Thaksin and Wife Fail to Board Return Flight

[sriracha john]

Needless to say the piece from the WSJ has not been posted.

Please use your status as a paid subscriber to the WSJ to post it.

I don't do posts of newspaper pieces.

If you are going to post an article it's just honesty (as well as good manners) to post the article to which it refers even it contains comments with which you disagree.

I don't subscribe to the WSJ but found the article within about ten seconds.For members who would like to see it google Thailand Jumps the Shark and follow the links.

It has absolutely nothing to do with honesty nor manners, but good flame attempt anyway. Actually, I don't subscribe to any paid news sources and thus don't post them. Simple, really.

All I got with your google search is some blog and a link to a review of the blog: "Part of a bitter expats complete breakfast."

Perhaps, even if you don't post news in the news clipping forum, you could provide a direct link to the WSJ article?

I see there is an editorial in The Nation today raising fundamental question about the justice system in Thailand, and the influence of the junta undermining fairness.I was wondering whether you would be posting this for forum members interest.

If you need help, I can show you again how to post news. It's not difficult.

Thanks I appreciate it.I'm not very technologically oriented so keep it simple.

It's never too late to learn something new... perhaps we could start with simply learning how to include a link in your post.

Then you can support the points you make to voice your agenda that otherwise lack corroboration.

[younghusband]

Needless to say the piece from the WSJ has not been posted.

Please use your status as a paid subscriber to the WSJ to post it.

I don't do posts of newspaper pieces.

If you are going to post an article it's just honesty (as well as good manners) to post the article to which it refers even it contains comments with which you disagree.

I don't subscribe to the WSJ but found the article within about ten seconds.For members who would like to see it google Thailand Jumps the Shark and follow the links.

It has absolutely nothing to do with honesty nor manners, but good flame attempt anyway. Actually, I don't subscribe to any paid news sources and thus don't post them. Simple, really.

All I got with your google search is some blog and a link to a review of the blog: "Part of a bitter expats complete breakfast."

Perhaps, even if you don't post news in the news clipping forum, you could provide a direct link to the WSJ article?

I see there is an editorial in The Nation today raising fundamental question about the justice system in Thailand, and the influence of the junta undermining fairness.I was wondering whether you would be posting this for forum members interest.

If you need help, I can show you again how to post news. It's not difficult.

Thanks I appreciate it.I'm not very technologically oriented so keep it simple.

It's never too late to learn something new... perhaps we could start with simply learning how to include a link in your post.

Then you can support the points you make to voice your agenda that otherwise lack corroboration.

Thanks.I await your advice.

In the mean time for the benefit of newcomers it's helpful to have on the record that although you are a fantastically prolific poster of articles (and genuinely I think that provides a useful service) there is not even a pretence of balance or reporting a differing opinion (even to the extent of tinkering with articles that on balance do support your agenda).It's useful to have this out in the open.

[sriracha john]

Needless to say the piece from the WSJ has not been posted.

Please use your status as a paid subscriber to the WSJ to post it.

I don't do posts of newspaper pieces.

If you are going to post an article it's just honesty (as well as good manners) to post the article to which it refers even it contains comments with which you disagree.

I don't subscribe to the WSJ but found the article within about ten seconds.For members who would like to see it google Thailand Jumps the Shark and follow the links.

It has absolutely nothing to do with honesty nor manners, but good flame attempt anyway. Actually, I don't subscribe to any paid news sources and thus don't post them. Simple, really.

All I got with your google search is some blog and a link to a review of the blog: "Part of a bitter expats complete breakfast."

Perhaps, even if you don't post news in the news clipping forum, you could provide a direct link to the WSJ article?

I see there is an editorial in The Nation today raising fundamental question about the justice system in Thailand, and the influence of the junta undermining fairness.I was wondering whether you would be posting this for forum members interest.

If you need help, I can show you again how to post news. It's not difficult.

Thanks I appreciate it.I'm not very technologically oriented so keep it simple.

It's never too late to learn something new... perhaps we could start with simply learning how to include a link in your post.

Then you can support the points you make to voice your agenda that otherwise lack corroboration.

Thanks.I await your advice.

In the mean time for the benefit of newcomers it's helpful to have on the record that although you are a fantastically prolific poster of articles (and genuinely I think that provides a useful service) there is not even a pretence of balance or reporting a differing opinion (even to the extent of tinkering with articles that on balance do support your agenda).It's useful to have this out in the open.

Here's a good place to start your lesson... let me know when you've mastered that much and we can move on from there.

How to Select, Cut, Copy, Paste, & Save anything you find on the Internet

http://www.lollie.com/happy/cutandpaste.html

Then you will eventually be the same as every other member of the forum, that's not part of admin/mod team, and you can post whatever you wish to post to support your, previously uncorroborated, individual point of view... the same as it's always been since the News Clipping Forum was begun.

Edited August 20, 2008 by sriracha john

[stumonster]

Can we accept courts that look away during coups?

By The Nation

Published on August 20, 2008

I don't think it could be said that the courts were impartial before the coup.

Out of interest, has anyone ever mounted a court challenge to any of the coups?

and it would depend as to where this latest coup originated from - Will no one rid me of this meddlesome .... ?

[younghusband]

Needless to say the piece from the WSJ has not been posted.

Please use your status as a paid subscriber to the WSJ to post it.

I don't do posts of newspaper pieces.

If you are going to post an article it's just honesty (as well as good manners) to post the article to which it refers even it contains comments with which you disagree.

I don't subscribe to the WSJ but found the article within about ten seconds.For members who would like to see it google Thailand Jumps the Shark and follow the links.

It has absolutely nothing to do with honesty nor manners, but good flame attempt anyway. Actually, I don't subscribe to any paid news sources and thus don't post them. Simple, really.

All I got with your google search is some blog and a link to a review of the blog: "Part of a bitter expats complete breakfast."

Perhaps, even if you don't post news in the news clipping forum, you could provide a direct link to the WSJ article?

I see there is an editorial in The Nation today raising fundamental question about the justice system in Thailand, and the influence of the junta undermining fairness.I was wondering whether you would be posting this for forum members interest.

If you need help, I can show you again how to post news. It's not difficult.

Thanks I appreciate it.I'm not very technologically oriented so keep it simple.

It's never too late to learn something new... perhaps we could start with simply learning how to include a link in your post.

Then you can support the points you make to voice your agenda that otherwise lack corroboration.

Thanks.I await your advice.

In the mean time for the benefit of newcomers it's helpful to have on the record that although you are a fantastically prolific poster of articles (and genuinely I think that provides a useful service) there is not even a pretence of balance or reporting a differing opinion (even to the extent of tinkering with articles that on balance do support your agenda).It's useful to have this out in the open.

Here's a good place to start your lesson... let me know when you've mastered that much and we can move on from there.

How to Select, Cut, Copy, Paste, & Save anything you find on the Internet

http://www.lollie.com/happy/cutandpaste.html

Then you will eventually be the same as every other member of the forum, that's not part of admin/mod team, and you can post whatever you wish to post to support your, previously uncorroborated, individual point of view... the same as it's always been since the News Clipping Forum was begun.

Thanks for that useful link for which I'm genuinely grateful.

Your second paragraph is a little hard to understand.However I think it's useful to have on record that your posting of articles only reflects your political agenda, and that -as the forum's most prolific poster on current affairs/politics -there's no attempt to show balance.Nothing wrong with that but best to have it out in the open.

However probably best not to censor bits in quoted articles which don't fit in with your ideology.

[sriracha john]

Please use your status as a paid subscriber to the WSJ to post it.

I don't do posts of newspaper pieces.

If you are going to post an article it's just honesty (as well as good manners) to post the article to which it refers even it contains comments with which you disagree.

I don't subscribe to the WSJ but found the article within about ten seconds.For members who would like to see it google Thailand Jumps the Shark and follow the links.

It has absolutely nothing to do with honesty nor manners, but good flame attempt anyway. Actually, I don't subscribe to any paid news sources and thus don't post them. Simple, really.

All I got with your google search is some blog and a link to a review of the blog: "Part of a bitter expats complete breakfast."

Perhaps, even if you don't post news in the news clipping forum, you could provide a direct link to the WSJ article?

I see there is an editorial in The Nation today raising fundamental question about the justice system in Thailand, and the influence of the junta undermining fairness.I was wondering whether you would be posting this for forum members interest.

If you need help, I can show you again how to post news. It's not difficult.

Thanks I appreciate it.I'm not very technologically oriented so keep it simple.

It's never too late to learn something new... perhaps we could start with simply learning how to include a link in your post.

Then you can support the points you make to voice your agenda that otherwise lack corroboration.

Thanks.I await your advice.

In the mean time for the benefit of newcomers it's helpful to have on the record that although you are a fantastically prolific poster of articles (and genuinely I think that provides a useful service) there is not even a pretence of balance or reporting a differing opinion (even to the extent of tinkering with articles that on balance do support your agenda).It's useful to have this out in the open.

Here's a good place to start your lesson... let me know when you've mastered that much and we can move on from there.

How to Select, Cut, Copy, Paste, & Save anything you find on the Internet

http://www.lollie.com/happy/cutandpaste.html

Then you will eventually be the same as every other member of the forum, that's not part of admin/mod team, and you can post whatever you wish to post to support your, previously uncorroborated, individual point of view... the same as it's always been since the News Clipping Forum was begun.

Thanks for that useful link for which I'm genuinely grateful.

Your second paragraph is a little hard to understand.However I think it's useful to have on record that your posting of articles only reflects your political agenda, and that -as the forum's most prolific poster on current affairs/politics -there's no attempt to show balance.Nothing wrong with that but best to have it out in the open.

However probably best not to censor bits in quoted articles which don't fit in with your ideology.

Best perhaps to get started then on your lessons so you can soon join the rest of the forum.

Sorry if the second paragraph exceeded your comprehension, but basically every non-admin member that posts articles do so with articles that support their point of view. This is nothing new and I'm surprised it previously escaped you.

If you have a differing point of view, posting an article that corroborates it or expounds on it lends credence to your point of view. In situations involving differing points of view, you, as a member of the forum are at liberty to post articles that share your point of view.

I've shortened articles of content that contained passages that were off-topic, repetitious, or irrelevant. I've also corrected articles that were grammatically incorrect or contained misspellings. This is not censoring as it's never done to change the crux of the article and I would hope anyone would do the same to improve readability.

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

Edited August 20, 2008 by sriracha john

[hammered]

It would be nice to see us get back on topic.

For what it is worth I see many on both sides of the divide posting bias comments and misrepresenting articles etc etc. I guess that though is why they are on differnt sides. Lets just live with it. As someone said on some movie reffering to the media: "Lets see what lies they are telling us today", which is apt enough.

Anyway back on subject we see the Nation telling us that courts should re look at coup masters and now we have Kowit statuing he dint agree with the 2006 coup, which is actually no surprise. Does this give us an in on some details of an arcane deal worked out in the smoke filled rooms by the shadowy powers that control the country and probably even occupy the distant recesses of the Samak brain that havent been locked up to not allow truths of slaughters in days gone by surface, or is it just the lies they are telling us today?

[sriracha john]

Someone's exerting pressure....

Finance Minister clarifies comments of PM during Party meeting

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Surapong Suebwonglee revealed that yesterday's People Power Party meeting saw Party Leader and Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej assuring that he understands the various problems being faced by the Party.

The PM attributed the problems to a lack of discussion on issues in the past and also commented on rumors surrounding former PM Thaksin Shinawatra by saying that such ideas were an archaic form of politics.

The PM asked that all Party members be more constructive in their political activity.

Surapong clarified however that Samak's statement that he would cease activity if problems persisted referred to ceasing activities as Party Leader and did not mean a dissolution of Parliament.

He then commented on other issues, stating that the Party was not concerned over the formation of a new Party from its own members as well as the lottery case being transferred to the Central Administrative Court. As for the Party dissolution case, the Finance Minister assured that the party has prepared the needed documents for the issue.

- ThaiNews / today

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

PPP MPs say they were satisfied by Samak's elaboration on former PMs arrest warrant

People Power Party Northern MP Surapong Tohvijakchaiyakul, who led a petition calling for Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej to declare the details of an arrest warrant for deposed PM Thaksin Shinawatra, stated that during the Party's meeting yesterday Samak satisfactorily elaborated on the matter.

Surapong acknowledged that all Party members understood the situation and agreed that the misunderstanding came from a lack of communication.

The MP affirmed that his petition did not seek to remove the Party Leader and also expressed his certainty that Samak would lead the Party for the entire 4 year term.

He continued to assure that his Northern MP group would not leave the PPP unless the Party was dissolved and even then would remain unified in their transfer.

- ThaiNews / today

Edited August 20, 2008 by sriracha john

[younghusband]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

[plachon]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

[younghusband]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

I vaguely remember that but wasn't it accidental? Or perhaps I was just tweaking your tail.

[marshbags]

STOPPAGE TIME

Dear British exile and asylum authorities

By Tulsathit Taptim

The Nation

Published on August 20, 2008

THINGS are complicated in Thailand so please bear with me. Surely, you must be wondering why I call it "political persecution" after they allowed me and my family to leave on first-class flights with enough luggage to provide warmth for all the street bums in London? All I'm saying is, everything Thai flatters to deceive at the moment.

I had no choice. The people who were after me let me know that I was going to lose, and lose BIG. They treated me like a snake in the house - surrounding the poor thing, armed with broomsticks, cleavers and hockey sticks and leaving the door open. What would you do?

Once I'd taken the only way out I had, they deemed me a coward and used that to virtually convict me of these "crimes". If that is not political persecution of the smartest kind, I don't know what is. Now, having made me a fugitive with a shattered reputation, they want me back. Like OJ Simpson, my "innocence" was destroyed once I started running, and future punishment will be justified in their eyes.

If you fall prey to this trick and agree to send me back, consider the consequences. Not only will you be feeding a democratic champion of the poor to the dictatorial lions, your own standing as the last refuge for freedom fighters in distress will also collapse. And that will be just a tiny part of your problem.

Think about your economy. In fact, think about the world economy. My exile or asylum will provide the likes of Bell Pottinger Group - England's biggest PR company - with unlimited contracts. It takes a concerted, global effort by publicists, here in England and elsewhere, to fight the Thai Hitlers disguised as judges. I, as a free man, can keep a lot of people employed, and for a noble cause.

Think about your tourism. When Thai politicians come to visit me here with their families and aides, and aides of their families, together with the families of those aides - they spend. And these people have connections, you know. Of course, your image as a haven for political refugees needs no further promotion, but news of your righteousness and generosity deserve to reach the remotest or most ignorant parts of the world.

If you allow me to stay, they will come. Thailand's crazy laws on taxes, conflicts of interest and the kind of foreign investment phobia that demonised the likes of Ample Rich and Win Mark, guarantee that a lot of good, selfless politicians will in no time be flushed out, crying for your help. By the way, do you have a place for my friend Vatana Asavahame, who is languishing somewhere in Cambodia?

If you kick me out, think of your Common Law, of how it will be dragged down to the same muddy level as the prejudiced, pretentious and highly politicised Thai constitutions. On the other hand, imagine how your support for me will serve as inspiration for all democracy advocates around the world.

Think of Manchester City, of how people will lose faith in the sport - if you allow politics to interfere with it - that your great nation proudly created for the world. Things were going so well until they refused to unlock my hard-earned, frozen assets, sentenced my wife to jail and made us flee Thailand. Are you willing to allow Thai dictators to bring down the only football club to beat Manchester United twice last season?

And, come to think of it, imagine what a fortune we could make skinning the bookies together. Surely Ladbrokes, William Hill or Sportingbet will give tantalising odds regarding my future. With inside information, we can't lose.

Think of ending this once and for all. If you let me stay, the problem is solved. If you send me back, it will be deja vu all over again. Court cases against me are likely to drag on for at least two more years, by which time there will be a World Cup in South Africa. They will lift a travel ban and allow me to attend the opening ceremony again - and guess what, I will bolt again. You surely know my destination, don't you?

Finally, think of your face. You welcomed me and let me buy one of your football teams, God dam_n it. How bad will it look if you had to admit to the world that you permitted a criminal to live like a king in your land and run a prestigious business, with football fans singing his name. How bad will it look that you allowed a snake in your house? You aren't going to give those cynical, acerbic Thai columnists that pleasure, are you?

Yours always,

Democracy's Poster Boy

Unquote

If our citizens that are fully informed on the issues have anything to do with it, they had better start planning a move to yet another country.

This includes my humble self of course

The rest will know soon enough what it,s all about and this will only continue to attract negative publicity for the Kamoys on the run

marshbags

Edited August 20, 2008 by marshbags

[plachon]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

I vaguely remember that but wasn't it accidental? Or perhaps I was just tweaking your tail.

Ah, "an accidental" removal of a critical word that changed the nuance of the sentence? Kind of nervous twitch was it? You old comic "tweaker" you! But no excuses for getting your pantaloons in a twist now about other's selective postings, when they go to such strenuous efforts to support their viewpoint with links and wider evidence and keep this board abreast of events and news. Cos you really haven't a leg to stand on old bean.

[younghusband]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

I vaguely remember that but wasn't it accidental? Or perhaps I was just tweaking your tail.

Ah, "an accidental" removal of a critical word that changed the nuance of the sentence? Kind of nervous twitch was it? You old comic "tweaker" you! But no excuses for getting your pantaloons in a twist now about other's selective postings, when they go to such strenuous efforts to support their viewpoint with links and wider evidence and keep this board abreast of events and news. Cos you really haven't a leg to stand on old bean.

To be honest I can't remember the details.If you will remind me I'll comment, apologise or tweak your tail again...whatever seems appropriate.

On your second point I am afraid I must disagree.If someone posts hundreds and hundreds of articles many would think there is an implication to provide some balance and not just a stream of one sided opinions.It is precisely this selective bias that misleads and thus represents an approach that is very far from keeping this board abreast of events and news.Add a willingness to doctor the evidence and prima facie you have a dishonest approach unless this forum is just inconsequential bar room talk.Some believe it should be better than that including many who disagree with almost everything I say.I think the point has been made enough times.

[plachon]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

I vaguely remember that but wasn't it accidental? Or perhaps I was just tweaking your tail.

