animatic Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 So it's as I said then...he didn't flee. He wasn't on bail or escaped custody or anything like that was he? He was just out of the country when deposed and just out of the country again when found guilty. He requested and was given special permission to go to China, on the condition that he return for his court case verdict. Had he been found innocent, he would have returned of course. He wasn't. He didn't return. He broke the conditions. Most people would describe that as fleeing. Edited to add - to repeat what whybother has just said. Also he was represented in court by his attorneys. It's not like there was no due process open to public scrutiny or that he didn't get to properly state his legal case. Plain and simple HE LOST, and HE SKIPPED, and then later his passports were revoked by proper legal mechanisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Thaksin's regular passport it seems was taken away by ministerial decision and not by court order. That leaves it open to ministerial revue and not court revue or empowering legislation to overturn a court decision. The one mimister took it away so another can give it back arguement is yet another recent example of the now classic case of taking opponents tactics and using them themselves. It all links to if you can do something and it is accepted then we can too and if you wont let us it is double standards. It is a tactic that resonates and has served PTP very well over time. Revue? But for most reason minded, logical thinking people, for a minister to revoke the passport of a fugitive who has fled the country, this would be deemed sensible and well justified. If PTP wish, as you suggest, to claim this as simply being a case of what you did, we can do too, they should also with their action be able to argue why it is sensible and why it is well justified. As PTP have yet to, and as you seem to do a rather good job these days of speaking on their behalf, perhaps you can explain? Never mind Thaksin, why should any convicted criminal who has fled their sentence, have the right to retain their passport? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 If he was on bail or under some kind of special court permission to leave then yes I'd have to agree he fled. But without evidence from you I'll take your statement with a large pinch of salt. Personally I think they must have been stupid to let him leave. Did they honestly think he would come back. I think that really what they wanted him to do was to go away and shut up. But he never did the later hence all the problems. <deleted>. It is common knowledge that he had to get permission to leave. http://www.topnews.i...mpic-host-china http://www.channelne.../366804/1/.html http://en.wikipedia...._United_Kingdom Thanks for providing those links. I'll go and have a read. Not everybody knows everything about this or anything else that is why it is an established principle here that if you're going to state something as fact then you should always provide links to support it.... Some of here have been following the whole story since BEFORE the coup. Some relative newcomers regularly dispute the facts we observed, because the waters have been well and truly muddied for 5 years with propaganda and Perception Management disinformation. That does NOT change the original observed reality, only the "perceived of memories' for some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Thaksin's regular passport it seems was taken away by ministerial decision and not by court order. That leaves it open to ministerial revue and not court revue or empowering legislation to overturn a court decision. The one mimister took it away so another can give it back arguement is yet another recent example of the now classic case of taking opponents tactics and using them themselves. It all links to if you can do something and it is accepted then we can too and if you wont let us it is double standards. It is a tactic that resonates and has served PTP very well over time. It was taken away because he was a fugitive and a number of arrest warrants were issued by the court. That hasn't changed, has it? That's the main difference between the two tactics used by the two different ministers. Common sense says revoke the passport of a convicted criminal fugitive. Nonsense says reinstate the passport of a convicted criminal fugitive. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Thanks for providing those links. I'll go and have a read. Not everybody knows everything about this or anything else that is why it is an established principle here that if you're going to state something as fact then you should always provide links to support it.... So if someone states that Yingluck is PM they have to provide a link to prove it?! Don't be ridiculous. What whybother stated would be well known to most here, and if it wasn't to you, why expect others to run around searching on the internet for you? You have google as well, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Thaksin's regular passport it seems was taken away by ministerial decision and not by court order. That leaves it open to ministerial revue and not court revue or empowering legislation to overturn a court decision. The one mimister took it away so another can give it back arguement is yet another recent example of the now classic case of taking opponents tactics and using them themselves. It all links to if you can do something and it is accepted then we can too and if you wont let us it is double standards. It is a tactic that resonates and has served PTP very well over time. It was taken away because he was a fugitive and a number of arrest warrants were issued by the court. That hasn't changed, has it? That's the main difference between the two tactics used by the two different ministers. Common sense says revoke the passport of a convicted criminal fugitive. Nonsense says reinstate the passport of a convicted criminal fugitive. . Nonsense Nepotism says reinstate the passport of a convicted criminal fugitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Thaksin's regular passport it seems was taken away by ministerial decision and not by court order. That leaves it open to ministerial revue and not court revue or empowering