WinnieTheKhwai

You know what I mean. I already tried to make you happy by not using the word 'elite' which I know you dislike.

I invite any sane Thai or Farang to walk through the demonstartion and you will quickly see that once a tank fires a shot and this rabble (village mafia) will be on the run. Easy just block all escape routes and then go in and finish all these "simple minded ppl" off. Put them out of their misery.

I have noticed how frightened they all are. Some stupid thugs will make an attempt to show how "strong" they are but a good sniper will end their life.

The whole thing is a sham. Bring it on!!

I hope you are just trolling.

Meh, just another keyboard rambo with a little too much to drink.

Let's see if the zero tolerance policy against spreading hate and inciting violence is still in effect though.

In addition they've proven pretty much beyond doubt that they're a genuine people's movement, and not Thaksin's stooges.

That statement is naive beyond belief.

No, you simply disagree with it.

Of course they could throw all of that away in the next two days.

That ship sailed many moons ago.

Clearly not, when as of today PM Abhisit is urging the UDD to accept the compromise. When the tanks move in, that ship will have sailed.

Agreed. In addition they've proven pretty much beyond doubt that they're a genuine people's movement, and not Thaksin's stooges.

Of course they could throw all of that away in the next two days.

What is a "genuine people's movement"?

A movement of people that gathers and protests out of genuine sense of grievance where that grievance is legitimate?

For sure Seh Daeng and his cohort of merry men are Thaksin's stooges. For sure there are others involved who are not.

The signs from the last two months at Phan Fa and Ratchaprasong: "All We Want Is An Election". Those who hang out for more are Thaksin's stooges.

^ Yes, agreed with that in full.

In Thailand, a year after the 2005 election, Thaksin dissolved parliament. That meant that he was no longer PM.

There was no result in the 2006 election. Thaksin could get enough seats to satisfy the constitution even without any opposition.

not this again............................. . . . . . .

(and why wasn't there a result in the 2006 election.... etc.)

(...and then ultimately, this justified the disaster of moving the tanks into bangkok and establishing junta rule?? Thailand was plunged back DECADES because of that. We're seeing the fruits of that action still around today.)

Red Shirt leaders are now taking direction from Thaksin's recently engaged law firm.

A rabble of dissenting ship board lawyers on a precariously listing boat.

They now stand to lose credibility with their own constituency.

Here, Here! I at one point had some sympathy for the reds but they now seem to have lost the plot. Why are they still protesting? What do they expect to achieve now? What have they achieved? A general election in a few months time and thats it. Time to go home now.

Agreed. In addition they've proven pretty much beyond doubt that they're a genuine people's movement, and not Thaksin's stooges.

Of course they could throw all of that away in the next two days.

Not Thaksin stooges? Sae Daeng saying yesterday that he and the second string leaders were now in charge because that's what Thaksin had ordered ... that pretty much makes them Thaksin stooges.

Because you trust every word Sae Daeng says? I think he's a nutter, and a dangerous one. If the crazies are now in charge then that's not the fault of 100,000 protesters who by and large campaigned peacefully, with Bangkok people taking note. Of course after the botched crackdown by a criminal Dep. PM it all went South, but you can hardly blame the 100,000 protesters for that.

Right, I'm cool with the above. Taking a stance against military coups definitely doesn't put her in the PAD & establishment camp though right.

UDD itself was formed in response to the military coup of 2006. It's the main thing they're campaigning for: to end military and 'amart' influence in politics, and establishment of a democratic system.

They were VERY happy with Aung San Suu Kyi's comments!

Red Shirt leaders are now taking direction from Thaksin's recently engaged law firm.

A rabble of dissenting ship board lawyers on a precariously listing boat.

They now stand to lose credibility with their own constituency.

Here, Here! I at one point had some sympathy for the reds but they now seem to have lost the plot. Why are they still protesting? What do they expect to achieve now? What have they achieved? A general election in a few months time and thats it. Time to go home now.

