Deputy PM Suthep Denied He Would Shine Thaksin's Shoes

[jdinasia]

you mean he couldn't figure it out before he became an MP? before he was caught? hmmm interesting perspective

It would probably depend on if he handled all of his investments himself or used a broker etc. Were those shares part of a mutual fund? Did he have any control over the use of the shares or direction of the company? It would also depend on if he knew every business dealing of every company he owned shares in. I own stock in MANY companies and honestly do not know every aspect of what each company does. Ex. Justin Industries --- Justin boots -- I used to hold a not insignificant amount of shares in this company (I still may, I am not sure) and I had no idea that they were also involved in publishing and building materials

I assume that you are aware of the recent by-elections for MP's that BJT and the Dems did quite well in but PTP took a beating in ... why were they held?

[ChiangMaiFun]

you mean he couldn't figure it out before he became an MP? before he was caught? hmmm interesting perspective

It would probably depend on if he handled all of his investments himself or used a broker etc. Were those shares part of a mutual fund? Did he have any control over the use of the shares or direction of the company? It would also depend on if he knew every business dealing of every company he owned shares in. I own stock in MANY companies and honestly do not know every aspect of what each company does. Ex. Justin Industries --- Justin boots -- I used to hold a not insignificant amount of shares in this company (I still may, I am not sure) and I had no idea that they were also involved in publishing and building materials

I assume that you are aware of the recent by-elections for MP's that BJT and the Dems did quite well in but PTP took a beating in ... why were they held?

I am no fan of PT (although may appear so) but I dislike the Dems hypocracy more - including senior figures who give land away to wealth family's as a 'favour' and avoid hearings - this has no place in politics - anywhere

[jdinasia]

I am no fan of PT (although may appear so) but I dislike the Dems hypocracy more - including senior figures who give land away to wealth family's as a 'favour' and avoid hearings - this has no place in politics - anywhere

Please cite a source proving where Suthep actually gave away land in Phuket to wealthy families. If you want to look for examples of avoiding hearings (not what Suthep did in the shareholder situation) please feel free to look at Jatuporn

You might also want to look up Alpine Golf when looking at land cases.

[jayboy]

Please cite a source proving where Suthep actually gave away land in Phuket to wealthy families.

Fascinating.He seems to have no idea what brought the Chuan Democrat led government in 1990, and the notorious role Suthep had in the Phuket land crisis that precipitated it.None of this is obscure or hard to read up on.

[chuang]

[."

The fact that the Dems have actually done some things to directly remove the taint of corruption at times is a HUGE step forward for Thai politics.

..LOL...

[hammered]

Suthep and Snoh are both still in politics inspite of the land indiscretions and both still go on as though they could actually solve anything. It really isnt worth getting partisan over as you can dig plenty of dirt on all. I would rate Sarayud slightly higher than these two as justice did get served there. In most cases justice is obstructed until either everyone forgets or statutes of limitation expire

[jdinasia]

Please cite a source proving where Suthep actually gave away land in Phuket to wealthy families.

Fascinating.He seems to have no idea what brought the Chuan Democrat led government in 1990, and the notorious role Suthep had in the Phuket land crisis that precipitated it.None of this is obscure or hard to read up on.

Hmm Chuan One fell in 95 not 90, Chuan 2 in 2001. Again cite a source where Suthep was proven to have given away land in Phuket to wealthy families. You are correct that none of it is obscure other than proof. It REALLY isn't obscure as to the dates of Chuan Leekpai's administrations Being accused of corruption is not the same thing as having it proven I will accept a conviction as evidence of proof.

(Granted --- Suthep's dealings in Surat later on probably should have led to a conviction. I wonder why Thaksin did not pursue the case?)

edit for typo

Edited April 5, 2011 by jdinasia

[jdinasia]

Suthep and Snoh are both still in politics inspite of the land indiscretions and both still go on as though they could actually solve anything. It really isnt worth getting partisan over as you can dig plenty of dirt on all. I would rate Sarayud slightly higher than these two as justice did get served there. In most cases justice is obstructed until either everyone forgets or statutes of limitation expire

Concur .. typical dirty politics.

