retarius

Just finished watching the Red's VCD on the 10th April events.

Will it's gross to watch, couple of things I noticed.

1. There's only about 7 minutes of original footage, mainly from parliament, day-time scenes and just text on a colored background spread over the course of 25 minutes in total.

2. Actual footage from the 10th April events count for about 1.5 minutes out of this 7 minutes.

3. Rest of the CD is repeat after repeat after repeat with sometimes scenes cleverly looped to make it look like a scene of 2 minutes where it's actually only 10 seconds worth of material. There are also many scenes that are used in various different scenarios. They have maybe one or two scenes from military that are used over and over again at the end of various different 'scenes' to show military shooting at different locations...

The best shot however I find is where they show the red's the next day, mourning over their fallen comrades.

It's somewhere around the 13.50 mark.

Why is this the best shot?

While I deplore all violence and absolutely mourn all victims of this situation so far, looking at that scene did make me wonder.

From the 14 Picture Frames on the table, there is only 1 frame with a 'normal' picture of the deceased person.

All the other frames contain Police File Mug Shots...!

13 Former criminals died that night.

Gives you something to think about.

Normal people did not die out there because they stay out of trouble, except for some unlucky people that got into the cross fire and of course the soldiers that where sent into battle for which I have the greatest respect, given that they had only received half the mandate necessary to clean this up.

People looking for trouble, according to those pictures, did die that night.

Sorry for being so cold-hearted, but it puts a slightly different perspective on things I think.

In other words the army were able to shoot only villains...or the whole of the red shirt demonstration are criminals?

Don't be silly, the 'police file mugshots' are the pictures from their ID cards...everybody with a Thai ID has a picture looking like this....

It seems that in Thai politics people are usually acting out of personal interest rather than national interest. With the amount of corruption people are always struggling to get their share. Why would anyone buy votes if there wasn't money to be made from being in office? I agree that the constitution should be fixed so that all Thais can receive good government and representation. The problem is finding people who will do it without attempting to give an advantage to their own side. I think getting red Thais and Yellow Thais in one room and expecting them to draft a neutral document is wishful thinking.

You raise interesting and important points....last year in the local elections in my town here in Isan the incumbent was offering 500 Baht to voters...he was challenged by a rather attractive lady who ran a huge campaign, her picture was everywhere and there were almost non-stop taxis blaring out her message for one month before the election, she offered 1000 baht to voters...strangely, the incumbent won hands down...apparently lots of folk went to collet the 1000 baht from the nice lady but then voted for the incumbent...but she must have spent an enormous amount of money, and clearly she was expecting to get all of her campaign money back with interest if she had won...based on our old friend corruption...on this occasion the increased donation didn't work...maybe the poor people are not that stupid?

I also agree with the notion of a revised constitution...clearly whoever drafts the constitution will stack it towards the party that they favor....the army wrote the present constitution to try to prevent Thaksin-policy supporters from gaining power; they even made it a criminal offense, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, to criticize or campaign against the constitution before the referendum; nevertheless the Thaksin-policy supporters won the most seats presumably because a simple look around will show you that there are a lot more poor people in Thailand who like pro-poor policies than there are rich folk driving their Benzes to shop at Ratchprasong...the World Bank report on Thailand in 2006 makes the point that Thaksin-policies halved the poverty rate in Thailand in 5 years, so no wonder he was popular with poor people, and no wonder people turned a blind eye to his corrupt practices, especially as the y think that all politicians are corrupt...

Like you I do not think it is possible to rewrite the constitution in a way that will be acceptable to both the elite and the poor...and rigging the vote to make one pass simply deprives it of legitimacy again....

For me the only way is via some body outside of the country, the UN or some such body, who would construct a constitution perceived as fair by the UN in an open vote, and then have UN monitored elections...but this path forward will not be acceptable to the elite and so is a non starter...which means impasse...

Even if the red shirts are broken at Ratchaprasong, the grievances will still be here and will go underground, with disastrous consequences, in my opinion....

I fear that the solution will come when life here becomes intolerable enough, and the prizes resulting from gaining power are reduced to the extent that people become prepared to make compromises....and sadly this seems a long way off...

The red shirt terrorist say they are a democratic party and if the majority of the people do not believe them, they will bomb the majority until they do.

I'm guessing you have a PhD in political science and no tattoos?

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obvious that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

Good ideas...thank you

The article said: It could be said that our democracy is just a “knock-off” of the British model and superficially revolves around an electoral process, while there is still the lack of a profound understanding of democratic principles including duties and responsibilities of citizens in addition to their fundamental rights.

