"what Thaksin Had Done Wrong"

[ColPyat]

Good cause, but he looked like a nutcase, hopelessly lost in idealism.

At least there you two appear to have something in common, then.

[Plus]

Maybe you should start worshipping me, too.

[ColPyat]

Maybe you should start worshipping me, too.

Dream on, mate.

Sorry, but i prefer left wing idealism. Right wing "idealism" is not to my taste.

[Siripon]

To answer your questions as you requested.

1. I support the junta because they overthrew a rightwing populist and parliamentary dictator who was seriously damaging the country. Whoever said the government is a right wing militia? Most newspaper columnists regard Surayut as well meaning but blundering. As for your allegations as to his involvement in Black May, where's the evidence as you like to say?

The Junta is even more right wing than Thaksin. It was a coup by the social conservatives. Proof of that are Gen. Sonthi's own interviews in which he consistenly said that he tries to instill more patriotism and nationalism in Thai people. This is considered "right wing". Please look up definitions and explanation on these terms.

According to the notes of Giles Ungpakorn's book, "A Coup for the Rich", General Surayud has given an interview in 'Thai Post', 22/6/2000, in which he admitted to have personally led a group of 16 soldiers into the Royal Hotel, in which those soldiers beat and kicked people.

General Surayud at that time was commander of the Special Warfare command, whose troops were definately involved in Black May.

2.Regarding the October people who joined Thaksin, as I mentioned some time ago in the few short years from TRT's foundation to last June, well before Thaksin's overthrow, over half of the original founders of TRT had left due to disillusionment with the great dictator. This is apart from well known figures outside who originally supported him.

Yes, many left, and many remained. There are huge conflicts between the different sides. But many of the very respectable oktober people and democracy activists have consistently refused to join either side. Personally, i do admire their consequence of thought and action.

3.If you could read Thai, and you really should learn to if you want to seriously debate Thai politics, then you would know that all policies of the present Thai government are freely debated in magazines and newspapers.

Not all aspects are freely debated. For that you have to go into the academic world, and even there some essential aspects are not publicly debated inside Thailand. I would advise you to have an open minded look about what is available. You may get a few uncomfortable surprises though.

Newspapers all over the world give anyhow mostly a very superficial idea on what happens.

1. The junta is a military government, not a militia.

2. So the extent of Khun Surayud's involvement in Black May is he was allegedly in charge of 16 soldiers who when entering The Royal Hotel kicked and beat some protestors. An enormous crime against humanity.

3.October people, a term loved by the media. There were thousands involved, first on October 14 1973 and later on October 6 1976. Most never became famous even though they performed acts of selflessness far more than the people who later became politicians.

How many October people remain with Thaksin and how credible are they?

The present leader, Chaturon has been in so many parties, he joined TRT under his father's 'suggestion', do you know how much money he paid for the dowry in his rather recent wedding?

Prapat, the icon of the October generation whose photo wielding a large stick against armed forces remains the ultimate symbol of idealism against might, ended up with an enormous orange plantation in the north, accused of encroaching. Even he left Thaksin.

Please tell me which credible figures still support Thaksin?

[A_Traveller]

Maybe you should start worshipping me, too.

Dream on, mate.

Sorry, but i prefer left wing idealism. Right wing "idealism" is not to my taste.

One should note that one person's left is another's right.... Like many, I suspect, I've been introduced to a 'liberal' who quickly turns out to be slightly right of Attila the Hun, but 'hugs trees'.

Idealism, hm, left wing allowed the existence of Stalin, right wing, Hitler.

Regards

[sriracha john]

Please tell me which credible figures still support Thaksin?

This highly, credible founding member of Thai Rak Thai still does:

Gen. Camerashy Issarangkura na Kodak

Now if he could have only avoided the pesky Defense Ministry cameras...

Edited February 23, 2007 by sriracha john

[ColPyat]

1. The junta is a military government, not a militia.

I thing you got something wrong there. I never mentioned the junta being a "Militia". I said that they are right wing. You don't need to be militia in order to be right wing. By your rather patriotic posts and your support for the military i would classify you clearly as right wing, for example. Though i doubt that you are a member of a militia.

