Gen Chaovalit Appointed As Supreme Commander Of People's Army Of Thailand

[rixalex]

How the hel_l can I be held responsible for your inability to read simple English?

The simple thing would have been for you to keep your own counsel or apologise for your inability to understand a simple concept. Even now you fail to have a grasp on reality mentioning 'many people' when it is clear from the posts only two of you seemed to fail to grasp the simplicity of the post. Or maybe I am doing you a disservice and you fully understood the post yet attempted to start some arguing on the forum because someone is perceived as having a different opinion to you.

highly suggestive it would seem only in the minds of two of the biggest perpetrators of squabbles on this forum. I think the term I should now use is 'grow up'

end of conversation, unless of course you want to continue making yourself look foolish and spoiling a decent thread

There are frequent occasions on this forum when a member will make a point i was about to, or make a point i agree with. When this happens, i generally don't bother to repeat what they have said, unless i have something else to offer the debate.

Simply because only two members questioned you on your statement -

maybe it is what is needed for Thailand to move forward. Some growing up needs to be done on both sides and a bloody nose does tend to bring one to their senses

- and felt it was suggesting / implying support for some kind of violent uprising, don't simply assume that we were the only ones to read your comment that way. I don't believe we were.

As for the rest of your comments above, it illustrates what i have already observed about your readiness to turn things into a personal slinging match and your inability to remain civil. I have no desire or interest to join you in that type of a "discussion"; and so yes, if that is all you can offer, i do indeed agree, this conversation is at an end.

Edited February 5, 2010 by rixalex

[webfact]

- my advise to whom it may concern -

Calm down!

Thank you

[ballpoint]

It has all the hallmarks of The People's Front of Judeah.

"What HAVE the farang ever really done for us?"

"Alright, apart from the railway, cars, air travel, airconditioning, refrigeration, antibiotics, tractors and electricity, what HAVE the farang ever really done for us?" Up the Judean peoples front!

[hammered]

I dunno if anyone has considered that all this stuff is trying to get a response from the military. There isnt a people's army as far as I am aware whatever Thaksin or Panlop say. However, constantly goading the military with this, a suggetsed visit by Thaksin to Preah Vihear, a grenade attack or two and trying to block as few army bases may if Thaksin is lucky get the response he needs.

Right now he is n the hands of the courts over his money and clearly doesnt like his chances. To change this he needs something to happen, riot, coup, death, violence, parliament disolution, Dem disbanding anything will do. If it involves martyrs even better for him. To analyse anything now the basic consideration is that everything being done by Thaksin and his groups is aimerd at proiducing a change, any change and before Feb 26 if at all possible. There is no other imperative right now. On the other side the government just need no change. From the third side the military also need no change. From the fourth side the PAD need no change. Right now sides 2-4 are in agreement as are the different sides in the government itself.

[SpoliaOpima]

Thaksin's "People's Army of Thailand".

Treason is one of the first things that springs to mind.

Unfortunately, this will harden the resolve of the judges rather than intimidate them IMO.

That is exactly what Thaksin and his cronies want. They want the judges to rule in favour of assets seizure in hopes that the resulting demonstrations will cause chaos and make the Democrat-led coalition look bad.

[hammered]

By the way, dont necessarily assume that the courts will take it all.

[jdinasia]

I dunno if anyone has considered that all this stuff is trying to get a response from the military. There isnt a people's army as far as I am aware whatever Thaksin or Panlop say. However, constantly goading the military with this, a suggetsed visit by Thaksin to Preah Vihear, a grenade attack or two and trying to block as few army bases may if Thaksin is lucky get the response he needs.

Right now he is n the hands of the courts over his money and clearly doesnt like his chances. To change this he needs something to happen, riot, coup, death, violence, parliament disolution, Dem disbanding anything will do. If it involves martyrs even better for him. To analyse anything now the basic consideration is that everything being done by Thaksin and his groups is aimerd at proiducing a change, any change and before Feb 26 if at all possible. There is no other imperative right now. On the other side the government just need no change. From the third side the military also need no change. From the fourth side the PAD need no change. Right now sides 2-4 are in agreement as are the different sides in the government itself.

I pretty much concur. All the Sae Daeng insanity added to a People's Army insanity added to the Red shirts claim of an impending coup are just tactics to get someone, ANYONE to act out and be seen as oppressing the Reds before the verdict is read on the 26th of this month.

I am hoping that the government and military continue to show the restraint that they have admirably shown so far. I doubt any Western government would be upset at all if people like Sae Daeng were rounded up and charged with sedition/treason and held without bail until after Feb 26th. I don't think that any Western government would be upset if charges were filed against Thaksin and extradition requests were made at this point either. I would have taken both of those actions already.

