mazeltov

Bangkok Post forum about the hospital incident had 24 replies. Everyone condemd the reds. Usualy there are about 60-40 against the reds.

OMG. Exactly the same squad of 6-7 internet warrior that always come up with the same stories is there active too.

I didn't do to well at school, hated it and Maths was my worst subject result. But through out life I have acquired a basic knowledge of many things, including maths, to understand that for example, that Party A who received 34% of the vote was more favoured by the greater group of individuals than either Party B's group of individuals with 33% of the vote, or Group C being a mix of all the other parties with their groups of individauls with 32% of the vote. Simple maths and nothing confusing. I am neither fooled or misled. Its game on from there as the maths says you can have many different equations when the horse trading for Group's C groups of individuals begin.

With that impressive result of 33% of the proportional votes the Party B would get 26 or 27 seats of a 480 member strong parliament in Thailand. Party A probably 28 seats. (or with 39% a party can get 33/34 seats)

One party is a newcomer, new name, new faces, ignored or bad mouthed by the media and bullied by the Junta. The other party is well known since years and also their faces and getting the everybodies darling treatment by the media and the Junta.

Either gunshots or a firecracker is being heard at Chula. Just how far will they go? A hospital of all places. No respect for anyone, even those who are in need of medical help. Sickening.

Of course this is not their FIRST hospital invasion this MONTH...

Lets not forget the emergency room Body Snatching scenes from two weeks back.

Not forget the nobody-died-when-we-shot-a-them-show and the disappearing dead from last year.

Sickening murderous regime, could not even win an election with the help of the Junta.

Are you for real?

Did cellphones get invented last month?

Where is all the pictures of hundreds of dead from last year?

hundreds of dead? did i say something like this? are you for real?

But okay, dead people don't take pictures.

Would you believe it anyway if some photos or videos where shown to you, BBC and CNN report about it and so on. You would still say didn't happen.

How many people died this year during the crackdown? Saw any pictures of them? The 'body snatching scene' was about that.

People are dead, victims of a failed crackdown operation, victims of a failed government.

The government lies.

Soldier died in friendly fire? NO, impossible, BBC is not a reliable source. Deny and blame the reds.

I read on Twitter someone heard a firecracker somewhere. OMG. Must be TRUE. Sickening reds. Firecracker how can they dare, reds are terrorist. I read it on twitter.

You asking me if i am for real? You?

You are incorrect. Read my statement carefully. Look up the election results of 2007. Learn about how elections work under this constitution. You will see that my statement is accurate.

yes, you tried that trick before, but telling only a part of the truth is almost telling a lie.

Again I am talking about the number of people. So what if some people got three votes, some two, and some one vote in the constituency election? The constituency vote is not a direct assessment of the popularity of a party as a percentage of the voting population. You know that it is not. I am not hiding anything. The constituency election is irrelevant to the point I am making.

I am asserting that the the proportional election, the 'one man one vote', is the only way to accurately and directly measure the popularity of a party as a percentage of the voters. In the proportional vote the Democrats had more votes than the PPP. Therefore, as a percentage of the population of Thailand who voted in 2007 elections, the Democrats appealed to more individual people than did the PPP.

That is my opinion and it is shared by many others. You may have a different opinion and it to may be shared by others. In the real world people disagree. People quite frequently experience the same events and come to very different conclusions.

Shared by many others? Who? You misinterpret the election result if you looking at it this way. You fool yourself and mislead others. That is not just another opinion but a fallacy.

I am not going to repeat last month discussion. Some people will never understand the election system in Thailand.

The 2007 election was overshadowed by the JUNTA. People are now in the street and protest. Demanding a new and fair election. Guess how many people will still vote for the Butcher of Bangkok and his soon to be dissolved Party?

Just to add, on the political management front, it should be recalled that at least one of the coalition parties which joined with Samak had openly campaigned on a platform that they would not enter into such a coalition.

