Treat Thaksin Like Any Fugitive, Abhisit Tells Govt

[Buchholz]

Agreed, teat anyone precisely the same. What means that Abhisit an Suthep should be treated as any other dictatorship that turned the guns on its people. It means too that the soldiers who ordered and who shot should be in the dock. Unfortunately we know for over 10 months that Suthep as the man responsible for DSI has falsified the reports and investigations into the deaths of many citizens and two nurses.

Abhisit is the last one who should comment on what the new government does or does not. He is as human rights abuser on precisely the same level as the man his criticizes.

If so, fair enough.

Let's pursue all cases... in chronological order.

Let's say we begin in 2000 as a nice, easy round number in which to start up the prosecutions.

[phiphidon]

Agreed, teat anyone precisely the same. What means that Abhisit an Suthep should be treated as any other dictatorship that turned the guns on its people. It means too that the soldiers who ordered and who shot should be in the dock. Unfortunately we know for over 10 months that Suthep as the man responsible for DSI has falsified the reports and investigations into the deaths of many citizens and two nurses.

Abhisit is the last one who should comment on what the new government does or does not. He is as human rights abuser on precisely the same level as the man his criticizes.

If so, fair enough.

Let's pursue all cases... in chronological order.

Let's say we begin in 2000 as a nice, easy round number in which to start up the prosecutions.

I presume you want to start there so that you can bring up the 2003 drug "crackdown" - Well good luck with that, opening up that can of worms.

[pisico]

I truly wonder what will happen with the denizens of TV when/if Thaksin returns and not to jail. These threads should be a good giggle on the day that happens if it does.

Looks like some here in TV have a life thanks to the hatred they bestow upon someone who is not even one of their own: Thaksin.

They seem to spend their day waiting for an opportunity to pounce on others, (at times even resorting to insult), being condescending and trying to "sabotage" any valid statements with vitriolic fervor. If they only knew how childish and ridiculous they are.

I call them they usual suspects. Foreigners who will never be accepted as one more citizen of this country and, if given the right circumstances, can end up like the Norweygian who was jailed after failing to extend his visa due to illness.

It can happen to you too guys. Calm down and try to have a real life.

Logging out now: I am off to the gym. Why don't you too?

[Junglejumbo]

Abhisit may one day become a fugitive too. Abhisit was at CRES when all the important decisions were made including to allow live amunition to be used, and for soldiers to continie shooting even as TV pictures broadcast randomly shooting soldiers at Lumpini Park, Rama4 and elsewhere, as well as witness testimonies from the Red cross and other medical dispatch teams. He could easily be found guilty in due course then what would the saint do?? Would he leave the country like Thaksin or hold it out for 10 years or more in a Thai jail where everyone will hate him.

[Seri]

Well a "nice little earner" was made - by the Abhisit government when they sold the land at auction at over twice the price Pojtaman paid for it, really can't see how corruption fits in there, especially as they had to compensate her for the land in the first place and only did so at the price she paid, not the price the government made on the sale. Who's corrupt?

I would think that since the abhisit government was able to sell the land at auction at over twice the price potjaman paid for it shows that she indeed bought it at an under-valued price. now why didn't anybody bid anything higher? was there any "intimidation" to any of the other bidders?

if i was bidding for this land and knew 1) that thaksin was over-seeing the department responsible for these assets' sale and 2) that potjaman was going to bid for it, then i would ask myself: "is it worth putting a bid?"

[Buchholz]

Agreed, teat anyone precisely the same. What means that Abhisit an Suthep should be treated as any other dictatorship that turned the guns on its people. It means too that the soldiers who ordered and who shot should be in the dock. Unfortunately we know for over 10 months that Suthep as the man responsible for DSI has falsified the reports and investigations into the deaths of many citizens and two nurses.

Abhisit is the last one who should comment on what the new government does or does not. He is as human rights abuser on precisely the same level as the man his criticizes.

If so, fair enough.

Let's pursue all cases... in chronological order.

Let's say we begin in 2000 as a nice, easy round number in which to start up the prosecutions.

