Has Thailand Made Progress? Thaksin Taunts

[Publicus]

I'd certainly take you at your word.

UG's curt statement clearly and exclusively was that of an apolgist's attempt to justify Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption simply predicated on the fact that before Thaksin and TRT there had been a previous long history of corruption in Thai government and politics.

So while it's clear there isn't any comparason between Thaksin and his Baht 30/50 medical care program and Obama's efforts, I'd reiterate I take you prima face at what you say in response to my above post.

It sometimes is the case that any forumist needs to be more clear as to a statement. I'd trust that on my part I'm clear in this one.

[sabaijai]

I'd certainly take you at your word.

UG's curt statement clearly and exclusively was that of an apolgist's attempt to justify Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption simply predicated on the fact that before Thaksin and TRT there had been a previous long history of corruption in Thai government and politics.

So while it's clear there isn't any comparason between Thaksin and his Baht 30/50 medical care program and Obama's efforts, I'd reiterate I take you prima face at what you say in response to my above post.

It sometimes is the case that any forumist needs to be more clear as to a statement. I'd trust that on my part I'm clear in this one.

Not at matter of trust at all, rather comprehension IMO the original text was clear, and if not then the explanatory response should be crystal clear.

[Publicus]

I'd certainly take you at your word.

UG's curt statement clearly and exclusively was that of an apolgist's attempt to justify Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption simply predicated on the fact that before Thaksin and TRT there had been a previous long history of corruption in Thai government and politics.

So while it's clear there isn't any comparason between Thaksin and his Baht 30/50 medical care program and Obama's efforts, I'd reiterate I take you prima face at what you say in response to my above post.

It sometimes is the case that any forumist needs to be more clear as to a statement. I'd trust that on my part I'm clear in this one.

IMO the original text was quite clear, but since you appeared not to comprehend, I explained in more detail. Not at matter of trust at all

[Ulysses G.]

Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption

If you don't have any facts, just make some up!

[brahmburgers]

Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption

If you don't have any facts, just make some up!

No need to 'make some up.' Thai legislators are dealing with a raft of corruption allegations instigated by T and/or his people. And those are just the ones they chose to focus in on. There are an additional raft of other corruption allegations that haven't been parked in the newspaper columns. Would you like a list of some of them? I can get a list started if you like.

If you're considering buying a car from someone who has a roadside yard, and fourteen unrelated people come up to you (while you're standing there perusing options), and each tells you horror stories about the vendor (faulty merchandise, inflated prices, etc), you might assume the vendor is not on the up and up. Would you need facts in order to steer yourself to a different vendor who doesn't have such a sordid reputation?

[hammered]

Maybe that's exactly the problem. The police report to who???? I would appear that the police ARE the mafia and report to no one. So you think that police corruption is not a government problem?

They policemen who harassed you report to their bosses, a station chief, who reports to the district chief, and so all the way up, to the police chief who reports to no one, but is appointed by the PM.

Right now Abhisit is at his wits end how to get his police chief choice confirmed by the board. The retiring chief was appointed by Samak and was kept on as a tribute to Newin.

So, how exactly is Abhisit responsible for your police troubles?

It is always amusing to see someone who favours Thaksin criticise the police considering the realities of that link and how it impacted directly on the kind of behaviour being described.

[hammered]

Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption

If you don't have any facts, just make some up!

Have a read of Snoh's little book or try Pasuk's business of politics (not sure about the name but it is in English)

or for somethign different try HRW and Amnesty on the drug war which is corruption but of a different more brutal kind.

[mca]

Basically a lot of the police in Thailand are going to be bent no matter if who's in power.

[rixalex]

Basically a lot of the police in Thailand are going to be bent no matter if who's in power.

Yes that's certainly true. That doesn't mean however that the government carries no responsibilty for corrupt policing. If, as Gary claims, the police have suddenly become more corrupt under Abhisit's term, then that's something they need to look at. I'm just not sure that we can rush to that conclusion on a bit of circumstancial evidence.

[rixalex]

Not at matter of trust at all, rather comprehension IMO the original text was clear, and if not then the explanatory response should be crystal clear.

It was very clear to me.

