Ultimate objectives of PAD

       a. PAD wants to get rid of corruptions. Thaksin, the billionaire civilian dictator, has left Thailand with extensive high level of corruptions and proxy politicians. Having cheated the country while in power, Thaksin hid his corrupt billion of dollars worth of assets overseas. When ousted, Thaksin is subjected to numerous convictions but cowardly fled jail overseas and pull strings on politicians to sabotage his homeland.

       b. PAD protects the Monarchy. Thaksin wants to launder himself through amending the laws with his proxy politicians, while trying to abolish the Monoarchy and make himself a President, that is to cause turmoils and change Thailand from being a "Kingdom" to a "Republic" in stead.

       c. As a permanent cure for Thailand, PAD wants to get real democracy for Thailand. At present it is a fake democracy with bad on-sale politicians.

       d. To achieve all above a, b, c we have to get rid of Thaksin and his proxy politicians and punish them according to the laws.

    Contemporary Thailand

    International Message

    A Letter From a Patriotic Thai to BBC regarding Jonathan Head

    ( Last edit 2009-06-09 )

    Dear Sirs,

    Your Bangkok correspondent, Jonathan Head, has been busy interviewing repeatedly only Mr Jakrapob Penkair and publishing the interviews. As we Thais know, Mr Penkair has been working for Mr Thaksin Shinawatra, the former Prime Minister of Thailand who was ousted by a military coup on September 19, 2006. In the traditional view of the media in the western world, Jakrapopa military coup is taboo and branded as an uncivilized, unacceptable and undemocratic way of seizing power from a legitimate government formed by a proper parliamentary process, regardless of whether such a government has won the elections by vote-buying or election fraud, it is still legitimately a democratic regime to reckon with by Western standards. The landslide victory of the Thai Rak Thai Party in the early 2006 elections was a mirror image of how the late President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines had won his second term presidency in 1969. The world knew well that Marcos was the most fraudulent plunderer of the Philippines. The present Philippine government is still servicing the public debts of $25 billion made by Marcos 15 years ago.

    Thaksin Shinawatra did everything equivalent to plagiary: his regime followed moduses operandi favoured by Marcos including despicable practices based on nepotism, cronyism, despotism, land grabbing, oligarchy, racketeering, human rights violation, extra-judicial killings, bribery, etc. Marcos' terrible deeds which damaged his country to almost the point of destruction are now an undeniable hard fact. We think every real democratic government in the world knows exactly what Thaksin did to Thailand during his term of office. But the media in the West were totally obsessed with their fixed notion that the military coup - no matter how justified its raison d’être - was unacceptable and undemocratic beyond any doubt.

    The first thing the western media wanted to do was to attack the coup-makers and whatever subsequent events. Right and wrong are solely judged by the West's democratic standards. We could not help thinking that the customary journalist attitude in the West is to give the broadside attack on the coup-makers. Editorial pages and columnists would make comments in favour of the ousted regime and its leader to the point that the leader, regardless of the serious damage he had inflicted upon the country or how deeply he was involved in unlawful activities, always had the democratic rights to continue to remain in office. The leader's practices of despotism, nepotism, cronyism, bending of laws and widespread corruption within his regime carried no credibility whatsoever and not worthy of any discussion or analysis. The only key issue for all the media in the West to discuss was that the leader was an elected political leader who had been unfairly removed from power with unconstitutional and undue political process. Bad deeds and serious breaches of ruling ethics and moral values national leaders are supposed to uphold are not valid enough to push the question of undemocratic change of regime over the table. The modern journalistic attitude is in favour of an elected demonic ruler so long as he won the election. That seems to be the gauging standard for rulers. Other standards based on transparency, political ethics and the old-time ruling have become verboten.

    Thaksin did it all as Marcos had done to the Philippines during his 20-year tenure of office. Thaksin and Marcos' styles of government were identical in all aspects. With the backing of the US government and declaration of martial law, Marcos was able to stay in power for an extended period, not possible in true democratic process. Everyone at that time knew only too well that the US government needed the Philippines under Marcos as its Vietnam War ally. And that was why Marcos survived the Philippine people's hostility until he ordered the assassination of former Philippine Senator Benigno 'Ninoy' Aquino Jr. on the tarmac of Manila International Airport upon on his return to the Philippines on August 21, 1983. The rest is history the world knows so well.

