Thaksin, Yingluck enjoying their tour of the US

[4MyEgo]

10 minutes ago, GBW said:

why?

You need to go back a long ways and read and study and then make a judgement call, i.e. not believe everything you are fed through the media.

 

I will tell you this much in case you don't know, Thailand is run by the military and has been since Yinluck stood down, not wanting a repeat of the bloodshed when her brother was ousted, perhaps you didn't see it all on live TV, the world covered it all when the Military and Police force openly killed scores of protesters.

 

Thailand is not a democratic country, at least with the Shinawatra's the average Thai could speak freely, open your mouth today and watch what happens, like I said, its military rule, is that democracy ?

[ostyan]

Of course, they are happy. Could steal enough for two lives without the minimal chance to be caught.

[BobBKK]

1 hour ago, shy coconut said:

You may be surprised to know that most of the "whole world" don't give a fig about the

political situation in Thailand.

 

You know very well that the reason they do not honour the warrants is they know it's political. 

[BobBKK]

27 minutes ago, GBW said:

why?

You need to ask 'why'?  the boys with the guns took over?  they then set up Yingluck with nonsense charges so she would leave?  you do get that right?

[Eric Loh]

8 minutes ago, ostyan said:

Of course, they are happy. Could steal enough for two lives without the minimal chance to be caught.

I don’t think they are happy living away and have their lives taken apart from their families. But I can tell you that the generals are happy without a chance in hell that they will be indicted and convicted for stealing and a bag load of corrupt practices. What a travesty.

[amdy2206]

Thailand may consider them criminals, but obviously the rest of the world doesn't. Best wishes to them. They were far better than the current Junta. Freedom of speech etc. Never with Mr 44.

[Jonathan Swift]

6 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

And what type of Visa, Passport are they traveling into the USA on?  Can't be diplomatic since that was all recalled revoked wasn't it? 

The "filthy rich foreign businessman/fugitive with lots of money to spend" visa, comes with a position in the Trump white house. Actually, there is a "special person" type of visa for people of exceptional skills and background, that's probably what they got. 

[starky]

5 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The billions are easily explained. He was a former ex cop who failed in several businesses until he used his political connections to wangle a nice Telco monopoly. Then he screwed the Thai public and forced them to buy their phones from his company or they couldn't use his service and there was no choice!

 

Yeah for free enterprise, fairness and competition! 

Yet still they love him. Not my place to judge who the Thais would prefer to have as there elected leaders is it yours?

[ostyan]

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

I don’t think they are happy living away and have their lives taken apart from their families. But I can tell you that the generals are happy without a chance in hell that they will be indicted and convicted for stealing and a bag load of corrupt practices. What a travesty.

This is a  country of no consequences. 

Edited June 11, 2018 by ostyan

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

Umm, I think most people (expats too) are aware of the political history of the Shins without consulting Wikipedia, but most of us don't develop a morbid fascination with the subject. 

 

Morbid fascination - like posting "Man Child" on copious posts referring to the current PM you mean?

 

If your thoughts were correct, then why do many posters seek to pretend the Shins are innocent? Or deflect and dismiss their crimes by saying everything against them is "politically motivated"? The current get out of jail card popular with crooked politicians and billionaires.

 

I will challenge any poster who claims such.

 

What would be fair would be to point out the high selectivity that pervades the justice system here. That some cases get progressed, whilst others are swept conveniently under carpets to wither away. That who you are, which family, what wealth, who connected too and if your mates are currently the ones in power, affects how you are treated within the justice system. That is not conducive to reducing corruption and helping safeguard real democracy and accountability. And there are plenty of examples to support that.

 

But that doesn't mean those progressed and convicted are innocent. It does mean it's wrong in that only those on one side are dealt with.

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, sandrew33 said:

The level of misguided BS in your post is epic. And you know that... Or you aren't that bright. 

 

Thaksin was rich well before politics and the value of his holdings arguably went down over the term of his leadership. Feel free to check the various evidence based reports I and others have linked in here previously. 