[jayboy]

Hmm Chuan One fell in 95 not 90, Chuan 2 in 2001. Again cite a source where Suthep was proven to have given away land in Phuket to wealthy families. You are correct that none of it is obscure other than proof. It REALLY isn't obscure as to the dates of Chuan Leekpai's administrations Being accused of corruption is not the same thing as having it proven I will accept a conviction as evidence of proof.

edit for typo

You can concentrate on my typo (for which I apologise) or you can deal with the issue.

What you will "accept as proof" of Suthep's corruption is of course neither here nor there.There is much corruption in Thailand which comes nowhere near the courts

Most Thais know the score on Suthep's corrupt background.His political enemies are explicit:his political friends will smile ruefully.None deny his guilt.

[jdinasia]

Hmm Chuan One fell in 95 not 90, Chuan 2 in 2001. Again cite a source where Suthep was proven to have given away land in Phuket to wealthy families. You are correct that none of it is obscure other than proof. It REALLY isn't obscure as to the dates of Chuan Leekpai's administrations Being accused of corruption is not the same thing as having it proven I will accept a conviction as evidence of proof.

edit for typo

You can concentrate on my typo (for which I apologise) or you can deal with the issue.

What you will "accept as proof" of Suthep's corruption is of course neither here nor there.There is much corruption in Thailand which comes nowhere near the courts

Most Thais know the score on Suthep's corrupt background.His political enemies are explicit:his political friends will smile ruefully.None deny his guilt.

I am glad you know how "most Thais" think! Suthep is far from being a fave of mine. I didn't focus on a typo, I focussed on facts that disproved your previous statement. Proof is important and facts and reality often get twisted in politics in Thailand. MANY Thais think Suthep is not nice and not "sincere" and think that most politicians are corrupt in Thailand. I would agree with those many Thais. Again, had a case been proven against Suthep and had he been sentenced to jail it would be a matter of a black-and-white statement. Since that never happened even after Chuan 2 fell and his political enemies gained power it pretty much begs the question of why didn't they go after him?

The fact for me is clear --- hammered nailed it on the head (pun intended). Sanoh is still around and so is Suthep and had there been the political will to go after them, both probably would not be. Making it pretty much a moot point.

[jayboy]

I am glad you know how "most Thais" think! Suthep is far from being a fave of mine. I didn't focus on a typo, I focussed on facts that disproved your previous statement. Proof is important and facts and reality often get twisted in politics in Thailand. MANY Thais think Suthep is not nice and not "sincere" and think that most politicians are corrupt in Thailand. I would agree with those many Thais. Again, had a case been proven against Suthep and had he been sentenced to jail it would be a matter of a black-and-white statement. Since that never happened even after Chuan 2 fell and his political enemies gained power it pretty much begs the question of why didn't they go after him?

The fact for me is clear --- hammered nailed it on the head (pun intended). Sanoh is still around and so is Suthep and had there been the political will to go after them, both probably would not be. Making it pretty much a moot point.

I think you have in the past gone out of your way to defend Suthep.Not sure why.Your statement that most Thais think he is "not nice" or "insincere" adds nothing, nor does the blanket assertion that most Thai politicians are corrupt.The effect is to give the impression you believe that Suthep is no worse than the average Thai politician.Perhaps that is your intention.If incidentally you think the Thai judicial system punishes all (or any) corrupt politicians you need to hang around a bit longer.Oh yes there was one corrupt politician the courts pursued but perhaps there were other considerations in that case.

[ianbaggie]

Suthep Thaugsuban = a dangerous, two faced liar of the highest order..

......and Shinawatra is a hero in waiting I suppose................you really do live up to your name!!!!!!!

