How Many Years In Prison Does Thaksin Deserve?

[mc2]

Do you mean like "Member # 1" which was never honest at any point in time?

there is no justification for your claim that my title was not honest, as I did not reveal my numbering criteria to you.

anyhow you have somewhat redeemed yourself by updating the moniker but nevertheless I don't know how long you would have continued with this purely egotistical "number 2" falsehood had I not pointed it out.

[clausewitz]

Anyway I for one an impressed that someone has made it to be the #2 poster on an anonymous internet forum. It bespeakes much about their life.

Imagine the achievement if one could become #1, something us mere mortals can only dream about.

[Samuian]

Anyway I for one an impressed that someone has made it to be the #2 poster on an anonymous internet forum. It bespeakes much about their life.

Imagine the achievement if one could become #1, something us mere mortals can only dream about.

a genuine contribution to the net-community!

that what Forums are for - but don't start useless,

unfair backstabbing in using very cheap polemics!

- if you don't like his style,

his point of view - express it in a PM -

Alright?

edited for orthographic reasons...

Edited August 10, 2009 by Samuian

[DP25]

Anyway I for one an impressed that someone has made it to be the #2 poster on an anonymous internet forum. It bespeakes much about their life.

Imagine the achievement if one could become #1, something us mere mortals can only dream about.

Yes, much more impressive to make multiple anonymous sockpuppet accounts to prop up Dear Leader.

[sriracha john]

Do you mean like "Member # 1" which was never honest at any point in time?

there is no justification for your claim that my title was not honest, as I did not reveal my numbering criteria to you.

anyhow you have somewhat redeemed yourself by updating the moniker but nevertheless I don't know how long you would have continued with this purely egotistical "number 2" falsehood had I not pointed it out.

Well, as the change in number of posts status only occurred today, your diligent observation is noteworthy.

As for your own Member # 1 claim, it was never honest under the normal conditions one might associate with someone being considered Member # 1, such as membership join date, posting numbers, thread starting, etc.... and with your refusal to specify under just what circumstance you claim to be Member # 1, the Forum members can only imagine what your self-perceived Member # 1 status referred to.

Edited August 10, 2009 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

Anyway I for one an impressed that someone has made it to be the #2 poster on an anonymous internet forum. It bespeakes much about their life.

Imagine the achievement if one could become #1, something us mere mortals can only dream about.

Perhaps you should PM the member who is # 1 and ask.

Still, my own numbers probably wouldn't surpass those of some posters with the aggregate total of their multiple ID's.

[sriracha john]

btw, what's it say under Classifieds? Is it a person?

Can you find nothing worth posting about?

Which is more beneficial to the Forum? My "cutting and pasting" a percentage of my posts to the news or your trolling?

just do the right thing and change your title to "forums number 3 top poster" instead of making false and egotistical claims.

Like putting qualifications down as a signature?

Reminds me of...

The greatest troll ever on Thaivisa, ColPyat, in an extremely rare moment of honesty, accurately reflected:

"You can be anybody you want to be on the Internet."

[mc2]

The classifieds poster is actually a real human who approves the ads, and by approving it turns into a post. What makes you think his posts don't count ? If it is because he didn't actually write any of the posts, well, that means all your cut and paste jobs don't count as well.

Edited August 10, 2009 by mc2

[Ulysses G.]

The greatest troll ever on Thaivisa, ColPyat, in an extremely rare moment of honesty, accurately reflected:

"You can be anybody you want to be on the Internet."

Why am I not surprised that srirachajohn has taken to quoting himself!

Edited August 10, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[sriracha john]

The greatest troll ever on Thaivisa, ColPyat, in an extremely rare moment of honesty, accurately reflected:

"You can be anybody you want to be on the Internet."

Why am I not surprised that srirachajohn has taken to quoting himself!

Actually it's a quote of your idol, but as noted, it was a memorable and significant comment... particularly with the inundation on the forum lately of people it applies to as well as his own multiple bannings.

Edited August 10, 2009 by sriracha john

[mc2]

"the object of mc2s obsession" ... <deleted>

[Maestro]

A post in violation of forum rules (discussing moderation action) and the replies to it have been deleted.

--

Maestro

[dumbnewbie]

yeh but this thread has more than 3000 views and just 150 votes so there is people who dont care so much they couldnt care to vote.

Exactly. For example, I haven't voted.

26 posts and counting for you on this thread that you "don't care so much" about?