[dranor]

When Chavalit asked what the going rate was to become the Supreme Commander of People's Army of Thailand, Thaksin apparently replied with the same Red Shirt rally video-link slip-of-the-tongue goof immortalized on youtube...

[animatic]

If the security forces act with the same restraint they showed last Songkran,

Thaksin will lose the money AND lose the last shreds of red credibility.

So far that seems the case.

If one considers the high level of provocation ignored last April,

then the Reds will really need to be WAY over the top to goad enough.

Does the average Issan person care if Thaksin loses his money?

Just makes one more Puyai closer to them than before,

most Thai ladies are happy to belittle their best friend to lower their status

and raise their own, let alone get a khunying brought down to their level.

His losing his money isn't their losing their vote, it's just him not being able to buy it.

Edited February 5, 2010 by animatic

[Old Man River]

I don't think Thaksin should lose all of his frozen assets. I am not a Thaksin fan, but fair is fair. He was considered a rich man before 2001 and the going thought in Bangkok at the time was that he is so rich he won't need to steal from the country. OK, he got greedy, but the fact is that he had made a lot of money before he became PM, and the courts should acknowledge this and not seize all of his wealth.

Yes I know if he is given money back he will use it to try and seize control of the country, but I don't think it is the court's place to step in and try to outguess what a convicted criminal will do. They should, IMHO, rule on what he did, not what he might do.

[Insight]

I don't think Thaksin should lose all of his frozen assets. I am not a Thaksin fan, but fair is fair. He was considered a rich man before 2001 and the going thought in Bangkok at the time was that he is so rich he won't need to steal from the country. OK, he got greedy, but the fact is that he had made a lot of money before he became PM, and the courts should acknowledge this and not seize all of his wealth.

Yes I know if he is given money back he will use it to try and seize control of the country, but I don't think it is the court's place to step in and try to outguess what a convicted criminal will do. They should, IMHO, rule on what he did, not what he might do.

Somebody mentioned it before on the forum (apologies - can't remember who) that he should receive the amount he declared he had before his PM-ship, something to the tune of 800mil baht? Then maybe add on top of that potential (legitimate) earnings during his term.

[hammered]

I don't think Thaksin should lose all of his frozen assets. I am not a Thaksin fan, but fair is fair. He was considered a rich man before 2001 and the going thought in Bangkok at the time was that he is so rich he won't need to steal from the country. OK, he got greedy, but the fact is that he had made a lot of money before he became PM, and the courts should acknowledge this and not seize all of his wealth.

Yes I know if he is given money back he will use it to try and seize control of the country, but I don't think it is the court's place to step in and try to outguess what a convicted criminal will do. They should, IMHO, rule on what he did, not what he might do.

Agree and if the reports of Thaksin going to be bestowed with Cambodian citizenship are true we may even see a way out a sit is said if he accepts Cambodian citizenship iut means he relinquishes Thai which would rule him out of politics in Thailand and likely reduce his popularity further too

[rixalex]

I don't think Thaksin should lose all of his frozen assets. I am not a Thaksin fan, but fair is fair. He was considered a rich man before 2001 and the going thought in Bangkok at the time was that he is so rich he won't need to steal from the country. OK, he got greedy, but the fact is that he had made a lot of money before he became PM, and the courts should acknowledge this and not seize all of his wealth.

Yes I know if he is given money back he will use it to try and seize control of the country, but I don't think it is the court's place to step in and try to outguess what a convicted criminal will do. They should, IMHO, rule on what he did, not what he might do.

Agreed, but with the proviso that any money returned must be collected by him in person in Bangkok. Give him a week to pick up the cheque and if he doesn't show, it gets torn up and the money distributed to local charities.

[jdinasia]

I don't think Thaksin should lose all of his frozen assets. I am not a Thaksin fan, but fair is fair. He was considered a rich man before 2001 and the going thought in Bangkok at the time was that he is so rich he won't need to steal from the country. OK, he got greedy, but the fact is that he had made a lot of money before he became PM, and the courts should acknowledge this and not seize all of his wealth.

Yes I know if he is given money back he will use it to try and seize control of the country, but I don't think it is the court's place to step in and try to outguess what a convicted criminal will do. They should, IMHO, rule on what he did, not what he might do.

Somebody mentioned it before on the forum (apologies - can't remember who) that he should receive the amount he declared he had before his PM-ship, something to the tune of 800mil baht? Then maybe add on top of that potential (legitimate) earnings during his term.

