Ready To Tear The Country Apart

[h90]

Chuan is regarded as not corrupt and had after his term as PM less money than before. He repaired the 1997 crises in which Thaksin was also involved. The only thing you can complain at is that the Chuan government was slow.

Why was Chuan found by the National Counter Corruption Commission to be concealing assets then?

And the Chuan government was plagued by corruption scandals. It's where he got his nickname of 'the painter'.

Shows just how little you know about Thai politics pre-Thaksin.

Additionally, Thaksin was appointed in the cabinet after the government sparked the crisis by refusing to devalue the Baht.

So get your facts right before spouting off nonsense.

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Chuan had "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative", not really a big thing.

That the 1997 crises was a big dirty game in which some made a lot money, is well known, if he did something himself is not clear but it was the group of people he belong to.

[Koo82]

Let's imagine for one minute that the reds win, Thaksin comes back, his slate is cleaned, he runs for, and wins, and becomes prime minister. What will happen to Thailand? Protests will continue - and escalate - he will not be able to solve the matter of the economy any time soon, he tightens up on freedom of press, he persecutes everyone who has been against him, he insults the monarchy, he kills more drug dealers (and innocent bystanders), and Thailand goes up in flames. Surely no one wants that. Abhisit is not perfect, but he is perfectly good enough for now...considering the alternatives. At least he is no hardliner and is doing his damnest to heal the divide. You think for one moment that Thaksin will let bygones be bygones? His return would be wrought with vengence. Scary.

You are wrong if you think "he insults the monarchy" or will insult. People brought this up trying to knock Khun Thaksin but nothing is done because there is no evidence. The one having this issue is Sondhi but from the news I got from Dtv, they lifted this.

This is the last tool for those who try to knock him and the reds, knowing that no Thai will accept this. Sondhi used this tool too. Love is shown by doings, not by using it to knock other people.

These people are against the noble system:

[kurtgruen]

...let face the truce, the Thai Rak Thai party years ago made for the first time the poor fell like real human people,

and they will never forget it.

Some of the poor will never forget hundreds of hilltribe people being killed without a trail. Some of the people (even though they may be afraid to talk about it), won't forget Thaksin's son coming up to the tribal village in a motorcade, buying drugs. Maybe one day the truth will come out, I hope so.

Many people won't forget a truckload of Southern People suffocating to death during Thaskin's reign.

Yet, like with some other Monster, 70 some years ago, some people will continue to scream "Heil Thaskin", because some people just don't find human rights that important. After all, it's "Money #1", isn't it ;-)

[samgrowth]

Chuan is regarded as not corrupt and had after his term as PM less money than before. He repaired the 1997 crises in which Thaksin was also involved. The only thing you can complain at is that the Chuan government was slow.

Why was Chuan found by the National Counter Corruption Commission to be concealing assets then?

And the Chuan government was plagued by corruption scandals. It's where he got his nickname of 'the painter'.

Shows just how little you know about Thai politics pre-Thaksin.

Additionally, Thaksin was appointed in the cabinet after the government sparked the crisis by refusing to devalue the Baht.

So get your facts right before spouting off nonsense.

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Chuan had "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative", not really a big thing.

That the 1997 crises was a big dirty game in which some made a lot money, is well known, if he did something himself is not clear but it was the group of people he belong to.

I agree with you that Chuan had "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative" is NOT a big thing.

Mark escape the army. Is this a BIG thing? Mark try to hind the fact.

What about Samak moonlighting as a cook. Is this a BIG thing? Samak openly apprears on TV.

The law is the law, no matter how small or stupid that might sound. That's why Thaksin have to go to jail for giving concent, while his wife have all the rights in this world to bid for the Rachada land.

[h90]

Chuan is regarded as not corrupt and had after his term as PM less money than before. He repaired the 1997 crises in which Thaksin was also involved. The only thing you can complain at is that the Chuan government was slow.

Why was Chuan found by the National Counter Corruption Commission to be concealing assets then?

