I Will Return To Post Of Prime Minister: Thaksin

[Sandstone Art]

Looking at the change and chian of events for dear Thaksin, maybe he can consider " Will I Return To Post Of Prime Minister " instead of 'I will ' ?

[Plus]

Why should he go to prison?

Yes, why? He hasn't been sentenced. He ran away from his trial.

Like Hammered said - there are plenty of people charged with LM, including Sondhi, they are still here. Why did Giles run?

He hasn't been charged for manifesto yet, only for his earlier book that hasn't even been officially banned, as far as I know.

There's an interesting reaction from CM's Midnight university - apparently they are not too pleased with "comrade" deserting them when they are about to be charged for signing anti-LM letter. They feel abandoned now.

[hammered]

Why should he go to prison?

Yes, why? He hasn't been sentenced. He ran away from his trial.

Like Hammered said - there are plenty of people charged with LM, including Sondhi, they are still here. Why did Giles run?

He hasn't been charged for manifesto yet, only for his earlier book that hasn't even been officially banned, as far as I know.

There's an interesting reaction from CM's Midnight university - apparently they are not too pleased with "comrade" deserting them when they are about to be charged for signing anti-LM letter. They feel abandoned now.

Iirc there about a 1000 people who signed that. No doubt they arent all going to do a Giles. It will also be interesting to see how the red shirts deal with this headache too. I dont know how much this issue has been in the Thai language media but I have heard ordinary people talk about the "guy with a Chinese Dad and British passport who ran away(he is not that well known) who doesnt love Thailand".

I just hope this manouver isnt out of some stalinist or maoist playbook as a strategy to raise temperatures to such a level that some low ranking sympathisers will be attacked and killed by a vigilante mob. What he wrote is right up there with the unacceptable and he states he says it as a red shirt. That is hanging all the red shirts out there with the same label. At the moment the number of peeple aware of all this may still be low but word is going to get around.

[Plus]

That's another aspect of Giles that I dislike - inserting himself in all kinds of issues and lending his name to all kinds of people that have nothing to do wtih his main agenda, and then leaving them out to dry.

He appears to talk about democracy, equality, and freedom, and those are legitimate and interesting subjects, but his main beef is with monarchy, that's the only judgement and criteria to get into his good books. He would never ever accept Abhisit as a "democrat", for example. Never mind the issues, never mind the policies, never mind the ideology, the line between "us" and "them" is not concerned with any of these things, no matter how much democratic gobbledygook he puts out in his manifestos.

His one and only solution is a communist republic of Thailand.

[jdinasia]

That's another aspect of Giles that I dislike - inserting himself in all kinds of issues and lending his name to all kinds of people that have nothing to do wtih his main agenda, and then leaving them out to dry.

He appears to talk about democracy, equality, and freedom, and those are legitimate and interesting subjects, but his main beef is with monarchy, that's the only judgement and criteria to get into his good books. He would never ever accept Abhisit as a "democrat", for example. Never mind the issues, never mind the policies, never mind the ideology, the line between "us" and "them" is not concerned with any of these things, no matter how much democratic gobbledygook he puts out in his manifestos.

His one and only solution is a communist republic of Thailand.

Thankfully he is no Mao (or any other type of leader).

[sriracha john]

Question: Have any the people that are condemning the professor taken the time to read the document?

Answer: The international media has....

Over the weekend prominent Thai academic Giles Ungpakorn fled to Britain after being charged last month with lese majeste for passages in his 2007 book, A Coup for the Rich, which criticized the 2006 military coup that overthrew former premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

Ungpakorn claimed his self-published book was censored by Chulalongkorn University which refused to sell it at the college book store on the grounds that several passages could be construed as lese majeste.

After fleeing the country, Ungpakorn, a self-professed Marxist, issued a manifesto on the internet titled "Red Siam," calling on the Thai people to "modernize" the country. The manifesto contained several passages that would definitely qualify as lese majeste.

Deutsche Presse-Agentur (DPA) / 2009-02-11

[justanothercybertosser]

Thankfully he is no Mao (or any other type of leader).

And neither does he pretend to be. If you read that manifesto, there is a clear statement that this is not to be understood as a call to arms. Giles Ungpakorn never has worked in the underground here, different than other factions.

Nevertheless, this manifesto is the first public statement in this era that contains such a strong worded demand of system change. People have debated this issue for some time now, and also reasonably, besides the fanatic rabble rousing on the different stages.