One could argue even more strongly that their voters were roundly ignored, since maybe they would not have voted for them if they know they would subsequently join forces.

Regards

They had an easy excuse. Bullied by the Junta.

Mazeltov is now claiming that the "junta" put PPP into power by bullying the smaller parties into joining a PPP coalition?

Not even the Dems ever suggested something that ludicrous! (In fact the Dems just bit the bullet and became the opposition)

edit --- corrected the Freudian slip I made when typing M's name .....

FYI, before the election during the campaign for it and all the month before when the JUNTA was in power politicians of the PPP got bullied and the JUNTA rin a anti-thaksin propaganda show.

The election weren't that fair at all and because of the coup the reds protest today.

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...

They had a huge representation in government, twice, till they got booted out. For fraud that is!

The reds and their political backers (PT, Shinawatras) will have to wait till the next elections! Nothing unfair about this! Thats democracy!

They will probably win the next election, so whats the rush. If they play it fair and square they shouldnt have to worry.

Actually they still have well over 200 red representives in Parliament the entire PTP party,

PLUS it's coalition partners. What they don't have is control of the Cabinet, Army List and Budgets..

.

This is their idea of representation. Hand them total control or they create war in the streets.

Nice manifesto eh?

FYI

The red shirts protesters are a different group and not the PTP.

And the red shirts demand a fair election, so what is the problem?

Either gunshots or a firecracker is being heard at Chula. Just how far will they go? A hospital of all places. No respect for anyone, even those who are in need of medical help. Sickening.

Of course this is not their FIRST hospital invasion this MONTH...

Lets not forget the emergency room Body Snatching scenes from two weeks back.

Not forget the nobody-died-when-we-shot-a-them-show and the disappearing dead from last year.

Sickening murderous regime, could not even win an election with the help of the Junta.

You are incorrect. Read my statement carefully. Look up the election results of 2007. Learn about how elections work under this constitution. You will see that my statement is accurate.

yes, you tried that trick before, but telling only a part of the truth is almost telling a lie.

How many of the 60 million chose to vote Abhisit into power?

Results of the one-man-one vote party list election in 2007

Democrats: 14,084,265 39.63%

PTP: 14,071,799 39.60%

you ignoring that fact that the voters had also up to three direct candidates to vote for and that the vote for for the direct candidate has a bigger impact which parties at what strengths will sit in the end in the parliament. (400 seats of 480 seats total)

the proportional 2nd vote (or the 3rd/4th), where your figures are coming from has a lesser impact. (80 seats of 480 seats total).

that vote can be also placed by the voter strategically, for example with the intention to have more balance in the parliament or give one party not to much power, you don't have to give the 2nd vote for the same party of the candidate of your first choice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_voting

it is little bit more complicated than a simple "one man-one vote" system

But there is also a good chance people will respect the leader THEY voted for directly themselves and not via some

shady deal behind closed doors deals between fellow MP 's.

Anyway surely trying this out is far better than people killing each other ?

The people don't vote for the PM. In the last election almost exactly the same number of people voted for the PPP as did for the Democrats. It was an even split.

That is not true, after so much talks some people still don't understand the election process.

Everyone who has it.

Put on BBC now.

Poor Abhisit is tying himself in a wonderful knot trying to make the world understand what is going on in Thailand.

He makes himself look very very weak. "I do not have the power to issue martial law".

"The people who have the power, have no intention of issuing martial law". He is trying to skirt around the issue that he doesn't tell the army what to do, whilst not admitting it to the world. How wonderfully Thai.

I am sure he didn't learn the word "normalcy" at Eton. He is obviously reading the papers too much. I am sure it is "normality".

I guess you didn't learn the word normalcy at whatever school you may have attended. All you would need though is a dictionary.

nor·mal·i·ty play_w2("N0153800") (nôr-ml-t)n.1. The state or fact of being normal; normalcy.

A simple check would have told you that they mean the same thing. Problem is too many people here are so sure of being right they don't bother to check their facts.

