rubl

The brain behind these schools was, by the way, Tida Thawornset - Dr. Weng's wife, and present chair of the UDD. And no, both have forsworn violent strategies, especially due to their experience in the jungle and the mistakes the CPT made then.

Thank for the correction, I wasn't sure about that. I know (i.e. read somewhere) that a lot of CPT members have forsworn CPT and what it stood for. They've been pardoned, so be it.

Still the top-down structure of UDD, it's militant arm, Thaksin 'peoples army', the propaganda selecting English or Thai depending on target audience AND one not necessarily saying the same as the other, the use of ignorent cannon fodder, 'free our leaders'. Suspect to say the least. Just as bad as having an Englishman as Thai PM

Don't know if he has much in common. Just someone that they admire. I prefer Jon Ungpakorn to Ji and he's been critical of both (or all) sides, a very principled stance in my opinion. Ji decided to throw his oar in completely with the red shirts, in the process losing all semblance of academic objectivity and critical distance. Although one thing I like about Ji is he's never stopped being critical of Thaksin and pointing out his failings, whereas a lot of prominent red shirts that were against Thaksin before the coup, i.e. Weng, Thida, Somyot, Jaran Ditthapichai and several others have either become Thaksin advocates or totally silent & unwilling to discuss his crimes. Bit of an elephant in the room. But yeah, it is possible to be critical of Thaksin and be somewhat popular within the red shirt movement, as Ji & Sombat prove.

Searching for other things I found this about Jon U, from his friend and comrade Sung, May 2009. Seems to confirm what ES wrote

http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=10816

And remember what they did on October 1976 as well. Oh, sorry about that, too long ago and the late k. Samak said only one unlucky person died then.

Now tell me, didn't the UDD start around 2007 a bit past the October 2006 coup. Wasn't that when 'real' violence by shirts other than Army and Police started. I find too many 'facts' in the replies which seem to be based on 'what everyone knows', or 'says', or a simple 'I don't tell you yet'. The truth is wonderful, but tends to escape all of us, obviously hiding behind facts

No, it didn't start then. In the coup era only one violent incident happened, and that was the Sisao Thewet clashes, in which the UDD was falsely accused of having attempted to storm the residence of general Prem. At the time the UDD had no guards. Here is a little story about it:

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2008/08/12/revisiting-the-prem-compound-clashes/

The UDD ceased operating after the People Power Party won the elections, and reappeared after the PAD began their renewed protests. Initially the UDD had no guards, and only after the Makhawan clash they have slowly began improving their organization. The first proper guard units only appeared by late 2008, if i can recall.

Still busy searching. Found this interesting piece from 'comrade Sung', May 2009.

http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=10816

Which reminds me to ask, when did Dr. weng start the 'schools' to educate the ignorant poor in social doctrine ? Surely he must have told them that you need a seemingly peaceful arm and a more violent one, with only leaders having a need-to-know. Well he should know, learned a lot in Vietnam in the 70s.

Anyway, don't worry, still digging for information on red-shirt / UDD / DAAD / unknowns guards. Will get back to you.

PS no offence, but humans being what they are just referring to your own articles starts to become a bit suspect.

I don't think it'd be possible to go on the UDD stage and criticize Thaksin and receive a positive response though. As soon as someone does that, it'll be a good indication that the red shirts are becoming a true democratic movement, instead of (mainly) being a patronage-based network.

Well, well, what do you know. I agree with this

At the day of the grenades i have been with the PAD protesters, so i have no idea if there were any Red Shirts behind the barricades injured.

We may have passed without knowing. I walked back from UCL, RamaIV to BTS Saladaeng that day, probably between 3 and 4PM. You may not have noticed, I was also wearing a pink shirt

Yeah, I understand such tactics hardly harbor reconciliation, but the military could equally argue that if they were truly peaceful as they were claiming to be, the PAD lady would still be with us.

Yes, they could, and would argue so.

I argue that it was a serious dereliction of duty by the military to have civilians (some of them known to be extremely violent PAD guards) facing protesters of an opposing side (some of them known to be extremely violent as well). The day of the grenades at Silom was the third day in a row of increasing amounts of PAD protesters appearing at the blockades every night, let through and encouraged by the military.

And as i said before - that was not the first time such tactics were used. And lets not go into the many active soldiers that were PAD guards (they didn't just appear there by themselves, and long before the UDD had any organized guard units, and before Sae Daeng trained the King Taksin warriors at Sanam Luang).

And remember what they did on October 1976 as well. Oh, sorry about that, too long ago and the late k. Samak said only one unlucky person died then.

