Seizing Any Of My Money Would Be Unfair: Thaksin

[khunjamespittman]

Didn't Thaksin make his fortune before entering politics? If so what right does the current government have to sieze his entire fortune?

One, it's the courts, not the current or previous governments.

Two, it's not his entire fortune, just a part of it.

Three, they may be partly/all ill-gotten gains, the court's still out on that one, for a few days more.

Four, he wants justice, but won't serve time, which the courts have already awarded him.

Five, he is delaying, by his absense, a number of other cases.

Six, you might like to read-up on how he made his previous money, which he expanded massively, while in office.

Well, you got a perfect score. 6 for 6 and not a single fact included.

1- The courts comprise the Judicial brach of government

2- The courts have not indicated whether they are considering all or only part of the money (you are speculating)

3- What court ruling supports this speculation?

4- The conviction you refer to does not involve the money. They are totally unrelated.

5- Charges can be brought in courts with the charged in absentia.

6- I suggest that your assumption has no basis in fact. The vast majority of the money was made in his pre-political official life.

It would be really helpful if there was something that prevent this kind of propaganda from trying to influence people. I hope some really smart people in the future will figure out a way to apply or change liability laws to handle out of conrol, emotionally driven situations like this.

Chill out folks. Try to filter the rice from the chaf to get to the truth.

Regards,

[lounger]

The issue is should the Supreme Court take all of his money?

My view is no. When Thaksin was first elected in 2001, by a landslide margin, it was widely believed that because he was already rich he wouldn't need to rip off the country. Therefore, it is hard to understand how all of his assets are now subject to seizure when only a part where obtained after he was PM. Did he abuse his position as PM? Yeh, of course he did, so seize this portion, but not all that he had before he entered politics.

Is this the issue? All the time I have been following this debacle the issue has not really been defined. There seems to be a tendancy to generalise as to whether assets should be siezed on the timing of the wealth or whether Thaksin should be called to account for other non specified activities.

My fear is that the courts brief is too narrow. The case should have been broadened to 'Thaksin should be fined for illegal political and social disruption'.

The court would have no problem building a case and the mounting cost of keeping the peace and refunding the treasury for lost commercial opportunity would easily come to 76b baht

[animatic]

In a parliamentary constitution "the government" itself is usually considered the PM and cabinet.

Which is how the redshirts look at it.

The judiciary is part of the over all governance mechanism, but not ' the government' itself.

I think the general view is is there is reasonable evidence to take any or all of his available cash

from the Temesek deal because he has proved to be " Unusually Rich" with little records to show

HOW it was acquired.

And Potajamin WAS convicted of trying ineptly to hide the money.

And under law once this proceeding is started it is the defendants duty to show provenance

of the excessive funds. So far it seems unlikely, considering the inherent contradictions in his

and families testimony, as reported, that they have proved their case.

A RICO style case of organized crime.

The sale to Temesek for a huge amount and avoiding taxes was most, and specifically, unusual.

And family manipulations to hide the money are documented.

He started his whole PM stint with a crooked transaction from square one, showing his intent to,

use his funds for profit in the job and manipulate them even greater.

If a gang uses money to create opportunity an even greater crime, like grifters

or a high tech robbery gang, they don't just get that money back if caught and

only lose the profits of that crime...

I don't see they made their case...

and there is much other external evidence to show they are duplicitous.

Edited February 24, 2010 by animatic

[somluck]

Khun T and half of Thailand agrees with me. This revolution is happening. The poor Thais are rising up. No one can stop the wave. Accept it

lets wait and see....The last demonstration in front of the bkk bank was reported with less than 1000 people.

A big uprising costs a lot maybe 1 billion per day. if Thaksin is still able to spend that for a longer period?

Its a simple minded peson who thinks the reds are paid to protest. Ok lets just wait and see how far this red revolution will go. Like i said the reds have time on their side....even though by your argument their money is running out

[geriatrickid]

Actually this is a government put in place by the Members of Parliament, the Members of Parliament were put in place by the people. Amazingly that is how the last 2 governments were put in place as well!

