NCPO unlikely to lift martial law as opposition remains

[Ve37]

Seems to me Thaksin got a fair trial and was convicted and sentenced. It was his party in power so that lets out the politically motivated excuse.

The truth is he ran because after his failed attempt to bribe the judges it was perfectly clear to him that he would get a fair trial and as we could see with his failed bribe that was the last thing he wanted.

Why does it seem to you that Thaksin got a fair trial? Did you see the facts? The guy was blatantly railroaded into a 2 year sentence over Article 100 and Article 102 of the National Counter Corruption Act without proof. I read the appeal,...which of course, the Bangkok Elite Court threw out.

Of course, "facts are stupid things," as George Bush said,...and as such, Mr Suthep's hate-driven Gobbelesque rhetoric is viewed as the proper viewpoint. Very sad. And quite humorous,...especially with Mr Suthep talking the name "the enlightened monk."

[BigC]

So Thaksin never did wrong--along with his family ?? 15 and more cases to answer to on his return. (this is why he is not here.) So again Thaksin never did wrong, never funded the red army, never run a government while on the run, it never ends- must remember not to get tied up with you on the super hero Thaksin, Answer this quick--what was his birthday date ?? you sound like you belong to his fan club.

If he was innocent why didn't he come back to face the charges.

Knowing the nature of the Thai Judicial system, I doubt he felt he would have gotten a fair trial, for sure he did wrong, and everyone knows it, including him, but would he have ever recieved a fair trial in the first place? But I do think you also seem to know a lot about him too, what did the birthday cake taste like?

Heard this a million times "he would never have got a fair trial" you forgot to say politically motivated.

defending the newbie for what ?? look at his post--elitist - rubbish. no need for the return birthday remark, it wasn't your post . Who doesn't know about the ########3 he has caused so many mega problems for Thailand and his red army is still (funding it'self) abroad.

everyone deserves a fair trial, he will never know and therefore he will use it endlessly-the same as Yingluck may well do--it's a Shin excuse.

Suppose Thaksins lawyer never put 3 million baht in a biscuit tin then to give to the high court judge ?

If so he got nicked for it

Thaksins biggest mistake is that even now he is still driven by power

Even overseas he still using people to politically influence the country

Personally I reckon it was just selfish putting his sister in charge it was just a ticking time bomb for political mess

Now she is going to be in as much trouble as him and I reckon secretly she already knew this bit could not say no to her brother so what does that tell you

[dominique355]

Seems to me Thaksin got a fair trial and was convicted and sentenced. It was his party in power so that lets out the politically motivated excuse.

The truth is he ran because after his failed attempt to bribe the judges it was perfectly clear to him that he would get a fair trial and as we could see with his failed bribe that was the last thing he wanted.

Why does it seem to you that Thaksin got a fair trial? Did you see the facts? The guy was blatantly railroaded into a 2 year sentence over Article 100 and Article 102 of the National Counter Corruption Act without proof. I read the appeal,...which of course, the Bangkok Elite Court threw out.

Of course, "facts are stupid things," as George Bush said,...and as such, Mr Suthep's hate-driven Gobbelesque rhetoric is viewed as the proper viewpoint. Very sad. And quite humorous,...especially with Mr Suthep talking the name "the enlightened monk."

Without proof? Really?

If I remember well, the law (BTW introduced by Thakson himself) outlawed any business dealings of cabinet members and their family with government agencies.

Now, Pojaman was Thaksin's wife and she did purchase the land from the government at a ridiculously low price? Right ot wrong? Fact or fiction?

I wonder if Amsterdam still pays posters here.

[whybother]

As long as Martial Law is in power, foreign investments will avoid Thailand. Investors need rule of law and predictable policies. Martial law is the opposite.

Vietnam and Cambodia will be happy, money originally marked for Thailand now goes there...and doesn't come back.

Tourist will avoid Thailand as some insurances exclude countries with Martial law in power. Will they come back?

Yep ... There will be no foreign investment in Thailand while martial law exists.

Well ... not much anyway.

VW to invest 1 billion euros in Thai plant

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/758628-vw-to-invest-1-billion-euros-in-thai-plant/page-2#entry8362156

[whybother]

Seems to me Thaksin got a fair trial and was convicted and sentenced. It was his party in power so that lets out the politically motivated excuse.

The truth is he ran because after his failed attempt to bribe the judges it was perfectly clear to him that he would get a fair trial and as we could see with his failed bribe that was the last thing he wanted.