Normalcy is a funny thing. A big goal for Abhisit, sometimes it comes soon as possible, some tomes it has been achieved already and elections are essential and once normalcy is restored Abhisit sees no problem in dissolving the parliament.

Abhisit and the pledge of normalcy in previous years

The whole idea of getting things back to normalcy is to have elections, Parliament and government that are legitimate," Abhisit said. July 25, 2006, NYT

We are ready: Abhisit

The Democrat Party yesterday vowed to restore political normalcy, ensure a robust economy and to bring about good governance as political activities start to return to normal. June 7, 2007, The Nation

Even the other main party in the race, the Democrat Party, offered a warning to ambitious military leaders as Thailand tries to regain political normalcy after the elections. ‘’If the military shows signs of wanting to hang on to power, the Democrats will be out there protesting,’’ Abhisit Vejajiva, leader of the party, said during a speech at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand on Tuesday. December 21, 2007, IPS NEWS

""My government will restore normalcy to the country and make Thailand victorious," the 44-year-old Abhisit said in his speech, which was shown live on national television." December 30, 2008, smh.com.au

On the first day of his official visit to England yesterday (March 13th), the premier met with a group of British businessmen and delivered a speech entitled "Restoring International Confidence and Pushing Thailand Forward." Mr Abhisit stressed during his speech that Thailand already returned to normalcy ... March 14, 2009, NNT

"What I like to stress is I am not worried about elections," he said. "That is not a problem. I am a politician who has contested elections for 17 or 18 years."

But the prime minister said elections should only be held after the situation became stable. "It would take some time for normalcy to return to the country." April 6, 2009

“We announce the state of emergency and related announcements to give legal power to the government to restore order and bring back normalcy as soon as possible,” Abhisit, 44, said on state television. “The government will try to prevent any losses. We hope to get support from the public to bring peace to the nation.” April 12, 2009, Bloomberg

"We will send a signal to the international community that normalcy has been restored," Abhisit said at his offices in Bangkok's Government House, which were at the epicentre of the protests by the pro-Thaksin "Red Shirts". April 25, 2009. Kuwait Times/ AFP

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva yesterday pledged to resolve animosity between rival groups and foster reconciliation in six to eight months to pave the way for a snap election.

"If things proceed as anticipated, then I aim to steer the country out of the present turmoil and bring about normalcy in six to eight months, following which I won't mind dissolving the House," he said. May 1, 2009, The Nation

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday he intended to stay in office for as long as it takes to bring normalcy back to Thai politics and the economy.

He said that though he did not know how long he would remain in the premier's seat, it should not be any longer than eight years. September 8, 2009, The Nation

"Thailand has been absent from the global stage for a long time. Now we have made a comeback," he said.

Abhisit said he had reassured foreign political and business leaders he met during his visit that the country had returned to normalcy September 27, 2009, The Nation

"Chaos will not be triggered by the government. I want to reassure the public that my government will continue working and restore normalcy as soon as possible," said Abhisit, before leaving the barracks by helicopter. March 15, 2010, Times of India

It must be emphasized that the law is a mechanism that allows the Government to effectively discharge its function. It does not intend to cause harm to the public. The objective of using the law is to return the situation to normalcy as soon as possible. The Government is doing everything it can and in accordance with international standards to restore peace and order. April 7,2010, thaigov.go.th

Speaking during his weekly TV programme, which was recorded Saturday and aired Sunday, Abhisit said the government's goal is to return normalcy to the country so the government has to consider all connected moves of the red-shirt movement before taking actions to solve the overall problem. April 25, 2010, The Nation

Thailand's prime minister said Monday that his government is working to achieve normalcy in the country amid massive opposition protests, but warned it will take "time, patience and cooperation" from all parties involved. April 28, 2010, CNN

I don't see much logic in your argument, blaming the reds that the bullet hit one soldier.

Actually if you would listen to the reds you would know that if you shoot at human beings it kills them. That is not just a red propaganda lie but the truth.

