Thaksin Back In UK, Eyeing US

[Lite Beer]

Thaksin back in UK, eyeing US

The Nation on Sunday

LONDON:-- Former PM freer to travel; Democrats claim Yingluck made apology to Prem on his behalf

Fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra arrived in the United Kingdom on Friday night and would stay in that country for about a week, his spokesman said yesterday.

Noppadon Pattama, former foreign minister who also acts as Thaksin's legal adviser, said the fugitive former PM would travel to the UK more often although he would mostly live in the city of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.

"He will travel more frequently between London and Dubai. He feels comfortable while in England. He has a house in London and the city is a centre of the world's news and information. He is likely to travel more often to England but he will mainly live in Dubai, where people can meet him more conveniently," he said.

Noppadon said Thaksin was also considering travelling to the United States to meet his Thai supporters there.

During the tenure of the previous government led by Thaksin's rivals the Democrat Party, the ex-premier's visa was revoked by the UK and he was denied entry by the American authorities.

Recently, according to Noppadon, Thaksin travelled to Germany, France, Japan and China. The spokesman said Thaksin's recent unhindered travels were proof that those countries recognised the corruption conviction against Thaksin was politically based.

Thaksin is in the UK to watch a football clash between Manchester United and Manchester City, which he once owned. Noppadon did not confirm speculation Thaksin was considering acquiring another team in the English Premier League.

Asked if Thaksin had a plan to travel to the US, Noppadon said there was no clear plan. "But in the future, it is possible. He wants to go to every place that he used to go. After a positive political change, he wants to meet Thai people there," he said.

Meanwhile, opposition Democrat Party spokesman Thepthai Senapong yesterday expressed suspicion at the ruling Pheu Thai Party's repeated denial that Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's meeting last Thursday with Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda had any political significance.

Thepthai said that he believed Thaksin, who is the PM's elder brother, was behind her meeting with Prem, supposedly to extend him belated good wishes for Songkran, the traditional Thai New Year. He said Thaksin's camp had tried repeatedly to offer an olive branch to Prem.

The Democrat MP said he believed that during her 35-minute meeting with Prem, the prime minister offered an apology on behalf of Thaksin, who had previously attacked Prem and accused him of being behind the 2006 coup that overthrew his government.

During the Songkran festival, while in Cambodia, Thaksin said he wanted to pay respect to Prem and described the elder statesman as a national figure worthy of respect.

-- The Nation 2012-04-29

[RisqEM]

I don't think this has anything to do with another country recognizing any corruption here, it's economics. If he's planning on buying another football league, anyone would let him in! Money talks, b.s. walks!

[Pseudolus]

On the whole I couldn't care less what he does but there is one part of this story that makes me mad;

"He has a house in London"

Prick. He and his ilk do so much to try and stop farangs owning a house in Thailand. I would assume all the politicians own houses outside of Thailand. A-holes.

[MaiChai]

Hope he's brought a brolly? The weather is lovely at the moment; drought to floods within a couple of weeks.

Maybe he can pay some of the tax he owes the British Government while he is here?

London is full of foreigners buying up all the property and making it unaffordable for the locals so I agree with the last poster.

Edited April 29, 2012 by MaiChai

[siampolee]

According to comments made there is it seems a large sum of Thaksin money in the U.K.

Is it possible there might be some upcoming ''campaigns'' that need to be financed thus the money in the U.K. might be needed to sponsor those ''campaigns?''

[LuckyLew]

As a Chelsea fan .... he really makes me want to cheer for Man U on Monday

[Edwin Buurman]

I really do believe if Thailand would be more easy with foreign ownership off houses and residences this would boost the economy and increase cofidence from foreigners in Thailand. The current laws make it to risky for many to investment. Laws who prevent huge landpieces who can endanger food supply within Thailand I can understand, but all the rest is not fair. Thais can buy abroad. Farangs and expats here have to deal with risky and expensive loopholes. Neighboring countries are more easy and become more and more attractive. Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Birma are inviting retires and second house owners. Even in China a foreigner can buy. The houses and properties I talk about are not affordable for the average Thai. Only for the wealthy ones and with the current legislation Thailand only helps them, to become more wealthy. This is not at all beneficial to majority off Thais only to the happy few. The happy few can buy cheaply small plots from less fortunate Thais. Creating this way from several small plots one big one and sell it in a expensive and overpriced way as "freehold". There is no fair deal or competition for the small land or house owner. The market is exclusive for wealthy Thais.