2. So the extent of Khun Surayud's involvement in Black May is he was allegedly in charge of 16 soldiers who when entering The Royal Hotel kicked and beat some protestors. An enormous crime against humanity.

Astonishing. General Surayud as commander of Special Warfare Command, whose troops were involved in the killing, who according to the statement was even himself descending to the scene is excused from his personal involvement in one of the more memorable Thai human rights violations because you feel that this is not bad enough to warrant any criticism?

3.October people, a term loved by the media. There were thousands involved, first on October 14 1973 and later on October 6 1976. Most never became famous even though they performed acts of selflessness far more than the people who later became politicians.

How many October people remain with Thaksin and how credible are they?

The present leader, Chaturon has been in so many parties, he joined TRT under his father's 'suggestion', do you know how much money he paid for the dowry in his rather recent wedding?

Prapat, the icon of the October generation whose photo wielding a large stick against armed forces remains the ultimate symbol of idealism against might, ended up with an enormous orange plantation in the north, accused of encroaching. Even he left Thaksin.

Please tell me which credible figures still support Thaksin?

Didn't you read my post. I said the ones i admire are the ones who chose neither side, and oppose both.

[younghusband]

To answer your questions as you requested.

1. I support the junta because they overthrew a rightwing populist and parliamentary dictator who was seriously damaging the country. Whoever said the government is a right wing militia? Most newspaper columnists regard Surayut as well meaning but blundering. As for your allegations as to his involvement in Black May, where's the evidence as you like to say?

The Junta is even more right wing than Thaksin. It was a coup by the social conservatives. Proof of that are Gen. Sonthi's own interviews in which he consistenly said that he tries to instill more patriotism and nationalism in Thai people. This is considered "right wing". Please look up definitions and explanation on these terms.

According to the notes of Giles Ungpakorn's book, "A Coup for the Rich", General Surayud has given an interview in 'Thai Post', 22/6/2000, in which he admitted to have personally led a group of 16 soldiers into the Royal Hotel, in which those soldiers beat and kicked people.

General Surayud at that time was commander of the Special Warfare command, whose troops were definately involved in Black May.

2.Regarding the October people who joined Thaksin, as I mentioned some time ago in the few short years from TRT's foundation to last June, well before Thaksin's overthrow, over half of the original founders of TRT had left due to disillusionment with the great dictator. This is apart from well known figures outside who originally supported him.

Yes, many left, and many remained. There are huge conflicts between the different sides. But many of the very respectable oktober people and democracy activists have consistently refused to join either side. Personally, i do admire their consequence of thought and action.

3.If you could read Thai, and you really should learn to if you want to seriously debate Thai politics, then you would know that all policies of the present Thai government are freely debated in magazines and newspapers.

Not all aspects are freely debated. For that you have to go into the academic world, and even there some essential aspects are not publicly debated inside Thailand. I would advise you to have an open minded look about what is available. You may get a few uncomfortable surprises though.

Newspapers all over the world give anyhow mostly a very superficial idea on what happens.

1. The junta is a military government, not a militia.

2. So the extent of Khun Surayud's involvement in Black May is he was allegedly in charge of 16 soldiers who when entering The Royal Hotel kicked and beat some protestors. An enormous crime against humanity.

3.October people, a term loved by the media. There were thousands involved, first on October 14 1973 and later on October 6 1976. Most never became famous even though they performed acts of selflessness far more than the people who later became politicians.

How many October people remain with Thaksin and how credible are they?

The present leader, Chaturon has been in so many parties, he joined TRT under his father's 'suggestion', do you know how much money he paid for the dowry in his rather recent wedding?

Prapat, the icon of the October generation whose photo wielding a large stick against armed forces remains the ultimate symbol of idealism against might, ended up with an enormous orange plantation in the north, accused of encroaching. Even he left Thaksin.

Please tell me which credible figures still support Thaksin?

