Vichai, if you want to take on the mantle of discussion panel chairman, you should note that the job comes with expectations of being a] accurate and b] even-handed in your summing up.
I think you should consider whether you’re really ready to leap to b] when you plainly struggle to come anywhere remotely close to a].
“Comment section has now been removed from the Bangkok Post.”
Judging by the e-mail notifications* of further comments after mine, there were another eight published before all the comments were removed. I suspect that at least one slipped through that was too near or beyond the mark. Frankly, given the context, I was surprised that the Post even opened the article to comments in the first place. As others have noted, they seem (lately) to operate a blanket “no comments” policy on anything to do with Prayuth, for example.
It seems we don’t need any independent or external assessments of Thailand’s corruption record.
‘The majority of Thai people say a corrupt government is acceptable to them if, in being dishonest, it can also bring prosperity to the people and to the country, according to the results of an Abac Poll released on Wednesday.’
‘Those who voiced no objection to corrupt practices included: 71 per cent of respondents under 20 years of age…’
johninbkk (96). Yes, Vajiralongkorn wields great power, though it is derived entirely from the political capital accumulated by his father. He seems to be in competition with his mother for the principal role in dissipating it: the one in buying pleasure for himself, and the other by inflicting pain and misery on her country.
Instead of CP I suggest using the person’s nickname “O”.
For the Bangkok Post, why not just “the Post” just as New Yorkers do when referring to their local rag.
There should be no confusion with the newly established ChiangMai Post which is yet to have an internet presence.
The Thai media have put on a brave face and done their best to present the court’s latest ruling as a victory for Thailand but they are having a hard time explaining why the court demanded the 20 million euros bank guarantee, if it really found the new ownership documents to be credible. They have also been too coy thus far to even mention the surprise appearance of the plane’s twin.
Since the court said the ownership should be defined according to Thai law, this should be a relatively easy task. There is plenty of Thai legislation that could be helpful here, for example the Foreign Business Act and the Land Code with its accompanying ministerial regulations. In order to establish the Thai nationality of individuals or companies, Commerce Ministry and Land Department officials are required to follow the money trail and find out who paid for the shares and/or land in question. Thus some who simply signs ownership documents but doesn’t pay for the asset in question is regarded as a nominee and not the real owner.
During 1988 Uprising in Burma two daring Japanese Video-journalists intentionally crossed the Moei (Thoung Yin) River near Myawaddy and got themselves captured by the Burmese Army there. Two were detained for a few days and eventually released back into Thailand, unharmed.
During that time the whole world’s eyes were on Burma and so a large throng of international media was waiting at Mae Sot to interview them on their release. Everyone was so eager to hear the sordid tales of how the two Japanese VJs were brutally interrogated and tortured by the Burmese.
And they were obviously disappointed to see the two were physically and emotionally okay. The two just stated that Burmese had kept them in their fortified camp and fed them well. So they asked the two what they were doing all the time there.
The two VJs answered that while they were in captivity they played volleyball with the friendly Burmese soldiers every afternoon.
I read that story in the back page of Bangkok Post in 1988 while the whole front page displayed the photos of decapitated heads on a table in Rangoon.
The morale of the story is that, due to the propaganda and misinformation campaigns by various anti-Burma groups, the outside world especially the media sees the Burmese as murderers, rapists, and torturers and when the real outcome doesn’t match their expectations they are overly disappointed.
IMHO, Htoo Htoo Han wouldn’t be the first one or the last one of these so-called activists who tried to wear that stereotypical-straight-jacket portraying themselves as the typical Burmese murderer, rapist, and torturer for their personal and/or organizational benefits and also for the benefits of International and Australian media.
Note on Initials. CP is the trademark of Thailand’s biggest agribusiness and one should be careful not to risk defaming CP and perhaps being drowned in insecticide.
BP are the initials of Thailands most thorough and reliable political blogster Bangkok Pundit, so when I see a reference to BP I get excited that I am apout to read something trustworthy and NOT one rung above the dismal level of reporting of The Nation.
Now that we are in agreement that Thaksin indeed is corrupt (to godzilian scale), we have to be disturbed that Thaksin’s Peau Thai Party (founded on corruption to serve Thaksin and only Thaksin) had been reincarnated with a vengeance.
