People Warned Against Forwarding PM's Doctored Audio Clip

[animatic]

The dark forces of thailand who want to impose the fines and prison sentances.

Are these the same dark forces of thailand who deny the people an election and the democratic right to express their opinion of the military coup.

And the Dark Farces of Thaivisaland keep trying to change history for the masters bidding.

A new election is legally due, when the majority of MP's terms expire.

There is no legal requirement for one prior to that time.

So anyone else think people can't say they disliked the coup?

Seem to me we hear that all the time.

Edited September 7, 2009 by animatic

[SHYTALK]

Everybody knows that the trick regards effective communication is to keep it simple and to the point.

Only dark force buzz-word slang hides true intent.

Like a child who is scolded by his parent, you have spit your "dummies" out.Nevertheless I'll give it back to you , here it is.

Regardless of your opinion, the truth is this passage of history was played out against the backdrop of military coups and junta appointed judiciary.

Real democratic environment.That is not good enough for me, and ought not to be good enough for you, unless.....

That is not recognised or adopted by true democracies, only despot third world crony states run by dark forces.

Take a look what history records, Taksin 3 Abisit 0.

[Publicus]

Tit, yes indeed.

Thailand IS a 3rd world country. What does that mean in Thaland? Among other things, it means:

Thailand is a country with an army that nominally exists to protect the nation against foreign aggressors but whose primary and real duty is to defend, promote and preserve its sacred institutions. There are few democracies of the world that share this unusual trait.

Thailand might be the equal to all South American countries combined for coups during the post WWII era.

We don't hear about vote buying in The Islamic Republic of Iran due to the purity of religious ideology there but vote buying is the rule in Thailand. All sides having differences in Iran justify themselves as expressing the will of Allah. In Thailand it's far more complicated, altho Thailand formally has a separation of church and state (and we know the recent discussions in this respect).

It's erroneous to claim Thailand is a "liberal democracy." Thailand is a constitutional monarchy which is fine for Thailand and and suits as just fine a (small) number of respected countries of Europe. Liberal democracy rather emphasizes the rights, liberties and freedoms of the individual and thus places sovereignty with the people; the head of state of a liberal democracy embodies the sovereignty of the people who elected him/her. Thailand HAS a democracy but is not a liberal democracy (Comparative Government 101) nor is it designed to have one.

Thailand has had 17 or 18 constitutions since 1932, which surely must outpace all the governments of South America combined.

Trying to hold Thailand to the standards of a liberal democracy with concomitant institutions is comparing apples and bananas (altho S America has had its reds, yellows and blues in the shirts department, and then some).

[Publicus]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

Edited September 7, 2009 by Publicus

[SHYTALK]

The party dissolution came through a coup introduced law. The '97 constitution said nothing about party dissolution in such a case.

You are mistaken here.

TRT dissolution was the punishment recommended by the very first investigating panel appointed by the EC, it was in May 2006, long before the coup.

Exactly.

Thanks Plus for finding facts.

Gee Pre-Coup wasn't Thaksin head of government then...

Actually more proto-dictator with only a 'committee / lame duck cabinet',

surrounding him, and no upper or lower houses.

Looks like he forgot to buy the election commission enough before hand.

Counter-propaganda 101: ~Tell the facts clearly and often.

Just forget that the people gave Taksin his authority in an election.

[SHYTALK]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

I hope you are not suggesting that the CIA were responsible for the military coup and the overthrow of thai democracy?

[Moonrakers]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

I hope you are not suggesting that the CIA were responsible for the military coup and the overthrow of thai democracy?

"Thai democracy" is an oxymoron, whether it be used in the past or present.

[Plus]

Americans were very supportive of a long list Thai military strongmen all through post-WWII history.

Sometimes it was a matter of convenience, sometimes a matte of alternatives, I guess.

Gen Surayud has an outstanding reputation, btw, in part for reorganizing and streamlining the military. He was also in charge when Americans started their war on terror.

"Democratic" army chiefs like Thaksin's brother-in-law will never be regarded anywhere as high.

In Thailand it seems "democracy" is the last shelter of every scoundrel and used extensively (if not exclusively) by crooks to cover up their corruption.

[Publicus]

Americans were very supportive of a long list Thai military strongmen all through post-WWII history.

Sometimes it was a matter of convenience, sometimes a matte of alternatives, I guess.

