retdson

Unfortunately, we live in times when this fellow is just as likely to get a book or movie deal, unless those go to his next of kin.

Unfortunately we also live in times when people can recklessly damage other people's reputations with impunity - and then sneer at them when they complain. The mods should have a serious look at this incident.

retdson

maybe we would like to get a serious look at the pictures you claim to have seen of Jeff Savage supposedly turning himself in?

until you do maybe i should remind you on behalf of the mods that:

15) Not to use ThaiVisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

moderator mario2008 at post #699 has already asked you to substantiate your claim with a link to the proof and you haven't

until you do, then you are in breach of rule 15 and as far as i am concerned Jeff Savage is still at large despite your efforts to misdirect the forum into thinking something else

now why would you do something like that?

do you know where he is?

are you his friend?

maybe you are him?

or is that recklessly damaging your reputation with impunity?

"maybe we would like to get a serious look at the pictures you claim to have seen of Jeff Savage supposedly turning himself in?"

I couldn't care less what you would like.

'maybe i should remind you on behalf of the mods that:

15) Not to use ThaiVisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.'

Do you mean like naming an innocent person IN WRITING as a criminal on a public forum? It's not only against the rules here - it's actionable defamation in civilized countries. I'd be careful about quoting rules if I were you.

"moderator mario2008 at post #699 has already asked you to substantiate your claim with a link to the proof "

And I've already explained why I'm not prepared to divulge someones twitter account on this thread.

"as far as i am concerned Jeff Savage is still at large ...."

I haven't the foggiest if he's still at large or not. He could be in custody for all I know. Couldn't care less either way quite honestly. I just said that he'd already been seen by the tourist police in Pattaya and that I'd seen the picture. If you don't choose to believe me it's entirely up to you.

"...despite your efforts to misdirect the forum into thinking something else"

Now you're calling me a liar. I must say, you have a very reckless streak in you when it comes to slandering other people!

Unfortunately, we live in times when this fellow is just as likely to get a book or movie deal, unless those go to his next of kin.

Unfortunately we also live in times when people can recklessly damage other people's reputations with impunity - and then sneer at them when they complain. The mods should have a serious look at this incident.

HE'S BEEN TO SEE THE POLICE IN PATTAYA ALREADY!!! Some people would be better reading the thread before they post.

For protection?

From Himself?

No idea. But there are pictures on twitter. I'd post them here if I knew how to link them. He was standing outside the police station with the journalist who uploaded the pics. Looking contrite and not very threatening I might add.

Please provide a link to the webpage.

It wasn't a webpage. It was a twitpic account. I don't think it's my place to provide a link here - in case the poor guy gets bombarded with hostile messages.

HE'S BEEN TO SEE THE POLICE IN PATTAYA ALREADY!!! Some people would be better reading the thread before they post.

For protection?

From Himself?

No idea. But there are pictures on twitter. I'd post them here if I knew how to link them. He was standing outside the police station with the journalist who uploaded the pics. Looking contrite and not very threatening I might add.

isn't this an internal matter for some of the more level headed brits in pattaya to handle .

i mean , the old fashioned way . locate this guy and , ya' know, teach him the meaning of respect ?

You mean assault him for threatening assault? That's clever. You're just the same as he is, mate.

HE'S BEEN TO SEE THE POLICE IN PATTAYA ALREADY!!! Some people would be better reading the thread before they post.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear....finally managed to catch up the end of this thread - it was moving that fast - and I'm sitting shaking my head in wonder. Incidentally, the man in question has been to see the police in Pattaya. I've seen the photographic evidence.

When I woke up this morning and heard that the army was going in, I thought it would result in 100s dead. I think it's less than 10. A phenomenally good and disciplined job on the part of the military that should bury once and for all this shit about repressive regimes slaughtering innocents, etc, etc. There's not government in the world that could have done it with less damage. Really, it's time for the redshirts (if they actually exist outside the mob) to quit burning the country and sit down like civilized people and take the hand this government has offered them. If they dont' want to do that - shoot the lot of them because no country in the world has ever lasted under mob rule. If normal people can't go about their lawful lives without fear and loss, the politics are irrelevant.

Here - I'm going to cut and paste the lot. The best comment yet on international media. Apologies to those who've already read it.

