Business Loves Thaksin

[jumnien]

It's amazing that so many Westerners still support and justify the military juntas in Myanmar and Thailand. Disgraceful really!

Same old smear.

These are surely two very different situations !

And how do you come to the conclusion, that "many Westerners still support and justify the military juntas in Myanmar", I just don't see any evidence for that. Sorry.

Regarding the new economic-package, it looks to me to be doing very little, to help the poor, and rather more to help the middle-class (who might pay some income-tax) or rich (who own the companies. Did the PPP really not have better policies ready, than the ones just announced, when they went into the election ?

It's easy to come to the conclusion that "many Westerners still support and justify the military juntas in Myanmar and Thailand." As for Thailand, there is ample evidence appearing entirely throughout the thread "Bringing Thaksin to Account." Regarding Myanmar, google Westerners doing business in Myanmar and you'll find many companies justifying doing business with the junta.

[Pierrot]

Rixalex, you said that without evidence, I was proving nothing, and you are 100% right. But I was just copying/pasting your own arguments. You made my point, thank you.

I want to add there is never anything personnal in my posts. I may some time criticize someone's ideas or the way they are expressed, but never the person.

[rixalex]

Rixalex, you said that without evidence, I was proving nothing, and you are 100% right.

Urm.. no, that's not what i said. You cut and pasted very well, but did you read it? PadThaiGuy said that the military robbed the country and i assumed for him to make such a claim he had some sort of facts and figures to support that. I simply asked that they be provided.

But I was just copying/pasting your own arguments. You made my point, thank you.

How have i made your point? Come on... for goodness sake. Are you really suggesting you think there is no evidence that Thaksin abused his power for personal gain. Snap out of that deluded dream world man.

Edited March 8, 2008 by rixalex

[Tony Clifton]

The Military and their cronies robbed the country blind over the last year and a half.

Care to substantiate that claim? Unless i've missed it, there's no evidence to suggest that anyone involved with the coup suddenly became unusually rich after it was staged.

On the other hand, the evidence against Thaksin is as plain as the nose on your face. Not even the Thaksin fanaticals i think would deny that he abused his power for personal gain. Or are there people out there who are really that blind?

To answer my own question, i fear sadly yes.

Care to substantiate that claim? Unless i've missed it, there's no evidence to suggest that Mr Thaksin suddenly became unusually rich after becoming PM. (he was already unusually rich before)

On the other hand, the evidence against the Junta is as plain as the nose on your face. Not even the Junta fanaticals i think would deny that they abused their power for personal gain. Or are there people out there who are really that blind?

To answer my own question, i fear sadly that bad faith is ruling here

Plenty more if you google for it.

01-MAR-05

Author: Grossman, Nicholas

Article Excerpt

BANGKOK

SOON AFTER Thaksin Shinawatra's election in 2001 as prime minister of Thailand, international journalists, local academics and watchdog groups began sounding alarms: They decried his record on human rights, his conflicts of interest, his government's lack of transparency, and his handling of the press. Pointing to an enormous personal empire that controls telecommunications and television, and to his paternalistic authoritarian tendencies, they saw him as a combination of Italy's tycoon-turned-politician Silvio Berlusconi and Malaysia's notorious former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.

Indeed, last year alone Thaksin's family fortune increased 76 per cent, while the country's stock market fell. The government has confessed to covering up a deadly bird flu outbreak to protect its chicken exports. And it has intimidated citizens through violence: A war on drugs resulted in the largely unexplained deaths of over 2,500 people; in the Deep South, heavy-handed tactics exacerbated an armed Muslim insurgency. "There have been no other governments after Oct 14, 1973, with such a high rate of human rights infringements," says Prachak Kong-kirati, a political science professor at Thammasat University. Many consider Thaksin a serious threat to Thai democracy a--leader whose ego, charisma and deep pockets could return Thailand to virtual dictatorship only five years after its landmark 1997 Constitution was established to prevent that possibility.

