jayboy

I personally don't believe there was any invitation, and the whole story is a hoax by T's attorneys to try to add a bit of respect to his rightfully trashed image. However, if Thaksin were to go to the US for such a meeting, and if the panel members were to even mention Thaksin's past abuses of human rights (Tak Bai, extra-judicial murders, etc) you can bet Mr. Amsterdam will interject with a loud and quick, "Sir, my client is not the one on trial here!"

I am a working person with no criminal record, still USA refuse my tourist visa application. How can Thaksin get a visa? Thaksin has no job, plus has a criminal record.

money, honey.

Well you may be right but you're putting yourself firmly in the camp that shortly could look rather silly if the invitation is real.(Not a fault in my view:I make predictions all the time - often completely off beam!)

The FT of 2 December has some interesting background including the nugget that little Kasit didn't even raise the subject of extradition when he visited Montenegro

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4d9da1e-fd65-11df-a049-00144feab49a,dwp_uuid=672232c6-1385-11de-9e32-0000779fd2ac.html#axzz17Oq0SNJC

Thaksin is many things, but he is not an idiot. He will not go the US. This is a non-story.

Possibly.

But if he does go to the US, says his piece and departs it will be hard for his enemies to claim he is permanently on the run from one third world dump to another.It will be hard for Thailand to pretend most countries don't consider any extradition request politically motivated and it will be hard for those forum members whose main interest is castigating Thaksin that the wider world shares their views.In fact quite a few people will have egg on their faces, especially little Kasit (not so much Abhisit who is not pushing the matter so much)

If - assuming Thaksin does travel to the US - the Thais say that for some technical reason an extradition request was not served (for Thailand and the US have a valid treaty) you can be sure they have been told in advance by the State Department they are wasting their time.If Thaksin doesn't travel then not only does he seem rather cowardly but in addition I think that this will be evidence that extradition proceedings represent a clear and present danger for him - somewhere, sometime.

Just speculation on my part and we will soon know the score.I do feel that Thailand (and Abhisit) has a lot of goodwill internationally so perhaps Thaksin will be shipped back to Bangkok.I honestly don't know - nor do I suspect do most other people.

Here is an eye witness report, with photos, of protestors and the reporter coming under sustained fire from the Army, by photojournalist and forum member Nick Nostitz. Be warned: some of the photos are graphic and gruesome.

http://www.thailandvoice.com/nick-nostitz-in-the-killing-zone/

Btw, Some of the forum apologists for Army brutality have already worked out a semi-excuse for this one: The protestors and Nick retreated to a nearby petrol station (huge explosive potential and all that) AFTER they were shot at.

Do you have anything posted from a non-Red?

Very revealing indeed.Bucholz just can't conceive of someone having political sympathies in one direction and still doing his best to report truthfully.

As far as courtesy goes ---- you have labeled me with various nice labels like "visa-runner', teacher, bar stool ..." etc. I won't be taking any courtesy lessons from you

Ah well, I tried.

You are twisting his words yet again.

How?

Further, you mention that you will engage in some discussion re thaksins significance, "but not in a bad tempered ranting".

When you are ready, I am happy to do so when so "tasked".

And again you isolate some of my words so9 that my 'cut down' comment seems to give a different meaning. In other words you are dishonest!

It's simply not worth the trouble to continue any form of discussion with people who do things like this.

Don't really understand your problem but if you don't want to engage, that's your right.

Pity really because I subsequently had a thought that might help with your MBA students who were so puzzled that uneducated people might be intelligent and capable of great things.You could have reminded them that a few generations ago many of their forefathers were illiterate unwashed peasants sweltering in the paddy fields of Swatow and Southern China, far more primitive conditions than the farmers of Thailand experience.Through emigration and hard work they produced descendants like your MBA students.

Point of order ---- the rank and file of the PAD wasn't of Thai Chinese descent. The leadership was (as is much of the leadership of the UDD)

Not all but the vast majority were.

Generalizations. Great stuff. Just like the vast majority of poor and uneducated are probably unable to make the most informed decision on which way to vote, especially when the temptation of baht is put their way...?

Exactly ----

The OPINION of Jayboy is simply that. An Opinion not based in fact, but instead based upon his world view of Thailand. I do enjoy the way he throws the word "fascist" around, and "criminal" around though! I mean those words certainly couldn't be applied to Thaksin's authoritarian rule or the leaders of the UDD along with many of the followers (nor about TRT/PPP/PTP).