[jdinasia]

Jayboy, regardless of what you may "think" that I have done. I have always said that Suthep is not my fave! I have said he "scares me" and many other things. The simple truth is I don't care what you think of me or how I post. My comments on "many" Thais was a refutation of your claim as to how "most" Thais think Corruption cases do hit the Thai courts fairly regularly over the years and quite often the person brought up on charges flees the country Thaksin was nailed for misuse of power in a clear-cut case. (The fastest and easiest case to prove against him, before they started going after the other cases. Why? Maybe because people charged with corruption usually flee the country before sentencing?) I've been around long enough

[jayboy]

Jayboy, regardless of what you may "think" that I have done. I have always said that Suthep is not my fave! I have said he "scares me" and many other things. The simple truth is I don't care what you think of me or how I post. My comments on "many" Thais was a refutation of your claim as to how "most" Thais think Corruption cases do hit the Thai courts fairly regularly over the years and quite often the person brought up on charges flees the country Thaksin was nailed for misuse of power in a clear-cut case. (The fastest and easiest case to prove against him, before they started going after the other cases. Why? Maybe because people charged with corruption usually flee the country before sentencing?) I've been around long enough

To get the obvious out of the way its just an internet forum.One would have to be bit disturbed to "care" what people say at an individual level.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post is getting at with relation to Suthep.Can it be summarised that although you are no fan nobody should be judged guilty unless found so in a court of law? Would be a sound thesis in Guildford or similar.In Thailand it's fatuous.

In any event what happens when the courts of law are themselves riddled with corruption?

On one point you are simply wrong, namely that in Thailand those accused of corruption tend to flee the country.

[Pi Sek]

I am glad you know how "most Thais" think! Suthep is far from being a fave of mine. I didn't focus on a typo, I focussed on facts that disproved your previous statement. Proof is important and facts and reality often get twisted in politics in Thailand. MANY Thais think Suthep is not nice and not "sincere" and think that most politicians are corrupt in Thailand. I would agree with those many Thais. Again, had a case been proven against Suthep and had he been sentenced to jail it would be a matter of a black-and-white statement. Since that never happened even after Chuan 2 fell and his political enemies gained power it pretty much begs the question of why didn't they go after him?

The fact for me is clear --- hammered nailed it on the head (pun intended). Sanoh is still around and so is Suthep and had there been the political will to go after them, both probably would not be. Making it pretty much a moot point.

I think you have in the past gone out of your way to defend Suthep.Not sure why.Your statement that most Thais think he is "not nice" or "insincere" adds nothing, nor does the blanket assertion that most Thai politicians are corrupt.The effect is to give the impression you believe that Suthep is no worse than the average Thai politician.Perhaps that is your intention.If incidentally you think the Thai judicial system punishes all (or any) corrupt politicians you need to hang around a bit longer.Oh yes there was one corrupt politician the courts pursued but perhaps there were other considerations in that case.

I despise Suthep. He is an idiot, not competent at his job and everything he does is shrouded in doubt as to what he stands to gain.

However, I have defended him on a number of points (mostly relating to the Red Shirt protests last year). My favourite was when addressing Jatuporn Promphan, "one of a number of heartless people using innocent civilians for their own gain" who uses "video clips to spread hatred" during the censure debate 31 May - 1 June last year.

Noteworthy to mention that I would class both Suthep and Jatuporn as "insidious".

[Pi Sek]

Jayboy, regardless of what you may "think" that I have done. I have always said that Suthep is not my fave! I have said he "scares me" and many other things. The simple truth is I don't care what you think of me or how I post. My comments on "many" Thais was a refutation of your claim as to how "most" Thais think Corruption cases do hit the Thai courts fairly regularly over the years and quite often the person brought up on charges flees the country Thaksin was nailed for misuse of power in a clear-cut case. (The fastest and easiest case to prove against him, before they started going after the other cases. Why? Maybe because people charged with corruption usually flee the country before sentencing?) I've been around long enough

To get the obvious out of the way its just an internet forum.One would have to be bit disturbed to "care" what people say at an individual level.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post is getting at with relation to Suthep.Can it be summarised that although you are no fan nobody should be judged guilty unless found so in a court of law? Would be a sound thesis in Guildford or similar.In Thailand it's fatuous.

In any event what happens when the courts of law are themselves riddled with corruption?

On one point you are simply wrong, namely that in Thailand those accused of corruption tend to flee the country.

Now now - I don't think it's fair to say "the courts are riddled with corruption" - they're probably the least corrupt part of the Thai public sector, although I would understand it if one didn't put too much value in that.

[jdinasia]

Jayboy, regardless of what you may "think" that I have done. I have always said that Suthep is not my fave! I have said he "scares me" and many other things. The simple truth is I don't care what you think of me or how I post. My comments on "many" Thais was a refutation of your claim as to how "most" Thais think Corruption cases do hit the Thai courts fairly regularly over the years and quite often the person brought up on charges flees the country Thaksin was nailed for misuse of power in a clear-cut case. (The fastest and easiest case to prove against him, before they started going after the other cases. Why? Maybe because people charged with corruption usually flee the country before sentencing?) I've been around long enough

To get the obvious out of the way its just an internet forum.One would have to be bit disturbed to "care" what people say at an individual level.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post is getting at with relation to Suthep.Can it be summarised that although you are no fan nobody should be judged guilty unless found so in a court of law? Would be a sound thesis in Guildford or similar.In Thailand it's fatuous.

In any event what happens when the courts of law are themselves riddled with corruption?

On one point you are simply wrong, namely that in Thailand those accused of corruption tend to flee the country.

Note --- I said "charged" with corruption not accused of it. Perhaps it is in the simple meanings of words that trip you up? Very few cases make it to court and often those charged, flee.

Shinawatra, Saxena (not an exact fit but all tied up with politicians), Vatana, ... I am sure someone else could come up with a more exhaustive list

[jayboy]

Jayboy, regardless of what you may "think" that I have done. I have always said that Suthep is not my fave! I have said he "scares me" and many other things. The simple truth is I don't care what you think of me or how I post. My comments on "many" Thais was a refutation of your claim as to how "most" Thais think Corruption cases do hit the Thai courts fairly regularly over the years and quite often the person brought up on charges flees the country Thaksin was nailed for misuse of power in a clear-cut case. (The fastest and easiest case to prove against him, before they started going after the other cases. Why? Maybe because people charged with corruption usually flee the country before sentencing?) I've been around long enough

To get the obvious out of the way its just an internet forum.One would have to be bit disturbed to "care" what people say at an individual level.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post is getting at with relation to Suthep.Can it be summarised that although you are no fan nobody should be judged guilty unless found so in a court of law? Would be a sound thesis in Guildford or similar.In Thailand it's fatuous.

In any event what happens when the courts of law are themselves riddled with corruption?

On one point you are simply wrong, namely that in Thailand those accused of corruption tend to flee the country.

Note --- I said "charged" with corruption not accused of it. Perhaps it is in the simple meanings of words that trip you up? Very few cases make it to court and often those charged, flee.

Shinawatra, Saxena (not an exact fit but all tied up with politicians), Vatana, ... I am sure someone else could come up with a more exhaustive list

Okay that's a perfectly fair point specifically the charged/accused distinction.However as so few are charged let alone making it to court I'm not sure statistically one can read much into it.

Still don't understand your really message on that paragon Suthep..first you defend him, then you don't like him.Is it a bit like your PAD allegiance i.e accept those bits of its platform when it suits you and then back away when it seems its being marginalised.

[animatic]

Hmm Chuan One fell in 95 not 90, Chuan 2 in 2001. Again cite a source where Suthep was proven to have given away land in Phuket to wealthy families. You are correct that none of it is obscure other than proof. It REALLY isn't obscure as to the dates of Chuan Leekpai's administrations Being accused of corruption is not the same thing as having it proven I will accept a conviction as evidence of proof.

edit for typo

You can concentrate on my typo (for which I apologise) or you can deal with the issue.

What you will "accept as proof" of Suthep's corruption is of course neither here nor there.There is much corruption in Thailand which comes nowhere near the courts

Most Thais know the score on Suthep's corrupt background.His political enemies are explicit:his political friends will smile ruefully.None deny his guilt.

