Lorn

This man is not cut out for politics, it is normal for the media to pick up on juicy stories, like it or not., politicians dont cry about it and throw tantrums, its part of the job to accept criticism. He should just keep quiet about this, his rantings only fuel the fire and make the BBC news story look more believable.

Of course he will not go and talk to the BBC, they would publish the discussion and it would likely be very embarrassing for Prayuth.

Also, he refers to himself as a leader of a country, well yes, self appointed leader, not elected by the people of Thailand which is against the whole idea of democracy. This is the whole point really, the West will never support a military take over and an unelected military government in power.

Also, why insist on knowing the authors name? Why does that matter, the BBC own the story and they ran with it. If he wants to challenge it then talk to the BBC.

He is also issuing a veiled threat about what the media print, then he is contradicting it citing freedom of speech and the threatening again, so is he threatening, not threatening,,,, who knows.

Whatever he says the BBC and other news agencies will continue to print stuff about Thailand that the current PM does not like, it will not stop, ever. Perhaps he should put this much energy in tackling the corrupt police and officials in the country.

Watch this documentary and try again, with a straight face, to talk about whether the west will or won't support military dictatorships. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/2011/08/201184144547798162.html

Now you're just trying to falsely dichotomize the argument....it isn't about whether or not the west supports dictatorships - they've done that for centuries.

The issue is that Prayuth does not have the full trust or support of the west yet and he is trying to put forward an image of being "accepted" by the international community that is at odds with the reality of the situation and this has been underlined or "exposed" by the BBC much to his dismay. Unfortunately he has shown his own ineptitude on the world stage by his apparently self-centred and arogant reaction to the item.

I took offence to "the West will never support a military take over and an unelected military government in power." SImple as that.

I am not that interested in Prayuth's reasons for reacting the way he did. Perfectly reasonable to believe it's simply about the "truth" being "exposed". Not that interested in discussing which news agencies are the most trusted or hold the moral high ground either.

This man is not cut out for politics, it is normal for the media to pick up on juicy stories, like it or not., politicians dont cry about it and throw tantrums, its part of the job to accept criticism. He should just keep quiet about this, his rantings only fuel the fire and make the BBC news story look more believable.

Of course he will not go and talk to the BBC, they would publish the discussion and it would likely be very embarrassing for Prayuth.

Also, he refers to himself as a leader of a country, well yes, self appointed leader, not elected by the people of Thailand which is against the whole idea of democracy. This is the whole point really, the West will never support a military take over and an unelected military government in power.

Also, why insist on knowing the authors name? Why does that matter, the BBC own the story and they ran with it. If he wants to challenge it then talk to the BBC.

He is also issuing a veiled threat about what the media print, then he is contradicting it citing freedom of speech and the threatening again, so is he threatening, not threatening,,,, who knows.

Whatever he says the BBC and other news agencies will continue to print stuff about Thailand that the current PM does not like, it will not stop, ever. Perhaps he should put this much energy in tackling the corrupt police and officials in the country.

Watch this documentary and try again, with a straight face, to talk about whether the west will or won't support military dictatorships. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/2011/08/201184144547798162.html

I continue to be amazed at the venom directed at the Prime Minster by a group of people who have absolutely no legitimacy . None of you can vote; your are all guests in Thailand and yet you sound as if the PM should listen to you. I don't blame his irritation. Whether Obama or any other leader shakes his hand is irrelevant. The United States opinion of the coup is well known. What is not so well known is that the US foreign policy continues to be erratic and hypocritical. Egypt had a coup- no criticism- because the new government got rid of an elected government that was supported by the Moslem Brotherhood- an enemy of the US. Thailand doesn't have oil; isn't near the Middle East or Israel and thus is treated differently because America has no real concept of the real dynamics of Thai politics and its search for political reform.There is no Thai lobby in the US to influence opinion as there is a huge Middle East lobby.

Westerners in Thailand need to show some restraint. When I am invited to your house for dinner, I don't continue to tell you I hated the food.

Well written until the "because America has no real concept..." The US supports dictators around the world when it suits them. When it is not in their interest to, they don't. This doesn't mean that everyone they support is evil and everyone they are against is good.

If you read Wikileaks, you will know that the US is well aware of the "real dynamics of Thai politics."

There is an irony in the author's glorification of Snowden's breach of USA national security. The Junta would not view a similar breach of Thai miitary and current government State secrets any different than the USA government. The author might be more effective with a direct criticism of the current Thai government for suppression of freedom of speech if his concerns for individual freedom are real.

