Revoke Thaksin's diplomatic passport, says Democrat ex-MP

[Alwyn]

"Watchara cited Thaksin's latest scheduled talk in South Korea next Monday as proof that Thaksin is still engaging in political activities". Actually it's only "proof" that he scheduled to talk in S Korea next Monday. Might have something political to say, he might not.

[Reigntax]

I have always thought that the passport illegally issued back in 2011 by Thaksins BIL must be diplomatic and now we see proof.

When Yingluck was on tour one of the things that it was reported that she did was to arrange visa free entry for holders of Thai diplomatic passports into all the countries she visited, this was reported as being reciprocal. Made it easy for big brother to travel the world.

Not revoking that passport is one on the holds that the present Govt has over Thaksin, as in behave yourself or else.

And no he would not be so free to move around on his other bought passports.

As for Thaksin knowing how to conduct himself and being responsible for his words........ Well not knowing when he had gone to far has brought us to the situation we are in now, read amnesty bill.

Well Robbienz you may think it was illegally issued but unfortunately you are wrong. When has any government issued an illegal passport. Please provide just one instance when this has occurred?

You may want to believe this is the case to suit your agenda but you have no idea what you are talking about.

"Not be free to move around..." Really. You know this from your years of experience or is this just more rubbish you wish to believe. He is as free to travel as any other person, probably has more freedom because most governments can see through the history of events and realise the truth. Unfortunately, if the truth hit you in the face, you wouldn't know what it was.

So in your wise opinion, Thaksin has created the situation Thailand is now in. This doesn't even require a response as is shows your inability to learn from history, your inability to reason, your inability to critically analyse the cause of any current problem and your preference to just type dribble that's suits your naive opinion based on nothing but ignorance and information you just make up.

I didn't realise the NZ education system taught people to be stupid but I suppose like many, it's much easier to just believe what people say and write, rather than analyse facts to decide whether the result is logical.

You and djjamie should hook up together as he is another fruitcake.

You might like to explain how a diplomatic passport that was issued when the passport issuing office was closed due to flooding and was hand delivered by Thaksins BIL could possibly legal.

You might also like to explain what diplomatic standing Thaksin had at the time the passport was issued, was the an ambassador, member of parliament, cabinet minister, civil servant representing the country.

Someone posted that as a past PM he deserved a diplomatic passport.

But he, as a convicted criminal who had broken his bail conditions and has numerous other criminal charges awaiting him, had already had his Thai passport revoked.

So in order for a new passport to be issued legally his status must have changed.

Could you please explain what that change was and when it took place.

His freedom to move comes from the visa free entry to many countries that a diplomatic passport conveys on the holder, should he only have a normal passport like the rest of us mortals he would need to apply for a visa every time he wished to visit many countries. This of course would be the reason his illegal passport was diplomatic.

Just what status the other passports he has bought confer on him I don't know, perhaps as an admirer of his you could explain ?

It would appear from your insults that you are another one of the gullible fools who believes the PT excuses as to why they were disposed by the people, the catalyst for their demise was of course the amnesty bill which brought so many people out on the streets in protest, including their own red shirt supporters.

I can post numerous links to reports from the time these events took place to prove what I write.

If you decide to reply attempt to do it without insults, it would be a refreshing change from the normal PT supporters posts.

The problem is nzrobbie is that neither you nor I know what went on, however unlike you, I would prefer to base any comment on facts rather than just make it up.

Your comments weakness is confirmed by the present government also failing to take any action. Why is this. I don't know and neither do you. On that basis why pretend to know when it is obvious that if the present government thought you were correct, they could easily cancell his passport.

You are incorrect again. I am not an admirer but he was successfully voted in by the Thai people which is far more than can be said for you or I, or for the present government.

I'm sure you can provide numerous links, as can anyone to present a one sided opinion. Such only shows a level of ignorance but if that makes you happy, so be it.

Now nzrobbie, respect is something to be earnt, not something automatically associated with a person who so obviously tries to force their inaccurate views on others. Of course those who support the current government, which has taken away their voices to contribute to society and who promote the government in doing so, are generally those who believe they have all the answers.

As for being a supporter of PT, guess what, wrong again. I am a supporter of free and open democracy and believe in accepting the results of a fair and equatable elections whether you support the majority party or not.

In saying that, I also respect your right to make up whatever stories you need to and I also uphold my right of rebuttal to that which is obviously just a fabrication of the truth through either laziness or inability to understand the entire situation.

[Fat Haggis]

Me think Watchara is unhappy because Ahbisit was not invited.

Who ? 55555

[metisdead]

Inflammatory insulting posts have been removed as well as the replies. If you cannot post without insulting others, don't bother posting.

[Fat Haggis]

Why should a criminal on the run have the luxury of a diplomatic passport?

The guy fly's in on a private jet, do you really think it makes any REAL difference if he has a DP or a regular passport, its not like he will be queuing with Somchai and Joe Bloggs.

