Pi Sek

Upon seeing this, I thought this decision would come from Gen Prayuth flexing his imaginary muscles. But it's not, it comes from the Defence Ministry, which is headed by our esteemed Prime Minister.

He also urged the Democrats to bring its fight against corruption to Parliament. He admitted that there are concerns on the negative impact of this on investment sentiment. If Thailand loses any opportunity, the Democrats must be responsible for that, he said.

Totally irrational people in this administration.

They are going to blame the opposition for their own shortcomings?

Yes, it looks like they are. However, to be absolutely fair on Peua Thai, most governments around the world would do the same. Politics is all about the blame game.

But obviously they are acting undemocratically and unconstitutionally when they file treason charges against (or do anything to stifle) any protest movement, as long as it's peaceful, lawful and doesn't infringe on others' rights.

Why give more power to poor people when they can be easily and cheaply be bought.

Better consolidate power for the elite, as they are not prone to greed.

I think this qualifies as a "555".

Admittedly Abhisit has withheld the full truth on occasions, but that just makes him good at politics - as far as I am aware, he has not lied. I would like to hear from those purporting that he lies all the time as to what exactly he has lied about.

Thaksin, on the other hand, lies all the time. I could list examples, but do we really need them? They're well documented already.

"Admittedly Abhisit has withheld the full truth on occasions, but that just makes him good at politics - as far as I am aware, he has not lied."

Let's try this just for a starter :

The 17-month- old Abhisit administration has set its sights on help from Interpol to have Thaksin, a holder of multiple passports and citizenship in Nicaragua and Montenegro, arrested and extradited to Bangkok.

“We will be providing documents to Interpol,” the premier confirmed during a Saturday afternoon press conference with foreign correspondents. “It is a two-step process: you need to issue an arrest warrant before extradition.”

This, however, is not the first time that the Abhisit administration has sought help from the Lyon-based international police organisation to nab Thaksin, the former telecom mogul who has been traversing the globe to escape a two-year jail term for corruption. But such efforts since April last year proved to no avail, because Interpol did not issue its well known Red Notice for the arrest of a wanted person for extradition based on a warrant or court ruling.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2010/05/thailand-govrsquot-tightens-noose-on-thaksin-with-terrorism-charge/

The Reality :

Interpol says no call received to arrest Thaksin

Cross-border police agency Interpol said Friday it had received no request to track fugitive Thai ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra and that it would not arrest him on purely "political" grounds.

Thailand said Thursday it would request Interpol's co-operation after it issued an arrest warrant on terrorism charges for Thaksin, whom it accuses of funding protests that led to deadly clashes in Bangkok in recent months.

http://www.zimbio.com/Abhisit+Vejjajiva/articles/yo7klAy2nB4/Interpol+says+no+call+received+arrest+Thaksin

How many more examples do you need , the army service that wasn't, the fact that he wasn't on holiday in the Maldives during the worst floods known and then he was on holiday but spent the time discussing flood control with the PM of the Maldives , the soldiers didn't kill anybody at the Wat, he wasn't a British Citizen and then he renounced his Citizenship and when caught out on that he admitted he had dual nationality. It goes on and on.

1) The Interpol issue. As far as I'm aware, the Foreign Ministry at the time was planning to submit documents to Interpol. But they couldn't get the translation sorted out. This may be a lame excuse in your eyes - it was in mine - but Kasit's incompetence to do what Abhisit instructed doesn't make Abhisit a liar.

2) The army service that wasn't. Sorry, you'll have to elaborate, I'm not sure what you're talking about.

3) Abhisit's Maldives trip. Did Abhisit actually say he wasn't on holiday in the Maldives? I thought the Democrat spokesman was the one with his wires crossed, Abhisit never denied it?

4) Wat Pathumwanaram. The Democrats (in particular Suthep) and Anupong always said that soldiers were not stationed on the BTS tracks, although photographic evidence suggests otherwise - but Abhisit said from day one that an investigative panel, perhaps even with foreign advisors/observers, would be set up to find the truth. As it turns out, the court judgement stated that the bullets were fired from military weapons from a particular unit (although the army still denies any wrongdoing in this case). But when did Abhisit state outright that the Wat Pathumwanaram deaths were definitely not caused by soldiers?

5) Abhisit being a British or Thai citizen. He never took up British citizenship nor used it. He had dual nationality as a default, with no input or application from himself. He was asked whether he was Thai or British, and he said he was Thai... so where's the lie?

Unless I have my facts wrong (if I do, please let me know), I'm sorry but I can't see where Abhisit has told lied. It looks like I may need some other examples.

Oh his integrity...his honesty...his patience...OMG!! How gullible can people be? This man lies & deceives more than a whore drops her drawers. Why doesn't he tell us the one about being the democratically elected PM while Anupong had a gun stuck up everyone else's arse.

Your first sentence is obviously about Thaksin as it describes him perfectly.

If the second is supposed to be about Abhisit then you must try reading up on the correct history of him coming to power. not just the twisted red version.

Admittedly Abhisit has withheld the full truth on occasions, but that just makes him good at politics - as far as I am aware, he has not lied. I would like to hear from those purporting that he lies all the time as to what exactly he has lied about.