Now tell me, didn't the UDD start around 2007 a bit past the October 2006 coup. Wasn't that when 'real' violence by shirts other than Army and Police started. I find too many 'facts' in the replies which seem to be based on 'what everyone knows', or 'says', or a simple 'I don't tell you yet'. The truth is wonderful, but tends to escape all of us, obviously hiding behind facts

I agree he should've been tried in court, but getting him there might have proved quite problematic. I also suspect that Seh Daeng might have been more a "front man" or even a "scapegoat" for the people that really planned the violence, especially on April 10th. Do you think this is a possibility, Nick? A friend who's quite well-placed told me that it wasn't Seh Daeng who planned the violence on the 10th, but rather more shadowy figures in the background, including the likes of Panlop and Manoon. Seh Daeng might not have even known of it before it happened, yet it seems he was quite probably shot in revenge for it. However, even knowledgeable, well-connected sources can be wrong (mainly I suppose because people lie or spread false rumours deliberately, you can talk to two people equally well placed and get five different stories), so I've given up hope of ever really knowing the truth of who was behind it. Perhaps Seh Daeng really was the "mastermind", I don't know.

Suggesting Seh Daeng might have been a 'front man', following 'a freind high up told me' and ending with 'perhaps real mastermind' topped with a bit of 'I don't know'.

No offence, but again you succeed in sowing disinformation and possibly discord. I too have spoken with some well-placed persons, even one who's name starts with a P. Can't give you details, old boy, need-to-know applies. Silly really, but there it is.

Read this again, if you feel like it, with Thomas Fuller was interviewing Gen. Khattiya Sawasdiphol, known as "Seh Daeng," when he was shot in the head.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126805541

Well, thanks

I feel extremely uncomfortable during firefights, especially at night, and generally try to avoid being too close to the bullets. These things are really scary.

Only fools don't know how to be afraid and those fools are the most likely to get you killed as well. I've served, but never in combat. Even 'life-fire' exercises are no substitute for the real thing I've come to understand. Seen enough 'instruction' films to get an idea. Payed attention with the 'first aid' lessons as well. Those were the days

Sorry, but when there are huge amounts of bullet holes to be seen in parked cars, traffic sign posts etc, in knee hight, stomach height, and head height (and some overhead as well), where you can see clearly that the entry holes came from the soldiers lines, and when existing, exit holes towards protesters, you know that of course more bullets did not hit anyting in between, when you know that there were many injured protesters at the locations, than you can conclude that the soldiers have fired straight at protesters, and not just in the air.

It's just a matter of applying logic. Fortunately, in this situation, the soldiers have blocked Dinso road with their APC's, giving protesters some sort of cover against the fire.

Just curious, are there statistics as to injured people and type of injuries?

As for applying logic, don't get me started. Let's just say I'm happy the APC's were of use

Here is a brief article on this (one mistake though, which was corrected as you can read in the comments):

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

If you swipe your mouse over the images, you can read the captions of the photos.

Thanks for the link Nick. I like this snippet:

"Nick Nostitz // Apr 16, 2010 at 2:11 am

“Steveâ€:

Fortunately i was during the two battles at the “wrong†place. When the heavy fighting took place in Khok Wua i was at Dinso Road, and walked over to Khok Wua just before the fighting began at Dinso. When i got back to Dinso, maybe last round of sniper fire passed when i was hiding behind the tanks, and that came clearly from the direction of the school.

Looking at the videos i am not too unhappy at all that i missed the heavy fighting. I do not want to become news – i want to continue telling the story."

I also saw it with my own eyes, sitting at home in BKK though, not walking around.

I cannot say for sure if the snipers on April 10 was indeed from the army, or from an outside force, what is clear though is that snipers operated (which the military has denied). The time of the first victim (which i won't disclose now) was before the first sighting of the "Men in Black". But i will continue to check, and if any evidence comes along that counters what i have found so far i will of course love to see it.

But so far, nothing came out, other than lies. Such as the insistence of Burapha force officers that they have not fired a single bullet that day, even though there is clear proof that huge amounts of bullets were fired at Red Shirts.

Set the stage: On Obercommando's remarks I asked what come first 'chicken or egg', he replied 'order for army to kill', I replied again and then you came with 'red-shirt by sniper'.

Now you state you don't know who the snipers belonged to, but they were there.

Beside the point, the issue was when the killing started. It's nice for you to say 'time was before the sighting of MiB, which i won't disclose now', but that doesn't help.

