Reds To Descend On Surayud's Vacation Home

[scorecard]

Animatic, you are so predictable. Does your hatred of Mr. Thaksin blind you to the concept of integrity and justice. It doesn't matter if it is 1 rai or 100 rai, whether it is in Bangkok or not. The gentleman in question appears to have abused his position and according to the news reports I read the other day was judged to have taken land from a nature preserve. How come you can never deal with a specific issue but always have to bring Mr. Thaksin into the matter? Former general Gen Surayud Chulanont is the accused in this matter, not Mr. Thaksin S.

How can you Not bring taxsin into the discussion.

Gen Surayud has been saying for more than 18 months that he bought the land after the appropriate government agency said if was OK for him to purchase it, and he's also ben saying for the same period of time that he will return the land if that's what is appropriate.

But of course jatuporn and his lame followers always choose to forget the details of the case that they want to ignore and focus on one aspect of the case that they can yell and scream about.

So to the next point, why are they (red shirts) doing this? Please don't tell me they are the champions of justice / the champions of making everybody (repeat everybody) abide by the law. In fact they have absolutely no credibility whatever to take up this stance.

The real reason is the try to win something they think (stupidly) will get their master back into the PM seat and also cancel all the strong cases for corruption and abuse of authoority etc., against him.

But of course in the next breath they will tell us that the are currently protesting for equal justice, respect for the judicial process, etc.

[Credo]

My understanding is that the original plot was 15 rai. Later this grew to 22 rai. So there was 2 purchases--and no one knew that this land wasn't to be sold. Or maybe when he decided to buy, no one dared say no.

And meanwhile ordinary people who use the land get charged with trespassing.

Seems like something is amiss here.

[way2muchcoffee]

My understanding is that the original plot was 15 rai. Later this grew to 22 rai. So there was 2 purchases--and no one knew that this land wasn't to be sold. Or maybe when he decided to buy, no one dared say no.

And meanwhile ordinary people who use the land get charged with trespassing.

Seems like something is amiss here.

You claim people were charged with trespassing. Source? How many people? What were the sentences? What were the fines? Did they lose the land? How long were they given to leave? Were they able to sue the people who sold it to them? Were the sellers also charged? Are there others living on nearby land illegally? Have they been charged? Is this a criminal offense? What are typical sentences for this kind of thing? All are quite pertinent questions that I have not seen any answers for.

Edited January 11, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Dustybin]

didn't Taksin and his wife get done for a somewhat similar dodgy land deal?

[animatic]

Davidusaf99 you are quite right.

I generally give benefit of the doubt, particularly were it seems persecution driven,

until I see things adjudicated in these side cases top the BIG case pending.

The Reds go in guns blazing. They are looking for dirt to gain ammunition in political battle.

Integrity is not on the table with this crew, they don't want justice, they want to WIN.

This was never an issue until Surayud was to be made P.C. member, then suddenly he is a target.

I like that the guy defending the wirecutters and property invasion clique is worried about integrity and justice.

This is brought up by Thaksin's red Shirts for political gain, it is impossible to keep Thaksin OUT of it.

Without his case, this paper-chase case would have gone unnoticed.

If the crown hold the land, it can do as it pleases with it.

I have no problem if Suayud loses this land and get a fine,

i suspect it was paper pushers and other lower level bureaucrats

who just made this happen in the old world Kow Tow way.

The question is, is this a prosecutable criminal act,

or just signing a paper presented by underlings to do a deal?

Thaksin KNEW he was signing something he shouldn't. It was obviously so.

We can assume Suruayud might have known this was questionable,

but could have assigned and underling to make it happen

and might as easily have assumed it was done properly.

The question is not was it illegal, but what intent to do illegal acts

and WHO actually organized the illegal act that culminated in a paper signed.

So be being devils advocate and presenting possibilities why this

may or may not be an actual crime, I am labled some sort of apologist for Surayud.

All I am saying is to not buy into the red's political legend whole cloth.