But then he might lose his job.

Exactly. Just like a journalist for Fox news would if they wrote anything that was pro-Obama or a MSNBC reporter would if they wanted to publish anything that didn't tow the Democrat party line. Journalism in both countries has become a joke.

Chris,

although you have a Master's and have worked in a non teaching role in the education industry, you are not a teacher. You have no education degrees, no teacher training and no teaching experience.

Of course, many people want to come and live and work in Thailand. But going into teaching to fund that etc is not the right way round. Would you be able to walk into a teaching job in the UK? If yes then fine. If no, then why would you expect to in Thailand.

Perhaps become a qualified experienced teacher first, and see if you are suited to it and like it. Then you can look overseas if that appeals.

Alternatively come and work at one of the private language schools. No idea how much they pay but they seem less concerned about standards.

I hate this "if no education degree you are not a teacher" argument. We are teaching English as a second language.

In most of Europe , Canada, USA, you can teach ESL with a TEFL, or TESOL diploma in language schools, community colleges, churches, and community centres.

If it's good enough for the Western world, why not good enough for Thailand?

When B.Ed degrees are insisted upon, Thailand's English education programs will plummet in quality.

Only Nigerians, Cameroonians, and Filipinos need apply.

Because there is a world of difference between what teachers "should" be doing with students who have studied English for so many hours at school, and what should be done with refugees and migrants who either learnt very little or perhaps a long time ago.

Schools in my country will only take people with Education degrees. They will not take French, Spanish, Chinese "teachers" just because they happen to be native speakers. We are talking about TCT regulations which govern schools aren't we? Private language centers can still hire who they want, can't they?

Your first sentence is incoherent.The English level in Thai schools is very close to zero.

Japan, Korea, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, and most countries worldwide are hiring native English speakers without Ed degrees because of the pay scale. If your country insists every teacher has a B.Ed ok.

If Thailand insists upon it, English language instruction will go through the toilet.

Language instruction is already in the toilet, as you alluded to in your first sentence. Yet you think trying to raise standards is going to make things worse? You also seem misinformed about what is happening in those other countries.

In Japan and Korea, you are assisting the local teacher who is a professional. The focus is on cultural exchange and hearing a native speaker's pronunciation and working together to create activities focused on speaking and listening. They are there to judge the appropriateness of what you are doing and are there to guide you. It is also becoming increasingly difficult to get a job there if your degree is not related to English. Work in Cambodia and Vietnam is largely limited to private language centres. So it's not accurate to say that those countries are hiring Native speakers to teach English the way it is being done in Thailand- where you are largely left to your own devices and someone who is not up to par is going to do far more damage.

A little tired of all these ex-pats remarks and always bashing Thai or Thailand when many live here :-(

Maybe many of you should go back to your own country, if you have one? :-)

I think criticising Thai-bashing is valid at times. But bashing the PM, as he was not chosen by the people of Thailand, doesn't fit.

Lorn, I would have to respectfully disagree with you that language learning has nothing to do with "the way male and female brains work." Burman et al. 2009 suggests that "Bilateral activation in the inferior frontal and superior temporal gyri and activation in the left fusiform gyrus of girls was greater than in boys. Activation in the left inferior frontal and fusiform regions of girls was also correlated with linguistic accuracy irregardless of stimulus modality, whereas correlation with performance accuracy in boys depended on the modality of word presentation (either in visual or auditory association cortex). This pattern suggests that girls rely on a supramodal language network, whereas boys process visual and auditory words differently. Activation in the left fusiform region was additionally correlated with performance on standardized language tests in which girls performed better, additional evidence of its role in early sex differences for language."

But, I do agree that females are better behaved and more motivated and that is a significant factor in females outperforming males. And, I do agree with you that societal factors are, yes, a factor but one of many (Rua, 2006)

References:

Burman, D. D., Bitan, T., Booth, J. R. 2008. Sex Differences in Neural Processing of Language Among Children. Neuropsychologia 46:1349-1362.

Rua, P. L. 2006. The sex variable in foreign language learning: an integrative approach. Porta Linguarum 6:99-114.

