jayboy

A series of frankly rather unconvincing posts seeking to deflect scrutiny of the army's record.Not to be taken seriously as the vast majority politically are motivated , and in some cases incoherent.None seem aware of (or prepared to admit the army's appalling record of violence in Thailand and refusal ever to accept accountability

Key question is the attitude of the Japanese authorities who will I suspect be rather more persistent in seeking the truth, not that our little band of apologists for murder are much interested in that commodity.

Doctors can only speculate as to what type of rifle fired a bullet that hit a body. And forensics can speculate on angle of entry/exit wounds and the victims position if the scene is not a static crime scene afterwards. This was not the case in this riot zone. No one without actual video footage of the actual shooting can determine definitively where it came from.

A forensic analysis of a bullet can tell one type of rifling from another in many, but not all, cases. An AK-47 fired bullet would not have the same barrel marking grooves as a M-16. So if the earlier 'leaked information' was about 'witness statements', none of whom can actually SEE a bullet in flight, and the update is based on actual ballistics analysis then this is a plausible change. That the Reds side will howl to the high heavens over this is understandable. I'll await todays press conference clarification.

The usual half baked quasi scientific claptrap but essentially determined by political prejudice.

Wrong also in assuming it is the Red leadership that will lead the charge at this predictable cover up.It's the Japanese Government which will not I think be put off by lies and obfuscation.

My mind would be comforted if Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand M.D. had been involved in the investigation process. This formidable lady lives by a mantra of 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'. In spite of not being part of the Establishment she has risen to the top of her tree and few, apart from the Police, would question her credibility.

You must be joking.I realise that Khunying Prnthip is the kind of colourful person that some foreigners latch on to.However her credibility is almost zero.

You are wrong also in believing she is not part of the establishment.

She was badly compromised in the GT200 scandal.

The headline should read:

Democrat says Pol. Lt. Col.Thaksin claims reconciliation cannot be achieved without him coming back and doing his time.

Works for me. It seems Abhisit is getting too much good press and the damned hamsters not getting the wished for traction. Cue for Noppadom and 'story time'.

Don't know what this gobblededook means but the truth of what Thaksin says is self evident.There can't be true reconciliation without him paying a part.Doesn't mean he shouldn't serve time or have his assets restored (though this will presumably be part of the bargaining process).Personally I think for the good of the country he should formally undertake not to seek public office.Watch this space but I don't think much will happen on this front for a few years, ie until wounds on both sides have healed.

The lawyer would not have saved me any time. That's my point. I do fly business class on long-haul flights, because I see a difference. If there is no difference, why would I pay more money?

If course, this applies to my situation, as well as the people I know who have applied. The situation of your friends may be different.

Doesn't really make sense I'm afraid.Perhaps you are not as busy as you think! Or perhaps you enjoyed hanging around Immigration totties !

If the lawyer saved an applicant making one trip to Immigration, he saved time for that applicant.And in practice there is much more to it.

Once again I'm not suggesting a lawyer is essential,just helpful for genuinely busy people.

The sufficiency economy philosophy has been stressed.

I'm not saying it isn't part of the rhetoric rather in the way Marxism is part of the rhetoric of government in China.But in in both instances one would be hard pressed to find practical implementation.Actually the sufficiency economy is in many ways an excellent approach and I think this has been demonstrated in the economic vicissitudes of recent years.But Thailand is for better or worse part of an interconnected world, and has to live with globalisation.One effect of this is a more dynamic and fluid economy which works against the old stratified class system which some proponents of the sufficiency economy would like to see preserved.Actually there are echos of the English nineteenth century rural movement led by William Morris and others.Personally I am sympathetic but it's like fighting a tidal wave.

jayboy>> I read your post as such since it specifically says 'one person' etc, but if you mean something else then I am looking forward to read the clarification.

It's all completely clear already.If some want to take offence where none is intended (far from it) so be it.

The target was of course the hysterical government propaganda machine , abetted by the military at election times in particular.

No, it wasn't clear and partly still isn't. You are saying that the government propaganda is saying that Abhisit and Abhisit only can fix everyone's problems?

It is completely clear and because there are a number of malicious people who deliberately misunderstand, not necessarily you - I don't know, that is my last word on the matter.

jayboy>> I read your post as such since it specifically says 'one person' etc, but if you mean something else then I am looking forward to read the clarification.