The argument against this is ... If you steal and get caught and then give back what you stole is there any penalty for stealing? It also doesn't take into account his other assets or hidden money.

[Old Man River]

I don't think Thaksin should lose all of his frozen assets. I am not a Thaksin fan, but fair is fair. He was considered a rich man before 2001 and the going thought in Bangkok at the time was that he is so rich he won't need to steal from the country. OK, he got greedy, but the fact is that he had made a lot of money before he became PM, and the courts should acknowledge this and not seize all of his wealth.

Yes I know if he is given money back he will use it to try and seize control of the country, but I don't think it is the court's place to step in and try to outguess what a convicted criminal will do. They should, IMHO, rule on what he did, not what he might do.

Somebody mentioned it before on the forum (apologies - can't remember who) that he should receive the amount he declared he had before his PM-ship, something to the tune of 800mil baht? Then maybe add on top of that potential (legitimate) earnings during his term.

The argument against this is ... If you steal and get caught and then give back what you stole is there any penalty for stealing? It also doesn't take into account his other assets or hidden money.

On money moved offshore, I realize that, but is it up to the courts do discern how much this is? Not in my book. On penalties, that is a different issue. If the court decides he is guilty, then they should decide the penalty. This should be separate from seizing assets just because they are available to be seized.

[animatic]

The question is how much penalty.

But another issue not mentioned. (Ok OMR just did while I was typing this)

Legally he has to declare moneys he received whether in Thailand or off shore.

And he has had HUGES sums obviously undeclared and untaxed in Thailand.

So the argument is he has been not paying taxes on much more,

like enough to buy Manchester city and sell for a profit,

and this money was not declared.... As a citizen he must by law.

So what he has been leaving here, can be seen as what he didn't hide,

from a long term, international, ongoing, conspiracy to defraud the Thai government of taxes.

He has taken this money off shore illegally, and this is plainly only part of his known assets,

but it IS the assets at hand. Since other assets are known but untouchable,

then that goes to a wider crime. Hence his being unhappy about the demise of Swiss banking secrecy.

Then add the logic that handing him back some, or enough to take revenge on his opponents

in Thailand is tantamount to handing an escaped murdered back his loaded gun,

while saying, 'lets go nicely to jail now and do the right thing...' ie DAFT.

In this specific case money is his weapon to destroy the country

if he doesn't get ALL his money back. De facto blackmail.

Edited February 5, 2010 by animatic

[jdinasia]

I absolutely agree, this is one for the courts. It doesn't matter what they decide. Guilty/Not-Guilty or Guilty and the kingdom keeps it all or Guilty and the kingdom returns some. There is a case to be made for each scenario. The basic thing is the courts decide and that is that.

[Old Man River]

T

Then add the logic that handing him back some, or enough to take revenge on his opponents

in Thailand is tantamount to handing an escaped murdered back his loaded gun,

while saying, 'lets go nicely to jail now and do the right thing...' ie DAFT.

In this specific case money is his weapon to destroy the country

if he doesn't get ALL his money back. De facto blackmail.

This reminds me of the Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report, where they arrested criminals before they committed the crime. I want to say maybe in your country the courts decide, de facto, what a person will do in the future, but I think we come from the same country. I hope, here, if the courts decide guilty they seize only what they can estimate as being gained while he was in office (penalties aside).

Edited February 5, 2010 by Old Man River

[Meridian007]

Wasn't there also mention of other cases against him that are pending on the completion of this one?

Even if he is "awarded" some of the money back, it should be held until the outcome of all of his cases are finished, and then if there is any left over from fines put against him, (more likely since he has proven that he won't follow the law in regards to jail time), he can have that. I think that if a financial punishment is put against him in lieu of jail time, he'll end up owing more than he could possibly get back of that 800 Million.

[Old Man River]

Wasn't there also mention of other cases against him that are pending on the completion of this one?

Even if he is "awarded" some of the money back, it should be held until the outcome of all of his cases are finished, and then if there is any left over from fines put against him, (more likely since he has proven that he won't follow the law in regards to jail time), he can have that. I think that if a financial punishment is put against him in lieu of jail time, he'll end up owing more than he could possibly get back of that 800 Million.

Yes, there are a number of cases pending. If found guilty of hiding his assets from 2001 to 2006 and using his office to increase his wealth, perhaps they will do what you suggest. It makes sense.

[animatic]

T

Then add the logic that handing him back some, or enough to take revenge on his opponents

in Thailand is tantamount to handing an escaped murdered back his loaded gun,

while saying, 'lets go nicely to jail now and do the right thing...' ie DAFT.

