Sweden Says It Did Not Ask Thaksin To Leave

[rixalex]

Of course, if Thaksin was arrested in Sweden, then he would probably claim asylum in Sweden and Thailand would be faced with the rather embarrassing problem of explaining how it's courts are all completely independent even though appointed under military rule, and the very man they have in custody could actually explain to them how himself was able to manipulate the judiciary.

With regards you assertion above that the courts were appointed under military rule can you be a little more specific as to the details?

[tonywebster]

I will not question that he dabbled in corruption Peter, I do question however that the current government is elected, well they are not elected by the people as in a democracy, they were elected by parliament after buying coalition parties in order that they have enough seats to form a government. This is where we differ, I believe a democratic government should be elected by the people and by the people alone, or you don't have an elected government, when the previous government was disbanded the vote should have been given back to the people and not chosen (after buying coalitions) by the courts, especially after the same court disbanded one party for vote buying while allowing another to become the government despite them also being found guilty of vote buying (people will prattle on about the executive arm etc, but vote buying is vote buying). I am also 100% certain that the reds in any guise will win the next election, The army and Abhisit know this also or they would be running to the polls now to have 4 more years rather than the 18 odd months they have left. It is a sad indictment on Thailand that the only way this party could into power was via the army and the courts and not because of a public vote, dont forget they have not won the last 3 elections so they were placed into power, now forgive me if I am wrong but that is not democracy.

i disagree that they want the election now before Thaksin runs out of money, thaksin is still a billionaire mate, in USD, not just in baht, so i don't think money is a major issue for them. The issue is that in 9 months time the current government will have pushed through 3 charter amendments which the reds want to stop, not for Thaksin, but for Thailand. they need to now to not focus on Thaksin and make their voices heard on the actual issues. We already know about the double standards and to continuing to harp on about them is pointless. they simply need to focus on getting a new election because that is what is best for Thailand. Do you consider a military government good for Thailand? because that is what we have now.

To think all this has come about because of the egos of two men, Thaksin and Sondhi, unbelievable

"Dabbled" in corruption? You've got to be kidding!!! The things he did WHILE he was PM that directly benefitted HIS company wasn't just dabbling.

The government wasn't disbanded. The party was. The PM was banned because he was part of the executive of the party, and they were caught red handed being involved in electoral fraud. They were the laws before the election. The law was clear. All the courts did was enforce the law. If the executive are involved, the party gets disbanded (not all the MPs get banned). If non-exectives are involved, they get banned individually. They PPP still broke the laws knowing they existed. The court didn't disband the government.

Even after the PPP was disbanded, an ex-PPP MP was the care-taker PM and the PTP could have still formed a government.

The fact that the smaller parties decided to no longer support the PTP may have been for many reasons, but it could have been because they thought that a Democrat government was better for the country and better for them. You can't really bring "being paid" to support them into the argument, because the Thaksin parties were pretty good at this.

OK. Maybe Thaksin's money will not run out so quick. He could probably still buy the election in 9 months too. But, besides that, the PPP didn't get a majority in the last election. I doubt they (PTP) would get a majority in the next election. I doubt the smaller parties will support them in the next election.

Abhisit is including everyone in the discussions for the charter amendments and then putting it to a referendum for the people to accept. The reds don't want the Democrat amendments, because it means there is less chance of getting Thaksin his money back.

I agree that the reds should not focus on Thaksin, but the problem is that they have to. They need Thaksin for his support. They need Thaksin because (some of) the poor farmers love (have been fooled by) him because he gave them so much (of other peoples) money.

And that's what it comes back to. It's all about Thaksin. It's all about Thaksin's money.

Peter it is this mentality that disturbs me, I will just highlight one part of your post for this, you say They need Thaksin for his support. They need Thaksin because (some of) the poor farmers love (have been fooled by) him because he gave them so much (of other peoples) money..

this is pure hyperbole, have you spoken to any of these farmers and asked them? it is an insult to them to think that they can not make an informed decision, PAD thinking in the extreme there Peter. The fact is Thaksin was corrupt and yes he lined his own pockets, but do you think the disenfranchised give a dam_n about that as long as their lives is also better? They don't care that he was corrupt, they only care that he helped them, that he stood up for them (or gave that appearance). These people have votes also and he is the first one to realize that, and now after all his troubles he is still getting support from these people, because he helped them, simple.

As for the coalition, it is well documented thet the Dems paid smaller parties substantial amounts of money and offered cabinet positions to get them, it was not a case that they no longer supported the PPP/PTP/TRT, they simply sold their souls to the highest bidder, maybe even under military pressure.

[mazeltov]

Or how about 10 years sharing a toilet with 100 other blokes because you posted a video on the internet?

Yep - utter rubbish - but I don't believe Thaksin's phone-ins are going to be used to criticize it.

can you just stop one time and forget about to have all the time thaksin in mind and take a look at other issues? you will be surprised what meanwhile happend.

Prachatai editor faces up to 50 years in jail

did you hear about laws like the computer crime act?

[Insight]

Or how about 10 years sharing a toilet with 100 other blokes because you posted a video on the internet?

Yep - utter rubbish - but I don't believe Thaksin's phone-ins are going to be used to criticize it.

can you just stop one time and forget about to have all the time thaksin in mind and take a look at other issues? you will be surprised what meanwhile happend.

Prachatai editor faces up to 50 years in jail

did you hear about laws like the computer crime act?

Why? Am I hurting your feelings?

This is a thread about Sweden allowing Thaksin to visit. The comment I quoted was the Swede's justification behind Thaksin not being contacted, so excuse me if I just happen to be making references to Thaksin!

I understood perfectly what mca as alluding to and gave my opinion, and then went on to highlight how the person being discussed in this thread was unlikely to help.

So apologies if you don't like what you're reading, but you might have better luck elsewhere.

[anotherpeter]

Peter it is this mentality that disturbs me, I will just highlight one part of your post for this, you say They need Thaksin for his support. They need Thaksin because (some of) the poor farmers love (have been fooled by) him because he gave them so much (of other peoples) money..

this is pure hyperbole, have you spoken to any of these farmers and asked them? it is an insult to them to think that they can not make an informed decision, PAD thinking in the extreme there Peter. The fact is Thaksin was corrupt and yes he lined his own pockets, but do you think the disenfranchised give a dam_n about that as long as their lives is also better? They don't care that he was corrupt, they only care that he helped them, that he stood up for them (or gave that appearance). These people have votes also and he is the first one to realize that, and now after all his troubles he is still getting support from these people, because he helped them, simple.

As for the coalition, it is well documented thet the Dems paid smaller parties substantial amounts of money and offered cabinet positions to get them, it was not a case that they no longer supported the PPP/PTP/TRT, they simply sold their souls to the highest bidder, maybe even under military pressure.

The coalition: in all countries where coalitions are used, the small parties are offered incentives (selling their soul) to join a coalition with the a larger party. Are you suggesting the Thaksin parties DIDN'T offer incentives?

Thaksin: The point is, Thaksin handed out money to get the support of the farmers. He set up the 30-baht health plan to get the support of the poor, but didn't fund the health system to cope with the influx of the people. He set up easy credit for them, so they could by their cars and motorbikes, without making sure they could actually pay back the loans. He also lined the pockets of the local rich 'elite' to make sure they would support him and they would "encourage" the local poor to support him.

They don't care that he was corrupt, because he gave them money. He made their lives better in the short term so that they would support him and get him the power that he wanted. He was the first one that worked out how to "exploit" the poor vote, because he realized that he could use it to get the power. And you're correct - he "gave the appearance" that he stood up for them.

Just because he "helped" the poor farmers does not mean he helped the country.

I am 100% for efforts to improve the well being of the poor, through education, through better pricing for their produce, (especially) through the reduction of corruption in their own backyard.

But, simply, Thaksin IS NOT the answer. And while the reds are in Thaksin's pockets, then the reds are not the answer either.

[tonywebster]

Peter it is this mentality that disturbs me, I will just highlight one part of your post for this, you say They need Thaksin for his support. They need Thaksin because (some of) the poor farmers love (have been fooled by) him because he gave them so much (of other peoples) money..

this is pure hyperbole, have you spoken to any of these farmers and asked them? it is an insult to them to think that they can not make an informed decision, PAD thinking in the extreme there Peter. The fact is Thaksin was corrupt and yes he lined his own pockets, but do you think the disenfranchised give a dam_n about that as long as their lives is also better? They don't care that he was corrupt, they only care that he helped them, that he stood up for them (or gave that appearance). These people have votes also and he is the first one to realize that, and now after all his troubles he is still getting support from these people, because he helped them, simple.

