Red Shirt Leader Jatuporn To Reveal 'Solid Evidence' Of Abhisit's UK Citizenship

[TheyCallmeScooter]

We have the same problem in the USA. Can't find out where our president is from. I guess the big differences is that we were able to vote for him (or not). As for Chinese ancestry, just look at a map, and look at the people. It's not hard to see where that China and India come into the picture. We need to have an election. .

Must we now?

What are we to vote on, California John?

[yesdavy]

So, he's not Vietnamese after all?

[yesdavy]

Hang on a minute, if Abbhisit still holds UK Citizenship (or duel citizenship). Does that mean there's a Brit in charge of running Thailand?? Surely that can't be correct. Foreigners (which Brits are, like all the white skinned devils here) can't own land, but can run the country?? I thought you had to be a full on 100% Thai national with a degree just to be able to get registered as a politician in a political party to run in local elections.

Hang on does that mean the pm needs a work permit

ROFLMAO!!!

[oldsailor35]

Jatuporn, he will volunteer to be put in jail too

:clap2:

the sooner the better..........

I guess thats one way of stopping free speech in Thailand !

[yellow1red1]

Thailand has not ratified membership of the ICC

:clap2:

[oldsailor35]

[/quote

Nothing really new, he is not Thai anyway but Chinese and just of the few elite Chinese that been running Thailand and hold most of the wealth and have a trickle down effect to the native Thais.

So if you want to use race and ethnic origin as a prejudicial argument against Abhisit, do you also recognise Thaksin's Chinese ethnicity and wealthy, elite family upbringing?

Just curious: you're not a card-holding BNP member are you?

As a 'genuine' matter of interest, and seeing as how you know. Where was Khun Thaksin born.

[asiawatcher]

More lip service from Jutaporn and more sloppy media reporting due to nothing new worth reporting. Birth rights - who cares? Many (including me) have dual citizenships and it means absolutely nothing except when coming in and out of Thailand where they insist in stamping everything to fill your passport! Two passports are great, one for entering and leaving Thailand and one for the rest of the world.

If the PM and Thailand's patriarch were born elsewhere, who cares? It's not as if they are not helping Thailand.

As for the continuing stupidity of claims of crimes against humanity.. oh never mind!

[backfromouterspace]

Bangkok Pundit did a piece on this a week ago. As Abhisit was born in the UK and his parents werent diplomats then he is a British citizen, whether he likes it or not. No proof anywhere that he has ever revoked his citizenship. He has never denied it

Does Bangkok Pundit have access to Google?

Abhisit denied this later, saying he was not a UK citizen.

http://www.nationmul...s-30147636.html

If Abhisit is British, a claim he denies, attorneys hired by his wealthiest political opponent claim he can be tried for “crimes against humanity” in International Criminal Courts.

http://www.globalpos...ish-citizenship

Pretty sure he has access to Google - in Thai language too which is why he found what Abhisit really said - word for word, which was not an outright denial, Different from what The Nation, a pro-Dem paper, reported.

[seri thai]

Bangkok Pundit did a piece on this a week ago. As Abhisit was born in the UK and his parents werent diplomats then he is a British citizen, whether he likes it or not. No proof anywhere that he has ever revoked his citizenship. He has never denied it, except to say he paid overseas student fees when he studied at Oxford Uni. ( But this doesnt mean he isnt UK citizen, just that he didnt live permanently in the UK.)

No Thai journalists are going to start bringing up the subject of where their leaders were born and whether they are still citizens of the UK or USA.

and he didn't have a Thai education, shocked.

ps is my comment all right or does it fall foul of TV rules, can we talk about Thai leaders?

As a rule of thumb I would say only elected ones....

If Abhisits parents had diplomatic status he may well have been registered as a thai national in UK. However I believe they were working in private practice and therefore he would probably have picked up British citizenship. If so he should have revoked it at 18 according to thai law.

[whybother]

As a 'genuine' matter of interest, and seeing as how you know. Where was Khun Thaksin born.

San Kamphaeng, Chiang Mai.

His great grand father was Chinese. So he is an elite Sino-Thai, which is generally who the red shirts are protesting against.

[sprq]

Anyone born in the United Kingdom whose parents were not diplomats or nationals of an enemy country in time of war is automatically a British citizen. He or she remains so unless he or she formally applies to the UK government to revoke the citizenship.

Presumably, all that Jatuporn is going to do is say the same and, apparently, produce some evidence that Abhisit has never revoked his British citizenship. Then will come the usual rabble-rousing rubbish.

Abhisit's Thai citizenship as a child of two Thai parents, his long residence in Thailand, his habitual use of a Thai passport and his self-definition as a Thai citizen together overrule and supercede the UK citizenship.

The most interesting thing in this context of nationality is the status of the highest personage, who was born in the USA and for similar reasons is a citizen of the USA, one would think. Over to you, Jatuporn.

[Murf]

No way is he British, or he would have sorted the stupid visa rules out!

[khaowong1]

Nothing really new, he is not Thai anyway but Chinese and just of the few elite Chinese that been running Thailand and hold most of the wealth and have a trickle down effect to the native Thais.

So, he's part of the original Thais:

The People of Thailand

The origin of the Thai people is rather vague, but scholars believe migrations occurred from the Chinese province of Szechwan around the 1st century AD.

This is what I have read and believe also.. And as the years went past, migrated down the Mekong, mixing with the locals that were here. What the locals were, I understand, were a mixture of the Lao/Khmer peoples. I could be wrong.

[anterian]

The British Nationality Act 1981 was an Act of Parliament passed by the British Parliament concerning British nationality. It has been the basis of British nationality law since 1 January 1983.

The Act also modified the application of Jus soli in British nationality. Prior to the Act coming into force, any person born in Britain (with limited exceptions such as children of diplomats and enemy aliens) was entitled to British Citizenship. After the Act came into force, it was necessary for at least one parent of a United Kingdom-born child to be a British citizen or "settled" in the United Kingdom (a permanent resident).

So in simple language, if Abhisit was born before 1981 he is entitled to British citizenship, born after that and he is not.. But note the word "entitled", an entitlement is something one normally requests. I would suggest he did not exercise this right otherwise he would not have paid the International fees at university.

[khaowong1]

Does that mean he's also 10 points down on the maturity development index?

I transferred from US school system to the British school system when I was mid-teens. Sorry to say, it felt like I was stuck with a group of 10 year olds.

I can't wait to see where this is going.

[oldsailor35]

As a 'genuine' matter of interest, and seeing as how you know. Where was Khun Thaksin born.

San Kamphaeng, Chiang Mai.

His great grand father was Chinese. So he is an elite Sino-Thai, which is generally who the red shirts are protesting against.

Thanks ........Chiang Mai is all i need to know. Not interested in the rest of your political posturing, i can make my own mind up !

[DP25]

This is what I have read and believe also.. And as the years went past, migrated down the Mekong, mixing with the locals that were here. What the locals were, I understand, were a mixture of the Lao/Khmer peoples. I could be wrong.

Lao people are also one of the 'Tai' people that came here, as are the Shan in Burma. The Zhuang in China are also Tai, the ones that stayed. That's why all these languages are so closely related

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_peoples

[bubba]

And then Chalerm, who of course is a member of the same party as Jatuporn, stated back in 2009 that Thaksin carries six different passports. I wonder if Jatuporn will mention that in his diatribe today?

Double-standards anyone?

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/17100/thaksin-carries-6-passports

[agord]

Nothing really new, he is not Thai anyway but Chinese and just of the few elite Chinese that been running Thailand and hold most of the wealth and have a trickle down effect to the native Thais.

Don't you mean he is a Thai of Chinese ancestry as most of the Hi So's, businessmen, politicians etc here are?

Abhisit is Chinese and there are aliens, vampires, goolies. goblins, magic elves, bigfoot, shape shifters, pixies.....

[whybother]

The British Nationality Act 1981 was an Act of Parliament passed by the British Parliament concerning British nationality. It has been the basis of British nationality law since 1 January 1983.

The Act also modified the application of Jus soli in British nationality. Prior to the Act coming into force, any person born in Britain (with limited exceptions such as children of diplomats and enemy aliens) was entitled to British Citizenship. After the Act came into force, it was necessary for at least one parent of a United Kingdom-born child to be a British citizen or "settled" in the United Kingdom (a permanent resident).

So in simple language, if Abhisit was born before 1981 he is entitled to British citizenship, born after that and he is not.. But note the word "entitled", an entitlement is something one normally requests. I would suggest he did not exercise this right otherwise he would not have paid the International fees at university.

So it depends on whether he is "entitled" to British citizenship, and therefore has to take it up (which I assume he didn't), or he automatically gets British citizenship and therefore needs to renounce it (which is claimed that he did - or at least didn't need to based on the first point).

[jcartermad]

Are we all not Global members of the human race. Being born here or there makes no difference to where YOU wish to throw your hat in with. If you were born in the USA or UK, as the two top men were, both or Thai parents then why cant they be Thai 100%? Having Thai parents means that YOU can elect to be Thai. Where you were born is of no relevance. It is what passport or passports they use / hold.. The PM does not have to give up British nationality...he has to apply for it! It appears that he never has applied so he is 100% Thai. The same applies to the top man. Born in the US but has never applied for US nationality. neither ever will of course...except if the PM is kicked out like the former PM.

