Court approves warrants for Kritsuda, two other reds over weapons cache

[Baerboxer]

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

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

 

Do you have any evidence of her alleged torture - pictures, medical reports, witness statements? 

 

But you are happy to support what she claims. So she knows she'll be found out for the weapons, flees the country and then claims she was tortured - the only one to make this allegation. Maybe she was laying the ground to appeal against any extradition request - not safe to send her back, politically motivated, not really a terrorist. 

 

We can all posit without any evidence.

[rubl]

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

 

What a coincidence that she leaves the country, after having been one of many people temporarily-arrested and questioned before release by the military, before being charged by the police to have been involved in supplying weapons for politically-motivated terrorist-acts.

 

 

What a coincidence she left the country just before being charged. 'Self-exile' becomes popular it seems.

[Baerboxer]

 

If, indeed, she was tortured, where is the medical evidence?

 

So you would testify on behalf of the CIA that Abu Zubaydah was not tortured 82 times while in custody in Thailand. There is no existing medical evidence of one such act, after all, let alone serial torture. And yet... and yet I personally believe he was tortured, just as he says.

 

Interesting idea you've raised. I wonder if there is another human on Earth that accepts that torture must be proved by visible medical evidence. I don't think there is.

 

 

Torture can be psychological as well as physical. 

 

However in earlier reports the lady alluded to physical torture - or was that a bad translation?

 

But equally you are happy to take the word of anybody without any evidence too? Normally she would have wanted some treatment or shown some signs but possible was more keen to flee before more evidence came to light? 

 

Would you accept that many Moslems were tortured, some to death, as were "war on drugs" victims under the brutal regime of Thaksin? Crimes for which the UN and ICJ might still be interested?

 

 

 

Edited August 10, 2014 by Baerboxer

[Baerboxer]

 

The birds are singing. Pointing fingers. Then some will try anything to not face the consequences. The small fish will do time. Now see if bigger and big fish will follow.

 

 The birds are singing, pointing fingers, the small fish will do time, they'll end up sleeping with the fishes (sorry, that one was mine, well the film mafia character, Sal Tessio's actually) - what's with the psuedo mob talk?

 

Dare I suggest that this recent turn of events should be subject to healthy scepticism. It's not as if the junta doesn't have previous (Oh, No, you've got me at it now). One would have thought that this might have been mentioned before the accusations of torture were raised...............  

 

 

Accusations of torture were raised - yes. Glad to see you recognize they are accusations.

 

Does the Shin clan and their gang have "previous" - doesn't take much to find the answer to that. 

[EricBerg]

 

The birds are singing. Pointing fingers. Then some will try anything to not face the consequences. The small fish will do time. Now see if bigger and big fish will follow.

 

 The birds are singing, pointing fingers, the small fish will do time, they'll end up sleeping with the fishes (sorry, that one was mine, well the film mafia character, Sal Tessio's actually) - what's with the psuedo mob talk?

 

Dare I suggest that this recent turn of events should be subject to healthy scepticism. It's not as if the junta doesn't have previous (Oh, No, you've got me at it now). One would have thought that this might have been mentioned before the accusations of torture were raised...............  

 

 

Publicus may be silent for a while, then it's comforting fab4 raises his voice again. Means I managed in some way to attack your hero in Dubai? Oh I see, the big fish? Happy to see you active fab4, means I had a point again somewhere. :)

[StealthEnergiser]

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

There are / were videos and photo's on line showing here with weapons and with TS , in my opinion the the army should of held her longer.

She now looks like a panicked rabbit.

Are you saying she was standing next to TS and they were in possession of war weapons? When were these photos purportedly taken?


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

 

No I am not saying she was in possession of war weapons while with TS , there are images floating around when of her on sitting down with holding a hand gun other hand guns next to herself . there also a couple video clips where raids on premises connected to he and heavy weapons were found i unable to find it now but believe she was at those premises when the raid happened .

 

I think the photo's were quoted from a twitter user @issarar

 

From looking at the video there was a very large amount of items and papers etc taken away for investigation.

 

 

 

Edited August 10, 2014 by StealthEnergiser

[Bland]

If, indeed, she was tortured, where is the medical evidence?

 
There has been no evidence presented to support her unproven claim.