This manifesto will have an impact, because it cannot be denied. It is in the public arena.

We have to hope that, for a change, this might lead to reasonable debate and a compromise, and not to even further escalation by the radicals on all sides here. Thailand should learn to accept that these sentiments are existing in its society, maybe to a larger extend than is generally thought. These people can be incorporated into a future vision of Thailand, whatever that may be in the end.

Brushing them aside as "enemy of the state", as some posters here seem to do, could destroy this society.

[hammered]

Thankfully he is no Mao (or any other type of leader).

And neither does he pretend to be. If you read that manifesto, there is a clear statement that this is not to be understood as a call to arms. Giles Ungpakorn never has worked in the underground here, different than other factions.

Nevertheless, this manifesto is the first public statement in this era that contains such a strong worded demand of system change. People have debated this issue for some time now, and also reasonably, besides the fanatic rabble rousing on the different stages.

This manifesto will have an impact, because it cannot be denied. It is in the public arena.

We have to hope that, for a change, this might lead to reasonable debate and a compromise, and not to even further escalation by the radicals on all sides here. Thailand should learn to accept that these sentiments are existing in its society, maybe to a larger extend than is generally thought. These people can be incorporated into a future vision of Thailand, whatever that may be in the end.

Brushing them aside as "enemy of the state", as some posters here seem to do, could destroy this society.

I fear that it may have a nasty impact as he states that what he says is as a red shirt. That is identifying the red shirt movement with this document. He didnt have to do that and considering there are a lot of red shirts still in Thailand now linked to what is not a popular idea it was not a very good idea at all. Indeed I suspect if we take the red shirt movement as whole rather than just the ideological leadership we would find a big majority not in agreement with Giles. There is potential for vigilante action against people linked to this if what was stated becomes widely known. I guess the criticism of Thaksin and PTP may allow the majority of the red shirts and even Thaksin himself to move away from Giles but.....

Definitely a politcal play by Giles gambling on economic determinism and future unpopularity.

Persoanlly I wouldnt say anyone was the enemy of the state as that is up to the Thai people to decide. However, Giles or anyone else rasining things like this in a public place in Thailand do so at considerable risk of immediate reaction from the people they claim to be wanting to liberate. I guess Giles recognises this by doing it from afar. That luxury is not afforded to a movement he has linked to it and also not to a large group who signed a letter against LM who I understnd are already critical of Giles action.

[JacknDanny]

The most amusing part was that Finland plans was working really well for TRT. I don't even understand the need to question the existence of its origins - it was in full bloom in front of our eyes already.

I also don't see the need to bring it into this thread. What purpose would it serve? It's been discussed to death already.

Even Giles should be continued in "Banned websites", really, as he openly distances himself from Thaksin.

If only mods can find a gentle way to redirect Giles discussion without breaking it off.

^ fully agree on both Finland and Giles....

for a bit of an update on the thread title's subject's woes....

City dump Thaksin from president's role

Manchester City have dismissed ­Thaksin Shinawatra from his position as the ­honorary Club President after deciding the time was right to take a stance against a man who has been convicted of multi-million-pound corruption and is ­currently on the run from the authorities in ­Thailand after being sentenced to two years in prison.

City's rulers in Abu Dhabi took the decision after high-level talks over the past few weeks to determine what to do about the way the former owner had become an increasing source of embarrassment to his successors at Eastlands.

The new owner, Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and the Chairman, Khaldoon Al Mubarak, concluded that it would be "inappropriate" to allow Thaksin to continue holding such a prominent position and that the former prime minister of Thailand should become the first high-profile casualty of their reign.

Simon Pearce, the Sheikh's personal envoy, and the other English representatives on City's board were also aware that the Premier League had strong objections about the involvement of a fugitive who was once described by Human Rights Watch as "a human-rights abuser of the worst kind."

Thaksin, who accepted the position when he sold the club to ADUG last ­September, has been on the run, spending time in the Middle East, China and the Bahamas, since his UK visa was cancelled in November. His current whereabouts are a mystery to City but the club's Executive Chairman, Garry Cook, managed to get a message to the 59-year-old, via intermediaries, before the 1-0 defeat of Middlesbrough on Saturday.

Thaksin's name was subsequently removed from the match-day programme and has also been taken off the club's ­website as well as various places inside the stadium.

The decision is understood to have been accepted by Thaksin and has gone down well inside the City boardroom, with one high-ranking official recently saying that it was "disgusting" that a convicted criminal should be allowed an honorary role at the club.