Now we can proceed to ‘moral’ and ‘epistemological’ debates about how a Peau Thai Party deeply corrupted by Thaksin could be expected to serve the Thai people without self-serving distractions and corrupt pursuits.
And we should expect more extra-judicial distractions . . . because such distractions are useful why Thaksin’s left and right hands shall be busy with other more rewarding pursuits.
#95 JohnH
” Such gifts would demonstrate loyalty (fealty?) and, hopefully, leverage patronage and protection from the CP.”
This implies that the CP wields great power . . . does he?
The 737 was a ‘gift’ to the CP. It’s a simple as that. Such gifts would demonstrate loyalty (fealty?) and, hopefully, leverage patronage and protection from the CP.
I’m also informed that on his frequent trips abroad, all costs are borne by Thai Air.
I’m also lead to believe that a recent inspection of Thai Air accounts by the Auditor General’s office revealed an unaccounted for deficit of some 200 milllion Baht. On pursuing this interesting discrepancy, the CP was mentioned, and the audit team were advised not to raise any more questions on the matter.
This fiasco begs another question: How many other ‘gifts’ have been graciously bestowed on the CP by the military and, indeed, other parties?
Somchai
Discussion 1 : 21/07/2011 at 12:45 AM1
‘Several reports that Robert Amsterdam is involved. Will he get comission from the bank guarantee or a bonus from the fugitive?’
SteveCM
Discussion 3 : 21/07/2011 at 02:43 AM3
‘No, Somchai (#1), not “several reports” – just one internet rumour (since explicitly & categorically denied by Robert Amsterdam). Getting a bit desperate these days, aren’t you?’
Basically, for everybody who doesn’t understand German: The question is whether Schneider will abduct this second plane as well to make sure he gets the other 50 %….
We’ll see… hehe …. I think the government of germany that was diplomatically struck by surprise due to the actions of Schneider will not let him do this… again…
I’d be very interested in what Hla Oo has to say.
He should be in his element on this issue.
Tall tales and wild claims go with the territory.
We need his considered opinion.
It seems that the Thai government has produced the requisite documents to prove the CP’s ownership of the 737.
‘A document showing the withdrawal of an impounded Boeing 737 from the Defence Ministry’s list of aircraft was among evidence presented to a German court to prove the plane’s ownership, an informed source said yesterday.
‘Other papers submitted included the Standard Certificate of Airworthiness, the aircraft registration and a permit to use private aircraft, all signed by HRH the Crown Prince Maha Vajiralong-korn when the Royal Thai Air Force presented the plane to him in 2007 for his personal use, the source said.’
In fact, the requisite documents were not produced: the court was still unconvinced. And not surprising. Nothing listed here establishes ownership, let alone a transfer of ownership from the RTAF to the CP.
The sworn statement of the director of Civil Aviation is one of the most laughable pieces of proof (but I bet the director wasn’t laughing or smiling when his boss handed him the statement and said ‘sign this’). How would he know who owns the plane? He could swear to the authenticity of a document issued by the Aviation department, but can’t swear to the underlying transactions. It’s like having the head of the Motor Vehicle department swear that I own my car.
Assuming the RTAF previously owned the plane (which no one seems to dispute), they need to present a document showing the transfer of ownership from the RTAF to the CP (signed by an RTAF official who was authorized to transfer ownership of an airplane).
The ‘invisible enemy’? Three invisibles, which come to mind, are honesty, integrity and incorruptibility. As sure as eggs is eggs, a combined attack from these subversive notions would destroy Thailand as we know it overnight.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s corruption record
Vichai, if you want to take on the mantle of discussion panel chairman, you should note that the job comes with expectations of being a] accurate and b] even-handed in your summing up.
I think you should consider whether you’re really ready to leap to b] when you plainly struggle to come anywhere remotely close to a].
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
c101
“Comment section has now been removed from the Bangkok Post.”
Judging by the e-mail notifications* of further comments after mine, there were another eight published before all the comments were removed. I suspect that at least one slipped through that was too near or beyond the mark. Frankly, given the context, I was surprised that the Post even opened the article to comments in the first place. As others have noted, they seem (lately) to operate a blanket “no comments” policy on anything to do with Prayuth, for example.