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-43...nd-Thaksin.html

[Prakanong]

Tony

Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM.

Pathalogical hatred and obsession with someone you really have no connection with can lead to some mental health diagnosis.

I do find it interesting the feelings some farang jhave with Thaksin and choose to ignore the history and actions of many other living Thai's. I understand how some of my freinds hate Thatcher after what she did to us as coal miners as it had and still does have a personal effect but farangs with rather tenuous links to Thailand having the strong feelings they do where they do not have them either in their home country or terrible reginmes around the world is strange to my eyes.

PS: When I say tenuous I know people have wives, children and family there so I am not being dispariging about that and it is certanly not my intention.

[rixalex]

Tony

Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM.

Pathalogical hatred and obsession with someone you really have no connection with can lead to some mental health diagnosis.

I do find it interesting the feelings some farang jhave with Thaksin and choose to ignore the history and actions of many other living Thai's. I understand how some of my freinds hate Thatcher after what she did to us as coal miners as it had and still does have a personal effect but farangs with rather tenuous links to Thailand having the strong feelings they do where they do not have them either in their home country or terrible reginmes around the world is strange to my eyes.

PS: When I say tenuous I know people have wives, children and family there so I am not being dispariging about that and it is certanly not my intention.

I don't understand the point you are making. Are you saying that just because i'm not a Zimbabwean i shouldn't get mad when i see Mugabe destroying peoples lives whilst he lives in grandeur? I have no link whatsoever with the country, but that doesn't stop me having feelings - feelings which by the way make me all the more sane and human. It's those who are left unmoved who i think should be worrying about their mental state.

[Prakanong]

Tony

Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM.

Pathalogical hatred and obsession with someone you really have no connection with can lead to some mental health diagnosis.

I do find it interesting the feelings some farang jhave with Thaksin and choose to ignore the history and actions of many other living Thai's. I understand how some of my freinds hate Thatcher after what she did to us as coal miners as it had and still does have a personal effect but farangs with rather tenuous links to Thailand having the strong feelings they do where they do not have them either in their home country or terrible reginmes around the world is strange to my eyes.

PS: When I say tenuous I know people have wives, children and family there so I am not being dispariging about that and it is certanly not my intention.

I don't understand the point you are making. Are you saying that just because i'm not a Zimbabwean i shouldn't get mad when i see Mugabe destroying peoples lives whilst he lives in grandeur? I have no link whatsoever with the country, but that doesn't stop me having feelings - feelings which by the way make me all the more sane and human. It's those who are left unmoved who i think should be worrying about their mental state.

Not at all - I think a rational thinking person should get mad at the likes of Zimbabwe.

Its that some farang on this board do not get mad at this and seem to think Thaksin is the be all and end all of evil - mostly they do not even look at Thaksin in the context of Thailand either - that he was dropped from a spaceship in 2000.

Probably their frame of refernce though as thats probably when most discovered Thailand.

[A_Traveller]

By the by, he wasn't a USD billionaire before becoming PM. His companies had weathered the '97 crash, by, oddly compared to how they were run then, being hedged, but they were still massively in debt.

Regards

[Prakanong]

By the by, he wasn't a USD billionaire before becoming PM. His companies had weathered the '97 crash, by, oddly compared to how they were run then, being hedged, but they were still massively in debt.

Regards

Hmmm - I think we need more evidence on this though - ie not a a billionaire - you really think they made 3 billion or so in such a short time.

Re - 97 crash - it is strange how his companies alone restructured ther USD loans just before the floatation - there are many stories about other govt and elite figures flying to Singapore with caes of cash to take advantage of the coming currency float. Why did other well connected companies not do the same as Thaksin as surely they would have access to the same info as him?

Even the CPB was hit hard and it was Thakisin who it is said bailed them out as well as buying ITV at an inflated price of US 60 million instead of say 5 million it was worth.