legislation to overturn a court decision. The one mimister took it away so another can give it back arguement is yet another recent example of the now classic case of taking opponents tactics and using them themselves. It all links to if you can do something and it is accepted then we can too and if you wont let us it is double standards. It is a tactic that resonates and has served PTP very well over time. Revue? But for most reason minded, logical thinking people, for a minister to revoke the passport of a fugitive who has fled the country, this would be deemed sensible and well justified. If PTP wish, as you suggest, to claim this as simply being a case of what you did, we can do too, they should also with their action be able to argue why it is sensible and why it is well justified. As PTP have yet to, and as you seem to do a rather good job these days of speaking on their behalf, perhaps you can explain? Never mind Thaksin, why should any convicted criminal who has fled their sentence, have the right to retain their passport? Most logical thinking people fully recognize the details of the political struggle in Thailand and the intra-elite power games and that they will only be resolved at a political level as they are political in nature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Most logical thinking people fully recognize the details of the political struggle in Thailand and the intra-elite power games and that they will only be resolved at a political level as they are political in nature Oh well, why bother with things like the law and its enforcement then. Irrelevant minutia, its not as if that counts for anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letitbe Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 The Thais had the chance to endorse the Dems at election time - endorse the bkk crackdown and endorse the policies. They did not and PT won the election (against the wise judgement and predictions on TV experts). That does give them a certain mandate as Thais knew that would include Khun T's rehabilitation. maybe and they will I guarantee pay dearly for that and of course its poor who will suffer most So be it Ive given up caring and apart from our house (I mean my wifes house) and maybe a bit of land were getting everything we can out of here before its to late Well stay as long as it does not descend into a pol pot or Mugabwie situation and if its just a Gaddafi or Saddam situation we can live with that but I feel sorry for all those who expect some other outcome they will be very disappointed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letitbe Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Isn't it illegal to hold Thai and foreign passports? Nope. It is frowned upon. But not illegal. Frowned upon! Yes, because if you can have a Thai passport why would you want one from another country as well? being a convict on the run is the only reason I can think of !!! Isn't being Thai the best that you can possibly be...... sarcasm How about because if you have a Thai and UK passport as our daughter has she does not need visa for most asian countries and also for most western countries That is IMO a totally crass statement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David48 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Because it is cheap and the sex is good - obviously. There is no other reason reason for being in this Third World country Dear cardholder ... I can not believe that what you said what you truly mean. I don't live here but currently on my 15th visit and staying over 2 months this time and while your thoughts on Thailand might be the equivalent of a 30 sec sound byte on a news clip somewhere, the hollowness of your soul amazes me. Why not enrich both the mind, body and spirit with the best that Thailand offers. Make merit at an orphanage, embrace the King's Birthday by joining the celebrations, be humbled in climbing the stairs at Doi Sutept (Chiang Mai) for Wat Phratart, sure ... enjoy an oil massage (happy ending optional), sure … be flattered when a girl half your age pays attention to you ... but to make that the sole reason of existence here ... you have lost my respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeaceBlondie Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 48% PT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 48% PT What does a minority vote have to do with anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardholder Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Because it is cheap and the sex is good - obviously. There is no other reason reason for being in this Third World country Dear cardholder ... I can not believe that what you said what you truly mean. I don't live here but currently on my 15th visit and staying over 2 months this time and while your thoughts on Thailand might be the equivalent of a 30 sec sound byte on a news clip somewhere, the hollowness of your soul amazes me. Why not enrich both the mind, body and spirit with the best that Thailand offers. Make merit at an orphanage, embrace the King's Birthday by joining the celebrations, be humbled in climbing the stairs at Doi Sutept (Chiang Mai) for Wat Phratart, sure ... enjoy an oil massage (happy ending optional), sure … be flattered when a girl half your age pays attention to you ... but to make that the sole reason of existence here ... you have lost my respect. Thank you David but I certainly don't need your respect and I am comfortable in my skin. I have done all the things you mentioned but have seen the contradictions and hypocricies that pervade Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawker9000 Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 They should have done this long ago, no country should deprive their citizens from their nationality , ID or passport cuz governments easily could use this as a political weapon , that's why i don't understand how so many countries call themselves democracies and still they have this kind of laws. :jap: No... it must be very undemocratic to cancel the passports of convicted felons. it doesn't matter if you have been convicted or not your government should have no authority to cancel your passport, even if you are convicted , if you are convicted they should prevent you from