Chalerm's Son To Contest For A House Seat

[ratcatcher]

[

Edited September 10, 2011 by ratcatcher

[chaoyang]

What's depressing is the number of people who have only just caught onto this. Or even worse, those who have still to.

But in fairness I suppose it's part of the long tradition of extreme hardball in Thai "politics". Cynical manipulation of useful people, outright violence, fall guys who take the rap for the powerful, hand grenades ... these things have always been in the toolbox of the successful. Nice guys don't rise to the top of such an environment.

Do a Wiki search on some characters called Phibunsongkram, General Pao and Field Marshall Sarit.

It looks like Chalerm is acting as the pitbull to take the lead in getting Thaksin a pardon, so he is useful at the moment. Even throw his son a pork chop and try to rehabilitate the Chalerm family name (face and sons are at the top of the list in Thai families, of course), and father Chalerm is highly motivated to bull his way into the minefield surrounding Thaksin.

Actually, it all makes sense when seen in that light.

[kraplung]

Where can I get a bet on him to win?

[Crushdepth]

Where can I get a bet on him to win?

Try your nearest police station. I hear they offer good odds.

[chaoyang]

One should also remember how Thaksin became the "ex-prime minister". He was elected by the people and removed in an illegal coup. The courts and foreign office were then used as weapons against him to declare him an "international fugitive" and a criminal.

At a whole different level, that's more abusive than Chalerm and his sons.

In light of what happened, I don't think Thaksin's team is going to show up at a rugby match and play cricket

Edited September 10, 2011 by chaoyang

[Crushdepth]

One should also remember how Thaksin became the "ex-prime minister". He was elected by the people and removed in an illegal coup. The courts and foreign office were then used as weapons against him to declare him an "international fugitive" and a criminal.

At a whole different level, that's more abusive than Chalerm and his sons.

In light of what happened, I don't think Thaksin's team is going to show up at a rugby match and play cricket

The bit about "the courts were used against him" is a matter of opinion. Obviously, I don't agree. But there are a number of parallels with Chalerm's sons, like the bit about being a fugitive

Edited September 10, 2011 by Crushdepth

[chaoyang]

Charging any political strong man with corruption in Thailand is like somewhat like pin the tail on the donkey -- put on a blindfold and find a target. But in Thai politics, you're almost certain to find a worthy target even when blindfolded. Take your pick -- they're all dirty.

After they removed Thaksin, the entrenched elite then used various arms of the government to try to finish him off. They were unsuccessful, very.

Now is looks like Thaksin's pieces are in place well enough to let loose the running dogs.

[samran]

One should also remember how Thaksin became the "ex-prime minister". He was elected by the people and removed in an illegal coup. The courts and foreign office were then used as weapons against him to declare him an "international fugitive" and a criminal.

At a whole different level, that's more abusive than Chalerm and his sons.

In light of what happened, I don't think Thaksin's team is going to show up at a rugby match and play cricket

One should remember that Thaksin, at the time of coup, was a caretaker Prime Minister, stalling calling an election, and thus, had less legitimacy than the local ampur dog catcher.

Chalerm and his sons is just a reminder how blatantly cynical PT are. Fortunately, this hubris is also going to be the making of their downfall...again.

[Crushdepth]

One should also remember how Thaksin became the "ex-prime minister". He was elected by the people and removed in an illegal coup. The courts and foreign office were then used as weapons against him to declare him an "international fugitive" and a criminal.

At a whole different level, that's more abusive than Chalerm and his sons.

In light of what happened, I don't think Thaksin's team is going to show up at a rugby match and play cricket

One should remember that Thaksin, at the time of coup, was a caretaker Prime Minister, stalling calling an election, and thus, had less legitimacy than the local ampur dog catcher.

Chalerm and his sons is just a reminder how blatantly cynical PT are. Fortunately, this hubris is also going to be the making of their downfall...again.