Edited January 11, 2010 by animatic

[animatic]

didn't Taksin and his wife get done for a somewhat similar dodgy land deal?

Thaksin got done for signing the paper allowing his wife to

purchase from Government Auction, a large parcell of prime Bangkok real estate.

The difference here was that as Prime Minister he was under restriction to not allow

himself or any close family member to do contracts with government entities under

his supervision. Since as Prime Minister ALL Thailand ministires and their sub-branches

are under his purview, he must have known he should NOT allow his wife to purchase the land.

His beating the Supreme court in 2001 may have lead him to believe he could massage

any legal wording his way, but that proved incorrect. He was convicted of abuse of power.

If Surayud can't meet the letter of the law, then he loses, simple enough,

but Thaksin lost already, and refuses to act in letter of the law fashion,

having his red shirts try and make this point against Surayud is quite disingenuous.

Politics and nothing more, regardless of the moral component.

Edited January 11, 2010 by animatic

[Insight]

If BP is anything to go by, the turnout is a bit of a joke given they were hoping for 100,000.

I'm sure the morning news will provoke a bit of a reaction in this household tomorrow regardless.

[monkfish]

Davidusaf99 you are quite right.

I generally give benefit of the doubt, particularly were it seems persecution driven,

until I see things adjudicated in these side cases top the BIG case pending.

The Reds go in guns blazing. They are looking for dirt to gain ammunition in political battle.

Integrity is not on the table with this crew, they don't want justice, they want to WIN.

This was never an issue until Surayud was to be made P.C. member, then suddenly he is a target.

I like that the guy defending the wirecutters and property invasion clique is worried about integrity and justice.

This is brought up by Thaksin's red Shirts for political gain, it is impossible to keep Thaksin OUT of it.

Without his case, this paper-chase case would have gone unnoticed.

If the crown hold the land, it can do as it pleases with it.

I have no problem if Suayud loses this land and get a fine,

i suspect it was paper pushers and other lower level bureaucrats

who just made this happen in the old world Kow Tow way.

The question is, is this a prosecutable criminal act,

or just signing a paper presented by underlings to do a deal?

Thaksin KNEW he was signing something he shouldn't. It was obviously so.

We can assume Suruayud might have known this was questionable,

but could have assigned and underling to make it happen

and might as easily have assumed it was done properly.

The question is not was it illegal, but what intent to do illegal acts

and WHO actually organized the illegal act that culminated in a paper signed.

So be being devils advocate and presenting possibilities why this

may or may not be an actual crime, I am labled some sort of apologist for Surayud.

All I am saying is to not buy into the red's political legend whole cloth.

Animatic do you think Thaksins conviction was politically motivated? a Yes or No will be enough.

You say Thaksin New he was signing something he knew he shouldn't yet even the Supreme Court was undecided

whether the FIDF was a government office?? Should Thaksin have know law better than a Supreme court judge?

Lets not forget the Supreme Court had previously concluded, in another case that the FIDF was not a government institution.

Edited January 11, 2010 by monkfish

[way2muchcoffee]

Animatic do you think Thaksins conviction was politically motivated? a Yes or No will be enough.

Of course it was politically motivated. The U.S. Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that are politically motivated. It is what it is. And it was Thaksin's time to go.

Edited January 11, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[monkfish]

Animatic do you think Thaksins conviction was politically motivated? a Yes or No will be enough.

Of course it was politically motivated. The U.S. Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that are politically motivated. It is what it is. And it was Thaksin's time to go.

Errrrr whats the US got to do with anything? and why would that make it OK here anyway?

[way2muchcoffee]

Animatic do you think Thaksins conviction was politically motivated? a Yes or No will be enough.

Of course it was politically motivated. The U.S. Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that are politically motivated. It is what it is. And it was Thaksin's time to go.

Errrrr whats the US got to do with anything? and why would that make it OK here anyway?

The point I was making is that all courts everywhere are politically biased. It is the nature of their function in societies. Judge makes judgments. Their political leanings effect their decisions. This is especially true in supreme courts where there is often no legal precedent for the cases they hear.