It's all completely clear already.If some want to take offence where none is intended (far from it) so be it.

The target was of course the hysterical government propaganda machine , abetted by the military at election times in particular.

Another thinly wailed attack against...

Unpleasant and dishonest smear.

My criticism is of the absurd hysteria of Government propaganda, and nothing else.

I am sure more than a few hampster acolytes will be on their treadmills late into the nights compiling the best physiological take on how to convince 'working class Thais' that only one person can improve their lot in life.

Some might say judging from the hysterical output from Government propaganda sources that has been the case for some time.

More brainwashing on Thaksin's part to contradict the 'Sufficiency Economy'...

someone please clip this fool.

The "sufficiency economy" has been quietly dropped if you hadn't noticed.

My point relates to Thailand's "economic woes".Again if anybody hadn't noticed the economy is in extremely good shape.

I am a busy executive myself. The lawyer can't take any time off your schedule, as all they can do is tell you which documents are needed, and it is you who has to provide them.

A lawyer offered me a fee of THB 40,000 for PR appplication, and another THB 60,000 in case of success. Or was it the other way around, I don't remember. If you want to part with THB 100,000, please let me know and I'll be your consultant - rather than a lawyer who is not approved to the Thai Board anyway.,

This tells me a couple of things most importantly you were dealing with the wrong legal firm.No reputable lawyer would charge a success fee for helping with PR.A first class lawyer would not take the case on unless convinced all criteria were met.(Obviously this is in reference to the years before the current hiatus with the Ministry of the Interior).I have already made it clear that using the right lawyer is not a cheap business.Using a good lawyer in any circumstances is not a cheap business.

I have also made it clear that it is perfectly possible to process the PR application oneself.I know people who have successfully done this.I think it is also true that using a lawyer or not using a lawyer makes no difference to the Department of Immigration.I don't think Immigration are impressed or unimpressed by an applicant having a lawyer in tow.(In practice this is hardly ever the lawyer himself but a legal assistant type.)

Where you are wrong is that a lawyer cannot take time off your schedule.A friend of mine who successfully applied for PR told me that the legal firm responsible liaised with his secretarial staff.The amount of paper work and follow up and minor problems should not be underestimated.He saved a huge amount of time and was prepared to pay for it.Call it the business class approach if you like.It's more expensive than travelling cattle class and doesn't really offer that much extra but it gets you to your destination in comfort at some significant extra cost.

And for those who draw the Chinese card, I too have more Chinese blood in me than Thai, but have zero loyalty towards China. I don't see why people get so riled up about nationality and blood, it should be about intention, action and all the other things that is the proof of a person, not where they were born or who their parents are. Nationalism is a dangerous thing and should become less relevant in these modern times.

I respect your post and the sentiments therein (and agree with them)

On the Chinese issue there has been much discussion of the pride in things Chinese of many Sino-Thais as China's remarkable rise has taken place over the last decade or so.At the yellow shirt PAD rallies in the past there were many indications of Chinese pride including banners "Sons of China" reflecting the mainly ethnic Chinese nature of the PAD movement (as well as racist slurs against other Thai ethnic groups ).In the first half of the twentieth century it was quite common for Thais to be concerned about Sino - Thai divided loyalties exemplified by a famous royal pamphlet.Now I think this has mostly passed whether though a triumph of assimilation or perhaps the Sino-Thai grasp of politics, business and even the military.My point is therefore while it is not particularly sensitive now the matter of Chinese ethnicity has a potential political dimension that other ethnicities simply don't.

Again you are stating things that just aren't true. "setting out to occupy an airport" was not the reported aim of the PAD. They were setting out to meet Somchai (the PM) not to occupy the airport. Your thoughts on what constitutes terror or what might have happened are not a justification for a charge of terrorism.

The AoT Board of Directors knew that doing the Thai thing of going out and meeting with the people would have yielded different results, their man on the ground failed and failed miserably to do his job.

"Vital Areas" were not locked down. The PAD had full run of the place and were even given access to the control tower (I believe that the people that went to the control tower should be charged with major crimes.) The airport was able to open almost immediately upon them leaving and no petty theft was reported even from the King Power people.

So in your Alice in Wonderland world it was the AOT that should be punished not the peaceful PAD crowd that only had the intention of greeting Khun Somchai.Once they were there they decided to stick around for a bit and finally departed after giving the airport a good needed tidy up.