The simple fact is that many countries do not see him the same as some people do in Thailand.

Yes, many countries see his massive amount of money, and stop there.

Actually many countries see a politician who won successive elections overthrown in a military coup. One of a series of politicians who won elections overthrown by military coups.

The lies are coming thick and fast. He wasn't overthrown by a military coup. Check the facts. He prefers to get his lobbyists to rewrite history like that as being removed when illegally occupying the caretaker PM role without authority doesn't sound so good.

He's a crook, a successful, very rich crook, but a common criminal, nothing more.

There's many an expat living in Thailand who's earnings that brought them here were made by dubious means, there's even expats making earnings here through dubious and illegal means, lots of people moved to Thailand with criminal records back in their homelands too.

Some I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest are possibly members here.

[Fat Haggis]

I believe only the Head of State can cancel his diplomatic passport and Prayut is NOT Head of State. Rember that Thailand is a Constitutional Monarchy. Prayut is Head of Government.

If what you write is true then it would also follow that a diplomatic passport could only be issued by the head of state.

Tell us, was Thaksins diplomatic passport issued by the head of state ?

Do you actually know the Terms and Conditions of the issuing of diplomatic passports within the Kingdom Robbie or are you simply making assumptions.

The passport office might have been closed to the public, but not to the Government, why hasn't the person who actually filed the paperwork, and then printed the passport off, never come forwards?

Are you aware of the whole procedure for a Thai National to be granted a diplomatic passport? I would have a guess that diplomatic passports can be done out of hours and when the department is closed to the public, and could be issued that same day if needed.

Doesn't really matter, Prayuth needs thaksin, it's his excuse to maintain Section 44, amongst other things, everyone needs a bogey man, it's used to control the masses, let's face it, if Thaksin wasn't the bogeyman, the country wouldn't need the Army in control.

[boomerangutang]

That's the issue, it wasn't a serious charge was it. Corruption over a land deal which most countries believe to be politically motivated anyway doesn't really count as a serious charge.

You're partly right. He was convicted of a relatively lesser charge, because that was the charge which was easiest to prove. However, he's been formally accused of more serious charges, such as sedition (funding the 2009 and 2010 riots in Bkk, for example), and could be charged also with ethnic cleansing (he was top banana when both Kru Sae and Tak Bai happened). Those killings of young Muslim men, dozens of whom were incarcerated when killed, could land him in front of the International Justice Court in The Hague. It may still happen, whether or not he flashes his diplomatic passports from Thailand, Nicaragua or Liberia.

[LannaGuy]

I wish these dinosaurs would shut up and asking for T's passport be revoked is a political act in itself so arrest the dinosaur!

[scorecard]

I believe only the Head of State can cancel his diplomatic passport and Prayut is NOT Head of State. Rember that Thailand is a Constitutional Monarchy. Prayut is Head of Government.

If what you write is true then it would also follow that a diplomatic passport could only be issued by the head of state.

Tell us, was Thaksins diplomatic passport issued by the head of state ?

Do you actually know the Terms and Conditions of the issuing of diplomatic passports within the Kingdom Robbie or are you simply making assumptions.

The passport office might have been closed to the public, but not to the Government, why hasn't the person who actually filed the paperwork, and then printed the passport off, never come forwards?

Are you aware of the whole procedure for a Thai National to be granted a diplomatic passport? I would have a guess that diplomatic passports can be done out of hours and when the department is closed to the public, and could be issued that same day if needed.

Doesn't really matter, Prayuth needs thaksin, it's his excuse to maintain Section 44, amongst other things, everyone needs a bogey man, it's used to control the masses, let's face it, if Thaksin wasn't the bogeyman, the country wouldn't need the Army in control.

"The passport office might have been closed to the public, but not to the Government, why hasn't the person who actually filed the paperwork, and then printed the passport off, never come forwards?"

You really think a junior who pressed the print button is going to come forward and risk revenge and risk the end of a career?

[Fat Haggis]

Sure why not ? After all didn't they say the same thing about the pack of cards falling about the rice scheme and the big names would be "implicated " ?

Didn't they say the same thing when they arrested 5 "alleged" MIBs in that they'd be singing like canaries?

So what's wrong with wondering why the person who issued it signed off on it can't come forwards ?

Personally I think people look too much into such things, and fail to grasp the real world is very much different from a Thai POV from that of a Farang ?

[JAG]

The guy fly's in on a private jet, do you really think it makes any REAL difference if he has a DP or a regular passport, its not like he will be queuing with Somchai and Joe Bloggs.

The simple fact is that many countries do not see him the same as some people do in Thailand.

Yes, many countries see his massive amount of money, and stop there.

Actually many countries see a politician who won successive elections overthrown in a military coup. One of a series of politicians who won elections overthrown by military coups.

The lies are coming thick and fast. He wasn't overthrown by a military coup. Check the facts. He prefers to get his lobbyists to rewrite history like that as being removed when illegally occupying the caretaker PM role without authority doesn't sound so good.