Edited January 11, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[tominbkk]

Hopefully someone 'pops' Arisman this time, when they have a chance.....that would be very very good.

[Dustybin]

Quite moraly and ethically straight forward.

If it was good for the goose, its good for the gander.

If you cannot defend Taksin, you cannot defend Surayad.

[Siripon]

didn't Taksin and his wife get done for a somewhat similar dodgy land deal?

Thaksin got away scot free buying and selling land donated to a temple which became Alpine Golf course and a new village.

Both Thaksin and Snoh Thianthong should have been prosecuted over that blatant injustice but the Interior Minister at the time, Mr 'Clean' Purachai Sombianboon didn't want to pursue matters against his boss at the time.

Edited January 12, 2010 by Siripon

[webfact]

PRO-THAKSIN PROTEST

Red shirts fly high at protest site

By THE NATION

Published on January 12, 2010

The red shirts yesterday employed aerial surveillance during their rally outside the vacation home of ex-premier Surayud Chulanont, planning to use a paramotor to gather intelligence on the security forces surrounding the protest site.

Red-shirt leader Arisman Pongruengrong told the Nation Channel he had taken the powered paraglider to the protest site in Khao Yai Thiang in Nakhon Ratchasima's Sikhiu district for a surveillance flight.

The television report also showed a paramotor being carried on a pickup. The Nation Channel reporter who covered the protest, Noppatjak Attanon, later reported on Twitter: "The paramotor has left the site |without Arisman appearing to be using it."

Hundreds of police were dispatched around Surayud's second home and the protest site, where the red shirts camped out last night.

They set up their stage opposite Surayud's residence, and their leaders took turns criticising the privy councillor. People coming to join the rally were searched by red-shirt guards to ensure no weapons were brought into the area.

Last April, Arisman led red-shirt protesters in storming a Pattaya hotel where leaders of Asean members and their dialogue partners gathered for their annual summit, forcing the event to be aborted. He turned himself in after being charged by police in connection with the raid.

-- The Nation 2010-01-12

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[caf]

Davidusaf99 you are quite right.

I generally give benefit of the doubt, particularly were it seems persecution driven,

until I see things adjudicated in these side cases top the BIG case pending.

The Reds go in guns blazing. They are looking for dirt to gain ammunition in political battle.

Integrity is not on the table with this crew, they don't want justice, they want to WIN.

This was never an issue until Surayud was to be made P.C. member, then suddenly he is a target.

I like that the guy defending the wirecutters and property invasion clique is worried about integrity and justice.

This is brought up by Thaksin's red Shirts for political gain, it is impossible to keep Thaksin OUT of it.

Without his case, this paper-chase case would have gone unnoticed.

If the crown hold the land, it can do as it pleases with it.

I have no problem if Suayud loses this land and get a fine,

i suspect it was paper pushers and other lower level bureaucrats

who just made this happen in the old world Kow Tow way.

The question is, is this a prosecutable criminal act,

or just signing a paper presented by underlings to do a deal?

Thaksin KNEW he was signing something he shouldn't. It was obviously so.

We can assume Suruayud might have known this was questionable,

but could have assigned and underling to make it happen

and might as easily have assumed it was done properly.

The question is not was it illegal, but what intent to do illegal acts

and WHO actually organized the illegal act that culminated in a paper signed.

So be being devils advocate and presenting possibilities why this

may or may not be an actual crime, I am labled some sort of apologist for Surayud.

All I am saying is to not buy into the red's political legend whole cloth.

Perhaps you should check your facts, Animatic.

[webfact]

KHAO YAI THIENG RALLY

Red heat on Surayud

By Pnaya Thiewsangwan

Janjira Pongroi

The Nation

Published on January 12, 2010

Former prime minister General Surayud Chulanont will not stand down as a Privy Council member despite pressure from the red shirts to do so, one of his aides said yesterday.

