389 replies to this topic
Posted 2009-11-07 08:40:22
 tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said:
Publicus, on 2009-11-07 01:36:57, said: I'm sure Abhisit and his sponsors in the Old Guard fully recongnize the threat Thaksin would pose to Thailand were he to relocate to Cambodia. I mean, think about it man! A former PM fugitive convicted of crimes, determined to seize control of Thailand for his own nefarious purposes
Hi Publicus
I accept the apparent need to promote a feeding frenzy of anti-Thaksin rantings in this thread---- but I expect better from you!!
"convicted of crimes" ---- " crimes???" Would you like to change that to crime. One. Singular!!! And ---oh---oh--- what a crime --- signing a document (as every Thai husband must do )-- acknowledging his wife is purchasing land!!!! I am particularly impressed by the frequent calls for his assassination on this forum. 
"determined to seize control of Thailand for his own nefarious purposes" 
Re-seize --- you mean?? He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup. If the last election ( of only 2 years ago ) is any indication he would probably be elected to lead the country again.
"nefarious purposes" ------ Well ..... After many years with him as the elected PM the Thai voters are more than aware of his "purposes" and somehow seem to prefer his nefariousness to that of his opponents!!
Publicus, your reading a bit of unbiased Thai history before you post would not come amiss.
And you often kill a good point by being so emotionally anti-Thaksin.
I agree he has many ordinary people who would vote for him as they did in the past and that is important but you should remember that in Thailand it is who you know that is even more important. He has some powerful friends as you presumably know.
Posted 2009-11-07 08:42:23
tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup.
Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
Posted 2009-11-07 08:54:00
nickynomates, on 2009-11-06 20:56:58, said: Lets not forget most Isarn folk have deep set roots from khamer blood lines.
They will not be upset by this move.
Maybe he is looking for some of Newin voodoo spells.
I know some Isaan folk from the red heart of Udon Thani & they are not at all happy with Mr T now, even to the point of considering him a traitor. Check out the latest poll which shows Abhisit's popularity increasing nearly threefold from just a couple of weeks ago.
I do not understand why Mr T took the risk of nationalistic sentiment turning against him. If he does not care then pity this wonderful country if he does return. Civil war would be the likely scenario.
Posted 2009-11-07 09:25:13
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 02:42:23, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup.
Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
One has got to laugh at the weird logic of some people.This one is priceless.
Posted 2009-11-07 09:37:08
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 08:35:28, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: Would you like to change that to crime. One. Singular!!!
Only one crime? Oh, that's ok then. Let's face it, who hasn't been convicted of a crime or two?
But what about all the cases against him that are unable to proceed because of his cowardly fleeing act? I'd say, when a suspect fails to present themselves as instructed by the courts, that should be taken as an admission of guilt.
Hi rixalex
Your point is 100% valid. Leaving the country left Thaksin open to this correct condemnation. There is , however , another side to that coin ------which also addresses this:
Quote Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
On 26 April 2006 a very high power summoned the heads of the three senior courts of Thailand to Hua Hin, and gave them instructions ------ within days the Constitutional Court amazingly annulled an election in which Thaksin's party had won a clear majority (an absolutely unprecedented action) ----- leading directly to the military coup that finally unseated the Government. ( only weeks before scheduled national elections ) With the courts "fixed" in this manner .. his chance of being fairly and justly treated was obviously nil! If I knew the courts were fixed against me ---I may wall flee also.
The coup was not "of the people" it was 'of others". It most certainly was for others. If Thaksin was responsible for his own downfall it was more rooted in his attempt to re-jig the Army promotions list than anything else.
Oh --- the real main cause of the coup ( only weeks before scheduled national elections -- did I mention that?? ) was the fact that Thaksin was going to win again. The traditional "snouts in the trough" had finally had enough. After so many failed attempts to defeat him at the ballot --- they were in total despair. How would they get their snouts back into their gravy train ----- which was by divine right theirs ---- and theirs alone??
Posted 2009-11-07 09:46:46
jayboy, on 2009-11-07 09:25:13, said: rixalex, on 2009-11-07 02:42:23, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup.
Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
One has got to laugh at the weird logic of some people.