He's a crook, a successful, very rich crook, but a common criminal, nothing more.

A lie is it? He won in 2001, in 2005, again in April 2006, although the Constitutional Court declared the result invalid as the Democratic Party had boycotted the election (sounds somewhat familiar does it not). Elections were due to be held again in October 2006 but never happened because the Military staged a coup, in order to prevent him winning again.

If there is a lie it is the repeated assertions from you and others that Thaksin had no political or democratic legitamacy, and lacked the support of the Thai people, but the Military had. A lie which has been repeated even more brazenly after this latest coup, in which, to everyone's surprise the military staged a coup to prevent an election in which once again a Prime Minister had presented herself for re election. Once again it had to be stopped, in order to prevent her from winning again.

Edited May 14, 2015 by JAG

[rixalex]

I think the US would give him a passport simply for being a fugitive from an M word D word. A lot of countries don't take an M word D word seriously at all.

Especially when the M word D word and Democrat sponsored judiciary forced him to become a fugitive by fleeing for his life.

Here we go again.

The paymaster was convicted for abuse of authority, a serious charge, the evidence was obvious and well publicized, there is no way anybody could say it was politically motivated, the case was heard and decided and the sentence of 2 years jail handed down whilst the paymaster's party was in government.

Next.

Serious charge really warrant an extradiction since South Korea has an extradiction treaty with Thailand. Looks like the government has given up asking for extradiction as most time the rest of the world just ignore. Wonder why?

That's the issue, it wasn't a serious charge was it. Corruption over a land deal which most countries believe to be politically motivated anyway doesn't really count as a serious charge

Thaivisa always seems so lucky in having people on hand able to speak for 'most countries'. Spokespeople of the world almost.

[marinediscoking]

That's the issue, it wasn't a serious charge was it. Corruption over a land deal which most countries believe to be politically motivated anyway doesn't really count as a serious charge.

You're partly right. He was convicted of a relatively lesser charge, because that was the charge which was easiest to prove. However, he's been formally accused of more serious charges, such as sedition (funding the 2009 and 2010 riots in Bkk, for example), and could be charged also with ethnic cleansing (he was top banana when both Kru Sae and Tak Bai happened). Those killings of young Muslim men, dozens of whom were incarcerated when killed, could land him in front of the International Justice Court in The Hague. It may still happen, whether or not he flashes his diplomatic passports from Thailand, Nicaragua or Liberia.

I find it laughable when people call him "convicted criminal felon on the run". They are trying to spin and rewrite history. He was found guilty of a "conflict of interest". I am will to wager every past Thai MP could be too if investigators really looked. If the other charges you mentioned really had merit he would have been detained by one of many of the non-pay-your-way-out countries long ago that he has visited. Former lower ranking SAS guards have been on trial in the Hague with little evidence so getting Thaksin there would not require much it was really there.

I was not a fan of Thaksin because during his time as PM, I could not get the normal business amendments/permits pushed through for my company as previously done with a tip. All the extra time satisfying stamp happy people and red tape was a time waster because of the bangkok officals looking over their shoulders. After he was gone the old way came back in my province making things much easier.

[Reigntax]

The guy fly's in on a private jet, do you really think it makes any REAL difference if he has a DP or a regular passport, its not like he will be queuing with Somchai and Joe Bloggs.

The simple fact is that many countries do not see him the same as some people do in Thailand.

Yes, many countries see his massive amount of money, and stop there.

Actually many countries see a politician who won successive elections overthrown in a military coup. One of a series of politicians who won elections overthrown by military coups.

The lies are coming thick and fast. He wasn't overthrown by a military coup. Check the facts. He prefers to get his lobbyists to rewrite history like that as being removed when illegally occupying the caretaker PM role without authority doesn't sound so good.

He's a crook, a successful, very rich crook, but a common criminal, nothing more.

A lie is it? He won in 2001, in 2005, again in April 2006, although the Constitutional Court declared the result invalid as the Democratic Party had boycotted the election (sounds somewhat familiar does it not). Elections were due to be held again in October 2006 but never happened because the Military staged a coup, in order to prevent him winning again.

If there is a lie it is the repeated assertions from you and others that Thaksin had no political or democratic legitamacy, and lacked the support of the Thai people, but the Military had. A lie which has been repeated even more brazenly after this latest coup, in which, to everyone's surprise the military staged a coup to prevent an election in which once again a Prime Minister had presented herself for re election. Once again it had to be stopped, in order to prevent her from winning again.

And let's not forget that an incumbent government has an obligation to continue running the country in "caretaker mode" from when they announce an election and up until the new elected government is in place.

So up until a new government is elected he was the legitimate PM and was overthrown by another illegitimate coup.

[rametindallas]

Actually many countries see a politician who won successive elections overthrown in a military coup. One of a series of politicians who won elections overthrown by military coups.