I presume you want to start there so that you can bring up the 2003 drug "crackdown" - Well good luck with that, opening up that can of worms.

Actually, it was just thrown as an easy number and the start of a new century, while at the same time, not being too distant nor too recent.

Personally, I would start before 2003 and include all cases, not just the ones with the malleable title of human rights abuse.

As a side note, that's been the thing ever since 2000.

A conviction on his honest mistake and the past decade of turmoil that he's been at the forefront of.... would have never happened.

On a positive note, I look forward to tragickingdom's concurrence on this course of action.

[whybother]

Agreed, teat anyone precisely the same. What means that Abhisit an Suthep should be treated as any other dictatorship that turned the guns on its people. It means too that the soldiers who ordered and who shot should be in the dock. Unfortunately we know for over 10 months that Suthep as the man responsible for DSI has falsified the reports and investigations into the deaths of many citizens and two nurses.

Abhisit is the last one who should comment on what the new government does or does not. He is as human rights abuser on precisely the same level as the man his criticizes.

Dictatorship? They were elected and also called elections themselves.

Do police go to jail when they kill someone that was shooting at them? Does the Chief of Police go to jail when a policeman shoots someone?

[scorecard]

when the People Power Party was in power, the then government set the legal guidelines not to forward a pardon petition to the Royal Palace if the case involved a fugitive.

"but...but... it's different now"

but... but... we don't agree with the charges against him

(neither does any other convict in the world!)

Abhisits mentor had a brother who was a fugitive. I think he went to Taiwan. About $8,000,000 but theres no chance of you mentioning that

That may well be true, however I don't know who your talking about. If true, u seem to be suggesting that Abhisit should therefore not be making any comment.

Well let's put this into a different situation, if your brother is convicted of something I guess your saying it's OK to punish you as well.

You can't have it both ways.

[scorecard]

Abhisit may one day become a fugitive too. Abhisit was at CRES when all the important decisions were made including to allow live amunition to be used, and for soldiers to continie shooting even as TV pictures broadcast randomly shooting soldiers at Lumpini Park, Rama4 and elsewhere, as well as witness testimonies from the Red cross and other medical dispatch teams. He could easily be found guilty in due course then what would the saint do?? Would he leave the country like Thaksin or hold it out for 10 years or more in a Thai jail where everyone will hate him.

And again, like so many before, you conveniently ommit details of the weapons in the hands of the red shirts. And of course you wiil also tell me that you believe in no double standards.

If abhisit or anybody is found guilty of any crime then they should suffer the appropriate punishment.

'Anybody' includes the red paymaster, or do you suggest 'that's different'.

[Buchholz]

Abhisit may one day become a fugitive too. Abhisit was at CRES when all the important decisions were made including to allow live amunition to be used, and for soldiers to continie shooting even as TV pictures broadcast randomly shooting soldiers at Lumpini Park, Rama4 and elsewhere, as well as witness testimonies from the Red cross and other medical dispatch teams. He could easily be found guilty in due course then what would the saint do?? Would he leave the country like Thaksin or hold it out for 10 years or more in a Thai jail where everyone will hate him.

Your future speculation pales in comparison to subject of this thread.

Thaksin is a fugitive. A convicted one.

Abhisit is neither.

Thaksin is both, and in the here and now.

He faces a life-time in jail on already pending cases.

If at some point in the next decade, Abhisit comes to be convicted, let him join the prison cell block in which Thaksin has already been serving in for that same decade.

.

[MunterHunter]

And even if it were true, did Abhisit try to use his position of PM to get the conviction over-turned or facilitate visa to other countries?

[hammered]

The thing a lot miss about the April/May deaths is they happened on Abhisit's watch. It isnt about arguing the politics of how it happened, it is about every time Abhisit is seen it reminds people across swathes of the country of the division and death that he oversaw from within an army base even though in the capital regarded as the heartland of Democrat power.