But please ---- don't let the facts stand in the way of a senseless rant

And what of the unelected privy council? It holds considerable power and authority as per the 2007 Constitution. (Can you see now why some people are opposed to the 2007 Constitution?)

For example, the council has a significant role when it comes to the appointment and removal of high-ranking officials or army officers such as Permanent Secretary or Director-General, including the appointment of some persons to certain posts under the provisions of law.

Even the issue of whether or not Mr. Thaksin was going to be able to obtain a pardon requires the privy council involvement as it considers petitions from convicted prisoners for amnesty or reduction of the term of imprisonment or termination thereof and considers petitions regarding grievances submitted by private citizens.

The council oversees the development and progress of the Royal sponsored and initiated projects in various fields such as agriculture, irrigation, rural development and environmental development. These are well funded projects that can inject large amounts of cash into various regions and groups. If one wishes to obtain support, I think it is best to remain in good standing with the council.

Wrong thread GK --- this one is about Thaksin whining about his money being seized.

BTW -- the privy council not only has nothing to do with this thread --- they have nothing to do with the Members of Parliament electing the PM

NO. You stated Actually this is a government put in place by the Members of Parliament, the Members of Parliament were put in place by the people. The privy council is an important component of the national government. I provided a few highlights of the privy council's role. These people are not elected. The council which includes a great many retired military officers can not be poo-pooed away as you have done. Perhaps you think that by tossing in the little drunk avatarto suggest that I was drunk gets you a pass on being called out for making a misleading and inaccurate statement. It does not. However, it does indicate arrogance and condescenscion.

Edited February 24, 2010 by geriatrickid

[Ricardo]

2- The courts have not indicated whether they are considering all or only part of the money (you are speculating)

With respect, Thaksin himself says he has $200 million outside the country, so the courts cannot be considering seizing "his entire fortune" as moetownblues had stated.

True, or not true ?

[somluck]

Whichever way the verdict goes one side will be dissatisfied. Civil war is looming....maybe this is for the better.

Wrong. There won't be anything close to civil war. The Thai people aren't as stupid as you make them out to be. They want peace and prosperity, regardless of the color or their t-shirts - and very few Thais are wearing Red. Look around.

Khun T and half of Thailand agrees with me. This revolution is happening. The poor Thais are rising up. No one can stop the wave. Accept it.

Half of Thailand? Is that the three guys you hang out with at the street corner, drinking Red Bull? Open your eyes Somluck. There hasn't been a Red Shirt demonstration of any consequence since April '09, when a mob stormed a hotel lobby, and some punks destroyed some buses in Bangkok. Granted, there's been a lot of hot air and threats since then, but the Red Shirts can't organize enough people to fill a Jack in the Box franchise. They're a spent force at best. Thaksin pretends he's cool and calm about the verdict. Then, in his next breath, he threatens fire and brimstone if he doesn't get his way.

He claims he has solutions for Thailand's economy, but then says he won't divulge his secrets until everybody indicates they like and forgive him. I do more for Thailand than he does, and I'm relatively impoverished. At least if I have something with which to assist my Thai neighbors, I put it out there. I don't keep it hidden and parlay it for some advantage.

Yes most Thais do not want civil war but this 76 billion bahts case might be the catalyst that is needed.

If the reds are a spent force like you claimed then there is no need for this government to be breaking out in cold sweat and thinking of hare brain ideas to deal with them. If 100 people can close donw the Bangkok Bank HQ of 3000 employees, I believe the reds are a force to reckon with.

[hammered]

Kind of weird but right now I find I have absolutley no interest in this case anymore. All the media, specualtion and Propaganda from every side just leave me bored with the whole thing. Roll on Songkhran for some enjoyment.

[jdinasia]

Actually this is a government put in place by the Members of Parliament, the Members of Parliament were put in place by the people. Amazingly that is how the last 2 governments were put in place as well!

