Visa For Thaksin Issued Under U.S. Laws: U.S. Ambassador Kristie Kenney

[Orac]

The focus of my comment was that is is embarrassing that the US gave Thaksin a Visa. Yes...I had the Land location wrong, mistake accepted (insert: Ratchadaphisek Rd). But your "facts" are clearly selected for impression. Why not mention that the first real auction was cancelled? I wonder why? That is how Pojaman got her chance to put a bid in. Not Important fact? The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." Those laws exist in many contemporary societies, where you try to keep the family of the government officials from buying land from government agencies. Pretty basic law to prevent corruption. You needn't try to re-litigate the case, especially one that has many hidden details. Point is that Thaksin was found guilty by Thai courts, he is a convicted criminal, and he jumped bail. The US should never have given him a Visa...period.

The problem is that the judgement itself shows how political the whole situation was. As you state above " The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." " so how on earth could they have found Thaksin guilty but Pojaman not guilty? There is also the point that the Bank of Thailand as supervisory body for the FIDF checked with the NCCC before hand who confirmed that the deal was not in breach of Article 100.

The whole thing stinks of the witch hunt that the set up of the AEC clearly was with a clear agenda to pin something on Thaksin even to the point of them drafting the complaint for the FIDF to sign as the one that was originally submitted did not name Thaksin.

The whole thing stinks of Thaksin helping his wife buy government land. Isn't that clear? I guess it is not.... if you are a devoted Thaksin fan...but to anyone else, it clearly stinks. Thaksin was guilty because he wrote a letter giving them permission to sell the land to his wife. Your facts are selective....there is no written record of having anyone having"checked with the NCCC". And if they did, why would they have even checked? Why did they even need to ask for a letter from Thaksin, giving them permission? Why? Because everyone knew it stinked...they were trying to cover their asses.... to have cancelled the first auction and then let Thaksin's wife in to buy it in the second, and just happens to be the high bidder. On land that was valued at twice that amount previously. hmmm anything smell here? But if none of the above is getting thru to you. Then let's just allow Michelle Obama to go buy some government land by first cancelling an auction and then submit a bid slightly higher than other bids in the range of $25 million dollars...and see if any one in the US thinks its an arm's length transaction. Take the wool off your eyes. Thaksin is a corrupt, a money greedy, power greedy megalomaniac. Sorry,he is not the nice little sweet heart you think he is. Try Tai Bak, try 2500 extra judicial deaths in the drug war. Try getting the limit of foreign ownership in Thai telecoms lifted in Parliament and then selling off a huge segment of Thailand's communication systems to Singapore - Temasek (sp) .... and not paying 1 baht in taxes. (Oh... maybe the Temasek deal was ok because the CEO was the Singapore PM's wife and that couldn't be a bad thing. ) This guy Thaksin....had many supporters when he first became PM. He became corrupt. He became a sick man whose greed for power and money corrupted and blinded him.. Sorry on this. He is not a good guy.

In answer to specific questions you raise:

"there is no written record of having anyone having"checked with the NCCC". And if they did, why would they have even checked?"

Though the written evidence has not been produced the BOT claimed the checks were made. The reason for the checks seems rather obvious given what happenned.

However, Bank of Thailand (BOT) Assistant Governor Phairoj Hengsakul, who is also a manager of the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), said yesterday the BOT had asked the National Counter-Corruption Commission (NCCC) for their opinion on the land purchase documents.

Former BOT governor MR Pridiyathorn Devakula had requested the NCCC to comment on whether it violated the Counter Corruption Act Article 100 before signing the contract. One of the NCCC members said the sale and purchase of the land plot was legal, Phairoj said.

"Before the sale and purchase, the former BOT governor consulted related people, including the Council of State, the NCCC and prosecutors but we haven't found any written evidence," he said.

http://www.nationmul...es_30017709.php

"Why did they even need to ask for a letter from Thaksin, giving them permission?"

As Pojamans husband he was required to sign off on the deal same as any spouse would be required to do. This wasn't a special letter specifically for Thaksin.

I have never claimed that Thaksin is a good guy but the problem is the powers aligned against him are so inept that they have been unable to pin anything on him. The land deal was clearly full of holes at the time when, as you rightly say, there were plenty of other more substantive issues that could have been addressed.

[mamypoko]

So what other Thai in history was granted a tourist visa to the USA with a well known record of being a criminal fugitive?

In the US, money prevails over any minor thing like being a wanted criminal.

One pretty much has to be a criminal to afford the fee for a U.S. tourist visa....was $140 now $150.

[KireB]

Thaksin's version of democracy and the American version are a match made in heaven.

??because..........................??

http://www.nationmul...goal-90343.html

OK. I get it...safe to say, we all get it, you don't like Thaksin and after reading that, I can't say he'd be on my top ten list. But, that article doesn't address my question. Spoon feed me.

edit: call me slow, but after a second read I noticed that's from The Nation. Please don't call that a valid source. I've read many of your informative posts, but using The Nation as a source is beneath you...unless you're making a joke. Are you joking?

It's pretty safe to say as a non American, that the international perception of the American version on democracy is not really .... positive! Sure the US has presidential elections and all, but this is nothing more than a show (as perceived by arguably most non Americans). The US has sold it soul to the devil long ago and is nothing more than a corpocracy serving only one goal: profit for its shareholders. Thaksin's version of a democracy is pretty much the same, he is the CEO of Thailand, with cronies in his board of directors.

I am sure that the likes of Cheney and Chalerm would be best buddies when having a beer.

PS: this is just opinion

[fred110]

So what other Thai in history was granted a tourist visa to the USA with a well known record of being a criminal fugitive?

In the US, money prevails over any minor thing like being a wanted criminal.

One pretty much has to be a criminal to afford the fee for a U.S. tourist visa....was $140 now $150.

$150 is pocket money. Are you that poor?

[MikeOboe57]

Is she joking or what ? I know people who have been refused visas into the US because they have traffic violations against their name. Hahaha. Joke.

So... to all you war correspondents on here, did you find any wikileaks info or something of that sort of info which states or implies irregularities in the issuance of Thaksins US visa?

Why don't you look for that yourself?

Hint:

http://travel.state..../visa_1750.html

Sorry, I may have missed something again here.... Re: irregularities in the issuance of Thaksins US visa... Couldn't find any info of any irregularities....

My mistake, sorry. To anyone who firmly belives that Thaksin is not a convicted criminal on the run there are of course no irregularities.

[Krungbin]

I was under the impression that the US Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies that one of the grounds for ineligibility for a visa was "“moral turpitude”. This term appeared in US immigration law in 1891, and directed the exclusion from the United States of "persons who have been convicted of a felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude". The most common elements involving moral turpitude are: (1) Fraud; (2) Larceny; and (3) Intent to harm persons or thing (sic).

If my memory does not fail... I believe that Mr. T. was convicted in his country for for violating Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act. Isn't "corruption" a "fraud"?

Going by the book, corruption includes "misuse of office or position of authority for private gain" and fraud involves betrayal of trust....Does it not look like the reason why TS was condemned?

Well, than... his visa should not have been issued.

[whybother]

As an American Citizen, I am embarrassed by our US government's groveling at the feet of Thaksin.

The fact is that he is a convicted criminal, who jumped bail. That is a fact. And there is no way under US law he should be granted a visa...unless higher ups in the Immigration Dept approved it and told the lower grade officers to give him a visa. Despicable in my view. He has no right to enter our country. He is a convict. He was tried by the Thai judicial system, not by the coup makers. His wife, with Thaksin's written permission, was given the special right to buy a huge tract of valuable government property near Suvarnabhumi Airport, just before the government auctioned the land, at a huge discount. Classic corruption....as was Thaksin's arrogant style. Those were the types of things that got him thrown out of power. His buying his way back into power.... by funding huge sums of money to Puy yai bans, Orbortors, MP's, etc through out the northeast and north....is common knowledge...not even disputed. But the US government decides to play sides and act like this was just a political prosecution and a political injustice. Embarrassing...for me.

Don't let little things like facts get in the way of your discourse there - you can't even get where the land in question is right.

There was no 'special right' to buy the land let alone a huge discount involved. The bid from Pojaman was higher than the Land Departments valuation and also was higher then the other two bids received from Land and House and Noble House. Also there was the issue of Article 4 of the National Counter Corruption Act which states that the accused must directly supervise the damaged party when at the time the FIDF came under The Bank of Thailand.

I thought the FIDF (and all it's debt) came under the control of the government after the 97 crash. The debt was recently transferred back to the BOT.

[khaowong1]

Shame on you Ambassador Kristie Kenney .

I'm pretty sure Ambassador Kristie Kenney had nothing to do with Thaksin getting a visa. I'm pretty sure this was done way above her pay grade. I'm pretty sure it was done with the express consent of the Sec. of State..

[khaowong1]

I was under the impression that the US Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies that one of the grounds for ineligibility for a visa was "“moral turpitude”. This term appeared in US immigration law in 1891, and directed the exclusion from the United States of "persons who have been convicted of a felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude". The most common elements involving moral turpitude are: (1) Fraud; (2) Larceny; and (3) Intent to harm persons or thing (sic).

If my memory does not fail... I believe that Mr. T. was convicted in his country for for violating Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act. Isn't "corruption" a "fraud"?

Going by the book, corruption includes "misuse of office or position of authority for private gain" and fraud involves betrayal of trust....Does it not look like the reason why TS was condemned?

Well, than... his visa should not have been issued.

Yes, I agree.. like not admitting Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Papa Doc, etc.. and if I'm not mistaken, they wouldn't even allow the Shah of Iran to enter. And he was OUR guy.

[mamypoko]

ref. #123

KireB~ I appreciate your honesty and opinion. As an American, I can say to a very large extent, with regard to the U.S., I agree with you. Know this, many of US agree with you. I suppose I'm just tired of blanket generalizations. I honestly don't know much about Thaksin and I often look to these forums to learn, but you can imagine if a news headline said "Thaksin fed the world for a day"...it would be spun into something negative.

[MyFriend You]

As an American Citizen, I am embarrassed by our US government's groveling at the feet of Thaksin.

The fact is that he is a convicted criminal, who jumped bail. That is a fact. And there is no way under US law he should be granted a visa...unless higher ups in the Immigration Dept approved it and told the lower grade officers to give him a visa. Despicable in my view. He has no right to enter our country. He is a convict. He was tried by the Thai judicial system, not by the coup makers. His wife, with Thaksin's written permission, was given the special right to buy a huge tract of valuable government property near Suvarnabhumi Airport, just before the government auctioned the land, at a huge discount. Classic corruption....as was Thaksin's arrogant style. Those were the types of things that got him thrown out of power. His buying his way back into power.... by funding huge sums of money to Puy yai bans, Orbortors, MP's, etc through out the northeast and north....is common knowledge...not even disputed. But the US government decides to play sides and act like this was just a political prosecution and a political injustice. Embarrassing...for me.

Also as an American, I am embarrased at how little you know about US Immigration Laws. Mt Thaksin proved beyong the interviewers doubt that he is able to support himself while in the US, has broken no US laws, is not on any (including Thailand's) no fly list, and has shown he is not an intended immigrant - that is a short version of the qualifications you ned to overcome before a Visitor Visa can be issued - if you are an avid reader of this forum, this has been pointed out numerous times.

Mr Thaksin would not have been isued an non-immigrant visa if he hadn't passed these tests - Another point is the US Embassy Bangkok has no authority to issue a Visa to anyone - the Prime Minister or Joe the Plumber - until the INS and DHS has approved it in the USA. The American Ambassador cannot issue a Visa under US Law, and cannot override a Consular Officer's decision to recommend issue or non-issue - this is built in for protection of US Law - I don't pretend to know everything "US Visa" but have been on the fringe of 'some things US Visa' . Another thing - I have never heard of anyone being denied a Visa for 'Arrogance' or 'Purchasing Property' in his or her home country - Your post has been read, and for me, has nothing of substance that remotely resembles merit - if this is so 'Embarrasing' to you, come to the Embassy and denounce your citizenship........you may find it is a lot harder than you think.

[MyFriend You]

I was under the impression that the US Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies that one of the grounds for ineligibility for a visa was "“moral turpitude”. This term appeared in US immigration law in 1891, and directed the exclusion from the United States of "persons who have been convicted of a felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude". The most common elements involving moral turpitude are: (1) Fraud; (2) Larceny; and (3) Intent to harm persons or thing (sic).

If my memory does not fail... I believe that Mr. T. was convicted in his country for for violating Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act. Isn't "corruption" a "fraud"?

Going by the book, corruption includes "misuse of office or position of authority for private gain" and fraud involves betrayal of trust....Does it not look like the reason why TS was condemned?

Well, than... his visa should not have been issued.

Yes, I agree.. like not admitting Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Papa Doc, etc.. and if I'm not mistaken, they wouldn't even allow the Shah of Iran to enter. And he was OUR guy.

The Shah was admitted to the US Canal Zone and kept in reletive protection by the US Army and US Navy on an Island off The Atlantic Coast, sooooo, one could construe this as 'almost the USA' But you are correct....moral turpretude is a broad definition, if they disapproved a Visa for that, then I would say about 75% of the applicants would not qualify.

[mamypoko]

So what other Thai in history was granted a tourist visa to the USA with a well known record of being a criminal fugitive?

In the US, money prevails over any minor thing like being a wanted criminal.

One pretty much has to be a criminal to afford the fee for a U.S. tourist visa....was $140 now $150.

$150 is pocket money. Are you that poor?

I just checked: I have 190 Baht in my pocket.

[MyFriend You]

Is she joking or what ? I know people who have been refused visas into the US because they have traffic violations against their name. Hahaha. Joke.

Sounds pretty preposterous, or maybe the applicant lied about these traffic violations, if so, he/she signed the application which clearly states if any information is found to be untrue, you will be denied a Visa, it will be impossible to get a visa after denied - believe this!!

[scotbeve]

Dear Mike oboe,

Please note the word "issuance" is in bold font... Do you not understand the comment????

[hellodolly]

As an American Citizen, I am embarrassed by our US government's groveling at the feet of Thaksin.

The fact is that he is a convicted criminal, who jumped bail. That is a fact. And there is no way under US law he should be granted a visa...unless higher ups in the Immigration Dept approved it and told the lower grade officers to give him a visa. Despicable in my view. He has no right to enter our country. He is a convict. He was tried by the Thai judicial system, not by the coup makers. His wife, with Thaksin's written permission, was given the special right to buy a huge tract of valuable government property near Suvarnabhumi Airport, just before the government auctioned the land, at a huge discount. Classic corruption....as was Thaksin's arrogant style. Those were the types of things that got him thrown out of power. His buying his way back into power.... by funding huge sums of money to Puy yai bans, Orbortors, MP's, etc through out the northeast and north....is common knowledge...not even disputed. But the US government decides to play sides and act like this was just a political prosecution and a political injustice. Embarrassing...for me.

Also as an American, I am embarrased at how little you know about US Immigration Laws. Mt Thaksin proved beyong the interviewers doubt that he is able to support himself while in the US, has broken no US laws, is not on any (including Thailand's) no fly list, and has shown he is not an intended immigrant - that is a short version of the qualifications you ned to overcome before a Visitor Visa can be issued - if you are an avid reader of this forum, this has been pointed out numerous times.

Mr Thaksin would not have been isued an non-immigrant visa if he hadn't passed these tests - Another point is the US Embassy Bangkok has no authority to issue a Visa to anyone - the Prime Minister or Joe the Plumber - until the INS and DHS has approved it in the USA. The American Ambassador cannot issue a Visa under US Law, and cannot override a Consular Officer's decision to recommend issue or non-issue - this is built in for protection of US Law - I don't pretend to know everything "US Visa" but have been on the fringe of 'some things US Visa' . Another thing - I have never heard of anyone being denied a Visa for 'Arrogance' or 'Purchasing Property' in his or her home country - Your post has been read, and for me, has nothing of substance that remotely resembles merit - if this is so 'Embarrasing' to you, come to the Embassy and denounce your citizenship........you may find it is a lot harder than you think.

Well two things Thaksins money was never the issue with his Visa and him having as much as he does in no way counteracts his right for a visa. But being a convicted criminal on the run should impact his right for a visa. Pure and simple.

And 2 if you don't want to be a American citizen just take out a citizenship in another country and tell them you no longer want to be a citizen.

As a American I am not surprised at how little you know.

[sunkist]

maybe the NASA deal is part of this

The continued assumption that NASA has some secret need to help this part of the world with weather predictions shows just how ignorant people can be. Just enjoy your flooded areas and NASA will be quite happy doing work that is appreciated.

[sunkist]

ref. #123

KireB~ I appreciate your honesty and opinion. As an American, I can say to a very large extent, with regard to the U.S., I agree with you. Know this, many of US agree with you. I suppose I'm just tired of blanket generalizations. I honestly don't know much about Thaksin and I often look to these forums to learn, but you can imagine if a news headline said "Thaksin fed the world for a day"...it would be spun into something negative.

I agree and it seems that the democratically elected leader of the country being overthrown by a military coup led by a Muslim and the later politically motivated criminal charges issued to justify this overthrow would also be considered in this forum. I am not a Thaksin supporter or detracter but I do understand that popular vote of the people elected him, later is party(another coup) and now his sister who is also elected by popular vote is continually reviled on this forum. Fail to understand how democratic believing people continue this vendetta.

[animatic]

As an American Citizen, I am embarrassed by our US government's groveling at the feet of Thaksin.

The fact is that he is a convicted criminal, who jumped bail. That is a fact. And there is no way under US law he should be granted a visa...unless higher ups in the Immigration Dept approved it and told the lower grade officers to give him a visa. Despicable in my view. He has no right to enter our country. He is a convict. He was tried by the Thai judicial system, not by the coup makers. His wife, with Thaksin's written permission, was given the special right to buy a huge tract of valuable government property near Suvarnabhumi Airport, just before the government auctioned the land, at a huge discount. Classic corruption....as was Thaksin's arrogant style. Those were the types of things that got him thrown out of power. His buying his way back into power.... by funding huge sums of money to Puy yai bans, Orbortors, MP's, etc through out the northeast and north....is common knowledge...not even disputed. But the US government decides to play sides and act like this was just a political prosecution and a political injustice. Embarrassing...for me.

Also as an American, I am embarrased at how little you know about US Immigration Laws. Mt Thaksin proved beyong the interviewers doubt that he is able to support himself while in the US, has broken no US laws, is not on any (including Thailand's) no fly list, and has shown he is not an intended immigrant - that is a short version of the qualifications you ned to overcome before a Visitor Visa can be issued - if you are an avid reader of this forum, this has been pointed out numerous times.

Mr Thaksin would not have been isued an non-immigrant visa if he hadn't passed these tests - Another point is the US Embassy Bangkok has no authority to issue a Visa to anyone - the Prime Minister or Joe the Plumber - until the INS and DHS has approved it in the USA. The American Ambassador cannot issue a Visa under US Law, and cannot override a Consular Officer's decision to recommend issue or non-issue - this is built in for protection of US Law - I don't pretend to know everything "US Visa" but have been on the fringe of 'some things US Visa' . Another thing - I have never heard of anyone being denied a Visa for 'Arrogance' or 'Purchasing Property' in his or her home country - Your post has been read, and for me, has nothing of substance that remotely resembles merit - if this is so 'Embarrasing' to you, come to the Embassy and denounce your citizenship........you may find it is a lot harder than you think.

Well various quite rich people have not been allowed into USA because they got busted for Pot in their home countries. True dollar millionaires, no work or support needed, but they were blocked from entry while having broken no USA Laws.If Thaksin's clan didn't control most of Thailands governmental functions at present it is unlikely he would have gotten the pass.

Bottom line, Thailand is enough of a trading partner, that they were willing to risk his presence to keep the gears turning after the NASA debacle a few months back. The State Dept. knows that local politics will trump common sense here, so likely threw an olive branch to the current powers that be. Not really much to lose except in some circles with little economic weight.

Pragmatism over idealism, and still wrapped in the flag,

because it is a putative Demcratically Elected Gov. saying Thaksin is good to go.

No doubt State knows the reality, but the facade is all that was needed here.

Similar to the transition from Sukarno to Suharto and beyond,

keep relations stable if possible.

Edited August 16, 2012 by animatic

[mamypoko]

As an American Citizen, I am embarrassed by our US government's groveling at the feet of Thaksin.

The fact is that he is a convicted criminal, who jumped bail. That is a fact. And there is no way under US law he should be granted a visa...unless higher ups in the Immigration Dept approved it and told the lower grade officers to give him a visa. Despicable in my view. He has no right to enter our country. He is a convict. He was tried by the Thai judicial system, not by the coup makers. His wife, with Thaksin's written permission, was given the special right to buy a huge tract of valuable government property near Suvarnabhumi Airport, just before the government auctioned the land, at a huge discount. Classic corruption....as was Thaksin's arrogant style. Those were the types of things that got him thrown out of power. His buying his way back into power.... by funding huge sums of money to Puy yai bans, Orbortors, MP's, etc through out the northeast and north....is common knowledge...not even disputed. But the US government decides to play sides and act like this was just a political prosecution and a political injustice. Embarrassing...for me.

Also as an American, I am embarrased at how little you know about US Immigration Laws. Mt Thaksin proved beyong the interviewers doubt that he is able to support himself while in the US, has broken no US laws, is not on any (including Thailand's) no fly list, and has shown he is not an intended immigrant - that is a short version of the qualifications you ned to overcome before a Visitor Visa can be issued - if you are an avid reader of this forum, this has been pointed out numerous times.

Mr Thaksin would not have been isued an non-immigrant visa if he hadn't passed these tests - Another point is the US Embassy Bangkok has no authority to issue a Visa to anyone - the Prime Minister or Joe the Plumber - until the INS and DHS has approved it in the USA. The American Ambassador cannot issue a Visa under US Law, and cannot override a Consular Officer's decision to recommend issue or non-issue - this is built in for protection of US Law - I don't pretend to know everything "US Visa" but have been on the fringe of 'some things US Visa' . Another thing - I have never heard of anyone being denied a Visa for 'Arrogance' or 'Purchasing Property' in his or her home country - Your post has been read, and for me, has nothing of substance that remotely resembles merit - if this is so 'Embarrasing' to you, come to the Embassy and denounce your citizenship........you may find it is a lot harder than you think.

Well two things Thaksins money was never the issue with his Visa and him having as much as he does in no way counteracts his right for a visa. But being a convicted criminal on the run should impact his right for a visa. Pure and simple.

And 2 if you don't want to be a American citizen just take out a citizenship in another country and tell them you no longer want to be a citizen.

As a American I am not surprised at how little you know.

Ref your second point: why would one just "take out" "a citizenship" in another country only to then tell that very same country you no longer want to be a citizen (there).?

I just don't follow your English.

Edited August 16, 2012 by mamypoko

[davidstipek]

Pretty basic law to prevent corruption. You needn't try to re-litigate the case, especially one that has many hidden details. Point is that Thaksin was found guilty by Thai courts, he is a convicted criminal, and he jumped bail. The US should never have given him a Visa...period.

