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

[hawker9000]

"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."

I'm perplexed. I wonder why any country would have no regard for a judicial system that just allowed bail for, and released a number of convicted murderers who were on death row.

You wonder why? This is Obamaland. The only laws enforced are the ones the Big O cares to HAVE enforced. With so little regard for our own judicial system, why in the world would you think there'd be any concern over anyone else's?

[ddye123]

Is Thaksin in the U.S.? The only papers or news organizations reporting this are Thai. I wait to see proof he is even in the U.S.

[ttelise]

"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."

I'm perplexed. I wonder why any country would have no regard for a judicial system that just allowed bail for, and released a number of convicted murderers who were on death row.

You wonder why? This is Obamaland. The only laws enforced are the ones the Big O cares to HAVE enforced. With so little regard for our own judicial system, why in the world would you think there'd be any concern over anyone else's?

Which laws does Big O enforce and which laws does he not enforce. Give me examples of US judicial system failures or what you mean by so little regard for our judicial system. I practice in Federal Courts all throughout the Country as my clients are nationwide. I see our system working very well even though I may personally disagree with certain holdings or policies. Personal disagreement does not mean system is not functioning properly or that the President has no regard for the US judicial system. Candidly, the president has no power over the judicial system except the power to appoint Federal judges. All influence ends there as Federal judges are then appointed for life.

[jerrysteve]

Thailand is the one who has acted in appropriately for their lack of respect for law and order, not the U.S.A.

How in the world can anyone or country including the U.S.A. have respect for Thailand and its powers to be,

when they do not even respect themselves, or

more appropriately, the powers to be have NO REGARD FOR THEIR OWN JUDICAL SYSTEM.

One cannot make chicken soup out of chicken feces!

Cases in point: Ez-bribe cards, letting convicted murderers go free on bail, and the list goes on and on and on and on infinitum.

[moe666]

I guess if you have enough money,anything is possible,even a U.S. Visa

Thats true many rich chinese have been buying green cards for themselves and family. I think it is at least half million investment or more.

[moe666]

"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."

I'm perplexed. I wonder why any country would have no regard for a judicial system that just allowed bail for, and released a number of convicted murderers who were on death row.

You wonder why? This is Obamaland. The only laws enforced are the ones the Big O cares to HAVE enforced. With so little regard for our own judicial system, why in the world would you think there'd be any concern over anyone else's?

I take it you are a Mitt supporter.yuk

[moe666]

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!

They have very strict rules for poor or middle class people and enforce them.

[moe666]

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.

Everything envoled is political because of Big Ts money, pior position ,PM, and his sister being PM didn't anyone see the photos of Hillary and Yingluck in Cambodia. acting like old friends.

[ttelise]

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!

They have very strict rules for poor or middle class people and enforce them.

Because too many poor have entered, never left and became more of a drain on our economy. You can thank of those before you who ruined it for you.

Look, I deal with same issues as my wife is Russian. She has a master's degree and has been here for 10 years working as an investment banker. Her mother comes here for visits, but not any other family member. We go to Russia or meet in Thailand when seeing rest of family and friends.

[nurofiend]

so it wasn't all some trumped up red propaganda lie ....

[waza]

The PTP, Prem, Redshirts, Amsterdam, Thai PM, Thai government, Carlye Group, International Crisis Group, UN, et al have sold the lie that Thaksin is a victim of an almart conspiratory and that his removal and conviction were politically motivated. He is portrayed as the Nelson Mandela of South East Asian by people such as ......

William Conway, managing director and co-founder of the Carlyle Group, was talking recently about the media coverage of his bank and the cast of ex-Presidents and former officials, including George H.W. Bush, James Baker III and Frank Carlucci, on its payroll. http://rense.com/general21/gf.htm

But in reality he is............

Edited August 9, 2012 by waza

[BuckarooBanzai]

Thailand is the one who has acted in appropriately for their lack of respect for law and order, not the U.S.A.

How in the world can anyone or country including the U.S.A. have respect for Thailand and its powers to be,

when they do not even respect themselves, or

more appropriately, the powers to be have NO REGARD FOR THEIR OWN JUDICAL SYSTEM.

One cannot make chicken soup out of chicken feces!

Cases in point: Ez-bribe cards, letting convicted murderers go free on bail, and the list goes on and on and on and on infinitum.

While I agree with your sentiments I just wanted to point out to you that the article on the EZ-bribe was a satirical sketch by "Not The Nation". Sadly you still need to use cash for the bribery.This thread has been a catharsis for many TV posters as they get to bash both T and the US and sometimes even Thailand all at the sames time. It seems for some that bashing is their favorite past time in life and even better than a wet dream. But as all threads go this will eventually fade and they will focus their rancor on some other aspect of T or his sister or the reds or the yellows or the US or Thailand. Many of these people are very predictable.Wouldn't life be different if people used the power of positive thinking as a rule instead of the demoralizing and demeaning effects of negative thinking. Provides some insight into ones mental well being ie. "crabby old man syndrome". Hope T has a wonderful visit in the US and meets Montezuma at they upper class venue he is visiting in LA. See, only positive thoughts.

[nurofiend]

Is Thaksin in the U.S.? The only papers or news organizations reporting this are Thai. I wait to see proof he is even in the U.S.

yeah, i bet it's a conspiracy!

Edited August 9, 2012 by nurofiend

[Mosha]

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!

If it happened to me I'd lodge a complaint with the embassey

[Buchholz]

Is Thaksin in the U.S.? The only papers or news organizations reporting this are Thai. I wait to see proof he is even in the U.S.

I think he is there visiting, but his itinerary and movements are also very revealing.

No outside media involvement, no meetings with anyone other than a handful of Red Shirts at crappy restaurants, no video call-ins back to Thailand, it's all exceedingly out of character for the publicity hound to be so low key.

One might gather from this is that, unlike Dubai, the USA is holding him to Dubai's stance that he is to avoid all political activity as a conditional requirement for him to visit.

.

Edited August 10, 2012 by Buchholz

[biplanebluey]

I can only hope the Yanks give him the same warm treatment they gave to a famous Aussie visitor, Phar Lap.

Kiwi Visiter !!!!

[Buchholz]

so it wasn't all some trumped up red propaganda lie ....

that applied to his earlier "visit"...

given the sea of countless other previous lies, it's really not surprising that some might have thought it just another one.

Thaksin to Visit USA to Testify in Human Rights Briefing

Noppadon Pattama, the legal representative for Thaksin, said Monday that the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe has invited him to testify in the U.S. capital on December 16 [2010].

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4070815

*bold and year added

,

Edited August 10, 2012 by Buchholz

[biplanebluey]

I see no people cheering and jeering----- I see no bodyguards ------ I see no red shirts -------I see no yellow shirts. I see a man getting out of a car somewhere in the world ! <deleted> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[scorecard]

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?

Geez Thai at heart, how many times will this need to be explained.

He has been charged with numerous offences, most of which cannot proceed because the thai law says he must be present in Thailand.

But the one conviction recorded against him, with a sentence already handed down of two years jail was heard and completed before he took himself into self imposed exile. He was sentenced to two years jail, given bail and allowed, at his request, to travel to China / Hong Kong for the olympic games. Bail was granted (stupidly) on his promise that he would return, he didn't, he broke his promise / broke his bail conditions and absconded - self imposed exile.

The case he was convicted on was a case of abuse of authority. In almost every county there are laws which say that politicians and their immediate family cannot buy state assets, and more. The said law is there for very good reasons - to stop unscrupulous people, who find themselves in positions of power from taking the common assets of the people. The said law is an old and very appropriate law, it's been on the statute books of Thailand for decades. Any suggestion that it was a new law created by the junta government or more recent goverrnments is totally false and is totally untruthfull.

The paymaster and his (former) wife both knew very well that he could not sign a document to approve sale of commonwealth property (land) to his wife. They are both well informed people dealing with legal matters continuously in the course of business, they both had / have numerous high profile lawyers in their enterages, there is no way they did not know the law, and in any case ignornance of the law is no excuse - a well established tenant of the law.

In reality there were bidders for the land in question but somehow that round of bidding was cancelled. In quick time the paymasters wife was the only bidder offering well under the value of the property. The paymaster signed on behalf of the state to close the sale - to his wife. His action was totally illegal and totally immoral.

In more recent time the paymaster, especially in the run up to the last election had several warcrys, one of which was 'fight for democracy and justice for all', but in reality his actions are the opposite.

It's also true that that very senior state officials at the photo op (there were photos in the media of him signing the state documents) knew very well that what they were witnesssing was totally illegal and they had a duty to say that it was illegal and could not proceed - they said nothing, just smiled. They were in fact derelict in their responsibilities to the state - the people of Thailand.

Also, the case was heard and the verdict given and the two year sentence imposed under a paymaster puppet PM - his own party.

None of the above is opinion, it's hard fact. How can anybody possibly say this case was politically motivated?

Edited August 10, 2012 by scorecard

[theblether]

The US is out of order in granting this visa. Take out all the corruption allegations ( convictions ) etc, they have granted a visa to the man that oversaw the extrajudicial execution of 2500 people during the drug clampdown.

You can't even say it was the execution of drug suspects, as it was only last week several police were convicted of murdering a young boy at that time, under the guise of this clampdown.

TS should be arrested for that policy alone, the US has disgraced itself by issuing this visa to a man with a diabolical human rights record.

[lovetotravel]

The US is out of order in granting this visa. Take out all the corruption allegations ( convictions ) etc, they have granted a visa to the man that oversaw the extrajudicial execution of 2500 people during the drug clampdown.

You can't even say it was the execution of drug suspects, as it was only last week several police were convicted of murdering a young boy at that time, under the guise of this clampdown.

TS should be arrested for that policy alone, the US has disgraced itself by issuing this visa to a man with a diabolical human rights record.

Although I agree with you here, he's not been convicted of these human rights violations? Right? If not, what can the US do??? Thailand has to convict him first, and we know that will never happen.

Putin visits the US and look at Russia's human rights issues. Not to mention so many other nations. Sad, isn't it?

[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?

Geez Thai at heart, how many times will this need to be explained.

He has been charged with numerous offences, most of which cannot proceed because the thai law says he must be present in Thailand.

But the one conviction recorded against him, with a sentence already handed down of two years jail was heard and completed before he took himself into self imposed exile. He was sentenced to two years jail, given bail and allowed, at his request, to travel to China / Hong Kong for the olympic games. Bail was granted (stupidly) on his promise that he would return, he didn't, he broke his promise / broke his bail conditions and absconded - self imposed exile.

The case he was convicted on was a case of abuse of authority. In almost every county there are laws which say that politicians and their immediate family cannot buy state assets, and more. The said law is there for very good reasons - to stop unscrupulous people, who find themselves in positions of power from taking the common assets of the people. The said law is an old and very appropriate law, it's been on the statute books of Thailand for decades. Any suggestion that it was a new law created by the junta government or more recent goverrnments is totally false and is totally untruthfull.

The paymaster and his (former) wife both knew very well that he could not sign a document to approve sale of commonwealth property (land) to his wife. They are both well informed people dealing with legal matters continuously in the course of business, they both had / have numerous high profile lawyers in their enterages, there is no way they did not know the law, and in any case ignornance of the law is no excuse - a well established tenant of the law.

In reality there were bidders for the land in question but somehow that round of bidding was cancelled. In quick time the paymasters wife was the only bidder offering well under the value of the property. The paymaster signed on behalf of the state to close the sale - to his wife. His action was totally illegal and totally immoral.

In more recent time the paymaster, especially in the run up to the last election had several warcrys, one of which was 'fight for democracy and justice for all', but in reality his actions are the opposite.

It's also true that that very senior state officials at the photo op (there were photos in the media of him signing the state documents) knew very well that what they were witnesssing was totally illegal and they had a duty to say that it was illegal and could not proceed - they said nothing, just smiled. They were in fact derelict in their responsibilities to the state - the people of Thailand.

Also, the case was heard and the verdict given and the two year sentence imposed under a paymaster puppet PM - his own party.

None of the above is opinion, it's hard fact. How can anybody possibly say this case was politically motivated?

If you read my entire reply, the question of the entire issue about the Rachadapisek deal was, was the FIDF a government entity?

It took a court judgement to decide whether it was, which hardly makes it a cut and dried case in my eyes. Yes he's be accused of myriad other things, but the thing they got him on is the Rachada case.

Edited August 10, 2012 by Thai at Heart

[scorecard]

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?

Geez Thai at heart, how many times will this need to be explained.

He has been charged with numerous offences, most of which cannot proceed because the thai law says he must be present in Thailand.

But the one conviction recorded against him, with a sentence already handed down of two years jail was heard and completed before he took himself into self imposed exile. He was sentenced to two years jail, given bail and allowed, at his request, to travel to China / Hong Kong for the olympic games. Bail was granted (stupidly) on his promise that he would return, he didn't, he broke his promise / broke his bail conditions and absconded - self imposed exile.