And the Chuan government was plagued by corruption scandals. It's where he got his nickname of 'the painter'.

Shows just how little you know about Thai politics pre-Thaksin.

Additionally, Thaksin was appointed in the cabinet after the government sparked the crisis by refusing to devalue the Baht.

So get your facts right before spouting off nonsense.

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Chuan had "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative", not really a big thing.

That the 1997 crises was a big dirty game in which some made a lot money, is well known, if he did something himself is not clear but it was the group of people he belong to.

I agree with you that Chuan had "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative" is NOT a big thing.

Mark escape the army. Is this a BIG thing? Mark try to hind the fact.

What about Samak moonlighting as a cook. Is this a BIG thing? Samak openly apprears on TV.

The law is the law, no matter how small or stupid that might sound. That's why Thaksin have to go to jail for giving concent, while his wife have all the rights in this world to bid for the Rachada land.

yes law is law and Thaksin bribed himself out "honest mistake" when he had shareholdings.

but you are changing the topic! you claimed Chuan was corrupt and all we find now is "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative", which is wrong but not corruption.

That is Abhisit was at the army or not, Chuan had "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative" against the massive corruption/abuse of power, bribing the courts and killing 3000 people in his war against drugs.

[Plus]

Mark will not be able to solve the matter of the economy any time soon, he tightens up on freedom of press, he persecutes everyone who has been against him and those insults the monarchy, he allows more drug dealers and underground lotterys,

Abhisit would do all that?

This coin doesn't have two sides.

Reds and their PTP party will be trashed in the next election, with their MPs flocking to Newin and other coalition parties.

Thaksin is finished, he needs a long breether even to consider the possibility of a comeback in any shape or form. Reds victory in the current protests is inconcievable. I can't think of any plausible scenario where their demands would be met one way or another. At best they can force elections, yet winning elections does not guarantee anything for Thaksin, as PPP has brilliantly demonstated after milking that cow for a year.

He's got no other choice, though, he is desperate.

For plus, a coin only has one side - his own opinion which can not be changed

Important too not to let facts get in the way in forum discussions

Err, sir, it's the future, it can't possibly be a fact, no matter how much you like the idea. Do you actually read the posts?

[samgrowth]

I agree with you. I think Chuan have no intension, and should not be punish for it.

Mark, like most Chinese escape army, it is a VERY common thing in Thailand; IMHO should not be punish for it.

BUT please set the same standard.

All I am saying is that

Why should Samak be punished for such a small offends, moonlighting as a cook?

Can you please provide your view on this matter?

[h90]

I agree with you. I think Chuan have no intension, and should not be punish for it.

Mark, like most Chinese escape army, it is a VERY common thing in Thailand; IMHO should not be punish for it.

BUT please set the same standard.

All I am saying is that

Why should Samak be punished for such a small offends, moonlighting as a cook?

Can you please provide your view on this matter?

Abhisit didn't do anything illegal so you can't punish him.

Thaksin.....you recall when he bribed the courts so his undeclared shares were a honest mistake?

that Samak thing was really unlucky and the law did not offer an other solution. Samak corrupt and a murder got kicked for the the cooking. That's indeed strange and maybe not complete fair

[trogers]

Thaksin is a genius in snipping bits and pieces of the past and paste them together to deceive the general public.

I am most interested of the start of his downfall, during April 2006. He just won an imperfect election, flew to Hua Hin and then back to BKK in a helicopter, and announced on TV with teary eyes that he will stand down from politics. Then he took leave from his post as PM and the rest is history.

What happened during that trip in the helicopter that caused his tears?

Can you, Thaksin, tell us during your next phone-in? Why start the story only at Sept 2006?

No one care to comment on what I have said? Or perhaps many want to forget what actually happened?

[Plus]

Yeah, I think the government should replay this message just to remind people Thaksin's own promise to step aside.

Reds would argue that it was before the coup, but for the rest of the country it doesn't matter - he promised to step down from politics great many times, but that one was the most memorable.