The lies are coming thick and fast. He wasn't overthrown by a military coup. Check the facts. He prefers to get his lobbyists to rewrite history like that as being removed when illegally occupying the caretaker PM role without authority doesn't sound so good.

He's a crook, a successful, very rich crook, but a common criminal, nothing more.

A lie is it? He won in 2001, in 2005, again in April 2006, although the Constitutional Court declared the result invalid as the Democratic Party had boycotted the election (sounds somewhat familiar does it not). Elections were due to be held again in October 2006 but never happened because the Military staged a coup, in order to prevent him winning again.

If there is a lie it is the repeated assertions from you and others that Thaksin had no political or democratic legitamacy, and lacked the support of the Thai people, but the Military had. A lie which has been repeated even more brazenly after this latest coup, in which, to everyone's surprise the military staged a coup to prevent an election in which once again a Prime Minister had presented herself for re election. Once again it had to be stopped, in order to prevent her from winning again.

Just in case some of the newer members of the forum might believe you abbreviated, glossed-over version of how Thaksin lost power, I keep this little time-line handy.

Thaksin’s Fall

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 40% of the electorate (not 40% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 40% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

[waitforusalso]

Actually many countries see a politician who won successive elections overthrown in a military coup. One of a series of politicians who won elections overthrown by military coups.

The lies are coming thick and fast. He wasn't overthrown by a military coup. Check the facts. He prefers to get his lobbyists to rewrite history like that as being removed when illegally occupying the caretaker PM role without authority doesn't sound so good.

He's a crook, a successful, very rich crook, but a common criminal, nothing more.

A lie is it? He won in 2001, in 2005, again in April 2006, although the Constitutional Court declared the result invalid as the Democratic Party had boycotted the election (sounds somewhat familiar does it not). Elections were due to be held again in October 2006 but never happened because the Military staged a coup, in order to prevent him winning again.

If there is a lie it is the repeated assertions from you and others that Thaksin had no political or democratic legitamacy, and lacked the support of the Thai people, but the Military had. A lie which has been repeated even more brazenly after this latest coup, in which, to everyone's surprise the military staged a coup to prevent an election in which once again a Prime Minister had presented herself for re election. Once again it had to be stopped, in order to prevent her from winning again.

Just in case some of the newer members of the forum might believe you abbreviated, glossed-over version of how Thaksin lost power, I keep this little time-line handy.

Thaksin’s Fall

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 40% of the electorate (not 40% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 40% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

What a load of BS smoke & mirrors.

He was validated by the electorate unlike any Thai politician preceding him. And again in 2011, the voting public made it clear by electing a party with an election slogan of 'Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai does'.

Nitpicking about legal squabbles caused by the Democrats non-democratic behaviour does absolutely nothing to take away from the fact that the people of Thailand preferred him as their leader, not Boonyaratglin, not Abhisit and certainly not Prayuth.

And regarding the sale of Shincorp, stop feeding us the yellow propaganda, brought up by a bitter Sonthi Lim;

"Supporters, however, counter that Thailand's mobile phone industry is highly competitive, and that little criticism was raised when the Norwegian firm Telenor acquired Total Access Communications, the country's second largest operator. Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva had criticized Thaksin earlier for not sufficiently opening up the Thai telecom sector to foreigners.Supporters further counter that the complete sale of Shin Corporation by the Shinawatra-Damapong families had been a long-standing demand of some public groups, as it would allow Thaksin to undertake his duties as Prime Minister without accusation of conflicts of interest"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Shin_Corporation_to_Temasek_Holdings

[lujanit]

I have never understood why his passports were never cancelled. He is a convicted criminal and a fugitive.

[JAG]

Where the "timelines" and assertions of "lies" fall down are when considered against the Democrat Party's regular boycotting of elections which they expect to lose, in the knowledge that the courts will invalidate those elections, and in the repeated use of the coup as a means of forestalling an election which would result in an unpaletable government.

Viewed in this context both the allegation of lies from Baerboxer and the rather selective "timeline" from Rametindallas are revealed as excuses for a good old fashioned overthrow of the democratic process by the military. Both gentlemen are perfectly within their rights to support the coups, but it does no harm to remind people of the completely cynical way in which the Thai electorates choices have been repeatedly overuled by these coups; reminders which are probably wasted on those particular gentlemen.

Edited May 14, 2015 by JAG

[rixalex]

And again in 2011, the voting public made it clear by electing a party with an election slogan of 'Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai does'.

Another blatant example of flaunting of electoral laws, which clearly state that convicted criminals, particularly ones who have been banned from politics as well, are not eligible to run for office, even if by proxy.

[rametindallas]

Where the "timelines" and assertions of "lies" fall down are when considered against the Democrat Party's regular boycotting of elections which they expect to lose, in the knowledge that the courts will invalidate those elections, and in the repeated use of the coup as a means of forestalling an election which would result in an unpaletable government.