The irony of Thaksin's situation is that much of it is his own making. I had hoped he would have learned from his experiences, but it doesn't look like it.

[chaoyang]

One should remember that Thaksin, at the time of coup, was a caretaker Prime Minister, stalling calling an election, and thus, had less legitimacy than the local ampur dog catcher.

Chalerm and his sons is just a reminder how blatantly cynical PT are. Fortunately, this hubris is also going to be the making of their downfall...again.

Some dog catcher. Say what you will, the guy has proven himself to be a brilliant strategist.

I too was sick and tired of his arrogance and endless hubs and crackdowns, but after what ensued -- and when the reasons for the coup became clear -- I knew Thaksin really had the old guard rattled.

I for one think the old system has to be rattled and modernized. He is far from the perfect choice to do it, but then people like Ghandi come around once every five generations. Thaksin's the one in position, so let's get on with it.

[Crushdepth]

One should remember that Thaksin, at the time of coup, was a caretaker Prime Minister, stalling calling an election, and thus, had less legitimacy than the local ampur dog catcher.

Chalerm and his sons is just a reminder how blatantly cynical PT are. Fortunately, this hubris is also going to be the making of their downfall...again.

Some dog catcher. Say what you will, the guy has proven himself to be a brilliant strategist.

I too was sick and tired of his arrogance and endless hubs and crackdowns, but after what ensued -- and when the reasons for the coup became clear -- I knew Thaksin really had the old guard rattled.

I for one think the old system has to be rattled and modernized. He is far from the perfect choice to do it, but then people like Ghandi come around once every five generations. Thaksin's the one in position, so let's get on with it.

Brilliant strategist? I really don't think so. A brilliant strategist would get results through diplomacy. Thaksin's influence is entirely due to his money, without it he is nothing.

Edited September 10, 2011 by Crushdepth

[Buchholz]

One should also remember how Thaksin became the "ex-prime minister". He was elected by the people and removed in an illegal coup. The courts and foreign office were then used as weapons against him to declare him an "international fugitive" and a criminal.

At a whole different level, that's more abusive than Chalerm and his sons.

In light of what happened, I don't think Thaksin's team is going to show up at a rugby match and play cricket

Charging any political strong man with corruption in Thailand is like somewhat like pin the tail on the donkey -- put on a blindfold and find a target. But in Thai politics, you're almost certain to find a worthy target even when blindfolded. Take your pick -- they're all dirty.

After they removed Thaksin, the entrenched elite then used various arms of the government to try to finish him off. They were unsuccessful, very.

Now is looks like Thaksin's pieces are in place well enough to let loose the running dogs.

Some dog catcher. Say what you will, the guy has proven himself to be a brilliant strategist.

I too was sick and tired of his arrogance and endless hubs and crackdowns, but after what ensued -- and when the reasons for the coup became clear -- I knew Thaksin really had the old guard rattled.

I for one think the old system has to be rattled and modernized. He is far from the perfect choice to do it, but then people like Ghandi come around once every five generations. Thaksin's the one in position, so let's get on with it.

The obligatory added,

"I'm no fan of Thaksin, but..."

.

Edited September 10, 2011 by Buchholz

[GazR]

One should also remember how Thaksin became the "ex-prime minister". He was elected by the people and removed in an illegal coup. The courts and foreign office were then used as weapons against him to declare him an "international fugitive" and a criminal.

At a whole different level, that's more abusive than Chalerm and his sons.

In light of what happened, I don't think Thaksin's team is going to show up at a rugby match and play cricket

But dude, Thaksin Shinawatra is a proven terrorist to everyone but his lawyers and the feeble-minded.

Do you think he will again instigate violent revolution rather than compromise?

Should he get off with a slap on the wrist for ordering the torching of 36 public buildings in Bangkok - including hospitals such as Siriraj Hospital with the King inside?

Before you answer, remember this is the same guy who contemptuously declared, "Democracy is not my goal."

(Clearly he thought he had a strangle hold on her at the time - a traditional Shinawatra mating ritual, so I believe.)

Edited September 10, 2011 by GazR

[samran]

One should remember that Thaksin, at the time of coup, was a caretaker Prime Minister, stalling calling an election, and thus, had less legitimacy than the local ampur dog catcher.

Chalerm and his sons is just a reminder how blatantly cynical PT are. Fortunately, this hubris is also going to be the making of their downfall...again.

Some dog catcher. Say what you will, the guy has proven himself to be a brilliant strategist.

I too was sick and tired of his arrogance and endless hubs and crackdowns, but after what ensued -- and when the reasons for the coup became clear -- I knew Thaksin really had the old guard rattled.

I for one think the old system has to be rattled and modernized. He is far from the perfect choice to do it, but then people like Ghandi come around once every five generations. Thaksin's the one in position, so let's get on with it.

Clearly you've drunk the Kool-Aid here.

Ghandi? Yep. Your credibility was wiped out with that one word. Ghandi he ain't. More like Al-Capone.

Next, you'll be saying he's a combination of Mandela, JFK, and Martin Luther King.

Unfortunately the only Mandela he's got anything in common with is Winnie Mandela who ran around with her thug 'football team'. I believe in Thailand they are known as red-shirt loyalists.

Edited September 10, 2011 by samran

[chaoyang]

One should remember that Thaksin, at the time of coup, was a caretaker Prime Minister, stalling calling an election, and thus, had less legitimacy than the local ampur dog catcher.

Chalerm and his sons is just a reminder how blatantly cynical PT are. Fortunately, this hubris is also going to be the making of their downfall...again.

Some dog catcher. Say what you will, the guy has proven himself to be a brilliant strategist.

I too was sick and tired of his arrogance and endless hubs and crackdowns, but after what ensued -- and when the reasons for the coup became clear -- I knew Thaksin really had the old guard rattled.

I for one think the old system has to be rattled and modernized. He is far from the perfect choice to do it, but then people like Ghandi come around once every five generations. Thaksin's the one in position, so let's get on with it.

Clearly you've drunk the Kool-Aid here.

Ghandi? Yep. Your credibility was wiped out with that one word. Ghandi he ain't. More like Al-Capone.

Next, you'll be saying he's a combination of Mandela, JFK, and Martin Luther King.

Unfortunately the only Mandela he's got anything in common with is Winnie Mandela who ran around with her thug 'football team'. I believe in Thailand they are known as red-shirt loyalists.

I've included my post that you replied to in the hope that you can read it again and actually understand what was said -- that clearly he's NOT Gandhi.

I believe it is useful if you can read and understand what you've read before making your angry replies.

Edited September 11, 2011 by chaoyang

[samran]

Okay- apologies then. But I'd rather wait for Ghandi then. Am afraid that any mess left behind by Dear Leader brother number 1 will take more than one Ghandi to fix

[rixalex]

Some dog catcher. Say what you will, the guy has proven himself to be a brilliant strategist.

I too was sick and tired of his arrogance and endless hubs and crackdowns, but after what ensued -- and when the reasons for the coup became clear -- I knew Thaksin really had the old guard rattled.

I for one think the old system has to be rattled and modernized. He is far from the perfect choice to do it, but then people like Ghandi come around once every five generations. Thaksin's the one in position, so let's get on with it.

Brilliant strategist? I really don't think so. A brilliant strategist would get results through diplomacy. Thaksin's influence is entirely due to his money, without it he is nothing.

I would also question the "brilliant strategist" claim, with regards Thaksin. I think were he, he would have remained as PM from 2001 to this day, not spent the last 5 years running around the globe as a convict. I think it was quite within his and TRT's power to hold on to power, perhaps even for the twenty years he predicted, but over-confidence, greed and abuses, all brought their demise and gave us with what followed, some of the most unpleasant and darkest years for Thailand. Sad thing is, the unpleasantness and darkness still i fear has a way to go.

