Thaksin Says He Has No Plans To Return Home

[Ricardo]

Not long ago he said, I be back in december. What happend?

Did little sister and PTP <removed> up?

Yes, they let someone they trusted attend the secret Cabinet meeting and he/she later spilled the beans about the pardon.

Coincidentally, this morning's other paper has Yingluck castigating her four cabinet ministers who leaked the secret pardon plans to the media, decrying their revelations as damaging to her government.

.

So it's not Chalerm's fault, for trying to stifle public-debate, on a highly-contentious issue like this, then ? The problem wasn't the secret-meeting, or what it set out to achieve, but the fact that the word got out, as it inevitably would soon have done anyway ? Yay for Red Democracy, yet again !

Happily Thaksin has now announced clearly, he doesn't want to come home, anytime soon. Since "Thaksin Thinks, and Pheu Thai Acts", does that mean that the Deputy-PM will stop his damaging activities, and get back to more important things ?

Somehow I doubt it.

[Thaddeus]

Thaksin is waiting for the right time. Everyone in Thailand knows this although differnetr groups define it differently. He will however be back andnot in jail. And most of those who oppose him will accept this and not suffer either

'Thaksin is waiting for the right time.' I sense a cue for a Martini ad.

"Du pain, du vin, du bai"

[whybother]

Coincidentally, this morning's other paper has Yingluck castigating her four cabinet ministers who leaked the secret pardon plans to the media, decrying their revelations as damaging to her government.

Lucky they did leak it. Otherwise she wouldn't have known about it.

[noitom]

Thaksin is a creature of the media. Hardly a day goes by that The Nation and The Bangkok Post don't have one, two , three or more headline stories about him, using his name and/or referring to him in most stories. Aimless kind of ranting. Empowering him. It's kind of difficult to see Thaksin as "the problem." He is but the 18th, 19th or 20th coup subject depending on how you count them. Certainly, his criminal conviction was politically motivated, and it's indisputable that many other business class elite folks have engaged in similar corrupt activity. The issue with Thaksin was that he outmaneuvered a lot of them, accumulated more wealth, played the game better, poached in their territory, and became a threat to "the system" and the pecking order as they know it.

What's amazing is the constant promotion of him by the Thai media. Feeding his ego and empowering him daily. Keeping him foremost in everyone's consciousness. One would have to wonder if it's not a diversionary tactic to deflect attention away from other similar looting and plundering that's likely to be going on by those clinging to position, pursestrings, and power. The key spokesperson for the PAD, the most vocal opponent of Thaksin, is none other than the media mogul Sondhi, Thaksin's former good friend, business associate and partner until their falling out.

So it's hard to figure out why all the dichotomous press behavior about Thaksin. On one hand the power elite loathe him, on the other hand they continually empower him in efforts to compromise him. Giving them credit for orchestrating some kind of diversionary media campaign is almost giving Thais too much credit for strategic thinking. But, it remains inexplicable as to why they would continually refer to him in almost every story each and every day. It's a bit too much isn't it?

[Ricardo]

Thaksin is waiting for the right time. Everyone in Thailand knows this although differnetr groups define it differently. He will however be back andnot in jail. And most of those who oppose him will accept this and not suffer either

'Thaksin is waiting for the right time.' I sense a cue for a Martini ad.

"Du pain, du vin, du bai"

Excellent one !

[maidu]

If you want to know what Thaksin is thinking, here's the trick:

Take what he says and reverse it.

If he says he doesn't know about the amnesty discussion, then he actually does know about it.

If he says he has no plans to return home, then you can be sure he does have such plans.

If he says 'I'm done with politics' then you know he's going to stay as political as he always was.

When he said 'hundreds of Reds were killed' in the Bkk riots of 2009, then you can be sure none were killed.

When he said he had nothing to do with the Reds commandeering and burning Bkk in 2010, then you know he bankrolled it.

The man is a pathological liar. He can't tell the truth even if he tried, because since he was in plastic pants, he's found it's advantageous to tell lies.