Gen Surayud has an outstanding reputation, btw, in part for reorganizing and streamlining the military. He was also in charge when Americans started their war on terror.

"Democratic" army chiefs like Thaksin's brother-in-law will never be regarded anywhere as high.

In Thailand it seems "democracy" is the last shelter of every scoundrel and used extensively (if not exclusively) by crooks to cover up their corruption.

Yes, Gen Surayud was appoined army chief by the Chuan government because of his professional credentials and his no nonsense approach towards incompetence.

More significantly, I would add that since the end of WWII the Government of Thailand has almost unconditionally supported the foreign policies of the United States in SE Asia regardless of whomever the particular PM was.

Clue, clue...

[Rumfoord]

Many do wrestle with these "Truth's and Fact's" ever since, we will make it very simple:

1.) Did he take advantage of his position in this deal - Yes or No?

2.) Did his wife (them) therefor make a very neat profit - Yes/No?

3.) Was the bidding process transparent - Ye/No?

4.) Did his wife DO end up the owner of this piece of pie in the center of the city - Yes/No?

5.) Was the bidding price below it's value at the time - Yes/No?

5.) Can this be judged as "abuse of power" - Yes/No?

Can you prove the Opposite?

If so you may be in the position to prove to any court that Mr.Thaksin has been dealt

unjust - if not it would be contempt of Court an offense in Thailand and would make your position and motives highly questionable!

in case you don't know. Thaksins then wife was cleared of all charges by the court. it was also not a judgement that charged Thaksin with "abuse of power". Thaksin was cleared of that too.

[animatic]

Many do wrestle with these "Truth's and Fact's" ever since, we will make it very simple:

1.) Did he take advantage of his position in this deal - Yes or No?

2.) Did his wife (them) therefor make a very neat profit - Yes/No?

3.) Was the bidding process transparent - Ye/No?

4.) Did his wife DO end up the owner of this piece of pie in the center of the city - Yes/No?

5.) Was the bidding price below it's value at the time - Yes/No?

5.) Can this be judged as "abuse of power" - Yes/No?

Can you prove the Opposite?

If so you may be in the position to prove to any court that Mr.Thaksin has been dealt

unjust - if not it would be contempt of Court an offense in Thailand and would make your position and motives highly questionable!

in case you don't know. Thaksins then wife was cleared of all charges by the court. it was also not a judgement that charged Thaksin with "abuse of power". Thaksin was cleared of that too.

Correct for once Rummy.

The long standing rules on Conflict of Interest.

It was the statute against political office holders or their close family members

doing business with government entities or companies with government contracts.

He clearly broke that statue, and didn't even bother to appeal that conviction.

She didn't break any law, but he did, as the political office holder.

Edited September 7, 2009 by animatic

[Publicus]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

I hope you are not suggesting that the CIA were responsible for the military coup and the overthrow of thai democracy?

Certainly not. The coup was entirely an internal Thai affair from top to bottom.

So to spell it out, I'm referring to the long standing, since the end of WWII almost unconditional support by the Thai Government of US foreign policy in SE Asia regardless of whom the particular prime minister was.

If needed, read my lips: The militaries of the US and Thailand have a rare and unusual beast called the Thailand-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Bangkok. You may have seen it near the US Embassy. To my knowledge, the only other such existing beast is the Republic of Korea-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Seoul.

Clue, clue...

The US Ambassador visited the new PM Gen Suryaud on his first day in the position AFTER the coup. I've already referred to the special and unusual role/sacred mission the Thai army assumes for itself, and likely does so as expected.

Thailand is a complicated and complex place but I don't see this one as being that tuff to figure. I just don't.

[animatic]

Another clue.

If anyone imagines that the CIA/ NSA etc were NOT totally aware

of Thaksin's phony baloney financial wheelings and dealings

and his attempts at co-opting democracy... well think again.

Hint two..

Anyone think money couldn't buy 'several someones' close to Thaksin as a spies??

Think 'nobody' has MORE money than Thaksin,

and he bought off all around him enough for dependable loyalty???

Think that a Thai can't be bought with enough money to snitch on the boss???

Think the army never planted a mole near him??

"Deep Somtham" pretending to be Thaksinista for the cause.

Any one believe Panlope isn't playing Thaksin like a violin at the moment.

Hint three

Most trade and alliance partners prefer NOT to have a proven pathological liar,

as their regional partner in a central location in times of crisis...

Hint 4

CIA & NSA deal in information...

where that information is used best is always in flux.

Hint 5

USA and Thailand do large scale military exercises on a regular basis.

Both sides get on with each other. Who doesn't help a friend if he's in trouble

and doesn't know it yet.

Edited September 7, 2009 by animatic

[Thai at Heart]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

I hope you are not suggesting that the CIA were responsible for the military coup and the overthrow of thai democracy?

Certainly not. The coup was entirely an internal Thai affair from top to bottom.

So to spell it out, I'm referring to the long standing, since the end of WWII almost unconditional support by the Thai Government of US foreign policy in SE Asia regardless of whom the particular prime minister was.

If needed, read my lips: The militaries of the US and Thailand have a rare and unusual beast called the Thailand-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Bangkok. You may have seen it near the US Embassy. To my knowledge, the only other such existing beast is the Republic of Korea-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Seoul.

Clue, clue...

The US Ambassador visited the new PM Gen Suryaud on his first day in the position AFTER the coup. I've already referred to the special and unusual role/sacred mission the Thai army assumes for itself, and likely does so as expected.

Thailand is a complicated and complex place but I don't see this one as being that tuff to figure. I just don't.

Supporting, actively inciting and actively dissapproving of something are different things.

It isn't as though the US has too much choice other to support the military of Thailand. Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Burma and China on it's doorsteps. Likewise, the relationship is mutually beneficial.

We will never know if there was something in the plan for Thailand to change it's public military alliances away from the US under Thaksin.

It would however be quite disappointing for the US to see that if they had supported/instigated the coup that they haven't really got anything out of it militarily or economically and that one of the largest US corporations is about to get dragged through the courts for evading 2bn USD of tax.

I have pondered this possibility for a while, but usually the US gets involved in this kind of thing when there is an obvious threat or an obvious benefit. Where is either?

Rising Chinese military activity in the region perhaps?

[Publicus]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

I hope you are not suggesting that the CIA were responsible for the military coup and the overthrow of thai democracy?

Certainly not. The coup was entirely an internal Thai affair from top to bottom.

So to spell it out, I'm referring to the long standing, since the end of WWII almost unconditional support by the Thai Government of US foreign policy in SE Asia regardless of whom the particular prime minister was.

If needed, read my lips: The militaries of the US and Thailand have a rare and unusual beast called the Thailand-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Bangkok. You may have seen it near the US Embassy. To my knowledge, the only other such existing beast is the Republic of Korea-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Seoul.

Clue, clue...

The US Ambassador visited the new PM Gen Suryaud on his first day in the position AFTER the coup. I've already referred to the special and unusual role/sacred mission the Thai army assumes for itself, and likely does so as expected.

Thailand is a complicated and complex place but I don't see this one as being that tuff to figure. I just don't.

Supporting, actively inciting and actively dissapproving of something are different things.

It isn't as though the US has too much choice other to support the military of Thailand. Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Burma and China on it's doorsteps. Likewise, the relationship is mutually beneficial.

We will never know if there was something in the plan for Thailand to change it's public military alliances away from the US under Thaksin.

It would however be quite disappointing for the US to see that if they had supported/instigated the coup that they haven't really got anything out of it militarily or economically and that one of the largest US corporations is about to get dragged through the courts for evading 2bn USD of tax.

I have pondered this possibility for a while, but usually the US gets involved in this kind of thing when there is an obvious threat or an obvious benefit. Where is either?

Rising Chinese military activity in the region perhaps?

That Thaksin is Sino-Thai is fact. That for sure is a starting point concerning the original TRT and their designs concerning future Sino-Thai and Thai-US relations.

However to be explicit, during the time the Thai monarchy was in exile HM was born in the United States while his prince father was at Harvard Medical School so HM always has been close to the United States (jazz, Benny Goodman and Elvis Presley etc etc). The relationship over three score years between HM and the Government of the United States has always been close and reciprocal.

When the US ambassador visited the coup's choice of PM Gen Surayud on his first day in the position the ambassador didn't need to wear yellow.

TiT.

[Moonrakers]

You guys have too much time on your hands.

[Thai at Heart]

That Thaksin is Sino-Thai is fact. That for sure is a starting point concerning the original TRT and their designs concerning future Sino-Thai and Thai-US relations.