Viewed in this context both the allegation of lies from Baerboxer and the rather selective "timeline" from Rametindallas are revealed as excuses for a good old fashioned overthrow of the democratic process by the military. Both gentlemen are perfectly within their rights to support the coups, but it does no harm to remind people of the completely cynical way in which the Thai electorates choices have been repeatedly overuled by these coups; reminders which are probably wasted on those particular gentlemen.

the Democrat Party's regular boycotting of elections which they expect to lose, in the knowledge that the courts will invalidate those elections

The elections weren't invalidated because the Democrats boycotted. They were invalidated in 2006 because Thaksin's TRT party violated election laws and in 2014 because not enough people turned out to vote to fill enough seats in Parliament. Wow, Thaksin's puppet Puea Thai Party couldn't motivate enough people to vote for them to form a government. How popular are they, really?

If Thaksin was so popular, why, in 2006, did he illegally pay smaller parties to contest his Thai Rak Thai party in constituencies where the Democrats boycotted (is is perfectly legal, under Thai law, to not enter a candidate)? Was it the well-established election law that stated that if a single party contested a constituency it must get 40% of the electorate? Could it be the wildly popular Mr. Thaksin could not get 40% of registered voters to the polls to support him? Maybe, just maybe, Thaksin is/was not as popular as his followers would like the rest of us to believe.

You seem to believe that votes count no matter how they are obtained (by hook or by crook) and that winning is more important that winning by playing by the rules.

BTW, that time-line comes from CNN which has consistently reported in Thaksin's and the Red Shirt's favor.

Thaksin and all his puppet governments break any laws they want to in order to get what they want. Thaksin's cousin, Surapong, the Thai Foreign Minister (self-professed to be unqualified for the position), had the passport office opened (when it was supposed to be closed to everyone else due to flooding) especially to print a diplomatic passport for Thaksin which he then hand-delivered to the de-facto leader of Yingluck's government in Dubai. That is illegal and, under long-established Thai law, convicted felons (is there any argument that Thaksin isn't a convicted felon?) are not allowed a passport of any kind. It is all part of Thaksin's modus operandi; not only is he above the law, he IS the law. His appointees do whatever he directs them to; legal or not.

[rametindallas]

A lie is it? He won in 2001, in 2005, again in April 2006, although the Constitutional Court declared the result invalid as the Democratic Party had boycotted the election (sounds somewhat familiar does it not). Elections were due to be held again in October 2006 but never happened because the Military staged a coup, in order to prevent him winning again.

If there is a lie it is the repeated assertions from you and others that Thaksin had no political or democratic legitamacy, and lacked the support of the Thai people, but the Military had. A lie which has been repeated even more brazenly after this latest coup, in which, to everyone's surprise the military staged a coup to prevent an election in which once again a Prime Minister had presented herself for re election. Once again it had to be stopped, in order to prevent her from winning again.

Just in case some of the newer members of the forum might believe you abbreviated, glossed-over version of how Thaksin lost power, I keep this little time-line handy.

Thaksin’s Fall

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 40% of the electorate (not 40% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 40% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

What a load of BS smoke & mirrors.

He was validated by the electorate unlike any Thai politician preceding him. And again in 2011, the voting public made it clear by electing a party with an election slogan of 'Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai does'.

Nitpicking about legal squabbles caused by the Democrats non-democratic behaviour does absolutely nothing to take away from the fact that the people of Thailand preferred him as their leader, not Boonyaratglin, not Abhisit and certainly not Prayuth.

And regarding the sale of Shincorp, stop feeding us the yellow propaganda, brought up by a bitter Sonthi Lim;

"Supporters, however, counter that Thailand's mobile phone industry is highly competitive, and that little criticism was raised when the Norwegian firm Telenor acquired Total Access Communications, the country's second largest operator. Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva had criticized Thaksin earlier for not sufficiently opening up the Thai telecom sector to foreigners.Supporters further counter that the complete sale of Shin Corporation by the Shinawatra-Damapong families had been a long-standing demand of some public groups, as it would allow Thaksin to undertake his duties as Prime Minister without accusation of conflicts of interest"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Shin_Corporation_to_Temasek_Holdings

And regarding the sale of Shincorp, stop feeding us the yellow propaganda, brought up by a bitter Sonthi Lim;

I guess it's just a coincidence that Thaksin had his 'rubber stamp' Parliament change Thai law re: sale of domestic telecoms from the maximum being 25% foreign held ownership (a standard around the world) to 49% just days before the sale of Shincorp to Temesek (holding company for Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund) In actuality, Temesek, through nominees, gained 80% control of ShinCorp. THAILAND: Shin deal 'a threat to security' Direct and indirect holding through nominees in Shin Corp by Temasek was up to 80%. http://web.international.ucla.edu/asia/article/37820 This article has lots of background info for those new to Thailand and don't know why all the fuss.