Surayud, however, would "be pleased to return" the controversial plot of land at Khao Yai Thiang in Nakhon Ratchasima in order to "end all the problems" if ordered by the Royal Forest Department to do so, according to the aide, who requested anonymity.

"He doesn't want to see more divisions," the source added.

"General Surayud can only follow one of the demands by the red shirts - that is to return the Khao Yai Thiang plot to the Royal Forest Department. He won't follow the demand for him to resign as a privy councillor. It's because he has done nothing wrong that would warrant resignation. The land problem has nothing to do with his position; they should not be mixed up," said the source.

Surayud's aide also said he suspected the rally by the red shirts near the ex-premier's vacation home on the controversial 21-rai plot was politically motivated.

He said there was an attempt to link this to the case of the Ratchadaphisek land scandal involving fugitive ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who was sentenced in absentia to two years in jail for conflict of interest.

The red shirts allege Surayud's vacation home was illegally built on a state-run forest preserve.

The Privy Council, which acts as an advisory body for His Majesty the King, is scheduled to meet late this morning. One of the topics on the agenda will be the ongoing rally by the red shirts at Khao Yai Thiang, according to a source familiar with the matter.

Surayud is expected to attend the meeting, the source said.

Later that afternoon, he would hold a press conference about a charity concert in Khao Yai. He was expected to talk about the land controversy, according to the source.

Meanwhile, Royal Forest Department director-general Somchai Piansathaporn yesterday said his agency would set up a joint committee with other government agencies to study possible solutions to the problems of forest encroachment.

Somchai said the panel would take about 60 days to complete its work before recommending a solution to Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti.

He added that the study would focus on encroachment in Khao Yai Thiang, Khao Khuen Lan and Pa Khao Tien.

He denied that the Royal Forest Department had used double standards of law enforcement in Surayud's case. He said Surayud possessed a plot of land that had been sold three times before ending up in his ownership. The plot is part of the land allocated to the poor under a Cabinet resolution dated April 29, 1975, he added.

However, he said, other enforcement cases involved villagers who had encroached on the Suan Lung Porn Forest at the foot of the Khao Yai Thiang mountain. The area is a part of the national forest, not an area allocated for landless farmers, Somchai said.

Moreover, the encroachment by villagers had occurred recently, he added.

-- The Nation 2010-01-12

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[crusty]

Anything they think they can make stink and cause an embarrassment.

Local issue made national for political revenge and gain, ONLY because of who it is,

This is not about law enforcement, but looking for excuses to avoid law being enforced against Thalksin.

4 rai in the woods, vs Bangkok Prime real estate worth a billion.

Convicted for intent to break the law, vs possible intent to not check title back 30 years.

If Thaksin is worried about letter of the law, then come back serve the time,

and maybe Surayud will pay his little fine too for this IF one applies.

I think you have got this completely distorted.

The discontent on this issue is surely motivated by the double standards applied by the elite when one of their own is involved, essentially to turn a blind eye.Surayud projected himself as a decent and honourable man so there was a particular need to show transparency and honesty in all his affairs.

I don't think your comparison of 4 rai in the woods/prime Bangkok real eastate is very relevant.Thaksin was the wealthiest businessman in the country well before he came to power.Surayud was a low paid army officer his whole career.Actually I have more questions about Surayud's source of wealth than I do about Thaksin's.

Well after they finish this protest, they should head for the Alpine Golf course just to see where their "morals" lie and that's a serious 950 rai of temple land !

[mca]

Surayud's aide also said he suspected the rally by the red shirts near the ex-premier's vacation home on the controversial 21-rai plot was politically motivated.

He further went on to say that Christmas comes in December, Belgium in in Europe and a dog is a mammal

[animatic]

Well considering the law Thaksin broke was intended specifically to stop Politicians in office from lining their pockets

through pressuring their subordinates to give sweetheart deals to them and their families, of course there is a political component.

If Suyayud is

by origin just a poor Army General

and his sources of wealth are from marriage

or questionable means from during his army service,

then how is he considered part of the traditional Thailand Elite?