I find this sort of topic interesting, but I don't presume to know enough about the situation to pass judgement on Thaksin. I'm just here asking questions, playing devil's advocate, etc., in an attempt to learn more.

[FD333]

Dumbnewbie

Well, you prefixed the Dumb didn't you, but it's increasingly suspect that you are anything like a 'newbie' isn't it?

Got a bit carried away with post#378 did you? Giving yourself away with the whole..." just trying to understand the whole thing here"...cue arm shrug and look of mock confusion.

Got all up yourself with semantics regarding 3,000 deaths (pardon me for getting a little shirty here, but for anyone to argue/deny/deflect 3,000 extra-judicial killings, which are an historical fact, is one of the most dislikeable aspects within the pro-Thaksin camp) and then return with post#379 (arf arf) with limp 'I'm just here asking questions, playing devil's advocate, etc., in an attempt to learn more'.

[rixalex]

yeh but this thread has more than 3000 views and just 150 votes so there is people who dont care so much they couldnt care to vote.

Exactly. For example, I haven't voted.

26 posts and counting for you on this thread that you "don't care so much" about?

I find this sort of topic interesting, but I don't presume to know enough about the situation to pass judgement on Thaksin.

Not knowing enough about a situation to make a judgement is quite different from not caring enough.

[hearditallbefore]

As expected, my thread with a positive light on our Prime Minister Thaksin was locked, so, as suggested, I will add it to this negative titled thread, that of course was allowed to remain open.

Nothing makes me more angry than a foreigner opening a negative post about my elected Prime Minister and then commenting like they actually know something. I will not lower myself to telling you who should run YOUR country, or that YOUR PM or President sucks or how long THEY should be in jail, so please try to be a little more respectful of others.

I am not here to argue, I am here to teach. If you do not like the facts given, it does not change the facts. Spend some time investigating anything I say and you will find it to be true. If you would like a link, google it or find the info. on your own, as any teacher, I don't have the time to explain every fact, so read the public record books, ask lawyers, and verify anything you don't know.

Why is it that every thread picturing our current, lawful, PM Thaksin in a truthful light, always closed or deleted on this forum?

We have to put up with hearing foreigners talk about "charges" they know nothing about, or even what the "charges" even are, or who made them, or why they were trumped up by jealous business competitors. But, when true facts are stated, or happy pictures are posted, then they are deleted or closed.

Why can't Thai people post the truth on this forum so the foreigners can learn something about the truth? Our "elected by us" PM will return to a hero's welcome.

To answer some of your questions:

1. Why isn't he locked up? Because he is not guilty of the trumped up charges and the flippant "court" did not consist of any unpaid, corrupt participants. All of the normal judges were sidelined while the criminals who pushed Thaksin out were spinning their web of lies.

2. Why doesn't the international community arrest him? Why does the international community support him? Because he the was the first Prime Minister in Thailand to complete full terms in office and be re-elected by a landslide by us, and then be pushed out by criminals while he was fighting for Thailand in another country.

3. Why do so many foreigners believe what the media spins? Because they only have access to biased, limited media and because many forums delete or close any factual, truthful reports.

4. If Thaksin is not corrupt, how did he get so rich? Thaksin was not rich when he began. While studying for his Master Degree in America, his wife Potjaman worked in a McDonalds to help make ends meet. Upon returning to Thailand, he had several failed business attemptes.

When he decided to jump into telecommunications, seeing other countries that has cell phones, he decided to attempt to help his country and himself by launching his own company and mobile phone satallite.

He found it very, very difficult to get financing, no one wanted to invest, not even some of the richest in Bangkok. Thaksin eventually succeeded and became a billionaire overnight as his work and dilligence paid off. All of his naysayers, became insainly jealous as he slowly turned his back on them and surrounded himself with people he could trust, just like YOU would do.

The jealousy continued to build as he became more powerful, branched out in other businesses successfully, helped our country, and empowered our people. The elite in Bangkok were left behind, students outside Bangkok were given more opportunity to learn and advance, as were farmers and the poor.

The elite in Bangkok were forced to pay their workers a livable wage, which we know is still too low, but getting better, we were able to sell local made products to make more money, and drug sellers and drug families were eradicated. The streets were safe for a couple of years, now since he has been gone, the drugs are back and killing more of our children than ever before.