On 23 January 2006, the Thai Telecommunication Act (2006) became effective, raising the limit on foreign holdings in telecom companies to 49%. The Act replaced the Telecom Business Law, which took effect in November 2001, and put the foreign investment cap at 25%. At the time, AIS was own by Shinawatra-family 49%.

On Monday January 23, 2006, the Shinawatra-family sold its remaining 49.6% stake in Shin Corporation, a leading Thai telecommunications company, to two nominees of Temasek Holdings (Cedar Holdings and Aspen Holdings). The Shinawatra and Damapong (Potjaman's maiden name) families netted about 73 billion baht (about $1.88 billion). Following Thai tax laws, they did not have to pay capital gains tax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Shin_Corporation_to_Temasek_Holdings we now know he used some of that 73 billion Baht to finance two attempted soft-coups of the democratically elected, by Parliamentary majority, Abhisit government and to create, from whole cloth, the UDD which is purported to be grass-roots but is really Astroturf.

Thaksin, the true Thai patriot (/sarc), flying around the world on his Thai diplomatic passport. It is detestable and disgusting.

[djjamie]

Excellent idea. Crime should not pay and this is why the coup was required because this is an example of a lack of accountability and a gross display of impunity. Of course the big bad Junta can do what it wants apparently and has been compared to North korea by some with wonderfully colorful imaginations so one can expect thaksin to have his passport revoked without question? Nope? It is a fine example of how intelligently this Democrat is focusing on the the big lingering problems facing Thailand. Don't forget Thailand's dynamic political example of crushing democracy was proven with this unelected criminal running the country from abroad and making billions from a rice scheme that did not help one single poor farmer.

As long as the most popular PM in the last decade does the appropriate thing by taking the undemocrats diplomatic passport away through proper channels then the country will steam along just fine. What you will not see is a North Korea or should I say a thaksin like undemocratic approach of just taking it or more appropriate to his regime silencing the person permanently Taking his passport will be a fine message that crime does not pay. Corruption does not go without punishment and accused mass murderers, accused terrorists that fund terrorist uprisings and convicted criminal fugitives are an example to the otherwise peaceful majority of Thai's that simply want to get on with their lives that the people that steal money from the rich and give to himself under the guise of giving to the poor does not pay.

[paymaster]

Is this the same passport that was produced and issued after the Foreign Affairs offices at Chang Wattana were entered after regular staff had left or has it mysteriously been renewed. It's my understanding that Thai passports have a five year validity.

[waitforusalso]

And again in 2011, the voting public made it clear by electing a party with an election slogan of 'Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai does'.

Another blatant example of flaunting of electoral laws, which clearly state that convicted criminals, particularly ones who have been banned from politics as well, are not eligible to run for office, even if by proxy.

Banned by a group of his political enemies in an organisation empowered by a military junta. Doesn't hold any weight with the international community or the Thai electorate. Yellows, the army & some die-hard TVF fascists are the only ones who think his removal was legitimate and it was fantastic that the PTP rubbed that in their faces in the 2011 trouncing.

[waitforusalso]

A lie is it? He won in 2001, in 2005, again in April 2006, although the Constitutional Court declared the result invalid as the Democratic Party had boycotted the election (sounds somewhat familiar does it not). Elections were due to be held again in October 2006 but never happened because the Military staged a coup, in order to prevent him winning again.

If there is a lie it is the repeated assertions from you and others that Thaksin had no political or democratic legitamacy, and lacked the support of the Thai people, but the Military had. A lie which has been repeated even more brazenly after this latest coup, in which, to everyone's surprise the military staged a coup to prevent an election in which once again a Prime Minister had presented herself for re election. Once again it had to be stopped, in order to prevent her from winning again.

Just in case some of the newer members of the forum might believe you abbreviated, glossed-over version of how Thaksin lost power, I keep this little time-line handy.

Thaksin’s Fall

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 40% of the electorate (not 40% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 40% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

What a load of BS smoke & mirrors.

He was validated by the electorate unlike any Thai politician preceding him. And again in 2011, the voting public made it clear by electing a party with an election slogan of 'Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai does'.

Nitpicking about legal squabbles caused by the Democrats non-democratic behaviour does absolutely nothing to take away from the fact that the people of Thailand preferred him as their leader, not Boonyaratglin, not Abhisit and certainly not Prayuth.

And regarding the sale of Shincorp, stop feeding us the yellow propaganda, brought up by a bitter Sonthi Lim;

"Supporters, however, counter that Thailand's mobile phone industry is highly competitive, and that little criticism was raised when the Norwegian firm Telenor acquired Total Access Communications, the country's second largest operator. Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva had criticized Thaksin earlier for not sufficiently opening up the Thai telecom sector to foreigners.Supporters further counter that the complete sale of Shin Corporation by the Shinawatra-Damapong families had been a long-standing demand of some public groups, as it would allow Thaksin to undertake his duties as Prime Minister without accusation of conflicts of interest"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Shin_Corporation_to_Temasek_Holdings

And regarding the sale of Shincorp, stop feeding us the yellow propaganda, brought up by a bitter Sonthi Lim;

I guess it's just a coincidence that Thaksin had his 'rubber stamp' Parliament change Thai law re: sale of domestic telecoms from the maximum being 25% foreign held ownership (a standard around the world) to 49% just days before the sale of Shincorp to Temesek (holding company for Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund) In actuality, Temesek, through nominees, gained 80% control of ShinCorp. THAILAND: Shin deal 'a threat to security' Direct and indirect holding through nominees in Shin Corp by Temasek was up to 80%. http://web.international.ucla.edu/asia/article/37820 This article has lots of background info for those new to Thailand and don't know why all the fuss.