This is part of the problem, Thais not understanding their personal responsiblity of the democratic process. Yes, protesting freely is part of democracy, but you still have to follow the ordances and guidelines for a demonstration; next voting "smart" is another responsibility of a citizen which means you do not vote for a candidate because you are "bribed". I can remember taking civic classes when I was in school which educated me what a democracy was. I wonder if the Thai schools teach what responsibilities one has living in a democracy and how it works? (I doubt it)

(After living in 5 different countries) I sometimes think a "developing" country is not ready for a "true" democracy, but it takes a firm hand to get things on the right track.(which means a strong leader wanting the best for his country-not a "thug") Look at Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore...these countries did not start as a democracy... Today they have their own "form" of democracy. I think as citizens of a country becomes more affluent and educated, then a "true" democracy can prosper. Unlike my American friends back home, I truly feel China some day will a "democracy" as it becomes developed. It cannot happen over night (look at what happened to Russia).

Toenail,

I think that the problem is less a misunderstanding of democracy, and more a general lack of respect for the law...if the rich and powerful elite are seen to be above the law, why would the poor respect it? For laws to be seen to be legitimate they have be seen to apply to everybody and to be impartial applied and enforced...in Thailand the law seems to be applied selectively; the judiciary do not give the appearance of impartiality; and enforcement is spotty at best....

I keep in touch with the UK/US press as well as Al Jazeera (in my opinion the best unbiased news source) and some of the Asian publications like New Mandala....it's pretty clear that Thailand isn't exactly high on the list of priorities or newsworthiness in much of the world....the UK is absorbed with the upcoming election, the UK is absorbed with itself, EU is absorbed with Greece's financial meltdown...the Guardian has had a couple of blogs on the subject and one editorial but neither raised much in the way of comments...ditto for the Independent....the Times had an article this week...and the Economist has had a couple of articles...all of the articles/editorials/blogs I read were broadly sympathetic to the idea of elections...what I've been surprised at is the issue of free speech, the world doesn't seem to be aware that all red supporting media have been closed down, but they are not buying into the yellow government propaganda....

The best article by far is in the New Mandala about the Royal Thai Army...it's a well researched article written by people who know something of the complexities of the military relationships...and beats hands down all the simplistic drivel from the yellow blind posters on TVF....

Anyone knows if Kaosan rd is OK to go to?

I plan on going there this evening by taxi from Bangkapi.

There are no protests in the area, was there 2 days ago, pretty much business as usual.

thanks

I just wonder if there are any road blocks on the way there

I just got back from a couple of nights in Bangkok...given all the hysterical press coverage about violence, I stayed in PinKlao and took a taxi to Khaosan on Thursday evening...the crowd was a bit thin...but no violence apart from a couple of farangs who couldn't hold their beer (according to the Nation, the redshirts have been using this as a new tactic to incite violence; they engage some farangs and buy them huge quantities of beer in the hope that they will cause mayhem...CRES is considering making the buying of drinks for anyone else a crime) ...

I was hoping to catch a glimpse of these mythical "terrorists" that the Nation says have horns growing out of their heads and breathe fire....but they must have been causing mayhem somewhere else...

Seriously, take sensible precautions, but it seems safe and quiet enough....

....maybe an unimpressed gourmand?....maybe a more appropriate response would to have avoided eating there?

Or maybe a clumsy attempt to tempt the US to come and protect their strategic interests?

As in all of these incidents I wonder cui bono? as the Latins used to say....

Maybe the US didn't protest against the shutting down of red TV because they saw the lies and incitement to violence shown on there every day.

Maybe the US only talked about a peaceful resolution because they know that the army didn't "mow down their protesting citizens" and know of the violence coming from the red side.

Maybe the US aren't biased, and the Thai government is not doing the wrong thing.

And maybe you just get your 'news' from the Nation....why don't you take a course in critical thinking?

I don't get my information only from the Nation. There are many different views discussed on TVF and many different news sources that everyone refers to, including red biased sources.

If you're of the opinion that the red leaders haven't incited violence and destruction, or if you're of the opininion that the army "mowed down" innocent unarmed protestors, then maybe you should do a bit more investigation.

Hmmmmm joined on 25th April 2010....4 days ago....69 posts already...what is going on here?

I have wondered about the silence of the US...usually the US is so vocal when it comes to free speech and democracy around the world; in my view, often the comment is appropriate and fair, but sometimes it is self serving hypocrisy to cover some less than excellent behavior on their part.

Being an American citizen I do read the US press...if you had read the thousands of column inches given to Chavez' closure of one anti-government TV station, you would have thought that thewhole Western hemisphere was about to collapse...why the deafening silence when Abhisit closes down all anti-government TV stations, web-sits and radio stations here in Thailand?

Or when armies mow down their protesting citizens there is usually some statement from the US condemning the act (unless it's Israel doing the mowing down, of course) since the US the military doesn't intervene in civil matters, which are handled by the police force...in this case, again nothing but a bland statement calling for a peaceful solution.

Another double standard if you like, showing you that Thailand is not the only country with double standards.

Personally, I think that the US are just waiting to see who 'wins' and then resume the relationship...incidentally the silence speaks volumes about the importance of Thailand to the US....ie I guess there're really not that interested in trying to solve another insoluble dispute on top of Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine....