Agreed. In addition they've proven pretty much beyond doubt that they're a genuine people's movement, and not Thaksin's stooges.

Of course they could throw all of that away in the next two days.

specifically Aung San Suu Kyi, a person who has expressed sympathy for the Red cause recently.

No she didn't, as I suspect you well know, but let's keep repeating the fantasy on the basis that one day it may become true.

Regards

/edit typo//

I can't be bothered to go look it up, but it was mentioned in some articles. She didn't express explicit support for UDD by name, but was talking about Thailand and the need for democracy and basic freedoms there. Sounded clear enough to me anyways.

I did notice that the Lychees don't look like much this year. DIdn't see ANY of the big, nice ones. And the small shitty ones are still expensive.

Is USA backing the red terrorists? Send this guy back home to US immediately. He was not officially invited, and should not go here to meet with the terrorists.

Well, let's see.. Logically there are only two options:

1. The USA has ended its long standing policy not to negotiate with terrorists.

2. The USA does not consider the Red Shirt movement terrorists.

Now, keeping in mind that Fox News is NOT having a field day as we speak, I'm inclined to lean towards option number 2.

Personal suggestion: Write to Fox, they've spun crazier things than this around to show the US government loves terrorists. They'd probably appreciate some help from the resident Farang crazies on this forum!

FOX hasn't spun things as far as your strawman argument above.

3. There was no negotiation (no give and take over any plans or contingencies)

4. The people he met with are attached to Thaksin more so than the Reds --- a message was being delivered to Thaksin that the US wants the reds to shape up and accept the government's reconciliation plan.

Since no negotiations took place --- BOTH of Winnie's points are a strawman argument to sidetrack things.

Obviously. I was responding to people shouting crap about negotiating with terrorists. I suggest you reply to them with any issues you have over semantics. (negotiating with terrorists vs talking with terrorists.)

I guess you're a fan of Fox News too.. figures! Your whole post doesn't serve any purpose other than pick a fight over semantics. I really hope you have actual points to make (that are on topic).

So to reset the dicussion: The US government has spent considerable time listening to the viewpoints of the UDD and Phua Thai vis a vis the current protests, as well as (most likely) deliver the message that the USA supports Abhisit's road map. (All this is on the website of the US Embassy in Bangkok) Ex-PAD extremist and current foreign minister Kasit wasn't happy. You wonder why, as clearly his boss (Abhisit) has reached out to talk with the UDD, too.

Campbell then travelled on to Burma, to meet with the opposition there, specifically Aung San Suu Kyi, a person who has expressed sympathy for the Red cause recently.

There. Now you have something to actually disagree with so you don't have get into how 'discussing' is different from 'negotiating' Clearly it's not negotiating because the US isn't a party in this conflict!

"Kalisin Wow"

Anyone here care to defend the actions of the Red Leadership? Anyone?

No, not really. I think this Suthep business is silly, the man is a thug and a liar, but like all thugs and liars in government before him, he will walk free. But his fate is NOT more important than the lives of the protesters, soldiers and the overall future of Thailand.

If they're going to make demands, they should have been specified in full, not dribbled out one at a time, every other day. AND it should have included things that matter, such as amnesty for anyone convicted on LM charges and getting the government to commit to the constitution regarding freedom of speech and end censorship, so they don't go into an election with their TV channel muzzled but ASTV/NBT/etc spouting garbage unhindered. I mean, seriously, Suthep doesn't matter one bit in the overall scheme of things.

Clearly there is no agreement among the leadership, so they agree on 'demands' that the hard-core guys bet on not being met by the government, while the reasonable ones think it will bring progress. Then when the government pretty much meets the demand, the hard core guys claim it wasn't enough. Abhisit can probably force it by offering amnesty to specific people who seem willing to cooperate, provided they end the protest.

I see OzMick is advocating violence once again.

A rhetorical question is NOT advocating violence, assuming that is the post to which you refer. If you think that I am advocating violence, use the Report button and let the moderators decide.

That'd be childish, and further impede whatever free speech is left.. I'm not arguing against having your post up there, but do highlight that suggesting violence (even veiled into a rhetorical question) is still suggesting violence.

"I wonder why they don't shove a grenade up Thaksin's bunghole pull the pin, or would that be too quick?" --That kind of rhetorical question?

Right, that's what I was saying: Thaksin wrote the book on bribing politicians over to his side. All that coalition building he did prior to going into elections under the TRT banner.

I see OzMick is advocating violence once again.

I think the April 10 discussion is off topic? This topic is about Dep. PM Suthep, and on ending the protest.

On the botched April 10 massacre though, whoever came to help the red shirts probably prevented mass slaughter, causing the government forces to retreat. This ultimately led to Abhisit's excellent roadmap, which I dearly hope the Red Shirts accept without too much sillyness over details.

Yes ... ofcourse, the army that were standing there with shields and batons were going to bring out the live ammunition with out any provocation from the reds ... right.

I think it's important that a thorough and independent investigation takes place. The Reds really want this to take place as well.

It'd have to be a little more independent than having Dr. Death come over.. A team of people with some more credibility and who are really independent.

I think the April 10 discussion is off topic? This topic is about Dep. PM Suthep, and on ending the protest.

On the botched April 10 massacre though, whoever came to help the red shirts probably prevented mass slaughter, causing the government forces to retreat. This ultimately led to Abhisit's excellent roadmap, which I dearly hope the Red Shirts accept without too much sillyness over details.

I see you guys are still falling for the crap spread here by the red propaganda

Those guys are either thicker than a plank or take some perverted pleasure in stirring you up - either way there is no point in arguing with them

I see you're not really replying to anyone or anything in particular? Be sure to tune back in when you have a point to make!

What a colorful character..

Arrogant, dangerous.. Movie material, I suppose.

The reds have become completely indefensible. And now here comes the red apologists ... They are indeed relentless. It's interesting that some of the more objective ones are turning against them.

Sorry to say I predicted this kind of mess (the reds dragging their feet indefinitely) right after the roadmap was announced.

Latest is the Red leadership will turn themselves in today.. So that'd be good news, if true.

I'm not holding my breath though.. I'm waiting for a last minute "Suthep should turn himself into the Calypso Cabaret and give a credible stage performance".

No, you get a parliamentary and legal mandate. When people vote for a party they want that party to govern, they don't want some elements of that party to be bribed away to join the other side. At that point, you lose a popular mandate.

Although I would agree it's largely a matter of definition.. and probably a discussion of the past anyway, as Abhisit has graciously agreed to go get his own popular mandate in November.

Someone should nominated him for a Nobel peace prize as well.

Yes, "popular mandate" is variable and emotive term.

At the moment Abhisit has the support of the majority of MPs. Some could talk about how he got the majority, but then you could ask exactly the same questions about how the PPP got a majority also (and ask about how Thaksin got his majorities).

Right agreed; Thaksin did kind of write the book on how to bribe parties and politicians over to your side. (He did however do it before elections, so people knew what they were voting for. )

If it's anything like the last World Cup, and all those before it, then it won't be a problem. Worst case is having to semi-close the door, turn off outside signs, etc.

No, you get a parliamentary and legal mandate. When people vote for a party they want that party to govern, they don't want some elements of that party to be bribed away to join the other side. At that point, you lose a popular mandate.

Although I would agree it's largely a matter of definition.. and probably a discussion of the past anyway, as Abhisit has graciously agreed to go get his own popular mandate in November.

Someone should nominated him for a Nobel peace prize as well.

Sure you can have it all. Admittedly not at the same time, but you can defo have it all.

I mean it's not like we're all here because the political debate is such good fun is it.