Thaksin 46 Billion Down

by **Laan Yaa Mo** » February 28, 2010, 3:18 am

Yes, KhonDahm, we are in agreement on this one for the most part. I doubt the yellow shirts will be the major winners of this windfall for there are military men and people who hold real power that will benefit. The yellow-shirts were useful for spearheading the campaign vs. Thaksin as are the courts now for shutting him down for good. With the mission accomplished, power-holders are not too pro-yellow shirt anymore. But, they keep them around in case the Yellows are needed in the future.

Do not believe the yellow-shirt propaganda that only ill-informed peasants from northeast and northern Thailand support Khun T. He has the middle-class vote in the northeast and north too, and some of that support comes from Bangkok as well.

Whatever his position was on democracy, the process that brought him into power was democratic as any election in most Asian and western countries. If you want to criticise the Thais for throwing a few hundred baht to electors here and there, take a close look at elections in the United States and the way money is tossed around.

Newspapers here are biased, but they are in the west too. We all know which way the Guardian and the Telegraph will point their readers, and in the United States the New York Times is far from a disinterested observer.

by **nkstan** » February 28, 2010, 6:25 am

I was under the impression that Thaksin was never elected to any office by the voting public!He ran for parliment in Chang Mai and was soundly defeated.He was made an honorary MP after he was selected to be PM!

It amazes me that many refuse to accept that he became obscenely rich in a short period of time after being a complete failure before his Shin Corp.,which was accellerated by his illegal gov't dealings!

I certainly agree that he gave recognition to the ''peasants'',something ignored by all elitist until him,but it seems it didn't help them at all,but it helped his powerbase and his ability to manipulate the gov't for his financial benefit!

I also agree that Thailand is not a democracy because a democracy has more elements than just voting!

I think Thaksin was ''better'' for expats than the ''yellows'',but it would only have been a matter of time depending on the ''winds'' that influenced his dictatorial mindset!

I see Thaksin as a person that cares little about anything accept his own personal gain.A complete boob at everything accept weilding power and collecting obscene wealth at the expense of Thailand!

I personally think that Thailand is a power struggle between the elitist class and that the masses are purposely left ignorant for easy manipulation and not to upset the class groupings that could cause potentially political change.Corruption is endemic as it is taught from an early age until accepted by most.

I see no logic or comfort for falangs taking sides in these power struggles as there is plenty of mud to find on either side!To defend one side against the other,is a joke at best!And nothing we say will cause any change,EVER!!! :roll:

by **trubrit** » February 28, 2010, 6:42 am

Fair enough summary that Stan.Reflects my way of thinking to just get on and enjoy myself, after all it will still be going on when you and I are just dust .

by **jackspratt** » February 28, 2010, 8:24 am

KHONDAHM wrote:
jackspratt wrote:Thaksin was also no great fan of democracy, having said himself that democracy was not his end goal (I am paraphrasing), and then calling for the violent overthrow of the current government (which whatever you may choose to believe, was democratically elected) during the Songkran riots last year.

The will of the people is certainly paramount, and hopefully an election will be held this year - assuming another, greater event, does not intervene.

As I have conceded in another thread, I do not follow Thai politics as closely as I follow American and European politics due to what I perceive to be a crippled press (les majeste, press suppression laws, graft, and conflicts of interest among other things) being able to expose what really goes on. Most of my news comes from BBC and the grapevine as filtered through my wife. There are important historical, social, and contextual nuances which exist that IMHO, not many (if any) foreigners are able to accurately comprehend or appreciate through translation or interpretation.

All that said, metaphorically speaking, there is a little kool aid in the water you've been consuming. Kool-aid being propaganda and water being contextual fact. It was proven to me beyond any doubt several times in the past that there is a lot of Fox-ing going on in the news media here. Your perception may not be as objective or balanced as you may think it is if you rely on domestic media and pundits. I stop short of saying it is not true only because I cannot be equally as sure that my perception from my sources are any more objective or less filtered.

There are 3 sides to every story: This side, that side, and the truth which tends to be a subjective mix of the two.