[A_Traveller]

If you care to research this you will find that to be the case. what's interesting is that key individuals found themselves working at/with AIS etc. after the crash. Did he know more than others, there are some very complex linkages here, not limited to the one which caused FEER so many problems. Unfortunately, since you're in Singapore I can't suggest a readable book re this since I'm advised it's not available there, as Henry gets less than flattering mentions.

Regards

/edit typo//

Edited March 8, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Prakanong]

If you care to research this you will find that to be the case. what's interesting is that key individuals found themselves working at/with AIS etc. after the crash. Did he know more than others, there are some very complex linkages here, not limited to the one which caused FEER so many problems. Unfortunately, since you're in Singapore I can't suggest a readable book re this since I'm advised it's not available there, as Henry gels less than flattering mentions.

Regards

PM me the book name then - I will get in Bangkok or the UK as I will be in both soon

[rixalex]

Not at all - I think a rational thinking person should get mad at the likes of Zimbabwe.

Its that some farang on this board do not get mad at this and seem to think Thaksin is the be all and end all of evil - mostly they do not even look at Thaksin in the context of Thailand either - that he was dropped from a spaceship in 2000.

Probably their frame of refernce though as thats probably when most discovered Thailand.

How do you know they don't get mad at Mugabe or any of the other corrupt crooks around the world? This forum is to discuss Thai related topics, so that's why Thaksin is foremost in many of the discussions; no other reason.

[Prakanong]

Not at all - I think a rational thinking person should get mad at the likes of Zimbabwe.

Its that some farang on this board do not get mad at this and seem to think Thaksin is the be all and end all of evil - mostly they do not even look at Thaksin in the context of Thailand either - that he was dropped from a spaceship in 2000.

Probably their frame of refernce though as thats probably when most discovered Thailand.

How do you know they don't get mad at Mugabe or any of the other corrupt crooks around the world? This forum is to discuss Thai related topics, so that's why Thaksin is foremost in many of the discussions; no other reason.

Intuition

[sriracha john]

Tony

Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM.

Pathalogical hatred and obsession with someone you really have no connection with can lead to some mental health diagnosis.

If Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM, then he criminally lied on his asset declarations...

============================================================================

The Nation / Dec 1, 2001

The net worth of Thaksin’s assets was just over Bt575 million on October 9, a drop of more than Bt566,000 from June when he last made an asset declaration, the commission said.

Constitutional and other laws require the premier, Cabinet members and publicoffice holders to declare their wealth when entering and leaving office. A new Cabinet lineup on October 9 made fresh declarations necessary. Thaksin last declared his wealth when he quit his post as Education minister in June. Cabinet members must also declare the assets held by their spousฌes and children.

Pojamarn declared being worth just over Bt9.7 billion on October 9, a loss of about Bt17 million since June. Her children Panthongthae and Phaethongthan declared assets worth just more than Bt4.9 billion, an increase of more than Bt40 million.

===============================================================

In whose name was this USD billionaire status you've given him?????

Pathological lying is also a mental health issue.....

[Prakanong]

Tony

Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM.

Pathalogical hatred and obsession with someone you really have no connection with can lead to some mental health diagnosis.

If Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM, then he criminally lied on his asset declarations...

============================================================================

The Nation / Dec 1, 2001

The net worth of Thaksin's assets was just over Bt575 million on October 9, a drop of more than Bt566,000 from June when he last made an asset declaration, the commission said.

Constitutional and other laws require the premier, Cabinet members and publicoffice holders to declare their wealth when entering and leaving office. A new Cabinet lineup on October 9 made fresh declarations necessary. Thaksin last declared his wealth when he quit his post as Education minister in June. Cabinet members must also declare the assets held by their spousฌes and children.

Pojamarn declared being worth just over Bt9.7 billion on October 9, a loss of about Bt17 million since June. Her children Panthongthae and Phaethongthan declared assets worth just more than Bt4.9 billion, an increase of more than Bt40 million.

===============================================================

In whose name was this USD billionaire status you've given him?????

