Babcock

Because the video was released by the Cambodians after Abhisit's aidehad been arrested on the Cambodian side of the border.

Abhisit, as usual, had lied so proof positive had to be produced.

Simple really. You're still not up to speed.

The video that was released did not have anything on it about Abhisit sending them there. All it had was someone in the group apparently talking to an Abhisit aide, telling the aide where they were.

The video wasn't very good for the group, as they (or their spokespeople) had said that they didn't know they were in Cambodia.

Nonsense they were miles inside Cambodia and they were trying to provoke an international incident.

Funny now how all interest in the temple has gone isn't it?

Thousands of people fled their homes. The thai army used cluster bombs and it was all about oil really.

Suthep was in meetings with the cambodians to discuss ownership of certain potential oil fields by certain families.

They may have been miles inside Cambodia, but their spokespeople were saying that they weren't. Then the video came out with THEM saying that they were inside Cambodia - I wouldn't think that they were miles inside though.

But, there was nothing on the video about Abhisit sending them.

Why would there be an attempt to start an international incident, while Suthep was in meetings to discuss oil field ownership? Your conspiracy theories are shooting each other in the foot.

Er why were they there?

Abhisit claimed initially they were in another province.

Abhisit is a bigger criminal than Thaksin ever was. Who cares what he says? He is nothing more than a smug elitist liar.

And you base your accusations on what facts? Do you understand the meaning of "criminal"? It is someone who has been convicted of committing a crime. Thaksin is a criminal and a fugitive one as well as he does not have the courage to face his sentence. Abhisit is neither charged with nor convicted of any crime.

Were you blabbering in your beeer?

Abhisit is not charged yet.

"Criminal"?

Go check out the 2 year prison sentence from the Assets Scrutinty Commitee. Thaksin had no right of appeal.

No international arrest warrant ever issued for Thaksin.

You rightwingers are unbelievable. Is that why you're here?

Hard to know what to believe about the #'s of people there.

The other newspaper has a photo. Seems to be about 1000 or so. As mentioned before, I'm sure the border problems caused a few not to come, but I'd bet the vast majority weren't getting paid, so no interest! Pretty much everybody I knew who went to Bangkok during the riots (wife's relatives) were paid and it was the only reason they went. Period.

No. Yes they were paid.

People clubbed together. People left their farms/businesses and they rotated so in fact a vast number of people came down to Bangkok.

It's wishfull thinking to insinuate that Thaksin paid all these people just to risk their lives and limbs and missing the big picture.

People got money for gasoline and food. There were benefactors. Remember Abhisit freezing the accounts of 150 wealthy Thaksin supporters.

So easily forgotten by the yellow apologists on here.

I know what Abhisit is he's a fxxxxxg cxxt.

The Topic reads, few red shirts cross over for Thaksin?

The Nation want to get their facts straight, as I have just looked at another newspapers photograph of the occasion and it clearly shows thousands of people there and in only one quarter of the photo.

Do they just count the busses going over on the day or something stupid like that.

What bad reporting.

Please scan and post.

I well remember the TV reporting in 2010 where they could only show a small section of the redshirts. Cropped image.

I remember too the Nation newspaper's photos of an early redshirt rally in a football stadium which packed out however they published a photo of a near empty stadium ( picture taken several hours before rally.)

Just as I mentioned yesterday visiting Silom in 2010 when Jutuporn was addressing the redshirts in front of the Bangkok Bank regarding Prem's ownership of golf course where land was seized from poor people.

The Nation claimed that office and shop staff abused the redshirts. Completely the opposite occurred in front of my eyes.

There was a celebratory mood in Silom. Weeks later I witnessed 1 young male office worker on an overpass screaming abuse at several redshirt motorcycle drivers below attempting to hold up traffic as a protest.

What was his problem? Maybe he reads the Nation or more probably ASTV.

They don't like it up 'em.

The "conflict of interest" was an invention of the Assets Scrutiny Committee and they had to repeatedly try and eventually succeed to get the FDIF or is it the FIDF (subsidiary of the Bank of Thailand, handling assets from the 1997 collapse and which is NOT a government department) to finally aggree over the conflict of interest. Pressure was brought to bear.

By the way noone is interested in what became of the land and I am here to tell you that it was sold on to a developer for a lower overall price than Thaksin's wife had paid.

Interesting huh?

If the FIDF was not under the control of the government, why were the government paying interest on FIDF debts, and why did they recently transfer that debt over to the BOT?

That's right!

That's why they did it. Why should a government be paying the interest when the bank has no real incentive to clear the debt? They can sell assets off at a loss.

The same applies in the UK with the bank of england notionally being independant but the finance minister in Thailand (chancellor) can order/instruct the Bank to for example make ready to try to devalue the baht.

Unlikely to be successful really but in this case the government here has sought ways to increase its credit rating so it could borrow to pay for the flood damage.

So the FIDF WAS under government control.

btw, I don't think it would (or did) make any difference to the credit rating. The debt is still effectively owed by the government/country.

No it's not. When push comes to shove then the finance minister can effectively order the bank but..

An analogy would be a competition on your Corn Flake package where employees of the Cornflake company cannot compete.

So Thaksin's wife could buy land in an auction as she didn't work for the bank nor did Thaksin who as her husband under thai law (as women have no official legal right to own property in Thailand) had to co-sign.

His lawyers checked it out at the time. She had declared wealth on Thaksin's appointment as PM of 1 billion baht.

She paid 775 million baht and the land had been valued for the FIDF at 750 million baht.

Because the video was released by the Cambodians after Abhisit's aidehad been arrested on the Cambodian side of the border.

Abhisit, as usual, had lied so proof positive had to be produced.

Simple really. You're still not up to speed.

The video that was released did not have anything on it about Abhisit sending them there. All it had was someone in the group apparently talking to an Abhisit aide, telling the aide where they were.

The video wasn't very good for the group, as they (or their spokespeople) had said that they didn't know they were in Cambodia.

Nonsense they were miles inside Cambodia and they were trying to provoke an international incident.

Funny now how all interest in the temple has gone isn't it?

Thousands of people fled their homes. The thai army used cluster bombs and it was all about oil really.

Suthep was in meetings with the cambodians to discuss ownership of certain potential oil fields by certain families.

Abhisit, due to his unfortunate choice of bed mates, the PAD, and even more unfortunate choice of Foreign Minister, refused to cosy up with Hun Sen thus achieving a "double whammy" of playing to the nationalistic vote and attacking his nemesis, Thaksin, at the same time. He even went to the extreme of provoking an incident by sending his secretary over the Cambodian border along with the Pad extermist Veera. Claims of innocence by Abhisit were disproved by video and aural proof. This event, along with playing dangerous games on the nervous border with flag poles and the ongoing stormy rhetoric over the (Hindu) Preah Vihear temple didn't help the situation with exchanges of gunfire across the border resulting in several unnecessary deaths. Thailands International standing was not enhanced by the use of cluster bomb artillery shells.

Historical revision x 5

.

Do tell me where my facts are wrong, Buchholz, always eager to learn. By the way you forgot to tell people you altered my post (again). Rule 30.

Where is the proof that Abhisit sent someone across the border? All there was, was video of someone talking to one of Abhisit's aides and saying where they were.

Because the video was released by the Cambodians after Abhisit's aidehad been arrested on the Cambodian side of the border.

Abhisit, as usual, had lied so proof positive had to be produced.

Simple really. You're still not up to speed.

They don't like it up 'em.

The "conflict of interest" was an invention of the Assets Scrutiny Committee and they had to repeatedly try and eventually succeed to get the FDIF or is it the FIDF (subsidiary of the Bank of Thailand, handling assets from the 1997 collapse and which is NOT a government department) to finally aggree over the conflict of interest. Pressure was brought to bear.

By the way noone is interested in what became of the land and I am here to tell you that it was sold on to a developer for a lower overall price than Thaksin's wife had paid.

Interesting huh?

If the FIDF was not under the control of the government, why were the government paying interest on FIDF debts, and why did they recently transfer that debt over to the BOT?

That's right!

That's why they did it. Why should a government be paying the interest when the bank has no real incentive to clear the debt? They can sell assets off at a loss.