The original is here:-

http://www.somtow.org/2010/05/dont-blame-dan-rivers.html

I have been composing a long, day by day account of the "troubles" of the last three days, which I have not yet posted. The reason is that I've been getting a lot of mail asking me to explain "the truth" to people overseas. A lot of people here are astonished and appalled at the level of irresponsibility and inaccuracy shown by such major news sources as CNN, and are imputing the most astonishing motives to this, such as suggesting that they're in the pay of Thaksin and so on.

I don't think this is really what is going on. Rather, I think that there are two basic problems: preconception and language.

CNN first became a force to be reckoned with during the "People Power" movement in the Philippines. The kind of coverage we had for this was amazing. There was a camera in every camp, and we could follow this exciting revolution every step of the way. We knew exactly who to root for: the oppressed masses led by the widow of the iconic Aquino, and we knew that whenever President Marcos appeared he was Darth Vader, the symbol of an evil empire. The arc of the story was simple and inexorable. A whole new way of looking at the news was born, with all the excitement of a TV miniseries and, prophetically, a reality show as well.

Of course, many of the little details of the story were conveniently glossed over. Reality was not — never is — so black and white. But there are three important things about this story: first, in its essentials, there was a lot of truth. And all the protagonists spoke English.

The Philippines, as Filipinos never tire of telling me, is the third most populous English speaking country in the world. We will leave the definition of "English-speaking" to another blog, but it's very important that the various sides in this conflict were able to articulate their viewpoints in a language which CNN well understood.

The third important thing about the story is that it fulfilled a vision of history that is an inseparable part of the inheritance of western culture, that is so ingrained in western thinking that it is virtually impossible for an educated member of western society to divorce himself from it.

It is a vision of history as a series of liberations. From Harmodius and Aristogeiton throwing off the tyrant's yoke to the removal of the Tarquins and the establishment of the Roman Republic to the failed rebellion of Spartacus, from Magna Carta to the Bastille to the American Civil War to the Russian Revolution, there is this Platonic Model against which these big historical movements are always compared. There is a bad guy — often a dictator — who can be demonized. There is a struggling proletariat. The end comes with "liberty and justice for all". This is Star Wars. The dark times. The Empire.

The "People Power" coverage was riveting, compelling, and contained all the emotional components of this mythical story arc. Finding another such story, therefore, is a kind of Holy Grail for the international media. When a story comes that appears to contain some of the elements, and it's too much hard work to verify those elements or get all the background detail, you go with the Great Archetype of Western Civilization.

Now, let us consider the redshirt conflict.

Let's not consider what has actually been happening in Thailand, but how it looks to someone whose worldview has been coloured with this particular view of history.

Let's consider the fact that there is pretty much nothing being explained in English, and that there are perhaps a dozen foreigners who really understand Thai thoroughly. I don't mean Thai for shopping, bargirls, casual conversation and the like. Thai is a highly ambiguous language and is particularly well suited for seeming to say opposite things simultaneously. To get what is really being said takes total immersion.

When you watch a red shirt rally, notice how many English signs and placards there are, and note that they they are designed to show that these are events conforming to the archetype. The placards say "Democracy", "No Violence," "Stop killing innocent women and children" and so on. Speakers are passionately orating, crowds are moved. But there are no subtitles. What does it look like?

The answer is obvious. It looks like oppressed masses demanding freedom from an evil dictator.

Don't blame Dan Rivers, et al, who are only doing what they are paid to do: find the compelling story within the mass of incomprehensible data, match that story to what the audience already knows and believes, and make sure the advertising money keeps flowing in.

A vigorous counter-propaganda campaign in clear and simple English words of one syllable has always been lacking and is the reason the government is losing the PR war while actually following the most logical steps toward a real and lasting resolution.

If the foreign press were in fact able to speak Thai well enough to follow all the reportage here coming from all sides, they would also be including some of the following information in their reports. I want to insist yet again that I am not siding with anyone. The following is just information that people really need before they write their news reports.

-- Thaksin was democratically elected, but became increasingly undemocratic, and the country gradually devolved from a nation where oligarchs skimmed off the top to a kleptocracy of one. During his watch, thousands of people were summarily executed in the South of Thailand and in a bizarre "war on drugs" in which body count was considered a marker of success.

-- the coup that ousted Thaksin was of course completely illegal, but none of the people who carried it out are in the present government.

-- the yellow shirts' greatest error in moulding its international image was to elevate Thaksin's corruption as its major bone of contention. Thai governments have always been corrupt. The extent of corruption and the fact that much of it went into only one pocket was shocking to Thais, but the west views all "second-rate countries" as being corrupt. Had they used the human rights violations and muzzling of the press as their key talking points, the "heroic revolution" archetype would have been moulded with opposite protagonists, and CNN and BBC would be telling an opposite story today.

-- the constitution which was approved by a referendum after the coup and which brought back democracy was flawed, but it provided more checks and balances, and made election fraud a truly accountable offense for the first time.

-- the parliamentary process by which the Democrat coalition came to power was the same process by which the Lib Dems and Tories have attained power in Britain. The parliament that voted in this government consists entirely of democratically elected members.

-- no one ever disputed the red shirts' right to peaceful assembly, and the government went out of its way to accede to their demands.

-- this country already has democracy. Not a perfect one, but the idea of "demanding democracry" is sheer fantasy

-- the yellow shirts did not succeed in getting any of their demands from the government. The last two governments changed because key figures were shown to have committed election fraud. They simply did not take their own constitution seriously enough to follow it.

-- the red TV station has a perfect right to exist, but if foreign journalists actually understood Thai, they would realize that much of its content went far beyond any constitutionally acceptable limits of "protected speech" in a western democracy. Every civilized society limits speech when it actually harms others, whether by inciting hate or by slander. The government may have been wrong to brusquely pull the plug, but was certainly right to cry foul. It should have sought an injunction first. Example: Arisman threatened to destroy mosques, government buildings, and "all institutions you hold sacred" ... a clip widely seen on youtube, without subtitles. Without subtitles, it looks like "liberty, equality, fraternity".

-- the army hasn't been shooting women and children ... or indeed anyone at all, except in self-defense. Otherwise this would all be over, wouldn't it? It's simple for a big army to mow down 5,000 defenseless people.

-- since the government called the red shirts' bluff and allowed the deputy P.M. to report to the authorities to hear their accusations, the red leaders have been making ever-more fanciful demands. The idea of UN intervention is patently absurd. When Thaksin killed all those Muslims and alleged drug lords, human rights groups asked the UN to intervene. When the army took over the entire country, some asked the UN to intervene. The UN doesn't intervene in the internal affairs of sovereign countries except when requested to by the country itself or when the government has completely broken down.

-- Thailand hasn't had an unbreachable gulf between rich and poor for at least 20 years. These conflicts are about the rise of the middle class, not the war between the aristocrats and the proletariat.

-- Abhisit, with his thoroughly western and somewhat liberal background, shares the values of the west and is in fact more likely to bring about the social revolution needed by Thailand's agrarian poor than any previous leader. He is, in fact, pretty red, while Thaksin, in his autocratic style of leadership, is in a way pretty yellow. Simplistic portrayals do not help anyone to understand anything.

-- the only people who do not seem to care about the reds' actual grievances are their own leaders, who are basically making everyone risk their lives to see if they can get bail.

-- the King has said all that he is constitutionally able to say when he spoke to the supreme court justices and urged them to do their duty. The western press never seem to realize that the Thai monarchy is constitutionally on the European model ... not, say, the Saudi model. The king REIGNS ... he doesn't "rule". This is a democracy. The king is supposed to symbolize all the people, not a special interest group.

The above are just a few of the elements that needed to be sorted through in order to provide a balanced view of what is happening in this country.

There is one final element that must be mentioned. Most are not even aware of it. But there is, in the western mindset, a deeply ingrained sense of the moral superiority of western culture which carries with it the idea that a third world country must by its very nature be ruled by despots, oppress peasants, and kill and torture people. Most westerners become very insulted when this is pointed out to them because our deepest prejudices are always those of which we are least aware. I believe that there is a streak of this crypto-racism in some of the reportage we are seeing in the west. It is because of this that Baghdad, Yangon, and Bangkok are being treated as the same thing. We all look alike.

Yes, this opinion is always greeted with outrage. I do my best to face my own preconceptions and don't succeed that often, but I acknowledge they exist nonetheless.

Some of the foreign press are painting the endgame as the Alamo, but it is not. It is a lot closer to Jonestown or Waco.

Like those latter two cases, a highly charismatic leader figure (in our case operating from a distance, shopping in Paris while his minions sweat in the 94°weather) has taken an inspirational idea: in one case Christianity, in the other democracy, and reinvented it so that mainstream Christians, or real democrats, can no longer recognize it. The followers are trapped. There is a siege mentality and information coming from outside is screened so that those trapped believe they will be killed if they try to leave. Women and children are being told that they are in danger if they fall into the hands of the government, and to distrust the medics and NGOs waiting to help them. There are outraged pronouncements that they're not in fact using the children as human shields, but that the parents brought them willingly to "entertain and thrill" them. There is mounting paranoia coupled with delusions of grandeur, so that the little red kingdom feels it has the right to summon the United Nations, just like any other sovereign state. The reporters in Rajprasong who are attached to the red community are as susceptible to this variant of the Stockholm syndrome as anyone else.

The international press must separate out the very real problems that the rural areas of Thailand face, which will take decades to fix, from the fact that a mob is rampaging through Bangkok, burning, looting, and firing grenades, threatening in the name of democracy to destroy what democracy yet remains in this country.

But this bad reporting is not their fault. It is our fault for not providing the facts in bite-sized pieces, in the right language, at the right time.

Posted by Somtow Sucharitkul (S.P. Somtow)

Half a dozen dead? Not the Tiannaman Square/Jonestown Waco scenario with hundreds dead that the redshirt leadership were trying to engineer. Their cynicism and disregard for the lives and wellbeing of their supporters has been breathtaking. Hats off to the Thai military that have done a difficult and awkward job with what is minimum loss of life.

As for the future - curfew for a week. Shoot anyone that breaks it. And after that - when everything has calmed down - talk to the opposition with an open heart. For this to be put to bed the old ladies have to be split from the blackshirts.

.......To the individuals who condone the actions against the people who subscribe to the red-shirt views, and to the individuals who take satisfaction with human beings suffering at the hands of the media and powerful, rich people who can get away with anything; to those individuals I turn my head away in disgust.....

Perhaps you could explain - what ARE 'the red shirt views'? Other than general mayhem. I'm not fan of the powers that are in this country; get my stomach slightly turned by the sycophantic 20 minutes nightly on the news; believe that Thailand needs to grow up and get itself out of the feudal mindset - BUT I don't understand what these people think they're doing now. WHAT WAS WRONG WITH AN ELECTION IN NOVEMBER?

Emergency service personnel confirms numerous black uniformed terrorists setting buildings on fire multiple locations near rama 4 hiway exit

http://twitter.com/sangbkk

Buildings buring all over town now.

This is Ahbist's greatest failure. Not anticipating the cost of cracking down.

Reds asked for a political deal. He gave them bullets.

Reds are going for the Outllaw Jonesy Wales solution - paint the town red, shoot the bad guys and burn everything to the ground. Can't blame them in their situation.

CORRECTION : Reds got fair political deal but refused to stop protesting.Som nam naa.

There was a very good post on here a while back about the correct usage of som nam naa. This is not an example. A lot of people - many of them innocent of any crime other than naivity and ignorance - are almost certainly going to die over the next couple of hours. Mothers will lose sons, wives their husbands, children their parents. The red leadership have engineered a Jonestown scenario. That this operation unfortunately has to be carried out is a given. But gloating is in very bad taste.

Work? What kind of work?

It's a power struggle - nothing more nor less. Redshirts all talk about 'democracy' but they don't mean what they say. If they really wanted democracy they'd have taken up Abhisit's offer of an election in November. Abhisit - for all his faults actually understands what a democracy is supposed to look like. And he knows you cant' have it without time to cool off, sort out the logistics, then campaign and hold an election in an atmosphere that isn't viscerally tribal and overshadowed by ongoing violence The sort they have in proper functioning democracies in other words.

But no the redshirts can't wait a few months to do it properly- and the mask slips. This demand for immediate dissolution and 'democracy' while they simultaneously attack and disrupt civil society is nothing but an attempt to create a power vacuum (anarchy) that they can manipulate for their own ends. I used to be quite sympathetic to the red shirts. - but I'm utterly sick of them now. I"m just sorry that so many are dupes of the cynics who run them.

It's a power struggle - nothing more nor less. Redshirts all talk about 'democracy' but they come across like a group of 10 year olds discussing shagging. . They really have no idea what they're talking about. If they really wanted democracy they'd have taken up Abhisit's offer of an election in November. Abhisit - for all his faults actually understands what a democracy is supposed to look like. And he knows you cant' have it without time to cool off, sort out the logisitics, campaign and hold elections in an atmosphere that isn't viscerally tribal and overshadowed by ongoing violence The sort they have in proper functioning democracies in other words.

But no the redshirts can't wait a few months - and the mask slips. This demand for immediate dissolution while they attempt to break down civil society is nothing but an attempt to create a power vacuum (anarchy) that they can manipulate for their own ends. I used to be quite sympathetic to the red shirts. - but I'm utterly sick of them now. I"m just sorry that so many are dupes of the cynics who run them.

If Abhisit wants to end this and he is so sure that nobody supports the red shirts, he should dissolve parliament immediately, call fresh elections. Nothing better than prove to the red shirts that he is indeed loved by the majority of Thais. And at the same time deal an embarrassing blow to them and making them lose face. He could even get an absolute majority, and that way the Democrats could rule alone, without needing the smaller coalition parties.

Unless of course it all goes wrong and Puea Thai ends up winning an absolute majority. But that would never happen, would it?

Well, it would if the political climate was such that opposition candidates were prevented from campaigning in their areas. Or vica versa. Personally, I thought Abhisit was on the right track with elections in November. A cooling off period - time to sit down and thrash out the electoral rules of engagement (agreement on how to curb intimidation / corruption etc) and then a normal election when everything had calmed down a bit. The way things are at the moment the country with no government at all for the best part of two months followed by a bitter and partisan election would seriously risk precipitating the country right over the edge into overt and outright civil war. I strongly advise you to read up on the origins of the 1936 - 39 Spanish War.

Civil war? When one side is the army and the other side is carrying assault rifles and they're locked in street fighting in the country's capital city - then yep - I suppose it could be called that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmj4EOngkl0 You need to slow it down to catch the hardware clearly.

OK, and this video is supposedly proof of what?

The video is what it is. I didn't post it as 'proof' of anything in particular - except I suppose to support the observation that when you have two politically opposing sides armed with military weapons fighting on the streets you're probably bordering on civil war.

Civil war? When one side is the army and the other side is carrying assault rifles and they're locked in street fighting in the country's capital city - then yep - I suppose it could be called that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmj4EOngkl0 You need to slow it down to catch the hardware clearly.

I'll second the Al Jazeera vote. IMHO the best and most comprehensive reporting out there.

The BBC is the most unbiased news agency in the world. It is funded independently, not by taxpayers, but by individuals who want to use their service. And they do. And they have done for more than 50 years. If you slate the BBC, you slate all common sense.

Not sure I'd agree with this. Personally, I find the BBC quite slanted in its reporting. It has an invidious habit of - if not outright lying - then at the very least biasing its reporting by the selective omission of important details.

I wonder what way Condo Security guards will swing if it gets to civil war....lots of farangs living in expensive condos rely on these guys to protect them, will they?

You already know the answer to your question. It was quite rhetorical.

The answer is NO !!!!!!!

What you can in fact rely on is that when the reds come knockin' your friendly guard in will give you away. 100% bankable, guilt edged, guaranteed!

Chai khap. me farang yer khap. Farang yoo hong 123, 345, 678, 789, gor, 909 duay khap. khaa mort loei.

!!!

As human being, it is wiser to stop everything by announcing elections immediately and give back power to People. Today the risk to fraction the Country are huge: it is the responsability of a state man to understand this and avoid the worst.

Peace not war or massacre

This is where it's all gone pear shaped - the Reds should have taken Abhisit's offer of elections in November. it was very reasonable. A cooling off period, a roadmap to agree the rules, and then a normal election. Instead they chose mayhem - rendering free and fair elections impossible. How could you hold elections in this climate of anger and distrust? that would really be a recipe for outright civil war.

I have been around a couple riots and those such as the Rodney King Riots in LA were nothing to do with the police, justice or Rodney King. Sure they may have started that way but there is always a certain element of society that just wants to cause chaos, hurt authority or prosper from these types of things.

I really suspect a large number of the red mob are simply there to cause havoc and have seized this opportunity to act out.

Undoubtedly true.

=====================================================================

An injured person with a weapon is more dangerous than one that can retreat and run away

I agree if the have a white flag becareful

But we learnt the hard way that it could be a trap during the Vietnam way

Its easy for all you computer savy louches to tell young soldiers what to do when they face a violent mob

But as I can say

"Been there done that"

I have the right to say they are doing the best that the circumstance put them under

If you want to know the real problem with politics in Thailand when it comes to the masses ... simply ask Thais under 40 year old what they know about the Vietnam War or ask all what they can tell you about WW I or II. I am not saying to ask them details of any sort but find out if they even know these things took place.

This a very true point. I can remember teaching a class of 20 something middle class Thais (this was about 10 years ago) and not one of them had heard of Pol Pot. Not a clue who he was!

What's the saying about people who don't know history being doomed to repeat it? Not saying that we're back in Cambodia 1975 quite yet - but the footage