Pathological lying is also a mental health issue.....

Self declaration is your evidence - do you declare everything

Try doing a business valuation

Remember net worth in Thailand is like an iceberg or did you not know

Edited March 8, 2008 by Prakanong

[sriracha john]

Tony

Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM.

Pathalogical hatred and obsession with someone you really have no connection with can lead to some mental health diagnosis.

If Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM, then he criminally lied on his asset declarations...

============================================================================

The Nation / Dec 1, 2001

The net worth of Thaksin's assets was just over Bt575 million on October 9, a drop of more than Bt566,000 from June when he last made an asset declaration, the commission said.

Constitutional and other laws require the premier, Cabinet members and publicoffice holders to declare their wealth when entering and leaving office. A new Cabinet lineup on October 9 made fresh declarations necessary. Thaksin last declared his wealth when he quit his post as Education minister in June. Cabinet members must also declare the assets held by their spousฌes and children.

Pojamarn declared being worth just over Bt9.7 billion on October 9, a loss of about Bt17 million since June. Her children Panthongthae and Phaethongthan declared assets worth just more than Bt4.9 billion, an increase of more than Bt40 million.

===============================================================

In whose name was this USD billionaire status you've given him?????

Pathological lying is also a mental health issue.....

Self declaration is your evidence - do you declare everything

Try doing a business valuation

Remember net worth in Thailand is like an iceberg or did you not know

So he criminally perjured himself.... thank you.

When faced with the evidence, you admit it...and say everyone does it....you'd be good on his defense team for his pending asset concealment case.

We'll have a long wait I suppose for any evidence from you that he was a USD billionaire before PM.

Don't bother... I'll provide it for you ...

"I was talking to my regular Singapore taxi driver last week and he said that Thaksin was a USD billionaire before he was PM."

Edited March 8, 2008 by sriracha john

[Thai at Heart]

By the by, he wasn't a USD billionaire before becoming PM. His companies had weathered the '97 crash, by, oddly compared to how they were run then, being hedged, but they were still massively in debt.

Regards

But under an anachronistic thing called the Foreign Business Law, he had no one thru which to realise his wealth. But no sweat he was PM so not a big problem.

97 hurt him and many many other simply because his assets were in Baht, and the uselss govts (not democrat) of the previous few years came very close to ruining him and many other heads of industry. This is what drove him to politics.

[Pierrot]

As Bill Clinton famously said "It's the economy, stupid"

If you think that the official explanation never really made sense, dig the subject and it explains a lot about the past 2 years.

[samran]

sounds to me like PPP/TRT have moles on TV.

How much are you being paid guys?

As for business people liking TRT, does this include all the people who went bust under TRT cause they couldn't afford increase the increase in under the table payments from 10% to 15% and then towards the end, 20%? I know a major roads contractor who gave up for this very reason. Close family friends of ours. And this during a time, according to the Thaksin rent-a-crowds, when business was 'booming'.

Unusually wealthy, no Thaskin didn't become. Just everyone around him did . He was good at using nominee structures remember?

[samran]

By the by, he wasn't a USD billionaire before becoming PM. His companies had weathered the '97 crash, by, oddly compared to how they were run then, being hedged, but they were still massively in debt.

Regards

But under an anachronistic thing called the Foreign Business Law, he had no one thru which to realise his wealth. But no sweat he was PM so not a big problem.

97 hurt him and many many other simply because his assets were in Baht, and the uselss govts (not democrat) of the previous few years came very close to ruining him and many other heads of industry. This is what drove him to politics.

As I recall, Thaksin was a member of the "useles govts" at the time which oversaw the futile defense of the baht. I think her was officially a deputy Prime Minister at the time, if I'm not too far off.

as for 97 hurting thaksin, that couldn't be further from the truth. Knowing that the BOT was running out of USD to defend the baht, Thaksin was seen in HK with his bankers shifting all his positions to USD and out of baht. He made sure he was in a position to not only protect himself, but prosper as well after the 1997 asian crisis.