Yes I should have been more circumspect. Of course different people do learn better in different ways and so the way language is taught may benefit a greater percentage of females than males. It just annoyed me that this was being used as an excuse to a) not bother engaging with half the population and perhaps as an excuse for not bothering to learn Thai themselves as they are male and therefore learning languages is so difficult for them.

i was contacted by someone from, I guess a tutoring agency, about having students and friends that were looking for language exchanges. I'll send you a pm about it if I get more info. There's also a group on Meetup.com for Bangkok language exchanges.

http://www.meetup.com/Bangkok-Language-Exchange-meetup/

Even if you can speak Thai did you ever think about what kind of intellectual enlightenment conversation you have from talking to a Thai man. As a rule, most Thais can not carry on an intelligent conversation unless the subject is eating, <deleted>**k, stealing and drinking. YOU FOOLS NEED TO WAKE UP TO WHERE YOU ARE LIVING. A Thai male friend will be an exception and usually he is interested in learning from you about western ways. Did you ever think about why Thailand is 38th in the world in education? It is because the government and the big man want to keep Thai people stupid so they can not come to Bangkok and make a big problem.

He's right, you know.

I'd better wake up to myself before I recklessly make friends with someone who actually isn't worthy to tie my boot laces.

Thanks Don, you're the best...

38th in education? 38th would be amazing considering what a poor country Thailand is (about 90th in term of GDP per capita). Did you base this on a study where only about 40 countries participated?

According to PISA tests (2012) (must be newer ones available but couldn't find them atm):

Aus 19th

NZ- 23rd

UK 26th

USA 36th

Thailand 50th

of the 65 countries that did the tests.

This is absolute nonsense. If women are doing better at languages in school it's because they pay more attention in language classes because society tells men they should be focusing on Maths, Science etc. It's got nothing to do with differences in the way male and female brains work.

Well, I think you will find plenty of evidence that male and females do think differently. Females can multi-task better than males, male are better at tasks involving practical logic and sequencing. Females are generally better at languages. These are just plain old facts accepted by educators everywhere in the world. Look it up on the Internet if you don't believe.

According to http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/10567876/Are-women-really-better-at-learning-languages.html

4 hypotheses are

1. They process language differently

2. They use more study strategies

3. They converse more

4. They are more motivated in school

Digging deeper into the first I find http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2478638/ who say

"the first to demonstrate a main effect of sex on the magnitude of activation. Neuroimaging studies on language have often failed to show sex differences (Buckner et al., 1995; Frost et al., 1999; Gur et al., 2000; Hund-Georgiadis et al., 2002; Roberts & Bell, 2002; Xu et al., 2001), even when using sample sizes larger than here (Brickman et al., 2005; Knecht et al., 2000; Sommer et al., 2004). In studies of adults that did find sex differences, effects have been weak, usually only demonstrable as differences in laterality (see introduction). A weak interaction of sex with age has also been demonstrated in children, evident as sex differences in the rate of developmental change in intensity (Plante et al., 2006). No previous study has looked for statistical differences between sexes across tasks (although some did look for sex differences on each of several tasks), and none controlled for all the other variables that potentially affect performance (age, accuracy, modality of word presentation and task). Our approach of examining effects across tasks and stimulus modalities is similar to that used by prior studies of amodal language processing (Booth et al., 2002b, 2003; Buchel, Price, & Friston, 1998; Demonet, Thierry, & Cardebat, 2005; Gabrieli, Poldrack, & Desmond, 1998; MacSweeney et al., 2002), which demonstrate higher-level linguistic functions by eliminating modality of word presentation as a confound."

seems hard to believe it's an established fact for 50 years.

Good idea. And while they're at, why don't they get rid of the MSG and teach people how to cook without it again.

The scientific community is pretty unanimous that there is nothing wrong with msg. Just idiots jumping on an imaginary bandwagon led to it being demonised.

http://alllooksame.com/?p=696

http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/msg-myth-versus-science/

The rule of law needs to be brought to this place. I am increasingly convinced the Thai justice system is at the root of most Thai problems.

And I'm increasingly convinced that Thainess is at the root of most Thai problems, or at least what the rulers want Thainess to be.

I think both of you are right.

What doesn't surprise me is the lack of interest in this thread by other TV members. If it was the northeast, the north or even central Thailand, they would be up in arms about the unfairness of it all. But because it is the deep south they are disinterested. I think this would apply to most Thai too. Sad really.

I prefer talking about things that have a possible solution. They want or will in the future want full independence. Thailand won't give it to them as it would decrease the coastline and access to fishing resources etc. dramatically. Nothing will change.

That's another story. Can't verify the facts.

Decades, yes. but a majority of families have moved in recently.