Sorry, but you sound like k. Thaksin with 'I have the solution to your problems, but that can wait, get me back first'. 'clear proof of huge amount of bullets fired' suggest but doesn't explicitly state like Robert A. did 'thousands of rounds fired into the protesters'. Only 18 killed that day?

(edit: add: 18 = 13 civilians, 5 army. In Libya they shoot better and really to kill)

I am not Oberkommando, i am just me. I don't think that i have ever stated that the snipers on April 10 came from the military. What i stated is that the first dead was a Red Shirt protester, and he was killed before the "Men in Black" appeared on scene, and was most likely killed by one of the snipers.

The proof of huge amounts of bullets fired is that the day after i spend about 3 hours walking the scene together with a professional. We looked at the holes, from which direction the bullets came, in which height they were fired, etc. And we took photos.

Here is a brief article on this (one mistake though, which was corrected as you can read in the comments):

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

If you swipe your mouse over the images, you can read the captions of the photos.

Late Sunday afternoon, nothing better to do. I didn't say you said an army sniper shot the first person on April 10th, 2010. I just wondered how come you know the first person shot was a red-shirt and shot by a sniper. I'm not questioning who the snipers might be, not even whether or not they were there (at least a few were, enough proof of that). Wonder about the 'I won't disclose now' only, too easy answer. So relax.

As for the 'huge amounts of bullets fired at' even if I would accept the 'huge', bullet holes suggest not 'fired at protesters'. That probably explains why with 'thousands of rounds' fired 'only 12 civilians killed'. The five army personel killed had grenades lobbed on them, no bullets there

I cannot say for sure if the snipers on April 10 was indeed from the army, or from an outside force, what is clear though is that snipers operated (which the military has denied). The time of the first victim (which i won't disclose now) was before the first sighting of the "Men in Black". But i will continue to check, and if any evidence comes along that counters what i have found so far i will of course love to see it.

But so far, nothing came out, other than lies. Such as the insistence of Burapha force officers that they have not fired a single bullet that day, even though there is clear proof that huge amounts of bullets were fired at Red Shirts.

Set the stage: On Obercommando's remarks I asked what come first 'chicken or egg', he replied 'order for army to kill', I replied again and then you came with 'red-shirt by sniper'.

Now you state you don't know who the snipers belonged to, but they were there.

Beside the point, the issue was when the killing started. It's nice for you to say 'time was before the sighting of MiB, which i won't disclose now', but that doesn't help.

Sorry, but you sound like k. Thaksin with 'I have the solution to your problems, but that can wait, get me back first'. 'clear proof of huge amount of bullets fired at red shirts' suggest but doesn't explicitly state like Robert A. did 'thousands of rounds fired into the protesters'. Only 18 killed that day?

(edit: add: 18 = 13 civilians, 5 army. In Libya they shoot better and really to kill)

(edit: emphasise with bold)

I try, but not really succeeding to get back to the OP. Ignoring a new subject on April 2009 is part of that.

Is no-one really interested anymore that this 'enemy of the poor', 'kill them all' maniac, 'stealer of an election' PM happens to be a British oppressor of the worst colonial stamp?

But his government's policies show him to be a friend (not enemy) of the poor, he was heavily-criticised for failing to issue orders to 'kill them all' and rather letting the (while peaceful) protests go-ahead, he didn't steal any election (the E.C. might have acted if he had done so), he denies being British (and Jatuporn has failed to deliver proof to-the-contrary as-promised), and anyway we Brits aren't colonialists these days ?

So "No case to answer, m'lud" !

Case dismissed and thank you for your attention

A quick search doesn't give me a clear time line and I'm reluctant to accept what you write here. Total death toll that day was five soldiers and 13 civilians, including a Japanese cameraman. No info on sequence of deaths (at least i haven't yet).

There are many things that happened in that period but which are entirely unclear to the general public, and/or are still kept from public knowledge.

Don't judge before you have the facts.

You judge saying a red-shirt was killed by a sniper first. In response to my reply to oberfuhrer on 'order for army to kill came first'.

The facts? Who knows. I only find vague info open to interpretation and opinion forming according to one's beliefs.

"The sequence of events on the night of April 10 remains shadowy. Witnesses and video footage indicated that the violence was kicked off by mysterious black-clad gunmen who both sides on the conflict have disowned."

http://myvietnamnews.com/2010/04/20/thai-red-shirts-mull-next-move-after-troop-deployment/

Unless you put more faith in the recent statement of Joe Witty currently employed by the Los Angeles Police Department SWAT and witness to the 'possible crime against human rights' by the British impostor.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/01/30/expert-testimony-alleges-criminal-acts-by-thai-army-in-april-may-2010/

You, by the way, have completely ignored my comment regarding the use by the state of the Blue Shirts (no red shirt militants present then), or the early morning attack at Samliem Dindaeng in which rounds were fired by the military directly into the protesters, and the lack of investigations into those incidents.