    Although Thaksin's grip onto state power did not last as long as that of Marcos' regime, his downfall was due mainly to his own overpowering greed that breached every transparent democratic principle. The September 2006 coup was the sum total of Thaksin's own sins and refusal to act in the frame of morality-based political actions. The fatal errors of Thaksin which increased his political vulnerability were strong criticisms leveled at General Prem Tinsulanonda, the President of the Privy Council. At an assembly of high ranking officials in early 2006, Thaksin, in his opening speech, made a comment that he was disturbed by comments made by a certain influential person, whom he referred to as an "extra-constitutional person". After the controversial speech, there was a public outcry for the precise definition of this extra-constitutional person. Thaksin issued no statement to clarify the meaning of his semantic slur, kept his mouth shut and was totally indifferent to public criticism against him. (Thaksin recently admitted that General Prem actually was on his mind when he referred to the "extra-constitutional person" in his speech.)

    People upset by Thaksin's slur directed at certain people in high places had come to the conclusion that there were possibly only two persons that fitted Thaksin's word play: General Prem and His Majesty the King. Thaksin did not stop making veiled criticisms against persons he regarded as his political nemeses. He made several ambiguous comments about political crises some of which with a hidden tone were related to His Majesty that could be interpreted as bordering on outright l?se majest?. Thaksin's semantic adventure enraged millions of Thai people who have high reverence for their King and hold him very dear to their hearts.

    His Majesty is recognized as possibly the world's most conscientious and hardest working monarch and during his 59-year reign has made extraordinarily tireless contributions to his subjects - regardless of their status, ethnicity or religion. He has been called the world's 'Development King' and has been honoured for the past 30-odd years with many prestigious awards from all over the world for achievements in rural development, water and soil management, occupational enhancement, health, education and fine arts. During the presentation of the United Nations Human Development Lifetime Achievement Award in May, 2006, the then U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Anan, said "Your Majesty's Sufficiency Economy Philosophy - emphasizing moderation, responsible consumption and resilience to external shock - is of great relevance worldwide during these times of rapid globalization."

    No political leader in Thailand with all the power, influence and immense capital at his disposal has ever devoted his entire life to or worked for the well-being of the Thai people at his own expense. Thaksin's rash boldness in his verbal statements related to His Majesty was the last straw that accelerated his downfall. The Thai people, now becoming highly disturbed and losing their tolerance toward Thaksin's unacceptable tactics to cling to power, started calling for the military to act in any way to force him to resign from his PM post. Some military leaders tried to convince Thaksin to yield to the public outcry but to no avail as he seemed to be both thick-headed and thick-skinned. What happened next was what the media in the West considered the gravest undemocratic way to oust the most corrupt politician in power in Thai history. After the September 19, 2006, coup was pronounced complete and successful in removing Thaksin from power, the coup leaders issued a statement shortly citing five reasons behind their decision to assume state power through the so-called undemocratic means as seen by the West. The five reasons briefly summed up here include:

    1) The hard and obvious evidence of the serious split in the Thai society as never before had manifested itself in the country. The split was to such a degree that people became polarized into two opposing groups in all segments of social structure. State officials were clearly separated into anti- and pro-Thaksin factions while many Thai families suffered the atmosphere of disharmony between husbands and wives as well as among siblings. Differences in the political stand among Thai family members made them antagonistic towards one another.

    2) Independent agencies set up to perform checks and balances on political offices and government agencies had become ineffective to the point of being branded as non-performing paper tigers. Certain agencies evidently showed they were under government control. Obviously, the country had lost its ability to counter irregularities and malfeasances in offices found almost in all parts of the public sector.

    3) The new general elections following the dissolution of the House of Representatives by Thaksin had become such an irreparable crisis that they were boycotted by three Opposition parties. That plunged Thailand into an abyss of political uncertainties and the three remaining commissioners of the Election Commission were convicted by the Constitution Court for their breaches of the people's trust and impartiality.

