Thaksin Kicks Off U.S. Trip With Cheers And Jeers

[Buchholz]

A high ranking (former) political figure such as Thaksin would generally be granted a visa. He, and his lawyers, may have had to jump through a few hoops, but given the political muddle in Thailand, it would be granted. He no doubt got a waiver for his conviction.

Why didn't he go before? My guess is that he would have had interference from the previous government and it would have been advised against by the US Embassy in Bangkok. It would have made the smooth operation between the two countries a little bumpy. Also, if he did get a visa and travel to the US and the Thai gov't did ask for his detention and return, he would have been arrested. The US legal system can be pretty blind at times. He would likely not have gotten bail and would have been held in detention.

It would be neigh unto impossible to get the US government to agree not arrest or extradite him. What if the arrest warrant comes from another country? It won't be ignored even if Thailand doesn't want him arrested.

My view exactly.

Do either of you think that his visa application process extended past his lawyer Noppadon requesting it and jumping through a few hoops?

Do you not think his cousin the Foreign Minister played a pivotal role in obtaining it for him? The same as he did when Thaksin asked his cousin to get him a Japanese visa... which he did, and which was subsequently issued to Thaksin.

[Thai at Heart]

A high ranking (former) political figure such as Thaksin would generally be granted a visa. He, and his lawyers, may have had to jump through a few hoops, but given the political muddle in Thailand, it would be granted. He no doubt got a waiver for his conviction.

Why didn't he go before? My guess is that he would have had interference from the previous government and it would have been advised against by the US Embassy in Bangkok. It would have made the smooth operation between the two countries a little bumpy. Also, if he did get a visa and travel to the US and the Thai gov't did ask for his detention and return, he would have been arrested. The US legal system can be pretty blind at times. He would likely not have gotten bail and would have been held in detention.

It would be neigh unto impossible to get the US government to agree not arrest or extradite him. What if the arrest warrant comes from another country? It won't be ignored even if Thailand doesn't want him arrested.

My view exactly.

Do either of you think that his visa application process extended past his lawyer Noppadon requesting it and jumping through a few hoops?

Do you not think his cousin the Foreign Minister played a pivotal role in obtaining it for him? The same as he did when Thaksin asked his cousin to get him a Japanese visa... which he did, and which was subsequently issued to Thaksin.

I am sure it had to go further than that. He presumably didn't apply in Bangkok and do you presume that Noppadon has every US ambassador on speed dial in his phone.

[BuckarooBanzai]

My point being when are we going to start bashing England for letting T in the door or isn't this as much fun as bashing the US?

why only bash England, its the UK, Britian or the United Kingdom and they pulled his visa when this all kicked off

From the Nation:

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. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Thaksin-back-in-UK-eyeing-US-30180928.html

I was always under the impression London was in England but if you want to point the finger at the other countries in the UK for some bashing up to you. It appears his visa for the UK is intact.

[rixalex]

Although as stated, i don't think this US visit does particularly say much about how the US views his conviction, but rather about which way the political wind is blowing, i do fully appreciate that from an outsiders point of view, perhaps not being fully aware of certain details such as his assets concealment case, such as the fact that his party was in power when he was convicted, such as the fact that he tried to bribe the courts, such as the fact that he has never claimed innocence nor provided evidence to this effect... and perhaps hearing a lot more about such well advertised by his team matters as the fact that he was kicked out thanks to a coup, and that he remains popular, might easily lead one to believe that the court case against him was "politically motivated". I get that outsiders might reach that conclusion. What i don't get is insiders reaching that conclusion too. Are you such a person? If so you genuinely baffle me.

Well, the system in the US has chosen to ignore the fact that he has a conviction. That much we can see as clear as night and day.

No, it is just that it is so blatantly simple to look at the machinations of the last 10 years and realise that the courts have been making political decisions one way or another for ever depending on who has been in a position to lean on them the most. Some Thaksin won, some he lost, but it doesn't remove the idea or belief that the legal system swings one way and that depending on pressure being applied.

I have always maintained that the issue isn't the politicians it is the courts. For virtually every crappy self serving move that Thaksin and TRT/PTP made, the other political parties made one, and then throw in a coup, and it is virtually impossible for anyone on the outside to look at any legal decision made in the last 10 years and believe that there hasn't been a political element to the verdict. So, in a way, I wouldn't blame any country for saying, I really don't care about any legal judgement against any politician in Thailand in the last 10 years, all the decisions were shonky and I haven't got time to get into the minutiae of every judgement. I mean, whom wouldn't a Western court convict from the Thai parliament for corruption, conflict of interest, dodgy deals, backhanders? 95% of them?

