Anti-Yingluck activists to face prosecutors

[robblok]

1 minute ago, ikke said:

Ha, you forget your Yellow friends killings, or you just cheat it out of the memory..... oh sorry...... they block the game and say that it never happened. And 'their' Ref agrees with them.

Numbers wise the reds have killed far mor then the yellows ever did. The reds are the most violent faction.. you can try to deny it but facts don't lie. The yellows certainly are not clean and the popcorn man is a disgrace but killing and bombing wise the reds are way ahead. I know its an inconvenient truth for you. 

 

But leaders on both sides red and yellow are only there for themselves to get rich themselves.  I support no one anymore as they are all in it for themselves.. but violence wise the facts don't lie. Just open your eyes. 

[Bob12345]

8 minutes ago, robblok said:

Numbers wise the reds have killed far mor then the yellows ever did. The reds are the most violent faction.. you can try to deny it but facts don't lie.

Why would that be you think?

 

Imagine you were a relatively poor farmer (the posterboy of the "reds") and your income and political say it being taken away by the rich Bangkok elite (the poster boys of the "yellows").

What can you do?

- call the police? Nope, the yellows have the army which is better armed

- go to court? Nope, the yellows have the courts

- start a NACC investigation? Nope, all yellows

- complain to the election commission that you want a new election? Nope, all yellows

 

So what options do you have when time is running out?

(no education, huge debts, falling prices of rice, floods, no food on the table)

 

The yellows on the other hand have the upper hand, control the money, control the industries, control the courts, control the army... Every minute they earn more and more. Why would they use force to disrupt the system they only have benefits from?

[robblok]

Just now, Bob12345 said:

Why would that be you think?

 

Imagine you were a relatively poor farmer (the posterboy of the "reds") and your income and political say it being taken away by the rich Bangkok elite (the poster boys of the "yellows").

What can you do?

- call the police? Nope, the yellows have the army which is better armed

- go to court? Nope, the yellows have the courts

- start a NACC investigation? Nope, all yellows

- complain to the election commission that you want a new election? Nope, all yellows

 

So what options do you have when time is running out?

(no education, huge debts, falling prices of rice, floods, no food on the table)

 

The yellows on the other hand have the upper hand, control the money, control the industries, control the courts, control the army... Every minute they earn more and more. Why would they use force to disrupt the system they only have benefits from?

So you accept too that the reds are the more violent of the two. Just look at the difference of protesting.. come to BKK bring fuel we will burn them.. now compare that with how the yellows protested.. and this was done by their leaders.. they whipped them up into a frenzy.. this was not done by the poor reds themselves.. so it just does not match. The red leaders use violence to get their way.

 

As for your excuses... it never excuses violence in my book.  (your excuses also count for the poor yellows)

 

Also i would say that the poor Yellows from the south and the poor red from the north are exactly the same. There is indeed a middle class part of yellows from BKK but I think numbers wise the poor from the South outnumber them (can't be sure don't have numbers to back that up too)

 

Anyway I stand with the facts that the reds are the more violent of the two and can back it up with numbers. I feel there is never an excuse for violence. Protesting sure.. violence.. NO. 

[nikmar]

No one desrves to be publicly hung out to dry more than Sutthep.
"Our democratic right to peaceful and polite demonstration" whilst threatening to spray human waste over government house.

Hypocrite.

Oh. And the monk as well!!

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[ramrod711]

2 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Imagine you were a relatively poor farmer (the posterboy of the "reds") and your income and political say it being taken away by the rich Bangkok elite (the poster boys of the "yellows").

Imagine that you were a poor farmer that had sold his rice and not been paid. Imagine that you wanted to form a group of farmers with tractors to go to Bangkok to protest. Imagine that you were blocked, threatened and turned back, not by the police, army or even by the "yellows" but by your red, so called friends from the political party you supported

[metisdead]

A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed. 

 

Another post containing speculative comments in violation of the following has been removed:

 

1) You will not express disrespect of the King of Thailand or any one member of the Thai royal family, whether living or deceased, nor to criticize the monarchy as an institution.

 

By law, the Thai Royal Family are above politics. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family.

 

To breach these rules may result in immediate ban.

 

Linking to external sites which break these rules will be treated as if you yourself posted them.
 

[ramrod711]

1 minute ago, nikmar said:

No one desrves to be publicly hung out to dry more than Sutthep.
"Our democratic right to peaceful and polite demonstration" whilst threatening to spray human waste over government house.

