Pi Sek

<snip>

To me anyone caugh up in this was guilty of poor judgement and a diminished understanding of the prevailing conditions.

<snip>

<snip>

Just another moaner and fool to have decided to step into the fire and then get burned.

If these two sentences weren't absolutely correct, I would find them rather insensitive and inappropriate. Unfortunately, they're bang on the mark.

The author has an issue with populism it seems. He must be a Sino-Thai yellow shirt amataya fascist dictator.

I mean, just because the country is losing billions (obviously a Democrat lie, as we won't know how much is being lost until the coffers are empty), why does that mean it's bad for the country?

A police spokesman said elite units had been deployed with authorisation to shoot on sight anybody looting, committing arson or inciting unrest.

From the Australian. Can't post the link. Well that doesn't look quite so good for abhisit.

Who issued those orders? No warnings required? Just shoot? Hmmmmm

He didn't order the live fire zone; that's been known for a long time. Except by rural red shirts & some online trollers.

Control of the CRES and the whole security operation was taken from Suthep Thaugsuban and handed to Gen. Anupong Paojinda weeks before live fire zones came into effect, because the protest had changed from civil disobedience into a military operation by armed terrorist/insurgent elements.

Did he receive a verbal or visual warning from the soldiers before they opened fire? Was the area signed as a no entry area? Were there warnings on tv and/or the radio about not entering the area? If the answer was yes to any of the above, did he ignore the warnings? Was he unaware of the warnings? If he chose to ignore any warnings, then he has no recourse, if the area was not signed, or otherwise advertised, then he can claim ignorance.

From what I understand, he didn't stop when he was told to.

That's what I gathered from the Pan Khamkhong case as well.

These stories just makes you want to bang your head against a wall repeatedly or volunteer for a frontal lobe lobotomy. As usual, there are no witnesses. At least no credible witnesses. Wait, scratch that. There is no credibility...in...Thailand. The look on this guy's face says it all: he looks genuinely confused as to why/how he could have been shot. There were protests, fires, guns, death, mass chaos on the streets, emergency decrees and still this guy is shocked. Like, "How could ANYONE have shot poor, innocent, harmless, van-driving me???" Then again, given the Thai military's history with everything from flying helicopters to protecting arms caches, it's hard to believe that there was any concept of the 'rules of engagement'. You can imagine the instructions given to soldiers: "ยิงอะไรที่สีแดง".

Yes, he clearly didn't understand, and continues to not understand, that driving towards military checkpoints in live fire zones after warnings to stop might encourage those manning that checkpoint to open fire. Personally I think he was a moron for doing so.

However, I don't think his van was red, so your imagined instructions don't make any sense here!

----

It would be interesting to see Abhisit and this guy have a chat. This Samorn chap is clearly no fan of Abhisit, but given the circumstances (i.e. armed insurrection attempt) Abhisit would be able to explain with consummate ease (as he has before) why such action was necessary whilst no doubt expressing regret that K. Samorn was shot. This guy just wants to have a shout at Abhisit - understandable, I suppose - but I fear that doing so would lose him a lot of face.

Interesting to see that he's happy the DSI is conducting the investigation, when the DSI was one of the principle bodies within the CRES justifying an armed response and was involved in its implementation!

Nothing illegal about selling used knickers, but no doubt the government will find a way to ban it due to a threat to 'national security'.

I've read this is popular in Japan.

Some foreign chaps in Samui that I know had an idea like this mid-last decade. They were going to advertise in magazines like Loaded and bought the URL "thaigirlsknickers.com". They were going to sell used knickers in boxed packaging with a "certificate of authenticity" where the girl explained the events of the last time that the knickers were worn, and mail them around the world for US$25. It sounded like a sure-fire money-maker!

Pensit & Laws told them it was not illegal, but not to do it. If they were going to do it, Khun Perasit (the senior French-speaking lawyer and MD of the firm) told them to do it with absolutely no foreign connection or risk deportation on "cultural" grounds. They didn't go through with it.

nice shirt:)

It's Monday

I don't think there's any doubt that Promphong's "the power rests with Yinglak" is utter gash. As in, I don't think anyone of any political persuasion believes it. However, he had to come out and say it, otherwise it would be an admission that the government is in cohorts with a wanted criminal fugitive. I'm fairly sure that's grounds for party dissolution (I'm surprised that the EC had nothing to say about the "Thaksin kid, Peua Thai tham" billboards - but there you go).