The case he was convicted on was a case of abuse of authority. In almost every county there are laws which say that politicians and their immediate family cannot buy state assets, and more. The said law is there for very good reasons - to stop unscrupulous people, who find themselves in positions of power from taking the common assets of the people. The said law is an old and very appropriate law, it's been on the statute books of Thailand for decades. Any suggestion that it was a new law created by the junta government or more recent goverrnments is totally false and is totally untruthfull.

The paymaster and his (former) wife both knew very well that he could not sign a document to approve sale of commonwealth property (land) to his wife. They are both well informed people dealing with legal matters continuously in the course of business, they both had / have numerous high profile lawyers in their enterages, there is no way they did not know the law, and in any case ignornance of the law is no excuse - a well established tenant of the law.

In reality there were bidders for the land in question but somehow that round of bidding was cancelled. In quick time the paymasters wife was the only bidder offering well under the value of the property. The paymaster signed on behalf of the state to close the sale - to his wife. His action was totally illegal and totally immoral.

In more recent time the paymaster, especially in the run up to the last election had several warcrys, one of which was 'fight for democracy and justice for all', but in reality his actions are the opposite.

It's also true that that very senior state officials at the photo op (there were photos in the media of him signing the state documents) knew very well that what they were witnesssing was totally illegal and they had a duty to say that it was illegal and could not proceed - they said nothing, just smiled. They were in fact derelict in their responsibilities to the state - the people of Thailand.

Also, the case was heard and the verdict given and the two year sentence imposed under a paymaster puppet PM - his own party.

None of the above is opinion, it's hard fact. How can anybody possibly say this case was politically motivated?

If you read my entire reply, the question of the entire issue about the Rachadapisek deal was, was the FIDF a government entity?

It took a court judgement to decide whether it was, which hardly makes it a cut and dried case in my eyes. Yes he's be accused of myriad other things, but the thing they got him on is the Rachada case.

You can try to twist it if it makes you feel happy, the agency selling the land is a government entity and that's fact, there is no doubt whatever that he broke the law.

There is no question mark whatever, this was not a politically motivated case.

[Docno]

Look, regardless of where you stand on Thaksin, the facts of the matter are these: he was democratically elected, ousted in a coup, and then convicted in absentia under a government that was effectively installed by the coup-makers. Under a subsequent election, Thaksin's party was again elected into power. So even if Thaksin is fully guilty of the charges against him, his conviction will necessarily be seen as being politically motivated, at least in part. The US authorities will of course get the same story from the current Thai government, which would only serve to corroborate this perception. So it shouldn't be surprising if a visa were granted (especially as it would have been supported by the Thai authorities).

By way of comparison, China considers the Dalai Lama to be a criminal of even greater dimensions (responsible, in their eyes, for terrorism and treason). However, that does not prevent the US and other countries from allowing him to visit because they understand that these accusations are politically motivated. Of course, I am NOT saying that the Dalai Lama and Thaksin are on the 'same level' in any respect, only that the US will understandably be more flexible in granting visas to 'criminals' when the criminal charges are seen to have a political dimension. [And, yes, I expect the Thaksin-haters to ignore this and flame me nonetheless.... asbestos suit on...]

[AleG]

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.

Has there ever been a "CEO" president/PM that wasn't a complete disaster for their country? Of the top of my head I can think of Berlusconi, Bush, Fujimori in Chile, Menem in Argentina, and of course Thaksin here in Thailand. Any others?

[geriatrickid]

The US is out of order in granting this visa. Take out all the corruption allegations ( convictions ) etc, they have granted a visa to the man that oversaw the extrajudicial execution of 2500 people during the drug clampdown.

You can't even say it was the execution of drug suspects, as it was only last week several police were convicted of murdering a young boy at that time, under the guise of this clampdown.

TS should be arrested for that policy alone, the US has disgraced itself by issuing this visa to a man with a diabolical human rights record.

Dr. Thaksin was cleared in multiple investigations.

The former military junta and defeated PM Abhisit's administration(s) had the opportunity to charge Dr. Thaksin for the allegations you raise. No charges were brought.

You are entitled to your erroneous beliefs. However, your beliefs do not establish a fact.

Dr. Thaksin's leadership against the drug cartels stopped Thailand from becoming another Columbia or Mexico. It is one of the reasons why no foreign governemnts criticize him in this matter.

[geriatrickid]

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.

Has there ever been a "CEO" president/PM that wasn't a complete disaster for their country? Of the top of my head I can think of Berlusconi, Bush, Fujimori in Chile, Menem in Argentina, and of course Thaksin here in Thailand. Any others?

Paul Martin was head of the multinational Canadian Steamship Lines. His leadership as finance minsiter and as PM saw Canada pay down its debt, and balance its budget. And before you dismiss Canada as a nothing country, it currently has one of the strongest economies and banking systems in the world. That was his legacy. His father was a cabinet minister too. There are examples in some Scandanavian countries as well.

[Ricardo]

Look, regardless of where you stand on Thaksin, the facts of the matter are these: he was democratically elected, ousted in a coup, and then convicted in absentia under a government that was effectively installed by the coup-makers. Under a subsequent election, Thaksin's party was again elected into power.

<snip for brevity>

With respect, I must disagree with your claimed "facts of the matter" :-

1. He resigned as elected-PM, to run the election in April-2006, and thus became merely caretaker-PM, no longer "democratically elected" as had previously been. I do accept that this is a subtle difference, but nevertheless real.

2. His maximum-6-months term as caretaker-PM had expired, by the time of the coup in September 2006, yet he was still trying to pretend that he was legally PM. You may remember that he was being abandoned by members of his Cabinet, as the summer & political-crisis continued, through the summer of that year.

3. His conviction took place, not under the junta-appointed government of PM-Sorayud, but under the later elected PPP-led coalition-government then led by PM-Somchai (Thaksin's then brother-in-law), which took-power (under the late PM-Samak) in January-2008 after the democratic-elections of December-2007.

4. He was sentenced in-absentia, only because he'd 'done a runner', and you may also recall that someone had tried to bribe the judges (the 'Lunch-Box scandal') for which at least one of Thaksin's lawyers later served time. He'd previously expressed full confidence, in the justice of the court and any outcome, so clearly did not feel at-the-time that he was being railroaded.

No need for an asbestos suit, I shall endeavour not to flame, but merely wish to try to get the facts right.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Good discussion Docno and Ricardo. Good example of well mannered debate.

[rixalex]

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.nationmu...nt.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.

Whilst i get why you have in general such a dim view of the judicial system and feel that pretty much every verdict is open to questioning, for my money, the problem far far and away, concerns instances in which the wealthy and powerful accused gets away with blatant criminality, and not the other way around, with the wealthy and powerful accused getting convicted of that that they did not commit. I really don't perceive that as being the burning problem here.

And the problem with calling into question the entire system as you do, is that it plays perfectly into the hands of those wealthy and powerful that do break the law, as you ably demonstrate in the case above regarding Thaksin. Any element of the case for which legally there could have been different interpretations, is immediately held up as proof positive of a political element. Had FIDF been deemed not a government institution, there would be claims from the prosecution of it being political, just as vice versa, with FIDF being deemed a government institution, as indeed it was, we have Thaksin's camp calling it political. Basically it gets to the point when no decision of the court is above being undermined and dismissed, when it suits people to do so.... which as i say, is all terribly convenient.

As you stated in a previous post, 95% of these politicians are indeed corrupt crooks, who are accustomed to not having to be bothered by the laws that everyone else in society has to follow. The day when for once, one of these people is actually held to account, and is not allowed to use their power and influence to subvert justice, i would have thought would be a day you would celebrate. Even if you have question marks about specifics of the case, are you not inclined to think, well either way, there is no doubt that he has broken laws - you need only look within the short period of this trial to see evidence of that with the attempted bribe and the fleeing - and so take the attitude that one way or another, he got what he deserved (indeed when you start considering all the other cases against him, you might argue he has got a lot less than he deserves). Some might call it karma.

But instead of celebrating this one small step forward that could potentially, eventually pave the way for greater accountability, you seem to prefer dwelling on all the others who have got away, with the underlying suggestion that if others can get away with it, why not Thaksin? It gets to the point, certainly with red shirt supporters, that he is deemed worthy of sympathy and pity in their eyes, for the way he was cruelly prevented from being able to do what rich and powerful people in this society normally do do.

All i can say is, that seems to me to be a very twisted way of looking at it.