If you have the army shoot the people on your watch in a democracy, you are history politically. This even more true when you clearly were not representing the interests of the majority in doing it, and that has been amply demonstrated in the votes the Dems haemoraged

Now for the Dems to move forward the rejected and unelectable one who will forever be remembered first and foremost for that incident has to go, but they cant see it and in there lies the problem. The Dems do not need to be reminding people all the time of the incidents, but every time Abhisit's smiling face crops up to make a speech on something it is a reminder. Stupid politics in the extreme and maybe Amsterdam is correct in his quip that by reselecting Abhisit the Dems had decided to give up totally on democracy and rely on "accidents" to give them government

[MunterHunter]

The thing a lot miss about the April/May deaths is they happened on Abhisit's watch. It isnt about arguing the politics of how it happened, it is about every time Abhisit is seen it reminds people across swathes of the country of the division and death that he oversaw from within an army base even though in the capital regarded as the heartland of Democrat power.

If you have the army shoot the people on your watch in a democracy, you are history politically. This even more true when you clearly were not representing the interests of the majority in doing it, and that has been amply demonstrated in the votes the Dems haemoraged

Now for the Dems to move forward the rejected and unelectable one who will forever be remembered first and foremost for that incident has to go, but they cant see it and in there lies the problem. The Dems do not need to be reminding people all the time of the incidents, but every time Abhisit's smiling face crops up to make a speech on something it is a reminder. Stupid politics in the extreme and maybe Amsterdam is correct in his quip that by reselecting Abhisit the Dems had decided to give up totally on democracy and rely on "accidents" to give them government

So on that basis Thaksin should never again sit in office... how many died in his war on drugs and 'truck stacking' incidents?

[hammered]

The thing a lot miss about the April/May deaths is they happened on Abhisit's watch. It isnt about arguing the politics of how it happened, it is about every time Abhisit is seen it reminds people across swathes of the country of the division and death that he oversaw from within an army base even though in the capital regarded as the heartland of Democrat power.

If you have the army shoot the people on your watch in a democracy, you are history politically. This even more true when you clearly were not representing the interests of the majority in doing it, and that has been amply demonstrated in the votes the Dems haemoraged

Now for the Dems to move forward the rejected and unelectable one who will forever be remembered first and foremost for that incident has to go, but they cant see it and in there lies the problem. The Dems do not need to be reminding people all the time of the incidents, but every time Abhisit's smiling face crops up to make a speech on something it is a reminder. Stupid politics in the extreme and maybe Amsterdam is correct in his quip that by reselecting Abhisit the Dems had decided to give up totally on democracy and rely on "accidents" to give them government

So on that basis Thaksin should never again sit in office... how many died in his war on drugs and 'truck stacking' incidents?

A subtle difference is unfortuantely for those who support human rights all the power structures were behind Thaksin's actions while Abhisit's were at a time of intense disagreement.

If Thaksin were to return to politics nobody would oppose him for the drug war or the body stacking. The establishment would maybe oppose him for other reasons but not those ones. There was plenty of time to do him on the drug war and seriously screw him up with the international community but it never happened

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

[phiphidon]

Agreed, teat anyone precisely the same. What means that Abhisit an Suthep should be treated as any other dictatorship that turned the guns on its people. It means too that the soldiers who ordered and who shot should be in the dock. Unfortunately we know for over 10 months that Suthep as the man responsible for DSI has falsified the reports and investigations into the deaths of many citizens and two nurses.

Abhisit is the last one who should comment on what the new government does or does not. He is as human rights abuser on precisely the same level as the man his criticizes.

Dictatorship? They were elected and also called elections themselves.

Do police go to jail when they kill someone that was shooting at them? Does the Chief of Police go to jail when a policeman shoots someone?

At the risk of repeating whats been said again and again - not all / possibly very few were killed whilst shooting at the security forces. An obvious example were the Temple killings. Yes police do go to jail depending upon circumstances if they are found to have used disproportionate force, likewise their Boss too if he has been found to order his "men' to use disproportionate force i.e live rounds and snipers against unarmed civilians.

[MunterHunter]

The thing a lot miss about the April/May deaths is they happened on Abhisit's watch. It isnt about arguing the politics of how it happened, it is about every time Abhisit is seen it reminds people across swathes of the country of the division and death that he oversaw from within an army base even though in the capital regarded as the heartland of Democrat power.