Funny, though, that the denial is interpreted by pretty-much everyone as a confirmation... how very Thai!

Hopefully Chalerm didn't go all that way just to be rebuffed again.

"By my calculations, the core money is not worth much more than US$500 million at today's liquidation value, and Thaksin's capacity to hold on to the debt is diminishing fast, by the day. So, in brief, his net worth has declined from a notional figure of US$5 billion to the present value of US$500 million," said the international financier, who asked not to be named.

He is even selling his Hong Kong real-estate.

Look like he is refilling his bank account through diplomatic pouches from those aspiring for a turn at the trough.

http://psmp3.com/play.php?id=YQp8jwRcoDo&t=Thaksin Thaksin held 2 luxurious paties in Hong Kong

Check out how pissed Chalerm is at the end

Thaksin has a nack for bouncing back from adversity. He has done so several times.

The video was a little grainy could not really see who was who. You mean the man that was pulled back when the van drove away?

Looked like a thoroughly sozzled Chalerm to me!

I think the point was... the orders that the major recounted are the kind that most people would expect a reasonably level-headed civilian government to give, that most people would expect Abhisit to have given, in a case of major public protests... not the kind of orders that would be the basis for a criminal prosecution.

In any event, I did like the major's explanation for how it knew it was the Black shirts rather than his own troops that were responsible for shooting the journalist. In essence he testified...the Black shirts are better, more precise shots than my troops.

And he's probably right on that count, considering that his unit from Prachinburi probably wasn't/isn't one of the Thai army's elite commands.

Good point. Many will be conscripts John.

A conscript can become an ace shooter as much as a volunteer can. That's a soldier's most fundamental function, i.e., being able to fire his weapon efficiently, accurately, with deadly force They practice it regularly.

In all of the movement and activity of the event, involving many people in many places, even a crack shot can hit an unintended target. Journalists are dying in war zones with an unprecedented frequency during recent times. An important factor in the deaths of so many journalists is the increased lethality of modern weapons and ammunition, and the journalists becoming "imbedded" with the troops. Although the journalists killed in Bangkok during the lethal civil disturbance of 2010 were not imbedded, they were in the line of fire of each side, which is not a good place for anyone to be.

Thaksin initiated the occupation but the government made the decisions concerning how to respond, in what ways, when and where, how. However, the presence of the black shirts made the whole of the event a preview of what a civil war would be like. That's the take-away from the events of the time. A civil war is an ugly event, as are events that resemble it, such as the developments of mid-2010.

It would be a radical departure of the Thai past if anyone in the events of the time were ever to be held accountable. The emotions are intense, but neither side, or the many sides, are not ready to be subjected to the rule of law. They never have been, they never will be. TiT.

I don't "like" your logic but I do agree with it

Read the OP

However, yes I believe the military did fire live rounds into the air above the protesters. as the did in 2009 as is amply shown in many videos and witness accounts.

<snip>

That is wrong - in 2009 the military fired directly at the protesters during the early morning attack that lasted from about 3.30 until 7.30 in the morning. I was there and bullets passed way too close for comfort.

Two of the badly injured Red Shirts got compensation awarded from the military by the civil court about 11/2 or 2 years ago.

I never knew you were there at the time. Isn't that the occasion when, some UDD claims say, 20 protesters were killed and their bodies taken away in army trucks? From what I gather there is no evidence to support this and no names had been given nor missing person reports filed... you didn't manage to get photos of this army atrocity did you?

Eye witness testimony, no doubt backed up by written reports and medical reports of injuries, can be so inconvenient to those trying to re-write history.

If it were so...

The first Red Shirt killed in the late afternoon round was at about 18.40 at Kok Wua intersection. Which is at least half an hour was before the so called "blackshirts" arrived, and fired at the soldiers. Before that, during the first clash in the early afternoon the first Red Shirt protester was killed.

Hiro was not killed at Kok Wua, but at Dinso Road, much later, just after Col. Romklao was fatally injured there, sometime around 21.00.

Contradicting his statement - there is ample evidence of soldiers having indeed fired at Red Shirt protesters: there are bullet holes in fixtures such as walls, phone boxes and street signs and posts that came directly from the soldiers' positions (also head and chest high shots) both at Kok Wua and Dinso.

Soldiers with assault rifles were positioned there, also quite in the front lines (at least in Dinso, where i was during the initial assault, walked out of there a few minutes before all hell broke lose there, fortunately). Not long before sunset, during one of the initial clashes i have asked one of the soldiers there if his rifle was loaded with blanks or with real bullets, and he answered that it was real bullets. There was also no attachment necessary when firing blanks mounted on his rifle. It is a lie that the soldiers had their rifles secured in trucks, and were only armed with shotguns, batons and shields.

There are even videos showing soldiers firing towards the Red Shirts.

There were snipers positioned at high buildings, firing at Red Shirt protesters (i have seen that myself when the sniper on top of the school fired his last round).

While there is no doubt that there were armed militants under the Red Shirt protesters who have injured and killed soldiers, it is a blatant lie that the soldiers did not fire at, injure and killed unarmed protesters on April 10.

Here are a few images i took during the aftermath:

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2010/04/15/mourning-and-definance/

Regarding what weapons they had/were using, from what I can see from the KhaoSod article, it seems that the Major was describing his orders and his unit's position/status at 09:00 and 11:00.

"According to his testimony, as his force made its way to their destination, Kok Wua Intersection near Khaosarn Road, they met resistance from ′no more than 500′ Redshirts who used sharp objects to repel the soldiers. He said 2 soldiers under his command were injured by gunshots fired from Redshirts′ position."

If I remember correctly, Kwanchai Praiphana led about 500 protesters to provoke the Army 1st regiment at Phan Fa bridge in the daytime of 10 April... this account sounds like the testimony of that incident, although news reports at the time said that the protesters were armed with bamboo sticks, catapults and molotov cocktails; not guns. However if, as the Major says, soldiers had gunshot wounds, I guess the medical records will be able to clear that one up.

"The witness went on to claim that his unit was not authorized to use live ammunition on that day. The Redshirts killed and injured "were not the doing of the military", he said."

That's a fairly absolute claim - and hard to disprove with an inventory of live ammo given that Red Shirts were arrested since with "confiscated" weapons/ammo. However, as we all know the Colonel was killed and this Major claims that he was injured during the Black Shirt assault - it's understandable (to me, anyway) that soldiers might have decided to ramp up their firepower in the absence of senior officers on the ground due to hospitalisation/death. In which case, we have a case of "firearms would be used only for ′self-defense′ or when the protesters started attacking public properties" - which somewhat contradicts what the Major says above. However, note that "his unit" was not authorised to use live ammo... quite possibly other units were.

Of course, it's also quite possible that this Major is perjuring to cover his superiors'/his underlings'/his own ass or he is giving false evidence to discredit the Red Shirts due to his personal views.

Taking everything into account though, for me... he is trying to show that the army was 100% innocent and the Red Shirts were 100% wrong. I do not believe that, just as I don't believe the Red Shirts' claims of the other way round. Simply put, the army was caught off-guard by a surprise heavily-armed ambush, and I fully expect shots were fired in anger back at them - with or without the authorisation from a dead Colonel or an injured Major.

<snip>

As to the sniper - i heard the bang of the gun and the bullet passing while i's was standing behind one of the APC's left by the Army. And in one of the many videos you can see, when shown on a very large screen, a silhouette and a muzzle flash. There was a sniper that shot at Red Shirts. I don't know if was a soldier.

But the theory that it was a Red Shirt militant killing his own is about as ridiculous as the theory that Col. Romklao was killed by one of his own troops from the back.

I don't agree with your dismissal that the sniper was a Red shooting Reds. It had been clear from the days leading up to 10 April - especially given Jatuporn's announcement that a "third armed element" of the protest group had arrived and Arisaman's constant threats of violence if "one drop of blood is shed" in the year leading up to the 2010 protest - that the Reds had been pushing for a violent confrontation to "escalate" the protest.

Also, note that video clip of the Red Shirts on the front line on 10 April who are asking each other in a panic whose side Gen Seh Daeng was on...

It's not just the Reds of course... Chamlong also allegedly admitted after a protest that he needed one or two protesters to lose their lives in order to garner public sympathy.

As you know very well, these protests are breeding grounds for immoral demagogues and charlatans. They want to establish their political goals, not help people.

It says here Thailand has 10 of them already, why stress the poor animal out transporting it to Chaing Mai?

Thai ones are a copy.

Fake white masks?

<snip>

Does that make me "yellow" now?

In some peoples' books I'm sure in does! Similarly I've been accused many times on here of being a "Thaksin-sympathiser", which couldn't be further from the truth.

Chalerm is exactly the type of Amataya that true Red Shirts should be clamouring to get rid of.

I see it as rather tragic more than ironic that it took Thaksin to tap into this political seam of unrest. The stage is wide open for someone to come to the fore genuinely in the centre of politics. Could be Abhisit, but he has too much Democrat baggage. Balancing the needs of business and Somchai average can be done, but PTP have gone to the extreme to insure they win votes.

I do wish these white shirts would lay off the "threatening the monarchy" line, and just focus on corruption and incompetence of the current government.

"Threatening the monarchy" is a smear campaign set up by those who support this government, based on historical significance either not known or disregarded by the mask wearers. Have the maskers made any statements to this effect - I doubt it.

But those on this forum with an agenda proclaim that GF is worn as an anti-monarchist symbol or that the WMs are stupid/ignorant. Neither position is valid.

Actually I think I have read somewhere relatively neutral that one of the White Mask complaints is that Thaksin and PT government are disloyal to the monarchy. However, I can't remember seeing any quotes from anyone - although I'm sure at least one of those banners or placards they're holding will have something communicating the Thaksin-hates-the-King message.

Emptyset's right, of course... it's a foolish card to play when they have so many legitimate complaints against this government's performance.

I have to say, even though I cannot stand this government, I hope they get to complete their term in office. People are starting to see why the Democrats would have been a better choice last time around - massive amounts of money is being lost on pea-brained ideas, the government seems to support censorship as much as the Democrats did, inflation (real-life, not the 1% or whatever officially quoted) has become unreasonable, unemployment is up... all the signs of a country out-of-control.

Besides, now is not a good time for an election. In 2 years we have seen quite a few by-elections go from red to blue, but there are still people brainwashed on both sides. There's always the argument that "the country will be too far gone" in 2 years' time but I think that, for the country to be at peace, both sides have to understand the dangers of voting in a party like Peua Thai.

Let them have their time at the trough and, if they have not governed in an acceptable fashion, then vote them out. And remember why you did.

They have not threatened the monarchy. Where does it say that? The mask is from the movie V for Vendetta, watch the movie then you will understand. Of course the mask may be worn because it's a cool mask.

I think he's saying that this commonly misused standard justification to get politically angry in Thailand is detracting from the more valid of their arguments - that the government is incompetent and corrupt.

Well, these masked people are taunting the red shirts and i think if i was a red shirt i would probably retaliate to this taunting, its only natural. And if they are not trying to make trouble, why are they doing it ?

Sorry for sounding personal, but I guess that makes you a... well, I can't use language that strong on here.

Taunting? What?

And maybe they are trying to send a public message rather than making trouble.

Hardly looks like an attack but more like a staged event. You have six people wearing red clothing and one with a mask. Everyone seems to be in party mood with happy smiling faces. Look at the pic, that is definitely staged. The guy in red is smiling and the little woman in the stripes is apparently being held back by the invisible man.

I've seen three videos of this - two where a few Red Shirt old ladies start shouting at the white masked protesters and then some guys jump in and start pushing and trying to take their banners away and it doesn't look like anything too violent, but it doesn't exactly look friendly either.

Then I saw the third, with Red Shirt guys whacking protesters with sticks and police having to drag Red Shirts off prone victims, and it reminded me of this:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhJ3KZb-W_I

Darks days for humanity when shit like this is happening.

Whatever this expo was, it would have done a lot of good for the city and province of Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya. After the flood response fiasco and now this, I don't imagine Peua Thai will be able to keep this province next time round.

For christ sake have you been to Ayutthaya and see how they look after there other tourism hotspots?!

Once or twice, yes. But what's that got to do with anything?

The inspectors were "favouring" the Thai bid and there was a good chance of something happening, which would have no-doubt benefitted quite a lot of locals through direct or indirect business, and the preparations would have needed a splash of paint to be applied to the town in advance...

My point is that a province that voted in PTP has been screwed by PTP... and it would have seen some of the cash cow if they had voted in the Democrats (which is why a lot of them decided to vote in PTP in the first place!). It's a feeling I get from quite a lot of people who voted PTP... but then, that's democracy in action.

In this case - once could be construed as unlucky, especially with a natural disaster and all, but twice in 2 years is a bit too unlucky, especially when there was seemingly no barrier to doing it and everyone winning. Maybe it was too much work for not enough kickbacks?

Whatever this expo was, it would have done a lot of good for the city and province of Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya. After the flood response fiasco and now this, I don't imagine Peua Thai will be able to keep this province next time round.

So Abhisit must question himself as to why he can not attend a Dem political gathering without fireworks and sling shots being fired (a direct hit to the head with a steel nut potentially fatal!) by the reds, yet the Government are considering stopping anti government protestors who do not protest violently but simply protest silently wearing....a mask. Aaaah Ok got it now!

"So Abhisit must question himself as to why he can not attend a Dem political gathering without fireworks and sling shots being fired"

That's pretty-much what PTP government vice spokesman Pakdiharn Himato is suggesting the leader of the Opposition should do in the face of political intimidation, yes.

"yet the Government are considering stopping anti government protestors who do not protest violently but simply protest silently wearing....a mask."

Well, they are trying/threatening to establish/fabricate the quantity and severity of legal infractions, not really stop it... yet.

Meanwhile, Mr. Sombat Boonngam-anong, leader of Red Sunday group which is a relatively progressive wing of the Redshirts mass, voiced his dissatisfaction with the Lamphun Redshirts on his Facebook, saying that the Redshirts had no legitimacy to disrupt rival groups′ rallies.

Sombat has always been more of a real democracy activist than the other leaders. He and his group should never have put on red shirts after it became clear that the red shirts were not working for real democracy but for for the interests of the Shinawatra clan who are undemocratic. He and his group should have also taken the red shirts off and denounced and distanced themselves from Thaksin's red shirts. Maybe he is just a bit stupid. From what I've read, he didn't do too well in his education.

Sombat for me, along with Veera, has been the most sensible of the prominent Reds. Sometimes he gets a little bit heated, but I like him as a personality and I like some of his ideas. I wouldn't say he's a "moderate" Red as some might describe Veera but but I would say he's actually interested in embetterment of society through intellectual discussion. I don't think he's stupid at all.

You are all welcome to rally down here in Phuket, I am sure the locals will be very impressed by your red propaganda.

I know the South pretty well, having lived in various places for over a decade. Phuket is the only place in the South where I have seen Red Shirts in red shirts doing Red Shirt stuff. But then, the Dems only won 70% of the vote there, their lowest margin outside the Deep South (edit - in the South).

I remember a group of about 40 Red Shirts at a Democrat rally in Saphan Hin protesting about Abhisit being a murderer and all. They were asked to leave after about 15 minutes.

I also met several migrant workers, both short- and long-term in Phuket, who supported Thaksin and therefore saw themselves at Red Shirts. More than in Nakhon, Surat, Krabi, Samui or Hat Yai.

The re-issuance of Thaksin's passport was, and remains, obviously indefensible (not to mention scandalous, criminal, anarchistic, nepotist, unethical), but we have had three pages of comments and certain factors should be taken into consideration:

1. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not seen the issue important enough to offer any explanation.

2. The PM's Office has interpreted the demand for explanation from the Ombudsman as a suggestion to retrospectively and retroactively change the Law.

3. The diatribe of re-written history and distorted timelines from IndyUK says that the passport had only been re-issued in contraversion to due process and regulation because the government (and by definition "the people") did not agree with the Law as it stands. This re-writing of history has a lot of gullible folk believing it to be true.

4. 473geo doesn't see it as defensible, just believes it to be amusing that people are taking exception to the government's flagrant abuse of power.