Funny though, how he would associate the PAD with "Sino-Thai" to the extent that he labels the vast majority of the PAD supporters that way (with no proof at all) yet fails to look at the leadership of the UDD. (granted he threw a dog a bone on that one ... but he did leave out the "sino-Thai" rhetoric he adds to the PAD (not just the leadership!) of fascist and criminal.)

He also managed to avoid addressing the rural Thai political machines that do control entire regions and avoid addressing the fact that the same type of political machine does not exist in BKK.

(It is kind of like the economist article that mentions not ALL UDD supporters are rural and not ALL UDD supporters are pro-Thaksin, but doesn't mention that the majority of the urban UDD supporters are either tied financially to Thaksin OR are first generation urban dwellers that still have to vote back home!)

I love his final point about how long you must be here to have an informed opinion His ad hominem attacks are becoming more subtle. I guess my now almost 8 years of living in Thailand (in multiple locations) and 16 years of spending time here before that, and studying the language enough to read the newspapers and watch the TV, and my constant interaction with Thais at every level of society don't account for much.

How do you know a perceptive foreigner? He's one that doesn't make blanket statements like "that is invariably a sign he is..."

Probably a courtesy to address me with these points.

I agree "criminal" is a label that could be attached to Thaksin."Fascist" probably not:the characteristics match the PAD leadership more closely.

I don't regard "Sino_Thai" as an insult.Surely I have made that clear.

Most PAD followers were Sino-Thai.You don't believe me.I suggested you ask around.

How is the rural political machine set up relevant? Interesting but for a separate discussion surely.

Don't attach too much importance to my "20 year suggestion".The key thing is to talk to knowledgeable people.

Anybody can pretend what they want to be on a forum like this.Actually I believe you but it doesn't really adds weight to your stated opinions.It's very easy over a period of posts to see exactly the level of education, knowledge and social background.Your commitment and interest are commendable.I just wish you would give and take a bit more.We might even have a reasonable discussion.

Thanks Jayboy - those lowly educated frequenters of the Bangkok taverns with an opinion of the political situation you often slate in when attacking other posters will be very pleased to read this.

You think it's a clever point but really it isn't.The farang element so strangely often supporters of repression in Thailand ( while often complaining about posh Tories at home) had in UK's wonderful welfare state every chance to educate themselves well.The poor of Thailand generally don't have that chance, and that's a key distinction.

Strange, I consider myself very much against repression, and I believe my political views represent that adequately. But you're free to disagree...

From your posts, even while often disagreeing, I fully accept your decency and democratic principles.

The irony I was pointing out, perhaps too oddly parochially British, is the oddity of many UK expatriates not obviously ex members of the Bullingdon Club who swoon like schoolgirls over the posh Thai establishment yet at home would be profoundly sceptical of "posh <deleted>" like Cameron and Osborne.

Further, you mention that you will engage in some discussion re thaksins significance, "but not in a bad tempered ranting".

When you are ready, I am happy to do so when so "tasked".

Point of order ---- the rank and file of the PAD wasn't of Thai Chinese descent. The leadership was (as is much of the leadership of the UDD)

Not all but the vast majority were.

Again --- pure speculation on your part colored by your world view of Thailand. Certainly NOT my experience having been to several rallies. The rank and file were urban Thai with some mix of rural Thai. Not Thai Chinese. You make the claim that the PAD was "Sino Thai" in the "vast majority" of cases. Document it or it is just your colored opinion. If you are talking about leaders .. then I think we can agree that the leaders of both the PAD and UDD were mostly Thai Chinese.

I may as well ask you to document your version.I won't however because it would be crass to do so.

The Bangkok urban class is largely a Sino-Thai one.If the PAD rallies simply reflected demographics it would imply a mainly Sino-Thai membership.Take into account the "sons of China" banners and accompanying racist rhetoric against ordinary Thais at those rallies, the appropriate assumptions can be drawn.Needless to say I wouldn't suggest for a moment that ordinary PAD members were of that view.Indeed I have always recognised the original impulse behind PAD was a noble one, even if it later became tarnished by its criminal leadership and their quasi fascist ideology.

I recognise you have no faith in my conclusions and therefore further debate is not productive.I can only suggest you talk to perceptive foreign residents of long standing, say over 20 years.They will perhaps tell you that when a Thai says "I am a Thai, one hundred percent", that is invariably a sign he is Sino-Thai.

I would point out that to continuously rant against the "Sino-Thai" is neither civilized nor "good tempered"

You are looking for racism where none exists.The expression Sino-Thai simply refers to Thais of Chinese origin and includes my wife and most of our friends.It remains a reality that the great majority of the PAD/yellow movement came from this grouping.Do you wish to simply bury this fact?

The "great majority"? Please show us all documentation that suggest that the rank and file followers of the PAD from 2005-2008 were "Sino-Thai". The people that started gathering at Lumpini Park certainly were not. The majority of the people I met that attended the rallies certainly were not. It does appear that the majority of the leadership is. It also appears that the Reds are led by Thai Chinese as well

Please don't edit out the content of my posts.

Firstly on the editing of posts, I do when replying edit out parts to which I'm not responding.Indeed I believe forum admin encourages this to avoid endless repetition.If you think I have edited in any way to change your meaning or intent, please let me know.If I have inadvertently done this I apologise and let me know the details.

Now on the ethnic composition of PAD, I think you are completely wrong.I think the entire leadership and most of the rank and file were of Chinese background.I don't know how you know the people you met at the rallies were of one ethnicity or the other in a melting pot like Bangkok.If you don't mind me saying your call for documentation isn't really relevant.Most commentators would say more than half the Bangkok population is of mixed Thai and Chinese ancestry.There are of course Thai "ter" PAD supporters, mostly of the "karatchakarn" class.

Point of order ---- the rank and file of the PAD wasn't of Thai Chinese descent. The leadership was (as is much of the leadership of the UDD)

Not all but the vast majority were.

I would point out that to continuously rant against the "Sino-Thai" is neither civilized nor "good tempered"

You are looking for racism where none exists.The expression Sino-Thai simply refers to Thais of Chinese origin and includes my wife and most of our friends.It remains a reality that the great majority of the PAD/yellow movement came from this grouping.Do you wish to simply bury this fact?

Are you saying all Sino-Thai's are PAD, just because the PAD is mainly made up of Sino-Thai. That's a bit like saying all red shirts are poor, uneducated, Thaksin loving farmers.

No I'm not saying that of course.I had hoped it wouldn't be necessary to clarify that.Let me just say that Thailand is wonderfully assimilated (in a large part to government policy and important cultural similarities) and most Sino-Thais don't even think of themselves in those terms.The odd thing is that some key figures on the Red side are also Thais of Chinese background (and I don't mean just Thaksin!)

I would point out that to continuously rant against the "Sino-Thai" is neither civilized nor "good tempered"

Very generous of you to acknowledge lack of education doesn't indicate lack of intelligence.If you had any knowledge of working class movements in the nineteenth century you would also know it doesn't imply lack of political sophistication.Indeed it is the demonstration of that sophistication in recent years that has so badly frightened the entrenched elite.The biggest misconception I believe is that the urban middle class is any less focused on their own selfish interests than the rural majority.

You are looking for racism where none exists.The expression Sino-Thai simply refers to Thais of Chinese origin and includes my wife and most of our friends.It remains a reality that the great majority of the PAD/yellow movement came from this grouping.Do you wish to simply bury this fact? Or just wanting to get into another bad tempered exchange.

Thanks Jayboy - those lowly educated frequenters of the Bangkok taverns with an opinion of the political situation you often slate in when attacking other posters will be very pleased to read this.

You think it's a clever point but really it isn't.The farang element so strangely often supporters of repression in Thailand ( while often complaining about posh Tories at home) had in UK's wonderful welfare state every chance to educate themselves well.The poor of Thailand generally don't have that chance, and that's a key distinction.

You isolate my words "uneducated ill informed masses" and put in front of them "the usual foul ranting", so that it sounds like I am putting them down.

That most definitely wasn't my intent and if you read my words as written it doesn't sound that way.

Perhaps you'd like to share what you mean by 'his significance".

The words you use to describe the rural majority indicate your view point very clearly.They are the same words used by the quasi fascist Pad and I must admit many of the urban Sino-Thai middle class.I could go on at length but the main point to emphasize is that poor education does not mean lack of intelligence or political sophistication.

I already sketched out Thaksin's significance in my earlier post.I would be happy to elaborate but not in a bad tempered ranting exchange.If you want a civilised discussion I'm happy to do so.

I may be in the minority here, but I think Thailand is remarkably generous with foreigners -- who can basically come and stay for life with relatively little problems. A visa run every few months, and that's it.

I'm also living proof that an ordinary guy can get PR, then citizenship, if you really want it.

People talk about Thai people becoming naturalized in the US, EU, etc., as if it is easy. It's not easy -- it still takes years and years.

And of course, the hurdles a normal Thai faces trying to visit those places as a simple tourist are light years away from how just about any nationality can stroll into Thailand with nothing but a tourist visa and a knapsack, and stay pretty much forever.

I agree entirely.

I have also felt for a long time that the implications of this generous policy weren't fully thought through at the time, and only recently have we seen signs of official unease.In other words the presence in Thailand of a very large expatriate population on short term visas wasn't necessarily a policy objective.I think the type of expatriate the Thais expected was very much the type that under current rules would be eligible to apply for PR, not necessarily a high flyer but a very solid professional and well educated person.Without going into details let us admit that the bulk of the expatriate population is very far from this template.I think therefore that the future trend will be for the Thai authorities to be much stricter in terms of permitting expatriates to remain here permanently on short term visas.If one stops to think about it the whole visa run process is an anachronism, though in some ways a delightfully Thai style arrangement that serves a real purpose.Nevertheless one does feel that many exploit this generous system.The stricter enforcement I anticipate is also because Thailand has become a great deal more prosperous and the advantages of having a large not particularly well off expatriate population may seem hard for the Thais to grasp these days.( Do well positioned Thais really these days feel comfortable with a place like Pattaya dominated by the very worst kind of expatriate and long term "tourist"?)The one category that might still make sense is the retirement market but I would imagine at the planning level the Thais might well want to commission a rigorous study to discover whether this is a real asset to the country or not.

- Yes, foreign governments know very well that he has strong internal support and they also know why! Vote buying and intimidation would be just two points they are well aware of.

There's nothing in this post that's unusual.I isolate just one sentence to demonstrate how obsession leads some to part company with reality, the absurd proposition that Thaksin became the country's most successful politician for 50 years through intimidation and vote buying.There is the usual foul ranting about the "uneducated ill informed masses".My post however, as I would have thought was obvious, was not a defence of Thaksin but a quick sketch of his significance.Over the heads of some it seems.

jayboy respond to any one of the points I mentioned. I can fully understand your reluctance to do so. If the situation was reversed I to wuld be reluctant to reply. Maybe I made a mistake in asking for a balanced answer.

No.You can't wriggle out of the situation so easily.Just let me know which points (connected to my post, not unrelated stuff like video evidence or Thaksin's position) to which you would like a response.I am happy to do so but you need to be a lot clearer.I note however that in another thread you bizarrely call me a "Tsarist malcontent" so perhaps I don't need to bother with you.

The man is not in the country hasen't been for a couple of years and in all likly hood will not be back.

Why so much attention given to him?

Do you people spend your whole life beating up on dead horses.

I expect the Tsarists said much the same about Lenin when he was in exile.

Wrong they did not have the internet.

The only Tsarists here are people such as your self. A very small minority if that much at all. Mainly malcontents.

Don't really understand what you're on about I'm afraid.Just letting off steam perhaps.

I think we know who the Tsarists are.

The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were also labelled "malcontents".

That regime's elite didn't understand the need to reform , nor that the lack of it would spell its annihilation.Interestingly that regime had contempt for the huge "uneducated" rural majority.

Let's hope some people have learnt the lessons of history.Remember that despite the injustices of the current regime, what replaces it could be much worse.The critical factor will be the enlightened self interest of the elite.The Russian elite had no such spirit of compromise and was scattered to the winds.Whether the Thai elite has a more intelligent set of instincts is a matter on which I could not possibly comment.

So you are a journalist or some other actor with intimate knowledge of the events, are you? Because saying "the army generally acted very professionally" sounds an awful lot like a "blanket statement", which could quite conceivably be motivated by your " own political convictions".

You obviously are unaware of my posting record and the political affiliation it reveals.

My conclusions were based on many accounts from diverse sources.I found ANU's Professor Desmond Ball's analysis particularly useful though his close relationship with the senior officer corps needs to be factored in.