[Baerboxer]

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

 

Yes i am sure TS is going to transfer large deposits via a bank account to her current account to fund things! If you believe that then you are beyond stupid.  He has allegedly been funding activities for nigh on a decade and no one has been able to pin any money movement on him. (Possibly because other parties/organizations also have money moved around in similar methods)

 

 

Indeed - he's much to clever to make mistakes like that, if he has been funding political unrest and terrorism as some allege. Although the large deposits and withdrawals from Yinglucks accounts in 2010 were never really explained or followed up. Cash is king - and lots of people have made lots of trips on diplomatic passports with lots of luggage,

 

But, I'm sure you are right. Lots of parties and organizations moving money around and money laundering going on.

Edited August 10, 2014 by Baerboxer

[iReason]

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

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

 

No coincidence at all, she made up the torture claims when she ran away to seek asylum in Europe, she has to tart up the victim image for that.

 

Noone else has claimed to have been subject to torture, only this woman that has been fingered, by fellow Red Shirts, to have provided war weapons to attack Thaksin/PTP opponents.

That war weapons were provided and used to that end is the incontrovertible truth, now we are seeng where those weapons came from.

 

Perhaps they were tortured? Plausible.

It seems natural that one would have to flee the LOS in order to make such a claim.

Do you really think any of those still here can stand and make accusations like that?

All have been detained and "processed" to get on board with the new "Happiness".

 

Check out the current news coming out about the CIA (Arab) torture center up north.

With, it appears full co-operation of the military.

 

“Why beat her up, she has a pretty face?” asked the general."

(adding that there was no point of torturing or beating her up as all the people held in the military custody have never been tortured.)

 

 What I would like to say about that can't be done or the mods will swoop in...

 

 

 

 

[iReason]

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

 

 

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

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

 

Do you have any evidence of her alleged torture - pictures, medical reports, witness statements? 

 

But you are happy to support what she claims. So she knows she'll be found out for the weapons, flees the country and then claims she was tortured - the only one to make this allegation. Maybe she was laying the ground to appeal against any extradition request - not safe to send her back, politically motivated, not really a terrorist. 

 

We can all posit without any evidence.

 

"Maybe she was laying the ground to appeal against any extradition request - not safe to send her back, politically motivated, not really a terrorist."

"We can all posit without any evidence."

 

You accuse others of speculation with no proof and then, proceed to submit your own conjectures...

  

 

[craigt3365]

A post containing comments derogatory to the army has been removed from view, along with an associated reply.  Please understand we are still under martial law.  And thus, under scrutiny for what's posted here.

[rubl]

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

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

 

No coincidence at all, she made up the torture claims when she ran away to seek asylum in Europe, she has to tart up the victim image for that.

 

Noone else has claimed to have been subject to torture, only this woman that has been fingered, by fellow Red Shirts, to have provided war weapons to attack Thaksin/PTP opponents.

That war weapons were provided and used to that end is the incontrovertible truth, now we are seeng where those weapons came from.

 

Perhaps they were tortured? Plausible.

It seems natural that one would have to flee the LOS in order to make such a claim.

Do you really think any of those still here can stand and make accusations like that?

All have been detained and "processed" to get on board with the new "Happiness".

 

Check out the current news coming out about the CIA (Arab) torture center up north.

With, it appears full co-operation of the military.

 

“Why beat her up, she has a pretty face?” asked the general."

(adding that there was no point of torturing or beating her up as all the people held in the military custody have never been tortured.)

 

 What I would like to say about that can't be done or the mods will swoop in...

 

 

swoop in ... allegedly that is.

 

In the mean time we're left wondering what you would like to say, whether it would be valid, invalid, related, rubbish, or simply some baiting stuff. In a way the suspense is almost killing me. I feel I should accuse you of psychological torture 

 

Of course it's a pain to have to comply to the strict forum rules here. May I suggest you find another forum which allows you to say what you want to say?

[Nickymaster]

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

The other way around you mean.... And she fled after having used HRW and the UN.

[Old Man River]

She was RELEASED long after the 7 days max to be held without court approval.

She was held for 27 days with court approval as she defied a summons to report to the NCPO previously. If she has she would have only been detained for 7 days as was every other person that did not "run away" from accountability.

some torture is mental not physical which may not show up on a medical examination.

The torture tactics described in her youtube video described covering her head with a plastic bag, locking her up in a zipped bag and having female soldiers give her a bath while she was blindfolded.

