ratcatcher Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 (edited) unfortunately the CNS Boss is on record as saying otherwise ...................................... And he is the big boss, top brass, top dog, organ grinder, big knob, gaffer, head honcho, grande fromage, poochakhan yai... So, if I were Mr T, I would listen to him... This is the Boss.(Organ Grinder)............ This is the.......Prime Minister (------) . "You aren't safe here." "You are safe here".... Edited June 19, 2007 by ratcatcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plus Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 The unfortunate reality is that there are splits in the NLA, splits in the govevrnemtn, splits in the judiciary, splits between government and Junta and splits in the Junta as well as splits in the military. Really there are only rumors of splits and no facts to support them. They all understand the simple truth - there's no way out apart from promised Constitution and elections. No one has ever flinched from these stated goals. They also handled Thaksin rather well. While it appeared at times that Thaksin had upper hand and the generals appeared absolutely clueless, in the end it looks like they simply had been feeding him a rope to hang himself all the time. Anti coup - pro Thaksin protests were a non event, too. The generals successfully managed to convince the public that protesters didn't have any actual cause. Two birds with one stone, as the usual "lovers of democracy" completely discredited themselves in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 (edited) "You aren't safe here." "You are safe here".... Ladies and gentlemen, attention please Come in close so everyone can see I got a tale to tell A listen don't cost a dime And if you believe that we're gonna get along just fine Snake Oil (Steve Earle) Edited June 19, 2007 by Mid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John K Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Hmmm. Im going out to the store. Does anyone need anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 there's no way out apart from promised Constitution and elections. there's an alternative ............................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 there's no way out apart from promised Constitution and elections. there's an alternative ............................... And are you at liberty to say what that might be..........?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 look to the west Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinthee Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 look to the west Mid my good fellow, if you don't stop talking like the Riddler on Batman we can't appreciate your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 your knowledge of local geography should suffice ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinthee Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 your knowledge of local geography should suffice ......... Yeah, right, Thailand a military junta forever, ostrasized by the world a pirranha, trade embargoed, etc..?? Come on, get real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkandrew Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 your knowledge of local geography should suffice ......... Yeah, right, Thailand a military junta forever, ostrasized by the world a pirranha, trade embargoed, etc..?? Come on, get real. Thailand, a savage flesh-eating fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 an answer to be expected , I simply suggested that there is an alternative . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkandrew Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 an answer to be expected , I simply suggested that there is an alternative . I think you are right. The Junta are playing the long game, testing the water and have extending deadlines every step of the way since October. I think that pariah status would not concern them in the least. Much shrugging of shoulders and statements that end "this is Thailand", said with purpose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinthee Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 an answer to be expected , I simply suggested that there is an alternative . I think you are right. The Junta are playing the long game, testing the water and have extending deadlines every step of the way since October. I think that pariah status would not concern them in the least. Much shrugging of shoulders and statements that end "this is Thailand", said with purpose... Ok, guys, you have a limited point, and yes, I mistyped, the Piriah status would concern them, but I think they can cleverly scrap together a consitution, a democratic election AND STILL pull some heavy strings into the future. I don't believe for a minute that they would take the country into the abyss to hold on to a junta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkandrew Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 an answer to be expected , I simply suggested that there is an alternative . I think you are right. The Junta are playing the long game, testing the water and have extending deadlines every step of the way since October. I think that pariah status would not concern them in the least. Much shrugging of shoulders and statements that end "this is Thailand", said with purpose... Ok, guys, you have a limited point, and yes, I mistyped, the Piriah status would concern them, but I think they can cleverly scrap together a consitution, a democratic election AND STILL pull some heavy strings into the future. I don't believe for a minute that they would take the country into the abyss to hold on to a junta. I was just joking about the fish... Your scenario is actually more likely, with a puppet and a master. However, what I think Mid and I were saying, is don't rule out a total TIT, we know best, 'State of Emergency' that turns perpetual... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 very hard to imagine that the military won't continue in an unhealthy relationship with the government instead of being it's servant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinthee Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 very hard to imagine that the military won't continue in an unhealthy relationship with the government instead of being it's servant. Reasonable point. Of course I think we'll see this for some years to come. But, no way a continuing junta. We might see a delay, but not much, or investor confidence will wane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 long time ago a river rat earned an apple core amongst other things whilst his friends toiled on his chores .......... something about a fence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Thaksin's demand that his safety be guaranteed as a condition for his return is preposterous... it's not possible for anyone anywhere to do that. If a Pope can be shot... if a President of the United States can be assassinated... no one can guarantee someone's safety. People are murdered all over the world everyday... big people, middle people, and little