In this specific case money is his weapon to destroy the country

if he doesn't get ALL his money back. De facto blackmail.

This reminds me of the Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report, where they arrested criminals before they committed the crime. I want to say maybe in your country the courts decide, de facto, what a person will do in the future, but I think we come from the same country. I hope, here, if the courts decide guilty they seize only what they can estimate as being gained while he was in office (penalties aside).

OMR while I agree on your minority report theme in basic priniciple.

But note also that the actions he has taken since he absconded skipping out on bail,

and the announcements during the Songkran riots and general statements of intent

and past actions versus those who have crossed him, indicate his functional malevolence

versus anyone he sees as thwarting his goals... He has made it plain a pattern of deceipt

and revenge is part of his makeup.

The courts do decide if someone is a risk of flight and deny bail.

The course decide if someone is a danger to others or themselves and put them in detention.

The courts decide if a person is continuing a pattern of deception and theft

and will continue to if not brough to heel. None of these are unsualy decisions,

IN ADVANCE of a crime, based on probability, based on historical actions.

When does a court case go beyond simple justice

and also enter the sphere of national security?

One wonders.

And yes this is not just from one case, but several cases,

and he has shown he will try and hide the money and avoid paying taxes on it if he can.

So I suspect they will see reason not to hand some back with more than it's amount

as possible levy for some of these grouped cases.

Edited February 5, 2010 by animatic

[Old Man River]

T

Then add the logic that handing him back some, or enough to take revenge on his opponents

in Thailand is tantamount to handing an escaped murdered back his loaded gun,

while saying, 'lets go nicely to jail now and do the right thing...' ie DAFT.

In this specific case money is his weapon to destroy the country

if he doesn't get ALL his money back. De facto blackmail.

This reminds me of the Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report, where they arrested criminals before they committed the crime. I want to say maybe in your country the courts decide, de facto, what a person will do in the future, but I think we come from the same country. I hope, here, if the courts decide guilty they seize only what they can estimate as being gained while he was in office (penalties aside).

OMR while I agree on your minority report theme in basic priniciple.

But note also that the actions he has taken since he absconded skipping out on bail,

and the announcements during the Songkran riots and general statements of intent

and past actions versus those who have crossed him, indicate his functional malevolence

versus anyone he sees as thwarting his goals... He has made it plain a pattern of deceipt

and revenge is part of his makeup.

The courts do decide if someone is a risk of flight and deny bail.

The course decide if someone is a danger to others or themselves and put them in detention.

The courts decide if a person is continuing a pattern of deception and theft

and will continue to if not brough to heel. None of these are unsualy decisions,

IN ADVANCE of a crime, based on probability, based on historical actions.

When does a court case go beyond simple justice

and also enter the sphere of national security?

One wonders.

Hard to say, but seriously, if the court decides against Thaksin for part of the sum (plus penalties etc.), you don't really think the court should just seize the rest because of what Thaksin might do with the money, do you?

[jdinasia]

Hard to say, but seriously, if the court decides against Thaksin for part of the sum (plus penalties etc.), you don't really think the court should just seize the rest because of what Thaksin might do with the money, do you?

Nope. I don't think there would be a legal way to hold the money should the court decide that he should get some/all back. I do think they might be able to require him to collect it in person and have a timeline like 30 days.

In this case that would work out to "Go to jail, go directly to jail. Do pass the courthouse on the way and collect $200"

[Meridian007]

Getting this back onto "The people's Army of Thailand", I just read that Panlop has left the red shirts over this. Evidently, great leader is changing his mind faster than his lackeys can keep up with, and I think this may be creating some rifts. Hopefully this will stall the latest violent plan for February.

Edited February 5, 2010 by Meridian007

[animatic]

Hard to say, but seriously, if the court decides against Thaksin for part of the sum (plus penalties etc.), you don't really think the court should just seize the rest because of what Thaksin might do with the money, do you?

Nope. I don't think there would be a legal way to hold the money should the court decide that he should get some/all back. I do think they might be able to require him to collect it in person and have a timeline like 30 days.

In this case that would work out to "Go to jail, go directly to jail. Do pass the courthouse on the way and collect $200"

Seize which is permanent, should pertain to what is considered ill gotten in the current context

vs

Continue to hold against other pending litigation,

and based on his prove track record of not meeting legal obligation's,

absconding, and known to have move large amounts off shore illegally.

Yes.

I doubt he should be given anything back at this time in light of his actions towards the country,

Some will be taken certainly, likely a large chunk, BUT not all of it will be permanently taken, pending other trials.