The problem is that the judgement itself shows how political the whole situation was. As you state above " The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." " so how on earth could they have found Thaksin guilty but Pojaman not guilty? There is also the point that the Bank of Thailand as supervisory body for the FIDF checked with the NCCC before hand who confirmed that the deal was not in breach of Article 100.

The whole thing stinks of the witch hunt that the set up of the AEC clearly was with a clear agenda to pin something on Thaksin even to the point of them drafting the complaint for the FIDF to sign as the one that was originally submitted did not name Thaksin.

The whole thing stinks of Thaksin helping his wife buy government land. Isn't that clear?

"Primary point!

1st.... His wife as Spouse of then Prime Minister was in Violation of the Law forbidding her to even concider the Purchase of the land in question!!

2nd.... His tied himself to this Violation by signing a letter as her Husband, agreeing to this purchase! "Case Point!!!"

Thaksin was guilty because he wrote a letter giving them permission to sell the land to his wife. Why? Because everyone knew it was Violation... they were trying to cover their asses.... to have cancelled the first auction and then let Thaksin's wife in to buy it in the second, and just happens to be the high bidder. On land that was valued at twice that amount previously. hmmm anything smell here?

As Pojamans husband he was required to sign off on the deal same as any spouse would be required to do. This wasn't a special letter specifically for Thaksin.

But it clearly is a signed Document that proves his disregard for the "Written law of Thailand" As equal to me as a Farang, purchasing land he in Thailand in my name and no one questioning my right to do... Or my personal interpitation of the law... You have my money... it's a done deal... no refunds... case closed!

Why do poster's only read what they want too... ""Why did they even need to ask for a letter from Thaksin, giving them permission?"

As Pojamans husband he was required to sign off on the deal same as any spouse would be required to do. This wasn't his Primary requirement!!

Not the whole article!

Regardless if he was the spouse it clearly states in ""Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision.""

Not to be labeled stupid or anything else I believe his primary interest was not as Spouse but his duty as Prime Minister... Correct?? Correct me if I am not reading this correctly or am I to interpet this as in Thailand your duty as a Government Official, is second to anything else...

Is not this how Traitors got Executed??? Putting something else before "God.. Buddha... and Country??"

[jcb2001]

I was under the impression that the US Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies that one of the grounds for ineligibility for a visa was "“moral turpitude”. This term appeared in US immigration law in 1891, and directed the exclusion from the United States of "persons who have been convicted of a felony or other infamous crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude". The most common elements involving moral turpitude are: (1) Fraud; (2) Larceny; and (3) Intent to harm persons or thing (sic).

If my memory does not fail... I believe that Mr. T. was convicted in his country for for violating Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act. Isn't "corruption" a "fraud"?

Going by the book, corruption includes "misuse of office or position of authority for private gain" and fraud involves betrayal of trust....Does it not look like the reason why TS was condemned?

Well, than... his visa should not have been issued.

Exactly, I would be interested to hear how or who approved a wavier for Thaksin's felony crimes. Just a brief explanation would do. Not the explanation Ambassdor Kenney gave. "Very lame excuse" from the embassy. Someone has to be responsible for allowing Thaksin to enter the US. We need an explanation! The Thai people need an explanation.

[jcb2001]

How was the visa granted when in fact, Thaksin crimes are still outstanding and he is still on the run to avoid his jailtime sentence? I will bet that there has never been a visa issued to a fugitive on the run wanting to visit the USA for pleasure. I have heard of convicted felons getting visa, but only after they have paid their dues to society.

[Jingthing]

How do we even know for sure he doesn't have a diplomatic Thai passport?

[jcb2001]

How do we even know for sure he doesn't have a diplomatic Thai passport?

Or an "A1" dip visa. It wouldn't surprise me.

[Buchholz]

led by a Muslim

[SuneeTH]

How do we even know for sure he doesn't have a diplomatic Thai passport?

Or an "A1" dip visa. It wouldn't surprise me.

Not possible. Mark / Kasit already took it back.

PAD should also protest in front of US embassy in Bangkok.

[JimGant]

How was the visa granted when in fact, Thaksin crimes are still outstanding and he is still on the run to avoid his jailtime sentence?

Well, because, the State Department has nearly complete latitude in these matters. And the State Department is tickled pink that the current government in Thailand was popularly elected. So when the current government wispered in Hillary's ear that, hey, our icon Thaksin was brought up on charges strictly for political reasons, was this so hard to believe? (As much as they'd have liked to shoot the bastard, convicting him of something was the next best alternative.) After all, this is Thailand, so why aren't the courts swamped with corruption related charges against the 15,000 (75,000?) overly-rich hi-sos? So, yeah, it didn't take a lot of pondering by Hillary to see the political overtones to this -- and then be reminded that "political crimes" (to include politically-motivated indictments) are grounds for visa waivers.

Besides, it makes perfect sense. Why deny a visa, and throw a bone to the often-wacky opposition? Yes, in the past we've supported the coup makers in this opposition (and others) -- but the US, whenever possilble, likes to endorse democratically elected governments, and least with a wink and a nod.

So, we instead throw the visa bone to the current government of Thailand. A nice, friendly thing to do -- not to mention diplomatically astute. Potential positives abound....

..... and negatives? Well, of course, the big one would have been, if we'd granted a visa to someone whose government wanted his extradiction. Christ, that was a no-brainer to answer -- Thaksin is the messiah of this government......a call for his extradiction would be ludicrous.....

....but, I'm sure, he is realistically viewed by the US as a real power hungry problem child. So, how can we help deflate this buffoon.....

Let him go to LA -- and be, for the first time in awhile, smacked-down by fellow Thais. Think the State Deparment maybe anticipated this.......I hope they were that smart.

Anyway, win-win for the US on this visa issue. Same as staying out of Syria. (But still trying to recover from hanging our best ally against Iran, Saddam -- not to mention the blood and bucks. Oh well. Can't get 'em all right.)

[simple1]

led by a Muslim

I assume referring to Sonthi Boonyaratglin, first Muslim to be Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Thai Army and former head of the Council for National Security, the military junta that ruled the kingdom. On 19 September 2006, he became the de facto head of government of Thailand after overthrowing the elected government in a coup d'état. After retiring from the Army in 2007, he became Deputy Prime Minister, in charge of national security

Edited August 16, 2012 by simple1

[hellodolly]

The

To defend the ambassador a little bit, I seriously doubt that SHE made this call and she is only doing her diplomatic job in defending it. Doesn't mean she is telling the truth ... obviously.

Precisely ! Now then where is Assange and Wiki leaks to uncover what the US state Department really think? ...oh bugger!

It is slightly amusing that The Ambassador says that the issue of a visa was not a political matter, as it clearly was. It is well known that Thaksin is a convicted fugitive criminal. By issuing a visa there can only be one process really, and that is that the US are not recognising the court decision because of the (incorrectly) perceived politics that may have surrounded it. Therefore whichever way you look at it, the decision to issue a visa is wholly a political decision, either that or precedent has just been set that known criminals with serious criminal charges against them, who are on the run are entitled to a visa to enter the USA. I don't think it is the latter option, so it must be political.

Kind of interesting she says it was not a political thing and he says the charges against him were.

I think the point is arresting Thaksin could be used as a political tool by one side and more probably both sides in thai politics, not that Thaksin is convicted of political charges...

What consequences would have a US extradition of Thaksin in Thailand? I ask the question seriously: what immediate consequences this act may have on interior politics in thailand?

more than one scenrio comes to my mind and none of them sounds really peacefull

I am with you. Politically it would be a God Send or Buddha send for the PT. The big question is how would the Army react to him openly taking over the Government and how would the people react.

I am quite sure there are people with money and power behind the scenes who would not give it a second thought to sink to Thaksins level and find a renegade Black Shirt. And I firmly believes Thaksin knows that also.