It is also one of their main complains and demands: Stop the killing.

If the government gives the order to shoot at people they are indeed responsible if someone dies and not the victim. Killing people is a crime, it is called murder.

Really? War is murder? If a madman rapes my wife and attempts to kill me and I shoot him dead it is murder? When a policeman shoots a criminal in the commission of a violent act it is murder? Sorry, but I think you are incorrect.

Soldiers are there to protect the public. Red shirts are menacing the public. It is the duty of the security forces to use whatever force is necessary to protect the public. Moreover, the armed red shirts have already killed security forces (murdered if you prefer) and possibly some unarmed civilians. The red shirts deliberately sent the caravan out. They then proceeded to attack the government road block. Therefore the red shirt leaders are entirely to blame for any accidental deaths arising from their illegal actions.

You are correct and mazeltov is using a fallacious argument.

Since murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of a human being then when the police and military are enforcing the law they cannot be guilty of "murder".

However, it IS possible for the Reds to be considered guilty of murder even when someone else has pulled the trigger. I am unsure if this applies in Thailand.

Felony murder is when, during the commission of a different crime, someone is killed. The person that is breaking the law is the person charged with Felony Murder. (This is a drastic simplification of a very difficult legal concept.)

Where is my argument fallacious? I am not using some madman and rapist as straw man.

But okay, so its LAWFUL KILLING of a human beings when the MILITARY shoot at CIVILIANS, because they are enforcing the law in accordance with international standard as Abhisit chose to say. Has the now really a carte blanche to do so, practise lawful killings?

I would say some might argue otherwise, using deadly force should be the last resort justified only when there is an immediate danger to the life of other people and all lesser means failed to apply. For example shooting/killing/stopping an armed man who goes on rampage in a shopping centre shooting at other.

But using deadly force should not be just another tactic to disperse a crowd of protesters. I doubt that can be called lawful.

And when military accidently kills one of their own soldiers are still the civilians the guilty ones, guilty of murder, because of some silly reasoning and the bullet was of course intended to take out one of them or what???

That sounds not right nor correct to me.

------

Here another video clip (sorry if it has been posted before.)

Look how peace and order is restored in accordance with the law and international standard so that normalcy comes back as soon as possible.

skynews — April 28, 2010

Alex Crawford reports direct from the scene.

Btw, if the clip of the cops on bikes is infact the video of the fatal shooting, then he was clerly not hit 'from behind in the head'(sic) as he was traveling towards the police and soldiers...

Just adding a note that quoting CNN and BBC doesn't seem to put you at full facts...

Beside the vague paraphrasing of the CNN and BBC news by deadsnoopy no one else but you claimed something different about the video.

But thanks that you rectified it now, your previous comment left some people in confusion.

The Friendly fire incident

This incident is not the lethal one afaik.

Was there more than 1 friendly fire incident today?

Do you have more information regarding the lethal one?

I don't see much logic in your argument, blaming the reds that the bullet hit one soldier.

Actually if you would listen to the reds you would know that if you shoot at human beings it kills them. That is not just a red propaganda lie but the truth.

It is also one of their main complains and demands: Stop the killing.

If the government gives the order to shoot at people they are indeed responsible if someone dies and not the victim. Killing people is a crime, it is called murder.

Really? War is murder? If a madman rapes my wife and attempts to kill me and I shoot him dead it is murder? When a policeman shoots a criminal in the commission of a violent act it is murder? Sorry, but I think you are incorrect.

Soldiers are there to protect the public. Red shirts are menacing the public. It is the duty of the security forces to use whatever force is necessary to protect the public. Moreover, the armed red shirts have already killed security forces (murdered if you prefer) and possibly some unarmed civilians. The red shirts deliberately sent the caravan out. They then proceeded to attack the government road block. Therefore the red shirt leaders are entirely to blame for any accidental deaths arising from their illegal actions.