In any case, the opinion of the Thai people is the only one that counts or matters, and they have spoken clearly on multiple occasions. IMHO doing things like tossing out an elected Prime Minister for essentially being reimbursed for expenses for his appearance on a cooking show reeks. Occupying an international airport and shutting down the country without anyone being held accountable (never mind that it was allowed to continue in the first place) reeks. The back-door parliamentary maneuvering which put the minority opposition in power reeks. Delaying and denying a new vote reeks. I could go on.

Give the people their vote and respect it, is what I am saying.

Should something happen to the unmentionable, that is the ONLY way there could be peace in the aftermath.

Just my song-baht.

Cheers!

KD I have read more widely on the subject of Thailand (particularly since 1932) than you might imagine - including reading material that is unable to be obtained in Thailand, and certainly wider than the domestic English language press.

As far as reeking is concerned:

- Samak was disqualified for having a second job (expressly banned under the Constitution), and then lying about the subject of payment to the court. I agree it was pretty flimsy. But he was not banned, and was willing and able to become PM again - unfortunately (for him) Thaksin kyboshed that idea, because Samak was failing to heed his master's voice enough. Instead, the compliant Somchai (Thaksin's brother-in-law) was installed as PM.
Besides all this, Samak was a coarse buffoon and an embarrassment, with blood on his hands from 1976, and to a lesser extent, 1992. Not that this prevents others from becoming Prime Ministers, or Presidents for that matter.

- no argument re the airport fiasco, although I do understand a number of the yellow shirt leaders have been charged over the incident. And it hardly "shut down the country".

- the behind the doors shenanigans that lead to the forming of the current government are unknown to you, your wife, or to me. There was a lot of speculation at the time, as there always is when the horse trading that leads to coalitions is occurring. If you have better information, please let me know.

- Thailand's current parliament expires in late 2011, when constitutionally, a new election must be held. Until then the current coalition (assuming it holds together) is legally able to govern. My own view is that they should call an earlier election - no later than the end of this year. Again, this is predicated on the absence of that watershed event about which no one speaks.

by **jackspratt** » February 28, 2010, 8:37 am

Putting aside for a moment the coup, the "selective" prosecution of Thaksin, and the general unfairness of it all, it amazes me that people on this forum are happy to overlook the criminality and unjust enrichment which appears to have been clearly demonstrated in this case.

Not to mention the numerous other transgressions, including assets concealment when he first became PM, the crackdown on the free press and government institutions during his tenure, the extra-judicial murders, the call for "revolution" during the Songkran riots, Pastrygate, etc etc etc.

If Thailand is to progress, it must start somewhere in terms of bringing to justice all the blatant criminals parading as politicians, police, armed forces, businessmen, etc. Complain if you like that it hasn't happened thusfar, but please don't say Thaksin doesn't deserve it because his won the most seats in a couple of elections.

by **Laan Yaa Mo** » February 28, 2010, 8:47 am

It is the way they got rid of him that stinks (judicial decisions, illegal yellow shirt intervention, military coup et al), all directed against Thaksin and his supporters. No-else outside his group, who might have been guilty of the same 'crimes', came under the same scrutiny. Take Sondhi for one example of someone who escaped any judicial condemnation and penalty. Why?

The focus was on getting rid of Thaksin, not on fairness, corruption or legalities. You know that as well as I do.

It is about power, and who wields it, not on what Thaksin might have alleged to have done, or had done, in the past.

by **rufus** » February 28, 2010, 10:28 am

Jack, I have already told you where to go and what to look for in order to be bable to judge the im[artiality of the judges. I am not going to dot the "i"s"and cross the "t"s as I assume you are capable of doing your own web searches. To repeat - look at the origins, geographical and political, of the judges; look at the dates when they were appointed; look at their associations with Prem, (and others who cannot be mentioned).
I assume you are aware of the fact that it is even illegal in Thailand to criticise the decision of the cout and the judiciary itself? Hence not too much can be discussesd on this board.

by **rufus** » February 28, 2010, 10:56 am

What I can say, (I hope), is that I suggest you look at the significance of April 2006 and the results thereafter.

by **jackspratt** » February 28, 2010, 10:59 am

rufus I have done extensive google searches on this issue eg "thailand supreme court judges thaksin trial" and "thailand Supreme Court Chairman Sukharom", and none of them reveal the names of the judges on the panel, let alone their origins, appointment dates or relationships.

