Thaksin, Supporters Vow To Fight Thai Verdict

[anotherpeter]

Thaksin still hasn't provided evidence against the specific charges that he introduced or changed laws and contracts that benefitted Shin Corp while he owned or controlled billions of baht in shares. His only defence has been about the legitimacy of the courts to charge and try him.

His transfer of shares to his family using "interest free promissary notes" may allow him to technically say that he didn't own the shares, but surely he was still in control of all of them while he was prime minister.

Also, although it's not illegal to provide low interest loans to other countries, the fact that Thaksin "encouraged" an increase in the loan, and the loan was specifically used by Burma to buy telecommunications equipment from Shin Corp, once again, shows a conflict of interest.

These facts do not say anything about whether the coup was right or that there is no corruption amongst the current ruling "elite". And they don't say anything about the "good" things that Thaksin did to support the poor (ofcourse some will say he did this only so they would vote for him) and to encourage business investment in Thailand.

But they do still clearly show that he made a lot of his money by changing laws benefitting Shin Corp while Prime Minister.

[webfact]

Lawyers to review key Shin deals

By TELECOM REPORTERS

THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- State agencies to seek funds lost in dodgy contracts with AIS, ShinSat

A legal team from the Information and Communications Technology Ministry has been assigned to examine Shin Corp's mobile phone and satellite concessions after they were raised by judges in the assets seizure case last Friday.

ICT Minister Ranongrak Suwanchawee said yesterday the Supreme Court's verdict against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra would be part of the basis for a review of amendments to concessions that benefited Thaksin's telecom empire at the expense of the state.

The directors and executives of state telecom enterprises, which awarded the concessions, would also be probed to see whose was involved in allowing controversial changes to state concessions.

The results will be submitted for Cabinet consideration this month.

TOT chairman Teravuti Boonyasopon said that while some amendments had inflicted financial pain, others had boosted TOT's revenue.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said on Saturday the Attorney-General's Office would work with government units to follow up on the legal consequences of the court's findings.

The landmark verdict found the former premier guilty of hiding his wealth and abusing his power while holding public office from 2001-06.

The justices also ruled by a majority that Thaksin had overstepped his authority on several counts to benefit his then family-owned Shin Corp and its affiliates, resulting in massive damage to the state.

Abhisit said the top executives of state enterprises put at a disadvantage by Thaksin's abuse of power would be guilty of negligence if they did not take legal recourse to protect their unit's interests.

Former Cabinet ministers and members of state enterprise boards, which approved the abuse of power, such as unfavourable concession changes, could be held legally responsible for the damage.

Both criminal and civil lawsuits could be filed to seek damages from the officials deemed to be most responsible.

TOT and CAT Telecom, the Transport Ministry and the Export-Import Bank of Thailand are among government units that were victims of Thaksin's abuse of power.

The court verdict said TOT had lost Bt70 billion in revenue when Advanced Info Service, the mobile phone unit in Shin Corp, was allowed to reduce TOT's share of AIS' prepaid phone revenue from 25 per cent to 20 per cent.

TOT and CAT were also deprived of concession fees totalling Bt60 billion when a telecom excise tax was introduced to replace the fees.

The Transport Ministry's contract with Shin Satellite, now known as Thaicom, was amended several times to the firm's benefit.

These changes cost the state Bt20 billion.

Meanwhile, the Finance Ministry had to provide Bt670 million over 12 years to Exim Bank to cover losses resulting from a Bt4-billion, low-interest credit line granted to Burma (Myanmar), in part to purchase equipment and services from Shin Satellite.

Altogether, state losses were estimated to top Bt150 billion.

TOT oversees AIS' concession, while the ICT Ministry supervises Thaicom's concession.

-- The Nation 2010-03-01

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[Cayenne]

It always amuses me to read so many armchair farang journalists write this as a battle purely between the poor and the elites. This romantic notion totally does excludes any possibility that there is still a middle class caught up in this.

Just because me and the 9.8 million others who casted a non-vote during the 2006 general elections don't like what Thaksin has done doesn't make us an "elite" (fyi it is us middle class people who pay the majority of the taxes you know and as far as I know the elites always find some way to evade taxes) nor does it make us a PAD supporter (I was sympathetic to their cause early on but stopped when they took over the airport )

But this does not make me and the rest of the middle class oblivious to what Thaksin has done. Yes he might have had good intentions in the beginning but he is no different from the elites as he is only trying to replace one system of elitism with another. This is what most people who only read these events superficially will never see. In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

[jayboy]

In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

How can Thaksin be Napoleon? He was driven from the farm in disgrace like Farmer Jones and like Farmer Jones has every problem blamed on him.Napoleon is surely more apposite to an old general who lives the good life but tells the poor animals that they should be satisfied with their lot, and subscribe to a state ordained philosophy that a tiny amount is more than enough to satisfy the soul (if not bodily requirements).Of course he has a gang of porkers (khaki and yellow in colour) to enforce and intimidate.