However to be explicit, during the time the Thai monarchy was in exile HM was born in the United States while his prince father was at Harvard Medical School so HM always has been close to the United States (jazz, Benny Goodman and Elvis Presley etc etc). The relationship over three score years between HM and the Government of the United States has always been close and reciprocal.

When the US ambassador visited the coup's choice of PM Gen Surayud on his first day in the position the ambassador didn't need to wear yellow.

TiT.

Sorry, but yes, I think a lot of us knew that all already.

I am not sure the ambassador of the time would have looked politically very smart if he had sat with a coup maker wearing anything other than very neutral colours. US bureaucrats don't sit easy with coups of any shape or form, so he was never going to wear yellow to show any kind of solidarity.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/03...cs_30015228.php

Ironically, the first thing that happened was that it cost the country 24mn USD, and it's been downhill ever since. But then when you get to write your own military budget who cares.

One of the first casualties of the coup was US$24 million (Bt902 million) in suspended military assistance. The biggest chunk of that was $16.3 million earmarked for use in training Thai military forces in counter-terrorism or to participate in operations alongside the US military.

It may be true, it may not be, but as conspiracy theories go, that is all it is to me. Thaksin is, was and never would have been a dealbreaker in China for Thailand. That real power lies with other industrialists in Bangkok.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[Publicus]

That Thaksin is Sino-Thai is fact. That for sure is a starting point concerning the original TRT and their designs concerning future Sino-Thai and Thai-US relations.

However to be explicit, during the time the Thai monarchy was in exile HM was born in the United States while his prince father was at Harvard Medical School so HM always has been close to the United States (jazz, Benny Goodman and Elvis Presley etc etc). The relationship over three score years between HM and the Government of the United States has always been close and reciprocal.

When the US ambassador visited the coup's choice of PM Gen Surayud on his first day in the position the ambassador didn't need to wear yellow.

TiT.

Sorry, but yes, I think a lot of us knew that all already.

I am not sure the ambassador of the time would have looked politically very smart if he had sat with a coup maker wearing anything other than very neutral colours. US bureaucrats don't sit easy with coups of any shape or form, so he was never going to wear yellow to show any kind of solidarity.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/03...cs_30015228.php

Ironically, the first thing that happened was that it cost the country 24mn USD, and it's been downhill ever since. But then when you get to write your own military budget who cares.

One of the first casualties of the coup was US$24 million (Bt902 million) in suspended military assistance. The biggest chunk of that was $16.3 million earmarked for use in training Thai military forces in counter-terrorism or to participate in operations alongside the US military.

It may be true, it may not be, but as conspiracy theories go, that is all it is to me. Thaksin is, was and never would have been a dealbreaker in China for Thailand. That real power lies with other industrialists in Bangkok.

Of course I'm not speaking literally...didn't we go literally thru this colors thing already when Sec of State Clinton visited for the foreign ministers security summit in Phuket?

I'm stating that TiT.

The US opposes the (any) coup and suspends certain (military) aid while in this particular instance its ambassador visits the General appoined PM by the coup makers to hobnob on his first day in office. I wonder if somehow Thailand now has got the suspended military aid funds back after all, which I suspect it has.

Thaksin the "democrat" is entirely ignored by the US Government. Thaksin the "democrat" gets his UK visa revoked. Even the Republic of France which is known for granting political assylum to just about anyone is off limits to Thaksin. Etc.

Thaksin's credentials as a democrat and as a supposed vicitim of a politicized judiciary who has been shut out of Thailand by an alleged military sponsored government is a dog that don't hunt. The guy's a fugitive from justice who's buying his way into foreign countries that have their hand out because he's a man without a country.

And deservedly so.

[SHYTALK]

Another clue to complicate matters further (see immediately previous post plse):

The day Gen Surayud took office as PM appointed by the coup generals the US Ambassador Ralph Boyce called on him in the office of the PM to wish him well and to discuss the future of democracy in Thailand.

I'm dropping more clues lately than Hansel and Gretel...

I hope you are not suggesting that the CIA were responsible for the military coup and the overthrow of thai democracy?

Certainly not. The coup was entirely an internal Thai affair from top to bottom.

So to spell it out, I'm referring to the long standing, since the end of WWII almost unconditional support by the Thai Government of US foreign policy in SE Asia regardless of whom the particular prime minister was.

If needed, read my lips: The militaries of the US and Thailand have a rare and unusual beast called the Thailand-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Bangkok. You may have seen it near the US Embassy. To my knowledge, the only other such existing beast is the Republic of Korea-US Joint Military Command headquartered in Seoul.