    4) Because of the political impasse, Thailand was unable to find a suitable new government to run the country properly. Several months passed with a care-taker government at the helm but with no mandate to manage the country's affairs. National security was greatly at risk due to the wide-open rift in the Thai society.

    5) There was a tendency towards widespread social disturbances and the high possibility of a bloody clash between anti- and pro-Thaksin groups on September 20, 2006. It is believed that the clash of the two opposing groups in Bangkok involved hundreds of thousands of hyped up people from both sides. This clash could well have led to a wide-scale civil unrest in Bangkok and other places all over Thailand. The only solution was to put a stop to the country's great risk of slipping into a state of anarchy. Any attempt by government security forces to break the clash would have resulted in a massive loss of lives on both sides. The coup leaders which called themselves the Council for National Security had nullified the Constitution in use since 1997 and enacted a new one as a Temporary Constitution until the new Constitution came into effect.

    The CNS also dissolved all independent institutions including the Constitution Court, the Election Commission and the Parliament. An interim government was formed to take over the running of the country and organized whatever was needed to put Thailand back into a real democratic system. In the Foreword of the Temporary Constitution, a statement was given to explain the valid reasons behind the coup as follows:-

    continue below
    "The causes leading to the taking over of administrative power from the government is related to the strong intention to solve the problems caused by several factors including the people's loss of faith in the administration of the country, the gross inefficiency in the control mechanism that was supposed to keep administrative functions in the right direction as well as the failure of the check and balance system to prevent unlawful use of state authority and interference in state agencies since fraudulent practices and misconduct in all branches of government were highly evident. No investigation has ever been conducted to bring the responsible persons to judicial process, thereby not a single wrongdoer has been prosecuted. Such a situation has brought about a threatening climate to the political system and the administration of the country. It has also created a very serious conflict among the Thai people, who have been highly agitated and have become polarized into two major opposing groups. It is abundantly clear that Thai society has completely lost its unity.

    This unprecedented rift in the country's social structure has become, beyond any doubt, a very dangerous social crisis. We have discovered that Thaksin Shinawatra has done everything almost in the identical manner as the late President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines had done to his country. You all at the BBC, we believe, are perfectly well-informed of - or if not, can easily find information on - the late President's regime in the Philippines during the late 60's up to early 80's. Before his downfall, Marcos had faced a strong and well-organized people's opposition and Thaksin, likewise, faced the same fate. What subsequently happened in Bangkok was that during the height of the anti-Thaksin campaign by a vast number of people, peaceful sit-in street and airport demonstrations to show a high degree of discontent against Thaksin were used. The campaign revealed many secrets involving high profile trails of corruption committed by Thaksin and his cronies. The Thai people's movement against Thaksin in Bangkok was almost a replay of what had happened in Manila in 1984-1986.

    With the help of the 21st century explosion of cyberspace communications and satellite television, the Thai people have been quickly awaken to deceptive and ill-intentions of Thai politicians in power. That is why Thaksin's regime could cling to state power for only 6 years before being abruptly ended by the September 19 military coup.

    One of the key reasons for Thaksin's downfall was that, despite his strong support in the military from his hand-picked top commanders who were mostly his classmates in the Pre-cadet Military School's Class 10, the Royal Thai Army C-in-C, General Sonthi Boonyaratakalin, the top Coup leader, was not picked by Thaksin for the top post in the army, although he was well qualified for the post through his step-by-step promotion to attaining a contention position as a credible candidate for the top army post. General Sonthi earned his Army C-in-C post based on his vast experience in key positions within the army and was not in any way indebted to Thaksin as related to his rise to the top army post.

    The regional army commanders supported General Sonthi because in the Thai Armed Forces, following superior orders is a strictly observed military tradition. Being loyal to any politician has never come before their deep-rooted sense of respect for their immediate superiors. Above all, should the political climate suggest a threat against their revered monarch, it is the primary duty of all Thai soldiers to close ranks to protect the King. By official title, HM the King sits on the throne as the traditional High Lord of the Royal Thai Armed Forces and by this royal title, His Majesty is the highest superior officer above all generals in the Thai Armed Forces. All high ranking officers in the Army, the Navy and the Air Force also serve as the King's Guards. They take oaths of loyalty in front of His Majesty during the annual Trooping of the Colours, which usually takes place a few days before the King's Birthday on December 5.

