Plus

Rkasa, I understand that your point is - pay the money first, then try to retrieve it from those who steal it.

What if it can't be retrieved? That is an almost sure possibility - the scam has been stopped, the money will end in Austrian firm accounts.

Now they can pay a billion in fees, or six billions on the invoice.

And who is "they", btw? Abhirak has been indicted precisely for that - trying to get the trucks first and sort the mess later. Who's the next "they" who wants to face a lawsuit?

By the way, I wonder if anyone can name a Thai PM not so long ago who was elected PM by parliament after his party got about 13 seats?

Seni Pramoj, in the 70s.

I cheated and looked him up though - there were two brothers, Seni and Kukrit and I was confused which one did what. Kukrit was installed as a PM later, after the military seized power.

It's so interesting that plus is always right and knows so much.

Not so good at responding to other points of view though.

As another poster said the usual suspects are highjacking.

You seem to know so much about me,

How about that alleged "deal"?

I'm not discounting the possibility, just pointing out that there are several things that justify the acquittal without any "deals".

Btw, what is that hijacking you refer to? Is it hijacked by "knowledge" and being "right"?

Is it really such a bad thing - people might stop waddling in their own ignorance.

Which 'allegation' shall we start with? The fact that Thaksin was elected and re-elected, then served as caretaker PM after the result was anulled because the democratic democrat party decided it couldn't win so took their ball and went home?

No, I specifically asked you about Prem's alleged involvement with police chief appointment.

That would be a start.

Where are those "reports" and why do they not make any sense?

Which side is Prem backing? Abhisit's or Newin's?

..the facts as I understand them are these:

Thaksin's party was elected in 2002. Thaksin was elected PM. In normal conversation, this is called Thaksi winning the election.

...

in 2008, the PPP were elected and Samak was appointed PM.

Samak was appointed?

Never mind the dates you hopelessly screwed up, but there was a vote in parliament, which Samak won.

Moving forward to about a year later, there was another vote in parliament, and it was won by Abhisit.

People in Thailand NEVER vote for the PM, they vote for their local representative and for their favorite party on the party list.

Thaksin, Abhisit, and Samak were all candidates on a party list system, and those are the only votes they get from people. I mentioned it because you insisted on "elected by people" and party list is the closest approximation to party leaders being voted in by people, and Abhisit got more votes than Samak.

But again, when the PM vote takes place, it happens in parliament, with both party list MPs and consituency MPs casting votes together. That's a parliamentary vote that Abhisit won squarely.

The deal was struck. if I say what the prevailing belief is in this forum, the post will be deleted - rightly, but we all know what it is. The deal was done, the fix was put in. I believe it, a lot of people out there certainly believe it. You probably don't. Which is OK... we all choose what to believe.

It's not a matter of belief.

Do you have any evidence that there was a deal? I've said several times here that they case was lacking strong evidence, and Klanarong, speaking on behalf of AEC, said it was about suspected wrongdoing.

Attorney General refused to back up the case, for the lack of evidence, and AEC went ahead on its own.

Now you ignore all of that and insist that it was a "deal".

Any proof?

... According to some, China is quite keen to resolve the Thailand geo-political anomaly and have been quietly white-anting for a year or two so the numbers may increase, but I think the view of most is that the protests are there to keep the flame burning rather than set Thailand ablaze just yet. Most of the people necessary for the ignition phase of the process will not step up to the plate unless there is a seismic shift in the prevailing circumstances....

What are you on about?

Now it's not just Thai elite conspiracy, but a Chinese one as well?

What next?

Yes, he did well in mobile phones, but I'm not so sure about his satellite business. Also don't forget that before that he tried probably several dozens other ventures that weren't successful at all, and there are plenty of ideas that were flops after he made a fortune with AIS.

so did richard branson but i would not accuse him of not being able to run a corner shop.

using well thought out metaphors to prove a valid point is a good way to influence the reader

the converse is that inappropriate metaphors only show you don't really have a point

I'm not going to argue someone else's metaphors, but Thaksin had only ONE truly successful business, and it was not in a really free market place and since 2000 he used his PM position to quadruple its value.