Maybe the US didn't protest against the shutting down of red TV because they saw the lies and incitement to violence shown on there every day.

Maybe the US only talked about a peaceful resolution because they know that the army didn't "mow down their protesting citizens" and know of the violence coming from the red side.

Maybe the US aren't biased, and the Thai government is not doing the wrong thing.

And maybe you just get your 'news' from the Nation....why don't you take a course in critical thinking?

I have wondered about the silence of the US...usually the US is so vocal when it comes to free speech and democracy around the world; in my view, often the comment is appropriate and fair, but sometimes it is self serving hypocrisy to cover some less than excellent behavior on their part.

Being an American citizen I do read the US press...if you had read the thousands of column inches given to Chavez' closure of one anti-government TV station, you would have thought that thewhole Western hemisphere was about to collapse...why the deafening silence when Abhisit closes down all anti-government TV stations, web-sits and radio stations here in Thailand?

Or when armies mow down their protesting citizens there is usually some statement from the US condemning the act (unless it's Israel doing the mowing down, of course) since the US the military doesn't intervene in civil matters, which are handled by the police force...in this case, again nothing but a bland statement calling for a peaceful solution.

Another double standard if you like, showing you that Thailand is not the only country with double standards.

Personally, I think that the US are just waiting to see who 'wins' and then resume the relationship...incidentally the silence speaks volumes about the importance of Thailand to the US....ie I guess there're really not that interested in trying to solve another insoluble dispute on top of Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine....

Good Night and thanks for putting a smile and my face ... still looking for that one red support who actually is willing to be reasonable and examine facts such as the ones that come right out of there leaders mouth instead of making up things and acting as if this is what the red movement believes in but is keeping it secret from the rest of Thailand and the world

This really isn't so much of a stretch as you're making it, so just hear me out. This is the progression of events for many red shirts:

1. For a long time, the powerful institutions of Thailand were untouchable. Although peoples' lives were hard, they suffered from all of the social ills that accompany poverty, and their areas saw few of the modern benefits and accumulation of wealth which were starting to come to Bangkok, this was simply a fact of life. It was not something that they thought could be changed.

2. Thaksin was the first politician to see the political potential of the region as a major voting block, and so was the first to really awaken them to the benefits of political participation. Yes, he was doing it to serve his own ends. Yes, there was massive corruption and vote buying. But his programs did start to improve the lives of the people of the provinces. So much so, in fact, that Thaksin's growing power became a real threat to the long-established powers that had ruled the country for so long.

3. With the coup and the subsequent political maneuvering, Thaksin's supporters were, for all intents and purposes, cut out of the political process once again. The movements which had sprung up in opposition to Thaksin sought not to topple him at the ballot box, but rather to limit the democratic power of the areas which had elected him because the people who lived there were obviously too stupid to do what was right for the country, and therefore had to be disenfranchised. This condescending sentiment was not lost on the people it was directed against.

4. After the rewriting of the constitution by the military and after the courts threw out Samak, dissolved the TRT party and with it Somchai's government, and finally made the decision to confiscate Thaksin's frozen assets without ever having brought any charges against the leaders of the airport seizure, it was clear to the red shirts that they'd lost their voice in the government and with it the political power they'd had their first taste of under Thaksin's government. The people upcountry are fully aware of these events, and each successive setback for them has brought them closer to the current populist fervor and their stubborn defiance of forces that, in pre-Thaksin times, they would have never dared to tangle with.

excellent post...thank you...some folks are simply blinded by their hatred of Thaksin

I think you have an overly active imagination or, at the very least, a great sense of hyperbole.

A little bit more convincing than anecdotes, from 2006

Thaksin May Reap From Pro-poor Policies

By Marwaan Macan-Markar

BANGKOK, Mar 10, 2006 (IPS) - Chinda Pintakan's graduation from the bottom of Thailand's social pecking order, as a poor rural farmer, to a step higher, as a waitress in a restaurant, has brought with it material benefits that have given her hope to believe that more is possible.

The 43-year-old mother of two sons has been enjoying an income of over 7,000 baht (175 US dollars) every month, on average, for the past five years. Prior to 2001, when she was part of her farming community in the village of Pong Samaki, some 30 kilometers beyond this northern Thai city, she brought home about 4,500 baht (112 dollars) per month.

For Chinda, as with the other members of her community who are earning better as rice farmers, there is little confusion about who has helped transform their lives. It is Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, she says. ''He gave a lot of opportunities for the poor people with his new programmes.''

Such praise for Thaksin - heading a caretaker government after a February decision to call for a snap parliamentary election on Apr. 2 -is also echoed by others living beyond Chinda's village of 200 families.

Sakorn Uwaiporn is typical. This 40-year-old woman, who earns a living as a food vendor near one of the entrances of the ancient fort that wraps a part of Chiang Mai, talks of other benefits that came after Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thai - TRT) party triumphed at the January 2001 elections.

