jayboy

You, sir, are denigrating the court with your unfounded, unproven innuendo. You should know this is an actionable offence if you are in the Kingdom. I urge you to stop the accusations which you try to explain away as 'puplic opinion'. You should know that all 'public opinion is not printable' in the Kingdom. Several newspapers have been charged for reporting the illegal words of others. You may or may not know that PTP spokesperson Noppadon recently made some disparaging remarks about the court and now the PTP is worried about dissolution and several of their party leaders have resigned. The newspapers will not quote his offensive language as they would be just as guilty. I think you can make your case that the issue should be investigated by non-involved parties without using any illegal adjectives to describe the court. Thank you; no offence.

I think you have demonstrated very clearly a certain type of blinkered mindset, namely to bluster and threaten - anything to intimidate a free discussion.The facts in this case speak for themselves and have been taken aboard by most politically aware Thais.The Constitutional Court has been compromised in the eyes of the country.If however you have evidence exonerating its actions by all means provide it.Your ignorant nonsense about PTP leaders resigning suggests however you have nothing to offer but childish bluster.

I am confused. Is it me or is it OK for a government official to meet, discuss, seek approval of government policy and giggle with a wanted fugative, charged with corruption, treason and funding the overthrow of that government? Not to mention a convicted criminal on the run to avoid his goal sentence and further prosecution?

Yes I think you are a bit confused.Sanan isn't a government official and can meet who he likes.Secondly this isn't the first meeting by neutral parties with Thaksin, for example the respected Bangkok Mayor Sukhumbhand met him in Brunei some months ago.Thirdly Thaksin remains the most popular politician in the country (and I grant you the most unpopular) and thus has a huge domestic base which can't be ignored.Fourthly he has transformed politics in Thailand, with the present government copying many of his policies.Fourthly he has been found guilty of only one relatively trivial offence.Fifthly there's a widely held view that many of the other charges against him are politically motivated.I don't think he's been charged with treason, has he?

In terms of the overthrow of governments, much of the current difficulty can be tracked back to the criminal coup of 2006 where the perpetrators remain unpunished.They awarded themselves a post facto pardon.I suggest first on the critical path is to nail these brutes and their not so hidden amart supporters.

And Thaksin? I think he's finished - too divisive and flawed.Let him stay in exile for a few years.But he's changed the country permanently so that the majority can no longer be patronised and ignored - which explains the fury and vengeful behaviour of the greedy, corrupt elite.

Most of the comments originating from some people are of the first type --- direct attacks against the man and don't even mention the content of their posts.

Polite suggestion: instead of going on a slightly pointless cut and paste bonanza (in any case confusing ad hominem attacks with something quite different) try and concentrate on the substance of the posts concerned.

If you feel that the Constitutional Court has not been compromised and its reputation has not been ruined by all means let's hear your arguments.Somehow I doubt we will hear considered thoughts on the matter in hand, though I would be pleasantly surprised if we do.Oh and if you are gently mocking I shan't as some do retreat into a hissy fit.But I'm primarily interested in the serious issues.

... The elite prefers posturing second raters like Sumet Jumsai and SP Somtow, because they are "on message. ...

... The establishment here would not appreciate the director's red sympathies, his pleasure and pride in Isaan culture and scarcely disguised contempt for the Bangkok elite.

However of I am wrong and have missed news of say a Ministry of Culture reception (the kind that people like admiring foreigners Tilda Swinton and others are hosting) for perhaps the only recognised Thai international artist, I will need to reconsider.But as things stand this artist is too "off message" for the elite.

Thanks for that Sabaijai, and it alters my position because I can recognise personal knowledge and perception when I see it.

<snip>

And while I'm glad to hear about the Emporium sell out, it doesn't alter the fact that the response of the Ministry of Culture (okay it's known this Ministry is a joke, but still) and the elitist establishment has been pathetic - and the reasons are well known.If he is declared a National Artist like that tit Sumet Jumsai, I will think again.

Somehow I don't think Sabaijai altered your position. You might "recognise personal knowledge" but you still ignore it.

It started off as 'the elite don't like him because he was not "on message", and finished off with the same dig at the elite.

I suggest you re-read the posts.There is no inconsistency and I appreciated Sabaijai's personal knowledge.

They ridiculed ideas, not the men themselves. Big difference.