A brilliant strategist would have done things so differently. Even a mediocre one would have done better.

[chaoyang]

I would also question the "brilliant strategist" claim, with regards Thaksin. I think were he, he would have remained as PM from 2001 to this day, not spent the last 5 years running around the globe as a convict. I think it was quite within his and TRT's power to hold on to power, perhaps even for the twenty years he predicted, but over-confidence, greed and abuses, all brought their demise and gave us with what followed, some of the most unpleasant and darkest years for Thailand. Sad thing is, the unpleasantness and darkness still i fear has a way to go.

A brilliant strategist would have done things so differently. Even a mediocre one would have done better.

By "brilliant strategist" I mean he was swept into power through his own strategy to begin with, deposed by vested interests, then able to engineer a comeback while abroad even with extremely powerful forces arrayed against him. That doesn't mean he was a great administrator.

He kicked the door down and shook up the multi-generation patrician elite who have used Thailand as their own fiefdom. He's crass, arrogant, often ill-informed and dangerous. But he kicked the door down. That is the most important first step in trying to bring some rationality to the economic structure of Thailand. The forces of change are now in play. It ain't pretty, but who is naive enough to think it would be?

Edited September 11, 2011 by chaoyang

[Colin Yai]

He has all the attributes required to become a successful Thai politician.

Yeah an outstanding "record", and with his attributes and of course the right "connections" he is destined for the very pinnacle of his chosen profession Edited September 11, 2011 by Colin Yai

[rixalex]

By "brilliant strategist" I mean he was swept into power through his own strategy to begin with,

By swept into power, you mean he bought a whole bunch of small parties and put them all under his banner. All it really took was a large sum of money. Anyone with the right bank balance could achieve exactly the same result. If the owner of CP decided to go down the same path, but threw more money about than Thaksin, do you really think Thaksin would still win? It's all about the money.

deposed by vested interests,

Deposed because of his own actions. It wasn't like he was running the country fairly and well, and suddenly had his legs kicked from under him. Had this happened, there would have been a very different public reaction to the coup. Rather he was messing things up. Like the way he sold his business. He was trampling over rules, trampling over people, and it pissed enough of the wrong people off. He didn't have to do this. He chose to. He wasn't the innocent victim. He was the perpetrator of his own downfall.

then able to engineer a comeback while abroad even with extremely powerful forces arrayed against him. That doesn't mean he was a great administrator.

Again, as with his election success, the main force in his favour was his bank balance. It has the power to win pretty much all battles in the end, because there are so few, who can't ultimately, be bought. It's what we are witnessing right now.

[jayboy]

By swept into power, you mean he bought a whole bunch of small parties and put them all under his banner. All it really took was a large sum of money. Anyone with the right bank balance could achieve exactly the same result. If the owner of CP decided to go down the same path, but threw more money about than Thaksin, do you really think Thaksin would still win? It's all about the money.

Deposed because of his own actions. It wasn't like he was running the country fairly and well, and suddenly had his legs kicked from under him. Had this happened, there would have been a very different public reaction to the coup. Rather he was messing things up. Like the way he sold his business. He was trampling over rules, trampling over people, and it pissed enough of the wrong people off. He didn't have to do this. He chose to. He wasn't the innocent victim. He was the perpetrator of his own downfall.

then able to engineer a comeback while abroad even with extremely powerful forces arrayed against him. That doesn't mean he was a great administrator.Again, as with his election success, the main force in his favour was his bank balance. It has the power to win pretty much all battles in the end, because there are so few, who can't ultimately, be bought. It's what we are witnessing right now.

Only yesterday you strongly claimed you are not in denial.Yet here you are again in full denial mode.

It's all about money, Thaksin drew a righteous coup down on himself, his bank balance was the reason for the subsequent election victories of Thaksin aligned parties.All the tired old lies and half truths regurgitated ...never a word about the Thai people tiring of the old unelected elites, the flirting with PAD quasi fascism by the Dems, the ethnic stereotyping and contempt for rural people, the grotesque disparity between government spending on the cities and the countryside.

It reminds me of a not quite reformed alcoholic, just one more little drink...it won't hurt.

Edited September 11, 2011 by sbk

[chaoyang]

By swept into power, you mean he bought a whole bunch of small parties and put them all under his banner. All it really took was a large sum of money. Anyone with the right bank balance could achieve exactly the same result. If the owner of CP decided to go down the same path, but threw more money about than Thaksin, do you really think Thaksin would still win? It's all about the money.

Perhaps others could do it, but he's is the one who did. As for CP Group: the last thing they want is sweeping change. These types have it so good they are literally living in paradise while most of the country lives in poverty and is required to kiss their ass as well.

Deposed because of his own actions. It wasn't like he was running the country fairly and well, and suddenly had his legs kicked from under him. Had this happened, there would have been a very different public reaction to the coup. Rather he was messing things up. Like the way he sold his business. He was trampling over rules, trampling over people, and it pissed enough of the wrong people off. He didn't have to do this. He chose to. He wasn't the innocent victim. He was the perpetrator of his own downfall<snip>It reminds me of a not quite reformed alcoholic, just one more little drink...it won't hurt.

Perhaps. The old boys really don't want him "trampling over rules, trampling over people" because that's supposed to be only their prerogative.

And I think it will certainly take more than a little sip to actually bring reform. It could be gallons need to be poured -- but then that may have already happened with the events in the streets of BKK last year.

Edited September 11, 2011 by sbk
jayboy screwed up the quotes, this is not jayboys post but rixalex

[rixalex]

Only yesterday you strongly claimed you are not in denial.

Wouldn't deny the claim you say i made, but, as it happens, i don't recall having made it yesterday. Perhaps you imagined it?

It's all about money,

Quite so.

Thaksin drew a righteous coup down on himself,

Didn't say it was a righteous coup - the motivations of the coup leaders is not entirely clear - many at the time, said that it was a thirst for power and a hunger for money, and that they were lying about the timetable for fresh elections - that there wouldn't be any - none of this proved to be true, so i don't think power or money really explains it sufficiently. What i do know, at least i believe, is that the coup could have been avoided by actions taken and actions not taken, by Thaksin. It was within his power to stop it. Or at least, it was within his power to create the grounds whereby a coup simply would not be accepted. It was. There was a good reason for that, and unlike other coups, it was not fear.

his bank balance was the reason for the subsequent election victories of Thaksin aligned parties.

He is no doubt popular in his own right, but yes, at the end of the day, it comes down to bank balances, and if tomorrow another billionaire tycoon comes along wanting to join in the game, and is prepared to throw more money at it, would they win? Or would Thaksin's great charisma, his great oratory skills, his bravery in not fleeing under persecution, his belief in family values, his love for the poor... all that stuff, would it win over someone coming along waving more baht under people's noses, promising 500 baht minimum wage, 30,000 baht for college grads, and all the other happy lies?

[rixalex]

By swept into power, you mean he bought a whole bunch of small parties and put them all under his banner. All it really took was a large sum of money. Anyone with the right bank balance could achieve exactly the same result. If the owner of CP decided to go down the same path, but threw more money about than Thaksin, do you really think Thaksin would still win? It's all about the money.

Perhaps others could do it, but he's is the one who did. As for CP Group: the last thing they want is sweeping change. These types have it so good they are literally living in paradise while most of the country lives in poverty and is required to kiss their ass as well.

Deposed because of his own actions. It wasn't like he was running the country fairly and well, and suddenly had his legs kicked from under him. Had this happened, there would have been a very different public reaction to the coup. Rather he was messing things up. Like the way he sold his business. He was trampling over rules, trampling over people, and it pissed enough of the wrong people off. He didn't have to do this. He chose to. He wasn't the innocent victim. He was the perpetrator of his own downfall.