Publicus for some reason, got completely the wrong end of the stick.

[Ulysses G.]

Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption

If you don't have any facts, just make some up!

No one is disputing that Thaksin was corrupt, but no more so than many others.

[steveromagnino]

Thaksin's unprecedended widescale corruption

If you don't have any facts, just make some up!

No one is disputing that Thaksin was corrupt, but no more so than many others.

Well, he made more policy decisions and had more of a free hand thanks to not being able to be censured, so one could argue that he did more, and the resultant corruption was of a greater scale.

Whereas his predecessors tended to be brought down by scandals such as the express way or the land conversion schemes or just general incompetence, Thaksin's scale was quite different and expanded to include new ways to skim including selling listing companies to his compatriots (PTT); healthcare schemes; airport construction scams; chicken flu coverup; retail regulations to favour CP; property schemes to rewards L&H, Noble; telco regulation/regulation to massively favour AIS then to allow himself to sell off 49.6% of Shin (ultimately resulting in 96% foreign ownership); soft loans abroad for his sattellites; soft loans via pseudo govt lenders to entities favoured; the elite card scam; lottery.

He was probably the first to understand how business works and systematically use government policy to support both his robber baron political colleagues from upcountry (old style) and his business backers (CP, Noble, L&H, Samart, Jasmine, Channel 3 etc) who could talk to him on a different level to well educated guys like Banharn and Chavalit who, if you know them, would be best described as the kind of guys in business you would probably not trust to even ask would you like fries with that. For the first time, Thaksin was elected and for the big business families, finally they had a guy that they had paid to get into power (as they paid for Banharn, Chavalit, etc also) but they could talk to him directly about FTAs, government policy, restrictions on people they didn't like, etc and action was taken quickly and fast. Ever wondered why the international hyper markets sold off during the Democrat years were severely restricted to help mum and pop stores? That was in the CP list of requests.

You'll note many of these families are no longer his fan club anymore. They sit on the fence at best. He is now rooting their businesses and they aren't happy about it.

The policy and corruption that he did which weren't so different to his predecessors were the giveaways to the poor; village fund, free cows, crop pledging albeit he increased the subsidies to rural farmers to a much higher level that is still maintained now, general roading and infrastructure stuff; manipulating local policy to favour his family (they all do stuff like this mostly except perhaps guys like Kukrit Pramoj who genuinely did do stuff for others without being a robber baron Banharn/Chavalit/Thaksin/Sanoh type).

He also built his govt in the same way; combining the same robber barons by provincial area, but by providing more stability to the govt, thereby reducing the costs of acquiring votes for the provincial godfather system as there were less frequent elections, less oversight (media intimidation) and also people in the provincial areas in the north and north east genuinely wanted to vote for a TRT government based on what they saw they were getting. He was also probably better than any of his predecessors at using govt money to fund his own and his own party publicity.

He also muzzled the media at a level not seen for years, restabilised the south and lost a fortune on the deisel subsidy.

The things he also didn't do included education reform; land ownership reform for foreigners; general deregulation and reduction of red tape. he also didn't manage to sort out corruption in the civil service nor did he manage to improve Thailand's competitiveness significantly through his own measures; rather they were the long term effect of multiple governments (for better or worse) just as the competitiveness of Thailand as of today is not solely the result of Abhisit and his loons but also the predecessors; most serious business people don't win or lose based on a single year or few months of govt policy but rather an ongoing development and support from infrastructure; transparency, rule of law, access to financing, access to markets. He also wasn't quite able to buy Liverpool :-) or reach any of his more extreme targets (opening the airport on time, reducing traffic, war on poverty, war on dark forces). He also didn't fix the Saudi situation or change the relationship with Burma. He didn't address any of the real corruption issues. Hard to do so when his cabinet were like a whos who of complete c&*ts. he also didn't manage to buy the skytrains and underground. And he didn't manage to disconnect Thailand's economy from the real world. We rode a rollercoaster up during his years which was a global uptick; now we are in the last year in a global recession. Not surprisingly we aren't doing so good now - although to listen to him it is simply because he isn't hear. Paging Thaksin - sorry mate, please come back down to earth.