people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 It's one of the functions of a gov't to protect it's citizens--this means all of them. Sometimes it means protecting people from themselves (suicidal people). I think it is nothing more tha a veiled threat by the military to him when they say they can't protect him. They most certainly can protect him and they should. Similar to other high profile people his travel and activities will have to be curtailed or tailored to meet security concerns, but they can protect him. And yes, people get assasinated everyone--even in very safe Sweden. The only places where statements such as those made by the military can be expected is in war zones or areas of military conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) It's one of the functions of a gov't to protect it's citizens--this means all of them. Sometimes it means protecting people from themselves (suicidal people). I think it is nothing more tha a veiled threat by the military to him when they say they can't protect him. They most certainly can protect him and they should. Similar to other high profile people his travel and activities will have to be curtailed or tailored to meet security concerns, but they can protect him. And yes, people get assassinated everyone--even in very safe Sweden. The only places where statements such as those made by the military can be expected is in war zones or areas of military conflict. While the government can attempt to protect someone (anyone) with varying levels of security, it's physically impossible to guarantee someone's safety which is what Thaksin is demanding. Even if he was placed in a cell for his own protection and monitored 24/7.... it's no guarantee. The only factor involved in assassinating anyone is the degree of difficulty associated with completing the task. To eliminate that possibility entirely (vis a vis guarantee) is impossible. Edited June 20, 2007 by sriracha john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grover Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) While the government can attempt to protect someone (anyone) with varying levels of security, it's physically impossible to guarantee someone's safety which is what Thaksin is demanding. Sondhi should just give him a handful of Jatukam amulets. Edited June 20, 2007 by Grover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 It has been gossiped about on the streets of Thaialnd for quite a while that T is extremely scared to return because he is scared of dying. Also on the streets it is gossiped that there is no way the military will kill him. However, it is strongly believed that some nationalist would get to the man however much security was provided. Sonthis previous statement was also seen as playing with T's fears. Then again this is only street talk and what does the average person know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 The point I am trying to make doesn't have to do with semantics. It has to do with the gov't alluding to the fact that it won't reasonably do what it can to guarantee his safety--which is all that any gov't can do. By bringing up the issue or responding to it, the gov't is basically insinuating that they won't provide him with what any gov't would usually provide a person regarding his safety. Regardless of what people think of him, he is a former PM and certain special safety measures are needed for people in those positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Clifton Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Surely, if he doesn't trust the good people here, he has enough money hidden away to hire his own security. Contact these guys: http://www.blackwaterusa.com/securityconsulting/ and then hurry on over to prove your innocence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) The point I am trying to make doesn't have to do with semantics. It has to do with the gov't alluding to the fact that it won't reasonably do what it can to guarantee his safety--which is all that any gov't can do. By bringing up the issue or responding to it, the gov't is basically insinuating that they won't provide him with what any gov't would usually provide a person regarding his safety. Regardless of what people think of him, he is a former PM and certain special safety measures are needed for people in those positions. There's a good New York Times article in the other thread: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=1371465 that spells out the practical aspect of Thaksin's demands. I don't believe they are telling him they won't provide any security at all... just that, in today's real world, it's impractical/impossible to guarantee he won't be harmed. They're just being realistic. Still, I don't believe they'll deny him any protection. The Times article does touch on the psychological aspects of Sonthi's non-guarantee... but in the end, he is simply being pragmatic and honest. Edited June 20, 2007 by sriracha john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Surely, if he doesn't trust the good people here, he has enough money hidden away to hire his own security.Contact these guys: http://www.blackwaterusa.com/securityconsulting/ and then hurry on over to prove your innocence. No need to go outside. There seems to be literally tens of thousands of ex-Navy SEALS, ex-SAS, ex-Army Special Forces, ex-CIA operatives, ex-Mossad living in Thailand.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Clifton Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 How practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 The point I am trying to make doesn't have to do with semantics. It has to do with the gov't alluding to the fact that it won't reasonably do what it can to guarantee his safety--which is all that any gov't can do. By bringing up the issue or responding to it, the gov't is basically insinuating that they won't provide him with what any gov't would usually provide a person regarding his safety. Regardless of what people think of him, he is a former PM and certain special safety measures are needed for people in those positions. The government have said they will provide security, and it woul not be in their interest to have him offed here. The military have also added that Mr. Thaksin is hated by quite a lot of people and as such may not be secure in Thailand. That as well as an effective mind game is reality. It is rare that government officials are so honest anywhere in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Surely, if he doesn't trust the good people here, he has enough money hidden away to hire his own security.Contact these guys: http://www.blackwaterusa.com/securityconsulting/ and then hurry on over to prove your innocence. No need to go outside. There seems to be literally tens of thousands of ex-Navy SEALS, ex-SAS, ex-Army Special Forces, ex-CIA operatives, ex-Mossad living in Thailand.... How practical. With apologies for not earlier providing contact information to Noppadon regarding my recommendation, most of the above individuals are readily available by simply asking around here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now