If you have the army shoot the people on your watch in a democracy, you are history politically. This even more true when you clearly were not representing the interests of the majority in doing it, and that has been amply demonstrated in the votes the Dems haemoraged

Now for the Dems to move forward the rejected and unelectable one who will forever be remembered first and foremost for that incident has to go, but they cant see it and in there lies the problem. The Dems do not need to be reminding people all the time of the incidents, but every time Abhisit's smiling face crops up to make a speech on something it is a reminder. Stupid politics in the extreme and maybe Amsterdam is correct in his quip that by reselecting Abhisit the Dems had decided to give up totally on democracy and rely on "accidents" to give them government

So on that basis Thaksin should never again sit in office... how many died in his war on drugs and 'truck stacking' incidents?

A subtle difference is unfortuantely for those who support human rights all the power structures were behind Thaksin's actions while Abhisit's were at a time of intense disagreement.

If Thaksin were to return to politics nobody would oppose him for the drug war or the body stacking. The establishment would maybe oppose him for other reasons but not those ones. There was plenty of time to do him on the drug war and seriously screw him up with the international community but it never happened

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

So the red logic applies again, its ok for Thaksin to kill thousands of Thai people, but Abhisit used force to dispel an illegal protest and hes the bad guy... riiiiight. Enjoy your dictatorship!

[Buchholz]

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

If that does occur at some point, we can only hope in the name of double-standard avoidance that Thaksin has already been long put away.

.

[hammered]

The thing a lot miss about the April/May deaths is they happened on Abhisit's watch. It isnt about arguing the politics of how it happened, it is about every time Abhisit is seen it reminds people across swathes of the country of the division and death that he oversaw from within an army base even though in the capital regarded as the heartland of Democrat power.

If you have the army shoot the people on your watch in a democracy, you are history politically. This even more true when you clearly were not representing the interests of the majority in doing it, and that has been amply demonstrated in the votes the Dems haemoraged

Now for the Dems to move forward the rejected and unelectable one who will forever be remembered first and foremost for that incident has to go, but they cant see it and in there lies the problem. The Dems do not need to be reminding people all the time of the incidents, but every time Abhisit's smiling face crops up to make a speech on something it is a reminder. Stupid politics in the extreme and maybe Amsterdam is correct in his quip that by reselecting Abhisit the Dems had decided to give up totally on democracy and rely on "accidents" to give them government

So on that basis Thaksin should never again sit in office... how many died in his war on drugs and 'truck stacking' incidents?

A subtle difference is unfortuantely for those who support human rights all the power structures were behind Thaksin's actions while Abhisit's were at a time of intense disagreement.

If Thaksin were to return to politics nobody would oppose him for the drug war or the body stacking. The establishment would maybe oppose him for other reasons but not those ones. There was plenty of time to do him on the drug war and seriously screw him up with the international community but it never happened

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

So the red logic applies again, its ok for Thaksin to kill thousands of Thai people, but Abhisit used force to dispel an illegal protest and hes the bad guy... riiiiight. Enjoy your dictatorship!

Im not saying what is right or not right but trying to analyse the real political situation as it is. The drug war didnt affect Thakins popularity one bit and there was no serious internal criticism of it. The May event lost the Dems votes, or maybe gained the red sympathy at least among people I know in Chonburi and it certainly didnt lose the reds any popularity up north among those I know.

Personally I dont support any human rights breaches but that is irrelevant in the murky world of Thai politics or of trying to understand it. The deaths caused by Thaksin/Abhisit had different political effects on them. I dont think any analyst would dispute that. It is not about moralising but trying to undertand. Human rights and respect for them will advance as Thailand develops as a more equal society if it mirrors development in other countries

[hammered]

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

If that does occur at some point, we can only hope in the name of double-standard avoidance that Thaksin has already been long put away.

.

I would guess it is far more likely everyone will be unfetterd of all charges rather than everyone end up in jail. In the short term there may be a few previous regime figures heavily investigated/charged. Certainly Thai media seems to indicate Suthep faces a few hurdles.

[Buchholz]

Im not saying what is right or not right but trying to analyse the real political situation as it is. The drug war didnt affect Thakins popularity one bit and there was no serious internal criticism of it. The May event lost the Dems votes, or maybe gained the red sympathy at least among people I know in Chonburi and it certainly didnt lose the reds any popularity up north among those I know.

Personally I dont support any human rights breaches but that is irrelevant in the murky world of Thai politics or of trying to understand it. The deaths caused by Thaksin/Abhisit had different political effects on them. I dont think any analyst would dispute that. It is not about moralising but trying to undertand. Human rights and respect for them will advance as Thailand develops as a more equal society if it mirrors development in other countries

For Thaksin, it goes far beyond the Drug War deaths and the extermination of cord-stacked Muslims, both of which agreeably and disappointingly didn't raise much of a public stink.

Whether it was Shipping Moo's death or human rights lawyer's death, which at least wasn't praised by the public as were the other extra-judicial slayings, Thaksin's record is far worse.

Factor in the added personal corruption and his other criminality, beyond human rights violations, and it's not even a close race for worst.

It doesn't bode well for Thailand if Thaksin is exonerated. If he isn't punished, no one else can justifiably be punished.

If Thailand wishes to move on to an "equal society", it needs to start there. If it doesn't, it will just continue on with its bumpy course, but will severely lag behind "development in other countries."

.

Edited September 5, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

If that does occur at some point, we can only hope in the name of double-standard avoidance that Thaksin has already been long put away.

.

I would guess it is far more likely everyone will be unfetterd of all charges rather than everyone end up in jail. In the short term there may be a few previous regime figures heavily investigated/charged. Certainly Thai media seems to indicate Suthep faces a few hurdles.

Oh, I agree in that no one will be held accountable for much of anything. That's the tradition which, unfortunately for Thailand, doesn't appear to be changing.

If anything, given the current clone situation, it's being incorporated even more so now. But hey, that's what the Thais seemingly want. So be it. It comes at the heavy price of kissing progress good-bye.

.

[Macmundi]

The whole police department needs to be overhauled. From head to toe. Every single police is corrupt. That IS a known fact. Otherwise, why would they buy their way in to work as Police? Don't need salary and they will still wan the job. The can live a very good life from the substantial amount of dirty money they are getting. Why did you think Thaksin joined the Police Academy as a young man? The man knew where the money is.

[hammered]

Im not saying what is right or not right but trying to analyse the real political situation as it is. The drug war didnt affect Thakins popularity one bit and there was no serious internal criticism of it. The May event lost the Dems votes, or maybe gained the red sympathy at least among people I know in Chonburi and it certainly didnt lose the reds any popularity up north among those I know.

Personally I dont support any human rights breaches but that is irrelevant in the murky world of Thai politics or of trying to understand it. The deaths caused by Thaksin/Abhisit had different political effects on them. I dont think any analyst would dispute that. It is not about moralising but trying to undertand. Human rights and respect for them will advance as Thailand develops as a more equal society if it mirrors development in other countries

For Thaksin, it goes far beyond the Drug War deaths and the extermination of cord-stacked Muslims, both of which agreeably and disappointingly didn't raise much of a public stink.

Whether it was Shipping Moo's death or human rights lawyer's death, which at least wasn't praised by the public as were the other extra-judicial slayings, Thaksin's record is far worse.

Factor in the added personal corruption and his other criminality, beyond human rights violations, and it's not even a close race for worst.

It doesn't bode well for Thailand if Thaksin is exonerated. If he isn't punished, no one else will justifiably be punished.

.

Thaksin has been clever or lucky. Im not going to make moral judegments as what he is is obvious, but things are moving beyond him now. He is positioned on the right side of history as the masses get politicized. What happens to him or doesnt will be a part of all that. I wonder if when he started the TRT crusade not so many years ago, if he knew what he would be unleashing?