Why does it seem to you that Thaksin got a fair trial? Did you see the facts? The guy was blatantly railroaded into a 2 year sentence over Article 100 and Article 102 of the National Counter Corruption Act without proof. I read the appeal,...which of course, the Bangkok Elite Court threw out.

Of course, "facts are stupid things," as George Bush said,...and as such, Mr Suthep's hate-driven Gobbelesque rhetoric is viewed as the proper viewpoint. Very sad. And quite humorous,...especially with Mr Suthep talking the name "the enlightened monk."

I don't know which appeal you read, but Thaksin didn't appeal his 2 year sentence.

[JAG]

Seems to me Thaksin got a fair trial and was convicted and sentenced. It was his party in power so that lets out the politically motivated excuse.

The truth is he ran because after his failed attempt to bribe the judges it was perfectly clear to him that he would get a fair trial and as we could see with his failed bribe that was the last thing he wanted.

Why does it seem to you that Thaksin got a fair trial? Did you see the facts? The guy was blatantly railroaded into a 2 year sentence over Article 100 and Article 102 of the National Counter Corruption Act without proof. I read the appeal,...which of course, the Bangkok Elite Court threw out.

Of course, "facts are stupid things," as George Bush said,...and as such, Mr Suthep's hate-driven Gobbelesque rhetoric is viewed as the proper viewpoint. Very sad. And quite humorous,...especially with Mr Suthep talking the name "the enlightened monk."

Without proof? Really?

If I remember well, the law (BTW introduced by Thakson himself) outlawed any business dealings of cabinet members and their family with government agencies.

Now, Pojaman was Thaksin's wife and she did purchase the land from the government at a ridiculously low price? Right ot wrong? Fact or fiction?

I wonder if Amsterdam still pays posters here.

Did he ever? Or is it just a TVF myth to explain away the (for some) uncomfortable feeling that not everyone views events as they may do?

[fab4]

Why does it seem to you that Thaksin got a fair trial? Did you see the facts? The guy was blatantly railroaded into a 2 year sentence over Article 100 and Article 102 of the National Counter Corruption Act without proof. I read the appeal,...which of course, the Bangkok Elite Court threw out.

Of course, "facts are stupid things," as George Bush said,...and as such, Mr Suthep's hate-driven Gobbelesque rhetoric is viewed as the proper viewpoint. Very sad. And quite humorous,...especially with Mr Suthep talking the name "the enlightened monk."

Without proof? Really?

If I remember well, the law (BTW introduced by Thakson himself) outlawed any business dealings of cabinet members and their family with government agencies.

Now, Pojaman was Thaksin's wife and she did purchase the land from the government at a ridiculously low price? Right ot wrong? Fact or fiction?

I wonder if Amsterdam still pays posters here.

You don't want to hear this but you're wrong and it's fiction.

The parcels of land (one of which was eventually obtained by Thaksins wife in a sealed bid auction) were bought from the Erawan trust by the FIDF and then put on the market by them.

The Assets Examination Committee, which was formed to examine all purchases of the Thaksin government, alleged that the purchase of the land was a breach of NCCC Act Article 100.

The Bank of Thailand also confirmed that prior to transferring the land to Pojaman, the Bank had been in contact with the National Counter Corruption Committee (NCCC), and that the NCCC had replied that as Thaksin Shinawatra did not directly supervise the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), who were the official seller, then there would be no problem with the NCCC Act Article 100.

The AEC pressured the FIDF to file a complaint with them which they failed to do. So the AEC complained to the junta.

On the 9th January 2007, the Ministry of Finance finally submitted a complaint to the AEC. The complaint neither mentioned Thaksin or Pojaman Shinawatra nor the amount of damage that the deal had done to the state. On the 16th January, a further complaint was filed, this time having been drafted by the AEC, and was signed on behalf of the FIDF, which named Thaksin and Pojaman Shinawatra as the accused.

By the 20th January 2007, whilst they had formed a committee to start the investigation, the FIDF had still not included any details about damages to the state, and as a result the AEC again formally submitted a complaint, this time to Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont about state agencies not co-operating with the AEC.

The FIDF replied that they were unaware of any damage, as the price paid was actually higher than the appraisal price; however they stated that should the AEC come up with a figure, and then they would include it in a new complaint. "We're ready to follow the AEC, but the committee will have to prove the loss in the court, because the fund will only report facts. I do not know whether the court will agree with the committee" stated Chanchai Boonritchaisri, a senior director of the central bank's Legal and Litigation Department.

The rest, as they say, is history - and history tends to get distorted with the retelling on this forum, as you so ably demonstrate.

http://slimdogsworld.blogspot.com