But please ---- don't let the facts stand in the way of a senseless rant

And what of the unelected privy council? It holds considerable power and authority as per the 2007 Constitution. (Can you see now why some people are opposed to the 2007 Constitution?)

For example, the council has a significant role when it comes to the appointment and removal of high-ranking officials or army officers such as Permanent Secretary or Director-General, including the appointment of some persons to certain posts under the provisions of law.

Even the issue of whether or not Mr. Thaksin was going to be able to obtain a pardon requires the privy council involvement as it considers petitions from convicted prisoners for amnesty or reduction of the term of imprisonment or termination thereof and considers petitions regarding grievances submitted by private citizens.

The council oversees the development and progress of the Royal sponsored and initiated projects in various fields such as agriculture, irrigation, rural development and environmental development. These are well funded projects that can inject large amounts of cash into various regions and groups. If one wishes to obtain support, I think it is best to remain in good standing with the council.

Wrong thread GK --- this one is about Thaksin whining about his money being seized.

BTW -- the privy council not only has nothing to do with this thread --- they have nothing to do with the Members of Parliament electing the PM

NO. You stated Actually this is a government put in place by the Members of Parliament, the Members of Parliament were put in place by the people. The privy council is an important component of the national government. I provided a few highlights of the privy council's role. These people are not elected. The council which includes a great many retired military officers can not be poo-pooed away as you have done. Perhaps you think that by tossing in the little drunk avatarto suggest that I was drunk gets you a pass on being called out for making a misleading and inaccurate statement. It does not. However, it does indicate arrogance and condescenscion.

Grasping at straws I see. In common parlance the "government" which is discussed is the PM, the cabinet, and the MP's. Otherwise I guess we could never discuss a 'caretaker government'.

The fact that you chose this thread to toss it into instead of the thread about Prem ..... well I'll let the others decide if your goal was to just further muddy the waters in this thread or not

but to get the facts right there are not a "great many retired military officers" on the Privy Council. There are in fact only Seven -- or Four if you divide the list out by what they have really done most recently.

That is 7 (or 4) out of 19. I can see no way to describe 7 people (or 4 people) as "a great many".

the list ---

Privy Council President: Gen. Prem Tinsulanonda

Privy Council Members:

1. Chaovana Nasylvanta

2. Tanin Kraivixien

3. Rear Admiral Mom Luang Usni Pramoj

4. Air Vice Marshal Kamthon Sindhvananda

5. Air Chief Marshal Siddhi Savetsila

6. General Pichitr Kullavanijaya

7. Ampol Senanarong

8. Chamras Kemacharu

9. Mom Rajawongse Thepkamol Devakula

10. Sakda Mokkamakkul

11. Kasem Watanachai

12. Palakorn Suwanrath

13. Sawad Wattanayagorn

14. Santi Thakral (2005)

15. Admiral Chumpol Pachusanon

16. Gen. Surayud Chulanont (2008)

17. Charnchai Likhitjittha (2008)

18. Supachai Phungam (2008)

[somluck]

7 out of 19 is not a GREAT MANY....only slightly less than 40%.

In a listed company this gang who holds 40% stake would be termed as principal shareholders, though not they are not the majority but can hold sway over many decisions. Coupled that with the not 'great many' members of judiciary on the council (i liken this group as nominee shareholders) ....okay you get the picture

Edited February 24, 2010 by somluck

[jdinasia]

7 out of 19 is not a GREAT MANY....only slightly less than 40%.

In a listed company this gang who holds 40% stake would be termed as principal shareholders, though not they are not the majority but can hold sway over many decisions. Coupled that with the not 'great many' members of judiciary on the council (i liken this group as nominee shareholders) ....okay you get the picture

It is a large percentage -- it is not a "Great Many" and the number would more accurately be described as 4 out of 19.

Please help me out though --- what current members of the judiciary serve on the Privy Council?

This is not a company and there are no 'shareholders' to compare it with a company is not only facile, it is rather specious. They are advisors and do not "make" decisions.

I'd ask what you mean by "nominee shareholders" but not only do I think you would not answer, I think if you did it would get you in trouble. The P.C. is appointed by the Head of State to serve as his advisors.