 

Is he a great bloke? Not really. Did he feather his nest in the manner of ever Thai leader ever? No doubt. Was he worse than, say, the current mob? No. And he was elected, the only Thai PM re elected by popular majority. Under the least restrictive Constitution and with a result not impacted by vote buying (I didn't say that no cash was splashed, I just said it didn't impact the result - a fact acknowledged by the UN, By Election experts globally and by the Dems before the last election in Thailand). All these are Facts that have been linked in here before. They are all searchable. 

 

The reality is that there are two primary competing forces in Thailand and neither are particularly savory but to argue that Thaksin is demonstrably worse is to simply play the game of the establishment elites. He has however had the support of the majority, by any measure, for 2 decades now. Which in a democracy should matter. 

 

 

 

You seem to have comprehension issues. Or perhaps see what you wish to see rather than what's written.

 

I never wrote that he wasn't rich before becoming PM. In fact I remember the much taunted "he's so rich he doesn't need to be corrupt" line. Got that wrong didn't they!

 

I wrote that the billions he made from Telco was because he used his political contacts to get a monopoly which meant he could then screw anyone who wanted a mobile phone and service connection. And boy did he!

That is easily researched even for you.

 

Again I didn't say he was worse. I said as bad as. You, me and anyone else will never know whose thieved the most. But had he wangled his amnesty, and had PTP remained in power with their hands on that 2.2 trillion baht loan, out of parliamentary and any scrutiny, then he might well have been the biggest. 

 

Thaksin and his puppets have won elections, and then betrayed the electorate by lying, cheating and breaking laws. In any sane country they'd be in prison, and declared not fit for office. But then so would many of their opponents too.

 

 

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, loll said:

And what evidence do u have that they are both corrupt??.Thaskin made his billions in the US long before he became PM.May be u believe what little P and the Junta say???

 

No he didn't make his billions in the US. And trying to bribe judges during the trial for abuse of power might suggest corruption to most people. Or perhaps allowing your criminal brother to run the country and appoint and reshuffle the cabinet might be another.

 

Try doing some actual research. Plenty to go at.

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, peperobi said:

I don't know what do you think about those two persons...I love them!

 

Do you love Bonnie and Clyde too?

[KiwiKiwi]

31 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Morbid fascination - like posting "Man Child" on copious posts referring to the current PM you mean?

 

If your thoughts were correct, then why do many posters seek to pretend the Shins are innocent? Or deflect and dismiss their crimes by saying everything against them is "politically motivated"? The current get out of jail card popular with crooked politicians and billionaires.

 

I will challenge any poster who claims such.

 

What would be fair would be to point out the high selectivity that pervades the justice system here. That some cases get progressed, whilst others are swept conveniently under carpets to wither away. That who you are, which family, what wealth, who connected too and if your mates are currently the ones in power, affects how you are treated within the justice system. That is not conducive to reducing corruption and helping safeguard real democracy and accountability. And there are plenty of examples to support that.

 

But that doesn't mean those progressed and convicted are innocent. It does mean it's wrong in that only those on one side are dealt with.

 

Personally, I think Thaksin was dishonest, and a thief,  but his conviction for assisting his wife by the parcel of land in Rachatewi, was considered widely to have been one example of what I allege was a corrupt Thai judiciary at work. Doubtless Thaksin was guilty of many and varied dishonesties,  that the alleged one for which he was convicted seemed dubious at the time, and still seems dubious.

 

Yingluck's case Is more clear, the 'crime'  of which he was convicted was clearly wrong and a further example of what I allege was the corrupt Thai judiciary at work. While it is true that you have moderated your position somewhat in respect of the Shinawatras,  you cannot credibly deny that you were one of their most  biased critics back in the day. To that extent, any improvement of the signal to noise ratio is welcome.

Edited June 11, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, BobBKK said:

Thailand's greatest premier and Thailand first female premier deserve their break from the cesspit that is politics in Thailand. Neither were perfect and one was very greedy but no more than the others. I don't know a Thai who does not look back fondly to those days, happier times, times when they were better off than living under the Army rule.

