Ex-finance deputy permanent secretary Anuthep arrested

[EnglishJohn]

Corruption in the bureaucracy continues much as before.There have been a few very high profile crackdowns but they for a variety of reasons these may not reflect very much about the war on corruption.

The acid test as was pointed out I think by Catterwell recently will be whether the Junta tackles the small but notorious group of senior army and police mafia types - so far untouched.

We know that Thaksin was corrupt in the sense of fixing the game, but I am sceptical whether politicians in general represent the most venal section of Thailand's corruption problem though it suits the purpose of some to suggest exactly this - along with the electoral democracy politicians represent.

It's very unlikely that foreigners without some real background of doing business over many years in Thailand would have much to offer on this topic.Their experience is largely limited to traffic cops and the immigration clerks who deal with their visas.

I'm perfectly willing to give this government a chance but in truth the much vaunted war on corruption is very far down its priorities list.

"We know that Thaksin was corrupt in the sense of fixing the game,......."

In which "sense" wasn't he corrupt?

In the sense of accepting bribes.In the sense of amassing a large fortune on the basis of a very small salary.He played by the standards of the Sino Thai tycoon class and in truth his behaviour differs little from theirs.

Where his behaviour was uniquely bad was - having been given great responsibility - he changed the rules to benefit his personal financial interests.There was no sense of fair competition.

But notwithstanding his poor record Thaksin's vast wealth is comprehensible and it is possible to work out how it has been accumulated.The wealth of many of his persecutors cannot.The great wealth of many generals cannot.

It suits the purpose of some to suggest that Thaksin was uniquely corrupt.He wasn't - just more effective than most of his Sino Thai business equivalents.He is hated not for his corruption - though that is the pretext - but because he challenged a power base and had a majority on his side.

Dream on in your red-shirt fantasy world.

Thaksin is so hated because he is an ego-driven, conscienceless megalomaniac. He craves power to compensate for his lowly golum-like appearance.

He is not satisfied with money. He wants cronies and worshippers at his feet telling him how great he is. He will play any trick imaginable to get rid of his opponents and will send his gullible followers to their deaths for his own benefit without any conscience. It takes a real scumbag to mix hard-core thugs and mercenaries in with innocent civilians and start shooting. Or to send UDD lowlife to fire grenades (a terrible weapon to use in a crowd) at protesters who are endangering his grip on power.

I had to laugh when he said it was easy to win the hearts of red-shirts. Talk about treating people like dogs. You just promise them you will make them rich. Yet all I have seen is him make his loyal lackeys rich to keep them at his feet. The farmers aren't any better off (and plenty killed themselves when the rice scheme collapsed leaving them with big debts) and he threw all his loyal red-shirts under a bus when he changed the amnesty bill for his own benefit at the last minute.

But you can pretend to yourself it is just because he was so successful if it makes you feel better.

Aren't you embarrassed at being so shallow ?.

[simon43]

Aren't you embarrassed at being so shallow

Aren't you embarrassed at the complete rubbish you spout? It is like a worn-out, kid's record.

[Baerboxer]

Corruption in the bureaucracy continues much as before.There have been a few very high profile crackdowns but they for a variety of reasons these may not reflect very much about the war on corruption.

The acid test as was pointed out I think by Catterwell recently will be whether the Junta tackles the small but notorious group of senior army and police mafia types - so far untouched.

We know that Thaksin was corrupt in the sense of fixing the game, but I am sceptical whether politicians in general represent the most venal section of Thailand's corruption problem though it suits the purpose of some to suggest exactly this - along with the electoral democracy politicians represent.

It's very unlikely that foreigners without some real background of doing business over many years in Thailand would have much to offer on this topic.Their experience is largely limited to traffic cops and the immigration clerks who deal with their visas.

I'm perfectly willing to give this government a chance but in truth the much vaunted war on corruption is very far down its priorities list.

"We know that Thaksin was corrupt in the sense of fixing the game,......."

In which "sense" wasn't he corrupt?

In the sense of accepting bribes.In the sense of amassing a large fortune on the basis of a very small salary.He played by the standards of the Sino Thai tycoon class and in truth his behaviour differs little from theirs.

Where his behaviour was uniquely bad was - having been given great responsibility - he changed the rules to benefit his personal financial interests.There was no sense of fair competition.

But notwithstanding his poor record Thaksin's vast wealth is comprehensible and it is possible to work out how it has been accumulated.The wealth of many of his persecutors cannot.The great wealth of many generals cannot.

It suits the purpose of some to suggest that Thaksin was uniquely corrupt.He wasn't - just more effective than most of his Sino Thai business equivalents.He is hated not for his corruption - though that is the pretext - but because he challenged a power base and had a majority on his side.

We don't, and are unlikely to ever know if Thaksin and his family members ever accepted bribes; as with most politicians, civil servants, police and military personnel.

We do know Thaksin and several family members have been convicted of various crimes. We do know Thaksin has some 15 plus court cases pending. The Krungthai Bank scandal where co-defendants have been imprisoned for example.