I try, but not really succeeding to get back to the OP. Ignoring a new subject on April 2009 is part of that.

Is no-one really interested anymore that this 'enemy of the poor', 'kill them all' maniac, 'stealer of an election' PM happens to be a British oppressor of the worst colonial stamp?

The shooting by MiB came first, the grenade attacks before that already. Maybe you refer to the April 2009 clip with PM Abhisit saying 'kill them all' ? A wee bit doctored, but nice try.

Anyway, as I try to keep reminding people the OP is 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'.

Actually - no. What came first on April 10, before the "Men in Black" appeared on the scene was the death of a Red Shirt protester via sniper.

A quick search doesn't give me a clear time line and I'm reluctant to accept what you write here. Total death toll that day was five soldiers and 13 civilians, including a Japanese cameraman. No info on sequence of deaths (at least i haven't yet).

What happened with the OP stuff, not interesting enough ?

"The protesters, called Red Shirts for their garb, see the Oxford-educated Abhisit as a symbol of an elite impervious to the plight of Thailand’s poor and claim he took office illegitimately in December 2008 after the military pressured Parliament to vote for him."

begin removed ...

And additionally to this, the state has clearly used disproportionate violence against Red Shirts, also previous to last year's protests, such as the use of the Blue Shirts (never investigated even though more than ample evidence exists of who they were and led by whom), or the early morning attack against the Red Shirts at Samliem DinDaeng in April 2009 - where guns were fired directly at Red Shirt protesters (and at me as well). Again - never any investigations over that incident.

The only violence that is properly investigated is violence committed by Red Shirts, violence committed by the state is either not, or insufficiently investigated. Violence committed by the PAD is sluggishly investigated (expect speeding up of the cases now, as the PAD is now seemingly thrown away by their former backers as they outlived their use and purpose).

'disproportionate violence' against 'peaceful protesters' ? Surely you are talking about October 1976 now.

Forget it, we can argue till the cows come home and still not be done.

The OP is much more interesting 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'

Does that include the 60+ grenades lobbed on army, police and innocent non-red bystanders, Pathetic for sure.

Shooting peaceful protesters with live rounds and they respond using weapons of their own complete non-shock.

What came first the chicken or the egg?

The order to disperse protesters with live ammunitions came first.

The shooting by MiB came first, the grenade attacks before that already. Maybe you refer to the April 2009 clip with PM Abhisit saying 'kill them all' ? A wee bit doctored, but nice try.

Anyway, as I try to keep reminding people the OP is 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'.

You seemed to be excusing the grenade launches as the military not doing their job of keeping other protesters away.

I don't.

Nevertheless, this was a very complex situation leading up to the incident. But i won't go into this here right now, but i will later on in my book on this whole mess. It is important to see what happened then in context, and for this the space on this forum is just not enough.

Well, vanderGrift forgave those who caused him harm. Even said to have seen only a single M16 being assembled. Totally off topic by now, but watch this from him about all those 'peaceful protesters'.

http://nationsstate.blogspot.com/

Back to the OP 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'

Does that include the 60+ grenades lobbed on army, police and innocent non-red bystanders, Pathetic for sure.

Shooting peaceful protesters with live rounds and they respond using weapons of their own complete non-shock.

What came first the chicken or the egg?

Anyway, as said before back to the OP of 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'

Actually, the Red Shirt violence pre-dates that of the yellows with the their riot in July 2007 that injured hundreds. We're still waiting for the court cases to proceed further on those charges, btw.

Maybe it moved so slowly because there's not much of a case against them?

Plenty of video evidence and pictures from that violent incident.

Yeah, but they have to prove that the UDD leaders incited the violence to charge them, don't they? I don't know if there is any proof of that. Or is the charge trespassing? How could they be charged with that, though? They weren't inside Prem's compound, although IIRC some tried to go inside.

The UDD has a proven history of instigating violence from the very first moment they 'arose'. Against anyone deemed against their 'I don't know any' hero k. Thaksin.

PS although 2009 - 2010 period, but where is that clip with 'burn-it-my-way' k. Arisman when you need it. Who has archived the PTV broadcasts of main stage speeches.

Not "two months", but only a few occasions where deadly weapons were used during confrontations - one night of clashes on April 10, one afternoon at Vibhavadi Rangsit Rd (no journalist victim), and 6 days of mayhem in May.