Yes, we still love him and await his return, and the progression of our great counrty, until then we sit in stagnation and chaos with colored shirts our only headlines instead of how our country is moving forward.

LasT but not least, PM THAKSIN WAS DEMOCRATICALY ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE, US, WE ELECTED HIM !!!! NOT A FLIPPANT COURT!! WE ELECTED HIM AND WE WANT HIM BACK !!!

Please do not delete this thread, it not fair to us.......thank you

To answer the other question, NOWHERE AT ANY TIME, ON ANY DOCUMENT, WAS IT STIPULATED BY OUR PRIME MINISTER, THAT BURMA "MUST" USE PM THAKSIN'S COMPANY FOR THEIR SERVICE PROVIDER. Burma, specifically requested it being it was the cheapest bid on the project in Asia at that time. LOOK IT UP AND STOP WITH THE HEARSAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU ARE ONLY CONTINUING TO PASS ON BS. DO YOUR HOMEWORK!!!!!! IF YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON OTHERS LIKE YOU ARE AN AUTHORITY !!! PLEASE !!!

[Jingthing]

heartitallbefore ranted: Nothing makes me more angry than a foreigner opening a negative post about my elected Prime Minister and then commenting like they actually know something. I will not lower myself to telling you who should run YOUR country, or that YOUR PM or President sucks or how long THEY should be in jail, so please try to be a little more respectful of others.

You are welcome to post as a foreigner on US politics at least at US political forums. It is called FREE SPEECH. Sorry, Thais do not have a monopoly on being able to comment on Thai politics. Some incredibly insightful books and articles about Thai politics have been written by non-Thais; some are banned in Thailand (sadly). This being an English language forum about Thailand, MOST of us are NOT Thai. If that offends you, that isn't OUR problem.

BTW, this thread allows people to VOTE any way they wish as far as prison for the dear leader. Isn't that what "pro-democratic" reds want?

You are right about one thing. Many of us have NO RESPECT for fugitive Thaksin. We saw how we acted in office (like a dictator), how he ran away like a coward when the heat got too hot, how he tried to create a violent revolution during Black Songkran, you can be any nationality to see the truth today about all that.

If you want foreigners to have a more charitable view of your reform movement, clean up your act so it doesn't smell as much.

BTW, would you be protesting so loudly if the results of this poll were more favorable to your side? As it is now, the vast majority of the respondents want prison for Thaksin.

Edited August 12, 2009 by Jingthing

[Koo82]

0 from me.

Khun Thaksin only has a small mistake in the land case. No one lost job, income or died from the buying of that land. I can't see any reason Khun Thaksin must be in prison.

[Jingthing]

0 from me.

Khun Thaksin only has a small mistake in the land case. No one lost job, income or died from the buying of that land. I can't see any reason Khun Thaksin must be in prison.

OTHER charges are pending. He ran away. He is a fugitive. The intent for the survey is to get opinions about the TOTAL years in prison for Thaksin for all his crimes including those he hasn't been charged with such as the thousands of extra-judicial murders. He thinks he is above the law. Why? His money? Does the red side consider itself to be anti-corruption? If so, how can you justify following such a corrupt, consequences dodging leader?

Edited August 12, 2009 by Jingthing

[Insight]

Said it before on another topic, but still reckon it would be quite interesting to see which ISP's users are posting from....

[dumbnewbie]

Dumbnewbie

Well, you prefixed the Dumb didn't you, but it's increasingly suspect that you are anything like a 'newbie' isn't it?

Got a bit carried away with post#378 did you? Giving yourself away with the whole..." just trying to understand the whole thing here"...cue arm shrug and look of mock confusion.

Got all up yourself with semantics regarding 3,000 deaths (pardon me for getting a little shirty here, but for anyone to argue/deny/deflect 3,000 extra-judicial killings, which are an historical fact, is one of the most dislikeable aspects within the pro-Thaksin camp) and then return with post#379 (arf arf) with limp 'I'm just here asking questions, playing devil's advocate, etc., in an attempt to learn more'.

Whatever man. Believe what you like. If I were pro-Thaksin, I would have no problem saying so and explaining why. Instead, I'm asking questions, trying to learn more, and trying (mostly in vain) to get anti-Thaksin people to support their case.