    All of you in Britain have lived in one of the most advanced democratic societies for quite a long time where a military coup would be completely out of the question as an instrument to solve a political cul de sac. The British political system has been separated effectively from the military for hundreds of years. In Britain, the political structure has no room for active top military officers to be involved in any way in the political process. Fortunately, you and those of your older generations have never had any experience living under a foxy and highly corrupt leader like Thaksin. It is rather difficult for people in Britain to understand the frustrations of the well-informed members of the Thai society who have to live under a kind of regime, in which getting rich in whatever dubious way is commendable. There has never been a single statement issued to clarify the controversial issues involving government mega projects and charges of irregularities in government agencies.

    During the last 6 years under the Thaksin administration, not one official of any rank was prosecuted over corruption charges while an independent Anti-graft Commission discovered no strong case of graft in government agencies. Thanks to a complaint filed by a brave group of people with the Constitution Court, the Counter-Corruption Commission was charged with unlawful self-rewarding practices. The Constitution Court accepted the complaint and started its trial procedure. The Court found that the CCC had in esse committed an error in rewarding themselves a salary increase without proper authorization from the Senate as charged in the complaint. The Constitution Court sentenced all the CCC Commissioners to a prison term with a 2-year suspension citing they were all former high ranking government officials with good records. Nonetheless, one important fact emerged: all members of the CCC had been discreetly selected by Thaksin and the CCC Chairman was a former superior of Thaksin's when Thaksin freshly graduated from the Police Academy and was given a job at a police station in inner Bangkok.

    The selection process for the new Commissioners of the CCC was the responsibility of the Thaksin administration. But the selection process never came to pass. Thaksin's regime then enjoyed three years of free-hand governing of the country. The inaction of Thaksin created a void in the country's check and balance system whereby all government officials had no need to fear being investigated by a non-existing independent anti-graft agency. What an opportune period for Thaksin and his cronies to do as they pleased!

    During that time government-controlled media had never displayed any qualms concerning ethical and moral issues. In fact, there was no record of Thaksin himself, while serving as PM, ever championing in public for social values of honesty, a clean way of living, traditional moral codes and the code of good conduct for all to observe. Thaksin rarely took part in parliamentary debates, making only 12 appearances in 6 years. He seemingly was afraid to answer stinging questions from the Opposition. His disregard of parliamentary functions reflects his view that, with an overwhelming majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate while the Speakers of the two Chambers were his own people, it was unnecessary for him to attend any House or Senate sessions.

    Have you in Britain ever seen the House of Commons convening without your Prime Minister sitting at his bench? We think there would be quite a political storm if your Prime Minister intentionally missed just even one or two sessions at the Commons or the Lords.

    In Thailand, there is a distinct difference between the urban people and the poor rural folks who largely have no access to untainted information from the independent and uncorrupt media. Thaksin was and still is - despite his fugitive and seasoned globetrotter status - the King of PR spins. We are all baffled here at the way the media in the West have willingly provided Thaksin with space to launch verbal attacks on everyone he considers his enemies in Thailand. He has openly voiced his contempt of the Thai justice system on a regular basis on TV as well as at press interviews. The western media treat Thaksin better than they do the Dalai Lama, completely disregarding his status as an escaped convict and a coward who took advantage of the Court's leniency to his request to leave Thailand for the Beijing Olympic Games in October 2008 while still on bail over his corruption case. Could such Thai Courts' lenient treatment of him be interpreted as unfair treatment or injustice in the Thai judicial system as Thaksin has been spewing as if it were his favourite mantra?

    Does your representative here in Thailand, Mr. Jonathan Head, and do you - the BBC - not feel that it is the epitome of absurd irony that this convicted fugitive should publicly denigrate the entire Thai judicial system as having no justice while simultaneously suing people who have spoken out against him, hiring Thai and foreign-trained lawyers to use the auspices of the very system he makes a mockery of and despises in Thailand?

    continue below
    Thaksin's cowardice behind his fear of being incarcerated compounded with his opposing view of the court's ruling on his breach of the law governing political office holders related to conflicts of interest were clearly the main reasons for his contempt of the Thai Court. The acceptance of Thaksin by the media in the West including the BBC is beyond our understanding. Are corrupt politicians similar to Thaksin always treated by western media as people who can produce sensational news worth reporting?

    During Thanksin's tenure of office, the rural folks in Thailand were fed news and stories designed for them to respect him as their national leader who really cared for their poverty. The poor folks, particularly in the north and northeastern parts of Thailand had no access to information concerning Thaksin's family's shady deals in large-scale infra-structural development projects such as the graft-ridden Suvarnabhumi International Airport nor did they ever hear the full account of how he had bent the law to smooth the sales of his family's holdings of Shin Corp. shares to Temasek, Singapore Government's investment arm. They had no knowledge whatsoever of how he had used his influence as PM to manipulate top-ranked revenue officials to declare his family's share deals with Temasek a free-tax transaction. This enabled Thaksin's family to save more than 400 million pound sterling. When we say Thaksin's family, you should read as Thaksin himself.

    The September 19, 2006, coup in Thailand was a pleasant surprise for millions of Thai people in urban areas and those in the well-informed middle-class social rank. They welcomed the coup by giving flowers and food to soldiers manning the strategic locations in Bangkok. There were signs of joy and approval of the coup from the people of Bangkok. British people like your Bangkok correspondent Jonathan Head, would find it very difficult to comprehend the pleasure of Bangkokians upon hearing the coup news on the evening of September 19, 2006.

    The coup was a big relief to their deep concerns over Thaksin's political moves that exposed Thailand's national security to immense risks. One secret plan of Thaksin's was to exploit Thailand's resources through a scheme to set up special economic zones for long-term leases of 99 years in different regions of Thailand. Such special economic zones would have had a special status with the full privilege to govern themselves by having their own rules and regulations with policing and judicial systems of their own design. Thai laws and jurisdiction would not apply in these would-be economic zones. The imminent client for such special economic zones was said to be Singapore. We are all well aware that Singapore is desperate in terms of its territorial limits. The special economic zones in Thailand would be the perfect solution to Singapore's dire land scarcity problem. You should also know that Thaksin had already granted Singapore a lease of the RTAF airbase facilities in the Northeast to use as a base for its Fighter Pilot Training School. The airbase had been built and used by the US Air Force for its fighter squadron during the height of the Vietnam War.

    The special economic zones planned by Thaksin before his downfall can be compared to Britain's use of gunboat diplomacy with the last Imperial Chinese Government. The concession for use of Hong Kong and Kowloon for 99 years won by the Britain during Queen Victoria's reign in1898 was a fine example. We think by learning of Thaksin's relatively secretive plot to make parts of Thai soil available to foreign countries for almost a full-century lease should provide you with a more profound understanding of Thaksin. You should also know that Thaksin had prepared to issue a decree appointing himself, by virtue of his capacity as Thailand's Prime Minister, as Head of a Board for the Governance of all economic zones to be established. With such status under his belt, his power would have been close to the old-time Viceroy of India.

    You can imagine quite easily that, if Thaksin's power had not been cut short by the 2006 coup, his next move would have been to make himself a Permanent Prime Minister of Thailand prior to Hugo Chavez of Venezuela's successful campaign to win his mandate from the Venezuelan people to stay in his presidency as long as he so desires. We thank God that Thaksin's economic zone dream was shot down by the General Sonthi Boonyaratakalin-led 2006 Military Coup for it helped to keep Thailand's territorial integrity intact.

    During the Red Shirt rallies in Bangkok before they staged the blockage of the Government House, Thaksin Shinawatra addressed his followers from rural regions in northern and northeastern Thailand with comments attacking the highly respected Statesman General Prem Tinsulanonda, President of His Majesty the King's Privy Council, as the man behind the 2006 Military Coup. He also made a veiled accusation of the coup having the approval of the Royal Palace. He falsely implied on many occasions including interviews he had had with the media in the West that His Majesty had been informed in advance of the coup, and that General Prem had arranged the coup leaders' audience with His Majesty on the night of September 19 and that the General had appeared in a photo released by the Royal Palace to inform the public of HM the King's granting an audience to coup leaders. General Prem recently in his talk with well-wishers from his native Songkla province in the South said that it is his most important duty to be close to His Majesty, to report to or take advice from Him in time of national crises or events that are related to serious political issues. His presence at the Royal Palace had not been arranged to allow the coup leaders to have an audience with His Majesty as was always being implied in Thaksin's interviews with the western media.