I find it funnier that someone would fail to see the connection between Thaksin's actions whilst in power and the coup.
Coups are not usually peacefully accepted by the public when the ousted leader is doing a good job. This coup wasn't just peacefully accepted, it was broadly welcomed.
Posted 2009-11-07 09:57:54
tig28, on 2009-11-07 09:37:08, said: With the courts "fixed" in this manner .. his chance of being fairly and justly treated was obviously nil! If I knew the courts were fixed against me ---I may wall flee also.
Thaksin lost the right to moan and quibble about the fairness of any court case when he miraculously escaped being convicted of concealing his assets, and then later went on to attempt bribing the courts. He happily used the system to his advantage, and now it's being used against him. Tough.
What goes around, comes around.
Posted 2009-11-07 10:10:44
poryai, on 2009-11-05 11:08:54, said:
Its all clear to me now, apparently George is advising thaksin, who is advising the Cambodian PM.
Thai-visa just keeps going from strength to strenght, what next George? 
Posted 2009-11-07 10:25:35
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 03:46:46, said: jayboy, on 2009-11-07 09:25:13, said: rixalex, on 2009-11-07 02:42:23, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup.
Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
One has got to laugh at the weird logic of some people.
I find it funnier that someone would fail to see the connection between Thaksin's actions whilst in power and the coup.
Coups are not usually peacefully accepted by the public when the ousted leader is doing a good job. This coup wasn't just peacefully accepted, it was broadly welcomed.
I'm sorry but your logic is all over the place.
Clearly there were many connections between Thaksin's actions and the coup.This does not however mean as you suggested in your previous post that he caused it and that he is to blame for it.To make matters as simple as possible for you it does not follow that because one action takes place after another that the first action is responsible for the second, a delusion which classically educated members of the forum will recognise as the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.
Whatever Thaksin's failings, and they were many, the coup was monstrously disproportionate. Tig 28 has patiently explained some of the salient facts for you.For further information I would recommend you study carefully one of Acharn Pask/Chris Baker's excellent books.
You are incidentally simply wrong to assume the coup was broadly welcomed.As far as the majority of the people of Thailand were concerned this was certainly not the case (as opposed to the motley band of feudalists, generals, monopolist businessmen - and the mainly urban middle class).If the coup was as popular as you suggest why didn't the interests who implemented take the easier course of letting the Thai people vote Thaksin out of office?
Posted 2009-11-07 11:31:07
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 09:57:54, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 09:37:08, said: With the courts "fixed" in this manner .. his chance of being fairly and justly treated was obviously nil! If I knew the courts were fixed against me ---I may wall flee also.
Thaksin lost the right to moan and quibble about the fairness of any court case when he miraculously escaped being convicted of concealing his assets, and then later went on to attempt bribing the courts. He happily used the system to his advantage, and now it's being used against him. Tough.
What goes around, comes around.
Hi rixalex
Again your point is valid. It does depend upon who has their hands on the controls. The difference is that I am not trying to pretend that Thaksins manipulation of the justice system did not occur. I am not blindly asserting that the court rulings of those days were just. They were not under Thaksin --- and they are not now!!
Why -- i wonder do posters here not get 'all up in arms' over something as obvious and important as this:
15/05/2009 (an English language newspaper) reported how a Democrat escaped poll fraud charges. The Electoral Commission (EC) had charged the Democrat MP for Yasothon with vote buying. Amazingly the charges were dismissed by the Supreme Court. 
The same day... the same court upheld an EC charge against the Puea Thai MP for Sakon Nakhon .... accused of making defamatory remarks about the Puea Pandin Party during his campaign. They gave him a red card --- and banned him for 5 years.
Now rixalex if you wish to talk of Thai justice ---- why don't you talk to me of this???? I'm sorry --- of course this may not fit in with the blind anti-Thaksin theme so prevalent here.
The rabidly anti-Thaksin TV warriors for justice seem to be only able to see Thaksin corruption ... and hypocrisy puts me off my feed.