In Thailand if you are well connected enough (ie close to the power elite or seen to be serving its interests) you just have to hang on long enough to be brought back into the fold.Take for example Thanom Kittikachorn who died a couple of years ago and is to be cremated tomorrow.He was jointly responsible for the 1973 massacres referred to Siripon above, and yet his funeral rites are at the most exalted level (using language that does not infringe forum rules).

Edited February 24, 2007 by younghusband

[hammered]

To answer your questions as you requested.

1. I support the junta because they overthrew a rightwing populist and parliamentary dictator who was seriously damaging the country. Whoever said the government is a right wing militia? Most newspaper columnists regard Surayut as well meaning but blundering. As for your allegations as to his involvement in Black May, where's the evidence as you like to say?

The Junta is even more right wing than Thaksin. It was a coup by the social conservatives. Proof of that are Gen. Sonthi's own interviews in which he consistenly said that he tries to instill more patriotism and nationalism in Thai people. This is considered "right wing". Please look up definitions and explanation on these terms.

According to the notes of Giles Ungpakorn's book, "A Coup for the Rich", General Surayud has given an interview in 'Thai Post', 22/6/2000, in which he admitted to have personally led a group of 16 soldiers into the Royal Hotel, in which those soldiers beat and kicked people.

General Surayud at that time was commander of the Special Warfare command, whose troops were definately involved in Black May.

2.Regarding the October people who joined Thaksin, as I mentioned some time ago in the few short years from TRT's foundation to last June, well before Thaksin's overthrow, over half of the original founders of TRT had left due to disillusionment with the great dictator. This is apart from well known figures outside who originally supported him.

Yes, many left, and many remained. There are huge conflicts between the different sides. But many of the very respectable oktober people and democracy activists have consistently refused to join either side. Personally, i do admire their consequence of thought and action.

3.If you could read Thai, and you really should learn to if you want to seriously debate Thai politics, then you would know that all policies of the present Thai government are freely debated in magazines and newspapers.

Not all aspects are freely debated. For that you have to go into the academic world, and even there some essential aspects are not publicly debated inside Thailand. I would advise you to have an open minded look about what is available. You may get a few uncomfortable surprises though.

Newspapers all over the world give anyhow mostly a very superficial idea on what happens.

1. The junta is a military government, not a militia.

2. So the extent of Khun Surayud's involvement in Black May is he was allegedly in charge of 16 soldiers who when entering The Royal Hotel kicked and beat some protestors. An enormous crime against humanity.

3.October people, a term loved by the media. There were thousands involved, first on October 14 1973 and later on October 6 1976. Most never became famous even though they performed acts of selflessness far more than the people who later became politicians.

How many October people remain with Thaksin and how credible are they?

The present leader, Chaturon has been in so many parties, he joined TRT under his father's 'suggestion', do you know how much money he paid for the dowry in his rather recent wedding?

Prapat, the icon of the October generation whose photo wielding a large stick against armed forces remains the ultimate symbol of idealism against might, ended up with an enormous orange plantation in the north, accused of encroaching. Even he left Thaksin.

Please tell me which credible figures still support Thaksin?

Well my wife mixes with a lot of the grassroots "October People" and they almost to a person despise (this is not really a strong enough word) Thaksin and what he did and they have no time for the political prostitutes that came from their own numbers and leapt on the TRT bandwagon. In fact if anyone cares to talk to these ordinary people they would find they are remarkably intelligent and witty as well as scathing on the Thaksin phenomenon. Some have also produced some interesting art on the period of struggle against the previous regime. Most of what the press label as October people are not rich, not members of TRT and definitely did not support the murderous actions of the previous government. However, within any movement there are a number of opportunists and guns for hire these are the ones who abandoned their ideals joined TRT and stuck with them as they became the most murderous regime in at least 20 years. Even many of those self serving October people who did initially align with TRT left after seeing the full extent of what the regime was capable of.

