela... I guess they only have s few thoughts at the Tendentious Collective and so have to share them. This is recycled material from the TC.

Read Walden Bello and get off the pawn of the superpower treadmill.

"Recycled material from the

"Recycled material from the TC" is in fact documented evidence taken from the US Senate's archives featuring signed documents exposing Thaksin's extensive Washington support. It also includes official NED webpages showing how the US government-funded organization funds opposition and propaganda outfits around the world to serve corporate-financier interests - this includes Prachatai, Nitirat, and the UDD.

We have definitive evidence that demonstrates the measure of support the US has and is still giving Thaksin, his UDD which was granted an audience with Fortune 500 corporations (BP, Exxon, Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, etc.), evidence the UDD provides FOR us on their own website, not "material from the TC."

We have this evidence which contradicts your claims entirely, and is the sole reason you have decided to crutch your agenda along on vague US State Department cables instead of making a serious effort to flesh out your conspiracy theory with actual facts.

Just remember, each post you make that fails to demonstrate factual evidence to back up your claims, only further highlights the veracity of my research - despite your attempts to verbally belittle and dehumanize me with petty name-calling.

Only bits of NYT are evidence

Only bits of NYT are evidence as long as those bits support TC. Wikileaks can't be evidence because they contradict the conspiracy theory. So what you have to do is seek out well-known facts and concoct an unbelievable story. After that we call it research. And no one can prove it wrong because their facts are not acceptable to the oracle. Hence nonsense conspiracy theory is born.