You think she may have had a reason to leave the country. Can you blame her.

So you have rationalized and defended thaksin "running away" from criminal charges. You have rationalized and defended this lady for "running away" from criminal charges. Next you will rationalize and defend terrorists "running away" from criminal charges. Ohhh hang on!

You are becoming the very thing you purport to hate.

This entire post is rumour mongering, and false. It should be removed. Kritsuda was NOT let's repeat that was NOT held for not reporting. She did, in fact, report. The army claims, citing a signed statement by Kritsuda, that she requested to stay in custody.

Again - this post is rumour mongering and should be removed.

.

Actually, according to one of the English language newspapers, she was arrested on May 28th in Chonburi for not reporting. She had been summoned on suspicion of involvement of computer crime and weapons related charges.




Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Bland]

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

The other way around you mean.... And she fled after having used HRW and the UN.

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

[wandasloan]

The other way around you mean.... And she fled after having used HRW and the UN.

 

To straighten out the tangled "facts" here...

 

The UN and HRW intervened in her case while she was in the hands of the military, and was unable to contact anyone. It was impossible that she used either or both of them. If she does use them now, it will because they intervened without her knowledge in the first place.

 

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has intervened three times, twice without publicity. Since those interventions, the office has last week given complete details of where, when and how all three of its interventions proceeded. The HRW intervention at the time of her detention is public and widely reported. Not only did she not "use" the UN and HRW, she was physically detained and silenced, and unable to do so.

 

Then the army decided to release a suspected arms smuggler and weapons trafficker, and off she went. Pretty curious decision, that.

 

 

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

 

"Large bore caliber...."

 

This was to make you appear knowledgeable? Heh.

 

For what it's worth, I have photos in my home of me and (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns, plural. For what it's worth, I've not trafficked the guns in the photos. Or any others. I suspect you have absolutely no more knowledge of Kritsuda's attention to those (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns than mine, where "absolutely" is an absolute word. Or am I wrong?

 

.

Edited August 10, 2014 by wandasloan

[SeaVisionBurma]

A couple of inflammatory posts and replies quoting them have been removed.

Keep the discussion civil thanks, do not resort to flaming and accusations of being paid to post simply because you do not agree with a differing opinion

[rubl]

 

The other way around you mean.... And she fled after having used HRW and the UN.

 

To straighten out the tangled "facts" here...

 

The UN and HRW intervened in her case while she was in the hands of the military, and was unable to contact anyone. It was impossible that she used either or both of them. If she does use them now, it will because they intervened without her knowledge in the first place.

 

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has intervened three times, twice without publicity. Since those interventions, the office has last week given complete details of where, when and how all three of its interventions proceeded. The HRW intervention at the time of her detention is public and widely reported. Not only did she not "use" the UN and HRW, she was physically detained and silenced, and unable to do so.

 

Then the army decided to release a suspected arms smuggler and weapons trafficker, and off she went. Pretty dumb, I'd say.

 

 

You make it sound as if the army should have kept the alleged arms smuggler and weapons trafficker, or are you suggesting the army 'forgot' to tell the nice lady to ask permission before leaving the country?

 

BTW it's interesting to see the 'physically detained' as if describing being detained in such a way makes it sound more sinister than just 'detained'. Furthermore the use of 'silenced' is very interesting. Some use it only to indicate a somewhat permanent state, but I must admit taking one's mobile phone away has a much more satisfying result.

[rubl]

 

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

 

"Large bore caliber...."

 

This was to make you appear knowledgeable? Heh.

 

For what it's worth, I have photos in my home of me and (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns, plural. For what it's worth, I've not trafficked the guns in the photos. Or any others. I suspect you have absolutely no more knowledge of Kritsuda's attention to those (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns than mine, where "absolutely" is an absolute word. Or am I wrong?

 

 

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

[wandasloan]

Actually, according to one of the English language newspapers, she was arrested on May 28th in Chonburi for not reporting. She had been summoned on suspicion of involvement of computer crime and weapons related charges.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not "some newspaper" you won't even quote. Here are the facts of the case. Feel free to point out where they are wrong, in any detail. If you succeed, you will be the first to find any error in them, so please document the errors you find as extensively as possible and "some newspaper I read" isn't documentation.