Ah, "an accidental" removal of a critical word that changed the nuance of the sentence? Kind of nervous twitch was it? You old comic "tweaker" you! But no excuses for getting your pantaloons in a twist now about other's selective postings, when they go to such strenuous efforts to support their viewpoint with links and wider evidence and keep this board abreast of events and news. Cos you really haven't a leg to stand on old bean.

To be honest I can't remember the details.If you will remind me I'll comment, apologise or tweak your tail again...whatever seems appropriate.

On your second point I am afraid I must disagree.If someone posts hundreds and hundreds of articles many would think there is an implication to provide some balance and not just a stream of one sided opinions.It is precisely this selective bias that misleads and thus represents an approach that is very far from keeping this board abreast of events and news.Add a willingness to doctor the evidence and prima facie you have a dishonest approach unless this forum is just inconsequential bar room talk.Some believe it should be better than that including many who disagree with almost everything I say.I think the point has been made enough times.

You removed a word from a post I made to make it look like I wrote something different to my intended meaning. I haven't the time or inclination to sift through thousands of past posts to find the offending post and subsequent exchange. It is sufficient that we both know a misdemeanour was made and you are in a poor position to accuse others of censorship.

On the contrary, I think SJ deserves our thanks and congratulations on providing such a useful public service, which like any newspaper or journal you care to mention, has a certain editorial stance which is neither "dishonest" nor "inconsequential", as you maintain. If you could provide more evidence supporting your views and claims, then your position would be far stronger in criticising or denigrating others.

[younghusband]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

I vaguely remember that but wasn't it accidental? Or perhaps I was just tweaking your tail.

Ah, "an accidental" removal of a critical word that changed the nuance of the sentence? Kind of nervous twitch was it? You old comic "tweaker" you! But no excuses for getting your pantaloons in a twist now about other's selective postings, when they go to such strenuous efforts to support their viewpoint with links and wider evidence and keep this board abreast of events and news. Cos you really haven't a leg to stand on old bean.

To be honest I can't remember the details.If you will remind me I'll comment, apologise or tweak your tail again...whatever seems appropriate.

On your second point I am afraid I must disagree.If someone posts hundreds and hundreds of articles many would think there is an implication to provide some balance and not just a stream of one sided opinions.It is precisely this selective bias that misleads and thus represents an approach that is very far from keeping this board abreast of events and news.Add a willingness to doctor the evidence and prima facie you have a dishonest approach unless this forum is just inconsequential bar room talk.Some believe it should be better than that including many who disagree with almost everything I say.I think the point has been made enough times.

You removed a word from a post I made to make it look like I wrote something different to my intended meaning. I haven't the time or inclination to sift through thousands of past posts to find the offending post and subsequent exchange. It is sufficient that we both know a misdemeanour was made and you are in a poor position to accuse others of censorship.

On the contrary, I think SJ deserves our thanks and congratulations on providing such a useful public service, which like any newspaper or journal you care to mention, has a certain editorial stance which is neither "dishonest" nor "inconsequential", as you maintain. If you could provide more evidence supporting your views and claims, then your position would be far stronger in criticising or denigrating others.

Despite your attempt to prolong this I feel all the necessary points have been made several times.Trying however to find some common ground, if it's understood by all that there is "a certain editorial stance" (ie sucking up to the junta,PAD or whatever unpleasant and undemocratic authoritarian institution happens to be in vogue ) no more needs to be said.

[frodo]

For a man who had recently proclaimed to the world that the Thai justice system is essentially corrupt, and there is no more faith or integrity of the courts, he certainly has a lot of gall. Even more so is the fact his wife is a wanted and convicted criminal and he has jumped bail, therefore, he is a wanted man.

Thaksin takes legal action against PAD

(BangkokPost.com) - Deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra ordered his team of legal advisers to take legal action against the five core members of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) for libel and falsifying the government document, according to one of Mr Thaksin's lawyers.

Watchara Seangprathum claimed that the anti-government group was editing the arrest warrant document and attached it with the images of Mr Thaksin and his wife Khunying Potjaman. He said the group was displaying the images in different areas.

source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=129806

[Tony Clifton]

How can he possibly dare take legal action against people now that he s himself a fugitive? Surely it will be rejected, he s only slinging mud at PAD for them putting up a giant poster of his police photo.

Som nam na.

Falsifying the government document?

Pojaman's weight wasn't even displayed to begin with when it was issued.

His arrogance will kill him.

Edited August 20, 2008 by Tony Clifton

[jackspratt]

Now it's best to get to those lessons without further prompting as I dislike being an over-bearing teacher.

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

By the way I don't find you overbearing just a typical non commissioned officer type, ie many excellent qualities but best when given a clear line from an officer.There is room for all sorts.

