rabo

There is an agreement between the US and Thailand referred to as the Treaty of Amenity signed in Bangkok in 1966 between the US president and the King. It allows for 100% US ownership and requires 51% US ownership. Under the treaty the company is treated as any Thai company except, it is restricted from certain activities of national security such as banking, and, it is expressly restricted from land ownership.

Wow! What a piece of dangerous ultranationalist yellow garbage and hate-mongering. Yesterday they just praised Cambodia for extraditing two red shirts and today this.

...How long can Thailand and the Thai people tolerate Cambodian leader Hun Sen for his unpredictable but always hostile stance towards us?...

...He is surely a snake in the grass for Thailand, always seeking to gain ground when we have problems. His sheltering of Thaksin's band of terrorists and saboteurs deserves our forceful and meaningful retaliation. Hun Sen only understands this kind of action....

Let Hun Sen choose whether he wants friendship or hostility, and be clear about it, so that we can respond accordingly and do away with his two-faced diplomacy.

Isn't that a direct call for violence?

The emergency laws provide for the closing down of media that disseminate distorted information, divisive propaganda and calls for violence. Yesterday Col Sansern said that important reasons for keeping the emergency laws were the distortion of information and the use of mob psychology in the provinces... Based on that kind of reasoning and without double standards "The Nation" must be closed down with immediate effect.

The basic premis of the article is however correct. History has a long line of dictators and despots that used other nations, people, religions, etc, to justify their own despotic power. There is no easier way to hide one's own criminal activities and control people than teaching them to hate something else. After April and May of this year, this should sound very familiar.

Perhaps that's why Mr. Thaksin and his Cambodian counterpart get along so well.

That is an interesting observation and question. It might be interesting to see where the Singapore dollar fits into the picture, mainly because it is such a "well managed" currency.

It's interesting to hear Thaksin finally break his long silence to speak out on this topic as well as other amazing statements:

Thaksin phoned in to the Puea Thai Party meeting on Friday and predicted he would be back in Thailand by the end of this year.

It was Thaksin's first public call to the party, which is widely regarded as his proxy, since the anti-government demonstrations in central Bangkok were crushed by the army on May 19.

Thaksin, who has had an increasingly tough time finding refuge, said he was calling from an undisclosed African country.

He accused Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's administration of deceiving foreign governments by accusing him of terrorism.

Thaksin said the government's international public relations campaign had been successful in deceiving the US House of Representatives, which voted 411-4 Thursday on a motion calling on all Thai political parties to renounce violence and pledge to resolve their problems peacefully and democratically.

July 3, 2010 from DPA

http://www.earthtime...government.html

"Thaksin said the government's international public relations campaign had been successful in deceiving the US House of Representatives, which voted 411-4 Thursday on a motion calling on all Thai political parties to renounce violence and pledge to resolve their problems peacefully and democratically."

Spoken as only Mr. Thaksin can. He must be quite upset, tricking the US to support only peaceful means and ask everyone to renounce violence.

And that's the whole point to the resolution, the US will support Thailand and its institutions in the peaceful resolution of the problems, including the 5 point reconciliation plan. The support for Abhisit is only incidental to his support for the same. No need to even ask what they think of Thaksin and his goons' armed insurrection, sabotage, and arson.

People are taking far too much from this touchie feelie resolution. Please read the resolution. In particular, look at the request that the Thai government (along with protestors) renounce the use of violence. Yes the resolution supports the 5 point plan, but that support is for the promises Mr. Abhisit is making. A gangster can say that he likes puppies and I would agree, because I like puppies too. That doesn't mean that I support the gangster, just that i agree with his statement.

The resolution is not an endorsement of Mr. Abhisit. Wrapped up in the diplomatic language about reconciliation there is mention of timely free and fair elections and a free media. Anyone taking the resolution as anything more than support of basic freedoms is misguided.

H. Res. 1321

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

July 1, 2010.

Whereas Thailand became the first treaty ally of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region with the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, signed at Sia-Yut'hia (Bangkok) March 20, 1833, between the United States and Siam, during the administration of President Andrew Jackson and the reign of King Rama III;

Whereas the United States and Thailand furthered their alliance with the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, (commonly known as the 'Manila Pact of 1954') signed at Manila September 8, 1954, and the United States designated Thailand as a major non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally in December 2003;

Whereas, through the Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations, signed at Bangkok May 26, 1966, along with a diverse and growing trading relationship, the United States and Thailand have developed critical economic ties;

Whereas Thailand is a key partner of the United States in Southeast Asia and has supported closer relations between the United States and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN);

Whereas Thailand has the longest-serving monarch in the world, His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who is loved and respected for his dedication to the people of Thailand;

Whereas Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has issued a 5-point roadmap designed to promote the peaceful resolution of the current political crisis in Thailand;

Whereas approximately 500,000 people of Thai descent live in the United States and foster strong cultural ties between the 2 countries; and

Whereas Thailand remains a steadfast friend with shared values of freedom, democracy, and liberty: Now, therefore, be it Resolved,

That the House of Representatives--

(1) affirms the support of the people and the Government of the United States for a strong and vital alliance with Thailand;

(2) calls for the restoration of peace and stability throughout Thailand;

(3) urges all parties involved in the political crisis in Thailand to renounce the use of violence and to resolve their differences peacefully through dialogue;

(4) supports the goals of the 5-point roadmap of the Government of Thailand for national reconciliation, which seeks to--

(A.) uphold, protect, and respect the institution of the constitutional monarchy;

(B.) resolve fundamental problems of social justice systematically and with participation by all sectors of society;

(C.) ensure that the media can operate freely and constructively;

(D.) establish facts about the recent violence through investigation by an independent committee; and

(E.) establish mutually acceptable political rules through the solicitation of views from all sides; and

(5) promotes the timely implementation of an agreed plan for national reconciliation in Thailand so that free and fair elections can be held.

Attest:

Clerk.

Not sure what you think a resolution is, but it literally means to resolve to do or to support something, and this is a staggering near unanimous resolution of 411 US lawmakers who,

calling the Kingdom of Thailand a strong and vital ally, a major ally and a key partner in Southeast Asia, a country with whom they have critical economic ties, a steadfast friend with shared values of freedom, democracy, all the way back to Andrew Jackson and King Rama III! (Lord of lords, the number 51 does come to mind)

.... resolve to provide strong support for Thailand, strong support for the monarchy, strong support for the government, and strong support for each every one of the 5 points of Abhisit's plan for reconciliation, and strong support for elections to be held in a "timely" manner, as expressed by the current prime minister, Mr. Abhisit..

(wave US flag above images of Thailand and the King, fade to Abhisit addressing the country)

This resolution leaves no legitimacy whatsoever for Thaksin and his thugs program of violence and disruption of the country. Thaksin's entire modus operandi is out the door. It also calls on Abhisit to be a man of his word and carry through with what he has said he will do.As long as he does, he will get strong US support. If Thaksin tries to further destabilize the country or derail the reconciliation with his money and violence, the resolution clearly states that the US will support Thailand and its institutions. The resolution is also the first step in the legitimization of any actions the US might take to prevent the derailment of a peaceful resolution, such as support to help stop Thaksin's activities if required.

Such a resolution does not happen by accident, but through careful diplomatic work. I strongly suspect that this is the work of the US State Department itself and Ambassador John and his staff here in Bangkok.

It is unlikely that the temperature would erase the data on the hard drive recording surface. if the drive still works the data should still be there.

If the drive no longer works, the temperature has probably destroyed the electronic circuits. If the data is very important, you might be able to buy another drive of exactly the same model and ask a shop the put the new electronics in the old drive, then you should be able to use the old drive again.

Some luck required.

Can anybody give any suggestions (apart from the obvious) why the recent court cases confiscating Thaksin's assets were completely side-stepped in this documentary?

It's not as if all journalists see it as an unrelated incident after all; the Bangkok Post had the entire protest under a special report on their website entitled something like "Thaksin's Asset Seizure: The Aftermath"

<snip> I watched the programme and there were several aspects supporting the Redshirt movement that just weren't mentioned by Alistair Leithead.So what? But it was a perfectly acceptable if unexciting piece of journalism.I don't know why these people go off like a Catherine Wheel just because their particular perception isn't reinforced.

Your level of acceptable journalism is well below mine, perhaps you have adapted to modern standards better than I. I do expect any attempt to piece together a story to be accurate, not just one particular perception over another. If they can't do that then I expect them to just report factual information and let reader's work from that.

The BBC report was slightly better than their previous reporting because they did attempt to piece together a story. However, aside from some additional facts that were not well tied in, it was still mostly their earlier Cinderella we just want democracy story, which is easily digestible by most Westerners but does not reflect what is happening in Thialand.

the United States supported Abhisit's reconciliation plan

enough said

I am confused I didnt think Thailand was an American colony, if it isnt what on earth has this got to do with America ?

Sorry, I can't help you with your confusion. But, Thailand is not an American colony. It has to do with foreign relations, and no, America is not going to step in and help out Thaksin's side. They are well aware of the whole story from the start, which is probably why their reaction to the coup was so muted in the first place.

farmers and manual workers are rather under-represented in the sample. This is a common problem. People who work hard are more difficult to interview.

what the f does this mean ? people who wear a tie and / or don't operate a machine don't "work hard" ?

Ideally, in Thailand, no, they don't.

Partial list of logical fallacies -

<clip long list of examples>

Deception by exclusion, indirect.

Deception by exclusion, indirect, is a method of disseminating invalid perceptions by indirect action, sometimes used on the TV forum. Deception by exclusion, indirect works this way.

Poster A makes an irrelevant point X by way of providing a large number of examples.

All of the examples contain a bias in the direction of a secondary target point T.

The target point T is not necessarily related to the irrelevant point X.

Upon reading so many biased points supporting T, unrelated to X, the readers subliminally begin to believe T.

Example:

Poster A discusses point X, illogical methods used by posters.

Poster A gives many examples which suggest the innocence of the red movement, target T.

Other posters begin to wonder if the reds are in fact completely innocent and the government is completely guilty.

only APC's?

A couple of new reports spoke of tanks in the streets of Bangkok. 'heavily armed vehicle on tracks' a lot of civilians would call tanks and not APC.

Honestly, the friendly and smooth 4-letter word 'tank' is an euphemism for APC, 'tank' is a word civilians easy understand and prefer to use. APC sounds scary, belligerent, a word straight from the vocabulary of combatants, militarists, war veterans, soldiers. Soldiers are murderers.

When the military (US or major allied nations) mistakes journalists for civilians and shoot them dead, we should be indulgently when civilians and journalists mistake APC for a tanks.

Your last point is fair enough. To remain unforgiving though, perhaps the reds mistook the Ducit Hotel for a tank, since they were shooting anti-tank RPGs at it.

"some donors must have known what their activities would finally bring"

That's not logical. Only those who knew of those black guards with plans for violence would have known.

In turn, that's not logical. Pretty much every Thai who was paying attention knew the story and what was going on. This is especially true of those who participated in the events on either side. Anyone who was responsible for the movement of significant amounts of money knew exactly what the money was for.

Not taking any side, neither red or yellow, it's clear that those who argue the Western media is "so bad" are really saying they want certain political representation to be aired. Essentially they are calling for more political bias, not less. What they seem to admit is that the Western media doesn't intend to operate in their special political interests. Such people seem to be rather obviously cheering on "Al Jazeera" and just about calling for a boycott of cnn and bbc. Shouldn't we really be welcoming all forms of media, and actually calling for more stories like this to be aired, rather than dismissing most sources and only touting one of them as "legitimate". I should add that such complaining really does look terrible in the eyes of those in the West, that you cry or turn your nose up at any news source unless it meets your finely tuned political ideology.

Roykaenz, from what I understand, neither did Al Jazeera go through that ten page list of perspectives that you want aired, which by the way contains a lot more allegations, yet-to-be-proven accusations, and some downright questionable. For example, "the numerous bomb attacks that occur in 'numerous locations' across the city almost nightly" ?????????

The only reference on the BBC website I could find is here, but I didn't see any link to a video. http://tinyurl.com/25x5su6

Your comments have no logical bearing and drip with denial of alternate views, the same thing you accuse other posters of. In one breath you dismiss those who disagree with the BBC and then call for more views. The majority of the posts in this thread so far have complained about the omission of factual information and events. How does a news agency report a story to its audience with out reporting the events that caused the story to unfold in the first place? No problem if the audience simply wants to be entertained, amused, or shocked, and the news agency just wants its ratings.

The deterioration of news agencies like CNN and even the BBC into sound bite infomercialtainment has been going on for 20 years and has little to do with Thailand, other than they are no longer able to report complex stories that are beyond their audiences or even their reporters' ability to grasp in the allotted time space.

You said that complaining about your favorite news reporting looks terrible in the eyes of those in the West. I certainly hope so. When someone grabs my shoulder and shakes me out of a pleasant daydream, I'm shocked too. You certainly have all the right to choose your own form of entertainment, but please do not come and complain about others who may not agree with the last episode of your favorite news soap.

While stuck at a red light, you are the first to enter the second oncoming lane becasue the first oncoming lane has filled up.

Court grants bail for red shirt leader to apply to run in election

Court grant bail for red shirt leader Kokaew Pikunthong detained for terrorism charge so that he could apply to run in the by election next month.

Kokaew is scheduled to apply to run in the poll Monday next week.

The court said corrections officials will escort Kokaew to the registration venue. After he applied, the officials will escort him back to the prison.

The department will decide the outfit of Koekaew on that day, the court said.

The Nation

Court grants bail for red shirt leader to apply to run in election

AMAZING THAILAND.

A suspect being held on terrorism charges yet he is allowed to register to run for elections!When you think you have seen it all-amazing Thailand comes up with this.

Let all who trivialize Thailand on the rights they extend humans be humble. .

His view of Abhisit as a bit wet behind the ears and unlikely to be effective may no longer apply. Nothing can change us like facing insurmountable crisis and I imagine Abhisit is not the person he was a couple of months ago. I don't know if he used the crying towels sent to mock him by the red leadership but with in a month, the same red leadership was fractured and many were shaking in their boots.

You do not seem to have absorbed,let alone addressed, the writer's devastating criticism of Abhisit at all.The article was written very recently and fully takes into account latest events

Not at all, I simply think the author has an axe to grind and rather than attack the article's weakness, I choose to consider its valid points and give my own views of Abhist and a good path for Thailand's future. If you view the article as Thaksin +1 and Abhisit -1, it is perhaps you who has not understood the article.

If you would like me to address the author's views of Abhisist, let me simply place his 4 points here.

1. He is temperamentally unable to empathize with people who

do not share his ordered and rational way of looking at the world. Many Thai

voters of the lower economic echelons instinctively sense this, and do not

identify with him, even if what he is saying makes sense. A foreign journalist

who was given a private interview with Abhisit told me that when she asked

Abhisit what was his favorite book, he responded with the title of his favorite

economics text. This anecdote gives a clue to the psychological make-up of the

man.

2. He is an intensely private and self-controlled man, whose only soul-mate has

been his wife. [same was true of Seh Daeng]

3. He has never been exposed to people with different backgrounds from his own

"Sukhumvit-Oxford" background. I wonder how many Thai villagers he has ever

spent time with, or how often he has had real conversations with ordinary

working folk, listened to what they said, and pondered on what he could learn

from them? He appears to have massive self-confidence in his own rectitude.

4. The attempt on his life during the Songkran riots of 2009, and the smearing

of blood on the gate of his house may have deeply embittered him, rendering him

inflexible.

If I had such ability to analyze another man's psychology using only spontanious knowlege, I could easily write an entire book about Mr. Thaksin's shortcomings as a human being.

A well written article coached in carefully chosen words to appear neutral. There are, however, a couple of glaring omissions and points that need to be made.

How can someone say they are describing Thai politics and not mention once, except to describe one as "one of Thailand's more unsavory politicians" the role of the rural faction leaders? To ignore the rural faction leaders also ignores how Thaksin was able really able to form the TRT and later win control of the Parliament. It had nothing to do with his policies. The rural poor did not "vote for Thaksin", the voted for MP candidates that the local faction leader chose. He also plays down the demagoguery the community radios stations and the "Red Schools" used in "political education" of the rural poor. Nor does he address in any of his paths to reconciliation what must be done to control the rural factions leaders. He fails to explain why Abhisit is unable to visit areas of the North and Northeast due to the rabid, hate filled propaganda that has been going on for over a year now, making Abhisit the devil incarnate and cause of all their troubles.

The other telling item is his use of the word "amat". This shows how much he is a tool of the UDD propaganda that brought that obsolete term back into common usage.

To me, this is just another attempt by a western left wing liberal to put the situation into context that fits his paradigm. Perhaps maybe unique in that he actually addresses this with his section on "Thai Particularism" in which he says fit into a pattern of belief by the "elite" and therefore idea that this is not a western type political struggle is wrong. He fails to acknowledge that in most cases, particularly the BBC and CNN, they did a very shallow job of reporting and continued to portray events in the incorrect or over simplified context. You only have to watch the BBC Hard Talk interview of Abhisit to see that bias.

TH

The author's favoritism is certainly clear, as you said. He lightly steps over the level of red violence and the shortcomings of many of Thaksin's early programs, while taking careful aim at Abhisit. Given that bias, he did get all the pieces in all the right places, and the article is still worthy. Seems everything is biased these days, sigh.

Poppy Field Journal: Thoughts on Thailand's Turmoil, by James Stent

The best overall summary I have seen, which does cover the issue of media coverage and a great deal else.

Some - notably the taliban whether of red or yellow stripe - in this forum - will not be pleased.However unprejudiced people will recognise the intelligence and knowledge.I don't know Jim Stent but he definitely falls into that category of highly educated and high achieving foreigners I have mentioned elsewhere.

An excellent and well thought out article, one that may be a bit painful for anyone with polarized views irrespective of color. His pre-Thaksin evaluation of the state of Thai society and culture is, I feel, as close to reality as one can get in a couple of pages. His treatment from the Thaksin years to the present seems a bit soft on one side although he has all the right pieces in the right places and does not loose his logical way. As he continues with what he would hope to see, there is perhaps a bit to add.

His view of Abhisit as a bit wet behind the ears and unlikely to be effective may no longer apply. Nothing can change us like facing insurmountable crisis and I imagine Abhisit is not the person he was a couple of months ago. I don't know if he used the crying towels sent to mock him by the red leadership but with in a month, the same red leadership was fractured and many were shaking in their boots. If anyone doubts Abhisit's hand in this, just think back to early April and Abhisit's public scolding of Anupong, one of the most powerful men in Thailand.

Although Thai politics is corrupt across the board, the future I would like to see is one where the corrupt realize they must now adopt at least the image of a cleaner politics with a new generation of leaders like Abhisit. It will take a long time but hopefully some of the image will rub off.

This would also include new leadership for those trying to bring about change. Although red leadership is more than just Thaksin, it was fashioned by him and reflects the old style bomb something and lie methods of yesteryear. I hope the forces of change can now find a new style leader to compete with Abhisit's squeaky clean and honest image. Granted, new style leaders will be operating in a sea of muck and will need the skills to survive.

In the end, the future of Thailand belongs to all Thai and change will not come from blowing up the place and tearing down the house, but from grasping the tenuous threads of good that lead to the future. And like the author says, this will take time.

As for your obsession with educational levels, the first thing that an Ivy League PhD physicist with straight A's will tell you, it's not the education but experience and the will to see things the way they are.

Your entire educational premise is easily discarded. If it were true, there would be little sense in giving a vote to the rural masses.

ermm, civilians normally don't carry guns. someone who claims the opposite, 'armed civilians has the burden of proof. 'armed' means guilty, that needs evidence, a smoking gun, simple the fact that they were killed isn't evidence enough that they were culprits.

We have already seen lots of images of both armed with (bigger and smaller) guns aswell as clubs, knifes, slingshots, rocket-mortars, smoke-launchers etc etc.

If you want to make belief that none of these items can cause damage or injuries, that say so and I will be happy to prove you wrong.

ermm, in the entry you are quoting i also wrote:

"please keep in mind that the question if the red shirts or their black shirts were armed or not is a different issue and not point of the argument here. this is about the dead civilians, were they armed or unarmed and how they died."

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The red shirts and probably some of the blacks were civilians as well. Many of the reds were unarmed, obviously many were armed. The reds even discarded their red clothing to be indistinguishable from other civilians. These are precisely terrorist tactics, the plan from the beginning was to generate casualties so the government would fall, as was demonstrated on April 10.

Even if you had a way to determine exactly who was who, which you don't, there is no way to separate the responsibility for civilian deaths from the other armed militants.

You produced a document, not in English that does not prove your claim. So don't blame others for being confused.

ermm, civilians normally don't carry guns. someone who claims the opposite, 'armed civilians has the burden of proof. 'armed' means guilty, that needs evidence, a smoking gun, simple the fact that they were killed isn't evidence enough that they were culprits.

Um, can I use the RPG holes in the Dusit Hotel as evidence? Or that hi-res picture of the dead reporter sleeping with two soldier bodies torn up by shrapnel? Or the videos of black shirts firing M79 grenades? Or the plastic explosives left on the powr pylons?, or the videos of the guys dressed in black shooting guns on April 10? Oh! How bout the video of a soldier laser targeted then shot?

Or you are just looking for 21 to 30 year old males in golf shirts with a particular model/caliber carbine?

It should also be noted that the article of the UN Human Rights Convention referenced by the AHRC refers to the shackling of prisoners in prison, not in hospitals. I could not find anything from the UN specifically addressing the issue of restraining prisoners in hospitals.

ahh, yes. these silly human right lawyers totally forgot that these two are not ordinary convicts who were found guilty by a court of law and sentence to a prison term. they are just detainees under some nazi act like the Emergency Decree and therefore don't have the human rights like 'normal' prisoners. and as long you don't keep them in another place that is different from a prison human rights are void and it is totally normal and world wide practice to put them on a chain like dogs.

their crime: they are accused of attending a political assembly of more than 5 person, which is illegal under the SoE.

Your peaceful assembly of your friends were BURNING A POLICE BUS IN FRONT OF THE LUMPANI POLICE STATION! For god sake.

Maybe you are thinking about the assembly of 5 or more peaceful terrorists.

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 18, 2010

AHRC-OLT-005-2010

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Thailand by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

<snip content>

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

With no criticism of the AHRC letter, which seems properly written, let me mention the two cases they discuss.

It is clear from the letter that the army was dealing with protester instigated violence, which the army had been instructed to stop or prevent. In both cases the individuals were first shot with a shotgun. The "shotguns" were the rubber bullet guns provided to about 2/3 of the soldiers on that day, according to all available photos of soldiers. In the second case, when the individual started to run away, he was then hit with an M-16 round in a limb, in this case his hand.

Every detail from the AHRC report describes the army behaving according to instructions and according to accepted international standards in such circumstances. This is interesting as it is the first report I have heard with exact details of the army operation that day.

As for the chains, according to the rules of the SOE, the individuals were not incarcerated among convicted prisoners, but placed in a hospital. It is clear that the bed chain was used to prevent their escape from an unsecured environment, although cloth rope is usually used for patient restraint in hospitals.

In neither case was the army out purposefully killing innocent civilians, as often claimed here. There is also a question of reliability of the individuals' statements as the AHRC has taken the individuals' account at face value.

Assuming the the army as a whole did behave in this manner, the story again raises the question of who was so clearly targeting the reporters and the emergency workers?

<snip>

The UDD still control hundreds of community radio stations throughout the north, northeast and central Thailand. On these broadcasts they're fond of such threats as "If you meet a woman who says she's a democrat, rape her. Then rape her sisters and daughters too."

<snip>

You don't expect anyone to believe that rubbish, do you?

They do. One of my brother-in-laws had one of these stations until recently. They are mostly small one man shows, have local commercials, put on music, and rant pretty much anything on their mind when they feel like it. He was crazy about any politics local or international. He had two dogs, one named Bush and the other Clinton. Nice guy except you could not sit next to him while he was watching boxing, you would get punched unconscious as he swung his fists in sync with the boxers.

it was not a mistake , but the only way to reply as i 3 times get message that too much multi quotes are in it , only way to reply was to copy a few and delete , unless you know the better way how to do it:sorry: , then i welcome it ???

i did not change txt in mrssages , respect posters edit rights

It's not as easy but you can remove the older quotes as "quote", "/quote" pairs starting from the inside, like the blue quote below.

[guote name=david555' date='2010-06-21 18:33' timestamp='1277119990' post='3701735]

[guote name=ozzieman05' date='2010-06-21 17:01' timestamp='1277114496' post='3701525]

Answering within the quotes, or reformatting someone's quote with colours or bold print is not allowed though.

Every now and again we all make these silly mistakes, I have also done this not realising the definition of the rule

I will have to keep this one in mind myself in future

[/guote]

it was not a mistake , but the only way to reply as i 3 times get message that too much multi quotes are in it , only way to reply was to copy a few and delete , unless you know the better way how to do it:sorry: , then i welcome it ???

i did not change txt in mrssages , respect posters edit rights

[/guote]

BANGKOK: -- Anti-government red shirts seeking revenge are expected to instigate fresh turmoil in Bangkok and the provinces after the government lifts the emergency decree, security agency sources said yesterday.

These folks have no problem breaking laws, causing violence and terrorizing people but for some reason are scared to break the rules of the emergency decree?

a political assembly of more then 5 people would be a crime that allows the security forces to shot them down and arrest and chained the wounded like the the red shirts in this photo.

without the SoE the government could not do this legally. And without the SoE the reds could use their constitutional rights to protest without fear for life and health.

I think the chain is to keep them from running away, since they have been arrested. They also tie down people who are withdrawing from alcoholism, but in this case it's usually 2 or 4 limbs. I see the guy on the right has hurt his fingers.

Incredibly nice propaganda though.