    Thaksin formed his Thai Rak Thai [Thais love Thailand] Party which was dissolved for unconstitutional practices in 2007 and 111 of its Party executives were suspended from politics for five years. Another Party - the People's Power - was promptly formed with new puppet executives having strings manipulated by Thaksin. However, this in turn was disbanded in 2008 as its 109 politicians, including those of the Coalition, were again found guilty of another election fraud by the Constitution Court and banned from politics for another five years. With 220 executives "handcuffed" as it were, Thaksin formed yet another Party - Puea Thai [For Thailand] which to this day, remains without an official leader.

    In the subsequent General Election of 2008, the 'permanent' Opposition - the Democrat Party - found themselves winning and managed to form a Coalition Government with the present Premier, Abhisit Vejjajiva, at the helm. This meant that Thaksin's henchmen now had to be in the Opposition - a position totally foreign to them - and found the wind under their wings suddenly snuffed out. Ever since, Thaksin and his Red Shirts have been crying foul, saying that they were robbed by Abhisit in the General Election, which is a false accusation. In fact, Abhisit won the Parliamentary vote fairly and transparently by beating Thaksin's Puea Thai's candidate for the Premiership.

    The most important aim for Thaksin is for his cronies to pressure PM Abhisit to change certain provisions in the Constitution to benefit only Thaksin, and lay the foundation for his total exoneration and eventual return to power. This would be in the form of granting an amnesty to all banned politicians "for the sake of peace in the country." This, of course, is unacceptable and would be tantamount to allowing politicians to repeatedly commit offences and later have their corrupt deeds whitewashed for the "sake of keeping the peace". Some Thais, however, strongly feel that corrupt politicians - when caught and convicted - should by right be even more severely punished than the ordinary layman. Politicians have the direct responsibility to serve the people under their duties as guided by the constitution and know full well the risks and penalty involved should provisions to suppress vote-buying be violated, so why should they be howling for amnesty now?

    In his video link talks almost on a daily basis to address his cult followers, Thaksin said his return to Thailand from his overseas hiding places would be possible in two ways. One would be the grant of safe passage for him to return by HM the King. The other would be by the power of his followers in a show of a massive people's uprising from which the present PM Abhisit Vejjajiva administration would hopefully be toppled.

    During the second phase of the 2009 14th ASEAN Summit planned to include talks (concerning the lives of over 3,500 million people all over Asia) with 6 major industrialized countries in the Asia-Pacific region on Saturday, April 11, hundreds of Thaksin's red-shirt cult followers invaded the Royal Cliff Beach Resort Hotel, the venue of the Asean Summit, in Pattaya, the well-known seaside resort on Thailand's eastern seaboard. The mêlée ensued - which inflicted over 10 million baht's worth of damaged property - caused the Summit to be suspended and sent 16 Heads of State as well as Heads of certain international organizations, including the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, scurrying for their lives. Thanks to the quick thinking of Prime Minister Abhisit, all participants of the Summit were safely evacuated from the venue and flown out from the nearby Thai Navy's airbase at U-tapao, approximately 90 km. from Pattaya.