''It is easier for us to get loans. We don't have to go to the loan sharks,'' she says. ''The 30 baht health scheme (where Thais can get treatment for any ailment by paying 30 baht (0.75 cents) per hospital visit) is better for us than before.''

The endorsement of Thaksin's policies by these two women, who voted for the TRT at the January 2001 and February 2005 polls, is in stark contrast to the hostility the premier has been facing for weeks by demonstrators on the streets of Bangkok. Even other members of the rural poor who live in and around Chiang Mai offer views in support of the TRT's pro-poor policies that the capital's protesters, who are largely middle and upper-middle class, pooh-pooh as ''vote buying measures.''

What they have exposed, consequently, are political faultlines in this South-east Asian country that are pitting the rural poor, who make up a majority of the country's 64 million population, against sections of the richer populace from Bangkok and other urban centres.

It is a divide, say analysts, that mirrors the new political equations introduced to Thailand following the TRT's thumping electoral victories in 2001 and 2005 polls. Most noticeable among them being an aggressive set of policies to help the poor that has succeeded, after five years, in exposing how inadequate the previous means by which the elites and leaders of political parties dealt with the underclass.

''There is no comparison on pro-poor policies between the Thai Rak Thai and the parties in government before 2001,'' Giles Ungpakorn, political scientist at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, told IPS. ''The opposition Democrat Party has been in government many times before but their policies lacked sympathy for the poor.''

''Thaksin has redrawn the political map by offering policies to help the poor improve financially than the traditional vote buying technique of the other political parties before - just handing out only cash,'' he added. ''Most of the anti-government demonstrators and the opposition parties treat the poor with contempt.''

Cheanchom Thongjen, an economist at the World Bank, offers a similar comparison. ''The Thaksin government's policies to help the rural and urban poor were demand driven. They were in response to what the poor had identified as their priorities,'' she said in an interview. ''The governments before had a top-down approach, supplying the poor with assistance that they thought the poor needed.''

And now, as Thaksin, a billionaire tycoon before becoming premier, faces calls by Bangkok's anti-government demonstrators to resign on charges of alleged corruption, his family profiting from a 1.8 billion dollar deal and stamping down on the media and his critics, his political investments appear to be paying off.

The key planks of his agenda to lift the quality of life of the country's underclass have been: declaring a three-year freeze on their debts, offering one million bahts (25,000 dollars) to each of Thailand's 70,000 villages to create small businesses, the 30 baht health care programme and a housing project for the poor.

An initiative to boost rural economies has also come in the form of a one-village-one product programme (popularly known as OTOP), where by the government has offered to help cottage industries with research and development and marketing the products.

The 36,000 OTOP groups across the country, with each having between 30 to 3,000 people per group, have seen incomes rise over the past four years, says Sakda Siridechakul, president of Chiang Mai's OTOP association. ''OTOP has helped incomes to be spread to many people in the villages. It has given people producing handicrafts to feel they can be part of the global economy.''

All this week, in fact, Sakda has been leading other supporters of OTOP and, by extension, Thaksin, to gather outside one of the gates of Chiang Mai's old fort walls to paint cloth banners in support of the government. ''The Prime Minister is a smart person and stupid people want to attack him,'' said one of the 125 banners painted on Thursday evening.

Research by the World Bank reflects this sense of achievement at the grassroots. Four years after the TRT was first voted to power, Thais living in poverty had dropped to 7.08 million people from the 13 million in 2000.

Agriculture incomes in the poorest section of the country, the northeast, had risen by 40 percent during the same four-year period, added the Bank's 2005 'Thailand Economic Monitor.'

''It is a record that the anti-Thaksin demonstrators and the opposition parties have no answer to,'' says Giles. ''This is one reason why they are campaigning to boycott the April elections.''

Such anti-government sentiments have little appeal for women like Chinda, who says, ''People in my village will be voting for the Thai Rak Thai. We must keep Thaksin as the prime minister.'' (END)

Thanks for this...it matches what I observed in my own town and surrounding villages here in Isan....life improved dramatically for a few years since when I first came in 2001 when the place was really dirt poor...life got better until the coup in 2006...to be honest life hasn't gotten worse, but the improvement seems to have stopped....we have some shameful sights...one example is a half-built complex of about 1500 low income homes...known locally as Thaksin village...the idea was that instead of living in corrugated iron shacks the poor could rent-to buy...as I say the village is half built and totally unusable but instead of finishing it and providing homes for poor people the elite decided that the money would be better off in their pockets....

I have to confess, I'm stunned by this article...a fair, sensible and balanced article coming from the Nation...what is the world coming to?

We have no reliable information about this conflict here in Thailand...nothing but slanted opinions, outright lies and propaganda to read...I've tried to put below what I know as fact and some of the things that I believe.