But those other trials are real things

and how else would the fines and recouping of loss, be done,

if the funds are NOT sequestered securely IN THAILAND until then?

It may also be the only leverage to get him to come to those trials.

Whether this is permanent or not will be decided in the future,

but 'for now', I doubt he will get anything back.

Will Potjamin get a chunk back, remains a very open Thai question....

If a large chunk does get taken and he gets a large chunk too,

I would expect that he would immediately apply his chunk to the Thailand Peoples Army,.

and make all efforts to get what he lost back, and that is civil war for sure.

And it won't be a flowers on tanks version this time.

Edited February 5, 2010 by animatic

[OZEMADE]

Hard to say, but seriously, if the court decides against Thaksin for part of the sum (plus penalties etc.), you don't really think the court should just seize the rest because of what Thaksin might do with the money, do you?

Nope. I don't think there would be a legal way to hold the money should the court decide that he should get some/all back. I do think they might be able to require him to collect it in person and have a timeline like 30 days.

In this case that would work out to "Go to jail, go directly to jail. Do pass the courthouse on the way and collect $200"

Seize which is permanent, should pertain to what is considered ill gotten in the current context

vs

Continue to hold against other pending litigation,

and based on his prove track record of not meeting legal obligation's,

absconding, and known to have move large amounts off shore illegally.

Yes.

I doubt he should be given anything back at this time in light of his actions towards the country,

Some will be taken certainly, likely a large chunk, BUT not all of it will be permanently taken, pending other trials.

But those other trials are real things

and how else would the fines and recouping of loss, be done,

if the funds are NOT sequestered securely IN THAILAND until then?

It may also be the only leverage to get him to come to those trials.

Whether this is permanent or not will be decided in the future,

but 'for now', I doubt he will get anything back.

Will Potjamin get a chunk back, remains a very open Thai question....

If a large chunk does get taken and he gets a large chunk too,

I would expect that he would immediately apply his chunk to the Thailand Peoples Army,.

and make all efforts to get what he lost back, and that is civil war for sure.

And it won't be a flowers on tanks version this time.

I don't think any of this is really going to worry Mr Thaksin as he is off to visit one of his GOLD mines.

Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra announced Friday that he has no plan to visit the disputed area near the Preah Vihear temple.

He posted messages on his Twitter page, Thaksinlive.com, saying he is now in Dubai, and he is planning to visit Uganda to open a new business and inspect his gold mining business.

Thaksin said his opponents started false rumours that he would visit the disputed area near Si Sa Ket.

The Nation

[CLOD]

Well I don't see any problem here.

The monarchy and the elite have an army so why shouldn't the rest of the people, left behind, have theirs.

Or is that undemocratic in this model human rights abusing democracy.

[way2muchcoffee]

When a group of private citizens form a private army it is not necessarily illegal. Militias etc. are somewhat acceptable.

When a group of private citizens form a private army with the intent to overthrow the government it is called treason. Said army would be immediately put down.

In any case, this all seems to be a non-issue at this point.

Edited February 6, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Insight]

If there's any misunderstanding about what Sae Daeng, Palop et al were originally aiming for, check out 2Bangkok.com today. It features the cover of a pro-red rag along with English language translations ("Black tigers roar! - bloodshed over the land").

Obviously this was printed before the furious "I meant unarmed army!" back-peddling we're seeing now.

[animatic]

If there's any misunderstanding about what Sae Daeng, Palop et al were originally aiming for, check out 2Bangkok.com today. It features the cover of a pro-red rag along with English language translations ("Black tigers roar! - bloodshed over the land").

Obviously this was printed before the furious "I meant unarmed army!" back-peddling we're seeing now.

2B

or not 2B

"Of course, the spectacle of allowing a personality like Khittiya to engage the government and public

could be classic misdirection while the real plans for destabilizing the country are occurring behind-the-scenes."

These stupid statements kind of belie any pretense of being a front for a more logical game plan,

because to be proper disinformation they must appear to be be LOGICAL plans,

not just stupidly treasonous ideas from loose canons.

I am sure Chavalit woke up yesterday, saw the papers and started gargling his lips in horror.

'Oh my Buddha, what are they saying this morning..~!!! AIDE!! press release NOW!!!! Chop Chop!'

And he springs into action!

(Source: Matichon Weekly & 2bangkok.com)

Add an interesting look at red propaganda on Taksin magazine covers, with English translations.

http://www.2bangkok.com/09/RedPublications.shtml

Edited February 6, 2010 by animatic