On 23 January 2006, the Thai Telecommunication Act (2006) became effective, raising the limit on foreign holdings in telecom companies to 49%. The Act replaced the Telecom Business Law, which took effect in November 2001, and put the foreign investment cap at 25%. At the time, AIS was own by Shinawatra-family 49%.

On Monday January 23, 2006, the Shinawatra-family sold its remaining 49.6% stake in Shin Corporation, a leading Thai telecommunications company, to two nominees of Temasek Holdings (Cedar Holdings and Aspen Holdings). The Shinawatra and Damapong (Potjaman's maiden name) families netted about 73 billion baht (about $1.88 billion). Following Thai tax laws, they did not have to pay capital gains tax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Shin_Corporation_to_Temasek_Holdings we now know he used some of that 73 billion Baht to finance two attempted soft-coups of the democratically elected, by Parliamentary majority, Abhisit government and to create, from whole cloth, the UDD which is purported to be grass-roots but is really Astroturf.

Thaksin, the true Thai patriot (/sarc), flying around the world on his Thai diplomatic passport. It is detestable and disgusting.

Exactly!! Thaksin's opposition (including vociferous calls from Abhisit in parliament) had been insisting that he free up the Thai telecom sector to foreigners. Many others complained that he should sell his large shareholdings to avoid conflicts of interest. He then does exactly that & gets lambasted as a traitor. Thaksin entered the PM's seat as the richest man in the country & couldn't make a single decision without people claiming it impacted on one of his business interests.

[JAG]

I don't normally bother with the " but the other side did/said" arguments but may I point out that using the Army, which you have been appointed to command, as a trusted (presumably) serveant of the state to overthrow the elected government of that state when it is in the process of offering itself for reelection is the ultimate un democratic act. And yes, I do consider elections, internationally recognised as they are, and no matter how wealthy the man winning them, as a preferable means of forming a government over using the army to seize power. Why? Because they reflect the democratic will of the electorate. Even if the person they select is not to the taste of both those who consider themselves born to rule, and their supporters on TVF.

Edited May 15, 2015 by JAG

[Artisi]

Must be Thainess, a convicted fugitive criminal holding a diplomatic passport.

[rixalex]

And again in 2011, the voting public made it clear by electing a party with an election slogan of 'Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai does'.

Another blatant example of flaunting of electoral laws, which clearly state that convicted criminals, particularly ones who have been banned from politics as well, are not eligible to run for office, even if by proxy.

Banned by a group of his political enemies in an organisation empowered by a military junta. Doesn't hold any weight with the international community or the Thai electorate. Yellows, the army & some die-hard TVF fascists are the only ones who think his removal was legitimate and it was fantastic that the PTP rubbed that in their faces in the 2011 trouncing.

Banned on the back of a conviction handed down at a time when his own party was in power, by a judiciary Thaksin said he trusted and respected, a judiciary which he attempted to buy off with cash filled pastry boxes.

Now, since you have a direct line with the international community which puts you in the privileged and unique position of being able to speak on its behalf on all matters, why don't you ask it now what view it takes on leaders of nations using bundles of cash to try and sway court verdicts.

In most countries with well developed judicial systems, such an act is likely to result in the defendant receiving a much harsher sentence.

The actual sentence that Thaksin did receive, for the conviction that neither he nor fan boys like yourself can refute with that important stuff called evidence, was extremely light, when considering the failed bribe attempt and the fact that it most likely would have amounted to little more than a few months behind bars. But oh no, Thaksin being absolutely no different from the hi so elites that drones like you are deluded into thinking he is somehow fighting against, couldn't bring himself to actually respect a court verdict that didn't go in his favour, and fled like the yellow bellied coward that he is.

[Robby nz]

I have always thought that the passport illegally issued back in 2011 by Thaksins BIL must be diplomatic and now we see proof.

When Yingluck was on tour one of the things that it was reported that she did was to arrange visa free entry for holders of Thai diplomatic passports into all the countries she visited, this was reported as being reciprocal. Made it easy for big brother to travel the world.

Not revoking that passport is one on the holds that the present Govt has over Thaksin, as in behave yourself or else.

And no he would not be so free to move around on his other bought passports.

As for Thaksin knowing how to conduct himself and being responsible for his words........ Well not knowing when he had gone to far has brought us to the situation we are in now, read amnesty bill.