Now as for this:
Quote Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
When the coup occurred I gave a little cheer. In my narrow view Thaksin had gone too far in several areas ----- but rixalex ..... he had been supported by the Thai voters since 2001 and was an absolute certainty to trounce the perennial losers yet again!! Go ... Democrats!!!
That is why the coup occurred at that time ----- just weeks before scheduled national elections. (did I mention that??)
But why should the intelligentsia posting on TV care what the Thai people want and vote for --- they know what is best for Thailand. It is just that they are so stupid that they don't know what is best for them!!!
Posted 2009-11-07 11:33:55
jayboy, on 2009-11-07 10:25:35, said: Clearly there were many connections between Thaksin's actions and the coup.This does not however mean as you suggested in your previous post that he caused it and that he is to blame for it.
I didn't suggest it, i stated it.
Thaksin set in motion a chain of events starting from the under-hand way in which he sold Shin Corp. Had he not done this, or had he accepted some wrong-doing at the time and made some sort of gesture of good-will to allay concerns about the way he had avoided paying tax, the coup would never have happened. That's my opinion. If your differs then fine. That's your opinion.
jayboy, on 2009-11-07 10:25:35, said: To make matters as simple as possible for you it does not follow that because one action takes place after another that the first action is responsible for the second, a delusion which classically educated members of the forum will recognise as the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.
What is it with you Jayboy? You are an interesting, articulate and obviously well-educated member of the forum, yet you continually and repeatedly resort to this sort of childish, arrogant pomposity.
jayboy, on 2009-11-07 10:25:35, said: If the coup was as popular as you suggest why didn't the interests who implemented take the easier course of letting the Thai people vote Thaksin out of office?
Thaksin's tentacles had spread so far and wide that it was quite impossible for anyone to stand up and challenge him in a way that healthy democracies have to allow for democracy to function. This democracy wasn't functioning, it was on its knees having been repeatedly corrupted.
If the coup was an unpopular as you suggest, why did it meet no resistance?
Posted 2009-11-07 11:50:14
tig28, on 2009-11-07 11:31:07, said: Again your point is valid. It does depend upon who has their hands on the controls. The difference is that I am not trying to pretend that Thaksins manipulation of the justice system did not occur. I am not blindly asserting that the court rulings of those days were just. They were not under Thaksin --- and they are not now!!
You say the difference is you are not trying to pretend something, suggesting that i am. Can you please tell me what i am pretending. It's not clear.
tig28, on 2009-11-07 11:31:07, said: The rabidly anti-Thaksin TV warriors for justice seem to be only able to see Thaksin corruption ... and hypocrisy puts me off my feed.
I see corruption all over the place - in Thaksin, in the military, in the police and in the majority of politicians and a fair number of businessmen and women - and i condemn it all. The only reason i spend more of my time condemning Thaksin than any of the others is that Thaksin's corruption is continually trying to be justified and played down by people like you.
Posted 2009-11-07 12:03:21
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 11:33:55, said: jayboy, on 2009-11-07 10:25:35, said: Clearly there were many connections between Thaksin's actions and the coup.This does not however mean as you suggested in your previous post that he caused it and that he is to blame for it.
I didn't suggest it, i stated it.
Thaksin set in motion a chain of events starting from the under-hand way in which he sold Shin Corp. Had he not done this, or had he accepted some wrong-doing at the time and made some sort of gesture of good-will to allay concerns about the way he had avoided paying tax, the coup would never have happened. That's my opinion. If your differs then fine. That's your opinion.
jayboy, on 2009-11-07 10:25:35, said: To make matters as simple as possible for you it does not follow that because one action takes place after another that the first action is responsible for the second, a delusion which classically educated members of the forum will recognise as the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy.
What is it with you Jayboy? You are an interesting, articulate and obviously well-educated member of the forum, yet you continually and repeatedly resort to this sort of childish, arrogant pomposity.
jayboy, on 2009-11-07 10:25:35, said: If the coup was as popular as you suggest why didn't the interests who implemented take the easier course of letting the Thai people vote Thaksin out of office?
Thaksin's tentacles had spread so far and wide that it was quite impossible for anyone to stand up and challenge him in a way that healthy democracies have to allow for democracy to function. This democracy wasn't functioning, it was on its knees having been repeatedly corrupted.