[mumbu]

I am new to this forum and I am very impressed by the depth of knowledge and the analysis shown by many members. One immediate impression though is that initial eiphoria regarding the coup has gone (at least among the sizable group of the members of this forum). Indeed, the list of "achievments" of the junta and the government includes but not limited to a rapid deterioration of the situation in the South, bombings in Bangkok and "rapid response" by Banya of blaming opposition and ignoring the facts, bizzare measures of Bank of Thailand,

"new ideas" about foreign ownership of the companies etc.

In my view, it is a beginning of a long and sad period in Thai history of political instability, mediocraty and possibly even chaos related to imminent generational changes at the very top of Thai elite.

The coup is, of course, among other things is a personal tragedy for Thaksin who is, no matter what one thinks about him, is an extraordinary personality as is evidenced by the level and the intensity

of discussions on this thread.

But from the historical perspective the coup may be a blessing for him.

Because on the background of impotency clearly shown by current ruling clique, many of his actions which looked conroversial

may prove to be necessary or at least best possible at the time.

The starting point of this thread was a "laundry list" of the ruling clique.

Those who think that the current rulers should not prove their acquisations are absolutely wrong. Because down the road the similar list can be presented to them and if it happens that their greatest defender had gone, I am afraid no tanks will protect them.

[hammered]

I am new to this forum and I am very impressed by the depth of knowledge and the analysis shown by many members. One immediate impression though is that initial eiphoria regarding the coup has gone (at least among the sizable group of the members of this forum). Indeed, the list of "achievments" of the junta and the government includes but not limited to a rapid deterioration of the situation in the South, bombings in Bangkok and "rapid response" by Banya of blaming opposition and ignoring the facts, bizzare measures of Bank of Thailand,

"new ideas" about foreign ownership of the companies etc.

In my view, it is a beginning of a long and sad period in Thai history of political instability, mediocraty and possibly even chaos related to imminent generational changes at the very top of Thai elite.

The coup is, of course, among other things is a personal tragedy for Thaksin who is, no matter what one thinks about him, is an extraordinary personality as is evidenced by the level and the intensity

of discussions on this thread.

But from the historical perspective the coup may be a blessing for him.

Because on the background of impotency clearly shown by current ruling clique, many of his actions which looked conroversial

may prove to be necessary or at least best possible at the time.

The starting point of this thread was a "laundry list" of the ruling clique.

Those who think that the current rulers should not prove their acquisations are absolutely wrong. Because down the road the similar list can be presented to them and if it happens that their greatest defender had gone, I am afraid no tanks will protect them.

Hi and welcome. I would just add one comment. I doubt that the many thousand sof killings associated with the Thaksin reghime will be shown to have been either necessary or the best possible action however much time passes.

[ColPyat]

Hi and welcome. I would just add one comment. I doubt that the many thousand sof killings associated with the Thaksin reghime will be shown to have been either necessary or the best possible action however much time passes.

But unfortunately these killings, which i feel most strongly about in all of Thaksin's aera, are the least important issue of the present government.

Which, i think is rather telling about the intentions of the junta, and what they consider misrule, as opposed to what i do.

[hammered]

Hi and welcome. I would just add one comment. I doubt that the many thousand sof killings associated with the Thaksin reghime will be shown to have been either necessary or the best possible action however much time passes.

But unfortunately these killings, which i feel most strongly about in all of Thaksin's aera, are the least important issue of the present government.

Which, i think is rather telling about the intentions of the junta, and what they consider misrule, as opposed to what i do.

Yes they could certainly do with speeding the investigations up. That a hadful of cases have now been passed to the DSI may be the best chance for some justice.

[sriracha john]

Hi and welcome. I would just add one comment. I doubt that the many thousand sof killings associated with the Thaksin reghime will be shown to have been either necessary or the best possible action however much time passes.

But unfortunately these killings, which i feel most strongly about in all of Thaksin's aera, are the least important issue of the present government.

Which, i think is rather telling about the intentions of the junta, and what they consider misrule, as opposed to what i do.

Yes they could certainly do with speeding the investigations up. That a handful of cases have now been passed to the DSI may be the best chance for some justice.