Clue, clue...

The US Ambassador visited the new PM Gen Suryaud on his first day in the position AFTER the coup. I've already referred to the special and unusual role/sacred mission the Thai army assumes for itself, and likely does so as expected.

Thailand is a complicated and complex place but I don't see this one as being that tuff to figure. I just don't.

Your implication is that the illegitemate product of a military coup, and a junta appointed judiciary, is democracy, because american foreign policy says so.

That is absurd.

Unfortunately, the only role the thai army doesn't seem to assume is defender of the biggest peoples prize of all, ie true democracy.

In fact the army assumes the role of enemy of true democracy when it overthrows democratically elected governments, where the people have spoken.

No, not rational that the "mystery hand" whistles uncle sam.

[SHYTALK]

Another clue.

If anyone imagines that the CIA/ NSA etc were NOT totally aware

of Thaksin's phony baloney financial wheelings and dealings

and his attempts at co-opting democracy... well think again.

Hint two..

Anyone think money couldn't buy 'several someones' close to Thaksin as a spies??

Think 'nobody' has MORE money than Thaksin,

and he bought off all around him enough for dependable loyalty???

Think that a Thai can't be bought with enough money to snitch on the boss???

Think the army never planted a mole near him??

"Deep Somtham" pretending to be Thaksinista for the cause.

Any one believe Panlope isn't playing Thaksin like a violin at the moment.

Hint three

Most trade and alliance partners prefer NOT to have a proven pathological liar,

as their regional partner in a central location in times of crisis...

Hint 4

CIA & NSA deal in information...

where that information is used best is always in flux.

Hint 5

USA and Thailand do large scale military exercises on a regular basis.

Both sides get on with each other. Who doesn't help a friend if he's in trouble

and doesn't know it yet.

You could apply any of that to america and any of its dancing partners,

Take the uk for example, americas special dancing partner, where debate is now well on if maybe better off dancing in europe.

Maybe Taksin was also in tune with this and spied another damsel coming to the ball.

America is notorious for standing up its mia nois.

[Plus]

..implication is that the illegitemate product of a military coup, and a junta appointed judiciary, is democracy, because american foreign policy says so.

Of course not.

They installed a government that for once listened to the people, ministers who were ashamed of stealing from the people, and parliament that represented the people.

And they didn't appointed judiciary. Post-coup Constitution Court was staffed with judges from other top courts, not military barracks, and top judiciary is NOT under army's boot - they get their own audiences and inspiration directly from the Head of State.

[mulliganstew]

Thaksin is, was and never would have been a dealbreaker in China for Thailand. That real power lies with other industrialists in Bangkok.

Who are these industrialists?

No, not rational that the "mystery hand" whistles uncle sam.

Who is the mystery hand?

Maybe Taksin was also in tune with this and spied another damsel coming to the ball.

Who is Taksin? Don't you mean Thaksin? That's how he spells it himself on his website and official documents, anyway.

[animatic]

The party dissolution came through a coup introduced law. The '97 constitution said nothing about party dissolution in such a case.

You are mistaken here.

TRT dissolution was the punishment recommended by the very first investigating panel appointed by the EC, it was in May 2006, long before the coup.

Exactly.

Thanks Plus for finding facts.

Gee Pre-Coup wasn't Thaksin head of government then...

Actually more proto-dictator with only a 'committee / lame duck cabinet',

surrounding him, and no upper or lower houses.

Looks like he forgot to buy the election commission enough before hand.

Counter-propaganda 101: ~Tell the facts clearly and often.

Just forget that the people gave Taksin his authority in an election.

And he blithly threw that away to validate his Temasek deal with a snap election.

Then his side cheated so obnoxiously and obviously that it was dissolved and he with it.

He with his own hand left the Prime Ministers chair.

The people who voted for his party coalition should blame Thaksin for his down fall.

He called that election and no one else.

No hi-so elites were involved, well, except Thaksin himself.

Edited September 8, 2009 by animatic

[animatic]

Thaksin is, was and never would have been a dealbreaker in China for Thailand. That real power lies with other industrialists in Bangkok.

Who are these industrialists?

No, not rational that the "mystery hand" whistles uncle sam.

Who is the mystery hand?

Maybe Taksin was also in tune with this and spied another damsel coming to the ball.

Who is Taksin? Don't you mean Thaksin? That's how he spells it himself on his website and official documents, anyway.

Spelling Thaksin Shinawatra's name Taksin is partly to tie himn to the legendary General /King Taksin the great.

And so attempting to tie him top a long time Siam legend, as maybe a second coming etc.

Plays on the Godhead myth of late.

Taksin ruled for 15 years absolutely,

but end up tied into a silk sack and beaten to death.

Does Jim Thompson have a Thaksin monogrammed bag in stock?

What becomes a legend most!

[animatic]

Another clue.

If anyone imagines that the CIA/ NSA etc were NOT totally aware

of Thaksin's phony baloney financial wheelings and dealings

and his attempts at co-opting democracy... well think again.

Hint two..

Anyone think money couldn't buy 'several someones' close to Thaksin as a spies??

Think 'nobody' has MORE money than Thaksin,

and he bought off all around him enough for dependable loyalty???

Think that a Thai can't be bought with enough money to snitch on the boss???

Think the army never planted a mole near him??

"Deep Somtham" pretending to be Thaksinista for the cause.

Any one believe Panlope isn't playing Thaksin like a violin at the moment.

Hint three

Most trade and alliance partners prefer NOT to have a proven pathological liar,

as their regional partner in a central location in times of crisis...

Hint 4

CIA & NSA deal in information...

where that information is used best is always in flux.

Hint 5

USA and Thailand do large scale military exercises on a regular basis.

Both sides get on with each other. Who doesn't help a friend if he's in trouble

and doesn't know it yet.

You could apply any of that to america and any of its dancing partners,

Take the uk for example, americas special dancing partner, where debate is now well on if maybe better off dancing in europe.

Maybe Taksin was also in tune with this and spied another damsel coming to the ball.

America is notorious for standing up its mia nois.

But this isn't about any other dancing partner, but about Thaksin and Thailand.

Thaksin clearly was a loose cannon, and better to remove it, or tie it down,

before he wrecks the whole ship.

---------------------------------

Well this seems to have completely devolved....

And this audio file is lowly falling from public view try as Chalerm might to

bring it up on legislative sessions.

Interestingly Chalerm is the one trying hardest to FORWARD this audio clip.

I guess little Lord Haw Haw can afford the fine.

Edited September 8, 2009 by animatic

[Samuian]

Many do wrestle with these "Truth's and Fact's" ever since, we will make it very simple:

1.) Did he take advantage of his position in this deal - Yes or No?

2.) Did his wife (them) therefor make a very neat profit - Yes/No?

3.) Was the bidding process transparent - Ye/No?

4.) Did his wife DO end up the owner of this piece of pie in the center of the city - Yes/No?

5.) Was the bidding price below it's value at the time - Yes/No?

5.) Can this be judged as "abuse of power" - Yes/No?

Can you prove the Opposite?

If so you may be in the position to prove to any court that Mr.Thaksin has been dealt

unjust - if not it would be contempt of Court an offense in Thailand and would make your position and motives highly questionable!

in case you don't know. Thaksins then wife was cleared of all charges by the court. it was also not a judgement that charged Thaksin with "abuse of power". Thaksin was cleared of that too.

Thanks for letting me in on this, I know they are angels,

no one has done anything wrong, nope, it's the Junta, they did envy his shrewd

business instincts and his incredible wealth, that's all!

And besides I thought it was really sweet that they only purchased this piece of pie for

their children, that they didn't have so far to drive through the dangerous traffic in this

country!

How sweet - don't you think so - or didn't you know Ms.Sweetheart, the Good Mom said so?

Now they have a place to stay in the middle of the city and can socialize not being exposed to

the terrible and dangerous traffic... isn't that really caring and shows what nice parents they have?

No,no, no, not for taking big profits on something ill gotten - nope never - honest people, the most

honest this country ever got - see the Sound file it appears in the hands of some AC Asset

employees, but really comes from "a lady at a bus stop" and yes we see, what Mr.Chalerm is turning

this sound file into - maybe, maybe he could prove tha... ah well.., at least he is another very

caring and honest father of two Thai Heroes.... all genuinely good doer's who find themselves

ambushed by this bunch of military and Pad rough heads pulled by the 'democrats"...

However why do you miss what Mr.T was convicted of and why?

Edited September 8, 2009 by Samuian

[clausewitz]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/rea...;keyword=pravit

it's not difficult to understand why many Thaksin supporters will likely continue to believe in his innocence in this case.

There was no hard evidence but an assumption that because Thaksin was the prime minister, and was influential, back in 2003 when the bidding was made by his wife for the state-controlled land, Thaksin must be guilty because he and his wife "could have deterred other bidders from fairly competing in the bidding process".

And to make matters worse, Thaksin also used his signature and PM identity card to acknowledge the transaction made by his wife.

So we're dealing with an assumption and probability here - it's nonetheless an assumption and probability.

Is it a case of Thaksin being guilty until proven otherwise?

://www.bangkokpost.com/211008_News/21Oct2008_news06.php

Land case sets a precedent for officials

State employees now have to abide by the anti-corruption law, writes Parista Yuthamanop

Today's Supreme Court verdict in the Ratchadaphisek land case is certain to have a major impact on the political landscape.

The ASC, an ad-hoc body formed after the military staged a coup in 2006, allege Mr Thaksin and his wife violated the National Counter Corruption Act by bidding for the plot.

Khunying Potjaman lodged the winning bid for the land in December 2003 in an auction run by the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), a unit of the Bank of Thailand. The FIDF took ownership of the land in 1995 to cover the losses of the defunct Erawan Trust, with a book value for the property of two billion baht.

The winning bid lodged by Khunying Potjaman was 772 million baht, or 58,000 baht per square wah. The auction was the second held by the FIDF for the land - the first auction was handled electronically in July 2003.

Three bids were received, with Khunying Potjaman's bid beating a 750 million baht offer by Noble Development Plc and a 730 million bid by Land & Houses Plc.

The FIDF and the central bank were reluctant players in the ASC investigation. One point of dispute is whether the FIDF is under the authority of the prime minister.

Officials insist that they were unaware of the bidders' identities until the final bids were submitted.

"The FIDF realised that it was the prime minister's wife only when her name appeared on the bidding document. We did not suspect that the bid was illegal because the auction rules say it is the bidder's responsibility to ensure their eligibility to participate," said one former FIDF executive.

Another point in dispute is over the bid itself. At 58,000 baht per square wah, the price was in line with official property valuations set by the Treasury Department from 2000 to 2003. Valuations were revised upwards in 2004 to 62,000 baht per square wah by the department.

Sopon Pornchokechai, the president of Thai Appraisal Foundation, said the prosecution should have paid more attention to the market value of the land.

"While the court case centers on the legal aspects of the transaction, it should also have a clear explanation on whether the government lost from the deal. The public should be well informed about the auction price in comparison with the market price," he said.

An urban planning expert also questioned the ultimate value of the property. Zoning rules implemented from 2003 imposed greater restrictions in terms of construction and the use of floor space relative to a given land area, limiting the potential value of any subsequent development.

In 1989 the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration ruled that the area near the Thailand Cultural Centre be limited to buildings of no more than nine storeys. That rule was overturned by a new planning act that came into force this year.

The fact that Noble and Land & Houses, two of the country's most prominent property developers, also participated in the final bidding also raises doubt about allegations of collusion.

Manop Bongsadadt, a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Architecture, said the fact that listed companies joined the bid should indicate that the auction was transparent.

"I believe it was an open bid. Listed companies participating in the auction would have had to determine the market price of the land and seek board approval," Assoc Prof Manop said. "The tender prices should be no more than 5% to 10% different."

.

[Samuian]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/rea...;keyword=pravit

it's not difficult to understand why many Thaksin supporters will likely continue to believe in his innocence in this case.

There was no hard evidence but an assumption that because Thaksin was the prime minister, and was influential, back in 2003 when the bidding was made by his wife for the state-controlled land, Thaksin must be guilty because he and his wife "could have deterred other bidders from fairly competing in the bidding process".

And to make matters worse, Thaksin also used his signature and PM identity card to acknowledge the transaction made by his wife.

So we're dealing with an assumption and probability here - it's nonetheless an assumption and probability.

Is it a case of Thaksin being guilty until proven otherwise?

://www.bangkokpost.com/211008_News/21Oct2008_news06.php

Land case sets a precedent for officials

State employees now have to abide by the anti-corruption law, writes Parista Yuthamanop

Today's Supreme Court verdict in the Ratchadaphisek land case is certain to have a major impact on the political landscape.

The ASC, an ad-hoc body formed after the military staged a coup in 2006, allege Mr Thaksin and his wife violated the National Counter Corruption Act by bidding for the plot.

Khunying Potjaman lodged the winning bid for the land in December 2003 in an auction run by the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), a unit of the Bank of Thailand. The FIDF took ownership of the land in 1995 to cover the losses of the defunct Erawan Trust, with a book value for the property of two billion baht.

The winning bid lodged by Khunying Potjaman was 772 million baht, or 58,000 baht per square wah. The auction was the second held by the FIDF for the land - the first auction was handled electronically in July 2003.

Three bids were received, with Khunying Potjaman's bid beating a 750 million baht offer by Noble Development Plc and a 730 million bid by Land & Houses Plc.

The FIDF and the central bank were reluctant players in the ASC investigation. One point of dispute is whether the FIDF is under the authority of the prime minister.

Officials insist that they were unaware of the bidders' identities until the final bids were submitted.

"The FIDF realised that it was the prime minister's wife only when her name appeared on the bidding document. We did not suspect that the bid was illegal because the auction rules say it is the bidder's responsibility to ensure their eligibility to participate," said one former FIDF executive.

Another point in dispute is over the bid itself. At 58,000 baht per square wah, the price was in line with official property valuations set by the Treasury Department from 2000 to 2003. Valuations were revised upwards in 2004 to 62,000 baht per square wah by the department.

Sopon Pornchokechai, the president of Thai Appraisal Foundation, said the prosecution should have paid more attention to the market value of the land.

"While the court case centers on the legal aspects of the transaction, it should also have a clear explanation on whether the government lost from the deal. The public should be well informed about the auction price in comparison with the market price," he said.

An urban planning expert also questioned the ultimate value of the property. Zoning rules implemented from 2003 imposed greater restrictions in terms of construction and the use of floor space relative to a given land area, limiting the potential value of any subsequent development.

In 1989 the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration ruled that the area near the Thailand Cultural Centre be limited to buildings of no more than nine storeys. That rule was overturned by a new planning act that came into force this year.

The fact that Noble and Land & Houses, two of the country's most prominent property developers, also participated in the final bidding also raises doubt about allegations of collusion.

Manop Bongsadadt, a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Architecture, said the fact that listed companies joined the bid should indicate that the auction was transparent.

"I believe it was an open bid. Listed companies participating in the auction would have had to determine the market price of the land and seek board approval," Assoc Prof Manop said. "The tender prices should be no more than 5% to 10% different."

.

Have Noble Land & House employees also distributed a CD where all this "truth today" has been published on?

Regarding "Tranparency" - are you aware on who is who in Thai Hi-So ad that whoever crosses certain influential figures path - would fall from grace, never heard of it - did you?

I love this pure incidental case, he is incidentally PM, she is incidentally his wife and she wins incidentally the bid

of a MEGA - prime pie piece a land for "little less" then it's genuine value... ah' well where the heck is Ratjada .... then he might fight his case - why he doesn't - because now Thailand is run by a military Junta?

[Plus]

The case was absolutely clear cut - Prime Minister and his family are prohibited from entering into any bidding contracts with the state.

It doesn't matter if the bidding was rigged, if the state was disadvantaged, if the state won or loss money on the deal - it just cannot be done.

Don't forget it took a coup and several months of investigations to prove only that much - he knew of his wife's transactions. The chance of uncovering and prosecuting all possible negative effects and transgressions in that deal is very very low, and impossible if Thaksin remained in charge.

That's probably why the law doesn't require proof of corruption, simply entering into the bidding is enough.

[Publicus]

..implication is that the illegitemate product of a military coup, and a junta appointed judiciary, is democracy, because american foreign policy says so.

Of course not.

They installed a government that for once listened to the people, ministers who were ashamed of stealing from the people, and parliament that represented the people.

And they didn't appointed judiciary. Post-coup Constitution Court was staffed with judges from other top courts, not military barracks, and top judiciary is NOT under army's boot - they get their own audiences and inspiration directly from the Head of State.

Your inference perhaps but not my implication as the poster/forumist correctly recognizes and understands in the above post (as with a lot of other people).

My statement is that the US Government and the Kingdom of Thailand have had a special relationship since the immediate post WWII years regardless of who was PM.

Relations between the US and Thailand began in 1833 to include King Mongkut shipping two elephants to Pres Lincoln to help him to successfully fight the Civil War.

In short, who's this completely out of bounds Thaksin guy???