YH, those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Or have you forgotten how you once doctored one of my posts to suit your own stance? Hypocrisy is not an admirable trait in a gentleman or scholar.

I vaguely remember that but wasn't it accidental? Or perhaps I was just tweaking your tail.

Ah, "an accidental" removal of a critical word that changed the nuance of the sentence? Kind of nervous twitch was it? You old comic "tweaker" you! But no excuses for getting your pantaloons in a twist now about other's selective postings, when they go to such strenuous efforts to support their viewpoint with links and wider evidence and keep this board abreast of events and news. Cos you really haven't a leg to stand on old bean.

To be honest I can't remember the details.If you will remind me I'll comment, apologise or tweak your tail again...whatever seems appropriate.

On your second point I am afraid I must disagree.If someone posts hundreds and hundreds of articles many would think there is an implication to provide some balance and not just a stream of one sided opinions.It is precisely this selective bias that misleads and thus represents an approach that is very far from keeping this board abreast of events and news.Add a willingness to doctor the evidence and prima facie you have a dishonest approach unless this forum is just inconsequential bar room talk.Some believe it should be better than that including many who disagree with almost everything I say.I think the point has been made enough times.

You removed a word from a post I made to make it look like I wrote something different to my intended meaning. I haven't the time or inclination to sift through thousands of past posts to find the offending post and subsequent exchange. It is sufficient that we both know a misdemeanour was made and you are in a poor position to accuse others of censorship.

On the contrary, I think SJ deserves our thanks and congratulations on providing such a useful public service, which like any newspaper or journal you care to mention, has a certain editorial stance which is neither "dishonest" nor "inconsequential", as you maintain. If you could provide more evidence supporting your views and claims, then your position would be far stronger in criticising or denigrating others.

Despite your attempt to prolong this I feel all the necessary points have been made several times.Trying however to find some common ground, if it's understood by all that there is "a certain editorial stance" (ie sucking up to the junta,PAD or whatever unpleasant and undemocratic authoritarian institution happens to be in vogue ) no more needs to be said.

For some of us e.g. me, trying to gain a better (hopefully balanced) understanding of this saga, you are not contributing much YH.

Your "editorial stance" is no different, albeit 180 degrees opposed, to those you seem to object to. In the meantime, you have been accused of the same crime as those you have accused.

Can you please shed some light on this (ie a repudiation), instead of beating around the bush. Without that, you have the same degree of credibility as those you accuse.

Or maybe you don't care.

[sriracha john]

I think your position is now very clear so we can leave it at that, ie there's no pretence at balance and you only post articles supporting your point of view.Just for the record however you do censor articles and there is recent evidence of this specifically your removal of a reference to the junta shaped constitution in an article which otherwise met your criteria.

The balance is achieved by those that have opposing points of view to post articles that reinforce their opinions. It is therefore incumbent upon them to provide those articles if they feel that strongly about it. If you want something else, then I would suggest you subscribe to RSS which is explained here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rss

and is represented by the RSS logo:

As for the incident you refer to, I didn't know you were unaware that the constitution was written during the time of the coup government, I apologize for dropping what I presumed was a well-known and thus irrelevant part of a sentence which didn't change the crux of the article anyway. However, in deference to those that may not have that knowledge, I'll be sure to include that aspect if I should encounter that reference in the future. If I was in the habit (you did erroneously use the plural "articles" afterall) of deceptively altering any reports I've posted (which is what you seem to be attempting to imply), the result would be quite evident and an avalanche of reports would have been generated. I've posted thousands of articles and reports without any dispute other than the one you mention. Still, I appreciate your input and as stated, I will endeavor to prevent that solitary incident from being repeated.

Edited August 20, 2008 by sriracha john

[Plus]

Can we accept courts that look away during coups?

I was excited to see this headline, unfortunately the actual article was very disappointing - there's no clear line of thought, no arguments, just a desperate attempt by Pravit to attract attention to a dead horse - the coup. He just can't let it go and no one is listening anymore, so he resorts to creating screaming headlines.

I haven't checked the previous page, on this one there's only that provocative title quoted by Stumonster, I guess he also felt that there's nothing else to quote.

[sriracha john]

Finance Minister clarifies comments of PM during Party meeting

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Surapong Suebwonglee revealed that yesterday's People Power Party meeting saw Party Leader and Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej assuring that he understands the various problems being faced by the Party.

The PM attributed the problems to a lack of discussion on issues in the past and also commented on rumors surrounding former PM Thaksin Shinawatra by saying that such ideas were an archaic form of politics.

The PM asked that all Party members be more constructive in their political activity.

Surapong clarified however that Samak's statement that he would cease activity if problems persisted referred to ceasing activities as Party Leader and did not mean a dissolution of Parliament.

He then commented on other issues, stating that the Party was not concerned over the formation of a new Party from its own members as well as the lottery case being transferred to the Central Administrative Court. As for the Party dissolution case, the Finance Minister assured that the party has prepared the needed documents for the issue.

- ThaiNews / today

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

PPP MPs say they were satisfied by Samak's elaboration on former PMs arrest warrant

People Power Party Northern MP Surapong Tohvijakchaiyakul, who led a petition calling for Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej to declare the details of an arrest warrant for deposed PM Thaksin Shinawatra, stated that during the Party's meeting yesterday Samak satisfactorily elaborated on the matter.

Surapong acknowledged that all Party members understood the situation and agreed that the misunderstanding came from a lack of communication.

The MP affirmed that his petition did not seek to remove the Party Leader and also expressed his certainty that Samak would lead the Party for the entire 4 year term.

He continued to assure that his Northern MP group would not leave the PPP unless the Party was dissolved and even then would remain unified in their transfer.

- ThaiNews / today

Now that's he finished "talking" to the PPP MP's... Samak goes to the people involved in the other side of the issue and....

Police just did their job, says PM

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej told senior police yesterday that officers were simply doing their duty when they put former premier Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife Pojaman on their wanted list.

Samak did not admonish the police for distributing wanted posters for Thaksin and Pojaman to stations throughout the country after the couple skipped bail and warrants for their arrest were issued by the Supreme Court, Royal Thai Police spokesman Lt-General Watcharapol Prasanrajakit said.

The premier, in his capacity as chairman of the National Police Commission, attended yesterday's meeting of the commission.

"He told the meeting briefly that everything was fine and that the officers had acted in accordance with due process, which is understandable. He said it was the duty of police to follow procedures," the spokesman said.

- The Nation / Aug. 21, 2008

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

for once, Samak is right.

[sriracha john]

Meanwhile... going to the "behind-the-scenes" prior to the PPP MP meeting...

Thaksin calls long distance for peace

Ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra phoned different groups in the ruling People Power Party on Tuesday calling for unity and continued support for Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, key figures in various factions said yesterday.

Thaksin made his calls from Britain from Monday night up till the start of the PPP meeting on Tuesday, according to key faction members.

Suthin Klangsang, a northeastern MP close to Thaksin's former aide Newin Chidchob, said the former PM called Newin just before the PPP meeting began on Tuesday afternoon.

Thaksin said he was aware of MPs' love for him but he wanted them to remain united and to support to Samak, the party leader, Suthin said.

"Don't blame the party leader. He has done his best. Please help stabilise the party," Thaksin was quoted as saying.

The former premier also called MPs in other groups loyal to him, such as those from the North, Northeast and Central region.

Paijit Sriworakhan, an MP from Nakhon Phanom who leads the Isaan Pattana (Developed Northeast) faction, said Thaksin phoned "all groups" in the party, calling for "things to be settled peacefully".

"He wants stability to allow the government space to run the country. If the conflict continues, the problems won't be over," Paijit said.

MP Natee Sutinphuak, from Samut Prakan, said Thaksin also talked to MPs in his group about the matter on Monday night.

Meanwhile, a source from Newin's group said Newin would fly to Britain in a few days to talk to Thaksin in a bid to clear any infighting within the ruling party.

An MP loyal to Thaksin said that Prime Minister Samak's explanation to People Power Party MPs about the police wanted posters for the ex-PM and his wife had restored unity within the ruling party.

Surapong Tovichakchaikul, a People Power MP for Chiang Mai, said Samak's remarks at the party meeting on Tuesday had helped MPs' understand the situation.

He said party MPs agreed to continue supporting the government and would still back Samak as premier.

"It seems our party is even more united now. In the past, Samak didn't come to offer his explanation [at party meetings] because he was too busy with work solving the country's problems. I believe that after the prime minister's comments on Tuesday, we will have more unity," Surapong said.

Samak insisted on Tuesday he was sympathetic to Thaksin and said he would never stab the ex-PM in the back.

Surapong said party MPs from the North had agreed to remain together even if the PPP was dissolved over the electoral fraud case involving Yongyuth Tiyapairat.

"I believe that will also be the case for party MPs from the Northeast and Central region," he said.

The MP, who chairs the House Committee on Finance, Banking and Financial Institutions, said he and six or seven other MPs in his group would travel to Britain to meet Thaksin.

"We will certainly go", after passage of the 2009 Budget Bill in mid-September, he said. "We will offer him moral support and tell him some facts."

Meanwhile, PPP Deputy Leader Somchai Wongsawat said his wife Yaowapa, who is Thaksin's sister, did not attend the party meeting on Tuesday. He said Yaowapa went to the IFCT Building, which houses the PPP headquarters, simply to pay respect to a Buddha statuette she inherited from her parents.