I'll tell you why I'm skeptical about the received wisdom that Thaksin was a bad guy. It's because I know how other enlightened leaders have been smeared and run out of their countries, people such as the Shah of Iran and President Alberto Fujimori of Peru. These guys were autocratic, but they were making tremendous progress for their countries and for the ordinary people of their countries. But the US (my country, OK? And I'm generally pro-American, but I can see that some mistakes are made) and UK got rid of these guys for their own reasons.

Let's take the Shah first. You guys probably think he was the biggest fascist, a dictator king whose vicious secret police tortured and murdred thousands of innocents, right? Sure, because that's what the Western media told you! But do some research and you learn you've been duped. The Shah was actually a real patriot, not a puppet - he was doing his best to modernize his country to make it prosperous, powerful and respected in the world. His human rights record was no worse than that of neighboring countries, and better than some, according to Daniel Yergin, author of The Prize, an authoritative book on the history of the oil industry. So why was he singled out and made to look like a monster? Because he was a leader of OPEC and raised oil prices in 1974, against Western advice, in order that his country and people might reap some benefit from Iranian oil. It was only after this act of defiance that the West turned against the Shah and used their media (especially the BBC) to stir up a revolt and they drive this very decent man out of power and replace him with a mob of mullahs, who've been raping and torturing the Persian people for 30 years now (but they sell oil nice and cheap to the West). Now, because the mullahs have aligned themselves with Russia & China and threatened to destroy Israel and are developing the nuclear capability to do so, the West is turning against the Islamic Republic regime (as it should). But for 30 years they didn't give a dam_n that thousands and thousands of people were tortured and killed by the mullahs.

Then look at Alberto Fujimori of Peru. This guy single-handedly turned that country around 180 degrees in record time. When he was elected to office, Peru was a basket case. A vicious cult of Maoist guerillas controlled most of the country, regularly massacring villagers and terrorizing the capital with bombings and assassinations. The economy was a shambles. Nobody in his right mind would do business there. Unemployment and inflation were rampant. The country had been going down the toilet for many years, with no hope in sight. Fujimori took charge, promptly captured the head of the Shining Path terrorists and put him in a cage so everyone could see him pacing back and forth, ranting like the madman he was. He then turned the economy around, creating an Asian-style economic miracle, with massive investment, exports and GNP growth rates unheard of anywhere in Latin America - even better than Chile. I believe he also cracked down on the cocaine trade, and I think that is why the US ran him out of the country. Since then Peru has been sliding back towards the Latin American norm of economic stagnation, corruption, poverty and hopelessness.

I suspect that Thaksin was a good leader like these guys (or Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore, or Mahathir Mohammad of Malaysia, etc.). He cracked down hard on the drug trade (a very good thing, even if it wasn't done properly). Maybe that's why he was run out of the country? Because he was destroying the profits of some traditional elites in Thailand? I could be wrong. I really don't know. But seeing how good men like the Shah and Fujimori were villified and destroyed, I'm keeping an open mind about Thaksin until I learn more. I'm very much open to persuasion, so give me more evidence.

Edited August 12, 2009 by dumbnewbie

[Insight]

I am not here to argue, I am here to teach. If you do not like the facts given, it does not change the facts. Spend some time investigating anything I say and you will find it to be true. If you would like a link, google it or find the info. on your own, as any teacher, I don't have the time to explain every fact, so read the public record books, ask lawyers, and verify anything you don't know.[/b]

....

4. If Thaksin is not corrupt, how did he get so rich? Thaksin was not rich when he began. While studying for his Master Degree in America, his wife Potjaman worked in a McDonalds to help make ends meet. Upon returning to Thailand, he had several failed business attemptes.

Link please.

[Jingthing]

It is true both the Shah of Iran and Alberto Fujimori did some good things. So did Thaksin. So did Hitler. Mandella did some bad things. So did Gandhi. So did Lincoln. There isn't any human being who does all good or all bad. That really isn't the issue.

hearditallbefore: I am not here to argue, I am here to teach.

That is disingenuous . You are here to promote your point of view like most everyone else here. Providing supporting information will help your case. You are not above us even if you think you are.

Edited August 12, 2009 by Jingthing

[dumbnewbie]

It is true both the Shah of Iran and Alberto Fujimori did some good things. So did Thaksin. So did Hitler. Mandella did some bad things. So did Gandhi. So did Lincoln. There isn't any human being who does all good or all bad. That really isn't the issue.

Right. That isn't the issue. The issue is on balance, is a person mostly good or mostly bad, and is a person who is mostly good sometimes misrepresented as mostly bad (or more likely entirely evil)?