They all stink to high heaven, and I completely expect in the next year or so, there will actually be some verdicts passed for corruption against some pretty senior Democrats for god knows what. They may stay and take their punishment, but don't be surprised if they skip out of town too. And then what are we to do, sit around and say "See he is s a convicted criminal, he gets what he deserves", when we know only full well, that if the Dems were in power, the cases would never come to see the light of day.

It isn't that Thaksin is the devil incarnate, and all the others are sweetness and light. They are all, and I mean all schisters, gangster and conmen of the highest quality, who are busy feathering their nests at the expense of the country. Abhisit and Korn may be the closest thing to approaching clean politicians, but even Abhisit has the most horrendous conflicts of interest through his family.

So I choose not to condemn Thaksin too much, he got caught and chose to run, even though irony or ironies, the dam_n system let him out, but condemn the system that continues to not deliver unbiased, non-political judgements to suit the flavour of the day.

Was that a "yes"?

[Buchholz]

A high ranking (former) political figure such as Thaksin would generally be granted a visa. He, and his lawyers, may have had to jump through a few hoops, but given the political muddle in Thailand, it would be granted. He no doubt got a waiver for his conviction.

Why didn't he go before? My guess is that he would have had interference from the previous government and it would have been advised against by the US Embassy in Bangkok. It would have made the smooth operation between the two countries a little bumpy. Also, if he did get a visa and travel to the US and the Thai gov't did ask for his detention and return, he would have been arrested. The US legal system can be pretty blind at times. He would likely not have gotten bail and would have been held in detention.

It would be neigh unto impossible to get the US government to agree not arrest or extradite him. What if the arrest warrant comes from another country? It won't be ignored even if Thailand doesn't want him arrested.

My view exactly.

Do either of you think that his visa application process extended past his lawyer Noppadon requesting it and jumping through a few hoops?

Do you not think his cousin the Foreign Minister played a pivotal role in obtaining it for him? The same as he did when Thaksin asked his cousin to get him a Japanese visa... which he did, and which was subsequently issued to Thaksin.

I am sure it had to go further than that. He presumably didn't apply in Bangkok and do you presume that Noppadon has every US ambassador on speed dial in his phone.

I was responding to the part about

He, and his lawyers, may have had to jump through a few hoops

with the contention that that they were probably not enough, but when the Foreign Minister is added to the picture, it becomes more feasible for him to obtain a visa.

That's how it worked when he was issued a visa to go to Japan. The Foreign Minister intervened on his behalf to obtain it.

.

[Scott]

My guess is that he filled in the forms and provided them with whatever information they requested. From there they probably consulted with the people handling the Thai section at the State Department and they probably talked with the Ambassador here in Thailand, who would have the information on the gov'ts stance and what, if any implication there would be to granting the visa.

Once the lower levels had all the information it probably was discussed--briefly, with the higher echelons at the Dept. of State, and then approved.

He's lived in a number of countries, including the US. He has not violated the rules of his entry to those countries. He (seems) to have complied with the wishes of his host countries. The problems seem to be strictly between Thaksin and certain elements of Thai society. As far as granting/not granting a visa, he's a reasonably good risk for granting a visa.

[Buchholz]

My guess is that he filled in the forms and provided them with whatever information they requested. From there they probably consulted with the people handling the Thai section at the State Department and they probably talked with the Ambassador here in Thailand, who would have the information on the gov'ts stance and what, if any implication there would be to granting the visa.

Once the lower levels had all the information it probably was discussed--briefly, with the higher echelons at the Dept. of State, and then approved.

He's lived in a number of countries, including the US. He has not violated the rules of his entry to those countries. He (seems) to have complied with the wishes of his host countries. The problems seem to be strictly between Thaksin and certain elements of Thai society. As far as granting/not granting a visa, he's a reasonably good risk for granting a visa.

Somehow I think getting a visa to the USA was tougher than getting one for Japan (although they are certainly stringent in their own right in comparison to most).

If it necessitated the Foreign Minister's intervention in order to get Thaksin a visa to go to Japan, I'd find it hard to believe the Foreign Minister wasn't also involved in getting one for the USA and that it extended far beyond a lawyer filing a few papers and shuffling them about.

He hasn't been to the USA for six years. I also find it extremely difficult to believe he's not inquired before now about obtaining a visa. As the entry legitimizes his stance of being a victim of a political witch-hunt as soon it occurs (as evidenced in this thread), one would have to believe he's been trying periodically to obtain one all along during that period.

The difference is now he can have the request made from a Foreign Minister's position.

.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Buchholz

[Skywalker69]

South Korean bodyguards.

So he don´t trust Thais?

Would you?

He don´t trust his own people. I mostly trust my own people.

[hellodolly]

*Deleted quote edited out*

I doubt we will ever know. Both scenarios have merit.

What bothers me is why any government would worry about why the criminal was charged. They should be more concerned with the fact that the criminal is guilty.

It's like saying if I do the same thing and as guilty as Thaksin but I am charged and convicted because I did the crime the States will not give me a visa. But if I did it and was guilty but was charged because it made Thaakson dumb ass cabinet member look bad the states would say OK here is your visa

Edited August 9, 2012 by Scott
Deleted quote removed

[PoodMaiDai]

Reds and Yellows in the USA.

Where are the abusive US police when you need them?

[wlcart]

My father is very ill back in the states. He cannot travel. The US government will not give my daughters' Thai grandmother (my mother-in-law) a tourist visa. My father and my wife's mother will never meet thanks to the US government.

However, Thaksin, a convicted criminal on the lamb, can get a tourist visa to the US.

That is plain wrong!

[harrry]

Should the United States fail to take Thaksin into custody, it could be translated as the US government having no regard for the Thai judicial system, he said.- was there ever any doubt...

They can only take him into custody if Thailand asks them to, he actually hasnt committed a crime in the US

If he ticked no on any of the boxes he has.

[Moruya]

Should the United States fail to take Thaksin into custody, it could be translated as the US government having no regard for the Thai judicial system, he said.- was there ever any doubt...

They can only take him into custody if Thailand asks them to, he actually hasnt committed a crime in the US

Unless he was a mentally impaired British youth who hacked into the Pentagon of course......

[rixalex]

In terms of believing that the judgement against Thaksin was politically motivated, yup. I do.

Rather than getting into a lot of generalisations about how bad the system is, and how many iffy decisions there have been, which is easy to do, can you then tell me what specifically about this case for which he was convicted, based on the evidence you saw, that makes you think that legally he was treated unfairly?

[Scott]

Somehow I think getting a visa to the USA was tougher than getting one for Japan (although they are certainly stringent in their own right in comparison to most).

If it necessitated the Foreign Minister's intervention in order to get Thaksin a visa to go to Japan, I'd find it hard to believe the Foreign Minister wasn't also involved in getting one for the USA and that it extended far beyond a lawyer filing a few papers and shuffling them about.

He hasn't been to the USA for six years. I also find it extremely difficult to believe he's not inquired before now about obtaining a visa. As the entry legitimizes his stance of being a victim of a political witch-hunt as soon it occurs (as evidenced in this thread), one would have to believe he's been trying periodically to obtain one all along during that period.

The difference is now he can have the request made from a Foreign Minister's position.

.

You could be right about the Foreign Minister.

My guess is that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was in contact with the embassy in Thailand on the issue.

Japan is much more 'Asian' in how they handle things so the personal touch would be viewed differently than with the US where it might be viewed as an attempt to interfere.

He had to get all his ducks in order on the application, otherwise it would have simply been rejected. So, undoubtedly, some fairly high level people in Thailand had to voice their opinion that such a move would not be viewed as a detriment to the relationship of the two countries etc. etc..

My work in this area was a long time ago, so things have certainly changed. I also worked with a different group of people. I do know that some groups get a sort of preferential treatment--I would assume that former heads of state would fall into that category.

I am sure he also had to get a waiver for his conviction. I know a lot of Middle Easterners and Aficans (Nelson Mandela, for example) have to get one.

[Scott]

Posts and replies that are overly critical of the Thai judicial system and its rulings have been removed. Please exercise care in your comments about the Thai judicial system.

Other off-topic posts have also been removed.

[Thai at Heart]

In terms of believing that the judgement against Thaksin was politically motivated, yup. I do.

Rather than getting into a lot of generalisations about how bad the system is, and how many iffy decisions there have been, which is easy to do, can you then tell me what specifically about this case for which he was convicted, based on the evidence you saw, that makes you think that legally he was treated unfairly?

Well we could start by discussing whether or not the FIDF was a government institution at all......According to the Bank of Thailand at the time it wasn't, but subsequently it was, I wonder if it is today? Why does it take a court to work out whether an institution is a government institution or not?

You miss my point, and maybe I got my meaning wrong by saying the judgement was political. He played the game as it was always played. Be in power, and win. He was guilty of wrongdoing as judged on the day. But it still took a hell of an amount of legalese to define whether the various organisations were state entities or not. It worked for everyone else before, but largely they have got off scot free without anyone pointing too much of a finger at them.

It is how the court system came to be rejigged to change the situation to make sure they got him which is my issue. Would the case have ever come to light if the coup hadn't happened, if the Dems hadn't boycotted the election, the yellows hadn't protested for months, and god knows who else involved....

The system should be able to stand on its own two feet and make these decisions impartially without having to resort to the extremes that have been happening in Thailand for the last 10 years. It is the very idea that rules are there to be bent and interpreted that is the issue. There are either laws and fair judgements or there are not.

This was something I found in the nations blogs, there are literally thousands of posts out there discussing the rights and wrongs of what happened.

http://blog.nationmultimedia.com/print.php?id=13430

The FIDF appointed two committees to supervise the bidding process, the bid acceptance committee and the price opening committee. There were 4 potential bidders. But before each potential bidder can submit a bid, their qualification must be approved by these committees. One of the potential bidders was disqualified because their attorney who submitted the bid was not properly authorized. Khunying Pajamarn (offered B772 Mil) and two others are found to be qualified. The other two were publicly listed real estate developers, Noble Development Public Co. LTD. (offered B750 Mil), and House Public Co. LTD. (offered B730 Mil).

In December 2003, after the opening of the bidding price, the committee held a meeting to approve the sale to the highest bidder and the Land Sale and Purchased Agreement was signed with Khunyin Pajamarn.

Also in December 2003, Thaksin, as a husband, signed the consent form required to effect the registration of the land transfer.

As part of the formality of any registration of real estate requiring spousal consent,

... he used his official identity card. It shows his official title as Prime Minister.

And this is important… Prior to putting down his signature, it was confirmed that the office of the Prime Minister is neither the office in charge of, nor has the authority to direct or supervise the FIDF. This is supported by the Supreme Court decision No. 4655/2533 which ruled that the FIDF is a separate and distinct juristic body independent from the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Thailand. It has its own rights and duty in accordance with laws and regulations within the boundary of its objectives.

This has been raked over 1000 times, but was it an absolutely clear abuse of a member of government entering into a contract with a state enterprise? Hardly, but that is the way the court saw it on the day.

[h90]

My father is very ill back in the states. He cannot travel. The US government will not give my daughters' Thai grandmother (my mother-in-law) a tourist visa. My father and my wife's mother will never meet thanks to the US government.

However, Thaksin, a convicted criminal on the lamb, can get a tourist visa to the US.

That is plain wrong!

Where is the money in your father meets his wife's mother?

Money is the reason for decisions not some humanity or lives. See the recent wars, that is a much heavier example than the visas.

It is sad but it is the way it is. Both Thailand and USA aren't really Democracies.

[Bung]

The US let Mugabe in to their country, why not Thaksin? They are pretty similar people.

[Thai at Heart]

My point being when are we going to start bashing England for letting T in the door or isn't this as much fun as bashing the US?

why only bash England, its the UK, Britian or the United Kingdom and they pulled his visa when this all kicked off

The Celts would have seen through him and his evil ways.

The English, however, nicknamed him Frank and permitted him to purchase, rape and sell Man City.

Within days of the coup, there was a splurge of discussion about various companies having nominee shareholding structures one of which was a pretty prominent British retailer. I can understand why Thaksin's visa was quickly squished to protect British business...... All very hypocritical, but heh, that's $$$$$$

[Thai at Heart]

The US let Mugabe in to their country, why not Thaksin? They are pretty similar people.

I think you will find that the Mugabe clan are far more regular visitors to Thailand.

[toenail]

Maybe Thaksin is in the USA to have talks with presidential candidate Mitt Romney to learn how to hide money in overseas bank accounts.

[khaowong1]

Maybe the U.S. asked the Thai government before they issued the visa. And maybe they also agreed to no extradition. There's a lot that goes on behind the scenes that we don't know about.

This is the most probably scenario. The US immigration asked the This Embassy if they wanted to proceed with the extradition of Thaksin and they said no. I was once many years ago, on a vacation in the carribbean, when I returned to Miami, I was held for several hours at the airport while the immigration authorities checked with Oklahoma, where I was living at the time, and had a felony arrest warrant pending on me, that I didn't know about. Oklahoma said no, no extradition was necessary, and I was released. Fixing the problem when I got back home. So, my guess is, the US officials asked the Thai government and they said no. However, this does not excuse the US government from letting a convicted felon into their country. Has to be a political thing.

[alanferdi]

Ah but the problem Khun Suriyasai is that for an arrest and extradition to take place, the country were the criminal is wanted has to requested it, if Thailand doesnt request his arrest the US will do nothing, however has the US acted inappropriately in this case granting a visa to a well know fugitive....most certainly

Justice sucks? Korean Bodyguards..... chinese mind!

[longtom]

Well, the system in the US has chosen to ignore the fact that he has a conviction. That much we can see as clear as night and day.

No, it is just that it is so blatantly simple to look at the machinations of the last 10 years and realise that the courts have been making political decisions one way or another for ever depending on who has been in a position to lean on them the most. Some Thaksin won, some he lost, but it doesn't remove the idea or belief that the legal system swings one way and that depending on pressure being applied.

I have always maintained that the issue isn't the politicians it is the courts. For virtually every crappy self serving move that Thaksin and TRT/PTP made, the other political parties made one, and then throw in a coup, and it is virtually impossible for anyone on the outside to look at any legal decision made in the last 10 years and believe that there hasn't been a political element to the verdict. So, in a way, I wouldn't blame any country for saying, I really don't care about any legal judgement against any politician in Thailand in the last 10 years, all the decisions were shonky and I haven't got time to get into the minutiae of every judgement. I mean, whom wouldn't a Western court convict from the Thai parliament for corruption, conflict of interest, dodgy deals, backhanders? 95% of them?

They all stink to high heaven, and I completely expect in the next year or so, there will actually be some verdicts passed for corruption against some pretty senior Democrats for god knows what. They may stay and take their punishment, but don't be surprised if they skip out of town too. And then what are we to do, sit around and say "See he is s a convicted criminal, he gets what he deserves", when we know only full well, that if the Dems were in power, the cases would never come to see the light of day.

It isn't that Thaksin is the devil incarnate, and all the others are sweetness and light. They are all, and I mean all schisters, gangster and conmen of the highest quality, who are busy feathering their nests at the expense of the country. Abhisit and Korn may be the closest thing to approaching clean politicians, but even Abhisit has the most horrendous conflicts of interest through his family.

So I choose not to condemn Thaksin too much, he got caught and chose to run, even though irony or ironies, the dam_n system let him out, but condemn the system that continues to not deliver unbiased, non-political judgements to suit the flavour of the day.

Simple but perfect summary of the Thai justice system imo , detailed discussions of all the court cases won't result in any deeper insight.

[charmonman]

Hope he chokes on a rack ribs there. Or maybe he is there to personally deliver a donation to Mr Obama's re-election campaign.

That seems unlikely. He has much more in common with Obama's opponent Mitt Romney after all. They are both extremely rich businessmen who like to avoid paying taxes.

[Thai at Heart]

Hope he chokes on a rack ribs there. Or maybe he is there to personally deliver a donation to Mr Obama's re-election campaign.

That seems unlikely. He has much more in common with Obama's opponent Mitt Romney after all. They are both extremely rich businessmen who like to avoid paying taxes.

I wonder if Romney would realise he isn't meeting the " President of Taiwan"

Edited August 9, 2012 by Thai at Heart

[joseph49]

could he not have take-away?

[coma]

Hope he chokes on a rack ribs there. Or maybe he is there to personally deliver a donation to Mr Obama's re-election campaign.

That seems unlikely. He has much more in common with Obama's opponent Mitt Romney after all. They are both extremely rich businessmen who like to avoid paying taxes.

Romney has been traveling around and talking like the third anti christ. If he gets elected bad thing will happen. And they will be way out of the leage of small fry like Thaksin. Let the forces above help us all. Cause these two idiots surely won't.

[NomadJoe]

I miss Domino's Pizza.