What was the road block good for? Did it brought back peace, the thai people together and solved the crisis?

The red shirts don't want rape your wife, who told you that horror story?

They rally against the current govenment, the influence of the military in politics and demand a new election.

The reds shirts murdered security forces? Are you sure? Got any source for that claim?

Just to add, on the political management front, it should be recalled that at least one of the coalition parties which joined with Samak had openly campaigned on a platform that they would not enter into such a coalition.

One could argue even more strongly that their voters were roundly ignored, since maybe they would not have voted for them if they know they would subsequently join forces.

Regards

They had an easy excuse. Bullied by the Junta.

The CNN News website reported that the soldier was accidentally killed by fire from security forces......

Don't blame the redshirts for that.60% of the army support the reds.Policeforce 70%.Everybody know that or you must stick your head in the sand,like this government.

Absolutely the red shirt protesters are responsible. They were engaging in illegal actions. It is the government's duty to maintain control and order in public places. The responsibility for any injury to security forces must rest with the illegal protesters.

If you want delegate the responsibility than name nobody else but PM Abhisit here.

You can't maintain order in public places with killing the people.

Please connect the dots for me. I don't see the logic in your argument, so I must be missing something.

I don't see much logic in your argument, blaming the reds that the bullet hit one soldier.

Actually if you would listen to the reds you would know that if you shoot at human beings it kills them. That is not just a red propaganda lie but the truth.

It is also one of their main complains and demands: Stop the killing.

If the government gives the order to shoot at people they are indeed responsible if someone dies and not the victim. Killing people is a crime, it is called murder.

The CNN News website reported that the soldier was accidentally killed by fire from security forces......

Don't blame the redshirts for that.60% of the army support the reds.Policeforce 70%.Everybody know that or you must stick your head in the sand,like this government.

Absolutely the red shirt protesters are responsible. They were engaging in illegal actions. It is the government's duty to maintain control and order in public places. The responsibility for any injury to security forces must rest with the illegal protesters.

If you want delegate the responsibility than name nobody else but PM Abhisit here.

You can't maintain order in public places with killing the people.

I dont believe for one minute Abhisit would honour an agreement to hold an election

even in 9 months . When asked by CNN about rejecting the 3 months time frame

offered by the red shirts this is what he said :-

AMANPOUR: " Well, let me ask you, Mr. Prime Minister, it seemed for a few days that there might be a solution, some kind of new elections, perhaps within about three months, and then you rejected that."

VEJJAJIVA: " No. The -- the so-called offer was made by the leaders of the red shirts that this solution must take place in 30 days. ( it 30 days for dissolution and then 90 days for election wasnt it ? )I

It just doesn't make sense. When we had two rounds of open negotiations, I made it very clear that we need to make sure that there is a roadmap so that true reconciliation can be achieved. ( so this suggests Abhisit was being totally disingenious about his 9 month offer ? )

What we want to do is to make sure that the Thai economy is well underway as far as recovery is concerned. We want to make sure that the conditions and environment is right so that reconciliation can take place, that we would have free, fair and peaceful elections. And there is -- there are a number of things that need to be done before this solution can take place." ( so all Abhisit would have to say is that the Thai economy isnt well underway as afar as a recovery and he has grounds for postponing iy indefinately ? )

This is why the red shirts dont agree to wait......its now or never.

Don't trust Abhisit. He is full of lies. On the streets they call him "The Butcher of Bangkok".

If the curent government wanted to trash this a la Myanmar junta, it would already have been done day one,

and we wouldn't be having this conversation at all.

If there was massive censorship in Thailand

we wouldn't be having this conversation at all.

http://thainetizen.org/

http://en.rsf.org/thailand-thai-netizen-ne...2010,37164.html

Thai Netizen Network and Reporters Without Borders: Joint statement on the further censorship of websites and media under Emergency Decree

http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile....tatements/2498/

Asian Human Rights Commission - Statement: Censorship and policing public morality in a state of emergency

The original article describes a typical Abhisit government red herring - take attention away from themselves, use the threat of foreign interference as a pretext to validate their illegitimate position.

Don't blame the Government when at the TAN channel the imagination ran riot.

It's actally only about that some rumours could not get substatiated and pure nonsense.

Enjoy the funny replies the thread will get. The headline will bring up thai visa finest members.

Thaksin ordered killing of thousands of innocent people yet never got prosecuted for it. Does this give Abhisit automatic right to kill all the redshirted protesters? Afterall Thaksin did it.

How stupid can this "double standard" discussion get?

Thaksin ordered the killing of these people who were believed to be drug runners. It has nothing to do with what's happening now. Why bring this into the debate?

"thaksin ordered the killing of thousands of innocent people..."??????????????

is there an archive where we can research on this killings???????????

"thousands ", eh?

and, "all innocents" , too

holy toledo, oh jesus, oh budhha, oh-my-god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

where is the the records, photographs, evidence, wwitnesses,etc.etc.

In August 2007 the government appointed a special committee chaired by former Attorney General Khanit na Nakhon, to investigate approximately 2,500 extrajudicial killings that took place in 2003 as part of Thaksin's "war on drugs." Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the new investigations will lead to effective criminal prosecution of the perpetrators, who are believed to include senior police officers and members of the former Thaksin administration.

There are tons of news articles, picture and videos all over the net for anyone who wants to be better informed.

And to what results came this investigation?

Live television showed several motorbikes and one car heavily damaged by red shirt "protesters" at or near Rajprasong intersection. Just how "peaceful" is that?

Hi.

Quoting myself as news emerge - kudos to the reds, this was NOT done by them. The driver of the car (18 year old nutcase) ran his Porsche into some motorbikes that belong to red-shirt protesters, injuring some of them. He was arrested.

And rightly so! While shutting down the whole area is just wrong by the reds, using a car as a weapon against them is even more wrong. Hope that idiot will sit in jail for some time.

Best regards......

Thanh

Thanks for having the decency to admit that you were wrong in blaming the reds for that violence in your first post, you won't be the first to jump in and blame them for any outrage that occurs (remember Sondhi's shooting, and the usual suspects jumping in to blame the reds?)

classic example for the traps of cognitive bias.

lot of people claim that and that is evidently true because they believe they saw it on television.

Meanwhile of course cars and motorcycles waving red flags are zooming up and down the street in both directions (illegal, as it's a one-way street!).

It is strange the way traffic violations like not wearing helmets and not abiding by one way rules are allowed to be completely ignored.

traffic laws and a law that demands that you must get a licence from the amphur before you can drive around in the community while using an electric amplified sound system (you know who is here the target, and yes noise pollution laws exist in Thailand) are the laws in thailand that the authorities use to crack down street rallies.

a lot of pending cases against protest leaders from all sides and rallies we never heard of are cases of operating a sound system on a public street without proper licence.

the october 1976 crackdown was nothing else than a similar hard-branding strategy to label the protesting students as wreckers of civilisation, the most dangerous threat to the society and that the the public, the honest and law-abiding citizen finally have enough of it and that something has to be done. not an act of suppression the people, but the right thing to do to defend law, peace and order for the good of every one.

today some see that event in an other light. and there are also the roots of the 2006 anti-coup movement.

So then you would be a big supporter of the leader of the '92 protests? The name slips my mind, maybe you could provide it?

yes, i did that already. seems the case that you don't saw it, so i have to repeat myself just like you did.

the underlineed words a links to ither text in the internet, that give you additional information, the quotes are few snippets of events from the past.

maybe it can help you to decide who is phoney and who is genuine and stick to his principles.

Uh, you do realize who led the democracy movement to oust Suchinda in '92, don't you?

Chamlong the yellow friend of Thaksin or this odd Dr.Weng, the proto-PAD red shirt was also seen.