[healthcaretaker]

He should be jailed !!

Wonder why are these Red Shirts people so stupid ? Don't they accept the fact that he was a criminal ? This is where I don't understand.

Ah, I can answer that for you. (Because I have some red-leaning friends, and I read some of the websites, Facebook groups, as well as unbiased international news sources.)

Right, they don't accept that he was a criminal. Shrewd businessman: absolutely, that was the reason they voted for him in the first place, the widely touted CEO style leadership. They basically like what he did for the Thai economy, they liked that he was tough on drugs/vice, and most of all they like that he was the first politician to help the rural poor. That never happened before; if you were poor and got sick, you better be lucky. Thaksin made the first moves towards universal affordable healthcare. (Flawed as it was IMHO, but your question was why the Reds like him, so that's the question I'm answering).

What are these red shirts fighting for ? Arn't they happy that this culprit is gone and some money has been returned to the country ? Unless they think those money should go to their own pockets ?

There's a wide variety of goals; it's not a very homogeneous movement to be honest. Many just want Thaksin back as PM. Others have bigger goals that relate to constitutional issues and introducing democracy to Thailand. Others are socialists. Others are idiot loud-mouths.

If his supporters support and go against the government because he did some good job before, then they very stupid. Don't they know it is the job of every government servant to serve the country ? Don't they know a crime is a crime ? He might have contributed before but he was paid for the job. By making money of the country(so much) is also making the country poorer. Anyhow, it is not right.

I think those reds are not supporting "stupidly just for what he did for the rural poor". That is just a political excuse tactic. Those reds are simply "like-minded" like him. Cheaters and betrayers to the country and people. It's time the government should educate this people and not to be used in the wrong manner. And this include you .

[ballpoint]

I saw a article from BBC online about a leader of the red shirts who was not interested in Thaksins fate, an extract:

Back in 1976, Dr Weng Tojirakarn was a young student leader in protests that ended with the military opening fire and killing many of his fellow demonstrators.

He fled to the hills, where Thailand's Communist Party offered a haven for many in the radical intelligentsia of the time.

Not necessarily communist, several of those activists have since become leaders of the red shirts, like Dr Weng. Some, such as Chaturon Chaisang, were even members of former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's cabinets.

Equal rights

For men such as these, the Supreme Court verdict against Mr Thaksin's private wealth is of no importance whatsoever to the struggle.

I'm not fighting for Mr Thaksin. I'm fighting for my country to be a genuine democratic system

Dr Weng

"Mr Thaksin is just only one person in this country," says Dr Weng.

"He may be an ex-prime minister but he is nothing to do with what I'm fighting for, because I'm fighting for the genuine democratic system in Thailand."

I wonder how many other red shirts feel this way or may increasingly feel this way if the turn out money dries up.

I can't help feeling that they would be a very potent political force if they were to dump Thaksin and concertrate on their push for democracy and a better deal for the poor.

This seems unlikely in the short term, but who knows in the longer term.

Their best chance lies in not only dumping Thaksin, but also his unashamedly open followers in their leadership, and severing all ties to any current political party. However, I would say these are too wound up in the red movement for that to be easily done. I can not see how anyone can argue that the red group as a whole is not about Thaksin. The protests on his behalf. The links to the PTP, whose stated aim is to bring him back. The seemingly regular visits to Dubai. The fact that a pro Thaksin rogue general can decide to become a red leader, declare it to all, and not one member or leader speaks out against it. The phone ins, pro Thaksin banners and T-shirts. What is it about them that says "we're not about Thaksin"? These make me very suspicious of folk who claim to be in it for anything other than bringing him back. Surely, if there were enough people who thought like this, they could break away and form their own grouping? Surely, if that new grouping renounced all ties to Thaksin, the PTP, the military and the current red group, they would attract far more currently neutral followers, and even a number of current yellows? But then, they wouldn't have access to his money. Joining a group who you don't ideologically support just because they claim to share one common goal all too often ends in tears. It's exactly like a member of the British National Party swearing that they're not fascist, it's just that they don't support any of the mainstream parties.

