In Town

Yes, it was clearly Thaksin's fault. He wasn't in the country, but still, he forced the soldiers to shoot civilians. And the popcorn shooter? His was just a measured and reasonable response to the continued influence of the Shins in Thailand. The floods? Thaksin. The drought? Thaksin? No alcohol when you are thirsty? Thaksin...

Two people from one political side and only one from the other side, it's not really balanced, right?

How would you achieve a balance with Yingluk on one end of the beam. Calling her a political lightweight, even an airhead, doesn't do justice to what more resembles a helium balloon.

Misogynistic, as I said. Her brother is an evil genius who easily controls most people in Thailand, while she is just a ditsy airhead who cannot tie her shoelaces.

I think your caption under your icon is probably accurate, as you seem full of it.

Despite the misogynistic rantings of some here, my feeling is that Yingluck would mop the floor with both of them. All have had an opportunity to govern, but only YL has been effective, and only YL has actually business experience. Sometimes substance really does matter.

What? Cauliflower?

Abhisit, while well-spoken, is to me the very definition of the boy toy empty suit.

Despite the misogynistic rantings of some here, my feeling is that Yingluck would mop the floor with both of them. All have had an opportunity to govern, but only YL has been effective, and only YL has actually business experience. Sometimes substance really does matter.

I livecin Pakkred also. Love the place, I hopes its stay farang free.

There is a nice local floating market at Wat Tha Kieng. Only local people.

Pakkred - farang free

Nichada - farang bloody expensive

Maung Thong United FC play nearby, and it is always fun to catch a game.

Its heartening to see the professors finally standing up for democracy and free speech. Sad though that they could not do it for poor or powerless farmers, and only got the courage to stand up when it affected students. They are finally starting to realise that they are not a protected class, and that their cheerleading against democracy for the masses led to a loss of their freedoms as well.

This seems like perhaps the beginning of the end for the junta government. Increasing public disgust at the injustice of these arrests will perhaps grow, leading to further public protest and further arrests. Its clear now the government has lost the once solidly yellow academic community, both students and professors; and the business community is increasingly dismayed by the poor economy. What next for Thailand?

There is a group of posters on TVF that seem to relate every political issue to Thaksin. They accuse everyone with a different opinion than theirs of being a paid stooge of the evil one. But as this group grows smaller and smaller their claims become more and more outlandish, and it seems more and more likely that in fact they may be paid propagandists for the anti-Thaksin business group. Anyway, these days they don't even try to argue, or hide their agenda.

It's interesting to see how concerned the government is with the student movement for democracy. They know, I think, that as this movement grows it will become more and more difficult to control, because the students are actually the children of the elite who run the country. It was easy to portray the red shirts as the "other", as stupid hicks from the countryside unable to think for themselves, but it will be much more difficult to do so to the children of the generals, admirals, and corporate elite.

interesting days folks.

Good article which has hit the nail on the head. These peaceful students will hopefully inspire a whole generation!

Bad article written by some Red-Shirt apologist..... and just what do these so called "peaceful" students have to complain about.... get to your tax-payer subsidised classrooms and study... Who and what is/are behind them..?

I don't think the students are associated with the red shirts. If the author is a red shirt apologist, are you then a green shirt apologist?

The junta should be worried about these students, but their arrest probably creates more activists than it deters. The student movement is growing, and, as it is wholly outside the red movement, has the potential to be a game changer.

A coup by my book is illegitimate, i just prefer him above what we had before. I hope he can do the job he promised to do in the time allotted. I would not mind him staying on longer and taking on the police reforms.

I certainly don't agree with all things he has done, and YL was a lot easier on the eyes but work wise and what has been done this government illegitimate as it is has done more as previous ones. But still not done what I had hoped.

We will see what happens and if this was good or not.. in a few years we know more.

As for his character, can't say I like it much, seems grumpy, but as long as he does the job im ok with it.

A coup is only illegitimate when it fails. When it is successful it is legal. Else many European countries and the US government would be illegitimate and we would all still live in absolute monarchies.

Point taken, not 100% sure about it but yes its at least partly true.