I'm saying the Shah and Fujimori were mostly good, yet were unfairly tarnished, vilified and driven from power by people who were actually much worse. And I'm wondering if maybe Thaksin isn't another example of this.

[Ricardo]

In a democracy, Thaksin would've been allowed to serve out his term, after which other politicians would've been free to promise even better benefits to the people, and maybe Thaksin would've been voted out of office. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

Thaksin did serve his second term, he then resigned early and called a new election, which unfortunately was rigged and subsequently annulled by the E.C., he later served as pro-tem caretaker-PM until the coup.

In this shaky democracy, Thaksin was allowed to call an election early, and he chose to do so. Nobody but himself decided how long his second term lasted. What's undemocratic about that ?

[rixalex]

heartitallbefore ranted: Nothing makes me more angry than a foreigner opening a negative post about my elected Prime Minister and then commenting like they actually know something. I will not lower myself to telling you who should run YOUR country, or that YOUR PM or President sucks or how long THEY should be in jail, so please try to be a little more respectful of others.

Sorry, Thais do not have a monopoly on being able to comment on Thai politics.

Jingthing, what gave you the impression that "heartitallbefore" is Thai?

The fact that he/she said he/she is?!

When a poster uses personal circumstance to supposedly add credibility to what they are saying, such as claiming to be completely neutral, claiming to be Thai, or even claiming to be a doctor, it serves no purpose whatsoever without corroborating evidence. If they are unwilling or unable to present this evidence, as they usually are, i suggest you dismiss it out of hand as being the BS it most likely is.

Edited August 12, 2009 by rixalex

[Jingthing]

Jingthing, what gave you the impression that "heartitallbefore" is Thai?

I will give it the benefit of the doubt. It is an issue that is good to raise whether it is true or not. Thais are of course a wonderful addition to this board about Thailand, but that doesn't mean they are special entities here or that their claimed nationality gives them any more or any less credibility when expressing OPINIONS.

Let me put this another more rude way. Foreigners in Thailand are often not treated the same as Thai citizens. This is of course expected but sometimes we are treated very badly, or even nonentities. Well, not here, not on an English language board focused on foreign expats and tourists, not here ...

Edited August 12, 2009 by Jingthing

[Abrak]

I am not here to argue, I am here to teach. If you do not like the facts given, it does not change the facts. Spend some time investigating anything I say and you will find it to be true. If you would like a link, google it or find the info. on your own, as any teacher, I don't have the time to explain every fact, so read the public record books, ask lawyers, and verify anything you don't know.[/b]

....

4. If Thaksin is not corrupt, how did he get so rich? Thaksin was not rich when he began. While studying for his Master Degree in America, his wife Potjaman worked in a McDonalds to help make ends meet. Upon returning to Thailand, he had several failed business attemptes.

Link please.

I do believe it is wrong to state that Potjaman worked at McDonalds. It is possible he is getting confused with their daughter who did. Potjaman actually worked at Burger king to help support her husband. Thaksin himself worked at kentucky fried chicken to help make ends meet. It is not always easy to distinguish different fast food joints if you are not familiar with them.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200403/3...331_139048.html

[Moonrakers]

What a big bunch of crap.

The Shinawatra family are one of the richest in the (Northern/Chiang Mai) region, and that was before Thaksin was born. They made their money through silk and textiles...... GOOGLE IT.

If they did work in fast food joints then it was nothing more than a show or for something to do, there was no way it as to make ends meet with mummy's and daddy's riches. Pokeman and he have never had to worry about things such as paying the rent in their life..... GOOGLE IT.

But don't let the facts get in the way now eh!

If you want a link, here it is: WWW.GOOGLE.COM

Edited August 12, 2009 by Moonrakers

[Insight]

What a big bunch of crap.

The Shinawatra family are one of the richest in the (Northern/Chiang Mai) region, and that was before Thaksin was born. They made their money through silk and textiles...... GOOGLE IT.

If they did work in fast food joints then it was nothing more than a show or for something to do, there was no way it as to make ends meet with mummy's and daddy's riches. Pokeman and he have never had to worry about things such as paying the rent in their life..... GOOGLE IT.

But don't let the facts get in the way now eh!

If you want a link, here it is: WWW.GOOGLE.COM

I'm wondering if post-August Thaksin will still be able to support the PR firms he uses to peddle these "facts".

Shame if so.