And I have READ Lincoln Douglas and Gladstone Disraeli,

back in the day. Not the Cliff Notes versions.

And own an 1866 bio of Lincoln, with the debates in it.

You are right on reflection about Lincoln-Douglas where the debates were primarily ideas oriented.You are wrong on Disraeli - Gladstone where there was much (well deserved) personal mockery.

Ridicule for divergent or tangental thinking is not part of proper debate.

And ridicule for not changing focus to someone elses points in a group forum debate, has even less place in civilized society. But that then begs the question of whether some poster thinks this is civilized discussion. Or if they imagine that ONLY their points make it civilized, and other opinions are of no consequence and therefor the posters are of no consequence by extension.

Really? You don't seem to have studied the history of debating since ridicule has an important role where deserved.Read the Lincoln - Douglas debates or the exchanges between Gladstone and Disraeli.

In this particular the point being made was indeed absurd, namely to ignore the compromised Court and focus to the exclusion of all else on the whistleblower.It's not a rational position.

Your thoughts on who I believe to be of consequence are misplaced.It is very evident who adds value and who does not.

Why do people still keep going on about Interpol and Taksin? The Thai government has had 4 years to convince Interpol that Taksin is an international fugitive who would fall within their jurisdiction to arrest. They haven't done it. In fact it appears Interpol have absolutely no interest in Taksin at all.

Before the slower among you start suggesting I love Taksin and terrorists, I should say that all convicted criminals should do their time.

In keeping with the letter of the law, people shouldn't be deposed by illegal coups either.

Ooops - that perfectly moral and legally-based insight now makes me look like I love Taksin again. Okay, here goes. Taksin is a wart on the backside of humanity whose cancerous center feeds off greed and power and control. The sooner he and his association with the Red Shirts become history, the better for this country.

So there.

It's a minor point, but surely former-PM Thaksin only became a fugitive-from-justice two years ago, when he failed to return to Thailand, after his court-sanctioned trip to the Olympics. So the government has not "had 4 years to convince Interpol that Thaksin is an international fugitive" ?

Thank you for pointing out the error. After two years, Interpol remains uninterested in Taksin.

Actually ...

Interpol is only interested when one of it's member states asks them to get interested. As for k. Thaksin it's probably hardly five months ago the Thai government started the procedure to get Thaksin found and apprehended for a mild case of terrorism.

Good point.When then is your estimate of when Interpol will deliver Thaksin bound and gagged to the Bangkok Constabulary?

And to think some people had the naivety to think that Thaksin's ability to travel to where the hel_l he wants had something to do with the universal recognition that the "terrorist" crimes he is accused of are just the result of an old fashioned banana republic political vendetta and a unjustified scepticism that the Thai judicial system was clean and free of political direction.

A question was asked about Pasit on a thread about Pasit.

I answered the question about Pasit with an informative post.

You follow that up with ridicule and mocking.

Does it ever occur to you that ridicule is sometimes deserved? I have tried to make a serious point that there is now a problem of huge dimension with the Constitutional Court, and to obsess endlessly about how that information came into the public domain (to the exclusion of the main significance) is not only objectionable but intellectually dishonest.The whole of Thailand knows this now so it is hardly controversial.

For those who are interested in a serious analysis as opposed take a look at this.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2010/11/09/the-quantum-physics-of-the-thai-constitutional-universe/#more-11520

AFAIK, he has not.

He has been fired from the position for which he was issued a government official passport.

Question -----

Is there an "unofficial passport"? or are they meaning to say that he had a Diplomatic passport and that that has been cancelled (in which case --- did he use that or an ordinary Thai passport to enter HK? If he entered on a passport that has since been revoked then his permission to stay is automatically revoked. If he didn't ...

There are "ordinary" passports (left) and "official" passports (right). * the actual sizes of both are the same *

It was reported earlier that he had entered Hong Kong with the now cancelled official passport:

Two days before the scandal broke Pasit abruptly departed for Hong Kong, using his official passport.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=412813&view=findpost&p=3995992

and

Pasit Sakdanarong, secretary to the high court president, used his official passport to take a Cathay Pacific flight departing around 5.45 pm last Wednesday.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=405243&view=findpost&p=3964746

And yes, now that the passport he used to enter Hong Kong with has been since been revoked, he's in Hong Kong without permission.

He's on borrowed time before apprehension and return to Thailand.