Well Robbienz you may think it was illegally issued but unfortunately you are wrong. When has any government issued an illegal passport. Please provide just one instance when this has occurred?

You may want to believe this is the case to suit your agenda but you have no idea what you are talking about.

"Not be free to move around..." Really. You know this from your years of experience or is this just more rubbish you wish to believe. He is as free to travel as any other person, probably has more freedom because most governments can see through the history of events and realise the truth. Unfortunately, if the truth hit you in the face, you wouldn't know what it was.

So in your wise opinion, Thaksin has created the situation Thailand is now in. This doesn't even require a response as is shows your inability to learn from history, your inability to reason, your inability to critically analyse the cause of any current problem and your preference to just type dribble that's suits your naive opinion based on nothing but ignorance and information you just make up.

I didn't realise the NZ education system taught people to be stupid but I suppose like many, it's much easier to just believe what people say and write, rather than analyse facts to decide whether the result is logical.

You and djjamie should hook up together as he is another fruitcake.

You might like to explain how a diplomatic passport that was issued when the passport issuing office was closed due to flooding and was hand delivered by Thaksins BIL could possibly legal.

You might also like to explain what diplomatic standing Thaksin had at the time the passport was issued, was the an ambassador, member of parliament, cabinet minister, civil servant representing the country.

Someone posted that as a past PM he deserved a diplomatic passport.

But he, as a convicted criminal who had broken his bail conditions and has numerous other criminal charges awaiting him, had already had his Thai passport revoked.

So in order for a new passport to be issued legally his status must have changed.

Could you please explain what that change was and when it took place.

His freedom to move comes from the visa free entry to many countries that a diplomatic passport conveys on the holder, should he only have a normal passport like the rest of us mortals he would need to apply for a visa every time he wished to visit many countries. This of course would be the reason his illegal passport was diplomatic.

Just what status the other passports he has bought confer on him I don't know, perhaps as an admirer of his you could explain ?

It would appear from your insults that you are another one of the gullible fools who believes the PT excuses as to why they were disposed by the people, the catalyst for their demise was of course the amnesty bill which brought so many people out on the streets in protest, including their own red shirt supporters.

I can post numerous links to reports from the time these events took place to prove what I write.

If you decide to reply attempt to do it without insults, it would be a refreshing change from the normal PT supporters posts.

The problem is nzrobbie is that neither you nor I know what went on, however unlike you, I would prefer to base any comment on facts rather than just make it up.

Your comments weakness is confirmed by the present government also failing to take any action. Why is this. I don't know and neither do you. On that basis why pretend to know when it is obvious that if the present government thought you were correct, they could easily cancell his passport.

You are incorrect again. I am not an admirer but he was successfully voted in by the Thai people which is far more than can be said for you or I, or for the present government.

I'm sure you can provide numerous links, as can anyone to present a one sided opinion. Such only shows a level of ignorance but if that makes you happy, so be it.

Now nzrobbie, respect is something to be earnt, not something automatically associated with a person who so obviously tries to force their inaccurate views on others. Of course those who support the current government, which has taken away their voices to contribute to society and who promote the government in doing so, are generally those who believe they have all the answers.

As for being a supporter of PT, guess what, wrong again. I am a supporter of free and open democracy and believe in accepting the results of a fair and equatable elections whether you support the majority party or not.

In saying that, I also respect your right to make up whatever stories you need to and I also uphold my right of rebuttal to that which is obviously just a fabrication of the truth through either laziness or inability to understand the entire situation.

A crying shame then that you cant rebut anything I have written, nor it seems can you answer the questions I asked and have to resort to insults again.

Your posts show you have no interest in the truth of what went on . I make up nothing only rely on my own observations, the photos I take and the numerous news reports as things happened.

[Robby nz]

I believe only the Head of State can cancel his diplomatic passport and Prayut is NOT Head of State. Rember that Thailand is a Constitutional Monarchy. Prayut is Head of Government.

If what you write is true then it would also follow that a diplomatic passport could only be issued by the head of state.

Tell us, was Thaksins diplomatic passport issued by the head of state ?

Do you actually know the Terms and Conditions of the issuing of diplomatic passports within the Kingdom Robbie or are you simply making assumptions.

The passport office might have been closed to the public, but not to the Government, why hasn't the person who actually filed the paperwork, and then printed the passport off, never come forwards?

Are you aware of the whole procedure for a Thai National to be granted a diplomatic passport? I would have a guess that diplomatic passports can be done out of hours and when the department is closed to the public, and could be issued that same day if needed.

Doesn't really matter, Prayuth needs thaksin, it's his excuse to maintain Section 44, amongst other things, everyone needs a bogey man, it's used to control the masses, let's face it, if Thaksin wasn't the bogeyman, the country wouldn't need the Army in control.

I made no assumption, simply answered someone else who did.

Your last paragraph is the assumption, and based on, as usual, red propaganda.