The reds have a manifesto, it's pretty clear what they want..it's expressed simply and it seems perfectly reasonable...they want a vote and some representation in government...not too much to ask for in my opinion...but some folk on here who claim to have some sort of divine insider knowledge...claiming that they somehow know that the reds want all sorts of other things as well, things that are desperately unpopular, such as the nonsense about weakening of the monarchy....it seems to me that the claimers of the divine inside knowledge are simply parroting yellow shirt, Democrat lies...and it's getting really tedious. The other tedious divine knowledge is all the guff about Thaksin....you farangs out there do not know anything at all about Thaksin's role, you have no privileged information and again are just parroting yellow shirt lies....

Here is what I know and don't know:

I don't know whether Abhisit is corrupt...pretty much every other politician seems to be...and he was deputy chairman of the democrats when a huge illegal donation was made to them...what is the saying about smoke and fire?

I do know Abhisit is incompetent and in my opinion he has blood on his hands from the April 10th massacre...

I also know that Abhisit tells lies...he said on April 10th that the troops had no live ammo (and then the next day the army asked for 6000 live rounds back)....for god's sake the man can't even lie competently....lying is essential in politics and Abhisit should resign on the grounds of total incompetence...

I don't know who the men in black are...and I don't believe that anyone else on this board knows either, nor do they know what the agenda of the men in black is...

I don't know who put up the posters on Silom calling for Thaksin as president....whoever did it knew that this would be desperately unpopular with the masses and would therefore discredit the reds...thus I think it was done by Yellow shirts or government (particualrly as Silom was crawling with army when the posters were put up)...

Abhisit is probably corrupt, I agree. Just less so than most others.

Abhisit does seem to be handling this situation pretty incompetently. Blood on his hands?????? I think probably not, just a total balls up and playing into the hands of what the red leaders wanted.

Abhisit tells lies.......well, show me someone that doesn't. His lies seem smaller than redshirt lies and at least he is honest enough to correct them - but yes, there are lies.

The men in black are Seh Daeng's army. Everyone knows that, he told us. Photographic and video evidence tells us. The noodle lady told me, even the soi dogs are talking about it.

The posters for president Thaksin were almost certainly someone out to discredit him, well done!

I will add some facts of my own.

Redshirt guards are armed and have been from the first days of the protest - I have seen this with my own eyes on numerous occasions.

The only section of society that hasn't been the victim of a grenade attack are the redshirts. Politicians, the public, the army, banks, shopping centres anothers have all received grenade attacks but not the reds. Hmmmmmmmm.

Chavalit wrecked the Thai economy in 1997 and we don't want him back.

Parliament is composed of elected MPs representing consituencies and those that were elected by redshirts are there to represent them. PT is still the single biggest party even after those members who were cheating were banned, but they lost the confidence of their coalition partners and some of their own members who joined the democrats to form a perfectly legal government in the same way governments have always been formed in Thailand "democracy" was introduced.

Thaksin has the blood of 2500 "drug dealers", 23 environmental campaigners, a significant number of people in the south and one of Thailand's leading Human Rights Lawyers on his hands.

Redshirts have created an atmosphere of fear amongst people who don't agree with them at their checkpoints.

Redshirts break the law with impunity and then repeatedly say it was someone else trying to make them look bad.

Redshirts repeatedly threaten an escalation in violence.

Redshirts threatened to assault me when I tried to discuss issues that could help the poor with them.

Redshirt guards drew a gun on me at Rachaprasong when I refused to let them search me. Obviously my refusal was immediately withdrawn.

Yellowshirt leaders should also be held to account for their actions, although shutting down an airport for a week pales into insignificance compared to what we are dealing with now.

Multicoloured protestors wave Thai flags, praise the King, sing patriotic songs, curse Thaksin and other redshirt leaders. They disrupt the traffic a bit but go home after a few hours of shouting and are warned by their leaders not to go and confront redshirts. They don't create roadblocks, they don't shoot people, they are not armed, they don't demand they get more sweeties than you or they are starting a civil war, they don't have an army, they don't make reporters wear an armband with their own aims printed on them, they want peace and quiet.

Hopefully, Chavalit, Thaksin and all the other redshirt criminals will end up in a stinking cell together or worse.

(I didn't write that last bit, it was a "fake me", someone else trying to discredit me, perhaps even my third hand.)

Thanks for your answer...I know we don;t agree but it's nice to have soemthing better than a one-liner "your (sic) a moron" answer....you raise some good points

I agree and I do not care for the arms that the red-shirts bear...it is a provocation and they clearly shouldn't be allowed to have them...I will note that as an eyewitness at the yellow shirt party in Suvarnabhumi, they were also armed to the teeth, and it was scary...I saw with my own eyes guns, knives, machetes, baseball-bats, golf clubs and other weapons..the yellow shirts considered themselves vulnerable to attack from the lawful authorities and took measures to defend themselves...it worked since they were not attacked and despite the chaos they caused and so there was no bloodshed...what I fail to understand is the army moving on the redshirts when they absolutely knew that blood would be shed...the protest before that was [eaceful,if inconvenient.