The things he also did which others did some of included some reduction in tarrifs, FTAs, etc. Universal healthcare has come up a few times here; there was a scheme not nearly as wide coverage (apparently) prior to it and subsequent governments have improved and maintained the scheme. He did wind back some of the hardship measures of the previous govt regarding freetrade that probably would have hurt for 2-3 years but would now be paying dividends as is often the case when you open borders. But arguably not much worse or better than others.

On a personal level he also helped get attention away from his son cheating at RU; his daughters alledgely cheating to get into Kaset and Chula; he got off the asset declaration case which was fairly open/shut; he got his son the business of advertisign for the underground even though it was already signed to someone else etc. he also helped some of his friends. The Alpine golf course obviously. He made sure Chalerm, his mate who gave him the monopoly of either the satellite business or the mobiles I forget which, was able to assist his son to get away with murder. His best robber baron mates fared quite well even with scandals like the Samut Prakan waste water treatment facility that doesn't work hanging over them. And they all got to share in PTT shares of course.

You'll note the people voting for him in the first election and the second changed markedly. Apparently they are a nice to have group who are very important when they vote for you (SME owners, middle class) but with their greater education, opportunities and wider view of the world when they didn't continue to vote for TRT anymore in 2005 and beyond, suddenly the typical self made Thai and Thai Chinese business magnates who creates much of the GDP of Thailand suddenly had turned from team player to 'Bangkok elite villain' in just 1 year.

You have to give it to him for one thing - he was the first PM to learn the value of PR just as Kennedy was the first stateside who proved that looks and presentation counted just as much or maybe more than content (1960 electoral debate vs. sweaty tricky dick Nixon*).

* apparently he was called tricky dick for 2 reasons. One is because he was tricky. The second is because he was a dick.

So all in all, there are degrees of corruption, and with a greater power in parliament, the potential is there, simple logic, to be more corrupt as you can do more.

Most people who consulted to projects such as the airport were quite aware that they were seeing corruption of a scale far beyond previous efforts, and a lot more slick.

This logic of he was no worse than others, so we should just allow Thailand to continue being corrupt and accept it. Hmm. Personally, since I am sure that there are lots of people out there hitting people in the head and getting away with it, I have never thought that I too should be able to wander around and hit people in the head without consequence just because some others do it. Mind you, on Thaivisa, it sure feels that my head is hitting something. ;_)

Edited September 26, 2009 by steveromagnino

[Ulysses G.]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

[Thai at Heart]

So Steve,

Not wanting to quote your entire message which is a pretty good precis of what happened; the question is "has Thailand made any progress from the first day of the coup too today?"

I think largely no. The losses in political stability and global perception because of the coup, followed by the continuing protests of yellows and reds probably mean Thailand is a "net" loser over this period since the coup.

It is interesting to consider that if Thaksin was in power during this global recession (right now), people might be starting to see through his veneer and his popularity might be plummeting.

[animatic]

Well, he made more policy decisions and had more of a free hand thanks to not being able to be censured, so one could argue that he did more, and the resultant corruption was of a greater scale...

...This logic of he was no worse than others, so we should just allow Thailand to continue being corrupt and accept it. Hmm. Personally, since I am sure that there are lots of people out there hitting people in the head and getting away with it, I have never thought that I too should be able to wander around and hit people in the head without consequence just because some others do it. Mind you, on Thaivisa, it sure feels that my head is hitting something. ;_)

Another coherent and politically astute post from Kuhn Steve.

Clear, cogent and with solid historical perspective.

Edited September 26, 2009 by animatic

[rixalex]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

[animatic]

So Steve,

Not wanting to quote your entire message which is a pretty good precis of what happened; the question is "has Thailand made any progress from the first day of the coup too today?"

I think largely no. The losses in political stability and global perception because of the coup, followed by the continuing protests of yellows and reds probably mean Thailand is a "net" loser over this period since the coup.

It is interesting to consider that if Thaksin was in power during this global recession (right now), people might be starting to see through his veneer and his popularity might be plummeting.

Well the reorganization of Year One was a waiting period.