As for the coalition, it is well documented thet the Dems paid smaller parties substantial amounts of money and offered cabinet positions to get them, it was not a case that they no longer supported the PPP/PTP/TRT, they simply sold their souls to the highest bidder, maybe even under military pressure.

The coalition: in all countries where coalitions are used, the small parties are offered incentives (selling their soul) to join a coalition with the a larger party. Are you suggesting the Thaksin parties DIDN'T offer incentives?

Thaksin: The point is, Thaksin handed out money to get the support of the farmers. He set up the 30-baht health plan to get the support of the poor, but didn't fund the health system to cope with the influx of the people. He set up easy credit for them, so they could by their cars and motorbikes, without making sure they could actually pay back the loans. He also lined the pockets of the local rich 'elite' to make sure they would support him and they would "encourage" the local poor to support him.

They don't care that he was corrupt, because he gave them money. He made their lives better in the short term so that they would support him and get him the power that he wanted. He was the first one that worked out how to "exploit" the poor vote, because he realized that he could use it to get the power. And you're correct - he "gave the appearance" that he stood up for them.

Just because he "helped" the poor farmers does not mean he helped the country.

I am 100% for efforts to improve the well being of the poor, through education, through better pricing for their produce, (especially) through the reduction of corruption in their own backyard.

But, simply, Thaksin IS NOT the answer. And while the reds are in Thaksin's pockets, then the reds are not the answer either.

i think we will have to disagree about him helping the country, the fact is Thailand was performing better (I know people will point to the recessions elsewhere but still taking that into account thailand is much worse off both financially and politically and socially than it was before the illegal coup) and was a much nicer place to live before the coup, and again you make a strange assumption, there are many poor people in Thailand and they are not all farmers. he helped the poor irrespective of their employment or lack of it, this won him votes, this made sure he is the only PM in thai history to serve his term and the only one to be re elected.

I have no doubt that he offered incentives to coalition partners, but as far as I am aware there is no record of cash incentives, and as for buying votes, you tell me where that does not happen, in fact is happens more blatant than it does here, it is simple, if I want the votes of the young i offer tax breaks, if I want the votes of the elderly I offer pension incentives, if I want the votes of the civil servants I offer pay increases etc etc etc.

I do get your point in your posts, you are one of the more sensible ones on here as you do see both sides of the coin, you are not a fan of Thaksin and neither am I to be fair, but I will acknowledge his achievements and what he did for Thailand, especially the underprivileged, he tapped into that market and they are still loving him for it.

At the end of the day mate none of us get a say in this, I just hope that there will be an election, the people will speak and the government will be formed because of the will of the people, be them red or yellow, I want an end to corruption from both sides, I want an end to hypocrisy and i want an end to press bias.

I don't want much do I

[bangon04]

So up to now nobody has respected the Thai FM when they have asked that Thaksin be asked to leave a country, Sweden, Dubai, Cambodia, Montenegro.

Er....UK?? but then the UK always makes more effort for other countries than it does for its own citizens.

[anotherpeter]

i think we will have to disagree about him helping the country, the fact is Thailand was performing better (I know people will point to the recessions elsewhere but still taking that into account thailand is much worse off both financially and politically and socially than it was before the illegal coup) and was a much nicer place to live before the coup, and again you make a strange assumption, there are many poor people in Thailand and they are not all farmers. he helped the poor irrespective of their employment or lack of it, this won him votes, this made sure he is the only PM in thai history to serve his term and the only one to be re elected.

I have no doubt that he offered incentives to coalition partners, but as far as I am aware there is no record of cash incentives, and as for buying votes, you tell me where that does not happen, in fact is happens more blatant than it does here, it is simple, if I want the votes of the young i offer tax breaks, if I want the votes of the elderly I offer pension incentives, if I want the votes of the civil servants I offer pay increases etc etc etc.

I do get your point in your posts, you are one of the more sensible ones on here as you do see both sides of the coin, you are not a fan of Thaksin and neither am I to be fair, but I will acknowledge his achievements and what he did for Thailand, especially the underprivileged, he tapped into that market and they are still loving him for it.

At the end of the day mate none of us get a say in this, I just hope that there will be an election, the people will speak and the government will be formed because of the will of the people, be them red or yellow, I want an end to corruption from both sides, I want an end to hypocrisy and i want an end to press bias.

I don't want much do I

My generalizing about "poor" and "farmers" generally means the people of the N & NE. Thaksin had support in Bangkok initially, but lost that very quickly.

The economy was performing well in Thailand while he was PM. Was this because of him, or was it because the global economy was doing great? The economy is not doing so well now under the Abhisit government. This is obviously (mainly) because of the GFC and the global economy. It is very difficult to compare the two in economic terms.

I can understand that it was a nicer place before the coup ... since then it has been never ending protests.

Several posters mention Burma and Cambodia in relation to the "Puppet" Abhisit government. Maybe it would be more like those places if Thaksin had continued in power. He had already placed his people in many places, but failed to get them into the right places in the military. The military haven't turned the country into a Burma or a Cambodia, even though they have had plenty of opportunity over the decades.

IMO, Thailand is a fledging democracy trying to keep it's head above water. Thaksin used democracy to get power, and then started to make changes to make sure he kept that power.

[tonywebster]

So up to now nobody has respected the Thai FM when they have asked that Thaksin be asked to leave a country, Sweden, Dubai, Cambodia, Montenegro.

Er....UK?? but then the UK always makes more effort for other countries than it does for its own citizens.

Don't edit my posts please, it is against forum rules, please quote the full post, thanks.

That said yes the UK does make more effort for other countries. The UK revoked his visa but not at the request of Thailand. I am sure if he had bothered to fight it as a political charge he would have stayed in the UK, such as Pinochet did.

[tonywebster]

i think we will have to disagree about him helping the country, the fact is Thailand was performing better (I know people will point to the recessions elsewhere but still taking that into account thailand is much worse off both financially and politically and socially than it was before the illegal coup) and was a much nicer place to live before the coup, and again you make a strange assumption, there are many poor people in Thailand and they are not all farmers. he helped the poor irrespective of their employment or lack of it, this won him votes, this made sure he is the only PM in thai history to serve his term and the only one to be re elected.

I have no doubt that he offered incentives to coalition partners, but as far as I am aware there is no record of cash incentives, and as for buying votes, you tell me where that does not happen, in fact is happens more blatant than it does here, it is simple, if I want the votes of the young i offer tax breaks, if I want the votes of the elderly I offer pension incentives, if I want the votes of the civil servants I offer pay increases etc etc etc.

I do get your point in your posts, you are one of the more sensible ones on here as you do see both sides of the coin, you are not a fan of Thaksin and neither am I to be fair, but I will acknowledge his achievements and what he did for Thailand, especially the underprivileged, he tapped into that market and they are still loving him for it.

At the end of the day mate none of us get a say in this, I just hope that there will be an election, the people will speak and the government will be formed because of the will of the people, be them red or yellow, I want an end to corruption from both sides, I want an end to hypocrisy and i want an end to press bias.

I don't want much do I

My generalizing about "poor" and "farmers" generally means the people of the N & NE. Thaksin had support in Bangkok initially, but lost that very quickly.

The economy was performing well in Thailand while he was PM. Was this because of him, or was it because the global economy was doing great? The economy is not doing so well now under the Abhisit government. This is obviously (mainly) because of the GFC and the global economy. It is very difficult to compare the two in economic terms.

I can understand that it was a nicer place before the coup ... since then it has been never ending protests.

Several posters mention Burma and Cambodia in relation to the "Puppet" Abhisit government. Maybe it would be more like those places if Thaksin had continued in power. He had already placed his people in many places, but failed to get them into the right places in the military. The military haven't turned the country into a Burma or a Cambodia, even though they have had plenty of opportunity over the decades.

IMO, Thailand is a fledging democracy trying to keep it's head above water. Thaksin used democracy to get power, and then started to make changes to make sure he kept that power.

Well I am sure it is normal to want to keep power, and in this country you need your people around you as we have all seen with the many coups.

On another note does anyone actually think other countries base their information on what the Thai government tells them or what their own embassies tell them? I would imagine there is a massive difference between the truth and the Thai government information.

[monkfish]

Just goes to show you can't believe a word the current government and media are saying.

They only got caught out this time because a real democratic country was involved otherwise we have no choice

but to believe the BS being spewed out.

If the reds do win the next election (which isn't so far away) I can see a lot of people going down for defam which

is probably why they are now eager to make a deal.

[bangon04]

So up to now nobody has respected the Thai FM when they have asked that Thaksin be asked to leave a country, Sweden, Dubai, Cambodia, Montenegro.

Er....UK?? but then the UK always makes more effort for other countries than it does for its own citizens.

Don't edit my posts please, it is against forum rules, please quote the full post, thanks.

Thanks for the advice. The rule says:

30) Do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes, added emoticons, or altered wording.

Can you explain in what way I modified your words? or even modified the meaning of your words?

[Jingthing]

It is 100 percent OK with use SNIPPETS of other people's posts! In fact, it is desirable, to cut down the length of posts.

[rainman]

Another slap in the face for the Thai Foreign Ministry Propaganda Machine.

[bangon04]

It is 100 percent OK with use SNIPPETS of other people's posts! In fact, it is desirable, to cut down the length of posts.

Yes that's what I thought, too. But I was beginning to think the TV constitution had been rewritten recently and I had missed it.....

[Bengt]

Thaksin is NOT in Sweden, in that case our news media have write a lot about it, its just rumors and nothing else.

[TheOldWolf]

Thaksin is NOT in Sweden, in that case our news media have write a lot about it, its just rumors and nothing else.

Sorry Bengt, this is about that i WAS in Sweden last weekend. I suppose he used his Montenegro visa, because that is the only country which he has passports (to my knowledge) from that don´t need visa to visit Sweden.

I think this is a delecate matter for Sweden, because it needs good realtions with Thailand to get hands on Swedish fugetives in Thailand too.

[hammered]

All Thai governments need the support of the army. Abhisit has the support of the army now and Thaksin would have the support of the army once he gets his people in at the top. No difference there really, except for the fact that Thaksin is a convicted criminal and performed huge levels of corruption while he was PM.

Do you think the ARMY will support him or his government if THAI FOR THAI PARTY win? I am not sure about that. Samak didn't get any support from Army. Somchai couldn't order the army to stop the yellows from broke into the airport.

Now the RED LEADERs are attacking army days and nights and they are nasty, cursing, insulting...etc. They seems to make Thai army their enemy now. They chased the unarmed army out from the security points last week. If you listen ( In Thai) what they say on RED stage, you will see why I think the army is in their last point of being patient now.

That's why Thaksin is trying to get control of the reshuffle. The only way he can do that is through an election. Which is why he wants a dissolution now.

edit: but you're probably right. The current army leadership won't let that happen.

The 15 days/nine months does seem inextricably linked to the military reshuffle. But if PTP win say next year they can still undo any military reshuffle, so basing it on Prayuth rising as the red stage says makes no sense. That can and will be undone by PTP. A more plausible explanantion may be that Thaksin has actually promised some people promotions in the upcoming reshuffle in return for support. With compulsory retirement in th military it i likely if he cant be seen to be in the position to influence this that this support will drift away or be removed by retirement. Ditto in the police too and loads of other civil servants. It allmakes a lot more sense when not looking at who the Dems may pick but at who you wont be able to get in and what that means. The run up to Songkhran is a critical time.

[anotherpeter]

It is 100 percent OK with use SNIPPETS of other people's posts! In fact, it is desirable, to cut down the length of posts.

But you should point out that it has been snipped, and only snip irrelevant sections.

[JacknDanny]

Of course, if Thaksin was arrested in Sweden, then he would probably claim asylum in Sweden and Thailand would be faced with the rather embarrassing problem of explaining how it's courts are all completely independent even though appointed under military rule, and the very man they have in custody could actually explain to them how himself was able to manipulate the judiciary.

With regards you assertion above that the courts were appointed under military rule can you be a little more specific as to the details?

You are wasting your time alex!!

These red /Thaksinites, havent got a clue. They are like sheep!!! They believe that if you keep repeating a lie, or keep uttering the same nonsensical cr@p, that eventually someone will have a low enough IQ to believe them.

I just get frustrated reading the rubbish, because I cant believe that they really believe what they are writing, but are doing it to provoke/antagonise the likes of you and I, or to rabble-rouse the ignoramuses.

[rixalex]

Of course, if Thaksin was arrested in Sweden, then he would probably claim asylum in Sweden and Thailand would be faced with the rather embarrassing problem of explaining how it's courts are all completely independent even though appointed under military rule, and the very man they have in custody could actually explain to them how himself was able to manipulate the judiciary.

With regards you assertion above that the courts were appointed under military rule can you be a little more specific as to the details?

You are wasting your time alex!!

These red /Thaksinites, havent got a clue. They are like sheep!!! They believe that if you keep repeating a lie, or keep uttering the same nonsensical cr@p, that eventually someone will have a low enough IQ to believe them.

I just get frustrated reading the rubbish, because I cant believe that they really believe what they are writing, but are doing it to provoke/antagonise the likes of you and I, or to rabble-rouse the ignoramuses.

I have to agree JD.

In the all the years i have been using Thaivisa, i can't remember a time when it has been more awash with this sort of stuff. It gets to the point where there's not much else to do but step back, let them get on with it, and hope in time they get bored and move on to some other place. Defeatest i know but it feels like climbing a mountain.

[Jingthing]

It is 100 percent OK with use SNIPPETS of other people's posts! In fact, it is desirable, to cut down the length of posts.

But you should point out that it has been snipped, and only snip irrelevant sections.

No, you're wrong. Properly, you include ONLY what you are specifically replying to. There is no need whatsoever to indicate it is a snippet. We are not babies, dear, we can figure it out. Now if you edit a post in such a way that you have blatantly distorted the meaning and intention of the message of the post, then that is rude, and deserves a later rebuttal.

For example a movie reviewer writes, "This movie was the biggest piece of garbage ever made in world history!" and the movie PR reads This movie ... made world history!

[termad]

I wish Dubai would make a similar statement to clarify everything just to shut the Foreign Ministry's pie hole.

IMO, Dubai have said something to him. ("shut up while you are here")

Whenever he seems to be in Dubai, he is sick and can't do his nightly call in.

We'll see where his next call in come from.

Perhaps the Swedes also took exception to being contacted by the present Thai foreign minister a man who took part in act of terrorism i.e. Suvarnabhumi

[Jingthing]

That wasn't terrorism.

[anotherpeter]

I wish Dubai would make a similar statement to clarify everything just to shut the Foreign Ministry's pie hole.

IMO, Dubai have said something to him. ("shut up while you are here")

Whenever he seems to be in Dubai, he is sick and can't do his nightly call in.

We'll see where his next call in come from.

Perhaps the Swedes also took exception to being contacted by the present Thai foreign minister a man who took part in act of terrorism i.e. Suvarnabhumi

And the relevance to my post is ...

But besides that, I doubt that the FM actually called anyone. Thaksin was probably in and out of Sweden before the FM knew.

And, I've done all the terrorism posts, so I won't go into that for you again.

[termad]

That wasn't terrorism.

Of course it wasn't. They were all innocent plane spotters.

[CLOD]

Maybe the thai's did ask Sweeden to chase out Thaksin, but maybe the Swede's responded to the thais by saying,

"We will chase out Thaksin if you can explain to us how Military Junta Coups, Military Junta Coup-Issued Law, and Military Junta Appointed Judiciary, sits in a DEMOCRACY.

[Jingthing]

Sweden is like Switzerland. They like neutrality. They have no backbone. Look how they cooperated with the Nazis and you get the picture.

[TheOldWolf]

Maybe the thai's did ask Sweeden to chase out Thaksin, but maybe the Swede's responded to the thais by saying,

"We will chase out Thaksin if you can explain to us how Military Junta Coups, Military Junta Coup-Issued Law, and Military Junta Appointed Judiciary, sits in a DEMOCRACY.

I can assure you they didn´t. And I can assure you Sweden like to keep up good relations with Thailand, also what concerns lawbraekers. The problem is that Thaksin bought a passport in Montenegro and people from Montenegro don´t need visa to visit Sweden. And I also think lot activies takes place in secret.

[hammered]

My guess is that Sweden would like this to be the non-issue it really is.