Controversial Reconciliation Bill Officially Handed To Thai Parliament

[whybother]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

[yoshiwara]

It is clear from the comments (articles) submitted here that the Social Democrats,aka yellow shirts and their multicoloured sympathisers do not want reconcilliation or Democracy. Instead many prefer another Toups de terre which would probably destroy Thailand's efforts to remain a credible member of the international comunity.

The only thing clear is that your understanding is limited. Just for starters the Yellow Shirts instructed their followers not to vote for the Democrats so your 'aka' goes straight into the bin. As for reconciliation the Thaksin apologist position(and that includes you) has as its core requirement the return of Thaksin and restoration of confiscated monies. Save us the irrelevant references to democracy.

You might be right.

Why not give him his money back and solve the problem??

It was assessed and confiscated by doubtful means and it is his.

Are you referring to the money which he laundered through his son, his daughter and his chauffeur while PM and the evidence of which was never challenged? You really ought to sort out the party line with fellow Thaksin apologists contributing to the forum. Either the line is that he is corrupt but no more corrupt than others inside or outside Thailand or the line is that he is innocent and wrongly accused. I know we have the added confusion that some of you swing continuously backwards and forwards between both positions depending on which way you think the wind is blowing, but at least make an effort please.

[philw]

It is clear from the comments (articles) submitted here that the Social Democrats,aka yellow shirts and their multicoloured sympathisers do not want reconcilliation or Democracy. Instead many prefer another Toups de terre which would probably destroy Thailand's efforts to remain a credible member of the international comunity.

The only thing clear is that your understanding is limited. Just for starters the Yellow Shirts instructed their followers not to vote for the Democrats so your 'aka' goes straight into the bin. As for reconciliation the Thaksin apologist position(and that includes you) has as its core requirement the return of Thaksin and restoration of confiscated monies. Save us the irrelevant references to democracy.

You might be right.

Why not give him his money back and solve the problem??

It was assessed and confiscated by doubtful means and it is his.

Are you referring to the money which he laundered through his son, his daughter and his chauffeur while PM and the evidence of which was never challenged? You really ought to sort out the party line with fellow Thaksin apologists contributing to the forum. Either the line is that he is corrupt but no more corrupt than others inside or outside Thailand or the line is that he is innocent and wrongly accused. I know we have the added confusion that some of you swing continuously backwards and forwards between both positions depending on which way you think the wind is blowing, but at least make an effort please.

Sure.

Do you have evidence that the suspended funds are illegally gained. ??

Please show.

[whybother]

Are you referring to the money which he laundered through his son, his daughter and his chauffeur while PM and the evidence of which was never challenged? You really ought to sort out the party line with fellow Thaksin apologists contributing to the forum. Either the line is that he is corrupt but no more corrupt than others inside or outside Thailand or the line is that he is innocent and wrongly accused. I know we have the added confusion that some of you swing continuously backwards and forwards between both positions depending on which way you think the wind is blowing, but at least make an effort please.

Sure.

Do you have evidence that the suspended funds are illegally gained. ??

Please show.

The courts ruled that he implemented policies for personal gain (ie a loan to Myanmar for them to buy his product).

Do you have evidence to refute that?

[waza]

The only thing clear is that your understanding is limited. Just for starters the Yellow Shirts instructed their followers not to vote for the Democrats so your 'aka' goes straight into the bin. As for reconciliation the Thaksin apologist position(and that includes you) has as its core requirement the return of Thaksin and restoration of confiscated monies. Save us the irrelevant references to democracy.

You might be right.

Why not give him his money back and solve the problem??

It was assessed and confiscated by doubtful means and it is his.

Are you referring to the money which he laundered through his son, his daughter and his chauffeur while PM and the evidence of which was never challenged? You really ought to sort out the party line with fellow Thaksin apologists contributing to the forum. Either the line is that he is corrupt but no more corrupt than others inside or outside Thailand or the line is that he is innocent and wrongly accused. I know we have the added confusion that some of you swing continuously backwards and forwards between both positions depending on which way you think the wind is blowing, but at least make an effort please.

Sure.

Do you have evidence that the suspended funds are illegally gained. ??

Please show.

Thaksin had Bt512 million, his wife Pojaman Bt8.99 billion and his daughter Paetongtarn Bt3.26 billion when the ex-PM submitted their financial reports on March 14, one year after his first Cabinet completed its term. Thaksin first took office in 2001.