If the coup was an unpopular as you suggest, why did it meet no resistance?
Should read "The TRT Team with Thaksin as their helmsman had spread..."
Yes with the absolute Majority in Parliament, no census motion. no opposition, any check and balance out the window!
And those people insist that they have been "democratically elected" and founded the "Alliance FOR Democracy", aligning with what ever as long as they are willing to wear the color red - there is some very bitter irony in this, and does carry a clear message, the signature of the self proclaimed CEO of Thailand Incorp.!
"If the coup was an unpopular as you suggest, why did it meet no resistance?"
It wasn't, it only took someone by surprise and this power hungry man who was very, very close to his ambitious fantasies became disillusioned and surely very, very upset and angry, he must have gone virtually trough the roof, all his "investments" gone, all the dreams of becoming the "sole leader".. I don't dare to go further into his (anticipated) fantasies, but I strongly think that this person had a clear vision of what would have come next.. he always wrapped it rather well in "leading this country like the CEO of a company" this says it all!
no further comment!
Posted 2009-11-07 12:47:48
Valentine, on 2009-11-07 08:54:00, said: nickynomates, on 2009-11-06 20:56:58, said: Lets not forget most Isarn folk have deep set roots from khamer blood lines.
They will not be upset by this move.
Maybe he is looking for some of Newin voodoo spells.
I know some Isaan folk from the red heart of Udon Thani & they are not at all happy with Mr T now, even to the point of considering him a traitor. Check out the latest poll which shows Abhisit's popularity increasing nearly threefold from just a couple of weeks ago.
I do not understand why Mr T took the risk of nationalistic sentiment turning against him. If he does not care then pity this wonderful country if he does return. Civil war would be the likely scenario.
Just to add to the above that I spent Friday night with a group of Thai people and the hot subject was Thaskin and Cambodia. Needless to say to say the comments about Thaksin were not good. However, most were surprised that he had made such a silly move or taken such an obvious risk. This group were not really red or yellow by the way. Mostly the kind of people that have littel usual interest in poltics so I was a little surpriised that half the night was spent on this one subject.
Edited to add: Im not sure that most Isaan people have Khmer links either. That may be true in some of the southern Isaan but whole swathes of the Isaan certainly dont regard themselves as Khmer.
Edited by hammered, 2009-11-07 12:55:24.
Posted 2009-11-07 13:00:10
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 09:46:46, said: This coup wasn't just peacefully accepted, it was broadly welcomed.
Hmmmmmmmm,,,,,,,
Something seems to be wrong in your logic.
If the coup was so "broadly welcomed" as you cliam, the actions of the PAD (occupying streets in Bangkok, occupyng the Governement House, occupying 2 national airports and causing the bioggest fownfall of tourism in ages, etc.) were not justified at all.
Unless the actions of the PAD were meant to bring Thalsin back into power .....
Posted 2009-11-07 13:06:03
caf, on 2009-11-07 09:40:22, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: Publicus, on 2009-11-07 01:36:57, said: I'm sure Abhisit and his sponsors in the Old Guard fully recongnize the threat Thaksin would pose to Thailand were he to relocate to Cambodia. I mean, think about it man! A former PM fugitive convicted of crimes, determined to seize control of Thailand for his own nefarious purposes
Hi Publicus
I accept the apparent need to promote a feeding frenzy of anti-Thaksin rantings in this thread---- but I expect better from you!!
"convicted of crimes" ---- " crimes???" Would you like to change that to crime. One. Singular!!! And ---oh---oh--- what a crime --- signing a document (as every Thai husband must do )-- acknowledging his wife is purchasing land!!!! I am particularly impressed by the frequent calls for his assassination on this forum.
"determined to seize control of Thailand for his own nefarious purposes"
Re-seize --- you mean?? He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup. If the last election ( of only 2 years ago ) is any indication he would probably be elected to lead the country again.
"nefarious purposes" ------ Well ..... After many years with him as the elected PM the Thai voters are more than aware of his "purposes" and somehow seem to prefer his nefariousness to that of his opponents!!
Publicus, your reading a bit of unbiased Thai history before you post would not come amiss.