 

The whole world knows the truth and they can travel freely and will always remind us of the injustice and hypocrisy that thrives in the Land of Guiles. They were no angels, just part of the rotten 'system' that carries on until this day. I wish them well and hope Thailand gets truth and honesty from the upcoming youth that is pressing against the Junta dinosaurs door.

 

They reinforce the role model that the very very corrupt can escape real punishment and become fabulously wealthy which is was keeps corruption an 'acceptable" of life here.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, GarryP said:

Really? She personally misappropriated the funds or other members of the government took advantage of the rice pledging scam scheme? Seems she is being held accountable for bad policy and a failure to oversee the same properly. But why should she be held accountable for the thieving of others? If she was to be banged up in prison for her failure to follow the advice of others and take action, then just about every prime minister before her would need locking up.  The case was clearly political. Hence, she needn't worry about getting visas.  

 

My personal opinion is that she should have never been prime minister from the beginning but she was doing her brother's bidding. She was way out of her depth and verging on incompetent.  But incompetence in government seems to be quite common here. Look at Tweedledee and Tweedledumber, who we have at present .     

I disagree with you Garry, she is responsible, she was told about fake G2G deals and said she would investigate it. She investigated said no fake deals. We now know better (fake deals were proven in court). So either she is super incompetent or this was done on purpose. The fake G2G deal companies have been linked to Thaksin in the past. 

 

Anyway she was just a puppet of her brother, and your right about incompetence being the norm. The current government is not that good either. Though I must say more corruption cases than ever have been brought up and are under investigation. The only thing is to wait and see if anything comes from it.. if it does its one of few things this government did right.. if not.. waste of time.

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

Personally, I think Thaksin was dishonest, and a thief,  but his conviction for assisting his wife by the parcel of land in Rachatewi, was considered widely to have been one example of what I allege was a corrupt Thai judiciary at work. Doubtless Thaksin was guilty of many and varied dishonesties,  that the alleged one for which he was convicted seemed dubious at the time, and still seems dubious.

 

Yingluck's case Is more clear, the 'crime'  of which he was convicted was clearly wrong and a further example of what I allege was the corrupt Thai judiciary at work. While it is true that you have moderated your position somewhat in respect of the Shinawatras,  you cannot credibly deny that you were one of their most  biased critics back in the day.

Thaksin escaped before his more serious cases came before court. They have been stalled ever since, but thankfully now they changed the law and are proceeding with those cases without Thaksin. Before he could state he was only convicted of the land deal and your right its a minor case... but the other cases are not they show how corrupt the guy was. 

 

As for YL .. everyone told her about the fake G2G deals.. pointed it out.. she said no there is no corruption Ill investigate.. came back.. no corruption. Later its been proven that the deals were fake so that is dereliction of duty.. tough it could be on purpose as the rice dealers involved have links with Thaksin.. So I don't see it as a wrong verdict.. the only problem I have with it that they don't do the same for other incompetent maybe criminally incompetent people. 

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

Personally, I think Thaksin was dishonest, and a thief,  but his conviction for assisting his wife by the parcel of land in Rachatewi, was considered widely to have been one example of what I allege was a corrupt Thai judiciary at work. Doubtless Thaksin was guilty of many and varied dishonesties,  that the alleged one for which he was convicted seemed dubious at the time, and still seems dubious.

 

Yingluck's case Is more clear, the 'crime'  of which he was convicted was clearly wrong and a further example of what I allege was the corrupt Thai judiciary at work. While it is true that you have moderated your position somewhat in respect of the Shinawatras,  you cannot credibly deny that you were one of their most  biased critics back in the day.

 

Ok. So Thaksin freely admitted he signed the document, knowing he shouldn't have done so as it was against the law. He then tried to bribe the judges and then legged it. No appeals or attempt to fight it. Why do you consider that conviction dubious? Even he admitted it and first tried to make it go away by giving the money back and then by bribing the judges.

Did it warrant a 2 year prison sentence is a more fair question.