The is a non story. 1000's of people have been born outside their parents homelands and they dont "give up Indian or Zambian" nationality. They never apply and just revert to the nationality rule that if your grandparent or closer is British then you can apply for British nationality. They never consider themselves less than British. Even Cliff Richard was born in India. No way is he Indian...of course he is British.

This topic is a non event and will soon die when the real political issues come to fore. The PM is Thai and that is it.

[bangkockney]

Bangkok Pundit did a piece on this a week ago. As Abhisit was born in the UK and his parents werent diplomats then he is a British citizen, whether he likes it or not. No proof anywhere that he has ever revoked his citizenship. He has never denied it

Does Bangkok Pundit have access to Google?

Abhisit denied this later, saying he was not a UK citizen.

http://www.nationmul...s-30147636.html

If Abhisit is British, a claim he denies, attorneys hired by his wealthiest political opponent claim he can be tried for “crimes against humanity” in International Criminal Courts.

http://www.globalpos...ish-citizenship

He has never come out and flat denied being a British citizen. The 2 articles you link to have no direct quotes in Thai from Abhisit.

He has remained deliberately vague over the whole issue.He states is a Thai citizen (ขอยืนยันถือสัญชาติไทย) and does no hold British citizenship as Robert Amsterdam states (ไม่ได้ถือสัญชาติอังกฤษตามที่นายโรเบิร์ต อัมสเตอร์ดัม). He also states that he when he was studying in the UK, he paid student fees the same as foreigners or when he goes to the UK, he needs a visa to enter (ระหว่างที่ศึกษาเล่าเรียนอยู่ที่ประเทศอังกฤษก็ต้องจ่ายค่าเล่าเรียนเหมือน คนต่างชาติทั่วไป หรือการเดินทางไปประเทศอังกฤษก็ต้องยื่นเรื่องขอวีซ่า).

None of the above is Abhisit denying he is a British citizen. He has never come out and said" I completed the forms and paid the necessary fee to renounce my British citizenship in 19xx".

[whybother]

He has never come out and flat denied being a British citizen. The 2 articles you link to have no direct quotes in Thai from Abhisit.

He has remained deliberately vague over the whole issue.He states is a Thai citizen (ขอยืนยันถือสัญชาติไทย) and does no hold British citizenship as Robert Amsterdam states (ไม่ได้ถือสัญชาติอังกฤษตามที่นายโรเบิร์ต อัมสเตอร์ดัม). He also states that he when he was studying in the UK, he paid student fees the same as foreigners or when he goes to the UK, he needs a visa to enter (ระหว่างที่ศึกษาเล่าเรียนอยู่ที่ประเทศอังกฤษก็ต้องจ่ายค่าเล่าเรียนเหมือน คนต่างชาติทั่วไป หรือการเดินทางไปประเทศอังกฤษก็ต้องยื่นเรื่องขอวีซ่า).

None of the above is Abhisit denying he is a British citizen. He has never come out and said" I completed the forms and paid the necessary fee to renounce my British citizenship in 19xx".

Is this not denying being a British citizen:

He states is a Thai citizen (ขอยืนยันถือสัญชาติไทย) and does no hold British citizenship as Robert Amsterdam states (ไม่ได้ถือสัญชาติอังกฤษตามที่นายโรเบิร์ต อัมสเตอร์ดัม).

[tinsom]

Hang on a minute, if Abbhisit still holds UK Citizenship (or duel citizenship). Does that mean there's a Brit in charge of running Thailand?? Surely that can't be correct. Foreigners (which Brits are, like all the white skinned devils here) can't own land, but can run the country?? I thought you had to be a full on 100% Thai national with a degree just to be able to get registered as a politician in a political party to run in local elections.

k to

as far as i can work out he was born in uk not sure if both parents are thai if so this entitles him to have british passport and thai passport

cant see what problem is he cant help where he was born why would he want or need to denounce he was born in uk

good luck to him as far as i can tell he was elected to leader of party and got made prime minister by default

so what if he was born in uk no harm in that its a advantage as his english (british) i may add is word perfect

an as far as i can work out he does job for benifit of thais unlike thasin who was init for himself at the expense of poor this

but he is lesser of two evils its him as prime minister of the corrupt thaksin that was here before

thais have to understand thaksin was corrupt and gave money to thais in one hand and took it away in other hand

i find it amazing that thai red shirts are so stupid to believe the thai political machine to think they would allow thaksin to take charge again

so he could line his own pocket again

so all i can say to red shirts

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE

your protests will not achiee anything just damage tourism and this is main revenue that thailand has

[bangkockney]

The British Nationality Act 1981 was an Act of Parliament passed by the British Parliament concerning British nationality. It has been the basis of British nationality law since 1 January 1983.

The Act also modified the application of Jus soli in British nationality. Prior to the Act coming into force, any person born in Britain (with limited exceptions such as children of diplomats and enemy aliens) was entitled to British Citizenship. After the Act came into force, it was necessary for at least one parent of a United Kingdom-born child to be a British citizen or "settled" in the United Kingdom (a permanent resident).

