Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing well irony here in Thailand insofar as watching a convict quite honestly - that's the legally correct term for a person, even if they are pardoned, if they were convicted of a crime in the past, it's fair to call them a convict - decrying so-called lawfare here in Thailand while at the same time, decrying the so-called "Sensational Media". What are we talking about here? 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Thai Examiner, that is thaiexaminer.com, the article is titled: Thaksin warns that the media in Thailand has become too sensational and influential as he sues lawyer. Now we will get into that here in a minute but just off the headline there, again "Media is too sensational and influential", says the person who has been making speeches with World Economic Forum talking points, had his own Attorney who was the former Prime Minister here in Thailand actually attend the World Economic Forum. When I say, "had his Attorney", it's hard to say if he directly gave orders to that effect but there seems to be a lot of gray area here with regard to who has influence on whom. Now Mr. Srettha's Government fell based on a Constitutional Court ruling but not before again as noted, before he actually attended the World Economic Forum while being Prime Minister and I believe Mr. Srettha was Mr. Thaksin's Attorney at one point or has been in the past. Again, hard to say where influence begins, where directions begin; there's a whole gray area here where it's difficult to delineate what's going on, but I find it highly ironic that someone who has used the Media to their own ends for years here in Thailand, would decry "so-called" sensationalism. And my next question is, is it only sensationalism when it disagrees with you? Is that a “sensational” media because you didn't seem to have a problem - and I was here in 2010 - you didn't seem to have a problem utilizing the Media to stir things up here in the city as it burned. I remember that, when you were taking pot shots from Phnom Penh utilizing that very same Sensational Media that you decry so much now, because you don't have the influence you once did. That's what upsets me so much. I wasn't Thai in 2010 and I didn't really quite understand what was going on here, but I know now and I know in retrospect what was going on, so I'm sick and tired of hearing about the "Sensational Media" from people who would use it to that end, and not be here to deal with their own consequences, because I also watched the aftermath of that when many who were part of all of that, let's not get into colours of shirts here, but folks did time, okay? Folks had to deal with the consequences of their actions and those consequences were not sitting for an entire year in a Police Hospital; it was prison for some people. Some people died as a result of that kind of sensationalism. And now people show up over here, after not being here for 15 years, and they can't just get their way rolling in the door because they don't have a majority in the Government and they actually do need to find compromises and consensus and they don't like that because they want to be control freaks, and they want to tell everybody what to do, and when they can't get that then it's the "Sensational Media" which I haven't heard anybody, I haven’t heard Mr. Thaksin talking about Sensational Media for the last 15 years when it was working to his ends. But now that there are folks here in Thailand who question some of these outcomes - especially when a guy 18 months ago or a "core coalition" party rolls into town spouting nothing but World Economic Forum talking points. And the first thing they try to do is put Chinese Police on our streets here in Thailand and they try to put us under a Digital Wallet that will track and trace in a totalitarian manner all of our financial transactions here in Thailand, and guess what? Thailand's going to go on the hook for a trillion or half a trillion baht in debt and these people are standing there saying, "thank you, please". Standing there saying, "hey we'd like to thank you for that." No, no thank you. We're not interested in living under totalitarian surveillance that's going to be monitored from Davos, Switzerland, okay? It's not a sensational media that wants to see the country better and doesn't want to see it be led down the primrose path by somebody who in my opinion, may not have the best interest of Thailand at heart. 

That said, quoting further: "Thaksin Shinawatra warns that Thai media has become too sensational and influential.." - says the guy who is not supposed to be involved in Thai politics, who seems to be involved in Thai politics all the time - quoting further: "..calling for more factual reporting." On what? The fact that you tried to saddle us with Digital Money that could only be spent within a certain parameter of people's houses. That could only be spent on certain things and that could expire, that we were all supposed to go in debt for? Like that factual reporting? Quoting further: "Meanwhile, he has filed a criminal defamation complaint against lawyer Theerayut Suwankesorn after the latter’s court case was dismissed. Thaksin Shinawatra, the former Premier, has expressed concerned about the growing influence and power of the media in Thai society." What a joke! You didn't have any problem with the growth and influence of the media in Thai society when you were sniping from the sidelines and this city burned. I was here; I am tired of hearing this nonsense double-speak. Quoting further: "The former PM said on Friday that one thing he had noticed since returning to Thailand was an expanded and more sensational media." You mean a media that actually follows up and asks questions? And doesn't just take whatever you spew at them in terms of WEF talking points at face value? You mean that kind of media that does their job? I love that line from The Departed, "I'm the guy that does their job." You must be the other guy. My personal opinion is the media is doing pretty good thus far. Quoting further: "Thaksin was commenting at a gathering held to celebrate the 75th anniversary of Thailand's publishing behemoth, Thai Rath." Quoting further: "Certainly, the former Premier stated he had no problem with reporting the facts and explaining them to readers.." - so long as it is slanted in your favour? - quoting further: "..but he felt that today's media environment had become too emotional." Too emotional? You stirred up emotions that caused a riot in this city in 2010. Too emotional? - "In particular, he objected to the media taking the lead in society." What does that even mean? You mean the media reporting news and people reacting to it the way the media is supposed to operate, not just receiving diktat from Davos and then just spewing it forth in their organs? Quoting further: "On Saturday, it was confirmed that Mr. Thaksin, through his lawyer, had filed a criminal defamation complaint against lawyer Theerayut Suwankesorn. Theerayut had filed a Constitutional Court case against Mr. Thaksin earlier this year, which was thrown out in November." Now I am not going to get into the merits of all that, that's not the scope of this video.

That said, let me just state this as somebody who operates sort of in the legal sphere and who also - not necessarily by conscious decision but who ended up sort of in the media space - this lawfare stuff, okay if a frivolous lawsuit was filed against you, there is recourse for that in Thai Courts. That being said, I speak with legal specificity on this channel, and I am fully prepared to defend anything I have ever said in the public space here in Thailand in a Court of Law here in Thailand. No problem whatsoever. Okay? But let me be clear here. I know I have gotten fairly hyperbolic and emotional and passionate in this video because I am, but I don't have any real problem with any political operators operating in Thailand's political sphere, so long as it's legitimate, okay? I discussed it before, it's my understanding when this person came back to Thailand they were going to retire, they weren't going to be involved in anything political. That was sort of the whole reason for it. We were supposed to have reconciliation, not somebody showing up and just saying "oh I'm in charge now". That is not the way it works, okay? And beyond even that, the "core coalition" party did not get a majority of votes. They have to operate within that "operative term" a coalition. So, consensus needs to be come to, in order to start operating. Again, this is not “Brother loves traveling salvation show" where you just show up back in town and we just all start doing exactly what you want to do, again, especially where there is not a majority in the Parliament involved.

So, for those who are watching this, the thing to take away from this video is it really makes me angry when I see people disingenuously saying oh, “we need to use lawfare’ or disingenuously saying lawfare may be, or implying I should say - maybe they are not overtly saying it - but the implication being that lawfare is necessary to go after this “sensationalist media”. Again, I find it highly hypocritical to call the media at this time sensationalistic, when it has been used in the past to a very detrimental effect on the people of the Kingdom of Thailand.