The facts (and they are facts) in this summary are well-known to those who follow Thai matters. For those who don't, and wish to update themselves on Thai politics, this article is hard to beat.

www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KJ07Ae01.html

It isn't only what the Thai press fails to report (see,e.g. the earlier discussion on its failure to print HM the King's call for unity) but also it's fawning adulation of the elitist government Thais had foisted on them (see any issue of www.bangkokpost.com or www.nationmultimedia.com for examples).

But today we had a remarkable piece of garbage thrown our way -

www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/10/26/regi...egional_30115188.php - "Kudos to PM for a successful summit"

If there is a more inept multinational organization than the UN, it's ASEAN. Absolutely nothing was accomplished (as usual), for which dubious achievement The Nation sings PM Abhisit's praises. No doubt the press was lavishly entertained at the photo ops.

But all is not sabai, sabai in the press room. We are warned - "Too bad, the kind of drama and excitement one witnessed throughout the Thai chairmanship will be absent from now on. Vietnam has meticulously mapped out its 12-month chairmanship what it wants to achieve for Asean and for the host." Damn Vietnamese, actually hoping to accomplish something, ruining the party for everyone. Mai sanook.

www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asia...view/1016152/1/.html

The chickens are coming home to roost. The incumbent elitist Democrats have played confrontational politics with Cambodia since gaining power. Now a Thai (former PM Thaksin) who encouraged peaceful relations with Thailand's neighbors is being attacked for assisting a neighbor by the same military/old-money elite who perpetrated the coup. Seems that the Cambodian PM trusts Thaksin to provide economic advise. And why not, given the economic boom Thailand enjoyed under TRT.

Where will it all end - the refusal by the elite to recognize the legitimacy of majority rule? This fear of rural power seems to drive all government decision-making today, even in foreign policy matters.

Opinion from an elitist source -

www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/11/06/opin...opinion_30115992.php

Hun Sen is "looking down on the Cambodian people." How's that?

PM Abhasit "made the [ASEAN] summit a successful event." How's that?

"the Thai people strongly support the government's stance on this issue." That is, except supporters of Thaksin (over 1/2 the population).

There's a lot more claptrap in this editorial, but the sample above will do.

www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asia...view/1016442/1/.html

Major news! The Thai elitist government, in response to Kamphuchian refusal to follow orders from Thailand, is about to "tear up an oil and gas exploration deal." No matter that the "deal" has been a dead issue since it was agreed upon 8 years ago.

And the put upon elitist Thai government is petulantly threatening to close the borders, a move not likely to be implemented, as those most affected (patrons of Cambodian casinos) are members of the moneyed elite.

"the reputation of Asean" (??!!)

www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/11/10/opin...opinion_30116199.php

A totally stupid editorial. Asean's only "reputation" is that of doing nothing. Don't even consider their spineless handling of the Burmese junta. Recall their lack of outrage over the treasonous coup in Thailand and the subsequent abject subservience of the Thai media to the successful squelching of HM the King's call for unity a few months ago.

Would you buy a used car from this man?

www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asia...view/1019095/1/.html

More evidence that it's OK to commit treason (staging a coup) in Thailand, as long as the elite approve (you get to run for PM). But maybe political expediency will bring Khun Sonthi over from the dark side.

In August I posted several items questioning why Thai media failed to report HM the King's remarks on national unity. This in spite of portions of his speech being published in a variety of Newspapers worldwide. I left unsaid the obvious reason for the censorship; the King was obviously targeting the elitist government for ignoring the needs of the rural majority in Thailand.

Now we have this ingenious item:

www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/12/03/opin...opinion_30117825.php

Khun Pornpimol refers back to the King's speech, which The Nation had previously censored. We are treated to an echo of what the King said, with a pompous (albeit belated) seconding of the King's "call for us to [do] the right thing by the country and by everyone, and not for just a handful." Where was The Nation's support for the King in August? Could the censorship have had anything to do with the anger of rural Thais at the ruling Military/old-money elite?

Those political interests that once represented rural Thailand (TRT, PPP) are long gone, thanks to a coup and judicial fiat engineered by the elite. But the King remains as a staunch defender of Thai farming families.

For once, a realistic depiction of the political scene that recognizes there is a Thailand apart from Bangkok.

www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/01/11/opin...opinion_30120052.php

"The pundits like to play up conflicts between the Democrats and their coalition allies, and constantly imagine the coalition is at breaking point, but the truth is that the allied parties also have no interest in an early election. Unless their enemies can engineer a crisis, the government will try to last out its term until the end of 2011.

"Even then, will there really be a general election? Why would the military brass allow another election when they will then want to overthrow the outcome, exactly as they have done on the last two occasions - first by a coup, and the second time by a parliamentary manoeuvre? A third demolition might be technically more difficult, and politically more risky. A safer route might simply not to allow a vote to take place. This will take some effort in coming up with the pretext, but several scenarios can be imagined."

". . . soldiers may not like the fact that, under the constitutional monarchy, they are required to heed the orders of elected civilians." Nicely put, you unnamed editor at The Nation. Too bad you hypocrites at that rag put the lie to your purported concern for the constitution when you supported the military coup and the subsequent destruction of the 1997 constitution. One would think The Nation would avoid the subject of "rogue" generals.

www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/01/15/opin...opinion_30120330.php