And you often kill a good point by being so emotionally anti-Thaksin.
I agree he has many ordinary people who would vote for him as they did in the past and that is important but you should remember that in Thailand it is who you know that is even more important. He has some powerful friends as you presumably know.
Thaksin's systematic destruction of democratic institutions and processes have been documented, hashed and rehashed so let's spare us any more specious claims that Thaksin is a democrat. Those among us who were in Thailand before Thaksin, during Thaksin and post Thaksin have a particular perspective which seems to have yielded a convincing consensus against the man and his powerful gang.
Thaksin is divisive. Thaksin is divisive in the extreme. Other leaders of countries who've been deposed for whatever reason or means simply have picked themselves up to go on with their lives. Thaksin however is possessed. It's unhealthy.
And thanks for your suggestion about Thai history.....you may rest easy that I've given it the consideration it deserves.
Edited by Publicus, 2009-11-07 13:18:45.
Posted 2009-11-07 13:09:30
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 11:33:55, said: This democracy wasn't functioning, it was on its knees having been repeatedly corrupted.
And the "Democracy" from the present government lead by Abhisit was neitherfunctioning as Sondhi L. and the PAD claimed several times.
Sondhi L. went even so far to make a new political party cliaiming that Abhisit and his fovernment were "not democratic".
Funny thing is that these claims and the setup of an own political party dated at same that the PAD leaders were charged by the Thai justice for their crimes.
Posted 2009-11-07 13:26:52
hammered, on 2009-11-07 12:47:48, said: Im not sure that most Isaan people have Khmer links either. That may be true in some of the southern Isaan but whole swathes of the Isaan certainly dont regard themselves as Khmer.
Look particularly at the map of the Khmer Empire in 1200
Posted 2009-11-07 13:32:44
coalminer, on 2009-11-07 13:00:10, said: Hmmmmmmmm,,,,,,,
Something seems to be wrong in your logic.
If the coup was so "broadly welcomed" as you cliam, the actions of the PAD (occupying streets in Bangkok, occupyng the Governement House, occupying 2 national airports and causing the bioggest fownfall of tourism in ages, etc.) were not justified at all.
When did i say those acts were justified? The PAD had the right of any group to protest peacefully, they didn't have the right to occupy GH or Swampy. They shouldn't have. It was a mistake and one they paid for with a drop in popularity. They should be charged just as the reds should be charged with all the mayhem they have created. As has already been stated however, justice here can't always be relied upon.
Posted 2009-11-07 13:40:55
hammered, on 2009-11-07 12:47:48, said: Just to add to the above that I spent Friday night with a group of Thai people and the hot subject was Thaskin and Cambodia. Needless to say to say the comments about Thaksin were not good. However, most were surprised that he had made such a silly move or taken such an obvious risk. This group were not really red or yellow by the way. Mostly the kind of people that have littel usual interest in poltics so I was a little surpriised that half the night was spent on this one subject.
Edited to add: Im not sure that most Isaan people have Khmer links either. That may be true in some of the southern Isaan but whole swathes of the Isaan certainly dont regard themselves as Khmer.
Tsk, tsk, tsk,
You must live in a total different Issaan as I live.
The whole town where I live (not wooden houses and squats) is cheering now already 2 days with the news about Thaksin, and every house has ASTV running from 24h on 24h.
Every time a red short leader names the word "Abhisit", a cheerio so loud that it wouild cause an earthquake of 10 on the Richter scale is emerging.
Yesterday, some neighbors were planning a trip to Cambodia to welcome Thaksn.
This is not finished, it only is the start of a new episode in the ongoing failures of this government and the PAD.
Posted 2009-11-07 13:45:15
rixalex, on 2009-11-07 08:42:23, said: tig28, on 2009-11-07 08:22:14, said: He was in charge of this country for many years until removed by a coup.
Had he been running the country properly the coup would never have happened. He caused it. He is to blame for the coup.
Wow. 
Posted 2009-11-07 13:51:02
coalminer, on 2009-11-07 13:26:52, said: hammered, on 2009-11-07 12:47:48, said: Im not sure that most Isaan people have Khmer links either. That may be true in some of the southern Isaan but whole swathes of the Isaan certainly dont regard themselves as Khmer.