[animatic]

I agree with you. I think Chuan have no intension, and should not be punish for it.

Mark, like most Chinese escape army, it is a VERY common thing in Thailand; IMHO should not be punish for it.

BUT please set the same standard.

All I am saying is that

Why should Samak be punished for such a small offends, moonlighting as a cook?

Can you please provide your view on this matter?

Samak ran the government,

and was given air time to talk HIS brand of politics while he cooked.

Samak took money from a government concessionaire to do a cooking show.

He had the ability to make the consessionaires shows get

more or less air time and so more or less revenue.

Not just HIS show but ALL of their shows.

He had them by the short hairs and could squeeze at will.

So they continued to stroke his ego and keep him happy.

He held their financial well being in his palm via his being head of the government.

In ANY country this is a significant conflict of interest.

He took money from an entity were he was the final comptroler.

It was in their best interests to make Samak happy.

Chuan was not getting rich off of a small farm co-op share.

But he also was not making the co-op's fortunes rise and fall

on his governments controling whim. The co-op was not a

regulated government air waves concessionaire.

No conflict of interest.

Edited March 31, 2009 by animatic

[kaiwatnok]

As he clearly doesn't have any love or care for this nation...it's a wonder anyone can support him.

If you look closely you will see that the Red shirt movement is actually moving towards being a Pro Democracy movement, rather than simply a Pro Thaksin movement. This is why their numbers continue to grow nationwide, despite thaksin possibly losing some of his popularity. it has become more than just about thaksin.......

we are in for some interesting times....... and unfortunately i fail to she how violence will be avoided.

[Jingthing]

Pro Democracy movement

Until Thaksin is completely out of the picture of the reds, that does not hold water.

[animatic]

Thaksin is a genius in snipping bits and pieces of the past and paste them together to deceive the general public.

I am most interested of the start of his downfall, during April 2006. He just won an imperfect election, flew to Hua Hin and then back to BKK in a helicopter, and announced on TV with teary eyes that he will stand down from politics. Then he took leave from his post as PM and the rest is history.

What happened during that trip in the helicopter that caused his tears?

Can you, Thaksin, tell us during your next phone-in? Why start the story only at Sept 2006?

No one care to comment on what I have said? Or perhaps many want to forget what actually happened?

No doubt a quiet word was had in the hallway

after he was leaving the official reason to visit.

Son you have made a hash of things.

No more support, we no longer trust you.

Time to call it a day.

And he agreed until his ego got the better of him.

And his power/money suddenly became a lost article in the back room.

Ego and greed have taken control

and that gnawing need for another

taste of true power at his finger tips.

Never once realizing he NEVER really had it,

it was only on loan.

[Plus]

If you look closely you will see that the Red shirt movement is actually moving towards being a Pro Democracy movement, rather than simply a Pro Thaksin movement.

Just how close are we supposed to be to overlook Thaksin personally pledging to lead the rebellion?

[Oberkommando]

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Why? I wasn't making a comparison between the two.

Cases or not, and let's be honest Thaksin is setting a precedent (no pun intended) for a politician being prosecuted for corruption. Chuan was nevertheless head of a government plagued by corruption scandals.

That the 1997 crises was a big dirty game in which some made a lot money, is well known, if he did something himself is not clear but it was the group of people he belong to.

Rumours that Thaksin profited off the Baht being floated have been going around for ages.

Nothing proven.

Move on.

[jayboy]

If you look closely you will see that the Red shirt movement is actually moving towards being a Pro Democracy movement, rather than simply a Pro Thaksin movement. This is why their numbers continue to grow nationwide, despite thaksin possibly losing some of his popularity. it has become more than just about thaksin.......

I can see that the Reds have the potential to be a pro democracy movement (as opposed to the yellow shirts and their disgusting leadership) but do you have any evidence it has transcended its Thaksinite origins?

[trogers]

As he clearly doesn't have any love or care for this nation...it's a wonder anyone can support him.