A typo is hitting 4 r t or 6 instead of 5,

Hitting 0 instead just means you had no idea what was the correct year, and just threw out something to continue the flame.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Jayboy, regardless of what you may "think" that I have done. I have always said that Suthep is not my fave! I have said he "scares me" and many other things. The simple truth is I don't care what you think of me or how I post. My comments on "many" Thais was a refutation of your claim as to how "most" Thais think Corruption cases do hit the Thai courts fairly regularly over the years and quite often the person brought up on charges flees the country Thaksin was nailed for misuse of power in a clear-cut case. (The fastest and easiest case to prove against him, before they started going after the other cases. Why? Maybe because people charged with corruption usually flee the country before sentencing?) I've been around long enough

To get the obvious out of the way its just an internet forum.One would have to be bit disturbed to "care" what people say at an individual level.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post is getting at with relation to Suthep.Can it be summarised that although you are no fan nobody should be judged guilty unless found so in a court of law? Would be a sound thesis in Guildford or similar.In Thailand it's fatuous.

In any event what happens when the courts of law are themselves riddled with corruption?

On one point you are simply wrong, namely that in Thailand those accused of corruption tend to flee the country.

Note --- I said "charged" with corruption not accused of it. Perhaps it is in the simple meanings of words that trip you up? Very few cases make it to court and often those charged, flee.

Shinawatra, Saxena (not an exact fit but all tied up with politicians), Vatana, ... I am sure someone else could come up with a more exhaustive list

Okay that's a perfectly fair point specifically the charged/accused distinction.However as so few are charged let alone making it to court I'm not sure statistically one can read much into it.

Still don't understand your really message on that paragon Suthep..first you defend him, then you don't like him.Is it a bit like your PAD allegiance i.e accept those bits of its platform when it suits you and then back away when it seems its being marginalised.

a fair reflection I'd say... anyway I think people may be surprised at the strength of the PTP vote - ordinary Thais just don't like the Krung Thep bourgeoises acting like they are Roman Generals stomping all over everyone else.

[jayboy]

Now now - I don't think it's fair to say "the courts are riddled with corruption" - they're probably the least corrupt part of the Thai public sector, although I would understand it if one didn't put too much value in that.

I'm not sure the judicial system can be included as part of the public sector.

The judicial system has been recognised as quite corrupt for many decades.Bribes are not usually paid directly to judges but are canvassed by officials and distributed to judges, police and civil servants.A major problem is the length of legal proceedings which itself encourages corruption for expeditious process.It's only fair to note that parts of the judicial system work quite well, and that there are many dedicated honest officials.In recent years it is sometimes said the judicial system has been directed to enforce an elite agenda, the so called judicialisation of Thai politics after general election results deemed to be unsatisfactory.That is of course a matter on which I could not possibly comment.

[animatic]

Maybe Suthep would compromise,

wear his dress suit and spit shine Thaksins... nose.

That is about as much love is lost between those two,

Edited April 5, 2011 by animatic

[jayboy]

Hmm Chuan One fell in 95 not 90, Chuan 2 in 2001. Again cite a source where Suthep was proven to have given away land in Phuket to wealthy families. You are correct that none of it is obscure other than proof. It REALLY isn't obscure as to the dates of Chuan Leekpai's administrations Being accused of corruption is not the same thing as having it proven I will accept a conviction as evidence of proof.

edit for typo

You can concentrate on my typo (for which I apologise) or you can deal with the issue.

What you will "accept as proof" of Suthep's corruption is of course neither here nor there.There is much corruption in Thailand which comes nowhere near the courts

Most Thais know the score on Suthep's corrupt background.His political enemies are explicit:his political friends will smile ruefully.None deny his guilt.

A typo is hitting 4 r t or 6 instead of 5,

Hitting 0 instead just means you had no idea what was the correct year, and just threw out something to continue the flame.

Thanks for that useful contribution.

[animatic]

Always a pleasure!

At least you had the right decade and country.

Edited April 5, 2011 by animatic

[ChiangMaiFun]

Always a pleasure!

At least you had the right decade and country.

cummon let's not be so pedantic - the Chang in da political room is Suthept's utter lack of credibility or sincerity

[Pi Sek]

Still don't understand your really message on that paragon Suthep..first you defend him, then you don't like him.Is it a bit like your PAD allegiance i.e accept those bits of its platform when it suits you and then back away when it seems its being marginalised.