Well done.You have really managed to get to the heart of this matter.It's all about diplomatic passports and Pasit's borrowed time.What a great sense of context and perspective you have, ie to cut through the peripheral irrelevancies like a disgraced and compromised Court and concentrate on pursuing the whistleblower - the really important thing.

A significant question for many. Question --- if Pasit is found to have taken Thaksin's money to discredit the court through these actions ... will your opinion change? I rather doubt it and I have my own opinion as to why.

The answer to your question is that if there is evidence he should be prosecuted and punished.But you still apparently don't seem to have absorbed what was obvious from the first and is now mainstream opinion:the problem is the court itself not the whistleblower (or evil paid agent of the great Satan as seems a popular explanation among some).

And now since I have been courteous enough to answer your question perhaps you will answer mine, namely why do rather doubt my opinion could not change?I am assuming - perhaps I shouldn't - you do not think I am a paid agent of Thaksin.

Anything that prevents judges from exploring all possible angles of a case because one given angle might cause concern for some or all of the population is perverting the law. Take all the serious cases that have been handled lately --- they justices examine the evidence before them, they meet and discuss the points of law and the evidence --- they go off and think about it and then maybe meet again --- they make a finding of truth about the charges and then prepare a statement as to how and why the charges are either valid or not valid.

Give it a rest.In the last few days even the mainstream local press (Thai and English language) have concluded that there are serious issues which not only need to be independently investigated but have undermined the standing of the court.

You can rattle on about the whistleblower and strain your imagination to bring in Thaksin and his moneybags.. but it's not the main issue now or even a significant one.I agree that ultimately these matters need to be properly checked but with respect common sense and perspective disappeared from your posts on this subject some time ago.The problem is squarely the integrity of the Court itself.

When Uncle Boonmee played at Emporium nightly for a month, the cinema hall was full every night, and sold out on most weekend nights. He has plenty of Thai fans on all sides of the spectrum. In fact that film, and Apichatpong himself as an artist, has enjoyed more support from the so-called elites, than any other sector of society, it seems. Apichatpong moves in rather elite circles in Bangkok and his fan base is almost entirely found here.

I know Joei personally, and his sense of disgust for corruption and greed run across the board, from members of government right into the UDD leadeership and their principal sponsor abroad. In personal conversation he expresses support for ideals held by anyone who believes in civil rights and democratic freedoms, but in no way, that I have seen, has he identified these as exclusive of one movement or another.

Thanks for that Sabaijai, and it alters my position because I can recognise personal knowledge and perception when I see it.

On the other hand Apichatpong's many interviews with Western critics suggest his line is not really the wishy washy on the one hand...on the other, both sides are equally at fault ... cop out.It is quite evident where his sympathies lie even perhaps he doesn't broadcast them undiluted among the Bangkok elite.What his interviews demonstrate is his insistence on the complexity of the political situation, and that - given the tycoons(above all Thaksin on the Red side), businessmen and educated people involved on both sides - this is not a straightforward class war as the more left wing Reds would have us believe.Actually this is very much the line that reputable commentators like Pasuk/Baker maintain.Butb it's very clear which group he finds distasteful and which group, with certainly many caveats, he finds broadly sympathetic.

And while I'm glad to hear about the Emporium sell out, it doesn't alter the fact that the response of the Ministry of Culture (okay it's known this Ministry is a joke, but still) and the elitist establishment has been pathetic - and the reasons are well known.If he is declared a National Artist like that tit Sumet Jumsai, I will think again.

You can call Mr Thaksin "criminal" or "fugitive" or any stupid name like this... But the day he will make his come back, some politiciens here will be shaking...

They all worked together to rob Mr Thaksin and grab a big slice ... But do not doubt for a moment that Mr Thaksin has the memory of an elephant and he will make the difference between hyenas and wolves ... Of course he is not all pink Mr Thaksin ... But you see if one accepts what they did to him; then you must accept what will happen to you when a girl will lie obnoxiously to extort your money in collusion with the authorities.

Think....

Why would anyone want a criminal, murdering, cowardly liar back in their country - the powers in Thailand HAD to gewt rid of this mafia style thug to stop him directing taxpayers money into his companies holding company - read up on the sale of Shincorp if your in ANY doubt as to what this sc****g really meant to Thailand!! And for goodness sake find out some FACTS before posting offensive garbage!!