* They don’t include the content.
Thailand’s corruption record
It seems we don’t need any independent or external assessments of Thailand’s corruption record.
‘The majority of Thai people say a corrupt government is acceptable to them if, in being dishonest, it can also bring prosperity to the people and to the country, according to the results of an Abac Poll released on Wednesday.’
‘Those who voiced no objection to corrupt practices included: 71 per cent of respondents under 20 years of age…’
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/247953/poll-corrupt-govt-acceptable-to-thais
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
johninbkk (96). Yes, Vajiralongkorn wields great power, though it is derived entirely from the political capital accumulated by his father. He seems to be in competition with his mother for the principal role in dissipating it: the one in buying pleasure for himself, and the other by inflicting pain and misery on her country.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Comment section has now been removed from the Bangkok Post.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/247992/court-wants-b846m-to-release-royal-jet
Looks like a sub ed. slipped up (Or maybe not)
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Instead of CP I suggest using the person’s nickname “O”.
For the Bangkok Post, why not just “the Post” just as New Yorkers do when referring to their local rag.
There should be no confusion with the newly established ChiangMai Post which is yet to have an internet presence.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
The Thai media have put on a brave face and done their best to present the court’s latest ruling as a victory for Thailand but they are having a hard time explaining why the court demanded the 20 million euros bank guarantee, if it really found the new ownership documents to be credible. They have also been too coy thus far to even mention the surprise appearance of the plane’s twin.
Since the court said the ownership should be defined according to Thai law, this should be a relatively easy task. There is plenty of Thai legislation that could be helpful here, for example the Foreign Business Act and the Land Code with its accompanying ministerial regulations. In order to establish the Thai nationality of individuals or companies, Commerce Ministry and Land Department officials are required to follow the money trail and find out who paid for the shares and/or land in question. Thus some who simply signs ownership documents but doesn’t pay for the asset in question is regarded as a nominee and not the real owner.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
johninbkk # 96
Power through fear, I fear.
Ricky # 97 You are right, and it is something I have thought about when posting.
Can anyone suggest any alternatives?
The Kachin war in regional perspective
[…] analysis by Ferrelly and others at New Mandala. And here a piece by Zin Linn for Asian Correspondent about the Chinese warnings to the United […]
Htoo Htoo Han the confessor
During 1988 Uprising in Burma two daring Japanese Video-journalists intentionally crossed the Moei (Thoung Yin) River near Myawaddy and got themselves captured by the Burmese Army there. Two were detained for a few days and eventually released back into Thailand, unharmed.
During that time the whole world’s eyes were on Burma and so a large throng of international media was waiting at Mae Sot to interview them on their release. Everyone was so eager to hear the sordid tales of how the two Japanese VJs were brutally interrogated and tortured by the Burmese.
And they were obviously disappointed to see the two were physically and emotionally okay. The two just stated that Burmese had kept them in their fortified camp and fed them well. So they asked the two what they were doing all the time there.
The two VJs answered that while they were in captivity they played volleyball with the friendly Burmese soldiers every afternoon.
I read that story in the back page of Bangkok Post in 1988 while the whole front page displayed the photos of decapitated heads on a table in Rangoon.
The morale of the story is that, due to the propaganda and misinformation campaigns by various anti-Burma groups, the outside world especially the media sees the Burmese as murderers, rapists, and torturers and when the real outcome doesn’t match their expectations they are overly disappointed.
IMHO, Htoo Htoo Han wouldn’t be the first one or the last one of these so-called activists who tried to wear that stereotypical-straight-jacket portraying themselves as the typical Burmese murderer, rapist, and torturer for their personal and/or organizational benefits and also for the benefits of International and Australian media.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Note on Initials. CP is the trademark of Thailand’s biggest agribusiness and one should be careful not to risk defaming CP and perhaps being drowned in insecticide.
BP are the initials of Thailands most thorough and reliable political blogster Bangkok Pundit, so when I see a reference to BP I get excited that I am apout to read something trustworthy and NOT one rung above the dismal level of reporting of The Nation.
Thailand’s corruption record
Vichai,
Can you provide a brief list of Thaksin’s worst corruption backed up with facts from credible sources?