 

As for Yingluck. She appointed herself to Chair the Rice Scheme, repeatedly said she and only she was in charge, repeatedly said there was no corruption in the scheme, never actually bothered to attend any meetings or seemingly ensure proper accounting and management of the scheme and never actually defended the charges of negligence. Do you think she wasn't negligent? Was a 5 year prison sentence appropriate is a fair question. But she never stuck around to appeal.

 

I will certainly agree to being a critic, and a critic of all corruption. But biased - nope. 

[robblok]

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Ok. So Thaksin freely admitted he signed the document, knowing he shouldn't have done so as it was against the law. He then tried to bribe the judges and then legged it. No appeals or attempt to fight it. Why do you consider that conviction dubious? Even he admitted it and first tried to make it go away by giving the money back and then by bribing the judges.

Did it warrant a 2 year prison sentence is a more fair question.

 

As for Yingluck. She appointed herself to Chair the Rice Scheme, repeatedly said she and only she was in charge, repeatedly said there was no corruption in the scheme, never actually bothered to attend any meetings or seemingly ensure proper accounting and management of the scheme and never actually defended the charges of negligence. Do you think she wasn't negligent? Was a 5 year prison sentence appropriate is a fair question. But she never stuck around to appeal.

 

I will certainly agree to being a critic, and a critic of all corruption. But biased - nope. 

I wonder if anyone believes that the bribing was unintentional.... i mean we always mix up cake boxes with those where we store money. So corrupt.. for sure and bribing judges.. i mean that is quite an offense in any country.  Bribing judges should warrant some jail-time. 

[KiwiKiwi]

8 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Ok. So Thaksin freely admitted he signed the document, knowing he shouldn't have done so as it was against the law. He then tried to bribe the judges and then legged it. No appeals or attempt to fight it. Why do you consider that conviction dubious? Even he admitted it and first tried to make it go away by giving the money back and then by bribing the judges.

Did it warrant a 2 year prison sentence is a more fair question.

 

As for Yingluck. She appointed herself to Chair the Rice Scheme, repeatedly said she and only she was in charge, repeatedly said there was no corruption in the scheme, never actually bothered to attend any meetings or seemingly ensure proper accounting and management of the scheme and never actually defended the charges of negligence. Do you think she wasn't negligent? Was a 5 year prison sentence appropriate is a fair question. But she never stuck around to appeal.

 

I will certainly agree to being a critic, and a critic of all corruption. But biased - nope. 

 

I disagree and there we will have to leave it, you were horribly biased, though that has changed a little, in line, no doubt with the dawning awareness that Prayuth is the tosser he ie, which can now hardly be denied.

 

But hey, you say tomato, I say tomato, and I doubt the twain will ever meet. All I will say is that my perception was not magic'd up out of thin air. What we think always has a reason, even if it isn't the one we like to pretend it is.

Edited June 11, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[KiwiKiwi]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

I wonder if anyone believes that the bribing was unintentional.... i mean we always mix up cake boxes with those where we store money. So corrupt.. for sure and bribing judges.. i mean that is quite an offense in any country.  Bribing judges should warrant some jail-time. 

 

Interesting to note wryly that Thaksin would not have attempted to bribe the judges had he not thought it would work. And if he thought it would work as it had doubtless worked in the past, how impressed can we reasonable be at their feigned moral outrage on this occasion?

 

Anyone with a brain understands that corruption is ubiquitous in Thailand. It's everywhere.

 

Thinking before speaking is such a good idea.

 

[robblok]

1 minute ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

Interesting to note wryly that Thaksin would not have attempted to bribe the judges had he not thought it would work. And if he thought it would work as it had doubtless worked in the past, how impressed can we reasonable be at their feigned moral outrage on this occasion?

 

Anyone with a brain understands that corruption is ubiquitous in Thailand. It's everywhere.

 

Thinking before speaking is such a good idea.

 

So what your saying is that Thaksin has bribed judges more often and got off because of it... ahh good work in clearing his name.

 

But your statement does bring to light an interesting idea of corrupt judges... I am sure it happens too bad it can't be proven and they can't be punished. 