Agreed and it's evident that it's not the least of the government's concerns. This aera is getting attention from the DSI and movement is being made on four of the more blatant cases of Thaksin's killings. It also has gone into the aera of Thaksin's direct involvement as one of "incitement," which was evident by his words and deeds.

[ColPyat]

Yes they could certainly do with speeding the investigations up. That a hadful of cases have now been passed to the DSI may be the best chance for some justice.

And the latest i have read was that so far they are at a stage to find out if there is enough evidence to link Thaksin to it.

Sorry, but so far it is all smoke and mirrors as some of the integral mechanics of the killings have been left untouched.

I can only repeat that i would be more than surprised if more than a token low to mid ranked fall guy is made responsible, and the rest gets off scot free, in order not to endanger the status quo.

I would say that apart from the historical evidence there is also clear evidence by the actions of the present government that people involved in such gross human rights violations will not be punished. After the Surayud apology for Tak Bai, has any of the responsible officers been punished?

Nil.

[sriracha john]

To stay on one topic per post, the investigation is ongoing, having only very recently given to the DSI. To say it's all smoke and mirrors would be to say that of any criminal investigation prior to an absolute conviction. To begin with 4 specific cases of the more despicable type of Thaksin's killings is a prudent and wise step. To attempt to try and take on an investigation of all 2,500+ murders at once would no doubt take considerably longer. The 4 cases as well as the ringleader Thaksin's incitement charge would seem to be the best avenue to pursue.

[ColPyat]

To stay on one topic per post, the investigation is ongoing, having only very recently given to the DSI. To say it's all smoke and mirrors would be to say that of any criminal investigation prior to an absolute conviction. To begin with 4 specific cases of the more despicable type of Thaksin's killings is a prudent and wise step. To attempt to try and take on an investigation of all 2,500+ murders at once would no doubt take considerably longer. The 4 cases as well as the ringleader Thaksin's incitement charge would seem to be the best avenue to pursue.

That is, if you ignore all evidence to the contrary, and label what was basically a concerted effort of all power networks in Thailand, including instrumental figures in the present government, as "Thaksin's killings".

As a historical example, i would advise you to familiarize yourself with what happened at Oct. 6th 1976, what led to it, and its aftermath. The drugwar killings went along very similar social mechanics, including the monks out in public washing the murderers off their guilt.

Thaksin rule was not monolithic, and neither were the killings. Exactly because of that all that you are made to believe is all smoke and mirrors.

Edited February 24, 2007 by ColPyat

[Tony Clifton]

Mr. PhD in criminology , PM, Pol, Lt., Col. CHEERED, TOLERATED and SUPPORTED this barbaric "concerted effort" before, during and after the killings.

Guilty.

[ColPyat]

Mr. PhD in criminology , PM, Pol, Lt., Col. CHEERED, TOLERATED and SUPPORTED this barbaric "concerted effort" before, during and after the killings.

Guilty.

Yes, he did, and yes, he is guilty.

But so are many others, still in grace and supposedly virtous, who will never be brought to trial for their involvement. Ever.

Hardly anybody even talks about them in connection with these barbaric murders.

And because of that, in the end Thaksin will also not be convicted of the drugwar killings. There are many people who cannot be implicated in the drugwar killings, and because of that, any effort will only be symbolic, and not of any substance. Exactly like Surayud's aplogy for Tak Bai, all face and no substance.

Just see how many of the guilty parties of '76 were ever brought to trial for what they did, and see where they are now - free, and in positions of power and influence.

[Tony Clifton]

Thailand hasn't clanged or evolved since 1976? The courts are comprised of the same people from 30 years ago? Isn't there much more media presence and coverage today than there was back then? More informed citizens expecting and waiting for answers, results from investigations and punishments? People have had it and doesn't the present government know it? Thai people are the junta are not stupid to the point of paving the way for history to roll in again and repeat itself, give or take a small percentage of lizards who only care about their own personal interests.