Form awarding himself a contract to supply the police, whilst the senior officer in the bidding process, to lending tax payers money cheaply to Burma so they could buy his family business's products, to changing laws so he could sell his company and avoid tax, the hidden assets, false declarations and bribery of judges attempts show he is not moral, ethical or law abiding. Creating a monopoly for his telecoms business and awarding his unqualified son a government contract for his new advertising business are again examples of his corruption. He's only a business genius when he can change the rules of the game to suit himself usually at the expense of the Thai people.

Wonder what he was doing in Korea visiting K Water who were about to be awarded a large contract by his sister's puppet government without EIA's or open tendering?

He was however following in a long line of politicians who have done similar; although perhaps not with the same ingenuity and cunning as he demonstrated.

There are many very very wealthy families whose source of funds would never be transparent or publicized. They exercise control to ensure their standard of living increases and their wealth increases. That can only be done at the expense of others. Thaksin threatened that. He wanted sole control and wanted his family clan to be the main beneficiaries. The fact he bragged openly how the family wealth had increased 450% during his sister's time in office inadvertently shows the link to family wealth and being in power - although he probably doesn't give a toss what anyone thinks anyway.

[jayboy]

Corruption in the bureaucracy continues much as before.There have been a few very high profile crackdowns but they for a variety of reasons these may not reflect very much about the war on corruption.

The acid test as was pointed out I think by Catterwell recently will be whether the Junta tackles the small but notorious group of senior army and police mafia types - so far untouched.

We know that Thaksin was corrupt in the sense of fixing the game, but I am sceptical whether politicians in general represent the most venal section of Thailand's corruption problem though it suits the purpose of some to suggest exactly this - along with the electoral democracy politicians represent.

It's very unlikely that foreigners without some real background of doing business over many years in Thailand would have much to offer on this topic.Their experience is largely limited to traffic cops and the immigration clerks who deal with their visas.

I'm perfectly willing to give this government a chance but in truth the much vaunted war on corruption is very far down its priorities list.

"We know that Thaksin was corrupt in the sense of fixing the game,......."

In which "sense" wasn't he corrupt?

In the sense of accepting bribes.In the sense of amassing a large fortune on the basis of a very small salary.He played by the standards of the Sino Thai tycoon class and in truth his behaviour differs little from theirs.

Where his behaviour was uniquely bad was - having been given great responsibility - he changed the rules to benefit his personal financial interests.There was no sense of fair competition.

But notwithstanding his poor record Thaksin's vast wealth is comprehensible and it is possible to work out how it has been accumulated.The wealth of many of his persecutors cannot.The great wealth of many generals cannot.

It suits the purpose of some to suggest that Thaksin was uniquely corrupt.He wasn't - just more effective than most of his Sino Thai business equivalents.He is hated not for his corruption - though that is the pretext - but because he challenged a power base and had a majority on his side.

We don't, and are unlikely to ever know if Thaksin and his family members ever accepted bribes; as with most politicians, civil servants, police and military personnel.

We do know Thaksin and several family members have been convicted of various crimes. We do know Thaksin has some 15 plus court cases pending. The Krungthai Bank scandal where co-defendants have been imprisoned for example.

Form awarding himself a contract to supply the police, whilst the senior officer in the bidding process, to lending tax payers money cheaply to Burma so they could buy his family business's products, to changing laws so he could sell his company and avoid tax, the hidden assets, false declarations and bribery of judges attempts show he is not moral, ethical or law abiding. Creating a monopoly for his telecoms business and awarding his unqualified son a government contract for his new advertising business are again examples of his corruption. He's only a business genius when he can change the rules of the game to suit himself usually at the expense of the Thai people.

Wonder what he was doing in Korea visiting K Water who were about to be awarded a large contract by his sister's puppet government without EIA's or open tendering?

He was however following in a long line of politicians who have done similar; although perhaps not with the same ingenuity and cunning as he demonstrated.

There are many very very wealthy families whose source of funds would never be transparent or publicized. They exercise control to ensure their standard of living increases and their wealth increases. That can only be done at the expense of others. Thaksin threatened that. He wanted sole control and wanted his family clan to be the main beneficiaries. The fact he bragged openly how the family wealth had increased 450% during his sister's time in office inadvertently shows the link to family wealth and being in power - although he probably doesn't give a toss what anyone thinks anyway.

If there is no evidence Thaksin hasn't accepted bribes there's nothing to discuss.We know that he has the debased morality of much of the Sino Thai tycoon class - so there is no need to invent new offences.

He has certainly been charged with various crimes and we equally know - from Wikileaks and other sources- that there was political motivation involved.The challenge then is to disentangle all this.

I'm sure his telephone monopoly was not a criminal offence.But you are right that there are many aspects of his business activity which need investigation.But I do not believe that his ethics differ much from several other Sino Thai tycoons who are "still at large".

I'm not sure I understand your point about other wealthy families.