Year two was Samak and then Somchai, and laid the groundwork for

a MUCH worse position for Thailand vis a vis the coming world recession.

They completely missed, or mis-read it and dropped the ball with a fecal splat.

I saw it as they were so obsessed with getting their short term gains done,

that the future of the world around their little political cocoon was rarely on discussion

Year 3 is done, but 2/3 by and Abhisit, who has been making progress. In spite of huge obstacles.

He inherited a complete cock-up because the predecessors were blinkered like a draft horse.

Add the hyena's snapping around his haunches, many by grace of Thaksin, have slowed progress.

There is a concerted effort to stymy all progress of the Dems,to make Thaksin's years 'appear better',

even as the situation was totally different, and what is currently faced is the inverse on a world level.

So I must lay most blame for lack of progress on :

a#1 ) world economic collapse, causing a sales/investment vacuum

b ) politically based partisan hassling, causing distraction and lost time,

as well as stifling what positive investment climate that remained.

c ) Medical issues world wide.

d ) PPP did NOT do any advance planning for what was clearly coming

and so the country was woefully unprepared to deal with the perfect economic storm when it arrived.

e ) Nationalistic impulses getting world wide attention and making Thailand less attractive to many.

Hassling foreigners publicly as public policy is NOT the way to encourage a country to prosper.

b + c and e contributing

causing a tourism and commerce tanking of grand proportions

Much of these factors are beyond any governments control,

they can only mitigate the circumstances. But Thaksin has

made it worse than it EVER needed to be for his own particular reasons.

That not as much progress has been made FORWARD, is not the point I think,

it is;

How well and how fast has the bacon been pulled out of the fire

when someone came in to the top willing and capable to even LOOK at the problem?

Breaking even in the current confluence of bad things should be considered a great achievement.

When the shit hits the fan, you expect to get messy,

but do you just soap it off, or do you grow something with the fertilizer provided?

I see Abhisit planting seeds for the future, since that is the best forward looking option,

besides preventing further externally caused drops.

Edited September 26, 2009 by animatic

[Thai at Heart]

So Steve,

Not wanting to quote your entire message which is a pretty good precis of what happened; the question is "has Thailand made any progress from the first day of the coup too today?"

I think largely no. The losses in political stability and global perception because of the coup, followed by the continuing protests of yellows and reds probably mean Thailand is a "net" loser over this period since the coup.

It is interesting to consider that if Thaksin was in power during this global recession (right now), people might be starting to see through his veneer and his popularity might be plummeting.

Well the reorganization of Year One was a waiting period.

Year two was Samak and then Somchai, and laid the groundwork for

a MUCH worse position for Thailand vis a vis the coming world recession.

They completely missed, or mis-read it and dropped the ball with a fecal splat.

I saw it as they were so obsessed with getting their short term gains done,

that the future of the world around their little political cocoon was rarely on discussion

Year 3 is done, but 2/3 by and Abhisit, who has been making progress. In spite of huge obstacles.

He inherited a complete cock-up because the predecessors were blinkered like a draft horse.

Add the hyena's snapping around his haunches, many by grace of Thaksin, have slowed progress.

There is a concerted effort to stymy all progress of the Dems,to make Thaksin's years 'appear better',

even as the situation was totally different, and what is currently faced is the inverse on a world level.

So I must lay most blame for lack of progress on :

a#1 ) world economic collapse, causing a sales/investment vacuum

b ) politically based partisan hassling, causing distraction and lost time,

as well as stifling what positive investment climate that remained.

c ) Medical issues world wide.

d ) PPP did NOT do any advance planning for what was clearly coming

and so the country was woefully unprepared to deal with the perfect economic storm when it arrived.

e ) Nationalistic impulses getting world wide attention and making Thailand less attractive to many.

Hassling foreigners publicly as public policy is NOT the way to encourage a country to prosper.

b + c and e contributing

causing a tourism and commerce tanking of grand proportions

Much of these factors are beyond any governments control,

they can only mitigate the circumstances. But Thaksin has

made it worse than it EVER needed to be for his own particular reasons.

That not as much progress has been made FORWARD, is not the point I think,

it is;

How well and how fast has the bacon been pulled out of the fire

when someone came in to the top willing and capable to even LOOK at the problem?

