The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

You obviously need to learn a little more. Taksin did not run any where, he was already out of the country. Why would anyone be stupid enough to return to face a military coup appointed court and a corrupt government run by the meglamaniac Suthep. Abisit , whom i believe to be an honourable man was just the figurehead under Suthep.

Under these conditions, i am sure i would not return to a "Kangaroo Court" judicary.............would you be foolish enough to do so ?

He is simply taking care of his business interests the best way he can... I've never heard of one Thai Martyr have you.... I seriously doubt he imagines being the first!

There was almost one.

"You can behead me if Thaksin is not back (in Thailand) by the end of this year (2013)".

I believe we have heard this before ... several times! Look up the word 'megalomaniac'!

Megalomaniac.............. Craving for, or mental delusions of power

The narcissism of this man never fails to astonish me, it is as if he lives in a total fantasy land of his own creation.

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

You obviously need to learn a little more. Taksin did not run any where, he was already out of the country. Why would anyone be stupid enough to return to face a military coup appointed court and a corrupt government run by the meglamaniac Suthep. Abisit , whom i believe to be an honourable man was just the figurehead under Suthep.

Under these conditions, i am sure i would not return to a "Kangaroo Court" judicary.............would you be foolish enough to do so ?

That is a fair point.

But why didn't he then come back to Thailand in 2011 once his own sister is the PM to take responsibility and defend himself? He should have nothing to fear except facing the possible jail sentence (maybe house arrest in a penthouse even?) and as well ask for a royal pardon?

The funny thing about the Thaksinista TV posters is that they are not able to defend their beloved "lord and master" without mentioning Suthep or Abhisit.

He and Suthep make a perfect couple. May them and all their cronies/families/"friends" finish to destroy Thailand. Once for all.

You can't compare them - O.K., they are both corrupt - but on a different level. Mr. T. opened a new universe of corruption in Thailand; which has to be stopped asap.

I don't like S. at all, but I do like what he is doing now (not how he does it, but a least he does something against 'it').

Without him, Mr. T. wouldn't be so desperate now (and the red zombies wouldn't have lost at least some of their support).

Thaksin wants his political enemies to adhere to the rules and laws

​and this is coming from an accuses mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive!

That is PTP logic right there.

you must be talking about suthep right. Killed 90 poeple and now preaches terrorism from his little world. Making threats to all that do not want what he wants.

At 90 deaths, Thaksin was just getting started.

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

You obviously need to learn a little more. Taksin did not run any where, he was already out of the country. Why would anyone be stupid enough to return to face a military coup appointed court and a corrupt government run by the meglamaniac Suthep. Abisit , whom i believe to be an honourable man was just the figurehead under Suthep.

Under these conditions, i am sure i would not return to a "Kangaroo Court" judicary.............would you be foolish enough to do so ?

That is a fair point.

But why didn't he then come back to Thailand in 2011 once his own sister is the PM to take responsibility and defend himself? He should have nothing to fear except facing the possible jail sentence (maybe house arrest in a penthouse even?) and as well ask for a royal pardon?

The judges are still the same judges. You have only to look at the present day NACC's zeal in dealing with his sister which mirrors their predecessors (the AEC) efforts to get Thaksin behind bars.

Isn't it curious that the man so many posters on here delight in calling a cowardly convicted criminal was convicted in a case that even "The Nation" found hard to believe;

The case is being presided over by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.

So far, testimonies by virtually all witnesses from the state-controlled Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), who auctioned the land, suggest that there is no hard evidence showing that Thaksin had misused his authority because FIDF supposedly had a certain level of independence from the government.

Unless the court comes up with some concrete evidence today it will be difficult to pass a guilty verdict.

Now the court has to prove that it is fair - a task made even more difficult considering the deeply divided views held by opposing political groups. The fact that the Assets Examination Committee (AEC) was appointed by the junta also means that the court would have to try doubly hard to prove to sceptics that it is not part of a systematic attempt to purge Thaksin from the political landscape.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/17/politics/politics_30083619.php

For those of a non partisan mindset further investigation would find that the FIDF was independant from the government and that the Governor of the Bank of Thailand confirmed that. You will also find that the FIDF said that there was no case to answer and the case was only raised after immense pressure from the Junta appointed AEC, an organisation formed solely to look into Thaksins, (no other political figures) assets.

For the complete blow by blow account of just how set up this conviction was, read http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com

Sociopaths are unable to accept responsibility for anything. Others are always blamed by these people. I am sorry but Thaksin is mentally ill and the cause of all the problems here in Thailand. The guy is a monster and should be removed from all influence if he cannot remove himself. What ruddy arrogance to demand that others respect the law when he has done everything he can for so many years to flout it. Not only Thai law, but international law too. I'm fed up of this man who ruins so many lives and I am fed up of those sycophants here who support him.

A mentally ill sociopathic monster who is the sole cause of all the problems in Thailand.There are two interpretations of this statement.The first is that it is true, and thus all steps necessary to remove him should be taken.The second that it is a hysterical, buffoonish and ignorant rant ignoring the complex political and social issues that have brought the country to its present pass.I have my own views on the applicable interpretation but others must make up their own minds.

To have some idea of what is going on in Thailand today, one has to read "Latest White Paper on Thailand" just google it.

Which just by coincidence is authored by Robert Amsterdam.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The funny thing about the Thaksinista TV posters is that they are not able to defend their beloved "lord and master" without mentioning Suthep or Abhisit.

It is just a game with some of these pro posters. just like the runs you get with bad food, perpetual motion, I think about 4 of them on this thread saying the same old stuff, rarely on topic, as if every topic was about Suthep. I now do the YAWN and wish others would do the same as answering them is feeding them.

Thaksin IS the root problem here despite repeated protestations by his boot lickers to the contrary.

He will never truly leave politics, he will always try to have some puppet under his control that will do his bidding. Anyone found to be doing the bidding of a fugitive ( in the same way PT have not to mention TRT, CTP, BJT and whatever other Thaksin proxy parties there have been ) should be put in jail, stripped of assets and banned from politics for life. Politics should be for the people, by the people and done by people who are here and not fugitives on the run with huge sums of money on a power trip....

" Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said people in the Shinawatra family had the right to be in politics and nobody had the right to prohibit them. " The Shinawatras have the right to be in or out of politics. But if you are in, you should comply with the law and are ready for scrutiny," Abhisit said. "

For those that think that Abhisit and Suthep are in lockstep with each other should examine this statement very carefully. It shows that there is a substantial different take on things between the two. Abhisit's view is clearly more principled, and Pheu Thai supporters would likely agree, though likely grudgingly. In this statement and view alone, Abhisit has cleared the very real possibility for a consensus. It is a very hopeful statement, because in it lies the principle of adherence to the law. Thaksin chides his " enemies " to adhere to the rule of law - which is a statement only Thaksin could utter without the least bit of self-consciousness. And the fact that Thaksin - unlike Abhisit - uses the word " enemies ", indicates that there is an even greater gulf between him and Abhisit than between Abhisit and Suthep. In terms of Thaksin's offer to get out of politics - we're heard it all before. Prior to the 2011 election he gave a series of interviews intended to bolster Yingluck's campaign promise that he would have nothing to do with her administration. In these interviews Thaksin reiterated that he was not only getting out of politics, but that he was in fact disinterested in politics. He said he had resolved to concentrate on his golf game ! Of course, once the election had taken place, the gold game was indefinitely postponed. The skype conferences began, a new passport was delivered by his cousin - now foreign minister, and Thaksin from time to time appeared in video transmissions to UDD rallies. One of them was comically jarring, as Thaksin in it complained that the Constitutional Court took what amounted to over a billion dollars. It's hard to imagine how he thought his supporters - many of whom would have no concept of such a sum - would react. They were delirious, however, so I guessed it must have worked - the common man supports billionaires. And then there was the amnesty bill. Yes, retirement really worked out well. So it will take much more than words for anyone to be convinced of what Thaksin says here.

Taksin cannot quit politics ... coz he already did that several years ago.

Or was he, perhaps (shock, horror!) ... lying?

"The problem was caused by the failure to adhere to the rules and the failure to respect the people's decision [at the ballot box]."

Totally agree! The Pheu Thai attitude of "thanks for voting, now go home, we have your mandate to do what we want" caused big problems. The rushed through blanket amnesty bill with even two years YIngluck government included showed a disrespect which simply called for problems.

I don't think anyone thinks Suthep is a saint or the "best" choice. No one is saying that as far as I can see.

To think that is missing the point entirely but more likely trying to distract from the facts.

But Suthep is a catalyst for change.

Whether he is the ideal person is irrelevant. Fact it, he put himself out there, he exposed the corruption and the failures of the Thaksin regime at great personal risk.

Trying to turn this into Thaksin Vs Suthep is ignorant and childish...but convenient and diversionary as the only defense.

People aren't standing up for Suthep. They are decrying the cowardly, corrupt, convicted felon and his puppet sister for what they are and what they have done to this country. To even attempt to defend them is ridiculous.

Should Suthep end up PM and do similar things, I'm sure he will suffer the same treatment. But until then, he has the courage and conviction to try and rid this country of the most vile and corrupt person ever...and like Suthep or hate him personally, he might die for you bitche$.

"The problem was caused by the failure to adhere to the rules and the failure to respect the people's decision [at the ballot box]."

Totally agree! The Pheu Thai attitude of "thanks for voting, now go home, we have your mandate to do what we want" caused big problems. The rushed through blanket amnesty bill with even two years YIngluck government included showed a disrespect which simply called for problems.

The question is why did he push so hard and that the time that he did - why was it so urgent - why is he apparently willing to give up at this time for what he has worked so hard to keep. If you answer that question certain things maybe become clearer.

If you look at his "attributes" and his weakness rather than just writing him of for being the %^& ^&& that he is then maybe things come in to focus.

Without what transpire with the failure of the bill - what was going to be the major change for Thailand and how could he have used that for his advantage - look at his previous business interests. Who are his friends and connection? Where could the Infrastructure developments fit into all of this,

What ever else you say about Thaksin, he had the ability to think big and see opportunities.

Now join the dots

as most of the people here i don't beleive a word...!

Thaksin, the criminal on the run, has conditions in order for Thailand to have peace. What a joker!!!

Pure blackmail from an evil man.

Lire lire pants on fire!!!!

Sent from my iPad

Keep the foot on Thaksin's goolies and keep pressing hard. Bottom line is there should be no pardon nor amnesty for Thaksin for the garbage that he has dragged Thailand into. He has more charges awaiting him and they need to be served the same as his lackey's have been dealing it to the rest of Thailand.

After seeing the way that the "Wanted for murder" character called Suthep, struts around Bangkok with complete immunity.

I cannot see why Taksin could not live quietly in Chaing Mai. After all there is a hell of a difference with Sutheps crimes and that of Taksins, which after all were just "trumped up" politically induced charges, aided and abetted by a military coup appointed court. Because they are afraid of his popularity.

Thaksin cannot live quietly ANYWHERE, let alone Chiang Mai.

When you casually mention that he charges against him were politically induced do you mean that he was allowed to break any laws he liked and NOT be punished.

The charge he was found guilty of is a law under "your" beloved 1997 constitution which has not yet been repealed.

IF he ever comes back then he has quite a few more charges awaiting him, all of which I am sure the Red Shirt supporters will say are politically induced against him.

As for Suthep I agree that he should be arrested but if 50 or 100,000 policemen in BKK cannot do it then who can?

Just out of curiousity would you not say that the murder charges against Abhisit and Suthep are not also "politically induced"?

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

You obviously need to learn a little more. Taksin did not run any where, he was already out of the country. Why would anyone be stupid enough to return to face a military coup appointed court and a corrupt government run by the meglamaniac Suthep. Abisit , whom i believe to be an honourable man was just the figurehead under Suthep.

Under these conditions, i am sure i would not return to a "Kangaroo Court" judicary.............would you be foolish enough to do so ?

You are twisting the truth yet again.

Yes Thaksin left the country.