The same applies in the UK with the bank of england notionally being independant but the finance minister in Thailand (chancellor) can order/instruct the Bank to for example make ready to try to devalue the baht.

Unlikely to be successful really but in this case the government here has sought ways to increase its credit rating so it could borrow to pay for the flood damage.

Answer to Bucholz ( can't figure out all the quotes , endquotes etc to post and gave up).

Just go to Wikipedia then and check your facts.

Thaksin's lawyers were never charged.

quote from (Not) the Nation:

"According to a report by the Nation news website, Supreme Court Vice President Mongkol Thapthiang, who heads a panel investigating the case, said the panel found the three guilty of the bribery charge by handing the pastry box containing two million baht (some61,000 U.S. dollars) in cash to a court official when they appeared on June 10, representing Thaksin and his wife Pojaman, at the court to report that the couple had returned from a business trip overseas. "

The same paper that broke the story.

Now one of the lawyers is a Pheu Thai MP. Is that possible if he has served a prison sentence?

You should check out Wikipedia and do some cross referencing. You may find that what is reported there does not tally with what is reported here in the english language newspapers.

As for the airport the general who took over the airport after the coup firstly he sacked all the directors and secondly he seized around 6 million dollars to give to his buddies in his regiment and thirdly when cracks appeared in the runway (built with the correct materials) he refused to repair it as he wished to blame Thaksin for any future failure.

Every day I see Jonathan Head reporting from Turkey on the syrian crisis.

We were told here when he was the BBC reporter for Thailand that Thaksin had bought him and he lleft here with 2 LM charges against his name so he cannot return.

"Lead lawyer Pichit Chuenban, legal assistant Supasri Srisawat and the coordinator of the legal team Thana Tansiri were found guilty by a panel of three judges of contempt of court in the precincts of the court.Each was given a six-month jail term.The trio also face criminal charges under Article 144 of the Criminal Code.The panel chaired by Supreme Court vice-president Mongkol Thapthiang suspects they were trying to give a bribe and has assigned the court secretary to lodge a police complaint."

K. Pichit Chuenban was a senatorial candidate in 2006 but not elected. He was put on the Pheu Thai party list in 2011 and since the 2011 elections an MP for Pheu Thai. Not sure if k. Pichit is still a lawyer, he was under investigation by the Law Society of Thailand for his role in the lunchbox affair.

As for the allegations regarding the General, please provide a few clear links or PM.

Remember the truth will set you free !

I told you.

Go check Wikipedia if you dare!

You lost me, dear chap. You put some words together to form a sentence, but it neither reflects what k. Abhisit, nor what I said.

The current government is reasonably legitimate with some doubt in how far a criminal on the run can be allowed to control what that government does. K. Abhist said k. Thaksin is holding the country hostage, seems a reasonable description.

I see let's get this right:

This criminal is holding the country to ransom because......

His crime was:

oh yes his wife bought some land at auction. Nothing wrong with that except that her husband was the prime minister.

His CRIME:

being married to his wife.

being the prime minister.

Further he sold his company and as a consequence of running a successful financial regime he was able to :

sell his shareholding (aquired before he became prime minister since he started said company)

at a profit of 117%.

(Although the Thai SET had risen by 133% in the same period he was condemned and had 1 billion dollars deducted from his frozen accounts).

Part and parcel of this fine was the fact that when prime minister he had reduced the duty payable to CAT and TOT(the National carriers)

set at 25% for mobile phone bills paid monthly in arrears to 20% for the new Pay as you go rates that enabled the poor to own phones.

Increased revenues followed substantially and additionally his government demanded that the fees were paid diredtly to government as excise duty and the part privatised TOT and CAT received in return due owed to them from the government as there was a problem with leakage of funds owed to government.

This reply reminds me of the saying about the fool and the wise men.

k. Thaksin's crime (or the only case which could proceed because he was still here) is none of what you write. He's not convicted because his wife bought some land, he's not convicted because he was married to the wife (at that time), he was not convicted because he was the PM. He was convicted because he had violated a conflict-of-interest law while in office and was sentenced to two years in prison.

The rest of the post is equally incorrect, but I'm not going to bother with finding all the details to correct a post which might have taken a foolmember two minites to write down.