Weng, as a member of the early 'PAD', helped to bring PAD and Chamlong together , in their protest movement against the Thaksin government

Chamlong Srimuang Slammed on 16th Anniversary of Black May Incident

Dr. Weng Tojirakarn

stated that the remarks coming from Gen Chamlong showed that he is pro-dictatorship and a person who lacks idealism. He also called on Chamlong to stop agitating for a coup d’état to happen because the people will not allow it and will counter it to the same extent as in May 1992.

It was illegitimate for the PAD or those involved in the 19 September 2006 coup d’état to hold commemorations of the May 1992 or October 1972/1976 incidents.

If they are involved in supporting the 19 September coup, it means that they stand opposite to the spirit and ideals of the martyrs who sacrificed their lives to end dictatorship’s rule. Dr. Weng also called for an end to the abuse of using democratic spirit as a tool. ...

Prachatai

May 22, 2008

STREETWISE: From Chamlong, with love

Everybody knows former Bangkok governor Chamlong Srimuang and Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra have been good friends for a long time. Their friendship dates back years to when Thaksin first entered the political arena. And during this time,

Chamlong has often sent his best wishes to the prime minister. The latest gesture of friendship was a gift of four books about health food to the prime minister.

Chamlong recommended the prime minister read the books, knowing he likely would. After all he is an avid reader. "He has advised many people to read foreign titles. I thus want him to read something that I find interesting, like side dishes," he said. One of the books is based on a doctor's conclusions that ground sesame seeds contain more nutrients than milk. That particular book choice was based on Thaksin's endorsement of milk consumption. The government recently launched a campaign to encourage people to give milk to their loved ones. ...

The Nation

,

June 18, 2004

MISSING LAWYER: ‘Rogue cop’ offers to talk

Democracy group demands 3 senior police be probed; threat to name more There were dramatic developments in the Somchai Neelaphaijit abduction case yesterday with a police officer in hiding offering to expose the identity of colleagues allegedly involved in the Muslim lawyer?s abduction, and a pro-democracy group naming three senior officers and threatening to reveal more....

If Thaksin fails to bring the culprits to justice, his government would lose the right to run the country, said Dr weng Tojirakan,

the CFD?s chairman.

?The government cannot provide security to the public and it knows that Somchai is a most respected Muslim lawyer.

If the government avoids seeking justice for him, the government policy?s of ?quashing fire in the South?? would be a political joke,?? he said.

The Nation

April 7, 2004

the october 1976 crackdown was nothing else than a similar hard-branding strategy to label the protesting students as wreckers of civilisation, the most dangerous threat to the society and that the the public, the honest and law-abiding citizen finally have enough of it and that something has to be done. not an act of suppression the people, but the right thing to do to defend law, peace and order for the good of every one.

today some see that event in an other light. and there are also the roots of the 2006 anti-coup movement.

Comparing the 76 crackdown with what is happening now is just enough sad and desperate bit of nonsense, much along the lines of Abhisit is like Hitler, or Thailand is like Burma. Either you don't have a clue what you are saying or you do and you have no shame using the genuine plight of others to try and win a phony battle.

i don't think Dr. Weng is a phony, or other members of the oktober people. until today there where still labeled as the bad communists and subject to other propaganda lies.

Weng is also saying to use violence.

From Tulsahit's tweet:

Dr Weng: "Don't get angry, do uses violence, Don't talk back"

All leaders are advocating violence today.

the propaganda and disinformation of tulsathit twit becomes more and more like a certain radio station in 1976 must have sounded.

looking at your signature quote "The government definitely has to extend the state of emergency, ... The situation requires us to do so.” Thaksin Shinawatra that was said 2005 about the situation in the south.

in case you don't know, Dr.Weng Tojirakarn, todays leader of the National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship, was an outspoken critic of that decree. "The group considers the decree issued last month to deal with violence in the deep South to be unconstitutional, said Federation of Democracy president weng Tojirakarn. The decree should not come into force since it would violate many basic rights of the people, he added."