Many want George Bush and his circus impeached, even jailed. Does that mean they want all military personnel that is and has been involved in Iraq found guilty and thrown in jail as well? No, only the decision makers, the ones who , by their decisions, involve all who work under them whether they are partial or not.

Saddam was found guilty along with a few others, has the entire National Guard been thrown in jail as well? Would that make any sense? No. Some are even part of the new government today.

[ColPyat]

Thailand hasn't clanged or evolved since 1976?

In some ways it has, but in many ways it hasn't.

You make one big fallacy in all your posts, and that is that you assume that Thaksin's rule was monolithic and absolute. This is wrong.

Thaksin ruled by the grace of the many power networks involved in Thailand, because he was of use for the time being. And when wasn't anymore - he was taken out.

During, and straight after the drugwar killings was the height of his popularity, both under the general population and the elite. Without the consent, planning and active collaboration of that elite the drugwar killings would not have been possible. Without the support of the population, and by all sectors, it would not have been possible.

We are not talking about Thaksin's underlings, but people and networks who held power long before Thaksin appeared on the scene, and who were/are equal or far above Thaksin in the Thai pecking order. Just because Thaksin held the rank of PM does not meen that he was on top of the ladder here. It is just that this is as far as most can see.

Many of those in the elites have turned against Thaksin, and so have some sectors of the population. They have not though turned against the drugwar killings. They had different reasons for that. I clearly remember for example Sondhi L.'s reference during one of the Royal Plaza demonstrations, in which he has chasticed Thaksin for having gone easy on the drugwar, and shortly after Chamlong's speach in which he called Thaksin a great PM during the first 4 years of his rule. But exactly under those four years the human rights violations happened, not after.

Many foreigners, and a tiny minority of Thais do feel horrified about the drugwar killings. It is a mistake to extrapolate from how you feel to how the elite might feel.

If you do not believe me than you should indeed remember the old saying "actions speak louder than words". And so far we have had very little action on the assorted human rights violations that happened under Thaksin. And lately not even many words either.

Very soon you might very possibly hear also Kraisak saying in public that he is a bit disappointed with the slow progress of the government in terms of the killings. But not much will come out of it, because for obvious reasons he does not hold the same massive power his father or grandfather did.

Not one of the countless assorted human rights violations here in Thailand, by Thais on Thais and others, have been punished yet. I don't see any indication that this sad tradition is about to be broken now, by a government whose Prime Minister has his own yet unsolved allegations of human rights violations stemming from Black May against him, and important members and supporters of the government who have been essential in the human rights violations under Thaksin.

Edited February 24, 2007 by ColPyat

[sriracha john]

To stay on one topic per post, the investigation is ongoing, having only very recently given to the DSI. To say it's all smoke and mirrors would be to say that of any criminal investigation prior to an absolute conviction. To begin with 4 specific cases of the more despicable type of Thaksin's killings is a prudent and wise step. To attempt to try and take on an investigation of all 2,500+ murders at once would no doubt take considerably longer. The 4 cases as well as the ringleader Thaksin's incitement charge would seem to be the best avenue to pursue.

That is, if you ignore all evidence to the contrary, and label what was basically a concerted effort of all power networks in Thailand, including instrumental figures in the present government, as "Thaksin's killings".

As a historical example, i would advise you to familiarize yourself with what happened at Oct. 6th 1976, what led to it, and its aftermath. The drugwar killings went along very similar social mechanics, including the monks out in public washing the murderers off their guilt.

Thaksin rule was not monolithic, and neither were the killings. Exactly because of that all that you are made to believe is all smoke and mirrors.

They're labeled as Thaksin's killings because as the #1 person in the country, he incited them, hence he is justifiably facing charges relative to that. To ignore all the evidence that supports that is contrary to common sense.

What happened in the last century, while important, is not what is being investigated presently. Certainly they can begin with the criminal events that occurred in this century and work backwards through however many centuries they choose to.

If others were actively involved in Thaksin's killings, then they too, can be subject to investigation, but it clearly makes sense to start at the #1 position as the main instigator.