Have fun and try a bit harder to stick to the truth.

Hey, at least he didn't accept a small gratuity for appearing on a television cooking program.

They don't like it up 'em.

The "conflict of interest" was an invention of the Assets Scrutiny Committee and they had to repeatedly try and eventually succeed to get the FDIF or is it the FIDF (subsidiary of the Bank of Thailand, handling assets from the 1997 collapse and which is NOT a government department) to finally aggree over the conflict of interest. Pressure was brought to bear.

By the way noone is interested in what became of the land and I am here to tell you that it was sold on to a developer for a lower overall price than Thaksin's wife had paid.

Interesting huh?

How can I upload a video clip here? I downloaded it back in February from Thaivisa and I was amazed by it. It's a .flv file (7 mb) and I've tried various formats with no success.

I've been accused of lying and just wish to set the recoed straight

Answer to Bucholz ( can't figure out all the quotes , endquotes etc to post and gave up).

Just go to Wikipedia then and check your facts.

Thaksin's lawyers were never charged.

quote from (Not) the Nation:

"According to a report by the Nation news website, Supreme Court Vice President Mongkol Thapthiang, who heads a panel investigating the case, said the panel found the three guilty of the bribery charge by handing the pastry box containing two million baht (some61,000 U.S. dollars) in cash to a court official when they appeared on June 10, representing Thaksin and his wife Pojaman, at the court to report that the couple had returned from a business trip overseas. "

The same paper that broke the story.

Now one of the lawyers is a Pheu Thai MP. Is that possible if he has served a prison sentence?

You should check out Wikipedia and do some cross referencing. You may find that what is reported there does not tally with what is reported here in the english language newspapers.

As for the airport the general who took over the airport after the coup firstly he sacked all the directors and secondly he seized around 6 million dollars to give to his buddies in his regiment and thirdly when cracks appeared in the runway (built with the correct materials) he refused to repair it as he wished to blame Thaksin for any future failure.

Every day I see Jonathan Head reporting from Turkey on the syrian crisis.

We were told here when he was the BBC reporter for Thailand that Thaksin had bought him and he lleft here with 2 LM charges against his name so he cannot return.

Thaksin is holding Thailand hostage ?

yeah, right... First of all, how is Thailand being held hostage? A ludicrous statement itself.

... rest removed

When a criminal on the run still dictates what his clone sister's government and his "Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts" party need to do, with govenment and cabinet members trying to push through reconciliation 'our way', dialogue is no longer necessary, I think you might be justified to say this megalanomaniac holds the country at ransom and as hostage.

As Frenchman this should remind you of Empereur Napoleon escaping from Elba on the 26th of February 1815 and being welcomed on French soil with "Vive L'Empereur!". Lasted only 100 days if I remember correctly. Less than 1000 killed and wounded for every single day, but then as G'kid said 'you can't make on omelet without cracking a few eggs'

oh, so I see.

The current gov't is elected, and so from the viewpoint of Abhisit, that is holding Thailand hostage...

I match your and raise you a

You lost me, dear chap. You put some words together to form a sentence, but it neither reflects what k. Abhisit, nor what I said.

The current government is reasonably legitimate with some doubt in how far a criminal on the run can be allowed to control what that government does. K. Abhist said k. Thaksin is holding the country hostage, seems a reasonable description.

I see let's get this right:

This criminal is holding the country to ransom because......

His crime was:

oh yes his wife bought some land at auction. Nothing wrong with that except that her husband was the prime minister.

His CRIME:

being married to his wife.

being the prime minister.

Further he sold his company and as a consequence of running a successful financial regime he was able to :

sell his shareholding (aquired before he became prime minister since he started said company)

at a profit of 117%.

(Although the Thai SET had risen by 133% in the same period he was condemned and had 1 billion dollars deducted from his frozen accounts).

Part and parcel of this fine was the fact that when prime minister he had reduced the duty payable to CAT and TOT(the National carriers)

set at 25% for mobile phone bills paid monthly in arrears to 20% for the new Pay as you go rates that enabled the poor to own phones.

Increased revenues followed substantially and additionally his government demanded that the fees were paid diredtly to government as excise duty and the part privatised TOT and CAT received in return due owed to them from the government as there was a problem with leakage of funds owed to government.

Then, this man dares to talk about white-washing when he and Suthep have dodged all responsibility for 2009/2010.

This week mister Abhisit proposed himself and Suthep together with Thaksin to be abstained from any amnesty law , or reconciliation law as you wish. Maybe you missed it?

Let's see the two of them give up their amnesty after they have been investigated, tried and found guilty.

How likely is that?

As we know all too well aportioning blame in Thailand runs into the problem of loss of face.

How does a feudal society deal with its elite miscreants?

We've seen no evidence of any change lately.

Change WILL come once Thailand starts losing out to its neighbours and doesn't modernise.

If the majority of Thais want him and like him, then that is good emough for me.

The majority don't. His parties never win a majority of the popular vote. His party, which is really just a coalition of Isaan and Northern old school political families that would win elections even without him, consistently gets about 15 million votes out of 35-38 million voters, out of a total electorate of 45 million. As much as it pains Thaksin propagandists to admit, support for his coalition, let alone for him, has never been a majority of Thais, let alone the vast majority as they try to claim

Yes they won a parliamentary majority.

Put that in your pie and smoke it!

10 green bottles and if one green bottle should accidently fall there'll be:

"Abhisit said all political troubles had Thaksin as the root cause because society had to sustain the collateral damage stemmed from efforts to solve Thaksin's legal wrangling."

"Thaksin regime?" Give me a break.

In the courts and concerning not the electorate right mate.

Cake and eat it or cake box and eat cake box and eat it (if it ever existed).

Only the Nation there to go on for that story like the fake story about the defects at Swampy airport also highlighted by the Nation.

Thaksin's lawyers banged up for 6 months without charge. (Never charged).

and then struck off by lawyers council of thailand (affiliated to PAD).

1% failure rate measured at airport in fact.

British Airways (world's largest airline, thought airport was very good).

Airport opening postponed for 1 year until after coup.

Second runway due to have been opened by now.

This is their way.

All I want to say is this to anyone out there bewildered by what you read here that 2 years ago:

I read that there was a redshirt gathering to occur in Silom and posters on here trolled and scoffed that redshirts would all be drunk and unpopular.causing trouble.

Living there as I did in the afluent part of town that it is I went to visit and saw a large number of people, not one beer can amongst about 6-700 people listening intently to public speeches and making way for Pat pong tourists going about their business.

I've just seen the last of the video where they show bullet casings that were fired. Problem downloading.

Lethal force was used indiscriminately.

And it's crap.

This is video from April 10th. I recognise it.It's shot from the redshirt side. Yes the army did use tear gas.

1000 people were injured that night and 19/25 died. This video has been edited to suggest that the thai soldiers were complient and yet the redshirts were just all fired up.

Notice the strange patriotic music being blasted at the people. The sense of unreality in the situation.

We hear gunshots but what is their aim and are they aiming at any one?

How is it then that 1000 people were injured and 9/25 died that night?

No sense of that here

Sorry a grenade when rolled across the floor with the pin out will explode. Every boy knoes this .

I'm surprised you don't. Don't give me lectures on what precise weapon was used because you really don't know.

You're only guided by what you have been told by those prosecuting the attacks on the protesters.

What nonsense you write.

If you'd bothered to read Amsterdam's report it stated the redshirts and the army were about 90 meters apart. Too far to throw a grenade they state.

If a redshirt had aimed a grenade launcher at the soldiers methinks it might have been spotted but otherwise what an incredible shot.

To hit a group of men; at night, standing behind other men and not in the "firing line". They weren't at the front of the queue.

The commander was near the front I think guaging the situation

If the police with their special units trained in crowd control had done their job, the army wouldn't have been involved. Just like in 'normal' countries. Incidentaly some posters defended the Minister of Defence setting up a War Room recently, seeing nothing wrong with using Army experience

Would that be the ficticious 478geo you referred to Rubl?

I do recall stating using military experience to monitor crowd control was acceptable, but the work on the ground should be carried out by the police and specialist police units.

One of the reasons I agree with implementing a crowd control centre, run by the best qualified people, supports my opinion that if the 2010 protest had initially been diverted to a less prominent location the escalation may not have taken place

As it was, there was minimal violence until the army showed up, once in position there was only ever going to be rapid escalation of confrontation, which proved to be the case

I am surprised there was no prolonged use of teargas, water cannons or any other anti riot methodology, also how the whole fortress was allowed to be constructed with little disruptive action from the government side

I am surprised if the government were convinced that the red shirts wanted 'martyrs', as some here are suggesting, then why did the government send in the troops and provide, seems a bit strange don't you think, or was it just desperate lack of vision?

There was no use of tear gas, water cannon. They only came with their guns.

There was use of water cannons when the red shirts stormed Thaicom. It didn't do much good.

and here I quote from Prachetai:

"Another clash broke out on April 9 when the UDD protesters, led by Jatuporn Prompan, Nathawut Saikua, Arisman Pongruangrong, and Karun Hosakul, went to the Thaicom satellite station in Pathumthani province to restore their People's Channel cable television to the air; its transmission had been disconnected by the government after the declaration of a state of emergency. The soldiers guarding the satellite station used shields and batons, water cannon, and teargas to stop the red-shirted protesters, but withdrew when they became outnumbered. As a result of the clash, 16 protesters and 5 soldiers were injured. The UDD protesters ended the siege of the satellite station after they reached an agreement with Lt. Gen. Krisda Pankongchuen, the Region 1 Provincial Police chief, soldiers, and the Thaicom executives that the People's Channel broadcast signal would be reconnected. The station remains partially blocked."

Following on from this the redshirts regained control of their staion, discovered an arms cache which they returned to the soldiers and given assurances about the station they left and the station was promptly re-seized by the army and "fully blocked" subsequently as I quote from Prachetai:

Thailand: End Political Violence, Bring Offenders to Justice

Tue, 13/04/2010 - 15:15

.

Which part of this do you disagree with?

To reiterate:

No I understood about 50000 troops were deployed and yes IT IS CLAIMED that up to 250,000 people gathered in Ratchaprasong and generally most stayed around 4 days so there was a big turnover.

Interesting you have no conmment on the fake video from ALeG. We had a good laugh about that.

Unless you are going to tell us that the redshirts deployed ewoks from Starwars to scurry across the bottom of the screen brandishing blasters.

If the police with their special units trained in crowd control had done their job, the army wouldn't have been involved. Just like in 'normal' countries. Incidentaly some posters defended the Minister of Defence setting up a War Room recently, seeing nothing wrong with using Army experience

Would that be the ficticious 478geo you referred to Rubl?

I do recall stating using military experience to monitor crowd control was acceptable, but the work on the ground should be carried out by the police and specialist police units.

One of the reasons I agree with implementing a crowd control centre, run by the best qualified people, supports my opinion that if the 2010 protest had initially been diverted to a less prominent location the escalation may not have taken place

As it was, there was minimal violence until the army showed up, once in position there was only ever going to be rapid escalation of confrontation, which proved to be the case

I am surprised there was no prolonged use of teargas, water cannons or any other anti riot methodology, also how the whole fortress was allowed to be constructed with little disruptive action from the government side

I am surprised if the government were convinced that the red shirts wanted 'martyrs', as some here are suggesting, then why did the government send in the troops and provide, seems a bit strange don't you think, or was it just desperate lack of vision?

There was no use of tear gas, water cannon. They only came with their guns.

Oh sorry was it April 22nd? I got my dates muddled up. We visited the redshirts at the monument in late March when Nick Nostitz climbed up on a TV gantry to take a panoramic photo showing roughly around 150,000 people gathered.

Everyone was very solemn. one man shook my hand. I was a witness no more. This is not my fight but for my wife and her children and their children it matters.

When I hear pampered elitist foreigners come on here and make all their insinuations about the poor, how they are controlled and duped etc etc and how their votes really count for nothing and the alternative is only really the STATUS QUO and to just be thankful I want to *ucking puke!

On April, 22nd, 2010 we had the grenade attack on multicolored-shirts which was badly aimed and hit BTS Saladaeng station instead. One Thai lady died, 80 injured with foreigners amongst them.

As for the 150,000 protesters, well maybe 'slightly' less

Not less.

I saw a huge number, at least that and later in Ratchaprasong the numbers grew to over 250000 which rotated every few days so a vast number came down to protest.

Don't understand?

OK I was correct. April 10th army near massacre.

April 22nd. Grenade attack on PAD supporters gathered in Silom opposite redshirt barricades.

The claim by Suthep was that a grenade was fired from Lumpini Park from the monument and struck down those people in Silom.

You go and stand at the monument and go figure how you will hit the street beyond the overhead BTS structure.

The hated red shirts claim that in fact it was fired from the 5th floor of the hospital and the "supposedly" celebrated forensic expert Porntip?

claimed she found chemical residue from a room there on the 5th floor supporting this claim.

This building had been cleared by the hospital authorities and where all the lights within the building had been put out and yet figures were seen within by the red shirts who latterly marched in to investigate causing a furore.

Question is what forensics if any were ever carried out at the Lumpini park location and what happend to the forensics regarding the 5th floor room?

See many many questions.

If my memory serves me well, you once wrote 70,000 soldiers gathered for the final attack on Ratchaprasong. Pity it got removed.

Now we have 250,000 at Ratchaprasong AND rotating every few days.

History rewritten while you sit at home with a beer and watch TV

No I understood about 50000 troops were deployed and yes IT IS CLAIMED that up to 250,000 people gathered in Ratchaprasong and generally most stayed around 4 days so there was a big turnover.

Interesting you have no conmment on the above fake video unless you are going to tell us that the redshirts deployed it ewoks from Starwars to scurry across the bottom of the screen brandishing blasters.

...

Dont tell me, a bunch of blackshirts ran up to the group of "unarmed" civilians behind the barricade, started shooting to provoke the army before secreting any arms the civilians had on them before running away never to be found.

...

There's at least one video of a Black Shirt doing exactly that. Funny you haven't seen it.

Oh, here it is.

That's funny, that shows absolutely nothing like I described. It does show a black clad "civilian" firing a couple of shots and then running away. It does not show a "black shirt" taking guns from a dead red shirt. Never mind, please try harder next time.

FAKE FAKE FAKE!!!!

Look at the crash barrier, the road, the perspective and the MIB appears to be about 2.5 foot tall.

It's a joke!

Wow you're really trying,NOT.

Oh sorry was it April 22nd? I got my dates muddled up. We visited the redshirts at the monument in late March when Nick Nostitz climbed up on a TV gantry to take a panoramic photo showing roughly around 150,000 people gathered.

Everyone was very solemn. one man shook my hand. I was a witness no more. This is not my fight but for my wife and her children and their children it matters.

When I hear pampered elitist foreigners come on here and make all their insinuations about the poor, how they are controlled and duped etc etc and how their votes really count for nothing and the alternative is only really the STATUS QUO and to just be thankful I want to *ucking puke!

On April, 22nd, 2010 we had the grenade attack on multicolored-shirts which was badly aimed and hit BTS Saladaeng station instead. One Thai lady died, 80 injured with foreigners amongst them.

As for the 150,000 protesters, well maybe 'slightly' less

Not less.

I saw a huge number, at least that and later in Ratchaprasong the numbers grew to over 250000 which rotated every few days so a vast number came down to protest.

Don't understand?

OK I was correct. April 10th army near massacre.

April 22nd. Grenade attack on PAD supporters gathered in Silom opposite redshirt barricades.

The claim by Suthep was that a grenade was fired from Lumpini Park from the monument and struck down those people in Silom.

You go and stand at the monument and go figure how you will hit the street beyond the overhead BTS structure.

The hated red shirts claim that in fact it was fired from the 5th floor of the hospital and the "supposedly" celebrated forensic expert Porntip?

claimed she found chemical residue from a room there on the 5th floor supporting this claim.

This building had been cleared by the hospital authorities and where all the lights within the building had been put out and yet figures were seen within by the red shirts who latterly marched in to investigate causing a furore.

Question is what forensics if any were ever carried out at the Lumpini park location and what happend to the forensics regarding the 5th floor room?

See many many questions.