No matter that your ridiculous account bears no relation to what happened according to neutral observers.The slander you make against the AOT has been widely used by PAD fanatics (though at least you do not repeat the lie that the closure was orchestrated by Thaksin) and is incontestably wrong.The AOT had the duty to close the airport down one the unruly mob was on the premises.World airport safety experts have confirmed this.

You have made some shameful posts but I think this is one of the most disgraceful.You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

Again, I can't see what that has to do with the price of fish.

History is filled with people who have betrayed their 'own' country - despite the fact they had absolutely no cultural affinity with the people they sold out to. They are generally called 'spies'.

Or should the fact that someone who holds another passport be barred from serving in public life based on peoples automatic assumption that having that passport will make them a sell out.

Why not just bar them all together? Using your flawed logic that people will automatically be sold out, there is nothing to stop a future politician renouncing their former citizenship, entering parliament and the going on to sell out people anyway.

I completely agree.This would be a non issue were it not for Amsterdam's stunt (though I'm not saying he doesn't raise some important and unaddressed issues) with the ICJ.It has always been known that Abhisit was born of Thai parents in the UK.He has never used the privileges associated with his place of birth, eg has always travelled to the UK on the same visa basis as any other Thai.

And yet there is something "alien" about Abhisit which is fascinating and compelling, but it is not connected to his place of birth.It is to do with his long exposure to Western value systems at elite British institutions, let us concede at the best school and one of the best universities.It is not possible in my view to have this kind of exposure and not be troubled deeply by many of the fairy tales, inanities, greedy vested interests and lies that pervade Thai politics.But he is PM and thus has to make compromises and negotiate with those unelected bodies (military, politicised courts, feudal interests etc) that eased his way to power.As a Thai he is also to some extent a creature of his environment, and at some level buys in to this nonsense.He has incidentally been very clever in hiding and distancing himself from early PAD sympathies (unlike Korn - also a decent man - whose more overt support may come back to haunt him and his PAD hardline wife).And so there is a fascinating internal struggle going on in Abhisit's mind and heart.Perhaps he is also biding his time but one thing is sure - those that propelled him to power cannot be entirely sure he will be their tool for ever.

... he certainly has lied less than any other PM in recent history

But this is very far from certain.Abhisit has consistently lied about the murder of red shirts and other civilians by the army last year.

whilst the reds have denied the existance of men in black mercenaries paid for by their boss Thaksin and accredited the deaths of police, army, civilians, non combatants, to ''fake reds'' within their ranks

must be true, the reds never lie...........

We were discussing Prime Ministers, and Abhisit has proved to be an accomplished liar.

I'm sure there are dishonesties propagated by the Red leadership but that is another subject altogether.Your accusations incidentally don't make much sense but to analyse your efforts would take us further off topic.

... he certainly has lied less than any other PM in recent history

But this is very far from certain.Abhisit has consistently lied about the murder of red shirts and other civilians by the army last year.

What an interesting turn in this thread.

No, you don't need a lawyer to make sure you send in all the documents required in the list prepared by the PR department - the list is in English language.

I don't know a single PR applicant (successfull or still waiting since 2006) who used a lawyer. More to the point, I don't know anybody who bought laptops for the immigration officers. Maybe some lawyers just want to justify their invoices to naive applicants.

The reason that virtually no applications have been approved in the past several years has nothing to do with the immigration officers or their laptops. Don't let any lawyer fool you into that line of thinking. In fact, do not use a lawyer. If he says he has to buy laptops, he is crooked anyway, which is proof that he is not to be trusted.

Get real, people. Don't fall for crooked lawyers.

Agree with most of this, but the fact remains that many have used lawyers to good effect.You can do it yourself but the busy executive will probably use a decent lawyer.It's also rather more than putting the documents together by the way.I agree that second or third tier firms should be avoided.

aww, I only get apoplectic if you claim they are recognized as lawyers on their work permit.

But I entirely concur with that.

If you go back (a long way!) in this thread, there were a few posts about people being asked for 'extra' money by their lawyers. Obviously there's no way of telling where the original request came from ...

Now that I can well believe and underlines the need to select the right legal firm.

I note MikeyIdea's comments on Immigration inducements.Since he obviously knows what he's talking about I shall have to factor that in.

The whole 'Party List' thing is crap, it totally jiggers the system.