They are mostly older men --- leaders in their fields.

Note ---- this thread is about Thaksin whining about possibly losing his cash ... there is a thread about attacks on Prem that is more appropriate to discussions abotu the Privy Council. Do be aware that talking about the P.C. is a dangerous road to tread relating to the law in Thailand and forum rules.

[SomTumTiger]

Well, at least we all agree that Thaksin is a crook

[Hawk]

Well, at least we all agree that Thaksin is a crook

Show me a politician, or any government employee that isn't a crook.

[LindsayBKK]

Didn't Thaksin make his fortune before entering politics? If so what right does the current government have to sieze his entire fortune?

He has always spent other peoples money.

His ex-wife's money was the starter (she had rich parents)

That's also why she divorced him to save her funds.

Sondhi in partnership. Took his money then kicked him out of the company. Then it went Bankrupt.

Then he took money from government to buy land, selling & buying property,companies without tax.

Even the guy who was busted with bringing cocaine back from overseas (name I can't mention) did a house/land deal with Thaksin cause this person got it for nothing.

Thaksin will still have lots of cash because he gave it to others to keep for him, son, daughter, his limo driver, gardeners, even a housemaid.

2billlion US is not a big loss for him.

[somluck]

7 out of 19 is not a GREAT MANY....only slightly less than 40%.

In a listed company this gang who holds 40% stake would be termed as principal shareholders, though not they are not the majority but can hold sway over many decisions. Coupled that with the not 'great many' members of judiciary on the council (i liken this group as nominee shareholders) ....okay you get the picture

It is a large percentage -- it is not a "Great Many" and the number would more accurately be described as 4 out of 19.

Please help me out though --- what current members of the judiciary serve on the Privy Council?

This is not a company and there are no 'shareholders' to compare it with a company is not only facile, it is rather specious. They are advisors and do not "make" decisions.

I'd ask what you mean by "nominee shareholders" but not only do I think you would not answer, I think if you did it would get you in trouble. The P.C. is appointed by the Head of State to serve as his advisors.

They are mostly older men --- leaders in their fields.

Note ---- this thread is about Thaksin whining about possibly losing his cash ... there is a thread about attacks on Prem that is more appropriate to discussions abotu the Privy Council. Do be aware that talking about the P.C. is a dangerous road to tread relating to the law in Thailand and forum rules.

how can it be 4? those with military prefix before their names are not military? just need to do simple counting? pls dun try to split hairs between definitions of large percentage or great many. i think there are at least 2 ex judiciary members on the PC. many things do not need to be spelt outright, many a times Prem himself said he is not involved in politics but his innuendos says otherwise

Edited February 24, 2010 by somluck

[somluck]

Didn't Thaksin make his fortune before entering politics? If so what right does the current government have to sieze his entire fortune?

He has always spent other peoples money.

His ex-wife's money was the starter (she had rich parents)

That's also why she divorced him to save her funds.

Sondhi in partnership. Took his money then kicked him out of the company. Then it went Bankrupt.

Then he took money from government to buy land, selling & buying property,companies without tax.

Even the guy who was busted with bringing cocaine back from overseas (name I can't mention) did a house/land deal with Thaksin cause this person got it for nothing.

Thaksin will still have lots of cash because he gave it to others to keep for him, son, daughter, his limo driver, gardeners, even a housemaid.

2billlion US is not a big loss for him.

You really needs maths lessons. First you cannot count from 4 to 7 then now you say 2 billion US is not a big loss? Even if you are the world richest man, 2 billion US is not small change

[jdinasia]

7 out of 19 is not a GREAT MANY....only slightly less than 40%.

In a listed company this gang who holds 40% stake would be termed as principal shareholders, though not they are not the majority but can hold sway over many decisions. Coupled that with the not 'great many' members of judiciary on the council (i liken this group as nominee shareholders) ....okay you get the picture

It is a large percentage -- it is not a "Great Many" and the number would more accurately be described as 4 out of 19.