According to figures on Wikipedia, they were about 500k in 1983, and 1,3 million in 2014. Some sources claim 1,5 million.

So in 30 years the population has gone from 1% of the total population to 2%. Wow. Talk about an invasion! And wasn't it suggested that these Muslims breed like rabbits. So surely their excessive breeding inside the country must be the cause of the increase. Why would you think it was immigration?

you posted in bad faith. consider the growth rate and the fact that this population is concentrated in small area of Myanmar

No. The growth rate is what you would expect from an impoverished area. The better access to infrastructure and opportunities a population has, the lower the growth rate. Don't see anything to back up your assertion that the majority of families must have moved in post 1983.

Also the 500k stat was for Rohingya whereas 1.3million is for all Muslims in the area. A not insignificant minority are Muslims from China and India who do not consider themselves Rohingya.

I don't speak enough Thai to be able to claim I have close Thai male friends. I live out in a rural area. My brother-in-law is a friend, but he speaks good English. Most of my friends would be Thai women, I guess. In general, their English is better so there is the ability for basic communication. I like dancing and this seems to be more of a woman's thing. I can belt out the odd Thai song at karaoke (if the Thai is also in English script) which the Thai blokes always enjoy and is worth a few rounds.

Females generally pick up languages much better than males. You can see it when teaching at school. 80% of 'gifted' English classes will be girls, 15% ladyboys and just a few boys. I guess a ladyboy's brain must be wired the same as a female. Almost all females I meet are willing to try some English. It is harder for blokes. They are more concious about 'face' in social situations (until they have had a few drinks, after which you will be their new best friend).

Many Thai men are decent and hard working. Sometimes their wives complain to me that they have too many girlfriends, but they generally trust me to go to karaoke bars with their husbands. It can be a little strange to me how people I barely know can tell me such intimate things. Thai men can be the same. When a little drunk t is hard to know what to expect, but generally I am 'overwhelmed' how friendly they are.

This is absolute nonsense. If women are doing better at languages in school it's because they pay more attention in language classes because society tells men they should be focusing on Maths, Science etc. It's got nothing to do with differences in the way male and female brains work.

"In March, Myanmar declared the temporary identification cards invalid. Those who held them could vote in the last national elections in 2010, but they won't be able to vote this time."

Picked a very poor comparison.... Why do they have temporary ID cards? Most of them were probably born in Myanmar. They ought to have permanent ID cards.

If they were born in USA they would be US citizens, automatically (Trumpy would need Constitutional amendment to change that). And could be on path to US citizenship.

I guess precedent means nothing either, if they could vote in 2010, why can't they vote now?

Giving nationality to people who just happen to be born from foreign parents but within national borders is a mistake.

The Rohingya have been in Myanmar for decades, as the OP said..Citizenship has been taken away from them even if their parents were born nationals.

That's another story. Can't verify the facts.

Decades, yes. but a majority of families have moved in recently.

According to figures on Wikipedia, they were about 500k in 1983, and 1,3 million in 2014. Some sources claim 1,5 million.

So in 30 years the population has gone from 1% of the total population to 2%. Wow. Talk about an invasion! And wasn't it suggested that these Muslims breed like rabbits. So surely their excessive breeding inside the country must be the cause of the increase. Why would you think it was immigration?

ahh, tigermoth. Another name caller. You have already lost the arguement and face by name calling. As for history, Christianity and Buddism do have things to answer for in the distant past. Now lets get real. What religion supports murder of teachers, kidnapping of women children to be sold for sex slaves. Killing by stoning and beheading. Religious intolerance. Killing your daughter if she is suspected of bringing some form of shame to the family. Cutting the clitoris of young girls. Forming ghettoes where they do live in the west because they are not allowed to mingle with "infidels". Mullahs in the west who preach hate and violence. The mob that is invading your country will bring these cultural quirks with them. And the children of these economic tourists will grow to hate your culture because they will not be allowed to become a part of your society. They will hate you and then they will try to kill you. Here we come Boston marathon, here we come Sydney murderer, Here we come, London, Paris. So invite these anti assimilators into your home first. Show some humanity from your own hip pocket. At your peril.

The Christian bible supports (almost) all those things. Some "Christians" may choose to not follow that part of the bible but for some reason choose to still call themselves Christian. That is up to them. In the same way the Koran may support some terrible things but you equally cannot say the "religion" supports those things as if there is a coherent whole group which is "Islam" or "Christianity", It is clear that the majority of Muslims do not.

spiderorchid is right on point.