leaving the country, an if you still can run away then they should use Interpol or something , but they should not touch you citizenship at all and i say this not cuz i support Thaksin i say it just cuz is my view and in particular case of K. Thaksin there is a lot of political motivated s... involved Even though I completely agree with you. Governments have crossed this line for quite some time. In the good ole' US of A, land of 'freedom', if you fail to pay child support (very costly and for many unaffordable on their low income) then your passport gets revoked as well as your driving license. Obscene but true... To expect a government today to actually do the fair and just thing, is a pipedream these days. I personally think that if Thaksin did spend time in prison, that he would get the lesson of a lifetime and possibly become a politician who really knows the society he represents from top to bottom. But I think that most politicians should spend some time in prison, not necessarily because they are guilty of a crime, just because their needs to be a serious reality check for these people who live in their fancy bubbles of ignorance. Incarceration institutions of the world were supposed to be there as a form of rehabilitaiton, but their development has pretty much been at a standstill since the dark ages and rehabilitation is all but forgotten and punishment is the rule of thumb. No - prisons exist to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent from them. Rehabilitation is an objective within the prison environment (because most prisoners will eventually reach the end of their sentence and have to be released, and when that happens, it would be preferable that they not return to crime), but rehabilitation is not the PURPOSE of the prison. They are not sent there to "get well". They are sent there to do their time. Sick people go to hospitals. Criminals go to prison. Typical lib nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 If he was on bail or under some kind of special court permission to leave then yes I'd have to agree he fled. But without evidence from you I'll take your statement with a large pinch of salt. Personally I think they must have been stupid to let him leave. Did they honestly think he would come back. I think that really what they wanted him to do was to go away and shut up. But he never did the later hence all the problems. <deleted>. It is common knowledge that he had to get permission to leave. http://www.topnews.i...mpic-host-china http://www.channelne.../366804/1/.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra#Request_for_asylum_in_the_United_Kingdom Careful now, by supplying facts and links you will soon be labeled a yellow troll that is destroying this forum and makes is impossible for Red Shirt fans to be here. You figure out yourself why that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Most logical thinking people fully recognize the details of the political struggle in Thailand and the intra-elite power games and that they will only be resolved at a political level as they are political in nature Most people recognize it - some people seem to celebrate it. The only right thing to do is to complain and oppose it. To not do so guarantees one has no right to complain about law and order. Or double-standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 A post has been deleted for failure to use quote function leading to misunderstanding of who posted what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGJIMMY Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Surprise surprise!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Most logical thinking people fully recognize the details of the political struggle in Thailand and the intra-elite power games and that they will only be resolved at a political level as they are political in nature Most people recognize it - some people seem to celebrate it. The only right thing to do is to complain and oppose it. To not do so guarantees one has no right to complain about law and order. Or double-standards. The judiicary as with the legislature and government are all part of the social contract of a democracy under which people agree to be governed, judged and have laws passed in their names in return for a variety of things. If the poeple judge the social contract needs resetting it needs to be. In that way the judiciary is just part of the power politcal group too. All three need to evolve over time with the people. That is not unique to Thailand. It is also a situation that is looking a bit tenuous right now but will hopefully be resolved by sensible actions and decisions and a compromise to avoid further conflict Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotbeve Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Because it is cheap and the sex is good - obviously. There is no other reason reason for being in this Third World country Dear cardholder ... I can not believe that what you said what you truly mean. I don't live here but currently on my 15th visit and staying over 2 months this time and while your thoughts on Thailand might be the equivalent of a 30 sec sound byte on a news clip somewhere, the hollowness of your soul amazes me. Why not enrich both the mind, body and spirit with the best that Thailand offers. Make merit at an orphanage, embrace the King's Birthday by joining the celebrations, be humbled in climbing the stairs at Doi Sutept (Chiang Mai) for Wat Phratart, sure ... enjoy an oil massage (happy ending optional), sure … be flattered when a girl half your age pays attention to you ... but to make that the sole reason of existence here ... you have lost my respect. Thank you David but I certainly don't need your respect and I am comfortable in my skin. I have done all the things you mentioned but have seen the contradictions and hypocricies that pervade Thailand. Cardholder, I assume you are including your own hypocrisies as you are still here in the country (??)