[Buchholz]

Thaksin is waiting for the right time. Everyone in Thailand knows this although differnetr groups define it differently. He will however be back andnot in jail. And most of those who oppose him will accept this and not suffer either

'Thaksin is waiting for the right time.' I sense a cue for a Martini ad.

"Du pain, du vin, du bai"

Excellent one !

+ 2

Bravo !

[DocN]

Who cares what he says? Who actually gives a (attention) FROC? He will be back! Sooner or later, one way or the other...so stop reporting what he said or mentioned or...oh, whatever!

[animatic]

"So I would not go back home until the reconciliation really happens," he said in English. "I don't want to be part of the problem but I want to be part of the solution."

You are part of the problem, and the only way you will be part of the solution is if you never come back.

I don't mean to disagree wb but I am inclined to think Thaksin IS the problem, the whole problem and nothing but the problem.

Yep,

and worse he's amplified other problems and hitched them to his wagon, and taken non-problems and turned them into ongoing problems.

Long after he is gone a bigger problem will be festering in Thailand, that he has let loose.

And I don't mean 'empowered poor getting a better deal for themselves and following generations', but the network of neo-Maoists who now have a complete cross the nation network to use on going, that Thaksin has unseeingly handed them without understanding the implications and consequences. He has undone 30 years of work preventing Thailand from becoming Laos or Cambodia. Now similar forces are at work over a wide and connected area in Thailand.

And this calamity wrought by an uber-capitalist no less. Irony reigns supreme.

[maidu]

Who cares what he says? Who actually gives a (attention) FROC? He will be back! Sooner or later, one way or the other...so stop reporting what he said or mentioned or...oh, whatever!

I, for one, care what he says, even if his words reverse of his intentions. For example: if he says he loves Thailand and the Thai people, and only wants peace. Then you can be rather sure that he's planning another set of disturbances - which he can easily fund via his deep pockets and many nefarious connections here in Thailand.

The past two disturbances which he's funded and abetted, have caused serious problems in Pattaya and Bangkok - particularly Bkk. So, even though he's a bag of wind, he still has the capability and willingness to cause serious strife for Thais. That's why I care.

[bendejo]

"So I would not go back home until the reconciliation really happens," he said in English. "I don't want to be part of the problem but I want to be part of the solution."

You are part of the problem, and the only way you will be part of the solution is if you never come back.

Recall that he mocked the idea of reconciliation back when his hired goons were supposed to be bringing down the previous gov't. The guy wants his money and respect, that's all. He'll settle for the money as he knows well how to use it to buy respect.

[bendejo]

I, for one, care what he says, even if his words reverse of his intentions. For example: if he says he loves Thailand and the Thai people, and only wants peace. Then you can be rather sure that he's planning another set of disturbances - which he can easily fund via his deep pockets and many nefarious connections here in Thailand.

...

Yes, you got it right: whatever he says it's a good bet he means/intends just the opposite.

Eg: I have no intention of returning, translation: my bags are packed and the jet is fueled.

The anti-Socrates.

[hanuman1]

What a thoroughly odious cove this Thaksin character appears to be.

[animatic]

What a thoroughly odious cove this Thaksin character appears to be.

IV.

All men in the State of nature have a desire, and will to hurt,

but not proceeding from the same cause, neither equally to be condemn'd;

for one man according to that naturall equality which is among us,

permits as much to others, as he assumes to himself

(which is an argument of a temperate man,

and one that rightly values his power);

another,

supposing himselfe above others,

will have a License to doe what he lists,

and challenges Respect, and Honour,

as due to him before others,

(which is an Argument of a fiery spirit:)

This mans will to hurt ariseth from Vain glory,

and the false esteeme he hath of his owne strength;

the other's, from the necessity of defending himselfe,

his liberty, and his goods against this mans violence.....

VI. But the most frequent reason why men desire to hurt each other, ariseth hence, that many men at the same time have an

Appetite to the same thing;

which yet very often they can neither enjoy in common,

nor yet divide it;

and who is strongest must be decided by the Sword.

whence it followes that the strongest must have it.....