Thaksin, on the other hand, lies all the time. I could list examples, but do we really need them? They're well documented already.

You're dam_n right he is - So far abhisit has said he's covered by the Emergency Decree and then threatened to sue the DSI and the Attorney General. Curious reactions by a man who regards himself as cleaner than the driven snow.

One of the reasons he is suing the DSI and OAG is because if he issued the orders in his official capacity, they don't have jurisdiction as it should be dealt with by the NACC.

He has been charged in a personal capacity. How can he issue orders to the army in his personal capacity?

Indeed. This has been done to death by almost every informed commentator both inside and outside of Thailand - the DSI and OAG are acting outside their jurisdiction and the NACC have neither been instructed nor authorised to open any investigation. I would like to see the NACC open charges against Abhisit and Suthep, because this is the only honest way that they can be convicted or cleared. In the interests of reconciliation, I feel this MUST happen.

Got to love his integrity. Abhisit and Suthep are both willing to stand trial and possibly face life in prison or even worse, the death penalty rather than adopt this stupid blanket amnesty bill all for the sake of clearing one man.

This is the sort of person Thailand needs. Not the cowardly and unethical scoundrel they have running it now.

It still leaves the question though that I have still not had answered.

The actual amnesty is only for 'politically motivated offenses' dating from Sept 2006 to Aug 2013

So Thaksin still has charges for breech of bail, absconding from court and the land deal, which to me, are not 'politically motivated offenses'.

At least 2 of these offenses should still be hanging over him. He was actually convicted in his absence. That makes him a convicted felon. Even if he is pardoned under the amnesty, he is still a convicted felon, and under the constitution, he can not stand as an MP which means, he can never be a prime minister.

Whilst I totally agree on the integrity part, he also has political reasons for facing threat of death penalty etc instead of accepting amnesty - if the amnesty stands, he will never be able to stand up and say he fought unjust charges in court. Because of this, his political career will always be hindered by those who remain convinced that he ordered the "indiscriminate shooting of protesters", which of course he didn't. (He was very careful at the time to explain under which circumstances bullets were to be used, and I fully agree that non-peaceful armed protesters deserved to be neutralised by official armed forces. The problem is the shooting of unarmed peaceful protesters, soldiers, medics, etc - some of whom lost their lives.)

In response to your unanswered question, are you sure amnesty is for "politically motivated offenses"? I thought it was for "politically motivated convictions" (which would apply for convictions post-2006 for crimes pre-2006), but I suspect the language used in the amnesty bill is not entirely clear on this as I've also heard it's for "political crimes", "politically motivated prosecution"...

It wouldn't be too hard for a top lawyer to convince a court that his breach of bail and absconding from court charges would be political if investigation of his ex-wife's land purchase was political. He had to run to avoid the political witch hunt, he can argue.

Here's my objection to Thaksin - he came in, did some pretty good stuff for about 2 years, then started showing his true colours by ignoring the governmental controls that come with a democracy. The power went to his head and he decided that he was more than just a Prime Minister in a democratic system.

So yes, whybother is right - it's about what he represents, which is autocracy, dictatorship and right-wing fascism.

Of course, his outright animosity towards (and, many claim, murder of) those that disagree with him, his disrespect for and manipulation of the rule of Law, and his brazen claims that he is above criticism from international human rights organisations and that democracy is not what he wants, add quite a bit of weight to this.

Yes, it looks like he was picking up hotel guests... possibly as a side-earner to go with his timeshare selling. Right or wrong, this is illegal. Yes, it looks like he then returned with camera in hand to photograph some particular pieces of human excrement (presumably so as to make a formal complaint as to their earlier behaviour), and did so armed and expecting a confrontation. Upon producing the camera, he got one (before any weapons were produced). So yes, he's a fool too.

My synopsis - the Aussie should have been arrested, and he was. The taxi drivers should also have been arrested for assault (and their own taxi-legality should be under scrutiny) - it doesn't look like this happened. And the hotel should certainly discourage tourists from using these particular taxis, as they clearly lack the respect for the hotel and its guests to not cause violent scenes on their street frontage.

The point remains that quite a lot of Thai undesirable idiots doing the same thing as the Aussie don't get arrested, as is highlighted in the other thread. I've had this argument many times with Thai police, who generally tell me they're here to "protect Thai people" and that's why if there's a dispute they will often side with the Thai, regardless of who is in the right. I tell them they're wrong - they're here to enforce the Thai Law, and anything other than that is actually harming the Thai people. Very few of them agree.

Did the police bother to interview the clients? That might be an avenue worth exploring as to whether this was a taxi pickup or not.

Finally, this is more bad publicity for a tourist destination that is spiralling out of control. Phuket really has become a nasty place to go (well, in Thailand terms at least) and, as you can see, more people are mentioning Pattaya and Phuket in the same sentence as time goes by.

Went in 2005. My opinion.. very nice. Lots of temples, not much for Western tourists - so not many Western tourists, which suits me fine. I agree that the beaches and sea water are not the cleanest... but then I'm not a swimming-in-sea-from-beaches type and most of my favourite beaches are not "maintained" like those in tourist traps.