Congratulations on the excellence of your research, and the evenhandedness of your comments.However you may be interested to know that several leading institutions including some banks (eg SCB) with the highest connections in the land (geddit?) were intimately involved with the Shincorp purchase.

Probably best, in your case,not to warn others about posting garbage.Black pots and kettles old boy.

If the convicted criminal is really going to Norway, I hope some people from Interpol take notice and arrest this guy, so he can put in jail.

That's a bit hard on Sanan.He's an unappetising old crook to be sure but arrest by Interpol seems a bit harsh.

Your notions of what constitutes masculinity and femininity are not universal; in fact, American constructions of them are particularly brutal and dysfunctional (in my view). In *most* of the world, men can be far more affectionate towards each other than European-derived American men are allowed to be culturally, and emotional functionality is not viewed as 'sissy.' That was true as well of many of the North American cultures we replaced.

Picking up this point, an American friend of mine once told me that in Texas a gay person was defined as someone who liked girls more than football!

Then we have 'preferred places', where universities reserve places for children from the 'right families' or 'right schools'.

Then we have 'purchased places' where daddy buys a new wing for the library.

Can you give any examples of either? Thought not.

You're living in a chippy dreamworld where the odds are deliberately stacked against the disadvantaged.

Actually the odds are stacked but for a variety of complex social reasons.But for you it's just a simplistic conspiracy of the privileged classes and the private schools.

No, all I was saying was exactly what I said. That other stuff didn't cross my mind.

Oh, alright if you say so.

I was misled by the capital lettered "NO MARKET" and the peremptory ending.

I love art films. Thai audiences don't. There is no conspiracy in Thailand against this great director. There is simply NO MARKET for his art here.

Next ...

Indeed. I spent some days with some people from an extended family-angle and they watched the Thai soaps like it was the only way to get food, and then two kinds of Thai movies; ghost movies or comedies where there is a lot of boooing-noises.

It was like being intellectually raped since I really like good movies [and tv-shows].

So, sadly, I think this movie has virtually no market here.

I tend to agree, as made clear from my previous post.

However if I understand him correctly, Jingthing is saying something in addition, namely that the cool or non existent response by the Thai artistic establishment including the Ministry of Culture is simply a consequence of the film having very limited local commercial appeal.If that is what he is saying then I disagree.The establishment here would not appreciate the director's red sympathies, his pleasure and pride in Isaan culture and scarcely disguised contempt for the Bangkok elite.

However of I am wrong and have missed news of say a Ministry of Culture reception (the kind that people like admiring foreigners Tilda Swinton and others are hosting) for perhaps the only recognised Thai international artist, I will need to reconsider.But as things stand this artist is too "off message" for the elite.

Introducing a bounty system for reporting fraud might be a good idea.

You sound as though you would would've liked to join the Stasi.

I hate this 'grassing up' mentality. It's up to the individual government agencies to carry out proper checks. Not Sun/Mail readers like you.

And no, I am not in receipt of any government benefits.

Mind your own bloody business. If you want to do your 'Christian/Citizen's duty, (or whatever excuse you have for sticking your oar in'), go do some work for charity. Yuk.

I agree with GuestHouse.Benefits fraud is just another theft crime, ultimately paid for by taxpayers.If I saw some thug rob a post office, I would inform the police without a moment's hesitation.Why should welfare theft be any different?

I couldn't care less about your problems with "grassing up" being neither a member of the criminal classes nor in any sense obligated to the criminal scroungers

As a teacher and someone involved in UK higher education.

This is just not true .... if fact it's total &lt;deleted&gt;!

In the UK unless you pay for the very top private school your children will do no better than someone in a state school.

But, the private schools do know how to manipulate the university entrance requirements, where the state schools don't.

If you are unable to manipulate university entrance requirements in the UK yourself, then just send your children to private school for their A levels.

I do know how to work the system, In the UK I wanted my kids trained as doctors, dentists or pharmacists, they didn't go to private schools, every university they applied to offered them places (all good universities) ..... minor corruption was involved.

In Thailand, pretty much all the schools are low quality, state or private, but at least in the state schools the children will learn to read and write Thai correctly, something they won't learn in private schools. The only entrance requirement a Thai university wants is an upfront cash payment to the correct official. Good grades, you just pay the teacher a little bit extra.