Thaksin, ironically, is still a popular ­figure with many City supporters, who credit him with rescuing the club from financial hardship and setting up the ADUG deal. However, City are also aware of fans who refused to watch the club while Thaksin and his family were in ­control at Eastlands.

Thaksin, who made a £120 million profit by selling City, may now try to sell his remaining 10% stake in the club as tries to build a new life – he is reported to be building a £5.5 million property in China – and fight Thailand's extradition procedures. He has always maintained his innocence, describing his conviction at Thailand's supreme court last October as "politically motivated", and claiming he had to flee the country because it was not safe for him to stay.

- Guardian (UK) / 2009-02-11

I did try to warn them but they didnt even reply to my e mail.

[sriracha john]

*deleted

Edited February 11, 2009 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

Question: Have any the people that are condemning the professor taken the time to read the document?

Answer: The international media has....

The manifesto contained several passages that would definitely qualify as lese majeste.

Deutsche Presse-Agentur (DPA) / 2009-02-11

If you read that manifesto, there is a clear statement that this is not to be understood as a call to arms.

It doesn't need to be. It's as described above which is more than enough to condemn it.

Nevertheless, this manifesto is the first public statement in this era that contains such a strong worded demand of system change.

Which is just another way of describing the same illegal act that the international news agency described it.

This manifesto will have an impact, because it cannot be denied.

It will have an impact for the Red Shirts, because now they'll have to publicly say whether they back what one of their new converted speakers says.

It will certainly have an impact with Giles. I don't see him returning to Thailand after this.

[sriracha john]

No honour: Thaksin Shinawatra has been stripped of his honorary presidency of Manchester City.

GETTY IMAGES

Manchester City withdraw Thaksin Shinawatra’s honorary presidency

Manchester City’s former owner, Thaksin Shinawatra, is no longer the club’s Honorary President after the Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) he sold up to concluded that his conviction for corruption and wanted status in his home country of Thailand is an embarrassment they will no longer tolerate.

Shinawatra is currently in exile from Thailand where he has been sentenced to two years in prison. He has also had repeated allegations of human rights abuses leveled at him in relation to his time as Prime Minister of the south east Asian country.

City’s current owner, Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan and his chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak held talks to resolve the issue and have moved to act decisively to make Shinawatra the first high profile casualty of their stewardship.

Shinawatra, who was handed the position on selling the club last September, has lived an itinerant existence of late, spending time in the Middle East, the Bahamas, and China, where he is currently believed to be setting up home.

His UK visa was cancelled in November.

Though his precise whereabouts is unknown, a report in the Guardian newspaper suggests that City’s executive chairman Garry Cook has managed to relay his bosses decision to Shinawatra already.

The former owner’s name no longer features in the match day programme, on the club’s website or anywhere around the City of Manchester Stadium.

Shinawatra turned a £120 million profit on his short spell at the club when he sold up to ADUG and is likely now to sell his remaining 10 per cent share in the club as he continues his fight against Thailand’s extradition procedures.

The controversial figure has always maintained his innocence and described the conviction by Thailand’s supreme court last year as “politically motivated”.

- Telegraph (UK) / 2009-02-11

Edited February 11, 2009 by sriracha john

[JacknDanny]

Question: Have any the people that are condemning the professor taken the time to read the document?

Where in the document is there any incitement to revolt or to engage in violent acts? He specifically calls for an exchange of ideas, for questioning, not arms. I am amazed that on one hand many people will post in TV about the inability of Thais to question, and yet when a Thai does it, there is a kneejerk reaction that the fellow shouldn't be so uppity and should instead appreciate his position as the "house ni...r" . . All he is saying is that in order for things to improve, people must become involved.

Why should he go to prison? How would his being imprisoned serve his cause more effectivel?. Because mandela went to prison? I suggest that you read what Mandela had to say about his imprisonment. It set back his fight for justice by a decade and he wished he had never been sent to prison.

Dismiss the professor all you want, but there have been other "teachers" sent out into the wilderness that have come back to bite the posteriors of those that exiled them. Remember Mao Zedong? Ho Chi Minh?

Not a pretty picture, but they too were dismissed as scum, crackpots. Took them awhile, but they had the last laugh. All because the powers mishandled the situation. You can not supress ideas like this. In order to be effectively contained they must be discussed openly and if without value, shown to be as such.