I will go back one day... it was recommended that I go on Chinese New Year but I'm not sure I would like the noise. Koh Sichang is very popular with Chinese.

Songkran is also particularly busy time according to hotel staff, but it is everywhere... probably not so many farangs with ice-cubed water buckets on Koh Sichang though.

I stayed at Koh Sichang Palace and will again. The hotel was a bit dated/worn, but facilities were OK and it wasn't too pricey.

Reconciliation must be able to build trust between parties in order to identify the common national interest. It cannot be rushed, she said.

priceless

I have a suggestion... try a referendum

Whilst I think a referendum (possibly referenda) should be part of the country's immediate political evolution, honestly, I doubt there's any guarantee that a referendum would solve the country's problems on its own.

Blair shocked me and said something clever...

"Democracy is not just a way of voting, but also a way of thinking. Democracy is not just about how a majority takes power, it is how the majority relates to the minority," he said.

As far as Thai politicians are concerned, this really is Western naive hippie bull. This is where "Thai democracy", as we heard from a distinguished political figure the other week, comes in. The terms of the proposal for referendum can be very "vivid" - maybe too much so for the wishes of the whole population. It's very hard to "get" Thais to lose or to agree that they were wrong, even if they win.

A referendum is supposed to settle things down and, whilst not everyone might not agree, they would feel that their personal situation has been and is being represented on a national forum... I don't think that this is likely under the circumstances of a referendum. It's over one question so, when the lawyers and the politicians and army chiefs and whoever else have run their rules over the finished question, a referendum would entrenchen the winners and partisanise the losers, because as far as Thai politicians are concerned it's just another election but one that you have to win by a bigger margin because the stakes are higher.

"Reconciliation must be able to build trust between parties in order to identify the common national interest. It cannot be rushed", said Finland's ex-president and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari.

If I got paid for every discussion I've had with a Thai about the concept of "trust", I'd be a rich man.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408869/Tony-Blair-causes-Thailand-protests-accusations-paid-400k-talk.html

Daily mail says he was paid 400,000 quid = 20 million baht.

Much as I dislike and distrust Tony Blair, and Peua Thai party (for similar reasons), I recommend this link to anyone hoping for an in-depth analysis of whether the Daily Mail is a good source of information in each person's case.

http://www.shouldireadthedailymail.com

They installed it this afternoon. An externally-hired team (by them) of 2 guys with a dish, a box, a drill and a ladder. It took about an hour to fix & mount the satellite dish and set the box. They were polite and quick.

And where is CTH in Lamai?

I found this.

Gulf of Thailand cable. 093-7610997. Koh Samui. Surat Thani.

I just tried this number, was answered by a Thai lady who confirmed that it was the CTH shop in Lamai. It's very near to the Kodak shop/Pensit & Laws offices, across the road. I'll go in this afternoon and post what I find.

Thanks to all for the info.

A friend of mine just got the new HTC box in Bangkok and had to pay 20,000.-THB for 3 years. This will give you the next 3 seasons EPL, no idea if any and what other channels are included.

The alternative is to stream the games on your computer, providing you have a fast enough internet connection.

He's not PC-minded enough to watch on the Internet... but the HTC box is interesting? Can I find it on Samui or do you have to go to BKK?

Cancel UBC.

Go to CTH in Lamai.

Order their dish, box and channel package.

Pay less then UBC and get football plus

a bunch of other channels.

CTH? Where's that?

I don't watch TV if I can help it but, because UBC aren't showing English football any more, I have been asked by a tenant to see if I can get him an alternative satellite option. I have heard on some grapevine or another that there is an option using a satellite or "smart box" or something.

Questions:

1) What is it?

2) What is needed for it?

3) How much does it cost?

4) Where can I find it?

5) Is it legal?

6) Does it work?

7) Are there any other alternatives besides Samui Cable? The English Premiership is what the guy really wants but if it has movies and news channels, all the better.

I appreciate your responses and relating of your experiences of this service. Thanks.

Storm in a teacup regarding any reactions to his comments! The bigger picture is in focus here, for once

He's certainly not mincing words. 'Fed up, had it up to the back teeth with the pussy-footing around' comes to mind.

Just a question not only for yourself but others on here, do you think that the Thai Authorities will bring pressure on him to keep his mouth shut? TAT would probably despise the man and be glad to see the rear end of him. He has been pushing this issue for years and I say good on him but I do have some concerns that Thailand may just get fed up and say, revoke his work visa and kick him out of the country. He is not a diplomat so not protected in that way.

Larry's been the Australian Honorary Consul for ages - definitely for the last 9 years anyway. So I don't think that he's in danger of being replaced over this or that he's worried about being "looked closer at". Besides, the last thing TAT wants to see is a "Thailand's Aussie Consul kicked out for exposing corruption" headline.

However, he also owns a real estate agency, Phuket One Real Estate, which is a very reputable one (I suppose it has to be to avoid conflict of interest complaints) but a private business nonetheless. That might be a little more prone to political intimidation.