If your children are stupid, it won't matter how much you spend on their education. Many stupid people make loads of money, the ability to make money does not relate to educational level or intelligence.

When it comes down to it, most parents know absolutely nothing about schools or the education system. Too lazy to find out how it works, spending money is just too easy. Spending a lot of money on your children doesn't prove you love them, spending your time with them and on them does.

As someone who was educated in the UK state school system and then at Cambridge, I disagree with your comments on private schools in the UK.However until you define what you mean by "very top private schools", it's difficult to be too specific.In other words are you talking for example about the top ten private schools or the top 300.Anyway your comment about private schools manipulating university entrance requirements is simply foolish.You may possibly be referring to the work of the Sutton Trust that demonstrated that a relatively few private schools (about 50 from memory) had a disproportionate success in Oxbridge entrance.There is also evidence that private school pupils have disproportionate representation in the other elite Russell Group universities.This tells us however not that the universities are prejudiced against state school pupils (from the newsletter of my Cambridge college I see they bend backwards to favour bright state school children) but simply that the better private school pupils are on the whole better taught.One massive misconception is that Oxbridge admissions tutors prefer middle and upper class applicants whereas in fact they are desperate to secure the brightest applicants from all classes.The sad reality is that with the best of motives politicians in the 1960's and 1970's destroyed the old grammar school sysyem which despite the inequities of the 11+ gave huge numbers of working and lower middle class children (including your truly) the opportunity of an elite education.

You are incidentally living in cloud cuckoo land if you think there is no link between the ability to make money and educational level/intelligence.The evidence just doesn't support it.(If you said there was no link between educational level and intelligence, that's a position I would agree with).

Finally you say that you were able to work the system and that your state educated children secured good university places and successful careers.That's good and I congratulate you.But really this just confirms the need for pushy ambitious parents.Just imagine if the parents of children now in the major private schools transferred over to the state system.Would they be intimidated by the appalling lefty state school teachers who have done so much damage to the prospects of poorer children.They would not and in fact would put the fear of God into the mediocre and second rate in the state system.Generally the upper and upper middle class tend to take charge and this would be wonderful for the state system.Could it happen? Well perhaps since private school fees are increasingly beyond the reach of their traditional clients..let's see.

I love art films. Thai audiences don't. There is no conspiracy in Thailand against this great director. There is simply NO MARKET for his art here.

Next ...

I didn't say there was a conspiracy.I just said that the elite has not recognised anywhere near satisfactorily the one Thai artist of internationally claimedf genius.The elite prefers posturing second raters like Sumet Jumsai and SP Somtow, because they are "on message.

But you are right about art films not reaching a mass audience.It was ever thus.

I love world cinema and have been trying to get hold of his films in Chiang Mai for months. No luck at all. Have his movies been banned in this country? I know his political views are quite anti-establishment in some ways.

Anyway, if someone could suggest where I might be able to get hold of any of his movies in Chiang Mai, I'd be very grateful.

Cheers.

I saw a few dvd s of his in a shop in Bangkok Art Center , so they must be distributed although not widely shown.

He has been virtually ignored by the Thai establishment despite his international success and the honour he has brought to Thailand.

Whether that is because he has openly expressed his support for the red movement and shown his distaste for the greed,corruption and selfishness of the Bangkok elite is a matter on which I could not possibly comment.

http://www.mysinchew.com/node/40581?tid=14

Someone has miscalculated, wonder if a firm of lawyers headed by a gent with the initials R A had any input?

Beyond parody.The bizarre part is he seems to have no sense of how ridiculous he sounds.

Hardly by the courts own actions.

By repeating yourself nothing is added I'm afraid.

Rational people query why the efforts of the Court are focused on pursuing the whistle blower, while keeping silent about the alleged misconduct.

It's as simple as that.The question of any involvement by outside parties can certainly be followed up but to all but a few obsessives that's a secondary matter.

The Bangkok Post makes all this very clear in its editorial today.

Whe big question, as I asked before, is "WHY" at this point would anyone want to discredit the court?

The trouble is that's not the big question except in the fevered imagination of the "Thaksin is the root of all evil" brigade.

The real question is of course whether the court is discredited by its own actions or not.I agree that once this question is settled, it's legitimate to enquire whether corruption was involved or not but the critical path demands an answer to the former issue first.

Yes I tend to think Tulsie is barking mad but even a broken clock shows the right time twice a day.