A perfect storm is brewing. If the anticipated economic wallop arrives, the atmosphere will be ripe for the professor and his ideas. Jobless and underemployed youth will be eager to listen. They always are. Thailand is a nation with a young population. Crushing those that dissent and enforcing conformity encourages rebellion. Thailand doesn't need this now.

Do you really understand the Thai people at all?

Apart from the left wing clap trap that you are uttering (your opinion and you are welcome to it), although Giles is not using violent words, his whole ideas are vulgar, and totally opposite to what 99% of the population think.

In my opinion he is a s#it stirring, gonad-less, scum bag. . And that is being polite.

[justanothercybertosser]

I fear that it may have a nasty impact as he states that what he says is as a red shirt. That is identifying the red shirt movement with this document. He didnt have to do that and considering there are a lot of red shirts still in Thailand now linked to what is not a popular idea it was not a very good idea at all. Indeed I suspect if we take the red shirt movement as whole rather than just the ideological leadership we would find a big majority not in agreement with Giles. There is potential for vigilante action against people linked to this if what was stated becomes widely known. I guess the criticism of Thaksin and PTP may allow the majority of the red shirts and even Thaksin himself to move away from Giles but.....

Definitely a politcal play by Giles gambling on economic determinism and future unpopularity.

Persoanlly I wouldnt say anyone was the enemy of the state as that is up to the Thai people to decide. However, Giles or anyone else rasining things like this in a public place in Thailand do so at considerable risk of immediate reaction from the people they claim to be wanting to liberate. I guess Giles recognises this by doing it from afar. That luxury is not afforded to a movement he has linked to it and also not to a large group who signed a letter against LM who I understnd are already critical of Giles action.

It may well have a nasty impact, it may also have the opposite. Nasty impacts may well be even without his statement.

You post contains a few assumptions and even mistakes.

The most glaring mistake is that you believe that the Red Shirt movement has overall leadership. It hasn't, it never had. the structure of the Red Shirts is fundamentally different than PAD's structure, which does have an overall leadership.

This mistake is also behind several posts that you made, which you based on your assumption of a supposed split. This split never happened as these groups never were the same group, but always remained independent groups with significant differences in ideology, strategy and tactics.

You will have Red Shirt groups that will not accept Giles Ungpakorn's statement, and others that will. That the majority of ordinary Red Shirts may not accept this manifesto is an assumption. We can only make such a statement when we can base this on fact. At the moment i would not take anything for granted anymore here in Thailand. the last two years have initiated some major shifts of public opinion. To which extend, we cannot possibly know yet as public debate on these subjects is only possible with very strict limitations.

Our discussion here is hindered by a very disabling lack of very necessary hard data.

[justanothercybertosser]

Do you really understand the Thai people at all?

Apart from the left wing clap trap that you are uttering (your opinion and you are welcome to it), although Giles is not using violent words, his whole ideas are vulgar, and totally opposite to what 99% of the population think.

In my opinion he is a s#it stirring, gonad-less, scum bag. . And that is being polite.

What 99% of the Thai population thinks or not is a comment based on your opinion. There are no statistics that can prove, or disprove such a claim.

His idea vulgar? Depends on the context. For the Thailand of the past 50 years that may be so, but not for most countries in the rest of the world, of which Thailand is increasingly part of economically and socially. Many countries stood in the past before such elementary decisions over adaptations of their system when faced by a changing and/or developing society.

Thailand's society went through rapid changes over the past decades, from a primarily agrarian society into a newly industrialized society. Such developments will have an impact also on basic cultural parameters.

Brushing this aside as the agitation of a few individuals that are to be ostracized from society is the recipe for disaster. Even if it is just one percent of Thai society that thinks so (the number you stated), this still leaves a number of several hundred thousand people who would agree with the sentiments expressed in this manifesto (if you discount the children).

What are you suggesting? Putting all these people into jail? Kill them? Or find a social compromise in which these people safely can express their views?

Edited February 11, 2009 by justanothercybertosser

[Samuian]

Why should he go to prison?

Yes, why? He hasn't been sentenced. He ran away from his trial.

Like Hammered said - there are plenty of people charged with LM, including Sondhi, they are still here. Why did Giles run?

He hasn't been charged for manifesto yet, only for his earlier book that hasn't even been officially banned, as far as I know.

There's an interesting reaction from CM's Midnight university - apparently they are not too pleased with "comrade" deserting them when they are about to be charged for signing anti-LM letter. They feel abandoned now.