The grenade thing worries me....I don't know who is throwing them and there is no reliable information to be had from the English language sources in Thailand....as background, shortly after April 10th a lot of the extremely knowledgeable, totally unbiased, people here on Thai Visa were saying that the black shirts killed their own people to create the bloodbath as evidently these folks didn't commit suicide and the government's line was that it couldn't have been the army, because they had no live ammo...thus it had to be the black shirts killing their own people as a ritual sacrifice to get sympathy...this sort of talk sets alarm bells ringing in my suspicious mind...I'm now confused as to why they wouldn't be doing the same thing now with grenades if it buys sympathy...also setting off 45 or so grenades since March has caused remarkably few actual casualties (other than SalaDaeng)...they seem to go off at 3am in front of a deserted bank...thus I'm a bit confused about the true aims of these grenade attacks....

There was a lot of talk a from the same group of enlightened people on here that the grenades that hit SalaDaeng were fired from behind red lines in Lumpini Park...when someone pointed out (a rather stupid person, to be sure) that the shots were all uncannily accurate if shot from such a distance, a number of military types instantly rebutted the charge saying that from 50 to 100 meters a grenade can be fired with good accuracy....but it's much more than 100 meters from behind the red lines to SalaDaeng, so is it possible that the grenades were fired from somewhere else? Obviously if you are a yellow shirt you don;t need to ask questions like this....it's a bit like a Colombo episode where the prosecutor knows he;s got the killer but them Colombo asks an awkward question....

Thaksin love him or hate him put electricity on my mother-in-laws road...many other prime ministers before could have done this...after all the sub-station is only a couple of miles away and the soi has about 1000 people living on it, but they somehow the others couldn't find the funds to manage it...she's now an avid Thaksin fan, and nothing antone will say will change her mind...most of the Thais I speak to aren't all that horrified about the killing of the drug dealers (although I'm not a a fan)...but there are hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions, like my mother in law that benefited in small but meaningful ways from Thaksin's rule...

I'm sorry that you have been personally harrassed...this might be because you live or work in Bangkok...I live in Isan and it is very peaceful here...the whole point of political protest is to cause inconvenience to powerful people, which is why the protest is taking place where the elite live. work and play and not in Khon Kaen or Udon Thani....

I don't know if you know this but there is a state of emergency in Bangkok prohibiting groups of more than 5 people (a motorcycle's worth) of gathering together...thus the good,well intentioned multi-coloreds are actually breaking the law...THEY ARE LAWBREAKERS...but since they are sponsored by the yellows they can do so with impunity...what do you think would happen if the army started shooting rubber bullets at them? Now go back a few weeks the red protest was peaceful, it was like a festival, until the army showed up to clear them out..protesting peacefully is really easy if the army doesn't threaten you with violence...

I know nothing about Mr Chalavit's record, but if he was less effective than Abhisit then I'm glad he wasn't in power, however I will observe that it is a little unfair to blame him for personally wrecking the economy when the whole of SE Asia melted down due to a financial crisis...a reasonable person might conclude that this was a multi country, indeed a global problem...

I'm off to bed...pissed as usual....

And all this on the day after the government played the equivalent of the race card...(dramatic music, drums rolling)... it's all a big plot to overthrow the monarchy...involving just about every single one person whose politics are not the same as those making the accusations, including the whole of the opposition party (see the big pie chart, afraid I don't have a link but it is from BPundit). At least it got a positive that he was not jumping ship yet, or was he, from that white than white Ghandi figure himself, Khun Newin Chidchob.

And today we have the grenades pulled out the old store cupboard to explain away what is another bad day at the office in which on the first day that live bullets have been officially allowed, the security forces have managed to to take out one their own..(source just about every news outlet going). The grenades were abandoned in a motorbike (all of them), we didn't catch the culprit, it made us nervous that the protestors were angry or there were chaps there of ill-intention, so we decided to call it quits for the day and no, anyone that suggests it was chaos, well that's not fair, it was because of these things here that our chaps gave their usual impression that they could find the old proverbial with two hands...

For all I know all of this is right and true and fair but after the third force, the terrorists, Hitler, the cancer, I am full, im laew, enough, please. I almost appreciate the Reds for just saying they hate the govenemnt, period in a hundred different ways but at least it's consistent.

And before I get the obvious, of course I regret the loss of life.

Great post...thank you for this on what I'm afraid will turn out to be a terrible night

Like I said before. The reds made the demand to come to the negotiationtable.

From your statement presented with such certainty and conviction,I'm guessing you were actually physically present at the conference where the 'non-negotiable demand' was made...and that your parsa Thai is perfect so you didn't need any translation service but heard it first hand....a real farang insider with insider knowledge, aren't you....

Or maybe not, since an insider like that wouldn't be on here parroting yellow propaganda...maybe it's more likely that you read this snippet in that unimpeachable source, The Nation, so you 'know' it's true because it fits your preconceived prejudices...why don't examine what you are spoon-fed, just once in a while??