[way2muchcoffee]

I think those reds are not supporting "stupidly just for what he did for the rural poor". That is just a political excuse tactic. Those reds are simply "like-minded" like him. Cheaters and betrayers to the country and people. It's time the government should educate this people and not to be used in the wrong manner. And this include you .

While this might be true of many in the redshirt leadership I think you are wrong about the rank and file. I believe the rank and file believe whatever their leadership tells them, for the most part. And they really do appreciate the voice the have been given in Thai politics, having been denied one throughout the history of Thailand.

[Cayenne]

In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

How can Thaksin be Napoleon? He was driven from the farm in disgrace like Farmer Jones and like Farmer Jones has every problem blamed on him.Napoleon is surely more apposite to an old general who lives the good life but tells the poor animals that they should be satisfied with their lot, and subscribe to a state ordained philosophy that a tiny amount is more than enough to satisfy the soul (if not bodily requirements).Of course he has a gang of porkers (khaki and yellow in colour) to enforce and intimidate.

My analogy was that in trying to get rid of the old system Thaksin himself created a new one which was same as the old. He changed the laws to suit himself just like in the book (from two legs bad, four legs good to four legs good two legs better). The horse who did the heavy lifting for him worked himself to death while some of the smarter animals who questioned him quickly became viewed as his enemies. Finally just like at the end of the book when Napoleon looked himself in the mirror and saw that he was becoming human, Thaksin himself becomes the very "elite" he so called despises- look how many of his cronies benefited immensely from his administration.

[scorecard]

You said: ....That's picking the fly poo out of the pepper. Peanuts in the scheme of things. Did Thai Bank earn interest rate on the loan or did Burma default? Did it help communications in the Region? ...

So I guess your saying that because it might have improved communications for the region (which is not true, it was for Burma's benefit) and because they paid the installments on time (did they?) therefore massive abuse of power, massive interference (intimidation) in the operation of a government bank way outside the purpose/mandate of the bank, it's operating rules and values, massive intimidation of permanent bureaucrat's, massive corruption, massive gains by his family company are not relevant?

Can any country in the world develop a civil society where all people respect the law and the process of the law, using your approach? No way! Ultimately this approach would lead to a total breakdown of law and order - a lawless society (Somalia, a number of provinces of the Philippines, several African nations, and more.) Is this in fact what you would like to see?

But of course in your next breath you will say that thaksin is the champion of democracy for the poor people. What a laugh, the man is a corrupt liar, a despicable calculating manipulator and user of the poor, and a total charlatan!

I just wonder how he feels about the values he has taught his kids. If I was him I would be totally ashamed of myself in this regard.

I wonder how confused his kids are, especially when for years they were taught that they were 'elite' (an overused word with no clear meaning anyway), after all mummy has the k'ying title, and that they were entitled to just take what they want with no respect for the law and with no thought about what is morally right or wrong. And now of course thaksin and his red shirts try to tell us how bad the elites are. What a joke.

Think you need to do some rethinking and perhaps some further research about the whole thaksin story.

Edited March 1, 2010 by scorecard

[jayboy]

In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

How can Thaksin be Napoleon? He was driven from the farm in disgrace like Farmer Jones and like Farmer Jones has every problem blamed on him.Napoleon is surely more apposite to an old general who lives the good life but tells the poor animals that they should be satisfied with their lot, and subscribe to a state ordained philosophy that a tiny amount is more than enough to satisfy the soul (if not bodily requirements).Of course he has a gang of porkers (khaki and yellow in colour) to enforce and intimidate.

My analogy was that in trying to get rid of the old system Thaksin himself created a new one which was same as the old. He changed the laws to suit himself just like in the book (from two legs bad, four legs good to four legs good two legs better). The horse who did the heavy lifting for him worked himself to death while some of the smarter animals who questioned him quickly became viewed as his enemies. Finally just like at the end of the book when Napoleon looked himself in the mirror and saw that he was becoming human, Thaksin himself becomes the very "elite" he so called despises- look how many of his cronies benefited immensely from his administration.

I see what you're saying but it doesn't really stand because Napoleon (Thaksin) is disgraced and no longer on the farm. The old two legged elites are firmly back in control.

As I recall, the book doesn't end the way you suggest but far more poignantly with the common animals looking from pig to man, and from man to pig but no longer able to tell the difference.I leave it to others to suggest who in the Thai context are the "men" and who are the "pigs".