Thailand’s corruption record
Now that we are in agreement that Thaksin indeed is corrupt (to godzilian scale), we have to be disturbed that Thaksin’s Peau Thai Party (founded on corruption to serve Thaksin and only Thaksin) had been reincarnated with a vengeance.
Now we can proceed to ‘moral’ and ‘epistemological’ debates about how a Peau Thai Party deeply corrupted by Thaksin could be expected to serve the Thai people without self-serving distractions and corrupt pursuits.
And we should expect more extra-judicial distractions . . . because such distractions are useful why Thaksin’s left and right hands shall be busy with other more rewarding pursuits.
Anyone?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
#95 JohnH
” Such gifts would demonstrate loyalty (fealty?) and, hopefully, leverage patronage and protection from the CP.”
This implies that the CP wields great power . . . does he?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
A kind of response to BKK lawyer # 93
The 737 was a ‘gift’ to the CP. It’s a simple as that. Such gifts would demonstrate loyalty (fealty?) and, hopefully, leverage patronage and protection from the CP.
I’m also informed that on his frequent trips abroad, all costs are borne by Thai Air.
I’m also lead to believe that a recent inspection of Thai Air accounts by the Auditor General’s office revealed an unaccounted for deficit of some 200 milllion Baht. On pursuing this interesting discrepancy, the CP was mentioned, and the audit team were advised not to raise any more questions on the matter.
This fiasco begs another question: How many other ‘gifts’ have been graciously bestowed on the CP by the military and, indeed, other parties?
Anyway, the BP has an update here:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/247992/court-wants-b846m-to-release-royal-jet
And the comments section is open! Here are two.
Somchai
Discussion 1 : 21/07/2011 at 12:45 AM1
‘Several reports that Robert Amsterdam is involved. Will he get comission from the bank guarantee or a bonus from the fugitive?’
SteveCM
Discussion 3 : 21/07/2011 at 02:43 AM3
‘No, Somchai (#1), not “several reports” – just one internet rumour (since explicitly & categorically denied by Robert Amsterdam). Getting a bit desperate these days, aren’t you?’
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
well check this…. it is a german source.
Mr. Schneider was suing for 30 mio Euro. This has accumulated druing the years no 40 mio Euro. So now for the plane he got a breach of 20 mio.
But now there is another – similar – plane in Munich which obviously doesn’t belong to the CP but to the government.
Here is the German story: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/freising/konfiszierte-boeing-frei-aber-raetsel-um-zweites-thai-flugzeug-am-muenchner-flughafen-1.1122454-2
Basically, for everybody who doesn’t understand German: The question is whether Schneider will abduct this second plane as well to make sure he gets the other 50 %….
We’ll see… hehe …. I think the government of germany that was diplomatically struck by surprise due to the actions of Schneider will not let him do this… again…
Htoo Htoo Han the confessor
I’d be very interested in what Hla Oo has to say.
He should be in his element on this issue.
Tall tales and wild claims go with the territory.
We need his considered opinion.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
JohnH @84 reports
In fact, the requisite documents were not produced: the court was still unconvinced. And not surprising. Nothing listed here establishes ownership, let alone a transfer of ownership from the RTAF to the CP.
The sworn statement of the director of Civil Aviation is one of the most laughable pieces of proof (but I bet the director wasn’t laughing or smiling when his boss handed him the statement and said ‘sign this’). How would he know who owns the plane? He could swear to the authenticity of a document issued by the Aviation department, but can’t swear to the underlying transactions. It’s like having the head of the Motor Vehicle department swear that I own my car.
Assuming the RTAF previously owned the plane (which no one seems to dispute), they need to present a document showing the transfer of ownership from the RTAF to the CP (signed by an RTAF official who was authorized to transfer ownership of an airplane).
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
The ‘invisible enemy’? Three invisibles, which come to mind, are honesty, integrity and incorruptibility. As sure as eggs is eggs, a combined attack from these subversive notions would destroy Thailand as we know it overnight.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
JohnW
Bangkok Post cannot restrain their glee as they report the release of the Strawberry Picker’s plane:
Published: 20/07/2011 at 07:27 PM
Online news:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/247975/royal-jet-released
No mention in their report that it may be the result of an illegal gift by an illegitimate government.