BBC:

Thailand’s army chief has called for parliament to be dissolved, two days after deadly fighting between troops and anti-government protesters.

Gen Anupong Paojinda said that a political solution had to be found to Thailand’s crisis.

His comments appeared to echo calls from the protesters for the government to step down and call elections.

But speaking afterwards, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said his government and the military remained united.

Speaking to journalists, Gen Anupong said he was reluctant to use force to end the stand-off.

“It must be ended by political means,” he said. “The problem will be resolved with House dissolution, but when to dissolve depends on the outcome of negotiations.”

The Age:

THE Thai government is refusing to yield to red-shirt protesters’ demands to resign, despite the army seemingly deserting it and the country’s electoral commission recommending the ruling party be dissolved.
…
Army chief General Anupong Paochinda turned the screw further on Mr Abhisit when he said that Parliament might need to be dissolved if a solution could not be found to the stand-off.

In response to some of this coverage, the Public Relations Department:

Deputy Prime Minister for Security Affairs Suthep Thaugsuban has insisted that Army Commander-in-Chief, General Anupong Paochinda has not called on the government to dissolve Parliament before its scheduled timeframe. 

Mr Suthep, in his capacity as the Director of the Center for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES), reaffirmed that General Anupong did not press the government to dissolve the House, assuring that the commander is aware of the necessity of the set timeframe. Mr Suthep made clear that General Anupong was only giving his opinion that House dissolution would be the best way to resolve the prevailing situation. 

Mr Suthep added that the misunderstanding was a misinterpretation by the news media and asked that press members be more careful of their portrayals. 

BP: So is this government spin? Have looked around for what Anupong said and unfortunately most papers don’t carry the full quote, but Kom Chad Luek does:

 เมื่อถามว่า ท่านเคยออกรายงานทีวีแล้วบอกว่าหากเกิดการสูญเสียแล้วรัฐบาลต้องยุบสภา พล.อ.อนุพงษ์ กล่าวว่า “ตนพูดอย่างนั้นเหรอ มันไม่ใช่ การที่ตนและผบ.เหล่าทัพไปออกทีวีตอนนั้นมี 2 กรณี คือจาบจ้วงสถาบันอย่างรุนแรง และการดึงสถาบันมาเป็นประโยชน์ฝ่ายตน ตอนนั้นคิดว่าเราเป็นทหารของชาติ จึงขอเวลาทางทีวี เมื่อเทียบกับตอนนี้บริบทต่างกัน สังคมต่างกัน ถ้าการเมืองแก้กันไม่ได้และประเด็นตอนนี้ คือ การยุบสภา ตนเข้าใจว่าต้องยุบสภา ส่วนจะใช้เวลาเท่าไหร่นั้นต้องไปเจรจากัน เข้าใจว่าเรื่องนี้ต้องไปจบกันที่ยุบสภา หรือบางคนมาเสนอเป็นรัฐบาลแห่งชาติก็ไม่รู้ไปว่ากันเอง ตนขอแค่ให้เกิดความสงบเท่านั้น

[When asked that you previously went on TV and stated that if there is a calamity, the government must dissolve parliament. Anupong replied "I really said like that? No, I didn't. When I and the military commanders went on TV that time there were two issues, [first] there was a serious insult [directed at] the monarchy and [second] the bringing of the institution into the situation for the benefit of some people. At that time, [we] thought we were the country’s military so [we] asked for time on TV. When compared with now, the context is different. Society is different. If politics can’t solve it and the issue then is a dissolution then [I] understand there must be a dissolution. In regards to how long is needed [before the dissolution] then that needs to be negotiated [between the parties]. [I] understand that this problem must be solved by a dissolution or some people suggesting a national government then it is up to [the parties concerned]. I just want peace that is all”].

Wassana* of the Bangkok Post also covered what Anupong said and has a few other quotes.

BP: This doesn’t look like Anupong calling on or pressing the government to dissolve parliament. The reality is that there will be a dissolution this year. It is just a matter of when. Anupong isn’t really saying anything different from this. Actually, if BP was writing the script for Anupong to say something, BP would have said to say exactly that.

btw, on the relationship between the military and the government, well that is a whole different question. Someone also should have asked Anupong a few follow-ups on exactly how the context was changed.

*tip to anyone, always prefer Wassana of the Bangkok Post on factual matters in relation to the military. If there are differing interpretations of what was said or an event, go with what Wassana writes. BP doesn’t always agree with her analysis, but the facts that she bases this analysis on are more often than not right.