Oh yes,

he joined the elite when he was chosen for the Privy Council,

which is exactly when the Red Shirts started looking to find dirt on him.

I have never said Suayud shouldn't lose the land if the law says so, I HAVE said that,

but I notice those disagreeing with my comments always edit off, minus ellipses,

any comments to that affect and thus making it look like I am exclusively an apologizer for his actions.

As opposed to making devils advocate arguments against a purely hang em, high argument.

Some here try to directly equate this to Thaksin's high profit land grab,

and also to this elites vs poor argument, but do so in a shoddy manner.

My point is be fair in your arguments if you expect to win them.

So far too few seem inclined to do that.

At least my points have made SOME people think on the issue and not buy it whole cloth as done deal.

Meanwhile, Royal Forest Department director-general Somchai Piansathaporn yesterday said....

He denied that the Royal Forest Department had used double standards of law enforcement in Surayud's case.

He said Surayud possessed a plot of land that had been sold three times before ending up in his ownership....

3 times this is sold off and not a flag goes up until the Thaksin comparison was needed by the Reds.

And somebody researched the titles back 34 years, and what is being said about the OTHER 3 owners... nothing.

Politically motivated and the so called anti-elite label tagged on.

Edited January 12, 2010 by animatic

[hammered]

Anything they think they can make stink and cause an embarrassment.

Local issue made national for political revenge and gain, ONLY because of who it is,

This is not about law enforcement, but looking for excuses to avoid law being enforced against Thalksin.

4 rai in the woods, vs Bangkok Prime real estate worth a billion.

Convicted for intent to break the law, vs possible intent to not check title back 30 years.

If Thaksin is worried about letter of the law, then come back serve the time,

and maybe Surayud will pay his little fine too for this IF one applies.

I think you have got this completely distorted.

The discontent on this issue is surely motivated by the double standards applied by the elite when one of their own is involved, essentially to turn a blind eye.Surayud projected himself as a decent and honourable man so there was a particular need to show transparency and honesty in all his affairs.

I don't think your comparison of 4 rai in the woods/prime Bangkok real eastate is very relevant.Thaksin was the wealthiest businessman in the country well before he came to power.Surayud was a low paid army officer his whole career.Actually I have more questions about Surayud's source of wealth than I do about Thaksin's.

Well after they finish this protest, they should head for the Alpine Golf course just to see where their "morals" lie and that's a serious 950 rai of temple land !

That will be a test of whether the reds are a poltical clique solely out for the interests of one man or really do care about iniquities.

Sarayud should give up the land etc etc and then we should call on the red movement to move to Alpine. Lets see if they really care or are utter hypocrites.

[Ricardo]

Sarayud should give up the land etc etc and then we should call on the red movement to move to Alpine. Lets see if they really care or are utter hypocrites.

Don't hold your breath, hammered, the answer is the latter, I suspect.

In fact I find it slightly surprising that DL permitted this attack, with criminal-elements amongst the red-shirts caught on camera breaking-into someone else's property, when he himself is so very exposed on the same subject.

[animatic]

....I generally give benefit of the doubt, particularly were it seems persecution driven,

until I see things adjudicated in these side cases top the BIG case pending.....

...This was never an issue until Surayud was to be made P.C. member, then suddenly he is a target.

I like that the guy defending the wirecutters and property invasion clique is worried about integrity and justice. ...

....I have no problem if Suayud loses this land and get a fine,

i suspect it was paper pushers and other lower level bureaucrats

who just made this happen in the old world Kow Tow way

The question is, is this a prosecutable criminal act,

or just signing a paper presented by underlings to do a deal?....

So be being devils advocate and presenting possibilities why this

may or may not be an actual crime, I am labled some sort of apologist for Surayud.

All I am saying is to not buy into the red's political legend whole cloth.

Perhaps you should check your facts, Animatic.

So you don't think Surayud is being politically persecuted specifically?