Breaking even in the current confluence of bad things should be considered a great achievement.

When the shit hits the fan, you expect to get messy,

but do you just soap it off, or do you grow something with the fertilizer provided?

I see Abhisit planting seeds for the future, since that is the best forward looking option,

besides preventing further externally caused drops.

I don't think the plan included Samak and Somchai even being involved. All the best laid plans of mice and men of course.

And without doubt, Abhisit is now the "only" real plan for the short and medium term. I hope his seeds survive this rather stormy political rainy season which doesn't show any likelihood of abating any time soon. The biggest gainer is Newin out of all of this mess.

[wayfarer108]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

Steve missed a few, but caught most the low points well. Might also include how immgiration got tougher during the Thaksin period, ie, not a single permanent residence application signed during his first two years in office and his puritanical campaign to close nightclubs early (after his son was caught using coke in a disco restroom), which led to the estimated loss of 10,000 jobs, and shutting down alcohol sales between the hours of 2 and 5pm and after midnight.

[brahmburgers]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

Steve missed a few, but caught most the low points well. Might also include how immgiration got tougher during the Thaksin period, ie, not a single permanent residence application signed during his first two years in office and his puritanical campaign to close nightclubs early (after his son was caught using coke in a disco restroom), which led to the estimated loss of 10,000 jobs, and shutting down alcohol sales between the hours of 2 and 5pm and after midnight.

One of T's right hand men (was it Purachai?) was designated hit man on the 'cleaning up the sex business' campaign. It worked in northern Thailand and other outlying areas, and axed well over 10,000 Thai jobs, most of those in supporting businesses. However, their 'holier than thou' campaign by the two couldn't put a dent in the sex industry centers such as Bangkok, Phuket and Pattaya. Ironically, after the point man did his clean up mess, he went to reside in New Zealand.

[Thai at Heart]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

Steve missed a few, but caught most the low points well. Might also include how immgiration got tougher during the Thaksin period, ie, not a single permanent residence application signed during his first two years in office and his puritanical campaign to close nightclubs early (after his son was caught using coke in a disco restroom), which led to the estimated loss of 10,000 jobs, and shutting down alcohol sales between the hours of 2 and 5pm and after midnight.

Closing the clubs earlier, attempting to clean up the red light areas a bit not wholly bad ideas. War on drugs. Great idea, awful implementation.

Now alcohol between 2 and 5, has to be the most idiotic and badly written law ever passed. One bottle "no!". 2 cases "yes!".

Does anyone remember the one about closing petrol stations at 11pm to save electricity? That cost me an overnight somewhere because I couldn't find a petrol station open to refill and had to turn around and come back. I wonder if that is still on the books somewhere because, if there is one thing we know about Thailand, laws tend never to be reformed here, they just die and sit at the back of the room waiting for someone to arbitrarily dust them off.

Edited September 26, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[Moonrakers]

Does anyone remember the one about closing petrol stations at 11pm to save electricity? That cost me an overnight somewhere because I couldn't find a petrol station open to refill and had to turn around and come back.

I remember that. Wasn't it something to do with trying to reduce demand of petrol due to high prices or something?

Either way it was a very poor idea which made life more difficult for quite a lot of people, I had to stay overnight myself once or twice due to no petrol.

[Thai at Heart]

Does anyone remember the one about closing petrol stations at 11pm to save electricity? That cost me an overnight somewhere because I couldn't find a petrol station open to refill and had to turn around and come back.

I remember that. Wasn't it something to do with trying to reduce demand of petrol due to high prices or something?

Either way it was a very poor idea which made life more difficult for quite a lot of people, I had to stay overnight myself once or twice due to no petrol.

I think it was to do with electricity because they were bargaining with neighbouring countries about electricity supply. I think they even mandated that government offices should turn up the aircon slightly warmer. Shame that didn't work out in a way.

The point was that all of the pump stations had all these new fangled things like bright signs and lights, and fridges and stuff and they like use a lot of electricity at night, so like lets close them when all good kidiwinks should be tucked up in bed. Who knows it could have been part of a Thailand Kyoto compliance master plan.

Oh the heady days of policy on the hoof. Now we have the grand master plan.

[Plus]

"has Thailand made any progress from the first day of the coup too today?"

Hmm, in that sense the coup is still in progress. The objective was to get rid of Thaksin and that is not entirely over. Thaksin has stopped being a serious issue for only a couple of months, after Songkran revolution fiasco.

It's only after April that the government actually started paying attention to business rather than politics. Samak/Somchai were too busy saving Thaksin's ass, and Surayud was writing a new constitution.

They've managed to do the whole thing in six months, btw. Current bunch is looking at six months to rewrite six paragraphs that nobody cares about.

[Ulysses G.]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

Horse crap. None of his points begin to approach the corruption of controlling the world heroin trade, therefore Thaksin was far from "the worst". You are the one pointing a finger in another direction.

[animatic]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

Horse crap. None of his points begin to approach the corruption of controlling the world heroin trade, therefore Thaksin was far from "the worst". You are the one pointing a finger in another direction.

Thailand never "controlled a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade".

Since Afganistan blew it far into the weeds by quantity.

More was grown in Northern Burma and shipped through there.

And much went from low to Viet Nam too. Some went through Thailand,

and some was grown there to certainly.

If the sense is that puyais get a cut of what their underlings do,

then they profited from it, that doesn't say they necessarily directed it,

but more probably didn't stop it often either.

It was just one of many black market networks, but you use the word "Allegedly",

and that pretty much sums it up. Trying to White Wash Thaksin because a few

guys in the past ran heroin... well as a PM who actually was worse?

Name names.

Not once has it been said a PM ran heroin.

Not even specifically a General after a coup, actually ran heroin.

This is hyperbole.

Edited September 26, 2009 by animatic

[caf]

How about back when Thailand was behind a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade and many Thai government bigwigs were allegedly controlling it. That is corruption.

All those points that Steve raises and you can't address a single one? Just back to the same old, same old, point the finger in another direction defense.

Horse crap. None of his points begin to approach the corruption of controlling the world heroin trade, therefore Thaksin was far from "the worst". You are the one pointing a finger in another direction.

Thailand never "controlled a good piece of the worldwide heroin trade".

Since Afganistan blew it far into the weeds by quantity.

More was grown in Northern Burma and shipped through there.

And much went from low to Viet Nam too. Some went through Thailand,

and some was grown there to certainly.

If the sense is that puyais get a cut of what their underlings do,

then they profited from it, that doesn't say they necessarily directed it,

but more probably didn't stop it often either.

It was just one of many black market networks, but you use the word "Allegedly",

and that pretty much sums it up. Trying to White Wash Thaksin because a few

guys in the past ran heroin... well as a PM who actually was worse?

Name names.

Not once has it been said a PM ran heroin.

Not even specifically a General after a coup, actually ran heroin.

This is hyperbole.

Plus and Ulysses are both right on the points they have made. Very objective.

Your comments on the heroin trade are very naive. Of course it is all "alleged" No names no pack drill. The unseen Thailand.

[Ulysses G.]

Your comments on the heroin trade are very naive. Of course it is all "alleged" No names no pack drill. The unseen Thailand.

"Naive" is a much gentler word than I would have used. Heroin dealers do their best to hide what they are doing. It is a not matter of public record.

Edited September 27, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[rixalex]

None of his points begin to approach the corruption of controlling the world heroin trade, therefore Thaksin was far from "the worst". You are the one pointing a finger in another direction.

Au contraire.

You see, that's the difference between you and me. Whilst you spend hour after hour on Thaivisa defending Thaksin based on the fact that in your opinion, others are worse / have been worse, i simply hate the lot of them. For me, a corrupt leader is a corrupt leader, and i have no intention of wasting a second of my life defending any one of them, or arguing the toss about who was the worst.

Just wondering... do you spend the rest of your precious spare time on serialkillers dot com arguing that Charles Manson wasn't so bad after all when compared with Ted Bundy?

[webfact]

//General Reminder//

The topic title reads "Has Thailand Made Progress?"

Please stay on that topic

Thanks for your cooperation