One only needs to listen to the reds & gov't to know this. There is no inside info going on here.

Oh you are so wise....NOT...another yellow lie swallowing spoonfeeder...don't bother me with any facts, I just know everything...

Landof the free....pretty simple really....a lot of the world's quality media don't have any axe to grind, so they tend to be less biased....in most of the world, when a military coup takes place, deposes a popular elected leader, writes a constitution and makes it a crime punishable by 20 years in prison to criticize the constitution...then the world media views that constitution with a bit of suspicion...

Then when a group of armed (I saw the arms with my own eyes) paid (500Baht a day rent a thug) yellow shirts come out and close the airport and a new government is appointed by shadowy figures behind scenes who fund the yellow shirts, then, forgive their suspicion, but savvy reporters tend not to believe every shred of propaganda and outright lie that comes out of their yellow mouths...

If Thaksin was corrupt then he should have been dealt with as prescribed by the constitution ie in a court of law...he wasn't he was deposed in a military coup...however you look at it, this is undemocratic...so they question the legitimacy of the present incumbent

I have googled this assertion, and have been unsuccessful in getting a result.

Perhaps you would be good enough to pinpoint the particular clause you refer to.

Restrictions against campaigning to reject the draft

The junta passed a law that made criticism of the draft and opposition to the constitutional referendum a criminal act. Political parties were not allowed to persuade voters to cast ballots in favour or not in favour of the constitution. Any violators could be banned from politics for 5 years and jailed for 10 years.[2]

The restrictions against opposition to the draft were criticized by human rights bodies. “Even if amended to allow for ‘factual’ campaigning on the referendum, it is clear that the main purpose of the law is to intimidate and silence persons who don’t share the official view,” the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) said. “Meanwhile the administration is pumping vast amounts of money into Yes propaganda that is set to increase quickly.”[51]

The ban against campaigning against the constitution was enforced. In July, 20 soldiers and 10 policemen raided the house of a politician and seized anti-charter t-shirts, banners, documents, and recorded speeches.[52] Police also raided the Duang Prateep Foundation of former Senator Prateep Ungsongtham Hata and confiscated 4,000 posters which carried the message “It’s not illegal to vote against the draft constitution.” No charges were filed. The police claimed they were acting on orders from the military. “They could not cite any law to back up their actions,” said Sombat Boon-ngam-anong. Prateep filed a complaint with the police, claiming that they had committed an “unlawful” act, citing her human rights under the abrogated 1997 constitution.

Here is the text from Wiki....it was 10 years in jail not 20 as I said in the original post...I'm hoping it's ok to post things from Wiki

Landof the free....pretty simple really....a lot of the world's quality media don't have any axe to grind, so they tend to be less biased....in most of the world, when a military coup takes place, deposes a popular elected leader, writes a constitution and makes it a crime punishable by 20 years in prison to criticize the constitution...then the world media views that constitution with a bit of suspicion...

Then when a group of armed (I saw the arms with my own eyes) paid (500Baht a day rent a thug) yellow shirts come out and close the airport and a new government is appointed by shadowy figures behind scenes who fund the yellow shirts, then, forgive their suspicion, but savvy reporters tend not to believe every shred of propaganda and outright lie that comes out of their yellow mouths...

If Thaksin was corrupt then he should have been dealt with as prescribed by the constitution ie in a court of law...he wasn't he was deposed in a military coup...however you look at it, this is undemocratic...so they question the legitimacy of the present incumbent

I have googled this assertion, and have been unsuccessful in getting a result.

Perhaps you would be good enough to pinpoint the particular clause you refer to.

Look it up on wikipedia...the link has been posted on these boards on numerous occasions

I think that using force by Abhisit is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

It may disperse the crowd but it will NOT kill off the movement, peopel will still bear grudges and hold grievances and the movement will go underground.

Underground movements tend to resort to violent tactics....we see this already in the southern provinces here in Thailand...and we have seen it before in Northern Ireland, the Basque country, Palestine etc

The only hope for a peaceful outcome is negotiation

You are a born genius

But did you realise the Reds will not negotiate unless it is 100% their way

This is not negotiation

As I said before, every negotiation starts out with a set of demands which soften as the process starts out...the reds started out with immediate dissolution as the 'demand'...it is abundantly clear that you have never participated in negotiations, or been involved with them on any professional level...a very, very common strategy at the outset is to "demand" a non-negotiable demand, and then negotiate it....

Like I said before. The reds made the demand to come to the negotiationtable.

From your statement presented with such certainty and conviction,I'm guessing you were actually physically present at the conference where the 'non-negotiable demand' was made...and that your parsa Thai is perfect so you didn't need any translation service but heard it first hand....a real farang insider with insider knowledge, aren't you....

Or maybe not, since an insider like that wouldn't be on here parroting yellow propaganda...maybe it's more likely that you read this snippet in that unimpeachable source, The Nation, so you 'know' it's true because it fits your preconceived prejudices...why don't examine what you are spoon-fed, just once in a while??