Hypocrite.

Oh. And the monk as well!!

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I can't decide whether Suthep supporters throwing human waste is worse than red shirts throwing tainted blood. Not to mention the human waste red shirts burned at the blockade.

[Sir Dude]

The game is always rigged in favour of those who control the plutocracy (which is what Thailand is). As for Suthep, he is a duplicitous wriggling little sewer toad and deserves some long overdue punishment for his misdeeds...not a fan at all, and he is the flesh & blood representation of much that is so wrong here plus a deeply polarizing figure of no help whatsoever to the future of Thailand.

Edited January 13, 2018 by Sir Dude

[smutcakes]

30 minutes ago, robblok said:

Numbers wise the reds have killed far mor then the yellows ever did. The reds are the most violent faction.. you can try to deny it but facts don't lie. The yellows certainly are not clean and the popcorn man is a disgrace but killing and bombing wise the reds are way ahead. I know its an inconvenient truth for you. 

 

But leaders on both sides red and yellow are only there for themselves to get rich themselves.  I support no one anymore as they are all in it for themselves.. but violence wise the facts don't lie. Just open your eyes. 

The Yellows have the army to do their dirty work. Of course the Yellows don't need to get their hands too dirty with violence as much as the courts, military etc always step in as planned.

[nikmar]

I can't decide whether Suthep supporters throwing human waste is worse than red shirts throwing tainted blood. Not to mention the human waste red shirts burned at the blockade.

Aye. Very true. There is no one who can take the moral high ground.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, smutcakes said:

The Yellows have the army to do their dirty work. Of course the Yellows don't need to get their hands too dirty with violence as much as the courts, military etc always step in as planned.

Sure the standard excuse, i guess someone like you should see the difference between violent protesters mixed with black shirts where the army has to take charge with innocent protesters who are not harming anyone at all who were sought out by a terrorist faction of the red-shirts and were shot at with machine guns and grenades have been thrown leaving among the dead 2 children. 

 

That is totally different from mixing with terrorists then refusing to go away when the army is getting in and having the army get shot at by members of the red shirts in black. 

 

But hey... whatever gets you through the night to make them both look violent.

 

Fact remains the yellows themselves are NOT the army and are far less violent then the reds.

 

But I don't support anyone anymore because the reds and yellows are just pawns for their leaders to get into power and rape the countries treasury. 

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I find this to be a fascinating story. I find it fascinating not for it's content, but for the fact not a single post even remotely feels that the story is true or that the people mentioned will actually be prosecuted. Not a single one (at the time of writing).

 

This story epitomizes why I (and I assume others, but they can speak for themselves) tend to lean in favour of the "Red" side over the "Yellows" side. I think the most important thing to begin with is that it doesn't matter what I think as I don't get a vote or even participate in Thai politics. However, for the sake of argument...

 

I fully agree with the vast majority of negative views regarding the 'Reds'; they are arrogant, sleazy, duplicitous, power-happy, arrogant, two-faced, arrogant, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. I really can't argue much with any of it; I think it is all basically true. Yet, I still think they are better than the 'Yellows'.

 

Why?

 

Good question.

 

The best analogy that I can come up with is to compare Thai politics to a football (soccer) game. The Reds, as a team, take dives all the time, they yell at the Refs, they kick the opposing players in the groin the second that they think they can get away with it, they bitch and whine over every call made against them, they use every last minute detail of the rules to try to seek advantage for their side, they mouth off to their opponents throughout the entire game (and nothing less than the most vulgar, offensive things possible). In short, they are a team that is oh so easy to hate, and to hate with a good reason. And to hate with a passion. But they play inside the rules (barely) because they have to.

 

The 'Yellows', on the other hand, cheat. They bribe the Ref and/or change the rules to give themselves an advantage when they cannot win cleanly or fairly. They don't work hard to use the rules in their favour; if they are not benefiting from the rules, they change them. If a game is going to go badly, they boycott the game and take their ball home. If they know they will lose, they block the game and say that it never happened. And 'their' Ref agrees with them.

 

Which is worse? To me, the cheating is worse. 

 

For all their many, many faults, I prefer those who play the game by the rules over those who change the rules for their benefit.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

Good analogy. Agree with most, probably all of it. One of fairest and most balanced I've read.

 

But for me, neither is acceptable or preferrable. The Reds, are all the things you say and do what you say, same with the Yellows.

 

The difference is that the Reds aren't always clever enough in interpreting the rules or trying to change them, get caught and get sent off and banned. The Yellows get away with it more and if caught get told off or sin-binned. (I avoided the use of Red and Yellow cards as no pun intended!!).

 

Nothing will change unless there is a tremendous groundswell from the people to demand change. Change that means really reforming the justice system and really tacking corruption at all levels and all sections of society. But no one really seems interested in taking that game on. In a society where lying and cheating seem acceptable behavior, where face champions everything and where bribes, even to get your kids into schools with high fees, is regarded as totally normal and acceptable then change is unlikely.

 

At the end of the day, we are all aliens and guests here. Very few achieve citizenship. So we have to accept the way things are or leave. 

 

 

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

A fair analogy. 

 

The "reds", whatever you or I may think of them, and however unpleasant some of them may be, have been the consistent choice of the people of this country to form the government throughout the last two decades, (I nearly said this century, but that is a trifle melodramatic, given that the century is only 18 years old).

 

It is only fair to point out that the "yellows" have also been consistent throughout the same period. They have consistently ignored the will of the electorate and sought to obtain power through force or the threat of force.

 

As far as I am concerned the "bottom line" is that the "reds" are the choice of the people. 

 

And no, I don't for a minute think anything will come of this. Suthep won't be thrown under a bus - he knows too much.

 

You believe that those choices were all freely made, free of coercion. bribery, threat, intimidation etc etc?

 

I don't. I believe Red and Yellow control their own fiefdoms; and control them very well. The reason the Reds win an election is there are more people in their fiefdom. So the Yellows use ways to by pass elections. More like medieval clans vying for power than a modern political party based election. 

 

You can pretend that "the choice" of the people is paramount if you wish; and so ignore the that their choice isn't exactly a free and informed one. 

 

Suthep, Thaksin, Yingluck, Abhisit etc etc - all know far too much and are all members of the super elite untouchables. Worst that can happen, he has to also flee into exile as a fugitive too.

 

 

[sawadee1947]

well, I was waiting already a long time for this case. In according the turmoil they created they should spend a long time in prison. They also damaged the reputation of this kingdom.....if there was any....

[Artisi]

5 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I find this to be a fascinating story. I find it fascinating not for it's content, but for the fact not a single post even remotely feels that the story is true or that the people mentioned will actually be prosecuted. Not a single one (at the time of writing).

 

This story epitomizes why I (and I assume others, but they can speak for themselves) tend to lean in favour of the "Red" side over the "Yellows" side. I think the most important thing to begin with is that it doesn't matter what I think as I don't get a vote or even participate in Thai politics. However, for the sake of argument...

 

I fully agree with the vast majority of negative views regarding the 'Reds'; they are arrogant, sleazy, duplicitous, power-happy, arrogant, two-faced, arrogant, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. I really can't argue much with any of it; I think it is all basically true. Yet, I still think they are better than the 'Yellows'.

 

Why?

 

Good question.

 

The best analogy that I can come up with is to compare Thai politics to a football (soccer) game. The Reds, as a team, take dives all the time, they yell at the Refs, they kick the opposing players in the groin the second that they think they can get away with it, they bitch and whine over every call made against them, they use every last minute detail of the rules to try to seek advantage for their side, they mouth off to their opponents throughout the entire game (and nothing less than the most vulgar, offensive things possible). In short, they are a team that is oh so easy to hate, and to hate with a good reason. And to hate with a passion. But they play inside the rules (barely) because they have to.

 

The 'Yellows', on the other hand, cheat. They bribe the Ref and/or change the rules to give themselves an advantage when they cannot win cleanly or fairly. They don't work hard to use the rules in their favour; if they are not benefiting from the rules, they change them. If a game is going to go badly, they boycott the game and take their ball home. If they know they will lose, they block the game and say that it never happened. And 'their' Ref agrees with them.

 

Which is worse? To me, the cheating is worse. 

 

For all their many, many faults, I prefer those who play the game by the rules over those who change the rules for their benefit.

 

Thoughts?

 

Don't think too much... 

[khunken]

IMO it is fair enough for the PDRC to be indicted for any violence they caused during the protests against PTP. Suthep does deserve credit for initially organising the protest against the 'amnesty for Thaksin' vote in the Senate the next day but that should have been the end of it.

 

Yes Thailand would be a slightly better place with Suthep (& Chalerm) in jail or unable to have any political power in future - by whatever means.

 

There seems to be a lot of posters lumping PTP & the red hirts as 'red' and the Democrats & yellow shirts as 'yellow' and then going on to say the former are poor farmers and the latter are the elite. This is a highly simplistic view of a far more complex set of groups.

 

As Robblok points out the 'yellows' do consist of a mainly elitist & middle class in Bangkok & some surrounding provinces, but they also consist of poor farmers from the south who not only dislike Thaksin (for good reason) but are not really army supporters too (also for good reason). Yes, the army is supported by the majority of this side & vice-versa. There is not total support within the Democrat party for the yellow shirts.

 

The 'red' side consists of many poor people from the north & northeast but is run by a very much elitist family and has some really murderous militias as well as a handful of mercenary 'leutenants'. The police are supported by this side and the support is returned to them by the police. The majority of the red shirt supporters are not violent but will never have a major political effect in Thailand while being tied to Thaksin & his militias.

 

The above is merely a summary and is IMO.

Edited January 13, 2018 by khunken

[canuckamuck]

@robblok you are definitely consistent in your argument. Most of us know exactly how you feel about the reds, and particularly about some of the violent incidents. And the reactions of some of the reds after the fact. But perhaps it is time you gave those individual events a little less gravity and consider the bigger picture. The incidents that happened during the various periods of unrest were all tragic. But we all know that things here get out of hand quickly, bad decisions get made, communication and planning is non existent; combined with hot heads and an underdeveloped sense of caution. It is remarkable that the bloodshed was so limited for either side.  When you get people stirred up over here bad stuff is going to happen regardless of intentions of leadership. I am not saying they are not responsible; but this is dangerous business and the reds have paid with lots of their own blood as well.

 

There are two sides in this political picture; the disenfranchised grassroots majority (the reds) and the affluent middle, upper, and way upper class (yellows). We have seen both sides in power, and neither side was any good. But as the OP's analogy explains. This is not exactly a fair fight. One side is forced to remain within the law, and the other side writes the law to suit their needs. The yellows get support from various places, basically all the influential bases, corporate, military, judicial and so on. The reds seemed to have the police on their side initially and Thaksin of course - heavily outmatched, but still punching above their weight.

So now we can see that the yellow minority is digging in with the apparent intent to keep the majority from ever having real power again. I would think that there must be some point where some of your pet injustices against a few, might begin to pale in  light of much greater injustice and rights infringements towards the entire nation. You strike me as the kind of guy that would normally support the common man over consolidated power.

[JAG]

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

You believe that those choices were all freely made, free of coercion. bribery, threat, intimidation etc etc?

 

I don't. I believe Red and Yellow control their own fiefdoms; and control them very well. The reason the Reds win an election is there are more people in their fiefdom. So the Yellows use ways to by pass elections. More like medieval clans vying for power than a modern political party based election. 

 

You can pretend that "the choice" of the people is paramount if you wish; and so ignore the that their choice isn't exactly a free and informed one. 

 

Suthep, Thaksin, Yingluck, Abhisit etc etc - all know far too much and are all members of the super elite untouchables. Worst that can happen, he has to also flee into exile as a fugitive too.

 

 

5

Your premise,  that "The choice isn't exactly a free and informed one " is contradicted by international observers, including ANFREL. Yes, the electoral process here, largely "binary" in nature and returning geographical and political "blocs" lacks the nuances of a modern western system of proportional representation, but it essentially reflected (as was recognised by those observers; and the Thai Election Commission - hardly enthusiasts for "red" government) the wishes of the electorate. Their choice was free. They had a choice, which is rather more than the present regime has offered, or seems likely to. Nor for that matter did Suthep or his backers, during their campaign before the coup, seem to believe that the choice should be available.

 

Taking your point further - you say " I believe Red and Yellow control their own fiefdoms; and control them very well. The reason the Reds win an election is there are more people in their fiefdom. So the Yellows use ways to bypass elections." Is the sentence which I underline, any sort of reason to nullify the election results and hand power to the losers? Elections are won by the side which garners the most votes.

 

I do believe that the choice of the people as expressed in the election is paramount - and my view is confirmed by the conclusion of those international observers that the choice was free. You declare that the electorate were ill-informed, perhaps a more effective campaign by the losing side may have made them "better informed", and changed the result.

 

I'm left with the conclusion that the governments resulting from these several electoral processes are for you unpalatable, and therefore you are prepared to accept that the choice of a majority should be overturned by the military at the behest of a minority, We disagree fundamentally on that point, and probably ever will do...

 

Does that make me a "Democratic Soldier"?

Edited January 13, 2018 by JAG

[candide]

7 hours ago, Bob12345 said:

The junta has nothing to fear as they have amnesty already.

Also history shows they have nothing to fear.

 

Well, the only thing they do have to fear is the truth (and justice).

 

If Suthep comes out again and goes into detail how he and the current government worked together and organized these protests to get rid of an elected government, it might get nasty.

Imagine a 3-page interview with Suthep where he gives the details of his meetings with Prayut (and Prayut's bosses) on how to overthrow the government, maybe spiced up with some comments as "hope we get some people on our side killed to make it more serious" (direct reference to the american diplomatic cables from previous protest) and the likes.

I agree. Either he will not be convicted or he will be dead.

[candide]

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

You can pretend that "the choice" of the people is paramount if you wish; and so ignore the that their choice isn't exactly a free and informed one

I would not bet they are so uninformed. They have the feeling they belong to one political side and there is the opposite side with diverging interests.

 

The red supporters knew that Thaksin was a crook, but it was their side and at least he gave them some crumbles from the cake.

 

Similarly, the people protesting behind Suthep against corruption in 2014 perfectly knew he was a corrupt crook. But it was their side and he was supposed to protect their interest.

[janclaes47]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

@robblokyou are definitely consistent in your argument. Most of us know exactly how you feel about the reds, and particularly about some of the violent incidents. And the reactions of some of the reds after the fact. But perhaps it is time you gave those individual events a little less gravity and consider the bigger picture.

 I was ready to respond to a post of Robblok, but you took me the words out of the mouth.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

@robblok you are definitely consistent in your argument. Most of us know exactly how you feel about the reds, and particularly about some of the violent incidents. And the reactions of some of the reds after the fact. But perhaps it is time you gave those individual events a little less gravity and consider the bigger picture. The incidents that happened during the various periods of unrest were all tragic. But we all know that things here get out of hand quickly, bad decisions get made, communication and planning is non existent; combined with hot heads and an underdeveloped sense of caution. It is remarkable that the bloodshed was so limited for either side.  When you get people stirred up over here bad stuff is going to happen regardless of intentions of leadership. I am not saying they are not responsible; but this is dangerous business and the reds have paid with lots of their own blood as well.

 

There are two sides in this political picture; the disenfranchised grassroots majority (the reds) and the affluent middle, upper, and way upper class (yellows). We have seen both sides in power, and neither side was any good. But as the OP's analogy explains. This is not exactly a fair fight. One side is forced to remain within the law, and the other side writes the law to suit their needs. The yellows get support from various places, basically all the influential bases, corporate, military, judicial and so on. The reds seemed to have the police on their side initially and Thaksin of course - heavily outmatched, but still punching above their weight.

So now we can see that the yellow minority is digging in with the apparent intent to keep the majority from ever having real power again. I would think that there must be some point where some of your pet injustices against a few, might begin to pale in  light of much greater injustice and rights infringements towards the entire nation. You strike me as the kind of guy that would normally support the common man over consolidated power.

These were not incidents, during the protest is was attack after attack on the protesters with Charlem telling them to go home because he could not protect them (i suspect he supported the attacks). Incidents are one thing, but if you go from burning of BKK to the protests against the junta you will see one thing that is always there.. violence from the reds. So i stand with my opinion that the reds are the most violent faction out there. Just look at how their leaders whipped them into a frenzy to burn BKK. Have you seen speeches like that from the yellows ? Do understand 4 !!! kids were killed by actions of the reds. I am all for protesting but not for violence. 

 

I am drawn more to the middle class as they are the ones paying for it all, i am certainly not pro elite besides anyone not calling the Shins elite are not seeing things right. Its just a fight between 2 elite sides with the people as pawns. Both sides want to be in power and could not care less about their supporters. I don't see either side being clean so I have stopped supporting any side as I just don't see anything happening. Just new corrupt leaders.. junta.. democrats PTP whoever... in power that rape the treasury. No improvements at all for those who brought them in power.

 

I am also someone that believes in teaching people to fish... instead of making them dependent on handouts. The latter is what the PTP does and how it can bind its supporters to them. I just dislike it when tax money is wasted in handouts instead of real solutions, like setting up cooperation, teaching people new ways of farming and just telling people to stop farming as there is no profit in it. I feel its madness to constantly go for handouts (good to buy votes) but it wont change anything while the people earning wages are constantly paying the price. That is my problem with PTP policies, and with Democrat policies if they do the same thing. Because its nothing more then vote buying and solves nothing. 

 

 

[canuckamuck]

38 minutes ago, robblok said:

 So i stand with my opinion that the reds are the most violent faction out there.

 

As another poster explained, of course they were. They had limited options and their government was under attack.

Yes the reds had more murderers than the yellows did, if you don't count the army mowing down civilians and foreigners. But they both had murderers in their ranks. It's not much of a distinction.

Why do you think those statistics are so relevant to the current situation where people are losing their freedom and their rights. Where is your sense of Proprotion?

[robblok]

37 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

As another poster explained, of course they were. They had limited options and their government was under attack.

Yes the reds had more murderers than the yellows did, if you don't count the army mowing down civilians and foreigners. But they both had murderers in their ranks. It's not much of a distinction.

Why do you think those statistics are so relevant to the current situation where people are losing their freedom and their rights. Where is your sense of Proprotion?

Why its so important, because it shows the difference between the two sides, the reds are by a large margin more violent. Their leaders whipped them up for even more violence.. its a pattern. That is why its so important and that is why I don't think highly of the reds at all. You say both have had killers in their ranks.. that is true.. but the violence from the reds was much higher and instigated from higher on by hate speeches.. by having people bring fuel to burn a city.. to tel them to drive over people.  I would say 2-3 times more violence is a lot of distinction. There are almost no yellows that did what the reds did with their bombs and attacks on protesters, the Trad massacre ect ect. The only yellow scumbag worth talking about is the popcorn man who only engaged after being engaged by the reds.. not something like what was done in trad where unarmed protesters far away from everyone were targeted I guess you just dont want to see the difference. 

 

Of course I don't count the army because they are not the yellow and the reds had their say in them getting mowed down by having their men in black attacking the army. Had the reds just stopped and and not fired on the army things would have been different. You can blame the army here.. but the reds have a high portion of blame too with their blackshirts who were proven to be red shirts later on. 

 

I don't get why i should accept the violence of them and support them now because people are oppressed by the junta. I don't see how those things are connected. Just because they can't protest now does not make their actions back then good. 

 

I can tell you one thing had the PTP not tried to get Thaksin back they probably would be still in power or the junta would not be as powerful as now. Just think about that one for a while. 

 

 

[candide]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

These were not incidents, during the protest is was attack after attack on the protesters with Charlem telling them to go home because he could not protect them (i suspect he supported the attacks). Incidents are one thing, but if you go from burning of BKK to the protests against the junta you will see one thing that is always there.. violence from the reds. So i stand with my opinion that the reds are the most violent faction out there. Just look at how their leaders whipped them into a frenzy to burn BKK. Have you seen speeches like that from the yellows ? Do understand 4 !!! kids were killed by actions of the reds. I am all for protesting but not for violence. 

No incidents of course! They only killed when they were opposed, which did not happen often....

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/police-officer-killed-in-clashes-with-protesters-in-bangkok.html

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Police-in-bloody-clash-with-protesters;-4-dead-30227197.html

 

[brucec64]

 
Overthrowing an elected government by force of arms is not sedition in Thailand.
 
It is called ' selfless patriotism '
The army is as pure as the driven snow which is why they engineered the coup and subsequently have awarded themselves immunity from any kind of prosecution.

A coup is only illegal when it is not successful.

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Sir Dude]

If the junta is smart, then they should throw the book at both sides convincingly.....but don't hold your breath.

[Bob12345]

1 minute ago, Sir Dude said:

If the junta is smart, then they should throw the book at both sides convincingly.....but don't hold your breath.

They are afraid it might bounce back some time and hit them in the head.

[Sir Dude]

Maybe so man

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies about the riots of 2010 have been removed as this topic is about:

 

 

Quote

The up to 54 political activists including group leader Suthep Thaugsuban, have been charged by the Department of Special Investigation following their role in the 2014 demonstrations against former PM Yingluck Shinawatra and her government.