Muslim families have more children, which will lead them to migrate and spread out to other states in Myanmar looking for work, then they will settle there, have more kids, repeat.

Eventually the Muslim population will outnumber the Buddhist population and Myanmar will become a dominant Muslim country. By then the problem will be too big to contain.

It's good that they are taking care of this now, rather than later.

Take a look at Bangladesh, the country is so overpopulated that they are spilling out of their borders. These Muslims need to be dealt with with an iron fist, not pity.

Isn't this the same with Catholics having to spread from Philippines and South and Central America because they breed too damn much? Can't we just outlaw all religion or at least sterilize anyone stupid enough to believe in it before they poison their children's minds with their ignorance.

Oh wait Europe is full of Catholic countries yet don't have high birth rates despite what their teachings prohibit. Maybe this might the case in Muslim countries too. Let's have a look.

"The proven demographic fact that birth rates have been falling among Muslim women, both in Muslim majority countries and western countries where Muslims have migrated, is not new. Nor are articles debunking the idea that Muslims will become the majority in Europe"

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2011/01/27/will-pew-muslim-birth-rate-study-finally-silence-the-eurabia-claim/

Chris,

although you have a Master's and have worked in a non teaching role in the education industry, you are not a teacher. You have no education degrees, no teacher training and no teaching experience.

Of course, many people want to come and live and work in Thailand. But going into teaching to fund that etc is not the right way round. Would you be able to walk into a teaching job in the UK? If yes then fine. If no, then why would you expect to in Thailand.

Perhaps become a qualified experienced teacher first, and see if you are suited to it and like it. Then you can look overseas if that appeals.

Alternatively come and work at one of the private language schools. No idea how much they pay but they seem less concerned about standards.

I hate this "if no education degree you are not a teacher" argument. We are teaching English as a second language.

In most of Europe , Canada, USA, you can teach ESL with a TEFL, or TESOL diploma in language schools, community colleges, churches, and community centres.

If it's good enough for the Western world, why not good enough for Thailand?

When B.Ed degrees are insisted upon, Thailand's English education programs will plummet in quality.

Only Nigerians, Cameroonians, and Filipinos need apply.

Because there is a world of difference between what teachers "should" be doing with students who have studied English for so many hours at school, and what should be done with refugees and migrants who either learnt very little or perhaps a long time ago.

Schools in my country will only take people with Education degrees. They will not take French, Spanish, Chinese "teachers" just because they happen to be native speakers. We are talking about TCT regulations which govern schools aren't we? Private language centers can still hire who they want, can't they?

Platitudes....no more, and not only from the Thai PM.

The only people who want equality/egalitarianism are those on the bottom of the stack because they want something for nothing. Work for it....earn it!!

Good idea. So lets stop all inheritances and gifts from family members. Can't have people getting something for nothing.

I define a friend, as someone you get together with to share a meal, someone you have over for drinks, and just someone you hang out with often, or from time to time. I have a number of Thai male acquaintances. But, none I really hang out with. I regret that. I wish I did have some good male Thai friends. They do not seem that interested in engaging. It may be a lack of curiosity, it may be a lack of interest in foreigners, it may have something to do with foreigners getting a lot of the younger, prettier women, not sure. But, I know in most other countries I would have a lot of local friends. I wish that was the case here.

I imagine most Thais have enough friends. Why choose someone who speaks a different language unless you particularly want to practise that language? I imagine most don't find speaking English relaxing and the kind of thing they would want to do while drinking, eating, hanging out.They could also see foreigners as likely to not be in Thailand long so why invest the time and energy on it.

Oh and most of the young, pretty Thai women are not with foreigners.

This man is obviously very disturbed and a doctor released him back into the general population when it seems it was not safe to do so.

Tragic

RIP

Or he was safe if he took his medication but chose not to.

Why anyone should want to buy property here is a mystery to me.

Maybe the bubble is slowly popping.

I will tell you why

MY Purchase of 8 years ago has obviously saved me 8 years rent, hence the property owes me nothing now, so pure profit.Why do you not grasp this?????

Exactly!

We’ve owned our hose now for almost 9 years, and are now at about break even with what it would have cost to rent a similar place.

Bonus, we still own the house, and it’s gotta be worth something, yes?

It's not as simple as that. If you buy using a mortgage, then you must consider the interest. And if you are using cash, you need to consider the money you have lost by not investing it on something else. Those who talk about pure profit are remembering a bygone era when we were taught housing was a safe investment because prices were always going up.