[ozzieovaseas]

What possible significant new evidence could they have that they did not have before ? Maybe they will go for the evil twin brother defense;

"Your honour, we the defense would like to submit new evidence to the court, we have reason to believe that it was not our client who committed these act but it was his evil twin brother spongebob squarehead"

Why don't all of you Thaksin bashers educate yourself before you post here - it is really getting boring reading all those replies without the posters even bothering to find out what really happened.

Thaksins entire defense is publicly posted for evereyone to read on his website www.thaksinlive.com - if you read it you can then discuss the FACTS - and not rumors and the propaganda of his enemies.

You can also read his life story there and then you will understand why the poor Thais love him - because he and his family had to struggle to survive as millions of Thais do today.

Read the story of a little boy who got up every morning at 5 to help his parents sell coffee and clothes before going to school - and compare him to his enemies who have mostly been born stinking rich by stealing from the Thai people for hundreds of years.

If you read his story you will understand why he was making money available through village funds and you will understand his other populist policies - because he knows first hand that if you are poor in Thailand you get nothing!

Read it and then you can make up your mind and comment here. Read a certain Duncan McCargo document on the Thai elite on google and then comment here if you like.

Read and if you agree with me please pass on the information to others so we can all make an open minded informed decission.

This is the age of the internet you can get real infomation out there not the news the anti democratic propaganda machine has churned out for the last 50 years in this country!

Dude, I was silly enough to look at the site you're referring too. They just dress him up as some kind of God. Counterproductive to your claim that FACTS are available online, there is also false rubbish online-just 'cause its online doesn't make it facts. If you have your own website are you gonna bash yourself on it? Show us one thats neutral and based on facts. Your link is just another one of his little propaganda tools and a sob site.

The other guy was correct, by the time Thaksin came into the family, they already boasted great wealth. (well known to any inhabitant around Chiang Mai)

Anyway, his family was by no means "struggling to survive" as you put it.

Well said Gemini..

Your post saved me from being silly enough to look at the site , however it doesnt take a lot of brains to realize that a guy who writes such crud is probably being paid by Big T to construct the site and is probably just typing down a load of bullocks that Mr T wrote himself..

Easy enough to write a great story about myself..crusader for the people, steal from the rich and give to the poor, saving small animals in distress, helping old grannies cross the road ect ect ect

Posting it on the net does NOT make it facts though

Maybe if i wear a white lab coat WHILE im posting it on the net it will proove to be 100% correct by Thai standards

Doesnt exactly help dispell the myths about the uneducated north

[Cayenne]

In effect, Thaksin has become the new "Napoleon" from the book "Animal Farm".

How can Thaksin be Napoleon? He was driven from the farm in disgrace like Farmer Jones and like Farmer Jones has every problem blamed on him.Napoleon is surely more apposite to an old general who lives the good life but tells the poor animals that they should be satisfied with their lot, and subscribe to a state ordained philosophy that a tiny amount is more than enough to satisfy the soul (if not bodily requirements).Of course he has a gang of porkers (khaki and yellow in colour) to enforce and intimidate.

My analogy was that in trying to get rid of the old system Thaksin himself created a new one which was same as the old. He changed the laws to suit himself just like in the book (from two legs bad, four legs good to four legs good two legs better). The horse who did the heavy lifting for him worked himself to death while some of the smarter animals who questioned him quickly became viewed as his enemies. Finally just like at the end of the book when Napoleon looked himself in the mirror and saw that he was becoming human, Thaksin himself becomes the very "elite" he so called despises- look how many of his cronies benefited immensely from his administration.

I see what you're saying but it doesn't really stand because Napoleon (Thaksin) is disgraced and no longer on the farm. The old two legged elites are firmly back in control.

As I recall, the book doesn't end the way you suggest but far more poignantly with the common animals looking from pig to man, and from man to pig but no longer able to tell the difference.I leave it to others to suggest who in the Thai context are the "men" and who are the "pigs".

Actually, the end of the book does correspond with Thaksin while he was in power. Again back to my original point while he was in power he did roll with the so-called "elites". Didn't his wife get a royal title? He changed the rules and helped himself to this country's riches just like any "elite".

[jayboy]

Actually, the end of the book does correspond with Thaksin while he was in power. Again back to my original point while he was in power he did roll with the so-called "elites". Didn't his wife get a royal title? He changed the rules and helped himself to this country's riches just like any "elite".

Yes as an analogy of Thaksin's time in power I see what you mean.I didn't know Thaksin could award royal titles though.