    continue below

    The world is now well aware that Thaksin's constant instigations and support of the red-shirted street riots in Bangkok during the Thai New Year of April 13 and 14 were brought to an end with non-violent crowd control tactics through the deployment of army personnel without any serious injury or loss of a single life on the side of the red shirt rioters by grace of PM Abhisit Vejjajiva's strong assertion and belief of non-violent handling of the riots. But he himself had been mobbed by the red-shirted thugs in Pattaya on the way back to Bangkok with his Deputy PM, Mr. Sutep Thuagsubun. Again, on Saturday, April 11, after his announcement of the State of Emergency in Bangkok and its surrounding provinces, Mr. Abhisit, his Deputy PM, his Minister of Defence, General Pravit Wongsuwan and the PM's Office Secretary, Mr Nipon Prompun, were savagely attacked by an unruly red-shirted mob at the Ministry of Interior where he was meeting with some members of his Cabinet to consider the possible effects of the State of Emergency. The encounter with the ferocious assaults and drunkenness of the mindless red shirted hoodlum-like demonstrators as shown on television, barely allowed Mr. Abhisit, Mr. Sutep and Mr. Niphon to escape with their lives. Anyone seeing the video clips of the red-shirted attacks on Thailand's top political leaders might wonder how possible it was that such violence could have been allowed to manifest itself so brutally.

    We hope that by carefully reading this letter you would be able to think straight and unbiasedly and come to the conclusion that Thaksin has done everything to save his own skin with no concern for what happens to Thailand. You at the BBC must also know that just before the planned red-shirted street riots and destruction in Pattaya and Bangkok (at Thaksin's nightly urgings through phone-ins and video-links for the Red Shirts to gather all their wives and children together and descend upon Bangkok), Thaksin's own family members, including his ex-wife (by pretentious divorce) and all their three children as well as Thaksin's brothers and sisters, surreptitiously left Thailand with an enormous amount of baggage by air to different destinations.

    At the time of the writing of this letter, Thaksin and his family members are now happily ensconced at his luxurious Dubai residence. Why did Thaksin's family decide to leave Bangkok to seek refuge in Dubai just prior to the bold red-shirted declaration of their uprising? The answer is simple: they were expecting Bangkok to plunge into civil chaos and bloody clashes in the streets would occur as had been instigated by Thaksin. But his plan to return to Bangkok in a triumphant procession as the supreme red-shirted leader had been just a pipe dream. Thaksin's cloud nine expectations for the success of bringing PM Abhisit to his knees failed to materialize because of Mr.Abhisit's effective non-violent dispersal of hostile demonstrators which set a fine example for the world to see. He has demonstrated to the world that non-violent tactics in subduing rioters in the streets is validly possible.

    Incidentally, Jakrapob Penkair, one of Thaksin's most ardent henchmen, has proved himself a person who can easily sell his soul to any devil just for a fat cash reward and a baseless promise to make him an important figure in Thaksin's new administration. JakrapopJakrapob has been Thaksin's mouthpiece to whitewash the latter's image as he once served in Thaksin's administration before the coup. Jakrapob has evaded a police arrest warrant from Thailand to an undisclosed hiding place, possibly on nearby foreign soil. He was one of the red-shirted mob's core leaders who vehemently and vulgarly attacked Gen. Prem and PM Abhisit. It is beyond our comprehension why he is so fluent in such crude language since he is a well-educated son of a middle-class family. His father was a senior ranked RTAF officer who lived a comfortable life. It is incredible that people like him could be so easily hooked to Thaksin's power play. Well, high education is not always a guiding light for a man to choose a decent man to associate with!

    Jakrapob's talks with your Bangkok-based correspondent, Jonathan Head, and correspondents of other media, about the planned armed uprising by Thaksin's rural supporters aimed at toppling the Abhisit administration reflects his political ambitions. The more he talks about the armed struggle against the present government, the deeper the grave Jakrapob digs for himself. The hatred Jakrapob holds against PM Abhisit Vejjajiva is obvious. On the many occasions that he took to the red-shirt rally stage, he never missed his cue in bombarding PM Abhisit with vulgar rhetoric, not to mention his role in attacking General Prem in front of the latter's official residence in Bangkok, using unbelievably crude language as if it were his natural mother tongue. We have observed a lot of Hyde Park-style political rhetoric in Bangkok but never have we heard such vulgarity as used by Jakrapob to criticize General Prem and PM Abhisit. We are totally at a loss to comprehend why BBC's Jonathan Head should give Jakrapob so much credit during far too many "exclusive" interviews. Do you still think Thaksin is a credible ex-PM of Thailand who has suffered from an unfair and undemocratic military coup that he supposedly did not deserve?

    Yours faithfully,

    The Protectors of Thailand

CLICK for the dictator Thaksin