Strange that it's ok for numerous people to make a joke out of hundreds who have died here. I imagine if a single person made a joke about

the deaths of the two young white people in Koh Tao they would be banned.

I generally enjoy and respect your thoughtful posts, villagefarang, but in this case I think you are being overly judgemental and behind the times.

In the past, Thai law pretty much reflected your thinking. It reasoned that because foreigners could not legally own land in Thailand, in the event that their illegally obtained land rights were violated, the law could provide no remedy to protect an illegal interest in property. In the 1990's, however, Thailand's Supreme Court changed its thinking on this matter. Under current Thai land law if a person is found to have obtained an illegal interest in land, the Department of Land can step in and force the foreigner to sell the illegally owned land. The court thus reasoned that because an administrative mechanism for forcing the sale of illegally owned land existed, land ownership rights, even those obtained in violation of Thai land law, could still be protected under civil law. People, of course, have the right not to sympathize with Ian, but at least recognize and acknowledge - as the Thai Supreme Court has done - that two wrongs don't make a right, and land law shouldn't be used as a justification for ripping people off.

It should also be pointed out that instances of foreigners illegally obtaining interests in land are likely far more prevelant than many realize. For example, under Thai land law, if a foreign national marries a Thai national, any funds used to purchase land should come exclusively from the Thai national. The main reason for this is that in the event of divorce, the law does not want a foreign national to be able to assert an ownership interest in the land. The law further stipulates that when a Thai national and a foreign born national seek to purchase land, the couple should sign an affidavit which states none of the money used to purchase the land came from the foreign national. If a Thai/foreign national couple purchases land with assets which belong to the foreign national, this is in clear violation of Thai land law. Furthermore, anyone stating that the money to purchase the land did not come from the foreign national when in reality it did, is guilty of making false statements to a public official, which is punishable by fines and incarceration. My point is that the prevelance of foreigners circumventing or violating land law goes far beyond people just setting up dummy corporations, may extend right to one's own front door, and it may be wise to conduct a compliance review of one's own situation before passing judgement on others.

I also don't think that speculation about how this man's wife may or may not have 'felt' is appropriate. The motives for the wife's accumulation of debt are unknown and could have been incurred out of sheer avarice, gambling debts, or even been incurred prior to the marriage, hidden from the spouse for 8 years, all the while accumulating interest at loanshark rates. I'm just saying that not everyone who has been taken advantage of in Thailand is naive, a control freak, or a bloomin' idiot, and knowing you've been here for many years, I'm genuinely surprised you are as reluctant as you seem to be to acknowledge this.

Your post is long and I am somewhat confused by it, but I believe that you are in agreement with those of us that say "thinking of buying land in Thailand- JUST DON'T".

Here's the Cliff Notes version of what I wrote:

Thailand's Supreme Court has interpreted the law to allow foreigners to protect illegally obtained property rights. Those saying that 'anyone who violates Thailand's land laws deserves what they get,' are out of step with Thailand's Supreme Court.

Violation of land law is probably more prevalent than many realize and extends beyond people setting up dummy corporations. Before passing judgement on the OP, you may want to check first if you are fully compliant with the law.

Speculating about the health of the OP's prior marriage is unfair because all of the facts are not known. Blaming the victim by speculating that he may have driven his wife to commit fraud is also unfair.

I would not advocate violating Thailand's land laws. It is rife with peril, and in many cases registering land in another entity's or person's name creates a moral hazard. If you choose to take that risk, you need to fully understand the risks and potential consequences involved.

I admire the OP's efforts to seek justice and recover his assets. By alerting others to these dangers, as well as hopefully discouraging others from perpetrating similar criminal acts, the OP is helping the expat community and deserves to be supported by us.

Surely, it's only if the foreigner does not know that he is buying the property illegally? If you enter into an illegal contract knowingly, it is unenforceable.

Sounds like after such a long fight to prosecute this guy that they gave up fairly easy. It is unlike then not to appeal the decision from the court. Perhaps their was some persuasion from someone high enough to make them accept such a loss of face.

I am in agreement with you and there are very few people in Thailand with enough to drop a "subtle" hint.

This was started a couple of years ago before the current government came to power. Why didn't the previous government do or say something about it via the PM and DM (same person) at the time?

Because the previous government new that if it tried to tell the military and navy what to do, it would shorten the time until its inevitable demise?