If you look closely you will see that the Red shirt movement is actually moving towards being a Pro Democracy movement, rather than simply a Pro Thaksin movement.

we are in for some interesting times....... and unfortunately i fail to she how violence will be avoided.

Funny how history does repeats itself. Hitler was a protector of democracy and so was his Nazi party. Took over a 100 million lives in World War 2 to find out that so called Democracy can bring evil and insanity to power and the terrible consequences thereafter.

Do more reading - read about the events before WW2.

Edited March 31, 2009 by trogers

[mc2]

If you look closely you will see that the Red shirt movement is actually moving towards being a Pro Democracy movement, rather than simply a Pro Thaksin movement. This is why their numbers continue to grow nationwide, despite thaksin possibly losing some of his popularity. it has become more than just about thaksin.......

I can see that the Reds have the potential to be a pro democracy movement (as opposed to the yellow shirts and their disgusting leadership) but do you have any evidence it has transcended its Thaksinite origins?

for what its worth, thaksin has said in his latest speech

basically he wants his supporters to distance themselves from his personal problems and focus on the injustice done to them and to democracy

in other words shifting the focus as kaiwatnok suggests

[geriatrickid]

PAD is a front for the military. Full Stop. The reds have popularity ebcause many people do not like military dictatorship and profiteering. Full Stop. Reds are imperfect, but right now, there is no one around to stop the military from continuing its dictatorship, even if done through a smooth talking suit.

[Old Man River]

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Why? I wasn't making a comparison between the two.

Cases or not, and let's be honest Thaksin is setting a precedent (no pun intended) for a politician being prosecuted for corruption. Chuan was nevertheless head of a government plagued by corruption scandals.

There is a big difference in comparing the two when it comes to leading governments where corruption is concerned. With Thaksin, it was a one party government (his party). With Chuan (1997-2001) it was a 6 party coalition with 12 independent defectors from a 7th party. This is a big difference, and I suspect you know the difference.

[Oberkommando]

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Why? I wasn't making a comparison between the two.

Cases or not, and let's be honest Thaksin is setting a precedent (no pun intended) for a politician being prosecuted for corruption. Chuan was nevertheless head of a government plagued by corruption scandals.

There is a big difference in comparing the two when it comes to leading governments where corruption is concerned. With Thaksin, it was a one party government (his party). With Chuan (1997-2001) it was a 6 party coalition with 12 independent defectors from a 7th party. This is a big difference, and I suspect you know the difference.

Another difference is Pojaman Shinawatra, while not being directly involved in politics herself, and actually faced the music in front of a court, is constantly vilified for her criminal activities, both proven and alleged and used as an angle to attack Thaksin himself, both on here and by the media.

Yet, when someone points out Chuan's brother embezzled billions from Thai banks before doing a runner to Taiwan for 7 years until the statute of limitations ran out, it has 'nothing to do with Chuan' or is simply ignored.

Why is that do you think?

[Plus]

Because Thaksin declared Pojamarn his personal conscience?

The difference between Chuan and Thaskin is that under Democrats corruption was prosecuted. The first ever minister, Rakkiat from one of the coaltion partners, and Democrat Secretary General who didn't make a show of tears over his "honest mistake" and served his sentence, unlike Thaksin.

The mother of all allegations, Salween log scandal, was miniscule comparing to what Thaksin and co got away with.

Just the airport saw tens of billions of baht stolen in a broad daylight, in the full view of the public, Salween numbers were in meagre millions and no one still knows who really was on it.

Is it another history rewrite - comparing corruption under Chuan and Thaksin?

[animatic]

I have a brother, no one pretends that what he does, I did.

Chuan may or may not have known of is brothers banking antics.

But unless he actually signed or acted for said brother illeagally,

it is only guilt by blood association.

Having a legal wife is another matter.

Under thai law a wife is subordinate to the husband,

her acts are considered his in a legal sense.

So when Potjamin does something it is considered

to have her husbands implied consent

or have that needed explicitly as in the Rachada case.