In your previous post you said:

Jack I could certainly provide evidence and the post would last about 5 minutes. I suggest you do a little bit of homework and look at the providence of the judges, at who appointed them and when and also at their geographical background.

which is hardly pointing me to anywhere. :-k

I am not naive as to the varied and questionable backgrounds of some of the lower court judges - however, I have not read anything thusfar (which is not much) which might impugn the reputations of those in the Supreme Court.

I am also aware that those senior judges are appointed by the king, a process that no doubt Prem is involved in.

by **jackspratt** » February 28, 2010, 11:45 am

rufus wrote:What I can say, (I hope), is that I suggest you look at the significance of April 2006 and the results thereafter.

OK, that has pointed me somewhere, and some very interesting reading. Thanks for that.

If we assume the court was politically appointed (I am still mulling that one - and you have taken a wide interpretation of "political", which I do agree with), does it necessarily follow that their decision was a poor one?

Clearly, as stated earlier, I don't believe it was, even if one argues that it was tainted ie would a panel of independent overseas judges come to a different conclusion, based on the evidence presented?

by **Laan Yaa Mo** » February 28, 2010, 12:37 pm

[quote="
Clearly, as stated earlier, I don't believe it was, even if one argues that it was tainted ie would a panel of independent overseas judges come to a different conclusion, based on the evidence presented?[/quote]

Or the pressure exerted!

by **jackspratt** » February 28, 2010, 12:41 pm

My point was pretty clear Tilo.

I said overseas, and independent - pressure is not evidence.

by **bumper** » February 28, 2010, 4:03 pm

Religion and politics.

So far everything that has happened in the nine years in Thailand has in the end actually effected me very little.

Based on thE activities in Bangkok last might I would say the first line of the new Novel has been written now.

by **KHONDAHM** » February 28, 2010, 5:44 pm

jackspratt wrote:Putting aside for a moment the coup, the "selective" prosecution of Thaksin, and the general unfairness of it all, it amazes me that people on this forum are happy to overlook the criminality and unjust enrichment which appears to have been clearly demonstrated in this case.

Not to mention the numerous other transgressions, including assets concealment when he first became PM, the crackdown on the free press and government institutions during his tenure, the extra-judicial murders, the call for "revolution" during the Songkran riots, Pastrygate, etc etc etc.

If Thailand is to progress, it must start somewhere in terms of bringing to justice all the blatant criminals parading as politicians, police, armed forces, businessmen, etc. Complain if you like that it hasn't happened thusfar, but please don't say Thaksin doesn't deserve it because his won the most seats in a couple of elections.

I pass no judgment at all on Thaksin without knowing all the facts. As you pointed out, we may not ever know ALL the facts. Hence, I am completely neutral as to his guilt or innocence despite the verdict.

I admit to being biased to give him the benefit of the doubt because of the many positive things he has done for the poor. I have witnessed the fruits of his efforts first-hand. I also recall him being hammered for his ownership of Shin Corp throughout his first term - so he sold it - and then he was hammered even more. So, he offered to step down and also held a snap election. He still won decidedly despite the opposition's boycott and the "no vote" ballots. These examples and his persistent efforts to let the people decide are not the behavior of a purely wicked man.

Bluntly speaking, I do not give a rat's doot about whether or not he deserved it. I care about whether or not the will of the people is respected. Clearly, iif the minority opposition was able to usurp and hold power, it has not been respected.

Give the people their vote, I say! =D>

by **parrot** » February 28, 2010, 8:13 pm

After I started reading some of the info at asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pundit-blog (add the www.) and the many links to other sites that report on Thai politics, I decided that there were far too many shenanigans going on in the local political scene for an outsider (like me) to occasionally peer in and try to understand. I still read the site and the links and have my own opinion, but have decided that if I can't get a grip on the many ways to wai after all these years (age, position, relationship, economic status, social status among the factors) or how kriengjai comes into play when you're really pissed at someone, I'll hardly ever be able to understand the inner workings of Thai politics. And that's not even taking into account the role (the big role) of the military and the palace in the equation.

Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Re: Thaksin 46 Billion Down

Who is online