Abhisit too is caught up in the changes. He may well when selected have been the cleanest best face the democrats and the establishment ever had to put at its front, but it was at a time when that old structure was going to be surpassed whatever nice trappings put on it. I wonder when Abhisit started his poltical life if he ever thougth he would be the PM under who scores of people would be shot on the streets?

But whatever Abhisit and Thaksin are it is the change and the awakening of the mass to their democratic potential that is the real story and which will set the future direction of Thailand

[MunterHunter]

The whole police department needs to be overhauled. From head to toe. Every single police is corrupt. That IS a known fact. Otherwise, why would they buy their way in to work as Police? Don't need salary and they will still wan the job. The can live a very good life from the substantial amount of dirty money they are getting. Why did you think Thaksin joined the Police Academy as a young man? The man knew where the money is.

Sadly thats very true... the police force here as a whole needs a very big overhaul... and if this government is serious on battling of corruption that is one of the best places to start

[scorecard]

If Abhisit were to return to power (unlikely) he would face protest over the April/May deaths and calls for investigation and charges. He may face that anyway

If that does occur at some point, we can only hope in the name of double-standard avoidance that Thaksin has already been long put away.

.

I would guess it is far more likely everyone will be unfetterd of all charges rather than everyone end up in jail. In the short term there may be a few previous regime figures heavily investigated/charged. Certainly Thai media seems to indicate Suthep faces a few hurdles.

Oh, I agree in that no one will be held accountable for much of anything. That's the tradition which, unfortunately for Thailand, doesn't appear to be changing.

If anything, given the current clone situation, it's being incorporated even more so now. But hey, that's what the Thais seemingly want. So be it. It comes at the heavy price of kissing progress good-bye.

.

Your last paragraph is interesting, and IMHO in many ways correct.

Part of your paragraph: "But hey, that's what the Thais seemingly want....." This is where I find so much concern, I firmly believe that so many Thais used egg & pork prices etc., as the main factor deciding who to vote for.

One example, before the last election my adult Thai son got into a discussion (a pleasant discussion) with his neighbors (neighbors, both husband and wife, are Thai doctors of medicine, both are middle aged, both have never left Thailand, both speak zero English).

They both indicated in the discussion that food prices was the most important factor to decide who to vote for.

While this scenario continues Thailand will continue to tread water and even go backwards, and in the meantime Vietnam and other countries are developing quickly.

Perhaps there's a link here as to why the pt policy includes no strong budget for education reform.

Edited September 5, 2011 by scorecard

[Buchholz]

Thaksin has been clever or lucky.

He's been rich. That's how he's been going on for the last decade of turmoil.

Im not going to make moral judegments as what he is is obvious, but things are moving beyond him now.

They can't, really, not at least until things are more sorted.

He is positioned on the right side of history

It's too early and not nearly defined as yet. Act IV of his play is just beginning.

I wonder if when he started the TRT crusade not so many years ago, if he knew what he would be unleashing?

I think he knew full well what he was trying to do. The surprise came to him when his throttling the country for his professed 20 year-rule was reset. Ever since, he's been fighting tooth and nail to get it back on track for that dynasty.

(continued on next post)

Edited September 5, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

(continued)

But whatever Abhisit and Thaksin are it is the change and the awakening of the mass to their democratic potential that is the real story and which will set the future direction of Thailand

If they squander that potential by not holding people accountable, it might as well go back to sleep.

.

[AleG]

The thing a lot miss about the April/May deaths is they happened on Abhisit's watch. It isnt about arguing the politics of how it happened, it is about every time Abhisit is seen it reminds people across swathes of the country of the division and death that he oversaw from within an army base even though in the capital regarded as the heartland of Democrat power.

If you have the army shoot the people on your watch in a democracy, you are history politically. This even more true when you clearly were not representing the interests of the majority in doing it, and that has been amply demonstrated in the votes the Dems haemoraged

Now for the Dems to move forward the rejected and unelectable one who will forever be remembered first and foremost for that incident has to go, but they cant see it and in there lies the problem. The Dems do not need to be reminding people all the time of the incidents, but every time Abhisit's smiling face crops up to make a speech on something it is a reminder. Stupid politics in the extreme and maybe Amsterdam is correct in his quip that by reselecting Abhisit the Dems had decided to give up totally on democracy and rely on "accidents" to give them government

Oh, well, then all the Democrats have to do is to force a situation were the military has to be called in by the government and ensure that there are plenty of civilian casualties and thus force the government to fail.