Corner shops do not usually have that advantage (apart from being on the corner).

..

Will Pathongta, Pathongtae and Pojamarn walk off with the frozen money,

the former verdicts all be lifted and after all it will be called: "National Reconciliation",

because this country always went this way, if so..... there is a storm brewing and

this won't be over all too soon...!

In rubber case there was apparently no hard evidence at all, only "suspect wrongdoing" in Klanarong's words. In the asset freeze case there's some paper trail, but it can go both ways, true.

I doubt it will have any effect on former verdicts and I don't believe in any deals struck with Thaksin behind people's backs.

Why deal with him now? He can't do any serious damage anymore and has not bargaining cards left.

Another aspect of this verdict is that not all decisions go against Thakin's camp and undermine his argument that the courts are biased. He himself welcomed this latest decision, but not the previous ones. How can he explain his double standards now?

Yes, he did well in mobile phones, but I'm not so sure about his satellite business. Also don't forget that before that he tried probably several dozens other ventures that weren't successful at all, and there are plenty of ideas that were flops after he made a fortune with AIS.

... Your strategy seems to be to selectively rubbish parts of a post, hoping that it will cast doubt on the rest.

I went for the possible factual basis in your posts. Whatever rhetorics you built on those, so far non-existing facts, is of no interest to me and I'm not going to argue those heaps of what I consider garbage.

I WILL change my attitude if you can show that there's some substance in your allegations.

Thaksin got a huge mandate from actual elections. people voted for Thaksin, So did the government which then had Samak hoisted on them (moron though he was and is). Abhisit just does not have the same legitimacy. What's to understand? The electoral numbers are out there, it isn't exactly rocket science.

"People voted for Thaksin" - do you mean on proportional list ballots that had party names on them?

By that standard in 2007 elections more people voted for Abhsit than for Samak.

What other numbers you want us to look at?

Noppadol's action still seems perfectly sensible

And why do you think so?

Do you know what the stumbling block in the negotiations was and why Thai strategy had changed? Why were they actively trying to derail the bidding from the second half of 2006? What Cambodian terms they disagreed on, and how Noppadon settled them?

I want to see some back up for the "sensible" claim.

...read PPT (Political prisoners in Thailand - internet blog) for information on Prem's recent power plays in the matter of the police chief

Ha ha, that esteemed and trustworthy source, a anonymous blog, says exactly the same thing without any references: "Reports suggest that Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanonda (b. 1920) is at work."

Then it hints that Jumpol is Prem's choice.

And now your little theory breaks down completely, because Abhisit, your alleged military puppet, pushes for Prateep instead.

That's where theory comes to a dead end.

What about military controlling business? Nothing? Military looking to turn Thailand into Burma? Nothing?

TV stations - the army owned channel 5 them since the beginning, and it faithfully serves whatever govt is in power, it's probably least politicized TV channel anyway.

And please. Abhisit was not elected by the people of Thailand

He was elected in parliamentary vote, it was on TV and I was watching it. It doesn't matter who brokered the deal (it was Suthep who persuaded Newin to switch camps, btw).

He unceremoniously fired chief Thai negotiator, unilaterally changed Thai strategy, agreed to chopping up the site into temple/not temple, and then quietly signed an international agreement.

I don't know how it looks from a legal point of view, but he was far from naive.

Quite a few yellow shirt people are just headless chickens

So, judging by your signature - was it a "discussion" or an "argument"?

Some reports suggest that Prem is influencing the police chief selection...

...

Which reports? Where?

Did you just made it up to support your fantasies like "make no mistake about it: Thailands powers-that-be are quite able and willing to follow the Burma route"?

And we lived through a Thai military coup, it was nothing like Burma.

Abhisit is not his own man, nor that of the Thai people...

Really?

In last elections he led a party that got 14 million votes on a party list, more than PPP.

.. it is common knowledge that the Thai army inserts itself into business, media, propaganda and politics

And what do you know about that? Army backed parties faired badly in 2007 elections and one of them was eventually dissolved.

Which businesses the army inserted itself in? Which of the business on SET are run by the army?

Here's SET100 for you, should be a good start in your research:

http://marketdata.set.or.th/mkt/sectorquot...&country=US

Can't even hear the engine when the AC is on.

So the AC is loud, eh?

He has promised to start talking already, about a dozen times, even on the eve do or die Songkran assault.

He's got nothing.

MU-7 is not a competition to Fortuner, but it sells. The brand is strong, and there's a lot of advertising.

Everests are impossible to sell, by comparison.

It's not that simple. Thailand has domestic supplies of LPG and it imports the rest. Domestic LPG is cheaper and doesn't need a huge subsidy.

Overall usage is split in three nearly equal parts - cooking gas, transport, and industrial.

Cheap domestic supplies can probably cover cooking gas and transport, and industrial demand served by imports.

Either way - LPG is a better established and developed fuel. CNG/NGV depends on govt promotions, and there's only one company distributing it, PTT, and it doesn't want to invest in distribution channels all by itself. So, if there are, like, two CNG stations in the whole of North East - tough luck, no one can help you.

Privately owned LPG trucks, on the other hand, can supply it everywhere, it's not as technically difficult as dealing with higher compression CNG.

Talking to yourself again Jacko ?

Who are you talking ot, Doctor?

The previous comment was made a month ago.

Seriously, I hope your not holding our for a clean politician to be found in Thailand............ let me laugh a thousand laughs for you.

I don't fully understand what you mean.

This is the first "policy corruption" case, when the govt legally initiated policies for the benefit of certain companies or individuals, and the dismissal doesn't look good for the future. Either the legislation is not suitable or the there are impossible demands for the burden of proof.

In individual politicians cases they don't need to prove that he benefited from corruption, simply hiding shares is enough, for example. When it comes to cabinet resolutions or let alone parliament approved bills, it's a lot more difficult.

There are great many ways in which CP could have shown its gratitude for rigging this bid - they were so deeply involved with the government work. Perhaps they need to put greater legal distance between private companies and govt business, or greater distance between the govt and bureaucracy. I don't know, it's a big topic.

So nothing to say about how the post mortem whitewash happened during Aphasit's tenure then?

I already said that provincial court in Songkla has nothing to do with Abhisit.

It's kind of ironic that the very people who are at least making an effort to cut through the crap and seek justice for the Tak Bai victims (which happened on Thaksin's watch for sure) are referred to by an anti-Thaksin poster as "imbeciles"

I don't buy "they are imbeciles, but they are our imbeciles" argument.

Their way of going about those issues is counterproductive. You can say I was cherry-picking, but I don't see anything wrong with it - you can write me a nice long letter but one abusive sentence revealing your real attitude would be enough to dismiss it and never reply.

Out of 44 defendants only Newin openly betrayed Thaksin and so is "useful" for the elite conspiracy. The rest are either old Thaksin cronies or "non-essential personnel".

It's a bit of a stretch to say they were all cleared just for the sake of Newin. Don't forget that there were three groups of defendants, Newin being one of the least involved in actual workings (though at the very top).

Until there is an equitable distribution of power, we will see the same concentration of power that has made the Thaksin situation so scary.

That's why PAD came up with New Politics proposal, because tradition election system has been subverted by Thaksin like types beyond recovery, and it's not only about vote buying, it's about having no meaningful choice, selecting one out of several candidates backed by the same interests behind them who will do exactly the same things when elected. Especially true for smaller parties who will end up in government no matter what.

Public rallies are meant to shortcut the long way between people and their elected representatives.

They get media exposure, and, if the cause is accepted as just, they attract great many supporters in all echelons of society including those who have a greater say in decision making process.

Problem with reds is that no one is listening to them anymore. Not bureaucrats, not ministerial advisers, not political analysts, not opinion writers, not opinion makers, not academics - no one. They've discredited themselves after Songkran and Thaksin petition, possibly forever.

PAD, on the other hand, had wide spread and deep reaching support, it got "ear" almost everywhere, and lots of powerful people and organizations were forced to take heed of PAD movements.

By the way, did anyone see last weeks "Taksin" publication

Ha ha, let's see how many reds have seen it...