VII. Among so many dangers therefore,

as the naturall lusts of men do daily threaten each other withall,

to have a care of ones selfe is not a matter so scornfully to be lookt upon, as if so be there had not been a power and will left in one to have done otherwise;

for every man is desirous of what is good for him, and shuns what is evill, but chiefly the chiefest of naturall evills,

which is Death;

and this he doth, by a certain impulsion of nature,

no lesse than that whereby a Stone moves downward:

It is therefore neither absurd, nor reprehensible;

neither against the dictates of true reason for a man to use all his endeavours to preserve and defend his Body, and the Members thereof from death and sorrowes;

but that which is not contrary to right reason,

that all men account to be done justly, and with right;

Neither by the word Right is any thing else signified,

than that liberty which every man hath to make use of his naturall faculties according to right reason:

Therefore the first foundation of naturall Right is this,

That every man as much as in him lies

endeavour to protect his life and members.....

XV.

Yet cannot men expect any lasting preservation continuing thus in the state of nature (i.e.) of War, by reason of that equality of power, and other humane faculties they are endued withall.

Wherefore to seek Peace,

where there is any hopes of obtaining it,

and where there is none, to enquire out for Auxiliaries of War,

is the dictate of right

Reason; that is, the Law of Nature,

as shall be shewed in the next Chapter.

De Cive by Thomas Hobbes

Philosophicall Elements of a true Citizen.

Liberty Chapter I.

Of the state of men without Civill Society

Edited November 24, 2011 by animatic

[DocN]

Who cares what he says? Who actually gives a (attention) FROC? He will be back! Sooner or later, one way or the other...so stop reporting what he said or mentioned or...oh, whatever!

I, for one, care what he says, even if his words reverse of his intentions. For example: if he says he loves Thailand and the Thai people, and only wants peace. Then you can be rather sure that he's planning another set of disturbances - which he can easily fund via his deep pockets and many nefarious connections here in Thailand.

The past two disturbances which he's funded and abetted, have caused serious problems in Pattaya and Bangkok - particularly Bkk. So, even though he's a bag of wind, he still has the capability and willingness to cause serious strife for Thais. That's why I care.

So you actually read all the contradicting pieces of cr@p, that states he will be pardoned...oh, no he is not on the list...he doesn't want to come back....?!

Congrats!

[Reasonableman]

Sound advice, to protect your member at all times

[Skywalker69]

When Thaksin said he would be back in december we knew it woulden´t be true because he is a born liar.

Now he got me worried, when he say he wont be back any time soon.

Is he already at the doorstep?

[yoshiwara]

Thaksin is a creature of the media. Hardly a day goes by that The Nation and The Bangkok Post don't have one, two , three or more headline stories about him, using his name and/or referring to him in most stories. Aimless kind of ranting. Empowering him. It's kind of difficult to see Thaksin as "the problem." He is but the 18th, 19th or 20th coup subject depending on how you count them. Certainly, his criminal conviction was politically motivated, and it's indisputable that many other business class elite folks have engaged in similar corrupt activity. The issue with Thaksin was that he outmaneuvered a lot of them, accumulated more wealth, played the game better, poached in their territory, and became a threat to "the system" and the pecking order as they know it.

What's amazing is the constant promotion of him by the Thai media. Feeding his ego and empowering him daily. Keeping him foremost in everyone's consciousness. One would have to wonder if it's not a diversionary tactic to deflect attention away from other similar looting and plundering that's likely to be going on by those clinging to position, pursestrings, and power. The key spokesperson for the PAD, the most vocal opponent of Thaksin, is none other than the media mogul Sondhi, Thaksin's former good friend, business associate and partner until their falling out.

So it's hard to figure out why all the dichotomous press behavior about Thaksin. On one hand the power elite loathe him, on the other hand they continually empower him in efforts to compromise him. Giving them credit for orchestrating some kind of diversionary media campaign is almost giving Thais too much credit for strategic thinking. But, it remains inexplicable as to why they would continually refer to him in almost every story each and every day. It's a bit too much isn't it?

This is, of course, another variation on the 'it isn't about Thaksin' spin. Well if it is not about Thaksin then to what does one ascribe the reason for Yingluck being elected to run as PM candidate for PT and why has the government tried to push his return? The trouble with these thinly disguised attempts to exonerate Thaksin as someone no worse than the others is that it never corresponds to the behaviour of the man himself, the government, the reds, the forum supporters and Uncle Tom Cobbley and all. If Thaksin's convictions were 'politically motivated' (for this read 'he is innocent') then how come he laundered money through his chauffeur? Was the evidence politically manufactured? Maybe we shouldn't be chasing Thaksin for the nasty piece of work that he is. Maybe we should be going after the chauffeur. He's the Mister Big.

[Insight]

What a thoroughly odious cove this Thaksin character appears to be.

He's a saint, compared against some of his less-misguided cheerleaders.

[noitom]

Thaksin is a creature of the media. Hardly a day goes by that The Nation and The Bangkok Post don't have one, two , three or more headline stories about him, using his name and/or referring to him in most stories. Aimless kind of ranting. Empowering him. It's kind of difficult to see Thaksin as "the problem." He is but the 18th, 19th or 20th coup subject depending on how you count them. Certainly, his criminal conviction was politically motivated, and it's indisputable that many other business class elite folks have engaged in similar corrupt activity. The issue with Thaksin was that he outmaneuvered a lot of them, accumulated more wealth, played the game better, poached in their territory, and became a threat to "the system" and the pecking order as they know it.

What's amazing is the constant promotion of him by the Thai media. Feeding his ego and empowering him daily. Keeping him foremost in everyone's consciousness. One would have to wonder if it's not a diversionary tactic to deflect attention away from other similar looting and plundering that's likely to be going on by those clinging to position, pursestrings, and power. The key spokesperson for the PAD, the most vocal opponent of Thaksin, is none other than the media mogul Sondhi, Thaksin's former good friend, business associate and partner until their falling out.

So it's hard to figure out why all the dichotomous press behavior about Thaksin. On one hand the power elite loathe him, on the other hand they continually empower him in efforts to compromise him. Giving them credit for orchestrating some kind of diversionary media campaign is almost giving Thais too much credit for strategic thinking. But, it remains inexplicable as to why they would continually refer to him in almost every story each and every day. It's a bit too much isn't it?

This is, of course, another variation on the 'it isn't about Thaksin' spin. Well if it is not about Thaksin then to what does one ascribe the reason for Yingluck being elected to run as PM candidate for PT and why has the government tried to push his return? The trouble with these thinly disguised attempts to exonerate Thaksin as someone no worse than the others is that it never corresponds to the behaviour of the man himself, the government, the reds, the forum supporters and Uncle Tom Cobbley and all. If Thaksin's convictions were 'politically motivated' (for this read 'he is innocent') then how come he laundered money through his chauffeur? Was the evidence politically manufactured? Maybe we shouldn't be chasing Thaksin for the nasty piece of work that he is. Maybe we should be going after the chauffeur. He's the Mister Big.

The post before yours was referring to the media empowering him and promoting him into the consciousness of everyone and challenging why they do that. The post had nothing to do with his culpability or not. He wasn't there to defend himself objectively, so we'll never know if he is innocent or his guilt and conviction had to do with the motivations of those seeking to bring him down by manipulating the law. My post had nothing to do with "chasing him" - it had to do with aggrandizing him and giving him constant visibility. If they believe that he is guilty, and in fact was convicted under their interpretation of the law, then that's newsworthy a few times, but not forever. Efforts to extradite him several times failed, indicating that no other country's laws were in agreement with that of Thailand. That's newsworthy a few times, but not persistently unless you plan to take some action about it and walk the walk instead of talking the talk. But my post was about the newspaper's role in continually focusing on "him" rather than other more important social issues facing Thailand and what else is happening that we want to know about.

As far as the reason that one would have to "ascribe" to his sister's election is concerned, is that she won by majority of popular vote ascribed to "the people of Thailand" and Abhisit was defeated by the same popular vote. So, that brings us around to the original premise that Thaksin is being made into a "demagogue" by the media. The post did raise the possibility of a "reverse diversionary media strategy" to do this, and then reasoned that this was beyond the scope of Thais to strategize. That still leaves the question as to why the Thai press persistently aggrandizes Thaksin, and makes him more and more of a demagogue than he himself could accomplish when they seem to loathe and detest him.

[maidu]

It's simple: When T gets a ruling in his favor, then he says 'justice was served.' When he gets a ruling against him and his interests, then, "justice hasn't been served.'

That's the thinking of a base human being. However, as an ex-caretaker PM, we expect him to show a bit more maturity and respect for the judicial system in the country he represented. You'd expect someone of that stature to be an example to younger generations of Thais. Instead, he's the poster boy for avoiding taxes, lying, and avoiding responsibility (Tak Bai, etc), and upholding the Chinese maxim that "amassing wealth is the most important thing a person can aspire to."

[whybother]

The post before yours was referring to the media empowering him and promoting him into the consciousness of everyone and challenging why they do that. The post had nothing to do with his culpability or not. He wasn't there to defend himself objectively, so we'll never know if he is innocent or his guilt and conviction had to do with the motivations of those seeking to bring him down by manipulating the law. My post had nothing to do with "chasing him" - it had to do with aggrandizing him and giving him constant visibility. If they believe that he is guilty, and in fact was convicted under their interpretation of the law, then that's newsworthy a few times, but not forever. Efforts to extradite him several times failed, indicating that no other country's laws were in agreement with that of Thailand. That's newsworthy a few times, but not persistently unless you plan to take some action about it and walk the walk instead of talking the talk. But my post was about the newspaper's role in continually focusing on "him" rather than other more important social issues facing Thailand and what else is happening that we want to know about.

As far as the reason that one would have to "ascribe" to his sister's election is concerned, is that she won by majority of popular vote ascribed to "the people of Thailand" and Abhisit was defeated by the same popular vote. So, that brings us around to the original premise that Thaksin is being made into a "demagogue" by the media. The post did raise the possibility of a "reverse diversionary media strategy" to do this, and then reasoned that this was beyond the scope of Thais to strategize. That still leaves the question as to why the Thai press persistently aggrandizes Thaksin, and makes him more and more of a demagogue than he himself could accomplish when they seem to loathe and detest him.

He was there to defend himself. He wasn't there when they found him guilty.

[Buchholz]

The post before yours was referring to the media empowering him and promoting him into the consciousness of everyone and challenging why they do that. The post had nothing to do with his culpability or not. He wasn't there to defend himself objectively, so we'll never know if he is innocent or his guilt and conviction had to do with the motivations of those seeking to bring him down by manipulating the law. My post had nothing to do with "chasing him" - it had to do with aggrandizing him and giving him constant visibility. If they believe that he is guilty, and in fact was convicted under their interpretation of the law, then that's newsworthy a few times, but not forever. Efforts to extradite him several times failed, indicating that no other country's laws were in agreement with that of Thailand. That's newsworthy a few times, but not persistently unless you plan to take some action about it and walk the walk instead of talking the talk. But my post was about the newspaper's role in continually focusing on "him" rather than other more important social issues facing Thailand and what else is happening that we want to know about.

As far as the reason that one would have to "ascribe" to his sister's election is concerned, is that she won by majority of popular vote ascribed to "the people of Thailand" and Abhisit was defeated by the same popular vote. So, that brings us around to the original premise that Thaksin is being made into a "demagogue" by the media. The post did raise the possibility of a "reverse diversionary media strategy" to do this, and then reasoned that this was beyond the scope of Thais to strategize. That still leaves the question as to why the Thai press persistently aggrandizes Thaksin, and makes him more and more of a demagogue than he himself could accomplish when they seem to loathe and detest him.

He was there to defend himself. He wasn't there when they found him guilty.

Furthermore, he wasn't there to appeal his conviction, although that wasn't necessary as his attorney could file it for him.

Yet, he still didn't appeal the finding the found him guilty.

Instead, his "appeal" was in the form of Black Songkran 2009 and May Mayhem 2010.

.

[noitom]

The post before yours was referring to the media empowering him and promoting him into the consciousness of everyone and challenging why they do that. The post had nothing to do with his culpability or not. He wasn't there to defend himself objectively, so we'll never know if he is innocent or his guilt and conviction had to do with the motivations of those seeking to bring him down by manipulating the law. My post had nothing to do with "chasing him" - it had to do with aggrandizing him and giving him constant visibility. If they believe that he is guilty, and in fact was convicted under their interpretation of the law, then that's newsworthy a few times, but not forever. Efforts to extradite him several times failed, indicating that no other country's laws were in agreement with that of Thailand. That's newsworthy a few times, but not persistently unless you plan to take some action about it and walk the walk instead of talking the talk. But my post was about the newspaper's role in continually focusing on "him" rather than other more important social issues facing Thailand and what else is happening that we want to know about.

As far as the reason that one would have to "ascribe" to his sister's election is concerned, is that she won by majority of popular vote ascribed to "the people of Thailand" and Abhisit was defeated by the same popular vote. So, that brings us around to the original premise that Thaksin is being made into a "demagogue" by the media. The post did raise the possibility of a "reverse diversionary media strategy" to do this, and then reasoned that this was beyond the scope of Thais to strategize. That still leaves the question as to why the Thai press persistently aggrandizes Thaksin, and makes him more and more of a demagogue than he himself could accomplish when they seem to loathe and detest him.

He was there to defend himself. He wasn't there when they found him guilty.

Furthermore, he wasn't there to appeal his conviction, although that wasn't necessary as his attorney could file it for him.

Yet, he still didn't appeal the finding the found him guilty.

Instead, his "appeal" was in the form of Black Songkran 2009 and May Mayhem 2010.

.

You're right, he flew back in for two weeks or so to plead guilty "in person" and the left again without filing an appeal. Doesn't change the "main point" of the post regarding the newspaper aggrandizing him persistently to ultra demagogue status.

[Buchholz]

The post before yours was referring to the media empowering him and promoting him into the consciousness of everyone and challenging why they do that. The post had nothing to do with his culpability or not. He wasn't there to defend himself objectively, so we'll never know if he is innocent or his guilt and conviction had to do with the motivations of those seeking to bring him down by manipulating the law. My post had nothing to do with "chasing him" - it had to do with aggrandizing him and giving him constant visibility. If they believe that he is guilty, and in fact was convicted under their interpretation of the law, then that's newsworthy a few times, but not forever. Efforts to extradite him several times failed, indicating that no other country's laws were in agreement with that of Thailand. That's newsworthy a few times, but not persistently unless you plan to take some action about it and walk the walk instead of talking the talk. But my post was about the newspaper's role in continually focusing on "him" rather than other more important social issues facing Thailand and what else is happening that we want to know about.

As far as the reason that one would have to "ascribe" to his sister's election is concerned, is that she won by majority of popular vote ascribed to "the people of Thailand" and Abhisit was defeated by the same popular vote. So, that brings us around to the original premise that Thaksin is being made into a "demagogue" by the media. The post did raise the possibility of a "reverse diversionary media strategy" to do this, and then reasoned that this was beyond the scope of Thais to strategize. That still leaves the question as to why the Thai press persistently aggrandizes Thaksin, and makes him more and more of a demagogue than he himself could accomplish when they seem to loathe and detest him.

He was there to defend himself. He wasn't there when they found him guilty.

Furthermore, he wasn't there to appeal his conviction, although that wasn't necessary as his attorney could file it for him.

Yet, he still didn't appeal the finding the found him guilty.

Instead, his "appeal" was in the form of Black Songkran 2009 and May Mayhem 2010.

.

You're right, he flew back in for two weeks or so to plead guilty "in person" and the left again without filing an appeal.

Actually, he was already a fugitive who had fled the country when the guilty verdict was read and still a fugitive until the time for filing an appeal to the verdict had expired.

Thaksin has never plead guilty to any charge.