As it is my guess, that the real reasons might be others then given!

[hammered]

I fear that it may have a nasty impact as he states that what he says is as a red shirt. That is identifying the red shirt movement with this document. He didnt have to do that and considering there are a lot of red shirts still in Thailand now linked to what is not a popular idea it was not a very good idea at all. Indeed I suspect if we take the red shirt movement as whole rather than just the ideological leadership we would find a big majority not in agreement with Giles. There is potential for vigilante action against people linked to this if what was stated becomes widely known. I guess the criticism of Thaksin and PTP may allow the majority of the red shirts and even Thaksin himself to move away from Giles but.....

Definitely a politcal play by Giles gambling on economic determinism and future unpopularity.

Persoanlly I wouldnt say anyone was the enemy of the state as that is up to the Thai people to decide. However, Giles or anyone else rasining things like this in a public place in Thailand do so at considerable risk of immediate reaction from the people they claim to be wanting to liberate. I guess Giles recognises this by doing it from afar. That luxury is not afforded to a movement he has linked to it and also not to a large group who signed a letter against LM who I understnd are already critical of Giles action.

It may well have a nasty impact, it may also have the opposite. Nasty impacts may well be even without his statement.

You post contains a few assumptions and even mistakes.

The most glaring mistake is that you believe that the Red Shirt movement has overall leadership. It hasn't, it never had. the structure of the Red Shirts is fundamentally different than PAD's structure, which does have an overall leadership.

This mistake is also behind several posts that you made, which you based on your assumption of a supposed split. This split never happened as these groups never were the same group, but always remained independent groups with significant differences in ideology, strategy and tactics.

You will have Red Shirt groups that will not accept Giles Ungpakorn's statement, and others that will. That the majority of ordinary Red Shirts may not accept this manifesto is an assumption. We can only make such a statement when we can base this on fact. At the moment i would not take anything for granted anymore here in Thailand. the last two years have initiated some major shifts of public opinion. To which extend, we cannot possibly know yet as public debate on these subjects is only possible with very strict limitations.

Our discussion here is hindered by a very disabling lack of very necessary hard data.

I am quite aware of the internal organization of the red shirts. That however is not the point as the red shirts are seen as a single group - now split - by the public maybe thanks to this meme being sown very heavily by the media, polical analysts and it has to be said not denied publically by the red shirts themselves. Ask anyone outside of a political circle who the red shirt leadership are and they will name certain people from a well known circle the media and politcal analysts identify as the red shirt leaders.

I wouldnt take anything forgranted in the future. However in the here and now?

[justanothercybertosser]

I wouldnt take anything forgranted in the future. However in the here and now?

Given the by you stated misrepresentation in the media of the Red Shirt structures, the limitations of what can be said and what not - in the here and now i would take nothing for granted either, and especially not what is presented to us by the media. More and more Thais, even in the villages, are getting politicized, and their sources of information are increasingly found in completely unregulated alternative news sources. Some of those are professional, but others are pure agitation hack jobs for either red or yellow.

This should show that there is a pressing need for some form of public debate in a regulated arena before things go out of hand.

[tropo]

So in Thailand we allow convicted criminals to govern the country then ?

No, it doesn't work like that.

In Thailand the military stage a coup while the prime minister is away on official business and then convict him while he's abroad to ensure he will not return.

[jdinasia]

I wouldnt take anything forgranted in the future. However in the here and now?

Given the by you stated misrepresentation in the media of the Red Shirt structures, the limitations of what can be said and what not - in the here and now i would take nothing for granted either, and especially not what is presented to us by the media. More and more Thais, even in the villages, are getting politicized, and their sources of information are increasingly found in completely unregulated alternative news sources. Some of those are professional, but others are pure agitation hack jobs for either red or yellow.

This should show that there is a pressing need for some form of public debate in a regulated arena before things go out of hand.

"even in the villages" ?

[jdinasia]

So in Thailand we allow convicted criminals to govern the country then ?

No, it doesn't work like that.

In Thailand the military stage a coup while the prime minister is away on official business and then convict him while he's abroad to ensure he will not return.

Convict him while he's abroad? Didn't he know he was on trial?

[SmugFarangBore]

The pitiful handful of Thais that agree with him will have absolutely no chance of fulfilling his platform.

Disagree.

It almost happened in the 30's.

Could easily swing that way again in the future.

Nothing pitiful about having a brain and using it to have your own opinion either.