Not really true at all. A revolution is not the same thing as a coup. A coup occurs when a country's military takes power through armed force, a revolution when a people overthrow their government. I'm not certain, but I don't think there is any government in europe that owes its origin to a coup.

Amazingly, the headline of this story says all that needs to be said on this issue. And its true!

+1 (and I'm a Republican!)

Personally, I'm a progressive. I used to be a liberal until you Republicans succeeded in making "Liberal" a pejorative.

I'm a classical liberal. Anti-war and intervention, populist, protectionist and pro-labor. What makes me republican is the belief we should live within our means, and not saddle my children with debt.

A group of posters here seem to condemn the army while trying to explain why it could happen that peaceful protesters might be a wee bit violent at times. That seems to ignore the presence of terrorists in the midst of the peaceful protesters. It also explains (but not justify without further investigation) the many innocent deaths.

I find comments which try to talk down the UDD involvement in violence as deliberately controversial as you might find my remarks. Mind you, I've been having thse discussions two or three dozen times with every time a newbie popping up again writing the same level of BS. It doesn't help to make me feel more friendly and forgiving.

If you now faint to feel provoked, you may want to look up hypocracy.

Conclusion, the same old non-info in a topic saying new evidence has been submitted, but not made public yet.

I find it interesting that both you and Baerboxer both seem to believe that number of posts on TVF correlates with expertise on the events of 2010. Graft seems to have a very good grasp of those events, and a lot of facts at his fingertips, but has only been on TVF for a week. Perhaps there is a negative correlation between number of posts and actual knowledge. After all, those who spend all their time posting have little time for research or even regular work.

"The truth is out there" - well it is, if a bit of savvy is applied to a basic internet search. The fact is, this information is available to everyone no matter how many posts one has under their belt.

Yes, it is. Which makes the coincidence of lots of "newbies" coming on praising the Shins and ignoring the truth even more remarkable.

Information - like that on Mr. Amsterdam's site you mean?

Every so often a little clutch of posters come on an all spout the same things as previously little clutches of disappeared posters. Interesting phenomenon.

You seem to think that Thaksin or Robert Amsterdam would find it useful to pay people to post on TVF. The truth is that this site has absolutely zero political influence, and the proof of that is that it has not been shut down. But hey, if someone would pay me, I would be happy!

So many who support the Shins want to say democracy is an election. The elected government can then do what they want and if people don't like it, they can vote them out. Mugabe and Hun Set would be proud of that view.

Really, ... Mugabe and Hun, there you are just blathering again. ....

Finally, let me acknowledge that after this, you will be able to raise the victory flag of endurance, and so I will end simply with this point about support or non-support of the PTP - and let's take a really disgusting choice - I don't care if the Thai people elect Charlem or Suthep to lead their country as long as it is the Thai people who make that choice and not the generals and that Forbes list of the 50 wealthiest Thais...

+1 (and I'm a Republican!)

A group of posters here seem to condemn the army while trying to explain why it could happen that peaceful protesters might be a wee bit violent at times. That seems to ignore the presence of terrorists in the midst of the peaceful protesters. It also explains (but not justify without further investigation) the many innocent deaths.

I find comments which try to talk down the UDD involvement in violence as deliberately controversial as you might find my remarks. Mind you, I've been having thse discussions two or three dozen times with every time a newbie popping up again writing the same level of BS. It doesn't help to make me feel more friendly and forgiving.

If you now faint to feel provoked, you may want to look up hypocracy.

Conclusion, the same old non-info in a topic saying new evidence has been submitted, but not made public yet.

I find it interesting that both you and Baerboxer both seem to believe that number of posts on TVF correlates with expertise on the events of 2010. Graft seems to have a very good grasp of those events, and a lot of facts at his fingertips, but has only been on TVF for a week. Perhaps there is a negative correlation between number of posts and actual knowledge. After all, those who spend all their time posting have little time for research or even regular work.

Thaksin the saviour and Yingluck the beauty. Single handedly lifted Thailand out of the Middle Ages.

Yes, I agree. Good post mate!

Thaksin - no doubt the most democratic and effective leader Thailand has ever had. Brought heath care and prosperity for the poor, while improving the economy for everyone. Thaksin's sister Yingluck - Second best PM ever, but best looking, and probably a tad bit more politically savvy than her brother. Much much smarter than Abhisit, and nicer.

Cheerio, mate!

bull, red cloak, your post.

You got it. Just having a bit oh fun.

Thaksin - no doubt the most democratic and effective leader Thailand has ever had. Brought heath care and prosperity for the poor, while improving the economy for everyone. Thaksin's sister Yingluck - Second best PM ever, but best looking, and probably a tad bit more politically savvy than her brother. Much much smarter than Abhisit, and nicer.

Cheerio, mate!

More or less the opposite of yours. The soldiers arrive ready to kill; some with automatic weapons, some with shotguns and bandoliers of double ought buckshot (you could easily see the shot because the cases were transparent). They set up a "life fire zone" because they were ready to take life. In a normal country police deal with demonstrators in a respectful and responsible way.

People always talk about the blackshirts opening fire on the soldiers, but if they did, they were not much of a threat, as they didn't shoot anybody. The soldiers, on the other hand, were very effective in shooting nurses. I never saw a gun in the demo site; not to say there were not any there, there probably were--but I saw thousands on the soldiers side, and none among the hundreds of thousands of democracy demonstrators. Someone mentioned the multicolour shirts (yellow shirts on laundry day). I remember they used to come down and taunt the demonstrators, calling them stupid buffalo, and trying to spark a fight. I remember the fear among the crowd whenever soldiers were sighted on tall buildings; justifiable fear as it turned out. I remember the barricades, tires and bamboo, manned by young (and some not so young) toughs armed with bottle rockets, sticks and slingshots, standing tall in the face of soldiers with war weapons. I guess that is my take.

The 2010 insurgents were protesting against the legal government of the time. Why didn't they protest between 2006 and 2010?

Armed black shirts were caught on camera and video. Why does PTP especially Chalerm insist they did not exist?

The red shirt leaders agreed to disperse when new elections were agreed. Why did they suddenly change their mind and increase the violence instead?

The were given adequate warnings before the violence erupted and led to tragic loss of life.

Compare this with 2013/4. Protesters were largely peaceful. They were warned to go home as the police couldn't guarantee to protect them. From whom?

Yingluck requested they be allowed to protest freely, with no violence against them. Her handpicked head of CAPO predicted they'd get attacked, probably by his often quoted "mysterious third hand". Sure enough they were attacked. Bombed, shot at and murdered. And Chalerm, Tarit, and the RTP never managed to arrest and prosecute anyone, not one. Even those who fell into police hands somehow walked away with no charges. Why do you think that was?

what a (self-censored) post...

The 2010 insurgents were protesting against the legal government of the time.

following a judicial coup and installed by the army - which everyone in Thailand except a few posters here understands...

Why didn't they protest between 2006 and 2010?

did you miss 2006 post-coup? Did you miss 2009 post judicial coup? Of course you did...

Why does PTP especially Chalerm insist they did not exist?

1) who really cares, and 2) can't you guess that for yourself.

more interesting would be to understand who they were and why they were really there... but that would be a lively discussion beyond the scope and, possibly, rules of this forum...

The red shirt leaders agreed to disperse when new elections were agreed. Why did they suddenly change their mind and increase the violence instead?

The answers as to why the rejection of the agreement are out there for those who care to look. It also points out that the red shirt movement is not the monolithic Thaksin drones that they are made out to be on this forum.

As for the increase in violence, you might recall that it was immediately after the discussions on the elections that a sniper shot the rebel general and the military "cleansing" operation began... so you'll forgive me for pointing out that it was not the protesters who "suddenly increased the violence"...

The were given adequate warnings before the violence erupted and led to tragic loss of life.

The old "if they had only gone home, the the army would not have been obliged to kill them" argument... What a complete and total load of horse manure.

Compare this with 2013/4.

OK, let's do that...

Police killed by protesters with guns and grenade launchers

The laksi gunfight

protester violence to prevent voting

blocking the rice program loans to pay the farmers

what is missing is the military coming in with their snipers, live-fire zones and attacks on unarmed protesters and journalists...

Your usual one sided biased nonsense, mixed with the so often seen Shin supporter's insults, and ignorance of facts and reality.

You don't think Thaksin appoints the red shirt leaders? Who does then, Mickey Mouse? You don't think Thaksin pays them a salary like he did to all the PTP ministers and MP's.

You want to pretend that Thaksin never dissolved parliament, resigned the caretaker PM role and then took it back without any legal authority?

You want to pretend Thaksin and various of his cronies didn't break laws? Or you want to suggest their law breaking should be ignored?

You want to pretend the attacks on anti-amnesty for Thaksin and anti-PTP protesters were nothing to do with those who owned PTP?

You want to pretend the police really couldn't arrest and prosecute those responsible?

Dream on - must nice in your little pretend Shin dream world.

You don't care a PTP senior minister, one time deputy PM and head of CAPO repeatedly told lies? Guess you'll fit right in with the Shin worldview.

Hilarious. Its almost like Godwin's law. No matter what the topic, someone sooner or later (and typically sooner) will bring up Thaksin. When that happens, there should be a rule that the person that brought up Thaksin (unless of course he is relevant to the discussion) has automatically lost the argument. So the only question that remains is, is Thaksin relevant to this discussion? I vote no.

More or less the opposite of yours. The soldiers arrive ready to kill; some with automatic weapons, some with shotguns and bandoliers of double ought buckshot (you could easily see the shot because the cases were transparent). They set up a "life fire zone" because they were ready to take life. In a normal country police deal with demonstrators in a respectful and responsible way.

People always talk about the blackshirts opening fire on the soldiers, but if they did, they were not much of a threat, as they didn't shoot anybody. The soldiers, on the other hand, were very effective in shooting nurses. I never saw a gun in the demo site; not to say there were not any there, there probably were--but I saw thousands on the soldiers side, and none among the hundreds of thousands of democracy demonstrators. Someone mentioned the multicolour shirts (yellow shirts on laundry day). I remember they used to come down and taunt the demonstrators, calling them stupid buffalo, and trying to spark a fight. I remember the fear among the crowd whenever soldiers were sighted on tall buildings; justifiable fear as it turned out. I remember the barricades, tires and bamboo, manned by young (and some not so young) toughs armed with bottle rockets, sticks and slingshots, standing tall in the face of soldiers with war weapons. I guess that is my take.

Fact is that the protestors where armed with war weapons. That's where it all started. They weren't peaceful protestors but terrorists if you want to get technical. They had no problem with setting a dozen buildings on fire neither. I have images to proof that too. After months of negations (many found that too long) the army came in with weapons too. The army had no choice. Simple as that really.

By the way, tomorrow I will attach a few images where you can see that the blackshirts were shooting at security forces. Just to kill your funny story that the blackshirts had weapons but didn't shoot at anybody... But to be fair, we are getting somewhere. First you guys claimed there were no blackshirts, then there were blackshirts but they didn't have war weapons, now you agree that they had weapons and now the story is that they didn't shoot at anyone.

correction: negations should be negotiations of course

I do think it was clearly established last year that the blackshirts are PDRC.

But to your other points, thank you for correcting me. I remember now. The red shirt terrorists were armed with tavors and m-16s and rocket launchers and shotguns and tanks, and ruthlessly killed almost 100 soldiers, and seriously wounded or crippled for life hundreds of others, while suffering no casualties themselves. Yes, I guess that is how it was.

More or less the opposite of yours. The soldiers arrive ready to kill; some with automatic weapons, some with shotguns and bandoliers of double ought buckshot (you could easily see the shot because the cases were transparent). They set up a "life fire zone" because they were ready to take life. In a normal country police deal with demonstrators in a respectful and responsible way.

People always talk about the blackshirts opening fire on the soldiers, but if they did, they were not much of a threat, as they didn't shoot anybody. The soldiers, on the other hand, were very effective in shooting nurses. I never saw a gun in the demo site; not to say there were not any there, there probably were--but I saw thousands on the soldiers side, and none among the hundreds of thousands of democracy demonstrators. Someone mentioned the multicolour shirts (yellow shirts on laundry day). I remember they used to come down and taunt the demonstrators, calling them stupid buffalo, and trying to spark a fight. I remember the fear among the crowd whenever soldiers were sighted on tall buildings; justifiable fear as it turned out. I remember the barricades, tires and bamboo, manned by young (and some not so young) toughs armed with bottle rockets, sticks and slingshots, standing tall in the face of soldiers with war weapons. I guess that is my take.

The decision by the courts to confiscate Thaksins assets was made on the 27th February. A small group of red shirts (Red Siam) stayed outside of the court to show support for Thaksin. The protests against the government started on the 14th March. Your attempt to link the two events as though the UDD leapt to the bidding of Thaksin as reaction to his assets being confiscated is simplistic at best.

You may wish to read this, Naruemon and McCargo's "Thai Redshirts Revisited" and learn something about the disparate groups (and their aims/attitudes) that made up the UDD at that time. For example,

Overall, the redshirt movement was an extremely pragmatic alliance among groups ranging from idealistic post-leftists to others of a rather thuggish disposition: elements from the two sides that had fought one another in the 1970s were now collaborating. The ambiguous relationship between the self-exiled Thaksin and the redshirt leaders was a complicating factor in understanding the movement’s decision-making process because it was unclear how far the hard-liners really represented the former prime minister’s own stance. Yet, a focus on the leadership reveals relatively little about the movement itself, given the lack of direct connection between many of the UDD’s leading figures and their grassroots supporters.

and why were they protesting? Because Thaksins assets were confiscated? Oh, please...................

Ultimately, the redshirt protests were concerned with politics rather than the economy or culture. Redshirt frustrations with the system centered on their

sense of inequality, but their sense of inequality primarily concerned access to political resources. Our 57 interview informants were not revolutionaries, and were not seeking to overthrow or even radically to overhaul the prevailing political order. Rather, these urbanized villagers aspired to social mobility

under the existing system. Our informants were primarily demanding political justice, a problem for those who sought to reduce redshirt concerns to a

set of socioeconomic grievances.

Another one ! Joined yesterday, 4 comments racked up and posting like a pro ! Is there a factory somewhere churning these guys out ?

Yes, there must be a factory! Actually, I think event are driving more and more people to this side of the aisle. I remember after the coup in 2006 I felt like I was all alone, crying in the wilderness. But a decade later the international community understands Thailand much better than it did then, and from being a tiny minority among expats in 2006 that opposed the military coup the situation has reversed, and now it is only a tiny minority that supports the latest coup.

This has also occurred among the Bangkok people, who happily supported oppression of the buffalo ten years ago, and welcomed the killings in 2010, as demonstrators had disrupted their shopping. Now even hardened yellows realise their strategy to regain power on the backs of the military has failed and that they too have been pushed aside. Sometimes it seems the only people left who oppose the Thai people fulfilling their aspiration for self-government are the super rich, the military, and a few posters here on TV. That makes me happy.

But a decade later the international community understands Thailand much better than it did then, and from being a tiny minority among expats in 2006 that opposed the military coup the situation has reversed, and now it is only a tiny minority that supports the latest coup.

That must be the reason China, Japan and the US is investing in government projects here in Thailand. All arranged by Khun Prayuth and his team. By the way, the PM just got back from Singapore.

You sound like a desperate man. Going to extremes to convince people that the situation is not what they think (and see) it is. Prayuth is popular, the remaining Shins are packing their suitcases as we speak. Perfect! You are trying hard, too hard to even sound a bit convincing. It is very clear what your purpose is here.

Since Thaksin's passports were revoked we see a lot of guys like you here on TV. Interesting.

Not into conspiracy much, are you? Perhaps you are seeing more guys like me because there are more guys like me. Scary, huh?

Sorry about inward investment. everyone knows the economy is in the tank. But I did hear North Korea may be interested in Thailand. And its possible they are already providing technical assistance to the junta for those polls you think show the peoples love for the generals.