Please help me out though --- what current members of the judiciary serve on the Privy Council?

This is not a company and there are no 'shareholders' to compare it with a company is not only facile, it is rather specious. They are advisors and do not "make" decisions.

I'd ask what you mean by "nominee shareholders" but not only do I think you would not answer, I think if you did it would get you in trouble. The P.C. is appointed by the Head of State to serve as his advisors.

They are mostly older men --- leaders in their fields.

Note ---- this thread is about Thaksin whining about possibly losing his cash ... there is a thread about attacks on Prem that is more appropriate to discussions abotu the Privy Council. Do be aware that talking about the P.C. is a dangerous road to tread relating to the law in Thailand and forum rules.

how can it be 4? those with military prefix before their names are not military? just need to do simple counting? pls dun try to split hairs between definitions of large percentage or great many. i think there are at least 2 ex judiciary members on the PC. many things do not need to be spelt outright, many a times Prem himself said he is not involved in politics but his innuendos says otherwise

How can it be 4? well --- if they are better known for being in Business or Government then they would be listed in that capacity.

2 former jurists --- you suggest that it is bad to have people that have served in the courts in the past? But former jurists are NOT members of the Judiciary. They are FORMER judges.

Again the members of the Privy Council are appointed by the Head of State. Yet again you need to tread very carefully on this topic because to suggest that the P.C. is political is not a wise thing to do.

[somluck]

7 out of 19 is not a GREAT MANY....only slightly less than 40%.

In a listed company this gang who holds 40% stake would be termed as principal shareholders, though not they are not the majority but can hold sway over many decisions. Coupled that with the not 'great many' members of judiciary on the council (i liken this group as nominee shareholders) ....okay you get the picture

It is a large percentage -- it is not a "Great Many" and the number would more accurately be described as 4 out of 19.

Please help me out though --- what current members of the judiciary serve on the Privy Council?

This is not a company and there are no 'shareholders' to compare it with a company is not only facile, it is rather specious. They are advisors and do not "make" decisions.

I'd ask what you mean by "nominee shareholders" but not only do I think you would not answer, I think if you did it would get you in trouble. The P.C. is appointed by the Head of State to serve as his advisors.

They are mostly older men --- leaders in their fields.

Note ---- this thread is about Thaksin whining about possibly losing his cash ... there is a thread about attacks on Prem that is more appropriate to discussions abotu the Privy Council. Do be aware that talking about the P.C. is a dangerous road to tread relating to the law in Thailand and forum rules.

how can it be 4? those with military prefix before their names are not military? just need to do simple counting? pls dun try to split hairs between definitions of large percentage or great many. i think there are at least 2 ex judiciary members on the PC. many things do not need to be spelt outright, many a times Prem himself said he is not involved in politics but his innuendos says otherwise

How can it be 4? well --- if they are better known for being in Business or Government then they would be listed in that capacity.

2 former jurists --- you suggest that it is bad to have people that have served in the courts in the past? But former jurists are NOT members of the Judiciary. They are FORMER judges.

Again the members of the Privy Council are appointed by the Head of State. Yet again you need to tread very carefully on this topic because to suggest that the P.C. is political is not a wise thing to do.

i know Surayud Chulanont is best known for his capacity to shoot and kill unarmed student protesters.

i am stating that military and judiciary are under all under one roof like the situation now how the 2 institutions are working in concert to rid and purge thailand of any thaksin related elements

Edited February 24, 2010 by somluck

[yoshiwara]

Well, at least we all agree that Thaksin is a crook

Show me a politician, or any government employee that isn't a crook.

Is that your defence of Thaksin? It certainly appears to be one of the last remaining planks of defence from the forum reds.

It would be of somewhat interest to see the timeline of how Thaksin moved some funds out of the country (and presumably to tax havens) while in office and just before assuming office. No doubt this was done through family and other fronts as it doesn't look too good for a premier to do such a thing.

[jdinasia]

It is a large percentage -- it is not a "Great Many" and the number would more accurately be described as 4 out of 19.

Please help me out though --- what current members of the judiciary serve on the Privy Council?

This is not a company and there are no 'shareholders' to compare it with a company is not only facile, it is rather specious. They are advisors and do not "make" decisions.

I'd ask what you mean by "nominee shareholders" but not only do I think you would not answer, I think if you did it would get you in trouble. The P.C. is appointed by the Head of State to serve as his advisors.

They are mostly older men --- leaders in their fields.

Note ---- this thread is about Thaksin whining about possibly losing his cash ... there is a thread about attacks on Prem that is more appropriate to discussions abotu the Privy Council. Do be aware that talking about the P.C. is a dangerous road to tread relating to the law in Thailand and forum rules.

how can it be 4? those with military prefix before their names are not military? just need to do simple counting? pls dun try to split hairs between definitions of large percentage or great many. i think there are at least 2 ex judiciary members on the PC. many things do not need to be spelt outright, many a times Prem himself said he is not involved in politics but his innuendos says otherwise

How can it be 4? well --- if they are better known for being in Business or Government then they would be listed in that capacity.

2 former jurists --- you suggest that it is bad to have people that have served in the courts in the past? But former jurists are NOT members of the Judiciary. They are FORMER judges.

Again the members of the Privy Council are appointed by the Head of State. Yet again you need to tread very carefully on this topic because to suggest that the P.C. is political is not a wise thing to do.

i know Surayud Chulanont is best known for his capacity to shoot and kill unarmed student protesters.

i am stating that military and judiciary are under all under one roof like the situation now how the 2 institutions are working in concert to rid and purge thailand of any thaksin related elements

Your statement for what he is best known seems to be wildly divergent from that of the BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5392722.stm

Your statement about the judiciary --- well, besides avoiding the fact that you are comparing retired jurists to actively serving judges --- is yet again defaming the judiciary and impugning the courts in Thailand.

Amazing ... aint it? This thread is still about Thaksin whining that he is getting tried for his crimes and doesn't want to lose his stolen (from the Thai people) cash.

[frodo]

Didn't Thaksin make his fortune before entering politics? If so what right does the current government have to sieze his entire fortune?

He has always spent other peoples money.

His ex-wife's money was the starter (she had rich parents)

That's also why she divorced him to save her funds.

Sondhi in partnership. Took his money then kicked him out of the company. Then it went Bankrupt.

Then he took money from government to buy land, selling & buying property,companies without tax.

Even the guy who was busted with bringing cocaine back from overseas (name I can't mention) did a house/land deal with Thaksin cause this person got it for nothing.

Thaksin will still have lots of cash because he gave it to others to keep for him, son, daughter, his limo driver, gardeners, even a housemaid.

2billlion US is not a big loss for him.

Lest we forget he got a huge break in the late 80's by having false charges pressed against William Monson and essentially stole the business. Monson has already won a civil case against Thaksin and is still awaiting for an appeal filed for criminal charges against Thaksin. Ironic that Thaksin was PM when the courts went against Monson on bullshit technicalities. If Monson wins the appeal and Thaksin found guilty, I certainly hope the seized money will also go to another rightful owner...and it isn't Thaksin.

[Old Man River]

If the reds are a spent force like you claimed then there is no need for this government to be breaking out in cold sweat and thinking of hare brain ideas to deal with them. If 100 people can close donw the Bangkok Bank HQ of 3000 employees, I believe the reds are a force to reckon with.

There is no fear of the Red Shirts other than the concern on how to humanely control them if they resort to another Songran type of demonstration. On BBL, if the decision was made to clear the front of the bank, it would have been over in 5 minutes. The fact that they were allowed to remain and disrupt only shows this government is bending over backwards to keep the peace. However, if the military has to come in again, tactics will be different.

[somluck]

If the reds are a spent force like you claimed then there is no need for this government to be breaking out in cold sweat and thinking of hare brain ideas to deal with them. If 100 people can close donw the Bangkok Bank HQ of 3000 employees, I believe the reds are a force to reckon with.