[Pierrot]

By the by, he wasn't a USD billionaire before becoming PM. His companies had weathered the '97 crash, by, oddly compared to how they were run then, being hedged, but they were still massively in debt.

Regards

But under an anachronistic thing called the Foreign Business Law, he had no one thru which to realise his wealth. But no sweat he was PM so not a big problem.

97 hurt him and many many other simply because his assets were in Baht, and the uselss govts (not democrat) of the previous few years came very close to ruining him and many other heads of industry. This is what drove him to politics.

As I recall, Thaksin was a member of the "useles govts" at the time which oversaw the futile defense of the baht. I think her was officially a deputy Prime Minister at the time, if I'm not too far off.

as for 97 hurting thaksin, that couldn't be further from the truth. Knowing that the BOT was running out of USD to defend the baht, Thaksin was seen in HK with his bankers shifting all his positions to USD and out of baht. He made sure he was in a position to not only protect himself, but prosper as well after the 1997 asian crisis.

Maybe it's after realizing how poorly the country was run that he decided to take over. Then maybe it was his economical policies (and not his private business) that was the reason of all his trouble. Maybe ...

[samran]

By the by, he wasn't a USD billionaire before becoming PM. His companies had weathered the '97 crash, by, oddly compared to how they were run then, being hedged, but they were still massively in debt.

Regards

But under an anachronistic thing called the Foreign Business Law, he had no one thru which to realise his wealth. But no sweat he was PM so not a big problem.

97 hurt him and many many other simply because his assets were in Baht, and the uselss govts (not democrat) of the previous few years came very close to ruining him and many other heads of industry. This is what drove him to politics.

As I recall, Thaksin was a member of the "useles govts" at the time which oversaw the futile defense of the baht. I think her was officially a deputy Prime Minister at the time, if I'm not too far off.

as for 97 hurting thaksin, that couldn't be further from the truth. Knowing that the BOT was running out of USD to defend the baht, Thaksin was seen in HK with his bankers shifting all his positions to USD and out of baht. He made sure he was in a position to not only protect himself, but prosper as well after the 1997 asian crisis.

Maybe it's after realizing how poorly the country was run that he decided to take over. Then maybe it was his economical policies (and not his private business) that was the reason of all his trouble. Maybe ...

He didn't have any economic policy. Economic policy usually means you do something to do to reform the economy. He undertook no econmic reform.

He had a few populist policies to calm the masses. Thirty baht health care wasn't even his idea. He just took an existing programme for universal coverage and marketed it better. Combine that with a big brother TV show of him 'roughing it' with the country folk, and doling out thousand baht notes whenever he visited a town, and he was DA MAN...

No, the reason for his troubles were simple. Stripping away checks and balances - for example the auditor general. Subverting the spirit of the constitution. Trampling over opposition voices by trying to sue them at every turn, and only governing for those who voted for him.

He even managed to make himself extremely unpopular for selling an asset to foreingers. Even that made his followers look at him twice. (Ironically, I have no problem with his AIS sale to Temasek - but most Thai's couldnt stand for it).

[Pierrot]

The Military and their cronies robbed the country blind over the last year and a half.

Care to substantiate that claim? Unless i've missed it, there's no evidence to suggest that anyone involved with the coup suddenly became unusually rich after it was staged.

On the other hand, the evidence against Thaksin is as plain as the nose on your face. Not even the Thaksin fanaticals i think would deny that he abused his power for personal gain. Or are there people out there who are really that blind?

To answer my own question, i fear sadly yes.

Care to substantiate that claim? Unless i've missed it, there's no evidence to suggest that Mr Thaksin suddenly became unusually rich after becoming PM. (he was already unusually rich before)

On the other hand, the evidence against the Junta is as plain as the nose on your face. Not even the Junta fanaticals i think would deny that they abused their power for personal gain. Or are there people out there who are really that blind?

