|What do bankers and Big Business want us to believe about the coup? (ibtimes.co.uk)|
|Bloomberg mainstream media photo promoting view that there's nothing so bad about a military coup dictatorship to "restore law and order" as propagated by "liberal" Daily Beast.|
|Thai Coup 2006: When tanks rolled into Bangkok, some soldiers were welcomed, others feared. Some posed for photos with foreigners (Apichart Weerawong/AP).|
|Occupy Thailand? Red Shirts v. Yellow Shirts|
|2014: Will they shoot civilians or tourists? Yes.|
- Radical and pro-government? Yes, the street revolution partially succeeded or seemed to with the election of billionaire Bruce Wayne-style PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who was charged with corruption and ousted from the prime ministership before going into exile, and then again with his sister PM Yingluck Shinawatra, whom the courts recently deposed for behaving like her brother. The Shinawatras are pro-people, at least in their rhetoric, and the conservative, royalist Yellow Shirts will not stand for that. They are pro-rich, pro-business, and pro-status quo. Supporters of the sacked government have started anti-military actions resisting the coup, even as the military has taken former-PM Yingluck into custody at an unknown location. While most radicals are not pro-government, when they succeed they become pro-government. The conservatives become the "radicals," and that is why it is called a "revolution." One side moves up as another goes down. And if the new rulers behave the same way, the bottom again pushes its way to the top. This happened in the U.S., as it has around the world, with Barry Obama. The difference is this -- now the Powers That Be (s)elect fake "peoples' candidates," who say all the right things and then disappoint their supporters. This can be done, as it was with Obama, by grooming someone for the job, or an actual grassroots person can rise up as often happens in South America. If they are fake from the start, things will seem to go better for a lot longer; they will actually be worse as that impostor gets many right wing measures through in the name of popular consensus and liberalization (which to business people means pro-business and in the U.S. means progressive to those who are left-leaning). If the new leaders are authentic, it will go worse as all the conservative and reactionary elements (like the CIA) will step in to obstruct, slow, and depose them. They will be discredited, undermined, and eventually brought down or assassinated. From our point of view in the U.S., the Shinawatras were corrupt multi-millionaires -- that's what the right wing mainstream media told us. (NOTE: the New York Times and other mainstream media outlets are NEVER on the side of the left, the progressives, or liberation; they are always somehow or other aligned with the Powers That Be, the reactionaries, the rich, the status quo, and the undermining of liberation. Even when they seem to be on the side of privacy, freedom, Occupy, gay rights, peace with justice in the Middle East talks, they are -- if one reads very carefully -- in support of things as they are, business as usual, more and more oppression and loss of freedom. This may not be the fault of individual journalists. More often it is the editors, owners, and investors. We apologize for being fooled by the "paper of record" (and AP/Associated Press, Bloomberg, McClatchey, Los Angeles Times, Haretz, Int'l Business Times, BBC, and similar mainstream outfits controlled by a handful of megacorporations with their tentacles in everything).