[Baerboxer]

Just now, KiwiKiwi said:

 

I disagree and there we will have to leave iot, you were horribly biased, though that has changed a little, in line, no doubt with the dawning awareness that Prayuth is the tosser he ie, which can now hardly be denied.

 

But hey, you say tomato, I say tomato, and I doubt the twain will ever meet. All I will say is that my perception was not magic'd up out of thin air. What we think always has a reason, even if it isn't the one we like to pretend it is.

 

I respect your views and appreciate you may not want to discuss the details of the cases that the Shin siblings were convicted on; or the very serious other cases which may have been the real motivation for Thakson fleeing.

 

I was critical of the PTP regime during they're tenure as were others. But they weren't example of model of honest competent government. But there again seems not many anywhere are nowadays.

[robblok]

8 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

I disagree and there we will have to leave iot, you were horribly biased, though that has changed a little, in line, no doubt with the dawning awareness that Prayuth is the tosser he ie, which can now hardly be denied.

 

But hey, you say tomato, I say tomato, and I doubt the twain will ever meet. All I will say is that my perception was not magic'd up out of thin air. What we think always has a reason, even if it isn't the one we like to pretend it is.

Not liking Prayut ( I don't like him) does not mean I have to like Thaksin. I can dislike both. 

 

I will say the same about my perception I just see things different thing is Thaksin was a crook. a huge one. Prayut.. .maybe too but so far no proof has come out.  I don't think I am biased but you think I am.. i might think the same about you. 

Edited June 11, 2018 by robblok

[KiwiKiwi]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

So what your saying is that Thaksin has bribed judges more often and got off because of it... ahh good work in clearing his name.

 

But your statement does bring to light an interesting idea of corrupt judges... I am sure it happens too bad it can't be proven and they can't be punished. 

 

And the point of your comment is...?

 

You know , for someone who has played the old mates game on this very forum, you're pretty clear that someone else should not have done it in a different forum.

 

Over and out my friend, I don't have the time or the energy for listening to pretending, much less for taking it seriously. You might have a word with your mate.

[KiwiKiwi]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

Not liking Prayut ( I don't like him) does not mean I have to like Thaksin. I can dislike both. 

 

I will say the same about my perception I just see things different thing is Thaksin was a crook. a huge one. Prayut.. .maybe too but so far no proof has come out.  I don't think I am biased but you think I am.. i might think the same about you. 

 

OK. Whatever...

[KiwiKiwi]

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I respect your views and appreciate you may not want to discuss the details of the cases that the Shin siblings were convicted on; or the very serious other cases which may have been the real motivation for Thakson fleeing.

 

I was critical of the PTP regime during they're tenure as were others. But they weren't example of model of honest competent government. But there again seems not many anywhere are nowadays.

 

OK, whatever.

[robblok]

Just now, KiwiKiwi said:

 

And the point of your comment is...?

 

You know , for someone who has played the old mates game on this very forum, you're pretty clear that someone else should not have done it in a different forum.

 

Over and out my friend, I don't have the time or the energy for listening to pretending, much less for taking it seriously. You might have a word with your mate.

The point of the comment is that you even gave more evidence of how corrupt Thaksin is. I mean you said it yourself he probably has done it in the past why else try it. That only shows how bad the guy is so why even pretend he is not a utterly corrupt criminal.

 

I have absolutely no idea what your second paragraph is about but lets leave it at that. 

[KiwiKiwi]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

The point of the comment is that you even gave more evidence of how corrupt Thaksin is. I mean you said it yourself he probably has done it in the past why else try it. That only shows how bad the guy is so why even pretend he is not a utterly corrupt criminal.

 

I have absolutely no idea what your second paragraph is about but lets leave it at that. 

 

.

Right. Whatever

[Eric Loh]

Some good arguments presented by all sides. Fact of the matter is that no countries acted on Thailand’s requests for extradition tell a lot what the global community think about those charges. Charges and convictions locally can be just be about politics and who got more power over the investigating agencies and the courts. Retro-active laws make the convictions weak.