So Thaksin declared assets of bht 512 million in 2001, a little bit less than he had in 2006, if one considers the comfiscated funds the fund he bought Man city with ect ect

[philw]

Are you referring to the money which he laundered through his son, his daughter and his chauffeur while PM and the evidence of which was never challenged? You really ought to sort out the party line with fellow Thaksin apologists contributing to the forum. Either the line is that he is corrupt but no more corrupt than others inside or outside Thailand or the line is that he is innocent and wrongly accused. I know we have the added confusion that some of you swing continuously backwards and forwards between both positions depending on which way you think the wind is blowing, but at least make an effort please.

Sure.

Do you have evidence that the suspended funds are illegally gained. ??

Please show.

The courts ruled that he implemented policies for personal gain (ie a loan to Myanmar for them to buy his product).

Do you have evidence to refute that?

yes, can you show any illegality in th burmese transaction ??

[whybother]

yes, can you show any illegality in th burmese transaction ??

The courts ruled that there was a conflict of interest.

[yoshiwara]

Are you referring to the money which he laundered through his son, his daughter and his chauffeur while PM and the evidence of which was never challenged? You really ought to sort out the party line with fellow Thaksin apologists contributing to the forum. Either the line is that he is corrupt but no more corrupt than others inside or outside Thailand or the line is that he is innocent and wrongly accused. I know we have the added confusion that some of you swing continuously backwards and forwards between both positions depending on which way you think the wind is blowing, but at least make an effort please.

Sure.

Do you have evidence that the suspended funds are illegally gained. ??

Please show.

The courts ruled that he implemented policies for personal gain (ie a loan to Myanmar for them to buy his product).

Do you have evidence to refute that?

yes, can you show any illegality in th burmese transaction ??

I assume you are referring to financial transactions which were undertaken while he was Prime Minister and the proceeds illegally hidden to avoid taxes/examination. Replying to each piece of evidence provided with a throwaway 'sure', 'yes' and so on in an endless asinine effort to kick the convictions into the long grass doesn't impress anybody. Maybe you could entertain us with an explanation as to why Thaksin hid some of his assets in the bank account of the family chauffeur. Or maybe we will get another 'Yes, do you have proof of that?' Grow up.

[waza]

Sure.

Do you have evidence that the suspended funds are illegally gained. ??

Please show.

The courts ruled that he implemented policies for personal gain (ie a loan to Myanmar for them to buy his product).

Do you have evidence to refute that?

yes, can you show any illegality in th burmese transaction ??

I assume you are referring to financial transactions which were undertaken while he was Prime Minister and the proceeds illegally hidden to avoid taxes/examination. Replying to each piece of evidence provided with a throwaway 'sure', 'yes' and so on in an endless asinine effort to kick the convictions into the long grass doesn't impress anybody. Maybe you could entertain us with an explanation as to why Thaksin hid some of his assets in the bank account of the family chauffeur. Or maybe we will get another 'Yes, do you have proof of that?' Grow up.

Can you explain why he put assets in the name of his chauffer and maid without their knowledge and permission?

[yoshiwara]

I assume you are referring to financial transactions which were undertaken while he was Prime Minister and the proceeds illegally hidden to avoid taxes/examination. Replying to each piece of evidence provided with a throwaway 'sure', 'yes' and so on in an endless asinine effort to kick the convictions into the long grass doesn't impress anybody. Maybe you could entertain us with an explanation as to why Thaksin hid some of his assets in the bank account of the family chauffeur. Or maybe we will get another 'Yes, do you have proof of that?' Grow up.

Can you explain why he put assets in the name of his chauffer and maid without their knowledge and permission?

The crime is doing it while PM, the motivation is corruption and greed, the thinking is arrogance, laziness and stupidity.

[waza]

I assume you are referring to financial transactions which were undertaken while he was Prime Minister and the proceeds illegally hidden to avoid taxes/examination. Replying to each piece of evidence provided with a throwaway 'sure', 'yes' and so on in an endless asinine effort to kick the convictions into the long grass doesn't impress anybody. Maybe you could entertain us with an explanation as to why Thaksin hid some of his assets in the bank account of the family chauffeur. Or maybe we will get another 'Yes, do you have proof of that?' Grow up.

Can you explain why he put assets in the name of his chauffer and maid without their knowledge and permission?

The crime is doing it while PM, the motivation is corruption and greed, the thinking is arrogance, laziness and stupidity.

Actually the defence was he didnt do it while PM...............

Some of the judges concluded that Article 295 could not be applied in Thaksin's case, as he was no longer a political officeholder at the time of the alleged offence.

But you gotta love this statement..........

Constitution Court judges yesterday dismissed as irrelevant questions raised by a National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) panel about the court's ruling in Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's asset concealment case. The judges said the trial was over and a ruling had been made

[Noistar]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

How many police will the rally need?

[whybother]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

How many police will the rally need?

It said in article that there would be 1000 police there.

[smedly]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

Chalerm should be going on national TV and explaining his bill to all Thai people no just red shirts - doesn't he realise the sitting government represent all the people and not just red shirts

and for those here discussing the return of Thaksins assets it would be my guess he has already got most of it back

These types of bills concerning the constitution should require a 2/3 house majority like any other mature democratic country - this would better represent all of the Thai people and not just PTP and their bought voters - it would also have avoided all of this in the first place as PTP would have realised such a bill requires more than just their vote in the house - pathetic

[creekside]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

How many police will the rally need?

One of the police at the red shirt rally was Police Captain Chalerm. Bangkok Post is reporting that he made a speech there in which he promised Thaksin would be returned to Thailand as a free man by the end of this year.

He then bizarrely said that if he fails in the promise, "You can behead me."

[ratcatcher]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

How many police will the rally need?

One of the police at the red shirt rally was Police Captain Chalerm. Bangkok Post is reporting that he made a speech there in which he promised Thaksin would be returned to Thailand as a free man by the end of this year.

He then bizarrely said that if he fails in the promise, "You can behead me."

Thaksin returned to Thailand "as a free man"??? <deleted>

Is Thaksin not already free? Free to go wherever, do whatever and say whatever he wants.

The DPM is losing it, or maybe already has.

As for being beheaded, Mr Abhisit has offered his head to the ax man ahead of Chalerm.

[AleG]

The other paper reports that the red shirts are converging on Udon Thani for the "largest ever rally to bring Thaksin home". He is estimating that they will get (the majic) 100,000 people to turn up. (Does that mean that there weren't more than 100,000 at the 2010 red shirt rallies?)

Chalerm is planning to turn up to explain his "reconciliation" plan. Preaching to the converted I think.

How many police will the rally need?

One of the police at the red shirt rally was Police Captain Chalerm. Bangkok Post is reporting that he made a speech there in which he promised Thaksin would be returned to Thailand as a free man by the end of this year.

He then bizarrely said that if he fails in the promise, "You can behead me."

But remember, it's not about whitewashing Thaksin...

[yoshiwara]

I assume you are referring to financial transactions which were undertaken while he was Prime Minister and the proceeds illegally hidden to avoid taxes/examination. Replying to each piece of evidence provided with a throwaway 'sure', 'yes' and so on in an endless asinine effort to kick the convictions into the long grass doesn't impress anybody. Maybe you could entertain us with an explanation as to why Thaksin hid some of his assets in the bank account of the family chauffeur. Or maybe we will get another 'Yes, do you have proof of that?' Grow up.

Can you explain why he put assets in the name of his chauffer and maid without their knowledge and permission?

The crime is doing it while PM, the motivation is corruption and greed, the thinking is arrogance, laziness and stupidity.

Actually the defence was he didnt do it while PM...............

Some of the judges concluded that Article 295 could not be applied in Thaksin's case, as he was no longer a political officeholder at the time of the alleged offence.

But you gotta love this statement..........

Constitution Court judges yesterday dismissed as irrelevant questions raised by a National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) panel about the court's ruling in Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's asset concealment case. The judges said the trial was over and a ruling had been made

That last para is particularly interesting as it shows Thaksin as he is able to 'capture' different institutions using them to prod around the original convictions hoping against hope to open them up and kick them into touch. That process in parallel with the efforts to change the constitution, while revving up the redshirts in reserve. Current talk of having another election is more mood music to apply 'the people's will' over and above the rule of law. The trouble is that when trying to whitewash common criminal acts every effort to bury them cannot get rid of the stench of special pleading. Still they try.

[philw]

yes, can you show any illegality in th burmese transaction ??

The courts ruled that there was a conflict of interest.

Please cite the ruling.

[OzMick]

One of the police at the red shirt rally was Police Captain Chalerm. Bangkok Post is reporting that he made a speech there in which he promised Thaksin would be returned to Thailand as a free man by the end of this year.

He then bizarrely said that if he fails in the promise, "You can behead me."

Any good entrepreneur would be onto this in a flash - there's some really big money to be made here. Event T-shirts, pay TV rights, auctioning the executioners job - possibly so much per swing with a blunt machete, headless Chalerm dolls............ Johnny Walker could even do a special commemorative Black Label edition.

[whybother]

yes, can you show any illegality in th burmese transaction ??

The courts ruled that there was a conflict of interest.

Please cite the ruling.

Sorry, I can't find the court transcripts. This will have to do.

The court ruled Thaksin had abused his authority by assisting subsidiaries of Shin Court including the mobile telephone company, a satellite concession while maintaining control through a labyrinth of shareholdings.

http://www.voanews.com/content/thai-court-rules-against-thaksin-on-assets--85480532/165405.html

[philw]

Thanks but nothing to do with the Burmese transaction which was a low interest, soft terms loan through Thai banks.

Consider the major shareholder of the banks involved and you will see a different picture.

[whybother]

Thanks but nothing to do with the Burmese transaction which was a low interest, soft terms loan through Thai banks.

Consider the major shareholder of the banks involved and you will see a different picture.

Some different evidence on the same case:

http://www.mizzima.com/news/regional/3198-thaksin-wanted-leniency-towards-burmese-junta.html

He testified as witness to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office in the Bt 76 billion assets seizure case against the former Thai premier. He told the court that the Thai cabinet initially approved Bt 3 billion (91 million US$) to Burma for trade, agriculture, industry and tourism development through Thailand’s Export and Import Bank (Exim Bank). But the Burmese government later asked for more for telecom development. He had advised Thaksin not to approve it fearing conflict of interest.

[Siripon]

Thanks but nothing to do with the Burmese transaction which was a low interest, soft terms loan through Thai banks.

Consider the major shareholder of the banks involved and you will see a different picture.

http://www.mizzima.com/news/regional/3198-thaksin-wanted-leniency-towards-burmese-junta.html

>He testified as witness to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office in the Bt 76 billion assets seizure case against the former Thai premier. He told the court that the Thai cabinet initially approved Bt 3 billion (91 million US$) to Burma for trade, agriculture, industry and tourism development through Thailand’s Export and Import Bank (Exim Bank). But the Burmese government later asked for more for telecom development. He had advised Thaksin not to approve it fearing conflict of interest.

He is Mr Surakiart, if I remember correctly.The loan was certainly low interest, in fact 2% below the Thai banks rates, meaning the Thai tax payers had to make up the difference. Once again Thaksin makes money for his companies at the expense of the tax paying Thai public. .

[ballpoint]

Good summaries here

http://www.mizzima.com/news/regional/3595-thai-court-rules-on-thaksins-burma-loan.html

and here

http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/04/01/headlines/headlines_30069709.php

With the latter containing the following insight into his arrogance and contempt of the law:

"The panel found Bhana-pot signed a Bt102-million promissory note dated March 16, 1999, to pay "Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra" for the share purchase. The panel suspected the note was written after, as Pojaman was made a khunying on May 5, 1999".

His supporters can twist it all they like, but the fact is he made an unauthorised (by the cabinet) loan to the Burmese "government" in order for them to buy equipment from his own company, which ultimately cost the country some 670 million baht. Now, if the country had spent that money on communications equipment for Thailand, it would still be highly unethical for it to do so from the company owned by the PM, without full transparency and disclosure, but at least the country would have gotten something in return. Here we have Thailand effectively buying the equipment for a neighbouring country, through an underhand loan that was in no way transparent, to the benefit of its rulers and Thailand's own PM, and the detriment of the Thai people. Please tell us again the good he did for the country, when he wasn't ripping off and/or killing its people?

[dcutman]

A quote in the other paper. Chalerm has vowed to bring Thaksin home within this year. Chalerm says "behead me if Thaksin is not home a free man within this year".

[Robby nz]

A quote in the other paper. Chalerm has vowed to bring Thaksin home within this year. Chalerm says "behead me if Thaksin is not home a free man within this year".

Possibly Thaksin has threatened to do just that

[dickyknee]

A quote in the other paper. Chalerm has vowed to bring Thaksin home within this year. Chalerm says "behead me if Thaksin is not home a free man within this year".

trimming off the dead wood?