Perhaps. The old boys really don't want him "trampling over rules, trampling over people" because that's supposed to be only their prerogative.

And I think it will certainly take more than a little sip to actually bring reform. It could be gallons need to be poured -- but then that may have already happened with the events in the streets of BKK last year.

Fixed your screwed up quotations.

Edited September 11, 2011 by rixalex

[jayboy]

Chaoyang Re reversal of quotes no harm done.It's easy to do.

[scorecard]

I would also question the "brilliant strategist" claim, with regards Thaksin. I think were he, he would have remained as PM from 2001 to this day, not spent the last 5 years running around the globe as a convict. I think it was quite within his and TRT's power to hold on to power, perhaps even for the twenty years he predicted, but over-confidence, greed and abuses, all brought their demise and gave us with what followed, some of the most unpleasant and darkest years for Thailand. Sad thing is, the unpleasantness and darkness still i fear has a way to go.

A brilliant strategist would have done things so differently. Even a mediocre one would have done better.

By "brilliant strategist" I mean he was swept into power through his own strategy to begin with, deposed by vested interests, then able to engineer a comeback while abroad even with extremely powerful forces arrayed against him. That doesn't mean he was a great administrator.

He kicked the door down and shook up the multi-generation patrician elite who have used Thailand as their own fiefdom. He's crass, arrogant, often ill-informed and dangerous. But he kicked the door down. That is the most important first step in trying to bring some rationality to the economic structure of Thailand. The forces of change are now in play. It ain't pretty, but who is naive enough to think it would be?

'he kicked the door down', somehow I fear this is way off the reality of the situation.

He realized,(nothing teribly clever , in fact very obvious) that he could easily manipulate a very large percentage of the population as an easy way to 'win' an election. And he used money and resources from the common wealth of Thailand to achieve his mass manipulation.

Is this some emazingly clever strategy? No. Quite simple really, and at the same time highly lacking in morals.

The suggestion that he gave the Essan people a political voice (with all respect to the Essan people) is just spin, and nothing more.

[AleG]

By "brilliant strategist" I mean he was swept into power through his own strategy to begin with, deposed by vested interests, then able to engineer a comeback while abroad even with extremely powerful forces arrayed against him. That doesn't mean he was a great administrator.

He kicked the door down and shook up the multi-generation patrician elite who have used Thailand as their own fiefdom. He's crass, arrogant, often ill-informed and dangerous. But he kicked the door down. That is the most important first step in trying to bring some rationality to the economic structure of Thailand. The forces of change are now in play. It ain't pretty, but who is naive enough to think it would be?

His comeback has little to do with his brilliance as a strategist and more with hiring enough PR firms to orchestrate a (fairly successful) perception management campaign in Thailand and abroad.

[chaoyang]

Guys, I want to just say this and I'm done:

After working with the elite Thais I came away disgusted with the way they treat the less fortunate as well as their arrogance, rudeness and supreme demands for entitlement and special treatment.

Rich people everywhere can be more or less like that, but in Thailand I found it unbearable and seriously out of line with any notion of fairness or even kindness.

I don't care if it takes Atilla the Hun up uproot them. God can sort it out later.

[rixalex]

Guys, I want to just say this and I'm done:

After working with the elite Thais I came away disgusted with the way they treat the less fortunate as well as their arrogance, rudeness and supreme demands for entitlement and special treatment.

Rich people everywhere can be more or less like that, but in Thailand I found it unbearable and seriously out of line with any notion of fairness or even kindness.

I don't care if it takes Atilla the Hun up uproot them. God can sort it out later.

The point is, Thaksin is just another of those elites. Window dressing might be a little different is all.

[Colin Yai]

[

Ahh at long last , A photo of Chalerm with his mouth closed!, :lol: