rabo

Rabo --- Sae daeng might be a hero to some but he was a terrorist and killer as well. There is absolutely no reason to assume the guy that took the shot that was the proximal cause of his death is a coward. Certainly he was less of a coward than a man that ordered the grenade attacks of so many non-combatants. Whoever killed Sae Daeng was one professional military man (not nec. in the employ of the government) taking out the command and control of an illegal militia. Sae daeng expressed respect for the killing of the senior officer on April 10th for exactly that reason.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood my words, coward refers to Thaksin, the person ultimatly responsible, who flits around the world in his private jet looking for more passports from near failed states to protect him, as others suffer. We also do not know yet who ordered Seh Daeng's death. I also do not defend his actions, as the Thais say, rap gam, he has received his kharma.

A couple of terrorists

One down one to go

One brave soul ends his journey at the hands of another coward. It's an old story.

For all his rebelliousness, Gen Khittaya was loved and well known for his tireless help of the people around him. A friend of mine who knew him very well said "I cannot understand why he gets involved in the causes that he does but he does so with great dedication." He said the only person that ever had any influence on him was his late wife. If she would tell him, "go up stairs and change that dreadful shirt", he was on the stairs in two seconds. His life seemed to change after she passed away, which might provide a clue to how he became involved with the likes of Thaksin.

He will always be remembered as a Thai hero, a status denied to Thaksin inspite of all his billions.

I don't think this verdict is going to change much for him.

Oh yes it does.

Campaigning for someone convicted of corruption is one thing.

Also supporting the same person on terrorist charges will give even the forum Thaksin red apologists a few difficulties.

What about extradition treaties? He might seek asylum based on that Thailand carries out the death penalty. Guess we'll wait and see.

I think this is why he has been collecting passports from some of the finest nations on earth, Fiji, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Cambodia.

What major Red Shirt leader advocated violence? What did he say? Can you provide a link?

You've been given all the links above.

You're just trolling now.

Of the four video links provided above, I viewed three. (One link was dead.)

In one video, Nuttawuth threatens to burn Bangkok if the government seizes power. Why would a democratically elected government seize power? That wouldn't make any sense. Perhaps he's referring to a government illegally seizing power? That makes better sense. So, he's threatening arson in the event of a government illegally seizing power. What's wrong with that? If a goverment illegally seized power in my home country, I'd be out in the streets with my neighbors forming a militia to fight it.

In another video, Arisman Pongruangrong threatens to torch Bangkok if the military tries to disperse the Red Shirt protesters. He's threatening arson.

Although the other viewable video shows Red Shirt speeches, it doesn't show any major Red Shirt leaders threatening violence or arson.

So, there's a possibility of Arisman Pongruangrong being guilty of conspiring to commit arson. Are there other videos with more damning evidence of threatened violence by Red Shirt leaders?

I refer to your comments re the 1st clip. By definition, a govt is in power. How does a duly elected govt "illegally seize power"? The "illegal" addition is yours, and condones the treat to burn BKK "if the govt seizes power" which it already has done by being elected. He is talking crap to an audience to stupid or brainwashed to know it's crap, and is a clear arson threat.

misterjag Sigh. And the truth is..........

If it's the referenced tape you are talking about, what he said was "Tha phuak khun yeut amnat phuak rao, we will burn the city ....."

Which means simply if your group takes away our group's rights (amnat).

Although amnat is usually translated as power or authority, the best translation here is probably "rights", rights are powers granted under a constitution, etc. Way off the original interpretation and further altered with the word illegal to suggest something totally different.

misterjag said: "Although the other viewable video shows Red Shirt speeches, it doesn't show any major Red Shirt leaders threatening violence or arson."mj, How do you arrive at this conclusion? After going through all the tapes, they all clearly call for arson and destruction down to the detail of what bottles to bring, where they will be filled, and how many ccs of gasoline to use! Further, the crowd is instructed to burn down the city and the leaders say "Don't worry, we will take responsibility for that".

You misterjag have been fooled by propaganda. You sir, need to read the Thai media!

'Is it OK to shoot foreigners and journalists?'

May 22, 2010

[clip story]

Is making the question about shooting journalist and foreigners the main thrust of storey rather then the confirmation that the Army was under attack by more then "primitive improvised devices or launch one of their homemade rockets " a bias or just simple sensationalism?

TH

TH, not only is your assessment of this spot on, but people need to start investigating their media reports a lot more thoroughly. The reporter writes "I am in a Thai army bunker," meaning he has obviously been allowed in or brought along by the Thai army to give reports, presumably according to the army, that yes, there really is a threat out there and that they are not taking out journalists or innocent bystanders. I would have some fairly sincere doubts about a soldier yelling that across the road, with him understanding it in Thai, not to mention the fact of his yelling that with a farang sitting next to him....my guess is if it really happened, the soldier was wondering if it was okay to still shoot at the perpetrators with grenades and rockets when you could also see farang press reporters near them..but again, i dont believe it....going further with this, I proceeded to google the reporter's name...only one comes up, a freelance Australian photojournalist who lives in Bangkok. When you go to his website, there are no links to articles, stories, etc (maybe some similar journalism from the Sarajevo conflict he mentioned), just offers for a photography course and a portfolio of photos for sale that have no link whatsoever to the type of journalism displayed here. So in terms of a well written report on the ground fronting the Sydney Herald, I think a bit more credibility is needed here.

just to update that last post....the reporter does have some good credentials and conflict stuff on his website, my bad for it not coming up when i first checked it....but I still think the story is slanted.

As presented, the story does have a lot of implausibility.

Perhaps the soldier was referring to the anxious foreign journalist sitting in the bunker disturbing him when he shouted to the other side to ask "Is it OK for me shoot foreigners and journalists?".

In one video, Nuttawuth threatens to burn Bangkok if the government seizes power. Why would a democratically elected government seize power? That wouldn't make any sense. Perhaps he's referring to a government illegally seizing power? That makes better sense. So, he's threatening arson in the event of a government illegally seizing power. What's wrong with that? If a goverment illegally seized power in my home country, I'd be out in the streets with my neighbors forming a militia to fight it.

In another video, Arisman Pongruangrong threatens to torch Bangkok if the military tries to disperse the Red Shirt protesters. He's threatening arson.

Although the other viewable video shows Red Shirt speeches, it doesn't show any major Red Shirt leaders threatening violence or arson.

So, there's a possibility of Arisman Pongruangrong being guilty of conspiring to commit arson. Are there other videos with more damning evidence of threatened violence by Red Shirt leaders?

Perhaps the meaning is different than you suppose. Can you please tell us the phrase he used to describe the phrase he used to say "if the government seized power"? If you can't write the Thai then just spell out the phonetics.

Based on the poll result so far, it's good to see that most of us agree there's too much Thai government censorship and the Thai media is largely biased toward the government.

I don't agree that the international media are biased toward the Red Shirts. I think they're just painting the picture fairly. Nonetheless, the international media serve the useful purpose of providing a counterweight to Thailand's government-dominated media.

Of 315 people who voted, 108 said the Thai press was fairly balanced in their reporting vs. only 60 who though the international media was fair.

Among those that perceived bias, if 50% say something is biased left and 50% say it's biased right then there is no measurable bias. Out of the 315 people who voted, 76 more people said the Thai media was biased towards the government while 183 more people said the international media was biased towards the red.

The international media was seen as far more biased than the Thai media by the mostly Western TV voters.

Yes, but not the ones that you imply.

The first thing that I notice is that the trooper on the left is inexperienced and ill-trained. Holding his rifle by the magazine is a definite no-no, the butt of his rifle is up around his ear, he seems to have wrapped the fore-grip in duct tape because they get hot and in doing so has blocked the ventilation holes (doh!) and giving a colour contrast which makes him more visible, and has taped 2 magazines together, a silly idea for many reasons.

The troopers are correctly assessing the closest arrested person first. Yes, she is a woman. Women kill just as effectively as men, and are preferred as suicide bombers in the radical muslim camps (lately) because many men refuse to accept that they are a threat. Her loose fitting clothing could easily conceal a weapon, and she certainly looks fit enough to grapple with a young man. The assumption is that they are redshirts doing a bolt, so they are looking at a years jail time at least, and cause to be wary of their possible actions to evade arrest.

On closer look it appears that the tape on both the rifle and the magazine is a single strip used for some kind of marking. Black areas of the stock can be seen both top and bottom, ditto for the magazine and there appears to be only one magazine.

So, why the markings? is it possible that some of the rifles are used for a different purpose, i.e., their ammunition is not the same? The clear markings may be a warning not to use this rifle in life threatening situations.

Pictures speak more than words

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle7133440.ece

Uhm. You took a really bad example. And what does this picture say, exactly?

This picture is very useful for getting at the truth.

My wife is building a cement wall up country to separate the father's house from neighboring land to reduce some squabbling. By phone, she's had trouble judging whether it should be 5 or 6 blocks high. Seems 6 is OK, you can still have a view.

Presumably you raise this issue because of the large number of (middle class) Thais protesting (via the social media of Facebook etc. )against the supposed media bias of the Western press (CNN is particulary targetted).

Certainly the Western TV press is vague in explanations and sensationalist in tone. But of course it is. There barely can be a sentient being left on the planet who expects TV news to answer the question 'why'. If you want this answered then you must read.

As for bias, everyone is biased. There is no such thing as neutral since it presupposes a Truth, that if only we looked hard enough we could all agree upon. If you even raise a topic you are displaying a bias by creating the framework for debate.

What is odd about the furore over the Western press bias is the lack of protest about the astonishingly unreasonable Thai press. The Thai press is intentionally biased. I know from insider sources on a certain channel that when a reporter wanted to show a soldier throwing a grenade she was told they must not show it. The Thai press is mostly owned by the Thai government or Thai military. A quick check on Wikipedia can verify this claim.

What this furore is really about is the fundamentally incompatible viewpoints of the Westerner and the Thai. The Westerner finds coups totally repulsive and unforgivable in all circumstances. The Thai is blase about them because they are so used to them. So when a Westerner says Abhisit is illegitimate he is absolutely right from his viewpoint. It does not matter a jot that Abhisit was elected to parliament and has formed a coalition governemnt. All that matters is the method that started the process to get him to power started in 2006 with a coup. That's it. So the foundational position of the Westerner looks biased to the middle-class yellow-leaning masses.

Yes, everyone has bias and there is nothing, at least intrinsically, wrong about it. If one reads multiple sources with some understanding of the bias, one can get a bit closer to the truth.

As for bias I have marked a few items that I think indicate a strong bias on your part. (we all have and. .....)

The Thai press is not owned and controlled by the government or military. (maybe wiki is biased ) It is almost all privately owned and at times has been well known in the region for its fairness and independence. It can be biased. The Thai broadcast media is largely state owned, however it is run for profit, except for maybe MCOT or army channels. Thai radio is government controlled through its licensing but not necessarily its content. This is true in most countries.

If I were to read New York Times' editorials while watching Fox, I would quickly come to the conclusion that the Thai media is not so bad, given some understanding of their bia(s). Your suggestion that it is astonishingly unreasonable is in fact not backed by this pole.

I question howthe Westerner can be absolutely right (some bias here?) when any legitimacy of Abhisit's position can only be defined in terms of Thai law. Maybe what the westerner means is "I absolutely don't like that"

The major reason western media failed to present an accurate view is just they don't make an effort to understand things in the framework of Thai culture and society, and thus resort to easily grasped western concepts. The Thai press does not have this problem, whichever way they may be biased.

Another fact is AI are all the world has against the wealthy aggressor wheather that be Thaksin, The Thai Army, the US or the UK marching around the world in persuit of WMD/OIL and POWER. Please! People are not idiots.....

This post suggests otherwise.

I think this post shows what is wrong with AI in the first place, or at least their image. They cannot assume a prefab model that assumes wealth and organization is wrong and poor are always right.

Did Amnesty mentioned armed militia and bombs mixed with ordinary citizens?, and that some of those citizens were denied the right to leave by confiscating their national IDs? (I don't know)

Amnesty is not bad, but they have their own set of bias as everyone else today. Perhaps they have the same marketing concerns as the news media.

Articles like this are written by those who don't really understand the basics of good journalism. A lot of Thais live in a fantasy world where what you see on television represents an absolute truth. All CNN, BBC and other news organisations did is report from the ground and present both sides of the argument. Because this balanced approach conflicts with simplistic absolute truth of good guys vs terrorists presented by the Thai media, a lot of Thais believe "The Truth" can be found on their little Thai television programmes and "Lies" is found on the "foreigner television".

The direct opposite was true. The major international news media portrayed a purely imported Cinderella story of the downtrodden masses long oppressed by the evil ruling elite. Then maybe a nationwide revolt, if that didn't work then maybe a country entering civil war and when it was all over, the beginnings of an armed underground to destroy tourism. Devoid of facts, analysis, and understanding of Thai society.

In contrast, average Thais in many walks of life had a fairly clear and balanced sense of what was going on, regardless of what side they favored, if any. Of course, these Thais were not reading the international media.

you should view this video on the youtube site and see the hatred being spewed forth by the red supporters in the comments section

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M9XiJoWSSs...player_embedded

there are comments on there that cannot be reproduced here for reasons that will be obvious

on purely moral grounds they are disgusting allegations to make

however i urge you to read them and think about what some reds think this protest was all about.

Hi Blackman, ithere are only a small number of such comments. Although the content is Thai, the style and language is the best (worst) the West has to offer. Such comments might also come from the red damage control center, where ever that might be.

Point taken, but I don't see this as representing a large undercurrent in Thai society.

i know too much from my Thai wife who works in that area in Bangkok, Big things are coming for Thaksin " Dr Evil " , watch his private plane get impounded next

Reu mak mai dee! Reu mot dee mak.

I've seen this too, it's been all over Thai broadcast news. Mercenaries from Burma and Cambodia, the money trail, etc.

Yes but all the evidence so far has been individual eyewitnesses and rumors. That does not hold enough credibility for me. A real investigation, report or some evidence would give this rumor some legitimacy. I'm not saying that it's improbable, just that I can't believe everything negative being said about the UDD.

I heard this morning from a military source (still subject to rumors, of course) that they have captured a significant Cambodian national along with arms. Has this been reproted elsewhere? Other than rumor?

Oh dear. Another misinformed American!

The Russians won the war in Europe with help from Bletchley Park. You Americans arrived late and with the UK footing the bill. Please spare us the history lessons.

As far as Vietnam is concerned, surely the lesson is to do the history first. The locals just wanted their country back. Communism was a secondary issue.

Anyway, well done creating Pattaya!

Oh dear. Another misinformed World Citizen!

The Russians won the eastern front in Europe. In terms of modern military power planes/ships/tanks, the Russians had little to throw at the Germans except people, they fought hard with massive human casualties.

The Americans began throwing money and weapons at the war from the beginning and joined in after Pearl Harbor. They "helped" win two wars.

As for Vietnam, you need to get history. Vietnam was never a single unified nation. Both the north and south were toppled by the rebellious Tay Son brothers, helped by? Siam ! , which lead to french colonization.

Nice snide remark about Pattaya, useful in the absence of fact.

Ass! Airport seizure didnt involve any M-79's or RPG's! Nobody got hurt. Is that an act of terroism?

Well, once you sobered up you might want to read the definition of a terrorist act. Like your tag line and location, revealing.

Terrorist: a person who uses or favours violent and intimidating methods of coercing a government or community.

Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th ed. 1990

The yellows very carefully cleaned all their mess at that airport and left it spotless. The staff working their commented that nothing was out of place and no one fooled with any of the system or computers..

They did not terrorize anyone to my knowledge. They were inconvenientists or preventorists.

I find it convenient that all these weapons of mass destruction were found.

Has anyone wondered why they were not used?

Smells a bit fishy.

Not used - the terrorists fired over 100 grenades the past 2 months. perhaps you have not been paying attention...

Not exactly a lot of dead soldiers are there ??

Either the reds were lousy marksmen or most of them were not using firearms.

Which is it ??

April 10, approx 200 army injured, 600 civilians.

Who is doing most of the shooting ??

Presumably next will be the announcement of the red's intention to use portaloos as chemical weapons..................

ph

You badly defeat your own reasoning.

THe question is: Did the Army have to face protesters that possessed, and willing to use weapons?

On April 10 230 soldiers were injured, about 100 from gun shot wounds. The commanders were assassinated.

Answer: Yes. Period.

This is not a contest to see who can shoot more of the other side. It is ludicrous to say it was unfair because the Army had more or better weapons. The Army's job was to enforce the law.

The protesters should not be armed, they should not kill anyone. In that case the Army could have enforced the law without the use of deadly force.

It is very suspect that after a couple of days the government has a show for the press and other governments. Not having any press with them when they "found" this stuff (there were some willing I am sure) is just too much. The fact that a bunch of this stuff was all in the car park is also at best weird. I am not a red supporter but this smells bad. Why wasn't Pornthip w/her gt200 there when they let the people out of the temple?

I also have to think if ppl knew these things were there, they would have used them. Instead of just shooting firecrackers and bottle rockets. There were some using them yes, I understand that but when the sh*t was coming down they didn't hand stuff out or blow up the car bombs?

You are suggesting that the reds are peaceful innocent protesters because they would have definitely blown up all the car bombs for sure? This is your logic?

or some were thrown away by their owners to conceal their identity.

in an another thread "Thailand-Live-Today-Live-Saturday" there is a quotation of not "over 100" but 1000 ID cards http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thailand-Liv...14#entry3631514 - we will never know the truth

Thai's don't throw away their identity cards, they would be in even more trouble if caught. The police do not say "No ID? Gosh, you sure got us this time, you can go".

How dare you call these people "animals". So what did they deserve?

Your type were burning wiches at the stake 800 years ago in the name of God.

You cannot accuse the entire body of protestors of arson just because a few bad eggs decided to start fires.

The army were using their directive to shoot on sight looters and arsonists as an excuse to kill innocent people. It is not a difficult task to clear 5,000 unarmed protestors with live amunition and tanks. This was no victory.

How dare you call these people "animals". So what did they deserve?

Because they acted like animals, or worse, animals don't start fires in bldgs with other animals in them.

Your type were burning wiches at the stake 800 years ago in the name of God.

You cannot accuse the entire body of Christians of burning witches just because a few bad eggs did.

You cannot accuse the entire body of protestors of arson just because a few bad eggs decided to start fires.

No one did. 36 major bldgs (5 man team) + smaller arson, 36*5 +50 = 230 bad eggs.

The army were using their directive to shoot on sight looters and arsonists as an excuse to kill innocent people. It is not a difficult task to clear 5,000 unarmed protestors with live amunition and tanks. This was no victory.

That was the problem, "unarmed protesters" with live ammunition and guns. I have not heard though that the protester had tanks.

Earthalien, do not learn earthling logic from forums and blogs.

This morning about 11:00 I'm seeing more black smoke in the city, rising about 3x the height of byoke tower 2. Mostly died down by 11:30. Hard to say exactly where but looks to be on the west side of the red zone area. Any word?

Police tire disposal squad?

As a terrorist, he can't fly so he is stuck in France till Thai Government is working on the extradition process. But knowing him he already flee and in hiding again

He's got his own plane, he can fly anywhere.

oh . . . even better if the landing permission is not granted

he has enough money to buy air fuel !

Great, next time he takes off, all countries deny landing rights, kind of like a half way ticket for us commoners.

For those critical of the EU, just this morning they made a strong call for action in Bangkok, two days after it's all over.

As Thitinan in the Guardian said Thaksin needs to make a sacrifice by withdrawing from the red movement.

How, pray tell, could Thaksin withdraw from the Red movement? How could Thaksin make a pledge about anything? Everything he declares turns out to be lies. If he declared he knew how to ride a bicycle, I wouldn't believe him. Look at the record of his public declarations, and let us know whether ANY of them turned out to be true.

If Thaksin announced that he was a liar, would you believe him ?

Yes, of course. Could mean he is willing to change for the better.

We use 12 bases of the RTAF, sorry I called them our bases. Thx for the fact check though

And am looking up crowd control training provided to Thailand by US now

I think what I saw was a recent article, maybe here, that also discussed 237 million baht that was recently spent on crowd control equipment. The article was withing the last 6 weeks.