So simple, I wonder why nobody though of doing that bef.... oh, wait.

[hammered]

(continued)

But whatever Abhisit and Thaksin are it is the change and the awakening of the mass to their democratic potential that is the real story and which will set the future direction of Thailand

If they squander that potential by not holding people accountable, it might as well go back to sleep.

.

This is getting a bit complicated to know what to post where but:

The accountability will come after the changes and not now.

Basically Abhisit and the Dems currently represent the pinnacle of what was seen as best under the managed democracy system. The Thaksin-PTP alliance/reds represent now the start of a more laissez faire unmanaged democracy in a developing but unfinished pattern. This change is not unique to Thailand and has happened in many places. The managed system is always surpassed with something freer, so we would expect the same here. However, during the period of change both sides are playing by different rules so no final word on accountability will be found until the position is clear and probably a new set of rules and checks and balances is set up. Accountability of the new wont be under the old. The chances are I guess that all this will just happen through deals and use of the will of the people.

When I say Thaksin is on the right side of history, I dont mean he will not be held accountable. It depends where things end but his side has the momentum and numbers but I doubt he has control over it all any more. The red movement is big and has its agenda probably outside his comfort zone and certainly at odds with both the PTP new money capitalists and the old upcountry feudal characters.

Abhisit on the other side heads up a party stuck too closely to the managed system that the country is moving away from that badly needs reform and adaptation and as such faces more of a struggle poltically unless they can prevent democratisation which history suggests wont happen. But it is the bigger picture of increased democarcy without management rather than the characters involved that are driving things now. I guess they all have to find their places in it and their are opportunites and potential pitfalls. For Thaksin obviously the change is a chance to become cleansed.

When I say I wonder whwther Thaksin knew what he was unleashing, I m talking more about unleashing all the move to more demcoracy. I would think what he wanted was just managed demcoracy but with his cronies rather than the other lot running the management side. Now he faces a few different and maybe uncontrollable things. I alwasy though the mass amnesty thing would be the target but the reds especially at grassroots level seem very consistent in saying they will under no circumstances accept an amnesty for those who ordered and carried out the May clearance and the death that went with it. That is one thing already that makes negotiating a reset amnesty a little difficult, so maybe things will take a different route

[OzMick]

Interesting that you use the BBC's post (interesting in that most pro democrats were decrying the BBC coverage of events last year, saying they were biased, but in this case the post agrees with your viewpoint) with respect to the verdict.

In reality the charge was "convicted of conflict of interest" not corruption.

http://www.thenation...in-found-guiltyhttp://www.nytimes.c...sia/22thai.html

http://www.heraldsun...x-1111117816556

http://www.nytimes.c...sia/22thai.html

A fine little piece of nit-picking. Do you agree with this definition?

"A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other.

A conflict of interest can only exist if a person or testimony is entrusted with some impartiality; a modicum of trust is necessary to create it. The presence of a conflict of interest is independent from the execution of impropriety. Therefore, a conflict of interest can be discovered and voluntarily defused before any corruption occurs."

As the deal was done, and evidence indicates a nice little earner to be made, IMHO corruption is an accurate description.

Well a "nice little earner" was made - by the Abhisit government when they sold the land at auction at over twice the price Pojtaman paid for it, really can't see how corruption fits in there, especially as they had to compensate her for the land in the first place and only did so at the price she paid, not the price the government made on the sale. Who's corrupt?

You REALLY don't understand? the Abhisit government made a profit FOR THE PEOPLE OF THAILAND. She got her money back because she was not the guilty party, her husband had the conflict of interest. Giving her the proceeds of the sale would have allowed Thaksin (the same legal entity as his wife) to profit from his crime.