 

 

On 28 May 2014, Ms. Kritsuda Khunasen was taken from Chonburi province by police and soldiers and was under detention after that. No one was able to contact her while she was in detention and it was not known where she was detained.  On 17 June 2014, there was a summons for Ms. Kritsuda to report herself to the junta following National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order No. 68/2557 [2014]. This was the case although there was neither evidence that she had been released nor had any charges been brought against her.

 

Subsequently, on 20 June 2014, Colonel Winthai Suwaree, deputy spokesperson for the Army, admitted that it was true that Ms. Kritsuda had been detained.

 

On June 23, a video was released by army TV showing Ms Kritsuda praising the excellent treatment she received in army hands. At the time, she was still in army hands.

 

On June 24, Col Winthai announced she had been released.

 

.

[rubl]

 

Actually, according to one of the English language newspapers, she was arrested on May 28th in Chonburi for not reporting. She had been summoned on suspicion of involvement of computer crime and weapons related charges.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not "some newspaper" you won't even quote. Here are the facts of the case. Feel free to point out where they are wrong, in any detail. If you succeed, you will be the first to find any error in them, so please document the errors you find as extensively as possible and "some newspaper I read" isn't documentation.

 

 

On 28 May 2014, Ms. Kritsuda Khunasen was taken from Chonburi province by police and soldiers and was under detention after that. No one was able to contact her while she was in detention and it was not known where she was detained.  On 17 June 2014, there was a summons for Ms. Kritsuda to report herself to the junta following National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order No. 68/2557 [2014]. This was the case although there was neither evidence that she had been released nor had any charges been brought against her.

 

Subsequently, on 20 June 2014, Colonel Winthai Suwaree, deputy spokesperson for the Army, admitted that it was true that Ms. Kritsuda had been detained.

 

On June 23, a video was released by army TV showing Ms Kritsuda praising the excellent treatment she received in army hands. At the time, she was still in army hands.

 

On June 24, Col Winthai announced she had been released.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not from some poster who identifies her (or him)self as 'wanda'

[Old Man River]

The other way around you mean.... And she fled after having used HRW and the UN.

To straighten out the tangled "facts" here...

The UN and HRW intervened in her case while she was in the hands of the military, and was unable to contact anyone. It was impossible that she used either or both of them. If she does use them now, it will because they intervened without her knowledge in the first place.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has intervened three times, twice without publicity. Since those interventions, the office has last week given complete details of where, when and how all three of its interventions proceeded. The HRW intervention at the time of her detention is public and widely reported. Not only did she not "use" the UN and HRW, she was physically detained and silenced, and unable to do so.

Then the army decided to release a suspected arms smuggler and weapons trafficker, and off she went. Pretty curious decision, that.

Wanda, ok, staying with the facts, you now understand that she didn't report and instead was arrested (on suspicion of weapons related charges, etc.). On torture, all we have is her comments that she was treated fine and then a change of story that she wasn't. Do you know different? I don't.

The Army has let a number of people go, while they investigate. Isn't this normal? Why would they hold her until they had more facts?



Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[AGareth2]

Are you happy now?

[Old Man River]

Are you happy now?

I have been happy since May 22nd.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[wandasloan]

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

 

You seem to be alleging something here. I'll ask you one time to please re-read the post you quoted and seem to be answering, and then revise your own personal claim (quoted above) in light of what I wrote — compared with what you allege here. I'm pretty sure you made several honest errors. At least I hope so. Thanks.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not from some poster who identifies her (or him)self as 'wanda'

 

This is excellent advice. However, the number of posters here who can't even use that new-fangled google thingmy is depressing, and the person I answered is one of them. But I literally could not agree with you more. If even 20% of posters here did as you suggest, there wouldn't be this silly back-and-forth about facts.

 

I'm afraid I bet that almost everyone from this point on who argues the "facts" of the case won't have the facts of the case. That's the problem. Your solution is nirvanna, not an actual state of affairs.

 

.

Edited August 10, 2014 by wandasloan

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post has been removed.

[wandasloan]

You make it sound as if the army should have kept the alleged arms smuggler and weapons trafficker, or are you suggesting the army 'forgot' to tell the nice lady to ask permission before leaving the country?

 

Er, yes, I think the army should detain suspected arms sellers/traffickers and the like. Don't you? I think it was incompetent, for starters, that she escaped while under, first, actual physical detention and then surveillance. Don't you?