Unfortunately, I can also see a time when it could happen again. That's no reason to look forward to it though, as you seem to be so gleefully doing so. Do you really think that with a weakened "master" the military will simply fade away and allow the people to take control of the country? You need to wake up. Sure, a lot of people will protest, in any colour shirt they want, but a lot of people will then be killed. Something's rotten in the state of Thai politics, but you only need to look to our neighbours in the west to see that things could get a whole lot more so.

How on Earth did you ascertain from my post that I would be "looking forward with glee" to that happening?

I suspect that you, like many of the other posters here are attempting to attribute my position on certain political matters for me because I simply don't agree with the obsessive and erroneous viewpoint that Thailand's ills are solely down to one man now living in exile.

[sriracha john]

I suspect that you, like many of the other posters here are attempting to attribute my position on certain political matters for me because I simply don't agree with the obsessive and erroneous viewpoint that Thailand's ills are solely down to one man now living in exile.

Probably because, to the best of my knowledge, no poster (let alone plural "posters" and especially the superlative "many posters") has ever posted that...

and that prior to your arrival on the forum, most of those posters that have said this of other posters were subsequently banned as multi-ID'ers or repeated forum rule breakers.

Edited February 11, 2009 by sriracha john

[SmugFarangBore]

I suspect that you, like many of the other posters here are attempting to attribute my position on certain political matters for me because I simply don't agree with the obsessive and erroneous viewpoint that Thailand's ills are solely down to one man now living in exile.

Probably because, to the best of my knowledge, no poster (let alone plural "posters") has ever posted that...

and that most often in the past, those posters that have said this of other posters were banned as multi-ID'ers or repeated forum rule breakers.

You have still to back up your repeated allegations of me having multiple usernames.

Not a shred of proof you have provided, nor can you provide to back up your claims.

But I see you are still chipping away trying to discredit me as such.

Predictable, and tedious.

Edited February 11, 2009 by SmugFarangBore

[ballpoint]

The pitiful handful of Thais that agree with him will have absolutely no chance of fulfilling his platform.

Disagree.

It almost happened in the 30's.

Could easily swing that way again in the future.

Nothing pitiful about having a brain and using it to have your own opinion either.

Unfortunately, I can also see a time when it could happen again. That's no reason to look forward to it though, as you seem to be so gleefully doing so. Do you really think that with a weakened "master" the military will simply fade away and allow the people to take control of the country? You need to wake up. Sure, a lot of people will protest, in any colour shirt they want, but a lot of people will then be killed. Something's rotten in the state of Thai politics, but you only need to look to our neighbours in the west to see that things could get a whole lot more so.

How on Earth did you ascertain from my post that I would be "looking forward with glee" to that happening?

I suspect that you, like many of the other posters here are attempting to attribute my position on certain political matters for me because I simply don't agree with the obsessive and erroneous viewpoint that Thailand's ills are solely down to one man now living in exile.

Yes, you've used that argument before while defending Thaksin. You claim not to like him, yet shower him with praise while attacking every move Abhisit makes. Me thinks you doth protest too much. Or are you really arguing a case you don't believe in just to provoke? I believe there is a word for that.

In fact, you've done it again here. Because you don't agree with our appraisal of Thaksin it is an "obsessive and erroneous viewpoint". In other posts you've used "simple minded" to describe those you don't agree with. I'm sorry, but I beg to differ, and I'd like to know what power gives you the right to decide what is correct and what is erroneous? I have followed the career of Thaksin from his PDP days, and was a supporter of him right from the start. My reasoning was that a man who was new to politics, rising through a relatively clean party, with the backing of Chamlong, and already wealthy would be a clean sweep for Thailand. Here was a man who could really make a change. His first move on the political stage was to promise to solve Bangkok's traffic problems, with grandeous schemes including using helicopters to lift broken down cars off the roads and out of the way. In fact, he even set a deadline and promised to resign if he never met it. Should have been a warning as to the way he worked, but I stuck with him. The first real tarnishing of my view was the asset concealment case when he became PM, but I still wanted to give him a chance. Then he went and aligned himself with the same old clique. He had a mandate from the people and a working majority but he still went and included Banharn, Chavilit, Newin, Chalerm and all the other corrupt, lying same olds from previous corrupt, lying governments in his cabinet. Why? Over the years came the war on drugs, the muzzling of the press, the corruption stories, the murder of opponents, the promotion of family members and the law suits against anyone daring to tell the truth about him. Come on, it is not that difficult to see what he really is. That is why I use the word hate to describe how I see him now. He had a golden chance to really do something for the country and he not only blew it, he actually turned it on its head and used it to advance his own wealth and power. And I have no doubt what so ever that, had he been allowed to continue in office, he would have cemented his place there, moving his people into the police and military command, eliminating his opponents, biding his time before becoming El Presidente, supreme commander and glorious leader.

There. My beliefs, my facts, not some vague comments and abuse to anyone who differs in opinion.

[SmugFarangBore]

Yes, you've used that argument before while defending Thaksin.

I only appear to "defend Thaksin" when your rants against that odious man get in the way of truth and fact.

He isn't hiding under the bed, and he isn't in your closet waiting to jump out and scare you.

You claim not to like him, yet shower him with praise while attacking every move Abhisit makes. Me thinks you doth protest too much. Or are you really arguing a case you don't believe in just to provoke? I believe there is a word for that.

Nonsense. Just because I point out your inaccuracies and falsehoods does not me a Thaksin supporter make.

In fact, you've done it again here. Because you don't agree with our appraisal of Thaksin it is an "obsessive and erroneous viewpoint". In other posts you've used "simple minded" to describe those you don't agree with. I'm sorry, but I beg to differ, and I'd like to know what power gives you the right to decide what is correct and what is erroneous? I have followed the career of Thaksin from his PDP days, and was a supporter of him right from the start. My reasoning was that a man who was new to politics, rising through a relatively clean party, with the backing of Chamlong, and already wealthy would be a clean sweep for Thailand. Here was a man who could really make a change. His first move on the political stage was to promise to solve Bangkok's traffic problems, with grandeous schemes including using helicopters to lift broken down cars off the roads and out of the way. In fact, he even set a deadline and promised to resign if he never met it. Should have been a warning as to the way he worked, but I stuck with him. The first real tarnishing of my view was the asset concealment case when he became PM, but I still wanted to give him a chance. Then he went and aligned himself with the same old clique. He had a mandate from the people and a working majority but he still went and included Banharn, Chavilit, Newin, Chalerm and all the other corrupt, lying same olds from previous corrupt, lying governments in his cabinet. Why? Over the years came the war on drugs, the muzzling of the press, the corruption stories, the murder of opponents, the promotion of family members and the law suits against anyone daring to tell the truth about him. Come on, it is not that difficult to see what he really is. That is why I use the word hate to describe how I see him now. He had a golden chance to really do something for the country and he not only blew it, he actually turned it on its head and used it to advance his own wealth and power. And I have no doubt what so ever that, had he been allowed to continue in office, he would have cemented his place there, moving his people into the police and military command, eliminating his opponents, biding his time before becoming El Presidente, supreme commander and glorious leader.

There. My beliefs, my facts, not some vague comments and abuse to anyone who differs in opinion.

Oh I see how he really is, but you can't see what this government really is, and that's the problem.

[jdinasia]

This government is the elected government of the Kingdom of Thailand, what do you think it is Boor?

[ballpoint]

Yes, you've used that argument before while defending Thaksin.

I only appear to "defend Thaksin" when your rants against that odious man get in the way of truth and fact.

He isn't hiding under the bed, and he isn't in your closet waiting to jump out and scare you.

You claim not to like him, yet shower him with praise while attacking every move Abhisit makes. Me thinks you doth protest too much. Or are you really arguing a case you don't believe in just to provoke? I believe there is a word for that.

Nonsense. Just because I point out your inaccuracies and falsehoods does not me a Thaksin supporter make.