Look particularly at the map of the Khmer Empire in 1200
I don't think that this is any kind of answer to Hammered's statement; there is no doubt that a couple million people in Thailand's lower Issan have a Khmer background ([Parts of] Surin, Buri Ram, Sri Saket et al), but this does not apply to the rest of Issan who have a Lao (or other) background.
I'm not sure it matters much though; in the general political scheme of things the key words are equality and economic opportunity; Thaksin got elected in successive landslide election victories not because of ethnicity (the man's Chinese and from Chiang Mai for crying out loud) but because he empowered a region that until then was regarded as the nation's toilet and a source of cheap labor.
That worked very well for Thaksin, until the powers that be had enough and began to consider him a threat. Then it was quickly ended, and Abhisit put in power.
Edited by WinnieTheKhwai, 2009-11-07 13:52:37.
Posted 2009-11-07 14:05:54
WinnieTheKhwai, on 2009-11-07 13:51:02, said: coalminer, on 2009-11-07 13:26:52, said: hammered, on 2009-11-07 12:47:48, said: Im not sure that most Isaan people have Khmer links either. That may be true in some of the southern Isaan but whole swathes of the Isaan certainly dont regard themselves as Khmer.
Look particularly at the map of the Khmer Empire in 1200
I don't think that this is any kind of answer to Hammered's statement; there is no doubt that a couple million people in Thailand's lower Issan have a Khmer background ([Parts of] Surin, Buri Ram, Sri Saket et al), but this does not apply to the rest of Issan who have a Lao (or other) background.
I'm not sure it matters much though; in the general political scheme of things the key words are equality and economic opportunity; Thaksin got elected in successive landslide election victories not because of ethnicity (the man's Chinese and from Chiang Mai for crying out loud) but because he empowered a region that until then was regarded as the nation's toilet and a source of cheap labor.
That worked very well for Thaksin, until the powers that be had enough and began to consider him a threat. Then it was quickly ended, and Abhisit put in power.
Not quite.
The military stood in the prevent a looming confrontation between the anti and pro Thaksin groups, following weeks upon weeks of anti-Thaksin protests.
Posted 2009-11-07 14:11:46
coalminer, on 2009-11-07 13:26:52, said: hammered, on 2009-11-07 12:47:48, said: Im not sure that most Isaan people have Khmer links either. That may be true in some of the southern Isaan but whole swathes of the Isaan certainly dont regard themselves as Khmer.
Look particularly at the map of the Khmer Empire in 1200
For those of you who are adverse to clicking links, here is the map referred to:
Bare in mind that this was the political situation 800 years ago. It also reflects the political powers, not the ethnic makeup of the population. Khmer records of this time were already mentioning the influx of 'Syamese invaders' from the north.
Here is the political map for 470 years ago:
This map will be much more familiar with most Thais. For most Thais history begins in Sukhothai and continues in Ayuthaya, with a brief mention of the Lanna Kingdoms. The majority of Thais would be very surprised to see the first map and don't consider themselves to be of Khmer ancestry (although a large number of them undoubtedly are). In addition, right up to the 1930's, Thai rulers had a policy of forced migration of people from one part of the country to another. This was done in an effort to create a generic Thai culture and to break the power of regional movements. A good example are the numerous Muslims who live in the north-eastern parts of Bangkok. They are mostly descended from people who were taken from Pattani and forcibly resettled near BKK.
Here is a Ethnographic map of Thailand from the 1970's. As you can see, the lower half of Issan was considered to be majority Khmer. According to Wikipedia, there are 1.4 million Khmer currently in Thailand.
Edited by otherstuff1957, 2009-11-07 14:32:33.
Posted 2009-11-07 14:17:14
Thaksin sold his Shin Corp to a foreign government, Singapore, has chosen to hole up in another foreign land, UAE, and now signs on with yet another froreign government, Cambodia, as an economic advisor.
Thaksin's loyalty to himself and himself only is more than evident, as are his self-centered purposes. Money and power, power and money.
|
Sponsored by ...
|
0