He was ALLOWED to under the PPP government led by his brother in law Somchai Wongsawat.

A party which incidentally was disbanded for electoral fraud.

Do at least try to get more than one fact right in a post.

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

You obviously need to learn a little more. Taksin did not run any where, he was already out of the country. Why would anyone be stupid enough to return to face a military coup appointed court and a corrupt government run by the meglamaniac Suthep. Abisit , whom i believe to be an honourable man was just the figurehead under Suthep.

Under these conditions, i am sure i would not return to a "Kangaroo Court" judicary.............would you be foolish enough to do so ?

You are twisting the truth yet again.

Yes Thaksin left the country.

He was ALLOWED to under the PPP government led by his brother in law Somchai Wongsawat.

A party which incidentally was disbanded for electoral fraud.

Do at least try to get more than one fact right in a post.

When will the media in this country stop to publish whatever a fugitive hell raiser have to say?

Noppadon seems to bask in seeing his name in print and associated with a inside track to his boss. His legal expertise on rule and laws of Thailand are questionable

He apparently has knowledge of a lot of criminal activity but a complete '' Gomer '' in finding solutions or ways out of illegal problems/situations.

He's quite experienced in Trade Law. I am still impressed with how his Thai-Cambodian Joint Communique job was done when he served as Samak Gov't Foreign Minister.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.
He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

You obviously need to learn a little more. Taksin did not run any where, he was already out of the country. Why would anyone be stupid enough to return to face a military coup appointed court and a corrupt government run by the meglamaniac Suthep. Abisit , whom i believe to be an honourable man was just the figurehead under Suthep.

Under these conditions, i am sure i would not return to a "Kangaroo Court" judicary.............would you be foolish enough to do so ?

Totally wrong and very misleading:

He was charged with abuse of authority which is a serious charge.

He was guilty. I remember well the TV news coverage of him signing the documents on behalf of Thailand to sell the land to his then wife.

Totally illegal and he and his wife and the smiling senior officials in the live TV spot all knew what they were doing / what they were witnessing was highly illegal.

Surely nobody in any country would disagree with laws which are there to stop PMs etc., from selling state property, at a bargain price, to their relatives.

Further, the case was heard and he was sentenced to 2 years whilst his own party were in power.

He asked for bail to arrange an appeal, it was granted. He then asked for permission to leave Thailand to attend the opening of the Olympic games abroad. Permission was granted on his promise to return to Thailand. He fled.

Subsequent to this he made to attempt to lodge any appeal and the time allowed for appeal expired.

No kangaroo court / no witch hunt / no politically motivated case involved in any way whatever.

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

This would be a good argument if they were both judged by impartial courts.

The big difference between Abhisit and Thaksin is that Abhisit stayed in the country to face the music.

He did not run away. He accepted that he could be charged with man slaughter and even sentenced to death. He takes it as a man and face the consequences of his government's policies.

Thaksin on the other hand ran away like a coward. He did not want to take responsibility. He did not want to stand up for or defend the results of his government's policies.

So the key word as I see it is "responsibility" - and Thaksin's lack of it. He says that ""He is ready to sacrifice for the country and to have his family end their political career so that the country can move forward." Is that just another way to again very conveniently run away from his and his family's responsibility of the current state of affairs?

This would be a good argument if they were both judged by impartial courts.

Off topic. About Thaksin and family, Suthep is not family, why not discuss him on threads appertaining to him, We are only saying for a SECOND time BYE Thaksin, as he promised he was out of politics years ago. You little porky pie man.

Surapong also said he recently met a foreign fortune-teller who told him Thailand would become peaceful again after this month. ???

WHEN was it, ever, 'peaceful'? This foreign fortune-teller should be informed of the 2 dozen coups in the past 8 decades. The thousands of exiles. the ongoing power mongering kleptocrats.

So the fugitive from justice says if others obey the law he is prepared to sacrifice his family in order to get himself off the hook.

What a guy!

But on a serious note the Freudian slip in his statement proves one very important thing. The PM, DM and FM are only there because of him.

Red boys........ get out of that.