In fact, you've done it again here. Because you don't agree with our appraisal of Thaksin it is an "obsessive and erroneous viewpoint". In other posts you've used "simple minded" to describe those you don't agree with. I'm sorry, but I beg to differ, and I'd like to know what power gives you the right to decide what is correct and what is erroneous? I have followed the career of Thaksin from his PDP days, and was a supporter of him right from the start. My reasoning was that a man who was new to politics, rising through a relatively clean party, with the backing of Chamlong, and already wealthy would be a clean sweep for Thailand. Here was a man who could really make a change. His first move on the political stage was to promise to solve Bangkok's traffic problems, with grandeous schemes including using helicopters to lift broken down cars off the roads and out of the way. In fact, he even set a deadline and promised to resign if he never met it. Should have been a warning as to the way he worked, but I stuck with him. The first real tarnishing of my view was the asset concealment case when he became PM, but I still wanted to give him a chance. Then he went and aligned himself with the same old clique. He had a mandate from the people and a working majority but he still went and included Banharn, Chavilit, Newin, Chalerm and all the other corrupt, lying same olds from previous corrupt, lying governments in his cabinet. Why? Over the years came the war on drugs, the muzzling of the press, the corruption stories, the murder of opponents, the promotion of family members and the law suits against anyone daring to tell the truth about him. Come on, it is not that difficult to see what he really is. That is why I use the word hate to describe how I see him now. He had a golden chance to really do something for the country and he not only blew it, he actually turned it on its head and used it to advance his own wealth and power. And I have no doubt what so ever that, had he been allowed to continue in office, he would have cemented his place there, moving his people into the police and military command, eliminating his opponents, biding his time before becoming El Presidente, supreme commander and glorious leader.

There. My beliefs, my facts, not some vague comments and abuse to anyone who differs in opinion.

Oh I see how he really is, but you can't see what this government really is, and that's the problem.

And there you go again "inaccuracies, falsehoods, rants, getting in the way of truth and facts". It must be very lonely sitting up there in your tower, deciding what is right and what is wrong. I'll give Abhisit a chance and make up my own mind, just like I did with Thaksin. Until then, no one can tell me whether I am right or wrong about Abhisit, however the verdict is in on Thaksin.

[justanothercybertosser]

I have followed the career of Thaksin from his PDP days, and was a supporter of him right from the start.

This is an interesting though fitting admission. Many of Thaksin's erstwhile supporters turned out to be his most rabid opponents later on. Like you, i have followed Thaksin's carrer for a long time, maybe longer than you as i have already had certain doubts about him during the building of his different monopolies.

At the time of his election as Prime Minister i was not very happy, understood though that the Chuan Adminstration has done nothing for the poor, and was at the time the only available choice. Which does not say anything good for him, but says more about the quality of his opponents. After the drugwar killings i despised Thaksin.

When Sondhi L. started to oppose him, i was initially glad, but after hearing the first speeches, i started getting very scared. I hoped for a democratic opposition, but Sondhi, and then the PAD, were from the start a right wing opposition and as undemocratic as it can get.

Chamlong is a dirty one. Read up on his role in 1976, and you will find out that he was a major rabble rouser of the village scouts and other right wing organizations. Also on the day of the massacre he has been at the meeting place of the village scouts at Royal Plaza. Very nice hero, our "Maha-Chamlong" - a fanatic all his life. From right wing army officer to fundamentalist sectarian and back to right wing rabble rouser.

Funny though that you have the cheek to call me a Thaksin Lover, and accuse many of Thaksin's earliest opponents who are now part of the red Shirt movement of doing his bidding.

[sriracha john]

City gives disgraced Thaksin the boot

Fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra has suffered more indignity following Manchester City's decision to remove him as Honorary Club President.

British media reported the club's owners in Abu Dhabi had decided the time was right to take a stance against a man who has been convicted of multimillion-pound corruption, is presently on the run from the authorities in Thailand, and cannot even enter the UK.

The decision was reportedly taken after high-level talks over the past few weeks to determine what to do about the way the former owner had become an increasing source of embarrassment to his successors at Eastlands.

"Frank", as Thaksin was called, thanks to the similarity of his surname to "Sinatra", remains a popular figure among many City supporters, who credit him with rescuing the club from financial hardship and setting up the deal with the new, massively rich owners.

However, there were also fans who refused to watch the club while Thaksin and his family were in control.

The Guardian reported the new owner, Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and chairman Khaldoon al-Mubarak concluded it would be "inappropriate" to allow Thaksin to continue holding such a prominent position.

"Simon Pearce, the sheikh's personal envoy, and the other English representatives on City's board were also aware that the Premier League had strong objections about the involvement of a fugitive who was once described by Human Rights Watch as 'a human-rights abuser of the worst kind'," The Guardian said.

Thaksin's name was subsequently removed from the match-day programme and has also been taken off the club's website and various places inside the stadium.

The decision is understood to have been accepted by Thaksin and has gone down well inside the City boardroom, with one high-ranking official recently saying it was "disgusting" that a convicted criminal should be allowed an honorary role at the club, The Guardian reported.

Thaksin, who made a 6 Billion Baht profit selling City, may now try to sell his remaining 10-per-cent stake.

- The Nation / 2009-02-12