If he loses the land he should then sue those those that sold it to him, and the land office for compensation.

Since clearly the LAND OFFICE should have not allowed the sale. Nor the sales prior to it,

Those that made the sale to Surayud made the profit and not Surayud.

Ah yes someone is suggesting

that the guys with wirecutters are breaking into some land that is closed off.

But they are not committing a crime? How is this so?

Expose or protest an alleged crime by committing another one: good and ethical?

One is a civil issue, one a criminal issue.

And criminal intent is quite clear in one, the B and E, and not necessarily so in the other.

Edited January 12, 2010 by animatic

[jayboy]

That will be a test of whether the reds are a poltical clique solely out for the interests of one man or really do care about iniquities.

Sarayud should give up the land etc etc and then we should call on the red movement to move to Alpine. Lets see if they really care or are utter hypocrites.

Get real Hammered.These are political activists not Guardian readers from Hampstead.

[webfact]

UPDATE

Red shirts disperse after mock village opening to expose double standards at Khao Yai Thiang

Following a night-long camp-out at the forest reserve, the red shirts began dispersing from Khao Yai Thiang in Nakhon Ratchasima around 8.00 am on Tuesday.

Before dismantling the rally site, organisers staged a mock ceremony to open a village for forest encroachers in a snipe against Privy Councillor Surayud Chulanont who has a vacation home in the forest reserve.

The red shirts have threatened to organise their next rally at Khao Soi Dao in Chanthaburi in order to expose the forest encroachment by a golf resort linked to Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanonda.

-- The Nation 2010-01-12

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[animatic]

So did the Reds leave the land they expropriated in the same natural condition that they found it in,

when they broke in to have their rally?

Edited January 12, 2010 by animatic

[Samuian]

That will be a test of whether the reds are a poltical clique solely out for the interests of one man or really do care about iniquities.

Sarayud should give up the land etc etc and then we should call on the red movement to move to Alpine. Lets see if they really care or are utter hypocrites.

Get real Hammered.These are political activists not Guardian readers from Hampstead.

"These are political activists"

the extra topping on the pizza!

....so refreshing some of the post's here....thanks' made my day!

[Insight]

That will be a test of whether the reds are a poltical clique solely out for the interests of one man or really do care about iniquities.

Sarayud should give up the land etc etc and then we should call on the red movement to move to Alpine. Lets see if they really care or are utter hypocrites.

Get real Hammered.These are political activists not Guardian readers from Hampstead.

"These are political activists"

the extra topping on the pizza!

....so refreshing some of the post's here....thanks' made my day!

Or politicical activists don't read The Guardian...?

Or all Guardian readers should come from Hampstead...?

So many presumptions in one small sentence...

[caf]

So did the Reds leave the land they expropriated in the same natural condition that they found it in,

when they broke in to have their rally?

Yes.

( Take a look at your post 2 and the reply to it post 4 )

And i say again, check your facts please.

caf

[Thai at Heart]

If he loses the land he should then sue those those that sold it to him, and the land office for compensation.

Since clearly the LAND OFFICE should have not allowed the sale. Nor the sales prior to it,

Those that made the sale to Surayud made the profit and not Surayud.

Ah yes someone is suggesting

that the guys with wirecutters are breaking into some land that is closed off.

But they are not committing a crime? How is this so?

Expose or protest an alleged crime by committing another one: good and ethical?

One is a civil issue, one a criminal issue.

And criminal intent is quite clear in one, the B and E, and not necessarily so in the other.

He should return the land and yes, sue for his money back. He did something wrong, simply because his name popped up, to claim it is a specific witch hunt is a bit rich. It isn't as though he is claiming he doesn't happen to own it. It simply goes to prove that they are all at it.

It is precisely this back handed, off the books, you scratch my back, i scratch yours type of business that someone sitting on the Privy Council should want to try to stop.

I giggle when people say that TIT, when there is an obvious legal way to resolve the issue, but the system is so corrupted even members of the Privy council don't appear to want to negotiate their way through it.