A question for you.... If Abhisit is legally the PM why does the worlds media doubt it?In every article or interview with Abhisit it is raised as an issue. When he is asked about it he looks very uncomfortable. Are the world's media all wrong and you and the Nation right?

Simple. They have heard the red propaganda and being objective journalists they know there are different sides to any story, so they ask the most piercing questions they can come up with. That's their job. They are not expressing an opinion by doing so if they are pros. Of course, they are not all pros. In the west, asking piercing confrontational questions of people in authority is NORMAL. This is not the Thai way so may easily be misunderstood by many Thais.

Landof the free....pretty simple really....a lot of the world's quality media don't have any axe to grind, so they tend to be less biased....in most of the world, when a military coup takes place, deposes a popular elected leader, writes a constitution and makes it a crime punishable by 20 years in prison to criticize the constitution...then the world media views that constitution with a bit of suspicion...

Then when a group of armed (I saw the arms with my own eyes) paid (500Baht a day rent a thug) yellow shirts come out and close the airport and a new government is appointed by shadowy figures behind scenes who fund the yellow shirts, then, forgive their suspicion, but savvy reporters tend not to believe every shred of propaganda and outright lie that comes out of their yellow mouths...

If Thaksin was corrupt then he should have been dealt with as prescribed by the constitution ie in a court of law...he wasn't he was deposed in a military coup...however you look at it, this is undemocratic...so they question the legitimacy of the present incumbent

-- The Nation

Police confiscated 63 M-79 grenades from a motorcycle during a search on Vibhavadi Rangsit road on Wednesday.

Police stopped a motorcycle at a checkpoint set up after red shirts protesters clashed with troops on the road. Driver of the vehicle stopped as ordered but managed to run away.

Police then searched the vehicle and confiscated a total of 63 M-79 grenades from the vehicle.

It is still unclear how the explosives were packed.

Also found were documents of Pol Sgt Pratya Maneekote of Patum Thani's Kukot district.

Police could not say whether the drive was the sergeant.

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

Morons. They managed to let the guy flee. On foot. On an elevated expressway. Aren't situation like this one precisely why policemen get issued guns? Fortunately the guy was even more of a moron and left his papers behind. At least this will decrease the stock of M79 grenades ready to be tossed around Bangkok.

I don't believe this was staged: it looks too much like sheer stupidity at work.

How do you hide or even carry 63 grenades on a motorcycle? Where would you put them? How can a driver run away and get away?

Investigative reporters of the Nation please do your homework and at least make your stories half believable.

This sounds like the report in the Nation that 6000 AK47s and ammo that were supposedly stolen from an army depot just before the rally began...if an AK47 weighs 25 pounds (I'm guessing) you would need a train to cart the stuff away...think about it the guns would weigh about 75 tons...the Nation thinks its readers are idiots, and they are right....

Abhisit needs to resign immediately and let Thailand heal.

What one men can do !

Destroy a hole country.

Nobody win or lose !

Resolve the house, and late us make business again.

Land of smile - I see nobody smile more !

this conflict is all about money and there are some big smiles on the faces of some of the red leaders with ever growing offshore bank accounts

What information can you possibly have to back up this statement?....do you have access to their bank account records?of course you don't....it's a pack of yellow lies from the yellow lying machine

I think that using force by Abhisit is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

It may disperse the crowd but it will NOT kill off the movement, peopel will still bear grudges and hold grievances and the movement will go underground.

Underground movements tend to resort to violent tactics....we see this already in the southern provinces here in Thailand...and we have seen it before in Northern Ireland, the Basque country, Palestine etc

The only hope for a peaceful outcome is negotiation

You are a born genius

But did you realise the Reds will not negotiate unless it is 100% their way

This is not negotiation

As I said before, every negotiation starts out with a set of demands which soften as the process starts out...the reds started out with immediate dissolution as the 'demand'...it is abundantly clear that you have never participated in negotiations, or been involved with them on any professional level...a very, very common strategy at the outset is to "demand" a non-negotiable demand, and then negotiate it....

I think that using force by Abhisit is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

It may disperse the crowd but it will NOT kill off the movement, peopel will still bear grudges and hold grievances and the movement will go underground.

Underground movements tend to resort to violent tactics....we see this already in the southern provinces here in Thailand...and we have seen it before in Northern Ireland, the Basque country, Palestine etc

The only hope for a peaceful outcome is negotiation

Completely agree, unfortunately, the reds cannot/will not negotiate, it would seem that they are only capable of making demands!

FF

Don't be silly, Abhisit refused to talk last time when the reds softened their demands....

Yes, because it was more "Demands!" He, however did offer more talks, but the reds refused!

FF

Every negotiation starts out as a set of demands by each party which soften as the negotiation proceeds...it's how it's supposed to work...the problem comes when one side, Abhisit refuses to discuss a softened demand because he wants the other party to lose face or he's decided on a course of violent action....