Sorry Uber that dog don't hunt.

[Old Man River]

I recommend to search the internet a little bit.

The corruption cases of the democrats in the total 60 years are less than in one year of Thaksin.

Why? I wasn't making a comparison between the two.

Cases or not, and let's be honest Thaksin is setting a precedent (no pun intended) for a politician being prosecuted for corruption. Chuan was nevertheless head of a government plagued by corruption scandals.

There is a big difference in comparing the two when it comes to leading governments where corruption is concerned. With Thaksin, it was a one party government (his party). With Chuan (1997-2001) it was a 6 party coalition with 12 independent defectors from a 7th party. This is a big difference, and I suspect you know the difference.

Another difference is Pojaman Shinawatra, while not being directly involved in politics herself, and actually faced the music in front of a court, is constantly vilified for her criminal activities, both proven and alleged and used as an angle to attack Thaksin himself, both on here and by the media.

Yet, when someone points out Chuan's brother embezzled billions from Thai banks before doing a runner to Taiwan for 7 years until the statute of limitations ran out, it has 'nothing to do with Chuan' or is simply ignored.

Why is that do you think?

This is simple. It isn't ignored. It simply had nothing to do with Chuan.

[Oberkommando]

Because Thaksin declared Pojamarn his personal conscience?

The difference between Chuan and Thaskin is that under Democrats corruption was prosecuted. The first ever minister, Rakkiat from one of the coaltion partners, and Democrat Secretary General who didn't make a show of tears over his "honest mistake" and served his sentence, unlike Thaksin.

No, he actually jumped bail and did a runner. Same same Thaksin.

[Oberkommando]

you claimed Chuan was corrupt and all we find now is "undeclared shareholdings in a rural cooperative", which is wrong but not corruption.

It was the National Counter Corruption Commission that prosecuted him for this.

Needs no other explanation really.

Furthermore, I did not actually accuse Chuan of being corrupt. I said "Chuan found by the National Counter Corruption Commission to be concealing assets" and "Chuan was nevertheless head of a government plagued by corruption scandals."

Both true statements. Please don't be dishonest in your debate here and attribute to me something I did not say.

Edited March 31, 2009 by Oberkommando

[Plus]

Rakkiat did a runner, not Sanan. Still Rakkiat was the first ever sitting minister to get convicted for corruption, and "government plagued by corruption scandals" is not how one would descrive Dems' second term in office. General mood was that the checks and balances built in 1997 const were showing first results.

There are sick people in every society, one starts talking about plague only when something goes really out of hand. And that's not what happened under Chuan.

[Plus]

Oh, and by asset concealment do you mean that one share given to him as a gift, for a cooperative that went bust ages ago? Wasn't it, per chance, the work of the NCCC team put in by Thaksin in revenge for 2000 indictment? The team that was booted out for corruption themselves (or giving themselves illegal payraises)?

[Oberkommando]

Rakkiat did a runner, not Sanan. Still Rakkiat was the first ever sitting minister to get convicted for corruption, and "government plagued by corruption scandals" is not how one would descrive Dems' second term in office. General mood was that the checks and balances built in 1997 const were showing first results.

There are sick people in every society, one starts talking about plague only when something goes really out of hand. And that's not what happened under Chuan.

Yes, I should have been clearer in my post.

However, the Chuan administration was plagued by corruption scandals, and that certainly was the consensus at the time.

And again, that is precisely why he got his nickname, 'The Painter' because of his staunch defence of so many of his cabinet and party members accused of corruption.

As to "General Mood" they were an extremely unpopular government, crushing the poor under harsh economic measures while helping out the massive conglomerates. Their record on human rights wasn't too good either. IIRC one journalist compared them to a military dictatorship. The people voted them out quick smart though and elected Thaksin in a massive landslide, so what the "general mood" was is clear to everyone.

I can only deduce you were not around or in Thailand at this time going on your posts.

Edited March 31, 2009 by Oberkommando