[ColPyat]

They're labeled as Thaksin's killings because as the #1 person in the country, he incited them, hence he is justifiably facing charges relative to that. To ignore all the evidence that supports that is contrary to common sense.

What happened in the last century, while important, is not what is being investigated presently. Certainly they can begin with the criminal events that occurred in this century and work backwards through however many centuries they choose to.

If others were actively involved in Thaksin's killings, then they too, can be subject to investigation, but it clearly makes sense to start at the #1 position as the main instigator.

He never was the "number 1 person" in the country. There are far more powerful people and networks above him.

What happened 30 years ago is important as you can see the same social mechanics at play, and you can learn about the same complexities that were at play during the drugwar killings. What happened 30 years ago is pretty much in the public domain now, even though much that was written about it is still banned in Thailand, but easily available, while what really happened 4 years ago is not yet well researched and publicised. You will have to wait a while for that, if it ever comes out due to the lack of public voice these victims have, being mostly from the dregs of society.

And no, there are many individuals a networks of power existing in Thailand that cannot be subject to investigation.

[sriracha john]

Mr. PhD in criminology , PM, Pol, Lt., Col. CHEERED, TOLERATED and SUPPORTED this barbaric "concerted effort" before, during and after the killings.

Guilty.

Yes, he did, and yes, he is guilty.

But so are many others, still in grace and supposedly virtous, who will never be brought to trial for their involvement. Ever.

Hardly anybody even talks about them in connection with these barbaric murders.

And because of that, in the end Thaksin will also not be convicted of the drugwar killings. There are many people who cannot be implicated in the drugwar killings, and because of that, any effort will only be symbolic, and not of any substance. Exactly like Surayud's aplogy for Tak Bai, all face and no substance.

Just see how many of the guilty parties of '76 were ever brought to trial for what they did, and see where they are now - free, and in positions of power and influence.

In the past year, many events have occurred that would prevent me from trying to predict when and what Thaksin will be convicted of. At this time last year, I'm sure the Election Commission members were equally comfortable as your prediction with Thaksin that nothing untoward would happen to them.... and yet.... it did... in a major way.

I would point out the relevance of Surayud's Tak Bai apology occurring within a couple of months as a more positive step toward addressing the Southern situation than Thaksin accomplished in nearly six years of tyrannical rule, but I won't as I think one topic per post is a good way of staying as focused as one can in such a diverse topic as Thaksin's misdoings.

Edited February 24, 2007 by sriracha john

[ColPyat]

In the past year, many events have occurred that would prevent me from trying to predict when and what Thaksin will be convicted of. At this time last year, I'm sure the Election Commission members were equally comfortable as your prediction with Thaksin that nothing untoward would happen to them.... and yet.... it did... in a major way.

I would point out the relevance of Surayud's Tak Bai apology occurring within a couple of months as a more positive step toward addressing the Southern situation than Thaksin accomplished in nearly six years of tyrannical rule, but I won't as I think one topic per post is a good way of staying as focused as one can in such a diverse topic as Thaksin's misdoings.

The election commisioneers were hardly comparable in terms of power with Thaksin. There were symbolic fall guys in the way, but that's it.

The point of the Tak Bai "apology" was nothing but an empty gesture. Nobody responsible was punished, and the south is worse than before. Point being - nobody got punished for clear gross human rights violations in Tak Bai.

I would say that there is a 99% chance that Thaksin will never get convicted for the drugwar killings. And if, it will involve nothing more than a minor loss of face.

[sriracha john]

They're labeled as Thaksin's killings because as the #1 person in the country, he incited them, hence he is justifiably facing charges relative to that. To ignore all the evidence that supports that is contrary to common sense.

What happened in the last century, while important, is not what is being investigated presently. Certainly they can begin with the criminal events that occurred in this century and work backwards through however many centuries they choose to.

If others were actively involved in Thaksin's killings, then they too, can be subject to investigation, but it clearly makes sense to start at the #1 position as the main instigator.

He never was the "number 1 person" in the country. There are far more powerful people and networks above him.

