Abraham Lincoln - Superhero Anti-Royalist

There is a movie out in theaters now called Abraham Lincoln – Vampire Hunter.  I haven’t seen this film (and don’t plan to) but it is being billed as presenting a secret life of our greatest president, and an untold story involving vampires that supposedly shaped our nation.

I admire Abraham Lincoln. He was born in a one-room log cabin on a farm in Kentucky.   His father Thomas Lincoln and mother Nancy Hanks Lincoln were very poor and uneducated farmers.  Abraham’s mother died when he was child and he used to help his father in farming as a manual labor.

In his youth, he had less than 12 months in total education and as a young man, he was entirely self taught in law. In 1836, he was licensed to practice law, become a very successful attorney with his own large law practice, prior to becoming President; yet, he had no apprenticeship training, and never attended college. 

Yet Abraham Lincoln became our greatest President.  He preserved the union and freed the slaves. Despite the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans, he fulfilled the promise of the Constitution to millions more. And more than any other president, Lincoln reminds us that we can rise above our differences and respond to the “better angels of our nature,” as he once said.

That is good enough for me to admire Abraham Lincoln. I don’t need to see any film that tries to portray him as superhero vampire hunter. 

But come to think of it, Abraham Lincoln did speak out against another group of evil blood sucking parasites – royalists.

Lincoln applied the principles of America’s founders by comparing the evil of monarchy to that of slavery. Referring to the arguments circulating in support of the supposed justice of slavery, Lincoln held in his famous speech of July 10, 1858:

They are the arguments that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge [i.e., Stephen Douglas] is the same old serpent that says you work and I eat, you toil and I will enjoy the fruits of it. Turn in whatever way you will—whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it is all the same old serpent …

Slavery and king-craft:  “[I]t is all the same old serpent[.]”  Thank you, Mr. Lincoln. 

May we borrow that ax of yours to deal with some certain serpents?

Ambassador Kenney Reaches Out To Political Prisoners in Thailand

Every year the U.S. State Department releases a report on human rights practices for each country in the world. These Human Rights Reports – cover internationally recognized individual, civil, political, and worker rights, as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international agreements. The U.S. Department of State submits reports on all countries receiving assistance and all United Nations member states to the U.S. Congress in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Trade Act of 1974. The content of these reports are primarily based upon input from the U.S. Embassies located in these countries. 

I’m just getting around to this but just over a month ago, the 2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices were released.  One of the grave deficiencies in Thailand’s 2011 report concerned political prisoners.

It wasn’t just that the U.S. Embassy failed to highlight the predicament of political prisoners in Thailand.  They completely denied the existence of any political prisoners at all.  From the report:

“There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.”

Really?! There are so many political prisoners in Thailand that the government has built a special prison just for them.  It wasn’t as if it were secret as this was routinely reported in all of Thailand’s news outlets. For example: here, here, and here.

By denying their existence, the U.S. embassy in Thailand is complicit in the Thai government’s evil handiwork involving political prisoners. The question which arises is “why?”.

Certainly, many of the political prisoners in Thailand are the direct result of the unjust lèse majesté laws.  There has been a surge of lèse majesté cases since the 2006 coup which isn’t surprising.  Most of the power-mad royalists use the charge to silence those who would prefer a more democratic Thailand with justice and equality.

I’m sure the U.S. Government, which supported the 2006 coup, would prefer not to criticize the royalists’ primary tool of stifling dissent by classifying lèse majesté prisoners as political prisoners. Or perhaps, Ambassador Kenney doesn’t want to miss any invitations to royal birthday celebrations.

Of course, there could be another reason.

I would hope that the U.S. Embassy would consider our country’s very first document on this eve of its two hundred and thirty-sixth anniversary when they help draft any more “human rights” documents of their own.  

I’m only happy to share the words of our Declaration of Independence below.  Happy Fourth of July!   

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. 

Human Trafficking Tier 2 Watch List for Thailand… Again!

The State Department released its 2012 human trafficking report on Tuesday and for the third straight year Thailand was placed on the Tier 2 Watch List. But there is more to this than meets the eye.

The Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Report is the U.S. Government’s principal diplomatic tool to engage foreign governments on human trafficking. It is also the world’s most comprehensive resource of governmental anti-human trafficking efforts and one of the good things the U.S. Government actually does in the world. I have pulled out the part of the 2012 report on Thailand and made it available here. The entire world report can be found on the U.S. Department of State website here.

The TIP report is mandated by the Trafficking Victims Prevention Act (TVPA) passed by the U.S Congress in 2000. In the TIP Report (released annually in June), each country is placed onto one of three tiers based on the extent of their governments’ efforts to comply with the “minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking” found in Section 108 of the TVPA.

A GUIDE TO THE TIERS

TIER 1
Countries whose governments fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards.

TIER 2
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.

TIER 2 WATCH LIST
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards 

AND:

a) The absolute number of victims of severe forms of trafficking is very significant or is significantly increasing;

b) There is a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year; or

c) The determination that a country is making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with minimum standards was based on commitments by the country to take additional future steps over the next year.

TIER 3
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so.

The TVPA lists additional factors through which to determine whether a country should be on Tier 2 (or Tier 2 Watch List) versus Tier 3. First, the extent to which the country is a country of origin, transit, or destination for severe forms of trafficking. Second, the extent to which the country’s government does not comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards and, in particular, the extent to which officials or government employees have been complicit in severe forms of trafficking. And third, reasonable measures required bringing the government into compliance with the minimum standards in light of the government’s resources and capabilities to address and eliminate severe forms of trafficking in persons.

As I’ve reported before, after Thailand’s military made Abhisit Vejjajiva the Prime Minister, Thailand’s Tier ranking slipped from being Tier 2 previously under the democratically elected PPP led government to being on the Tier 2 Watch List for 2010 and 2011.   

This consecutive Tier 2 Watch List ranking is important in that in 2008, the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act included a provision (Section 107) that any country that has been ranked Tier 2 Watch List for two consecutive years and that would otherwise be ranked Tier 2 Watch List for the next year will instead be ranked Tier 3 for the next year. 

And if a country is ranked as Tier 3 then several penalties could be levied. Penalties such as the withholding or withdrawing of non humanitarian, nontrade-related foreign assistance, the withholding of funding for government employees’ participation in educational and cultural exchange programs, and U.S. opposition to assistance (except for humanitarian, trade-related, and certain development-related assistance) from international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

So, by being placed on the Tier 2 Watch List and allowing human trafficking to flourish in Thailand for two consecutive years, Abhisit not only embarrassed the Kingdom but he put the country at risk of economic penalties.  

However, Section 107 of the 2008 Act also provided a waiver of the consecutive Tier 2 Watch List rule. 

“The President may waive the application of clause for up to 2 years if the President determines, and reports credible evidence to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, that such a waiver is justified because - (I) the country has a written plan to begin making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;  (II) the plan, if implemented, would constitute making such significant efforts; and (III) the country is devoting sufficient resources to implement the plan.”

This is how Thailand received another Tier 2 Watch List ranking and not the otherwise required downgrade to the Tier 3 ranking. The government led by PM Yingluck Shinawatra provided a written plan that, if implemented, would constitute making significant efforts to meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and is devoting sufficient resources to implement that plan. Her government also continued implementation of its human trafficking law and conducted awareness-raising activities on human trafficking.

Also, during Yingluck’s first month in office, UN Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, Joy Ngozi Ezeilo, was invited to visit.  In a press statement following her visit, the UN Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons noted, among other shortcomings, weak enforcement of the country’s legal antitrafficking framework, inadequate efforts to address trafficking of migrants, endemic corruption among law enforcement officials, and a systemic failure to properly identify victims and protect their rights and safety. Yingluck’s government agreed to fund and open five national verification centers for Burmese migrant workers inside Thailand. These centers opened in late April 2012.

Although much more progress is needed, the democratically elected government led by PM Yingluck Shinawatra has at least started tackling the problem of human trafficking in Thailand exacerbated by a military installed government led by Abhisit Vejjajiva. Under his regime, Thailand’s image in the world’s eyes were tarnished. Instead of focusing government resources insanely on apprehending Thaksin Shinawatra and staying in power, Abhisit should have addressed the needs of Thailand’s citizens – but, of course, Thailand’s citizens weren’t the ones Abhisit had to report to.

Thailand’s Got Double Standards and Not So Much Talent

I’d like to weigh in on the latest controversy from Thailand that is making news across the world.

The “Thailand’s Got Talent” television show, broadcast last Sunday, featured 23-year-old Duangjai Jansaunoi, who walked onstage barefoot in jeans and a baggy men's button-down shirt. She introduced herself as an independent artist from northern Thailand.

She then turned to a large canvas and painted a yellow outline of a person.

Afterwards, she removed her shirt and unhooked a black bra.

Then she doused herself with several tins of paint before turning to the audience with a broad smile to display her multicolored torso. The area around her breasts was blurred out by censors.

As dance music played, the contestant used her body as a paintbrush to fill in the outline.

Some in the audience gasped with hands over their mouths, while others cheered her on. Well, just watch for yourself the entire act and subsequent drama.

"If I paint in a normal way, then it would be too ordinary," Duangjai told the judges after being handed a towel to cover up.

The judges then debated whether her act could be considered art.

"This is an art form. If we were in Italy, like Florence or Milan, or the Czech Republic, say Prague, this would be OK," said singer Jirayut Wattanasin. The audience roared in support, many flashing "V for victory" signs.

"I'm not saying this is not good, but it's not appropriate," said the panel's only female judge, actress Pornchita Na Songkhla. "Within the Thai cultural context, I don't support this."

By now she appeared as if “her pantieswere all in a bunch.” But I can’t be too sure Pornchita was actually wearing any panties as she obviously wasn’t in this famous fashion shot of hers (within the Thai cultural context, of course).

Pornchita Na Songkhla

The other male judge then said “I want to look in the aspect of art since coincidentally it is also my background. Speaking in the sense of artistic talent, I can identify and accept your show.”

That comment seemed to push poor Pornchita over the edge. “Are you all for real?” she asked. “Unfortunately I don’t have an artistic mind so I am going to say not pass.”

Pornchita na Songkhla (nicknamed Benz) doesn’t have an artistic mind?  So it wasn’t art when she posed naked covered in chocolate? Perhaps she just enjoys having chocolate poured on her – nothing artistic about that.

Is this next picture of Pornchita not art either?  Perhaps she actually uses two naked black men as her couch (special order from IKEA?).

But Pornchita had a duty to fulfill by judging Duangjai’s performance as not being “within the Thai cultural context.” After all, Pornchita is a Deputy Spokesperson for the Thai Ministry of Culture.

Obviously, much of Pornchita’s work isn’t “within the Thai cultural context” either. But that’s not the point.

As Deputy Spokesperson for Thailand’s Ministry of Culture, Pornchita is supposed to accurately promote and project Thai culture to the Thai people and the rest of the world. And one of the most prominent aspects of Thai culture is the blatant use of “Double Standards” – especially by judges.

Now being a judge on a nationally televised talent show is not quite at the same level as being an actual judge in a court of justice but it is a judge nevertheless and a high profile one at that. Now the entire world knows a little more about Thai culture thanks to Pornchita.

Thailand’s Ministry of Culture has been successfully trying to project Thailand’s culture of hypocrisy for some time now. The most famous of their efforts was in 2011 when they admonished three young girls for going topless during Songkran (Thai New Year) celebrations while having this picture on their own website.

Now if I were a judge on “Thailand’s Got Talent” I would have given a fairer evaluation to Duangjai’s performance and her finished painting.  To me art is in the eye of the beholder and it has to represent something. It has to “stir my soul.”

Duangjai’s initial drawing of the yellow outline of a person obviously represented the PAD movement. But what she did afterwards totally lost me.  She used her breasts to aptly deface the image representing the PAD.  Had she used her feet or, more appropriately, her buttocks then that would have convinced me that she was a true artist and had true talent. And the finished painting seemed unremarkable to me.

Sorry, I’d have to give Duangjai a “No Pass.”

Now as talent goes with regards to painting with body parts, nobody matches the fine artistry as that of Pricasso, an Australian painter. 

I wonder what Pornchita would think of Pricasso?

My thoughts exactly, Pornchita.

A Kangaroo Court's Monkey Trial - Dissolution is No Solution

Earlier this month, Thailand’s Constitution Court justices showed the world that it is nothing but a Kangaroo Court, a political tool of the military/amart which instated them.  Instead of interpreting the statutes fairly and reasonably, they used some creative manipulations of the language in order to issue an injunction for Parliament to suspend its vetting of the charter amendment bill.  Their only purpose it seems was to delay if not stop entirely the bill.

Now, in what appears to be a blatant attempt to partially legitimize their miserable institution, the Constitutional Court judges accepted a petition that could dissolve the Democrat Party under the same Section 68 of the 2007 Constitution using the same warped reasoning.

Of course, these judges are now digging themselves deeper in the hole of political activism and unreasonable interpretations but now they are screaming from the depths of their self-made “chasm” (some call it “judicial mining” but justice really gets the shaft) that they are at least impartial in their hearing process to both political sides. 

At the heart of this dissolution case is whether or not the Democrat Party-led government under Abhisit Vejjajiva had assumed power over the country's administration by unconstitutional methods. If the Constitution Court rules that the Democrats contravened the Constitution then it could dissolve their long-established (in deceit and corruption) political party.

So, are the Democrats being sacrificed (thrown under the yellow bus) in order to slightly improve the Constitution Court’s legitimacy?  

It’s not as if the Democrats have been real effective for the military/amart.  Abhisit squandered the power gifted to him in 2008 by the Constitution Court when they dissolved the ruling People’s Power Party and when the military strong-armed other political parties to support the Democrats.   As the incumbent party going against political third stringers (and with some of them thrown in jail to boot), the Democrats were set up to win the general election last July.  Instead, they were handily trounced.   

If the tree isn’t bearing any fruit or producing any shade then one might as well chop it down for kindling wood.  Burn, baby, burn.

Now this isn’t the first time the Democrats faced party dissolution by the Constitution Court.  In 2010, there were two charges against them.  First, for misusing 29 million baht ($907,000) allotted to the Democrats from a government fund and second, regarding failing to report a donation of 258 million baht ($8.4 million) from petrochemical conglomerate TPI.  

Some compromising videos were leaked during that time to the public showing outrageous improprieties involving several judges with regards to that case.  Nevertheless, the Constitutional Court ultimately allowed the Democrats to weasel out of these charges by pulling a technicality from out of the back end of their robes.   

But that was then, this is now. And what a difference 19 months makes.  Now the Democrats, the so-called political party of the elite, have been behaving badly recently in parliament; watching porn, physically attacking opposition MPs, saluting Hitler, etc…

In essence, the Democrat Party has been behaving like a bunch of monkeys throwing their own feces around.  

Their usefulness to the military/amart has not only come to an end but now they are an embarrassment and may need to be removed.  Has some deal with Pheu Thai been made?

Personally, I’m against the dissolution of political parties in Thailand. It was wrong to dissolve Thai Rak Thai in 2007 and the People’s Power Party in 2008 and it is wrong to dissolve the Democrat Party now.  The dissolution of political parties only weakens the democratic process – but that’s how the military/amart wants it.  It’s a whole lot easier for them to step in and have a dictatorship that appears "to save the day."

The electorate should be the ones who ultimately determine who should govern and who shouldn’t – and not some unelected jurists. The electorate have shown much better wisdom by continually, over the past 20 years, not electing the Democrats to control Parliament. This is because they know that if the Democrats control Parliament then... the Democrats control Parliament. It's as simple as that.  And who really wants a bunch of monkeys who throw their own feces around to run their country?