Not qualified to comment

Amsterdam says that the government is “not fully in charge of the country”, and if it tried to remove the Army chief, “it [the government] would be removed militarily without hesitation”. He also says he wished Prayuth could be removed.

How does Amsterdam know this? What are his qualifications to have such expertise about Thailand and Thai politics? He has no academic background in Thai studies, has spent very little time in the country, and was only hired in 2010 as a lawyer for Thaksin. He keeps commenting on the red-shirt occupation of downtown Bangkok, but he wasn’t even here at the time.

If the Army is such a negative factor in Thailand and so anti-poor, why is it consistently voted in surveys as the most popular non-royal institution in Thailand and much more popular than either the political parties or the NGOs cited by Amsterdam? For example, the ABAC poll in November 2011 gave General Prayuth and the Army the ratings as heroes in handling the floods. Prayuth is consistently very popular with the public in polls, and is seen as doing a good job.

Amsterdam does not mention one single thing that Prayuth has done wrong, or why he should be removed as he wishes.

Also, despite Amsterdam's saying the Democrats are “the Army party”, if he knew as much about Thai history as he claims, he would know very well that the Democrats usually have the worst relations with the military, and that there are very few generals in that party. There are many more former police and military figures in the Pheu Thai and non-Democrat parties. The Democrats are made up mostly of professional politicians, academic people and former civil servants.

Thai law prohibits foreigners from interfering in Thai political affairs, and Amsterdam’s claim that his opinions are pro bono rather than intended to benefit his clients is very doubtful. Regarding his statement, “I think the history of American policy in this country is shameful”, again he does not give a single example. Anyway, as he is a Canadian citizen it is not up to the US government to do what he wants, and he should complain to his own government.

Amsterdam is neither knowledgeable nor objective. Being a lawyer for Thaksin, his unsubstantiated opinions should be put in their biased context and entirely discounted. He blurs the lines between his representation of people and his political commentary, but he and his law firm are often quoted as saying that they use blogs and non-traditional means to help their clients.

Wikipedia quotes someone as saying about Amsterdam: “He uses the law but brings many other things to bear on the problem.”

Judge Judy

Chon Buri