To answer my own question, i fear sadly that bad faith is ruling here

Rixalex, I will go back to this quote to answer you.

By copying/pasting your quote and just changing the names, my point was to prove that both were of equal value : none !

I don't believe that both Mr Thaksin and the military seized power for personnal gain but I wouldn't claim that people around them (both side) didn't take advantage of their relation with the person in charge for their personnal profit. This is not only Thailand, more human nature I would say.

Now recent studies seem to show that when someone hear the same opinion more than a couple of time, he may consider it as fact. Mr Thaksin culpability of any wrong doing is an OPINION and it' not because some people will repeat it at nausea (literally speaking) that it will become a FACT. The junta had 18 month to show evidence of Mr Thaksin culpability, what did they find ? I guess the same people still expect to find WMD in Iraq ...

[Plus]

The junta didn't search for anything. They set up an independent investigating commission that lodged cases with the courts.

You say it's slow. Slow comparing to what?

Investigators in Ken Lay's case took two years to bring him to court. AEC, by comparison, is juggling about a dozen cases on their hands involving hundreds or non-cooperative individuals. Are they slow? Or are they merely methodical?

[samran]

Mr Thaksin culpability of any wrong doing is an OPINION and it' not because some people will repeat it at nausea (literally speaking) that it will become a FACT. The junta had 18 month to show evidence of Mr Thaksin culpability, what did they find ? I guess the same people still expect to find WMD in Iraq ...

Of all the naive statements, this is pretty much one of the most naive you can get. But, it is pretty much what you can expect from Thaksin rent-a-crowds.

The task of finding evidence against dear leader is akin to investigating a murder committed by IRA paras in a republican stronghold in Belfast. Everyone clams up. Nothing happened here governor, move along now.

In anycase, evidence does exist, but it is saved for more useful purpose of behind the scene arm twisting and the like. 'Wasting' it in the court of public opinion means that you can't use your 'evidence' when you need it most.

[Pierrot]

Mr Thaksin culpability of any wrong doing is an OPINION and it' not because some people will repeat it at nausea (literally speaking) that it will become a FACT. The junta had 18 month to show evidence of Mr Thaksin culpability, what did they find ? I guess the same people still expect to find WMD in Iraq ...

Of all the naive statements, this is pretty much one of the most naive you can get. But, it is pretty much what you can expect from Thaksin rent-a-crowds.

The task of finding evidence against dear leader is akin to investigating a murder committed by IRA paras in a republican stronghold in Belfast. Everyone clams up. Nothing happened here governor, move along now.

In anycase, evidence does exist, but it is saved for more useful purpose of behind the scene arm twisting and the like. 'Wasting' it in the court of public opinion means that you can't use your 'evidence' when you need it most.

Samran, reading your reply, I feel very confused.

On the one hand, I am sincerely, honestly, deeply sorry for you.

On the other hand I envy you.

In the mean time I got an answer (not yours, don't worry) that will end this very interesting debate.

Wish you all the best.

Pierrot

[Pierrot]

Action speak louder than words

First there was this thread, burried in some sub-sub-forum that nobody really reads (replies = 0)

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=188696

Then a couple of other announcements in favor of foreign investments in other section.

Who can now denies this government is really (foreign) business friendly ???

[rixalex]

In the mean time I got an answer (not yours, don't worry) that will end this very interesting debate.

So you were lying about it being ended?

[Pierrot]

In the mean time I got an answer (not yours, don't worry) that will end this very interesting debate.

So you were lying about it being ended?

It's a bit more complicated than that. To explain what was the difference between the economic policy of the PPP and the coup backers, it was somehow necessary to go against forum rules.

Now, forget about the theory, we have the facts. The new government is, slowly I agree, but clearly, opening the economy to foreign businessmen.

PS : To understand my point, one of the first action of the new gorvernment after the coup was to visit foreign governments and to explain, among other things, the new economic policy of the government. If you search what was actually this policy, and on what it was based, you will understand my problem.