It should be one man on vote:

Each MP candidate runs in his district and either wins or loses

based on an equal percentage of voters as EVERY other candidate gets to be voted for by.

,

The party with the most popularly elected individual MPs, gets first crack at forming a government.

If they can't do it in a reasonable period of time, say 2-3 weeks, the second biggest vote getting party gets a chance.

If no one can get a coalition of 50+% then run a new election.

The people get who they chose, and some arbitrary mechanism to favor political machines is removed from the equation.

The distinguished Thai expert and ex Cambridge historian, Chris Baker has views

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFPFYlZ4GQY&feature=player_embedded#at=105

Immigration do not ask for bribes from private individuals but they do request "help" (laptops etc) from law firms, another reason to do the paper work yourself

Not in my experience or in the experience of anyone I know.In fact I have never heard of any such irregularities in respect of PR applications when dealt with by the Department of Immigration.There is far too common an assumption that most Thai officials are corrupt:most aren't.

I have commented before on the choice of law firms.It's essential to choose the right firm.Most of the successful applicants I know simply use the international firms they were used to dealing with (headed by foreign lawyers although that undeniable fact gives some people on this forum an apoplexy).Most of this firms will have an experienced immigration specialist (obviously a Thai lawyer) who will take responsibility, although there will be minions dispatched to do the tedious aspects.

I don't deny that this is all rather expensive.One could take a risk and choose one of the firms specialising in servicing expatriates but I wouldn't recommend it.It can be done solo and I know someone who has done it.He spoke Thai very well and was very personable/charming - but he also for various reasons had a lot of time on his hands.

It's probably not worth paying a law firm to help out, since they won't be able to give you any more information than you can get by reading this thread thoroughly and visiting the PR section at Immigration, Chaengwatana, in person. You can get some professional help in obtaining notarised documents and getting notarised translations done but it will be cheaper to do this on an adhoc basis when you need it without paying an overall fee.

The first thing you need to do is get yourself a work permit and start paying as much tax as you can afford, as Mario points out. If you want to apply for citizenship instead, the same applies plus start donating to registered Thai charities and keep the receipts. At least three consecutive calendar years' of notarised tax receipts as a result of working in Thailand with a work permit will be required to apply for PR or citizenship. For the latter refer to this thread Both tracks require a lot of documentation, a reasonable knowledge of Thai and there is no certain outcome to these arcane processes that lack anything approaching transparency. Good luck.

You say it's probably not worth paying a law firm to help out, but the remainder of the post rather makes out the case for doing just that!

I know several successful PR applicants and most of them used law firms.It's really a question of how strapped one is financially and how much time one has to spare.All of the applicants I knew were prosperous and busy corporate executives.

Secondly, The F-5s and the F-16s is outdated and an upgrade is desperately needed. And Gripen's price is below half than the equivalent from the US. So they will get an agile fighter at a good price.

Even Thaksin seemed to think so...

Doesn't there need to be some rational assessment of threat when purchasing big ticket defence items?.For example the NATO armies had to rethink heavy armour requirements after the collapse of the Soviet Union meant it impossible tanks would battle it out on the plains of Germany.What is the nature of the threat to Thailand?

I can entirely see that a modern airforce is necessary to deal with any future nonsense from Laos,Cambodia or Burma.Beyond that I can't really see the threat beyond the long range possibilities I mentioned earlier.

As to the Gripen are there any like for like comparisons between the price Thailand paid and the price the Swedish airforce paid? One has to exclude sales to South Africa, Czechoslovakia etc as the record of corruption on those transactions is well documented.

this ridiculous purchase is driven other than by armed forces immunity from budgetary restraint (the armed forces budget has exploded upwards since the criminal military coup)

Do you have some insider information that differs from:

This year's budget was identified as 1.6 yesterday

which is still below the average for ASEAN

previously it was 1.5

ASEAN countries military expenditure as a percent of GDP

?.? (unreported) Myanmar

4.1 Singapore

3.9 Brunei

2.4 Vietnam

2.0 Malaysia

1.5 Thailand

1.1 Cambodia

1.0 Indonesia

0.8 Philippines

0.4 Laos

ASEAN average (not counting unreported Myanmar) = 1.9

On a world scale of military expenditure as a percent of GDP, Thailand ranks # 89.

With respect you seem to be quoting yourself.

No "insider" information is needed.Nobody seriously disputes that armed forces expenditure accelerated after the coup.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/LB26Ae01.html