.

.

[noitom]

You're right, that should have said he flew in to plead not guilty. Doesn't change the main point of the post which was to question the newspaper's professionalism and MO in persistently writing him in to every story and continuing to elevate him to higher and higher demagogue status.

[animatic]

The post before yours was referring to the media empowering him and promoting him into the consciousness of everyone and challenging why they do that. The post had nothing to do with his culpability or not. He wasn't there to defend himself objectively, so we'll never know if he is innocent or his guilt and conviction had to do with the motivations of those seeking to bring him down by manipulating the law. My post had nothing to do with "chasing him" - it had to do with aggrandizing him and giving him constant visibility. If they believe that he is guilty, and in fact was convicted under their interpretation of the law, then that's newsworthy a few times, but not forever. Efforts to extradite him several times failed, indicating that no other country's laws were in agreement with that of Thailand. That's newsworthy a few times, but not persistently unless you plan to take some action about it and walk the walk instead of talking the talk. But my post was about the newspaper's role in continually focusing on "him" rather than other more important social issues facing Thailand and what else is happening that we want to know about.

As far as the reason that one would have to "ascribe" to his sister's election is concerned, is that she won by majority of popular vote ascribed to "the people of Thailand" and Abhisit was defeated by the same popular vote. So, that brings us around to the original premise that Thaksin is being made into a "demagogue" by the media. The post did raise the possibility of a "reverse diversionary media strategy" to do this, and then reasoned that this was beyond the scope of Thais to strategize. That still leaves the question as to why the Thai press persistently aggrandizes Thaksin, and makes him more and more of a demagogue than he himself could accomplish when they seem to loathe and detest him.

He was there to defend himself. He wasn't there when they found him guilty.

Furthermore, he wasn't there to appeal his conviction, although that wasn't necessary as his attorney could file it for him.

Yet, he still didn't appeal the finding the found him guilty.

Instead, his "appeal" was in the form of Black Songkran 2009 and May Mayhem 2010.

.

You're right, he flew back in for two weeks or so to plead guilty "in person" and the left again without filing an appeal. Doesn't change the "main point" of the post regarding the newspaper aggrandizing him persistently to ultra demagogue status.

He was here for several months including Pastrygate which caused 3 of his lawyers to be convicted incarcerated and released.

He left when he found his best efforts to quash the conviction was for naught.

But this was never his main worry, the OTHER legal actions against him are much more worrisome. And if he is in jail, then he can't NOT show up to acknowledge those charges, which is ALL that has stopped those trials from proceeding.

He is trying to run up blanket amnesties and the like now.

There is nothing about the next round of global amnesties that is

about more than globally whitewashing Thaksin's long list of pending trials and convictions. He could likely have done his 3 months, down from 2 years, wrist slap for Racha standing on his head, in 'fully bribed up splendor in his special cell', BUT he would still have to go to court, in the police vehicle, in shackles, and he apparently couldn't deal with that loss of face.

Would he rather bring the country to it's knees or to the brink of civil war rather than lose face? seems that might be the case.

Thaksin says he has no (WORKING) plans to return to Thailand. (yet)

Edited November 25, 2011 by animatic

[hyperdimension]

The clown is not even smart enough to hire a decent speech writer to write speeches that cover up his intentions.

He has his public relations guy, Robert Amsterdam, who is quite a good writer, and I speculate that it is he who wrote the recent letter that was supposedly by Thaksin (and then Thaksin, or one of his people in Pheu Thai, translated it into Thai). However, Amsterdam cannot answer questions for him during interviews.

[hyperdimension]

If you want to know what Thaksin is thinking, here's the trick:

Take what he says and reverse it.

So "everyone will be rich in six months" becomes "everyone will be poor in six months"!

[Oberkommando]

You'd expect someone of that stature to be an example to younger generations of Thais. Instead, he's the poster boy for avoiding taxes, lying, and avoiding responsibility (Tak Bai, etc), and upholding the Chinese maxim that "amassing wealth is the most important thing a person can aspire to."

He's completely representative of the majority of Thai people IMO.