4) Why are Thaksin’s foes not angry with the junta for either botching the investigations, or selecting not to prosecute some crimes? Why is no one upset that Newin, Suriya and others seems to be walking away clean, much like the last round of “unusually wealthy” 15 years ago?

Apologies.

He came into politics because of his business interests and he was never able to separate the two. He thought he could act like a typical Thai tao-kae CEO and push everybody else around, and in the end that meant he was a very bad politician who failed to understand the political environment properly. Back in 2000, I did not see that he was also flawed in other ways which emerged in the violent way he approached the drug problem and the southern problem. Many people, including me, would like to see him being put on trial on these issues.

This, to my mind, comes a lot closer to the real issue many Thais had with Thaksin than the manufactured accusations of the junta. However, it alone is a weak rationale for the overthrow of a democratic regime.

Thaksin did seem willing to push the limits to enhance and preserve his power. I would guess that his close association with Newin Chitchob did more to turn Bangkok against him than corruption or violence. It did me.

However, it is far from clear that Thaksin’s government was more corrupt than that of Banharn or Chavalit. The violence against drug dealers was apparently endorsed wholeheartedly by the King (who in the quote I have seen even cited the number of dead approvingly). Accusing Thaksin of being brutal in the South seems silly in light of the militaries record over several decades and their leading role in the worst episode. Finally, I am skeptical that Thaksin promoted his own business at the expense of the country. Maybe he did, but the argument as presented so far is without substantiation. The loan to Burma seems trivial when one looks at what portion could actually have hit his own pocket.

I don’t think one can avoid the conclusion that the military acted for reasons of their own interest to a much greater extent than they claim.

The reason for my post, however, is to explore a bit more carefully your desire for a trial. I’d love to get answers to these questions from Ajarn Pasuk or any others:
1) What are the specific crimes you would like to see Thaksin on trial for?
2) Why do you think these are being ignored by the junta, who are pursuing crimes that seems much less serious and, perhaps, harder to convict.
3) Why is the junta only pursuing a few very minor cases? We have heard so much about the airport and CTX scanners, why are these now being ignored?
4) Why are Thaksin’s foes not angry with the junta for either botching the investigations? Why is no one that Newin, Suriya and others seems to be walking away clean, much like the last round of “unusually wealthy” 15 years ago?
5) Do you think the lack of progress is because Thaksin cleverly covered everything up, because the investigators are incompetent, because the junta has cut deals with everyone, or because their side was equally involved and the only crimes that Thaksin was involved in that their crony’s weren’t were his own personal dealings (Ratchada house, asset concealment)?

I am not a Thaksin fan or a Thaksin apologist, but everyday, it seems more obvious that the junta is far guiltier of “pushing people around” and not being able to separate their own interest from that of the country. Where is the outrage?