So in simple language, if Abhisit was born before 1981 he is entitled to British citizenship, born after that and he is not.. But note the word "entitled", an entitlement is something one normally requests. I would suggest he did not exercise this right otherwise he would not have paid the International fees at university.

So it depends on whether he is "entitled" to British citizenship, and therefore has to take it up (which I assume he didn't), or he automatically gets British citizenship and therefore needs to renounce it (which is claimed that he did - or at least didn't need to based on the first point).

Wrong.

If you were born in the United Kingdom before 1 January 1983, you are almost certainly a British citizen. Abhisit was born 1964, Newcastle, UK.

There is no need to apply for British citizenship by birth, it is automatic. There is no registration, you are simply a citizen. Yes, he needs a birth certificate to prove he is a citizen, but that is just to prove his status.

Edited February 19, 2011 by bangkockney

[sirchai]

Hang on a minute, if Abbhisit still holds UK Citizenship (or duel citizenship). Does that mean there's a Brit in charge of running Thailand?? Surely that can't be correct. Foreigners (which Brits are, like all the white skinned devils here) can't own land, but can run the country?? I thought you had to be a full on 100% Thai national with a degree just to be able to get registered as a politician in a political party to run in local elections.

Jatuporn claims he has solid evidence that Abhisit, who was born in Newcastle, England, holds British citizenship because he has not renounced it.

You thought he had to be 100% Thai? Is there anything 100% here? 100 % sure is only that we all have to go some day. Why can't he hold a dual citizenship and be the Prime Minister?

Wasn't another guy born in America, which would make him to an American?

[sirchai]

Nothing really new, he is not Thai anyway but Chinese and just of the few elite Chinese that been running Thailand and hold most of the wealth and have a trickle down effect to the native Thais.

Don't you mean he is a Thai of Chinese ancestry as most of the Hi So's, businessmen, politicians etc here are?

Abhisit is Chinese and there are aliens, vampires, goolies. goblins, magic elves, bigfoot, shape shifters, pixies.....

So, you're trying to tell everybody that UK citizens are all bad guys????:jap: So, please who are you? What does you make a better person?

[whybother]

Wrong.

If you were born in the United Kingdom before 1 January 1983, you are almost certainly a British citizen. Abhisit was born 1964, Newcastle, UK.

There is no need to apply for British citizenship by birth, it is automatic. There is no registration, you are simply a citizen. Yes, he needs a birth certificate to prove he is a citizen, but that is just to prove his status.

It seems that way ... so we can put that one to rest.

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/othernationality/Britishcitizenship/borninukorqualifyingterritory/

If you were born in the United Kingdom before 1 January 1983

If you were born in the United Kingdom before 1 January 1983, you are almost certainly a British citizen. The only exception is if you were born to certain diplomatic staff of foreign missions who had diplomatic immunity.

Interestingly:

Can I give up my citizenship?

If you are a British citizen, a British overseas territories citizen, a British overseas citizen, a British subject or a British national (overseas), you may give up your citizenship or status if you:

• already have another citizenship or nationality; or
• are going to get another citizenship or nationality after you have given up your British citizenship, British overseas territories citizenship, British overseas citizenship, British subject status or British national (overseas) status.

In addition to this, you must also be:

• aged 18 or over (but if you are under 18 and have been married, we will treat you as meeting the age requirement); and
• of sound mind (but if you are not of sound mind, you may still be allowed to give up your British citizenship or other British nationality if it would be in your best interests).

Abhisit had to be over 18 to renounce his citizenship.

[Buchholz]

Bangkok Pundit did a piece on this a week ago. As Abhisit was born in the UK and his parents werent diplomats then he is a British citizen, whether he likes it or not. No proof anywhere that he has ever revoked his citizenship. He has never denied it

Does Bangkok Pundit have access to Google?

Abhisit denied this later, saying he was not a UK citizen.

http://www.nationmul...s-30147636.html

If Abhisit is British, a claim he denies, attorneys hired by his wealthiest political opponent claim he can be tried for “crimes against humanity” in International Criminal Courts.

http://www.globalpos...ish-citizenship

Pretty sure he has access to Google - in Thai language too which is why he found what Abhisit really said - word for word, which was not an outright denial, Different from what The Nation, a pro-Dem paper, reported.

So is the Global Post a pro-Dem paper that has it "wrong", too?

Has the ICC acted upon Amsterdam's assertion that he is British and accepted the case?

[Insight]

None of Amsterdam's make-believe witnesses will ever see a single day in any court on earth, so all this is relevant how?

Still looking forward to the Abhisit rebuttal of whatever rubbish Juttaporn the liar produces today.