What happened 30 years ago is important as you can see the same social mechanics at play, and you can learn about the same complexities that were at play during the drugwar killings. What happened 30 years ago is pretty much in the public domain now, even though much that was written about it is still banned in Thailand, but easily available, while what really happened 4 years ago is not yet well researched and publicised. You will have to wait a while for that, if it ever comes out due to the lack of public voice these victims have, being mostly from the dregs of society.

And no, there are many individuals a networks of power existing in Thailand that cannot be subject to investigation.

If Thaksin wasn't #1, then who, besides the ONE obvious entity, was?

You refer to these far more powerful people (plural) with more power than the Prime Minister.

Who are they specifically?

Edited February 24, 2007 by sriracha john

[ColPyat]

Who are they specifically?

That is why i advise you to read up on the events surrounding '76. I do not want to go here on this forum into areas that might easily touch what we are not allowed to debate, and for a good reason, if i may add.

People and clans who have been involved in that aera are still alive, found on many sides of the present conflict, and partly in very powerful positions. But here on this forum i would prefer not to go any further.

A very important book that everyone who is interested in Thai politics, and especially the darker aspects, should read is: "Rituals of National Loyalty". Very enlightening.

Edited February 24, 2007 by ColPyat

[sriracha john]

In the past year, many events have occurred that would prevent me from trying to predict when and what Thaksin will be convicted of. At this time last year, I'm sure the Election Commission members were equally comfortable as your prediction with Thaksin that nothing untoward would happen to them.... and yet.... it did... in a major way.

I would point out the relevance of Surayud's Tak Bai apology occurring within a couple of months as a more positive step toward addressing the Southern situation than Thaksin accomplished in nearly six years of tyrannical rule, but I won't as I think one topic per post is a good way of staying as focused as one can in such a diverse topic as Thaksin's misdoings.

The election commisioneers were hardly comparable in terms of power with Thaksin. There were symbolic fall guys in the way, but that's it.

The point of the Tak Bai "apology" was nothing but an empty gesture. Nobody responsible was punished, and the south is worse than before. Point being - nobody got punished for clear gross human rights violations in Tak Bai.

I would say that there is a 99% chance that Thaksin will never get convicted for the drugwar killings. And if, it will involve nothing more than a minor loss of face.

and yet, who would have thought a year ago the EC would be sent off to prison? Who would have thought that Thaksin would dissolve Parliament? Who would have thought he would resign? Who would have thought there would be a coup when it happened? Certainly no one here on thaivisa nor in the media.

If the past 12 months have shown anything... it's that trying to predict events is completely unreliable and needlessly futile.

Your characterization of the apology would negate the point of doing any apology...

To say an apology is nothing is to not comprehend what an apology is.

To say nobody has been punished yet for Tak Bai when the interim government has been involved for a few months after six years of rule by Thaksin is to totally fail to appreciate the concept of time in such a complex and diverse issue.

[sriracha john]

Who are they specifically?

That is why i advise you to read up on the events surrounding '76. I do not want to go here on this forum into areas that might easily touch what we are not allowed to debate, and for a good reason, if i may add.

People and clans who have been involved in that aera are still alive, found on many sides of the present conflict, and partly in very powerful positions. But here on this forum i would prefer not to go any further.

A very important book that everyone who is interested in Thai politics, and especially the darker aspects, should read is: "Rituals of National Loyalty". Very enlightening.

There is only person that we are not allowed to discuss. In your plural usage of more powerful people phrase, then there must be others that are not covered by the rules of this forum. Who are they?

[ColPyat]

There is only person that we are not allowed to discuss. In your plural usage of more powerful people phrase, then there must be others that are not covered by the rules of this forum. Who are they?

I said already that i will not go any further. Please don't bait me into moving into topics that are beyond the scope of this forum.

If you are really interested in some of the backgound of the Thai complexities, which could easily be misunderstood and misconstructed, then read up the topic i advised you, especially also the book i mentioned. You will then understand my hesitation of being too detailed in this place.

Edited February 24, 2007 by ColPyat