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryofthailand Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) Just to clarify one point: To take away someone's passport does not mean his nationality is taken away. Under Thai law, the passport is just a traveling document. Consequently, to give Thaksin his passport back, has no meaning at all. That is, if we talk about the normal Thai passport. Now the diplomatic passport, that's something else ... First of all, I don't know where they get it's illegal to hold two passports from different countries. I know many American Thais that hold a Thai passport and an American passport. These people also hold dual nationalities. They all hold American and Thai citizenship. Lots of what you here from the Governments in Thailand seems to be hogwash. Barry Edited December 3, 2011 by barryofthailand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardholder Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Because it is cheap and the sex is good - obviously. There is no other reason reason for being in this Third World country Dear cardholder ... I can not believe that what you said what you truly mean. I don't live here but currently on my 15th visit and staying over 2 months this time and while your thoughts on Thailand might be the equivalent of a 30 sec sound byte on a news clip somewhere, the hollowness of your soul amazes me. Why not enrich both the mind, body and spirit with the best that Thailand offers. Make merit at an orphanage, embrace the King's Birthday by joining the celebrations, be humbled in climbing the stairs at Doi Sutept (Chiang Mai) for Wat Phratart, sure ... enjoy an oil massage (happy ending optional), sure … be flattered when a girl half your age pays attention to you ... but to make that the sole reason of existence here ... you have lost my respect. Thank you David but I certainly don't need your respect and I am comfortable in my skin. I have done all the things you mentioned but have seen the contradictions and hypocricies that pervade Thailand. Cardholder, I assume you are including your own hypocrisies as you are still here in the country (??)... You don't have to be hypocritical to live here - you just need to be aware of those that exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transam Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 So he will serve time in jail after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janderton Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) in my opinion there is something that escapes to the mind of all those who wrote (and repeated) the words convicted felon; i have no idea how many of you writers have attended at a thai tribunal: 70% of cases go to court without any evidence , is up to prosecutors to forward (or don't) a case basing their decisions on empty hands, only on "police said"... thaksin's cases were no different from the average and never forget that he is and will always be a third world's country twice elected prime minister deposed by a coup then any judgment or decision made by those who put him down is watched with suspicion by the rest of the world... Edited December 3, 2011 by janderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 in my opinion there is something that escapes to the mind of all those who wrote (and repeated) the words convicted felon; i have no idea how many of you writers have attended at a thai tribunal: 70% of cases go to court without any evidence , is up to prosecutors to forward (or don't) a case basing their decisions on empty hands, only on "police said"... thaksin's cases were no different from the average and never forget that he is and will always be a third world's country twice elected prime minister deposed by a coup then any sentence or decision made by those who put him down is watched with suspicion by the rest of the world... Being elected twice doesn't stop him from being a criminal. The courts spent a few hours reading out their decision. Are you suggesting that they did that even though they had no evidence? Just because 70% of cases supposedly go to court without any evidence, this wasn't one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transam Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 in my opinion there is something that escapes to the mind of all those who wrote (and repeated) the words convicted felon; i have no idea how many of you writers have attended at a thai tribunal: 70% of cases go to court without any evidence , is up to prosecutors to forward (or don't) a case basing their decisions on empty hands, only on "police said"... thaksin's cases were no different from the average and never forget that he is and will always be a third world's country twice elected prime minister deposed by a coup then any sentence or decision made by those who put him down is watched with suspicion by the rest of the world... Being elected twice doesn't stop him from being a criminal. The courts spent a few hours reading out their decision. Are you suggesting that they did that even though they had no evidence? Just because 70% of cases supposedly go to court without any evidence, this wasn't one of them. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlansford Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 The Thai people elected the current government, knowing they would pardon Thaksin. The people who fitted him up lost. If they were to round up all the people who oppose the wishes of the majority of Thais, and the elected government. Things might get easier for everyone. 48% is not a majority. But even it it was "round up all the people that oppose" doesn't sound like democracy to me. Should they grab any Jews, homosexuals, or gypsies as well? The currently elected govt received over 53% of the vote. PTP 48%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janderton Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 ... Are you suggesting that they did that even though they had no evidence? .... believe me or not in the seizure case the court's president stopped the prosecutor at least 3 times (if i good recall) and told him to skip his blablabla... he made him jump all the speech upon the evidences... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 ... Are you suggesting that they did that even though they had no evidence? .... believe me or not in the seizure case the court's president stopped the prosecutor at least 3 times (if i good recall) and told him to skip his blablabla... he made him jump all the speech upon the evidences... aahhhh ... so there was evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now