[nurofiend]

I don't think this has anything to do with another country recognizing any corruption here, it's economics. If he's planning on buying another football league, anyone would let him in! Money talks, b.s. walks!

you think they're letting him in based on buying another football club?

how is it economics? and by that i mean they obviously aren't letting him in on expectation of him buying a football club! so how?

[Woodcaulk]

Noppadon said Thaksin was also considering travelling to the United States to meet his Thai supporters there.

Perhaps all three of them could meet him for lunch at the airport food court.

[FarangTalk]

Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Birma are inviting retires and second house owners.

I was under the impression Cambodia has almost exactly the same foreign property ownership laws as Thailand.

[Chang_paarp]

Given Taksin was found to not be a fit and proper person to own a EPL club, I wonder how he will convince the EPL he is a different person. Maybe it time to find a new maid and chauffeur.

[pauljones]

According to The Nation and Bangkok Post, England is holding 4 billion USD belonging to Thsksin.

[moe666]

I really do believe if Thailand would be more easy with foreign ownership off houses and residences this would boost the economy and increase cofidence from foreigners in Thailand. The current laws make it to risky for many to investment. Laws who prevent huge landpieces who can endanger food supply within Thailand I can understand, but all the rest is not fair. Thais can buy abroad. Farangs and expats here have to deal with risky and expensive loopholes. Neighboring countries are more easy and become more and more attractive. Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Birma are inviting retires and second house owners. Even in China a foreigner can buy. The houses and properties I talk about are not affordable for the average Thai. Only for the wealthy ones and with the current legislation Thailand only helps them, to become more wealthy. This is not at all beneficial to majority off Thais only to the happy few. The happy few can buy cheaply small plots from less fortunate Thais. Creating this way from several small plots one big one and sell it in a expensive and overpriced way as "freehold". There is no fair deal or competition for the small land or house owner. The market is exclusive for wealthy Thais.

Unless Burma has made changes in the last few weeks you are still only allowed 30 days visa. Because of the slow opening up of politics in Burma people think it has went fron closed off society to full open in only a few months. Hate too bust your bubble but not much has changed and retirees are not being welcomed with open arms. With all of it faults Thailand is still the best place too retire.Canbodia still abackwater 30 years behind thailand, Philippines lousy food and lots of crime, Laos communist, malaysia to many muslims, and Burma 30 years behind and military dictatorship. Edited April 29, 2012 by moe666

[Pseudolus]

Is there a list somewhere that details the politicians assets? Would be interesting to see how many of the piggies own houses overseas. I would think it is a very large percentage of them with Hottie Yingluck and Abhisit leading the pack.

EDIT --- ahhh "By law, only members of the cabinet needed to declare their assets".

Edited April 29, 2012 by Pseudolus

[pipo1000]

I really do believe if Thailand would be more easy with foreign ownership off houses and residences this would boost the economy and increase cofidence from foreigners in Thailand. The current laws make it to risky for many to investment. Laws who prevent huge landpieces who can endanger food supply within Thailand I can understand, but all the rest is not fair. Thais can buy abroad. Farangs and expats here have to deal with risky and expensive loopholes. Neighboring countries are more easy and become more and more attractive. Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia and Birma are inviting retires and second house owners. Even in China a foreigner can buy. The houses and properties I talk about are not affordable for the average Thai. Only for the wealthy ones and with the current legislation Thailand only helps them, to become more wealthy. This is not at all beneficial to majority off Thais only to the happy few. The happy few can buy cheaply small plots from less fortunate Thais. Creating this way from several small plots one big one and sell it in a expensive and overpriced way as "freehold". There is no fair deal or competition for the small land or house owner. The market is exclusive for wealthy Thais.

Unless Burma has made changes in the last few weeks you are still only allowed 30 days visa. Because of the slow opening up of politics in Burma people think it has went fron closed off society to full open in only a few months. Hate too bust your bubble but not much has changed and retirees are not being welcomed with open arms. With all of it faults Thailand is still the best place too retire.Canbodia still abackwater 30 years behind thailand, Philippines lousy food and lots of crime, Laos communist, malaysia to many muslims, and Burma 30 years behind and military dictatorship.

It couldn't have been explained in a better way

[NanLaew]

Maybe he can pay some of the tax he owes the British Government while he is here?

Have you paid yours there? Or here?

London is full of foreigners buying up all the property and making it unaffordable for the locals so I agree with the last poster.

But... you are here aren't you... or at least aspire to be, no? You want to buy a house and land here but deny the same for someone who prefers the UK to Thailand?

[animatic]

So much for the rule of law.

The rule of money trumps it.

[JoePai]

Maybe he can pay some of the tax he owes the British Government while he is here?

Have you paid yours there? Or here?

London is full of foreigners buying up all the property and making it unaffordable for the locals so I agree with the last poster.

But... you are here aren't you... or at least aspire to be, no? You want to buy a house and land here but deny the same for someone who prefers the UK to Thailand?

Pathetic reply - all people are asking for is equal treatment

[Pseudolus]

But... you are here aren't you... or at least aspire to be, no? You want to buy a house and land here but deny the same for someone who prefers the UK to Thailand?

:Sure, and why not. The problem is though that I can not own my house here in Thailand even though the reasons stated would not actually cause any significant problems for anyone apart from the rich elite who do not want competition in their niches of the market. In other countries though, people like Thaksin and Abhisit can own 100 + houses all in the range that average people can buy, earn fabulous amounts of wealth from it, and actually have the negative impact in those countries that would not actually happen here.

If they relaxed the home ownership laws here, the people that would suffer would the the middle, upper middle and hiso rich gits because the level of investment a farang would make would compete in their buying power window. It would also hit their rental income, as more supply of rental accommodation from a plethora of different landlords not all intent of screwing the tenant out of their deposit and jacking up the rent every term; I like living in Thailand, but I wish my landlord was a westerner. Also, the HiSo who own the banks would suffer slightly as not all property would be bought with mortgages. Also, the Thai house owners that make a fortune charging a premium to farangs will have a lot of their market sucked away from them as the same farangs buy their houses instead. So many reasons why this law is simply to protect the rich's interest, and has nothing to do with at all the poor ability to buy a house.

(Edit .......and they certainly do not want rental income going out of the country....just like it does in the UK from Thaksin et al)

And before I get the "if you don't like it, go home" comment; well that's just a load of rubbish and anyone that makes that comment really should accept that they have given up on life itself. There are many good and bad things about every country in the world; I am lucky enough though to have been brought up in a society that is encouraged to question and comment on things as opposed to being a state drone that bleats out the party line all day.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Pseudolus

[animatic]

You can own a house or any building in Thailand. You can not own the land it sits on.

You can have a 51% Thai company own the land and then you lease it.

In London most of the land is only available for 100 year leasing not for purchase.

Edited April 29, 2012 by animatic

[Pseudolus]

You can own a house or any building in Thailand. You can not own the land it sits on.

You can have a 51% Thai company own the land and then you lease it.

In London most of the land is only available for 100 year leasing not for purchase.

.....because it is owned by rich people like the Duke of Westminster.

However, how about the rest of the Country? Thaksin and his crownies can pop into Rural Wiltshire, buy a complete town, rent it out sending all the loot back the Thailand (well, the Seychelles at a guess) and nothing to stop them..

Edited April 29, 2012 by Pseudolus

[jayboy]

So much for the rule of law.

The rule of money trumps it.

Tricky dilemma for the usual suspects.Until recently they were maintaining the governments of the world (and Interpol) were co-operating to hunt the fugitive Thaksin down, and that he was restricted to shady business trips to various African hell holes.No civilised country would receive him.It was always of course complete nonsense, and in practice Thaksin travelled where he liked.The barmy component of the Thaksin haters (Kasit being the best example) was never able to demonstrate the charges against Thaksin weren't politically motivated, and the Wikileaks disclosures have confirmed that - not suggestiong of course there are not genuine abuses to be dealt with.It doesn't however surprise me the loony tunes element is now suggesting the British Government has been compromised by Thaksin's money.

[FarangTalk]

You can own a house or any building in Thailand. You can not own the land it sits on.

You can have a 51% Thai company own the land and then you lease it.

In London most of the land is only available for 100 year leasing not for purchase.

I believe using a Thai company to circumnavigate the Alien land ownership laws is a crime in itself.

[Breville]

Nothing but a low-life scumbag, and anyone who supports him, whether Thai or Westerner is lacking in both brains and morals.

[rixalex]

It doesn't however surprise me the loony tunes element is now suggesting the British Government has been compromised by Thaksin's money.

The looney tunes element would be the one suggesting that were Thaksin a "normal" Thai of modest means, British authorities would still be ignoring very plain and clear visa application rules on the matter of criminal convictions, that apply to all except the wealthy elite.

[ginjag]

Living in Soho for 10 years and buying Freehold, Westminster of all places, Then later selling I found although much was as you say leasehold a vast amount like mine was freehold. If you buy leasehold, who cares you are well and truly GONE before it expires. But before that anyone can sell leasehold if there are above 40 years left on the lease. However Thaksin got his property, is not for me to speculate, BUT looks like money is talkng. Who wants to buy a silly 25 years lease here. All posters are really wanting is a 40 meter x 40 meter or even less to build a house on, thus having no one kick you out. (90% of the time it will go to your Thai partner or the state) so why the hell are Thai authorities so pigged off with us ????? In most cases they don't deserve visitors here.

[jayboy]

The looney tunes element would be the one suggesting that were Thaksin a "normal" Thai of modest means, British authorities would still be ignoring very plain and clear visa application rules on the matter of criminal convictions, that apply to all except the wealthy elite.

I don't think a normal Thai of modest means would be pursued for reasons of political vindictiveness, so your comment doesn't make much sense.

[jimbeam1]

You can own a house or any building in Thailand. You can not own the land it sits on.

You can have a 51% Thai company own the land and then you lease it.

In London most of the land is only available for 100 year leasing not for purchase.

.....because it is owned by rich people like the Duke of Westminster.

However, how about the rest of the Country? Thaksin and his crownies can pop into Rural Wiltshire, buy a complete town, rent it out sending all the loot back the Thailand (well, the Seychelles at a guess) and nothing to stop them..

Hello who just moved the goalposts. Then proceeded to get lost.

jb1

[AleG]

So much for the rule of law.

The rule of money trumps it.

Tricky dilemma for the usual suspects.Until recently they were maintaining the governments of the world (and Interpol) were co-operating to hunt the fugitive Thaksin down, and that he was restricted to shady business trips to various African hell holes.No civilised country would receive him.It was always of course complete nonsense, and in practice Thaksin travelled where he liked.The barmy component of the Thaksin haters (Kasit being the best example) was never able to demonstrate the charges against Thaksin weren't politically motivated, and the Wikileaks disclosures have confirmed that - not suggestiong of course there are not genuine abuses to be dealt with.It doesn't however surprise me the loony tunes element is now suggesting the British Government has been compromised by Thaksin's money.

"never able to demonstrate the charges against Thaksin weren't politically motivated"

So what?, nobody can break the law unless he is accused by someone without political bias?

The "political motivated charges" mantra doesn't stop being a red herring no matter how many times is regurgitated; trying to conflate accusation with conviction.

[animatic]

The looney tunes element would be the one suggesting that were Thaksin a "normal" Thai of modest means, British authorities would still be ignoring very plain and clear visa application rules on the matter of criminal convictions, that apply to all except the wealthy elite.

I don't think a normal Thai of modest means would be pursued for reasons of political vindictiveness, so your comment doesn't make much sense.

Guess you have never lived in a small Thai village.