Does that include the occasions where the government lied and said no live ammo was being used yet M16's were being fired on protesters without muzzle suppressors, meaning live ammo must have been used?

Let's face it, they were caught lying right to the end until the evidence was on YouTube then they started mumbling some weak retraction before finally being forced to admit soldiers used live ammo.

Pathetic.

Does that include the 60+ grenades lobbed on army, police and innocent non-red bystanders, Pathetic for sure.

Now back to the OP "Thailand ruled by British oppressor'

Yes, incomparably high amount of killed and seriously injured journalists.

Not "two months", but only a few occasions where deadly weapons were used during confrontations - one night of clashes on April 10, one afternoon at Vibhavadi Rangsit Rd (no journalist victim), and 6 days of mayhem in May.

I do not state that it was the fault of journalists that they were killed. I state though that some of us made wrong calls, and were too careless. I have my own problems with my profession, and at times our lack of proper conduct and self criticism. But discussing this here would lead to far.

I will not yet go into the the DSI issue, as it is not over yet. But suffice to say that some of the actions of the DSI are highly questionable, while during other investigations the investigators did a good job.

Amsterdam does what he does. I am not him, i am neither lobbyist nor lawyer. I am not hired by neither the Red Shirts nor the state, and keep my independence. In my case, i believe that there is more than ample evidence in video and photo that i was indeed where i claim to have been.

Again with journalists and reporters 'running loose', pointing 'things' at armed people (army, militants, etc.) two deaths in about 8 days is not incomparably high in my opinion. Those days also same 40 or so other deaths, many who really were collateral damage, or grenade casulties.

For the record I'm not questioning your integrity.

Now back to the OP 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'

begin removed

.......where does that leave us?

Back to the OP: 'Thailand ruled by British oppressor'

I'm a bit puzzled by the 'asking wrong questions'. Reporters are supposed to do that I think. It may not always be smart to do, but that's what journalists do. In the Western world politicians and protesters have become used to the wildest accusations and keep their cool, even on a Glenn Beck rant. A language difficulty is no issue here as the lady is Thai. It reminds me of this

"We needed to have the press be our friend ... We wanted them to ask the questions we want to answer so that they report the news the way we want it to be reported."

--Sharron Angle, during an interview with Fox News Channel's Carl Cameron, Aug. 2, 2010

In a conflict situation, especially when faced and outnumbered by highly emotional people, the number one rule is to be smart. This is not the western world, by the way. And also in the western world journalists get regularly attacked for not being very smart when asking the wrong questions, or the right questions in the wrong way. It's up to anyone, but i do not provoke emotional people, and i carefully judge every situation before i act.

The situation, when the reporter was out of the protest zone, continued by her being quite angry with the France 24 team, to whom i then explained the messy situation we were in, and who then apologized to the reporter for putting her under pressure then.

This was not a situation in a studio, but a quite extreme situation on the ground.

At the time this was big media business, many journalists from all over the world came here, and most had no experience whatsoever with the situation here, were under enormous pressure by their editorial offices, gave that pressure to their fixers as well. Many professional fixers have in the last days of Ratchaprasong refused to work on the streets, to a large part due to the pressures they were put under, in addition to the dangers on the ground.

Many times in those days i have helped to defuse developing situations where mostly foreign reporters made very wrong calls of judgment. And while working, i have tried to stay as far away as i could from the rat pack of parachute journalists, except from my colleagues i have known for a long time, and who have been professional and trustworthy in their approach, such as BBC and Al Jazeera, and of course my Thai colleagues.

I would also suggest to compare the situation here ten months ago, and what happened in Egypt. There you can see that the incidents here were quite minor (apart from the incomparably high amount of killed and seriously injured journalists (of which only one serious injury of a journalist - Chandler Vaandergrift - i am aware of was committed by Red Shirt militants, the remaining incidents by the military). Just because the DSI is a bit sluggish in their investigations, all of us who were on the ground, and at the frontlines at the time know where the bullets came from.

Incomparably high amount of killed journalists? Two over a period of two months with 'parachute journalists' and asking wrong questions? Be careful, before you know it you say it was their own fault being shot.

I agree the DSI is a bit sluggish, but they also deal with 90 deaths (about 12 soldiers and police amongst them) and have a need to be legally correct in their statements. I have read you were there, but lots of other people just say 'I've seen it with my own eyes', like Robert A. in his UDD video address on the 13th of this month:

"Firstly, I personally witnessed the horrors in Bangkok last May and was determined to record the carnage."