"She knows people in the party, so it's not unusual for her to talk to her friends there," he said.

Some PPP MPs said earlier that Yaowapa, a banned former executive of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai Party, called on Samak to defend Thaksin's human dignity and his honour as a former national leader.

In a related development, lawyers for Thaksin yesterday threatened to sue the People's Alliance for Democracy for "wrongfully circulating" photos of Thaksin and his wife depicting the two as wanted fugitives.

Lawyer Watchara Saengpratoom claimed the PAD defamed and violated the privacy of Thaksin and Pojaman by "falsifying" the warrants to look like a wanted list before putting them on public display.

He said he would lodge a complaint with Dusit police to pave way for criminal and civil lawsuits.

- The Nation / Aug. 21, 2008

[Tony Clifton]

How's that, he used to hold secret political meetings over in China and Hong Kong, planning on how to f*&65 up the country even further after it was whispered into his ear he had to leave politics, nearly bringing the country to civil war, now he will have the same kind of meetings in the U.K.

Edited August 21, 2008 by Tony Clifton

[sriracha john]

Thaksin said he was aware of MPs' love for him

Today:

Surapong Tovichakchaikul, a People Power MP for Chiang Mai, who chairs the House Committee on Finance, Banking and Financial Institutions, said he and six or seven other MPs in his group would travel to Britain to meet Thaksin.

and 13 days ago:

Deputy Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, who is a Deputy Party Leader, said Thaksin had quit politics. *yeah, riiiight*

Today:

Meanwhile, a source from Newin's group said Newin would fly to Britain in a few days to talk to Thaksin

and 13 days ago:

Meanwhile, House Speaker Chai Chidchob denied that his son - banned Thai Rak Thai Party executive Newin - wielded influence in the PPP. "Newin is one of the 111 party executives banned from political activities for five years and I see only the media trying to hype up Newin's involvement *yeah, riiiight*

PPP = Perpetual Pontificators of Piss

Edited August 21, 2008 by sriracha john

[Kerryd]

Well, I would hope that members of the British Gov't are following these news articles as well.

Any attempt at claiming Political Asylum should be rejected out of hand now. After all, he claims he fled because he couldn't expect to get a fair trail (especially after his attempts to "buy" a fair trail failed).

This just 6 months after claiming he had complete faith in the system.

Now, a week after saying the system is corrupt, he's instructing his lawyers to use that very same judicial system to sue PAD for distributing the wanted posters of him and his wife ?

He (Toxin) has probably never even heard of the word "hypocrisy", let alone is aware of it's meaning.

[sriracha john]

Thai FM considers revoking Thaksin's diplomatic passport

Thailand's foreign ministry is considering revoking the diplomatic passport of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra after a Thai court issued arrest warrants for him and his wife Pojaman for failing to appear at a court hearing in regard to a land purchase case in Bangkok on Monday, said Foreign Minister Tej Bunnag on Tuesday.

Mr. Thaksin had his diplomatic passport returned to him by former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama who had previously been the ousted premier's legal advisor.

Thai FM says whether to revoke Thaksin's passport depends on PM

BANGKOK, Aug. 21 (Xinhua) -- With many protesters rallying before his ministry on Thursday, Thailand's foreign minister Tej Bunnag explained that Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej would have a final say on whether to revoke passports held by deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra who is now living in London.

"It is a national issue, so the Foreign Ministry needs an instruction from the prime minister," Tej was quoted by local news network The Nation as saying. *It wasn't a "national issue" back when Noppadope re-issued it back to him? It didn't need to go through the Prime Minister then for a decision... *

It is not unprecedented for a Thai PM to revoke diplomatic passport of former premier, he said.

Tej made the statements protesters led by People's Alliance forDemocracy rallied in front of the ministry, demanding the ministry to cancel all passports held by Thaksin and his wife Pojaman. They said the couple were now criminal fugitives and were seeking asylum in England.

Thaksin, who was ousted during a military coup in 2006, is now holding both diplomatic and ordinary passports. He and Pojaman did not appeared to report to the Supreme Court on Aug. 11 for a hearing on their trials in a land deal case deal. Instead, they flew to London on the same day and Thaksin later announced their decision to seek asylum in England in a handwritten statement. However, according to Thai laws, a prime minister could hold the diplomatic passport all life.

[Bagwan]

http://www.gopetition.co.uk/petitions/call...nd/sign.html#se

Just in case anybody is interested.

[Tony Clifton]

A petition!

Ohhhhh now, look what you've done...

[sriracha john]

Given the tendency for Thaksin foes to permanently disappear...it might not be wise for those in Thailand to sign a petition with your identifying name and targetable address .