I do not want to sound patronising in any way here, but what's hard to understand?

It's very much like my own PAD allegiance - i.e. first they say they want Thaksin out, with which I agreed, and then they say they want to invade NBT, Govt House & Suvarnibhumi and install an election system of 30%-popular vote, with which I did not agree. At first I would have classified myself as a PAD sympathiser (though not a supporter and certainly not a member - certainly not when figures like Sondhi, Panlop and Chamlong are involved) - now I am absolutely not.

I wish the Red Shirts would "accept those bits of its platform when it suits (them) and then back away when it seems its being marginalised." I don't think that most of the violence of last year would have transpired at all if that were the case.

[jdinasia]

Note --- I said "charged" with corruption not accused of it. Perhaps it is in the simple meanings of words that trip you up? Very few cases make it to court and often those charged, flee.

Shinawatra, Saxena (not an exact fit but all tied up with politicians), Vatana, ... I am sure someone else could come up with a more exhaustive list

Okay that's a perfectly fair point specifically the charged/accused distinction.However as so few are charged let alone making it to court I'm not sure statistically one can read much into it.

Still don't understand your really message on that paragon Suthep..first you defend him, then you don't like him.Is it a bit like your PAD allegiance i.e accept those bits of its platform when it suits you and then back away when it seems its being marginalised.

Apparently you are still having some problems understanding what I have written. My "really message" is that I lump Suthep in with the Newin's and the Barnharns, etc ... dinosaurs that Thailand would be better off without. The regional Thai political machines are really at the heart of all the turmoil in Thailand. That most of them were bought up by Thaksin 2001-2005 doesn't mean that the ones on the other side of the political divide are any better. Is that clear? I don't assert he (Suthep) is innocent, I assert he has not been found guilty. Is that very hard to understand? I would think that someone that certainly attacks the "rightist" agenda would actually applaud another poster for holding up the legal concept of presumed innocence under the law! I guess that simply isn't the case though

You say I defend him? I point out the very simple legal issues involved. I have stated that he is kinda scary, I have not said he is innocent of anything. I have stated many time I don't like him but instead of accepting it you gnaw away with something that you apparently think makes a point. As for the PAD, you can whip that dead horse all you want. I have plainly stated my case on that yet like many other things, you appear to think that it scores points to bring it back up again.

Would it be fair to say that you "defend" Thaksin? I can certainly point out posts of yours without the need for any embellishment that suggest you do indeed do just that.

PiSek --- I was way more pro-PAD than you. While Thaksin was their target I supported their agenda even with some of the stupid things that happened like Swampy. When the PPP was disbanded as was certain from the VDO of the payoff, they (the PAD) lost almost all of their credibility. The PAD and the UDD and PTP are all in the same boat. They all need Thaksin to be meaningful in any way, but without the clear and present threat of Thaksin the PAD is just a platoon without a mission. They might have an excuse to exist again if it looks as if Thaksin will be whitewashed, but until that day mammaries and nuns comes to mind.

[jdinasia]

Always a pleasure!

At least you had the right decade and country.

cummon let's not be so pedantic - the Chang in da political room is Suthept's utter lack of credibility or sincerity

He's no less credible than others and more so, in my humble opinion, than a few

[stepenwolf1958]

don't you think it's absurd that you don't have to be an elected MP to be DPM?

I think many things are absurd but do I think that a cabinet member doesn't have to be elected to be DPM is absurd? No. In fact I think that in many situations you could make a case for cabinet members not being elected is a good thing. Resigning his MP status, clearing up any potential conflict, and then running for MP status again (note --- he is a constituency MP and not subject to banning should any party exec do something stupid) and winning his constituency soundly wasn't a trick at all. It was simply good politics.

What was the reason for election in his constituency? Actual MP there died or resigned so Suthep jumped in a wagon? May you tell me please?

[jdinasia]

The previous MP was sentenced to 2 months in prison and banned from politics for 5 years for falsely declaring assets. (note--- he didn't hide money, he hid the fact that he was in debt)

Suthep won by a 7:1 margin (approx 150k votes for him and 21k+ votes for the PTP candidate)