I would like to commend you on your one post honoring and blaming both sides.

There is three sides to all stories the Pro and Con along with the truth. The third option can be very elusive.

That being said you now mention factoring in outside accounts.

How about factoring in a group of armed peaceful protesters illegally seizing control of a large commercial area in Bangkok thereby depriving many honest citizens of a lively hood and refused to move or accept any thing other than there demands. Almost forgot to mention these armed peaceful protesters built defensive barricades.

While we are here perhaps some one can explain to me how a person can be presumed innocent when they knowingly as well as physically support illegal activities?

A balanced explanation would be appreciated. Please don't even try to say they didn't there is enough video evidence to show they did it. Not to mention they were paid. Until there master saw his coup wouldn't work. He then left them to there own devices. It is only now through the government that they are able to get bail.

What point are you asking me to respond to ? Some of the matters you raise seem unconnected with my post which was mainly commenting on the professionalism of the military's efforts to clear the centre.

The man is not in the country hasen't been for a couple of years and in all likly hood will not be back.

Why so much attention given to him?

Do you people spend your whole life beating up on dead horses.

I expect the Tsarists said much the same about Lenin when he was in exile.

What's up with you guys that obsess over every move Thaksin makes? Do you subscribe to twitter accounts that tweet when he goes to the toilet?

In a world that has madmen threatening to launch missiles in North Korea, wiki leaks,people getting beaten up by jetski touts, floods and wildfires, can we not go a day without Thaksin? He's not here. He's not coming back and he's probably not on most Thai people's minds. No one cares about him now. There are bigger problems that have nothing to do with him. I am going another year without a <deleted> bonus because of "market conditions". My friend called me today to say his mum requires more medical care and on his salary he's going to be eating lizard tails and crab shells. I don't care about Mr. Thaksin. He can't make my bank pay me more than 2% interest can he?

Although there are more important things, there are a few PTP politicians that care about him, and visit him and talk to him regularly. These politicians care about him so much that they have promised to white wash his crimes and bring him back to Thailand.

I wonder what all our comments will appear like in say five years time.

I think that Thaksin is probably too divisive a figure to participate in the country's future.At the same time he commands the affection and loyalty of millions and millions of Thais.To ignore that reality isn't helpful.

It's also silly and dishonest to suggest his life (though I think for most of us a very unenviable one) is confined to paniced flitting between third world hell holes.He clearly has the ability to visit almost anywhere he wants with high level access to boot (most recently with Putin).

Thailand is in error if it thinks foreign governments can't work out for themselves he has huge support internally and that the demand for extradition is primarily political in motivation.They also are well aware the feudal and military elites particularly resent his strong relationship with the rural majority.He will never be extradited.From the Western perspective he is in theory vulnerable perhaps to extradition for the drug war killings - but we know this will never happen (and why it won't).As for countries like China, Russia etc they probably couldn't care less, indeed would respect a "strong leader".

Much will depend on how political parties associated with him perform in next year's elections.On past record there will be efforts to frustrate the outcome whether by judicial direction or other means.We shall see.

My guess is that he will eventually return and lead a quiet life, in five or six years...?

His significance however is already clear.He was the most influential Thai politician since WW2.He changed the rules of the game.The Thai majority can no longer be patronised or ignored.The elite , at least the intelligent part of it, understands realignment and compromise is needed.

So you are a journalist or some other actor with intimate knowledge of the events, are you? Because saying "the army generally acted very professionally" sounds an awful lot like a "blanket statement", which could quite conceivably be motivated by your " own political convictions".

You obviously are unaware of my posting record and the political affiliation it reveals.

My conclusions were based on many accounts from diverse sources.I found ANU's Professor Desmond Ball's analysis particularly useful though his close relationship with the senior officer corps needs to be factored in.

Some, no doubt, make counter-punch comments, and attempts to derail conversations,

precisely because of their political leanings. Yes, certainly "Some on this forum should think..."

Please hold your own mirror, it might be enlightening.

Actually I do try quite hard not to let my politics interfere with the facts.It would have been easy to suggest that the army acted incompetently as some Reds do.I never have.

I'm also grateful when someone politely tells me where I was wrong.I admitted openly recently I had been in error (foolishly because I knew though overlooked) saying there had been no court verdicts on technical grounds favouring the Democrats' opponents.

Some people are never wrong or admit error.I don't include you in that category by the way.