There is no fear of the Red Shirts other than the concern on how to humanely control them if they resort to another Songran type of demonstration. On BBL, if the decision was made to clear the front of the bank, it would have been over in 5 minutes. The fact that they were allowed to remain and disrupt only shows this government is bending over backwards to keep the peace. However, if the military has to come in again, tactics will be different.

If the military comes in then that could be the spark for civil war. those generals knows it. There are alot of slient majorities who supports the red out there. The elites dun dare to risk a civil war.

[Insight]

If the military comes in then that could be the spark for civil war. those generals knows it. There are alot of slient majorities who supports the red out there. The elites dun dare to risk a civil war.

You are pushing a lot of angry rhetoric. I thought your comparison of the so called million-man-march to the gathering of people for significant ascension anniversary in 2006 was the most interesting part.

Will remind myself to read over all your posts again a few weeks from now.

[yoshiwara]

If the reds are a spent force like you claimed then there is no need for this government to be breaking out in cold sweat and thinking of hare brain ideas to deal with them. If 100 people can close donw the Bangkok Bank HQ of 3000 employees, I believe the reds are a force to reckon with.

There is no fear of the Red Shirts other than the concern on how to humanely control them if they resort to another Songran type of demonstration. On BBL, if the decision was made to clear the front of the bank, it would have been over in 5 minutes. The fact that they were allowed to remain and disrupt only shows this government is bending over backwards to keep the peace. However, if the military has to come in again, tactics will be different.

If the military comes in then that could be the spark for civil war. those generals knows it. There are alot of slient majorities who supports the red out there. The elites dun dare to risk a civil war.

They don't need to. They are the ones in power. It is the reds who would like to risk a civil war if they think they can win. However, their cover was blown with the red violence unleashed last Songkran. They can't now push a 'spontaneous' uprising. However, like the poor poker player he has turned out to be, Thaksin constantly pushes for an 'all-in' bet. Again. Thaksin apologists, however, desperately try to push the line that the other side are preparing the trouble. And at the same time, Thaksin disassociates the reds from the Songkran violence. Nice try.

[jdinasia]

If the military comes in then that could be the spark for civil war. those generals knows it. There are alot of slient majorities who supports the red out there. The elites dun dare to risk a civil war.

You are pushing a lot of angry rhetoric. I thought your comparison of the so called million-man-march to the gathering of people for significant ascension anniversary in 2006 was the most interesting part.

Will remind myself to read over all your posts again a few weeks from now.

LOL ---

The only person talking about war (and even that is vague enough to protect himself) is Thaksin who says he'll do "anything" to get his money back. note --- Thaksin is the epitome of the word "elite" in Thailand.

[yoshiwara]

If the military comes in then that could be the spark for civil war. those generals knows it. There are alot of slient majorities who supports the red out there. The elites dun dare to risk a civil war.

You are pushing a lot of angry rhetoric. I thought your comparison of the so called million-man-march to the gathering of people for significant ascension anniversary in 2006 was the most interesting part.

Will remind myself to read over all your posts again a few weeks from now.

nobody knows what will happen in the next few weeks. even thaksin or those in control now do not know for sure. everything is fluid and volatile. But rest assured this could be the final showdown. i am banging on civil war. game on!

The only thing that is fluid and volatile is the mindsets of the Thaksin apologists who are facing defeat. Game over.

[Crushdepth]

What is annoying is that every time Thaksin tweets that he farted it's front page news with a full description of smell and consistency and analysis of what it means for Thailand.

[somluck]

What is annoying is that every time Thaksin tweets that he farted it's front page news with a full description of smell and consistency and analysis of what it means for Thailand.

Thaksin is the saviour of Thailand. He started the revolution.

Edited February 24, 2010 by somluck

[Siripon]

What is annoying is that every time Thaksin tweets that he farted it's front page news with a full description of smell and consistency and analysis of what it means for Thailand.

Thaksin is the saviour of Thailand. He started the revolution.

The funniest statement this year on Thai visa.