 

 

BTW it's interesting to see the 'physically detained' as if describing being detained in such a way makes it sound more sinister than just 'detained'. Furthermore the use of 'silenced' is very interesting. Some use it only to indicate a somewhat permanent state, but I must admit taking one's mobile phone away has a much more satisfying result.

 

I'll look into getting an editor to go over my posts. In the meantime, though, you may have to continue being disgruntled. Just an honest warning.

 

But yes, she was physically detained and not, for example, under house arrest or with a GPS bracelet among other non-physical detentions. She was certainly silenced beyond losing her phone. Sort of like the Thai Visa editor silences, actually. Certainly not permanent, but what was silenced is lost forever, eh?.

 

What word to you prefer, so I can tell my editor, presuming one will work at the rates affordable for Thai Visa forum comments?

 

.

Edited August 10, 2014 by wandasloan

[rubl]

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not from some poster who identifies her (or him)self as 'wanda'

 

This is excellent advice. However, the number of posters here who can't even use that new-fangled google thingmy is depressing, and the person I answered is one of them. But I literally could not agree with you more. If even 20% of posters here did as you suggest, there wouldn't be this silly back-and-forth about facts.

 

I'm afraid I bet that almost everyone from this point on who argues the "facts" of the case won't have the facts of the case. That's the problem. Your solution is nirvanna, not an actual state of affairs.

 

 

When I google and find a few hundred pages with facts and upon further investigation condense to three different original pages, and those three include two newspapers and one government information site, what should I conclude about the googled facts?

 

The old man along the river came with a 'newspaper' fact, following which you came with more facts without telling where you got them. Both group of facts together seem to properly describe the known truth.

 

Anyway, it would seem Ms. Kritsuda didn't report in, but was apprehended.

[rubl]

 

You make it sound as if the army should have kept the alleged arms smuggler and weapons trafficker, or are you suggesting the army 'forgot' to tell the nice lady to ask permission before leaving the country?

 

Er, yes, I think the army should detain suspected arms sellers/traffickers and the like. Don't you? I think it was incompetent, for starters, that she escaped while under, first, actual physical detention and then surveillance. Don't you?

 

 

BTW it's interesting to see the 'physically detained' as if describing being detained in such a way makes it sound more sinister than just 'detained'. Furthermore the use of 'silenced' is very interesting. Some use it only to indicate a somewhat permanent state, but I must admit taking one's mobile phone away has a much more satisfying result.

 

I'll look into getting an editor to go over my posts. In the meantime, though, you may have to continue being disgruntled. Just an honest warning.

 

But yes, she was physically detained and not, for example, under house arrest or with a GPS bracelet among other non-physical detentions. She was certainly silenced beyond losing her phone. Sort of like the Thai Visa editor silences, actually. Certainly not permanent, but what was silenced is lost forever, eh?.

 

What word to you prefer, so I can tell my editor, presuming one will work at the rates affordable for Thai Visa forum comments?

 

 

 

I didn't find that fact or may have overlooked it, but was k. Kritsuda still under surveillance ?

 

As for the silence, nothing was lost forever in k. Kritsuda's case. She couldn't phone, so didn't talk to whoever she might have wanted to phone or text, or chat with. The 'silenced by mods' is an actual removal of posts and sometimes even a withdrawal of posting rights or a total ban. Still that's completely legal, read the forum rules 

[Old Man River]

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

You seem to be alleging something here. I'll ask you one time to please re-read the post you quoted and seem to be answering, and then revise your own personal claim (quoted above) in light of what I wrote — compared with what you allege here. I'm pretty sure you made several honest errors. At least I hope so. Thanks.

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not from some poster who identifies her (or him)self as 'wanda'

This is excellent advice. However, the number of posters here who can't even use that new-fangled google thingmy is depressing, and the person I answered is one of them. But I literally could not agree with you more. If even 20% of posters here did as you suggest, there wouldn't be this silly back-and-forth about facts.

I'm afraid I bet that almost everyone from this point on who argues the "facts" of the case won't have the facts of the case. That's the problem. Your solution is nirvanna, not an actual state of affairs.

.

So you have the facts. Please enlighten us. What happened while she was in detention? Is she guilty of charges being brought?




Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand