4 Grenades Explode Near Thailand's Anti-government Tv Station

[animatic]

Do you think the police knew the cheap China tear gas would kill people and wanted that outcome.

It's part of their training to know what the effect of the equipment has.

Failure to do so makes them responsible for the outcome.

Oh, and so you know, the first teargas grenade was captured on film and it's effect was clearly visible. Anyone with any training whatsoever handling the [less lethal] weapons could see what was happening. Are you saying the police is so poorly trained they cannot even put two and two together and understand the risk of firing explosive teargas grenades directly at people? Perhaps then it isn't only training that is lacking, apparently atleast one digit of IQ...

It was caught on video, but more over, they kept it up for HOURS on end.

It was on TV showing severed limbs, and they STILL kept up for hours more.

It was intentional and if you have seen the videos,

that IS beyond a reasonable thinking persons dispute.

Not to mention the findings of both comittees, and Dr. Portip's findings.

I know there are some here who prefer dogma to reason,

and pedantry to logic, and Thaksinomics to rational thought

And what they already like to know to scientific findings.

I'm sure some day we can find you a Darwin Award to fit.

.

[JoeInSurin]

Do you think the police knew the cheap China tear gas would kill people and wanted that outcome.

It's part of their training to know what the effect of the equipment has.

Failure to do so makes them responsible for the outcome.

Oh, and so you know, the first teargas grenade was captured on film and it's effect was clearly visible. Anyone with any training whatsoever handling the [less lethal] weapons could see what was happening. Are you saying the police is so poorly trained they cannot even put two and two together and understand the risk of firing explosive teargas grenades directly at people? Perhaps then it isn't only training that is lacking, apparently atleast one digit of IQ...

I agree with you that their training was bad and the China tear gas canisters should have been tested and for this they are at fault. I think it is a little much to imply that their intent was to kill people.

[LaoPo]

If the military govt. had accepted the EU's offer of election observers in 2007 then perhaps all of this could have been avoided.

If they were not confident of a clean election then why reject the offer?

With hindsight it seems they should have accepted and then perhaps we wouldn't be in this mess.

But then of course it would have prevented all this retrospective back biting that both sides love so much and it could have even led to the PAD pointing fingers at the EU if they didn't like the outcome. Well at least they might have appeared on international news every night, so maybe that was a bad diplomatic move by them. They could have "gone inter.."!

Well said and well observed !

LaoPo

[frodo]

http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/tops...s.php?id=131152 Here is the support to show your claim is rubbish. Or maybe you think siegeing Parliament and erecting barricades is lawful.

Total rubbish again. You've totally ignored the original question. What law did she break? "...she was killed while walking to the Royal Plaza with her mother and younger sister." You've labeled her guilty for this and feel that is okay that she was killed for merely walking with family members. I've seen nothing that supports your claim she broke into and took over Parliament, nor did she disobey any orders.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/09...al_30085618.php

[JoeInSurin]

It was caught on video, but more over, they kept it up for HOURS on end.

It was on TV showing severed limbs, and they STILL kept up for hours more.

It was intentional and if you have seen the videos,

that IS beyond a reasonable thinking persons dispute.

Not to mention the findings of both comittees, and Dr. Portip's findings.

I know there are some here who prefer dogma to reason,

and pedantry to logic, and Thaksinomics to rational thought

And what they already like to know to scientific findings.

I'm sure some day we can find you a Darwin Award to fit.

.

So the police in the middle of an mob while being assulted were watching TV. After watching TV while being assulted saw it and then kept it up for hours? Any reasonable person would not think someone in the middle of mayhem while being assulted by an illegal mob resisting arrest would be aware or have the full view of what was on the TV. If someone can do this they deserve the Darwin Award.

[ozterix]

Why does anyone waste their time and the forum space to argue with or attempt to inform joelinsurin is beyond my understanding...

Now looking back at a few of the people who on this forum keep defending T and PPP against all evidences of crimes and corruption, considering that they have some sort of education as they can express themselves in English and use a computer and internet, I find it easier to forgive the farmers from Isaan who did not have a chance to be educated nor were given the information to formulate some sort of opinion and ended up taking a few baht (previously stolen from them) to buy their vote in an election.

I am not pro anything, but I am against crime, dictators, corruption and the sort of behavior we see daily from our politicians, and even if PAD's idea on electoral system it is not the best proposition, I can't see the mass of Thai population vote in an informed manner and expressing a personal choice for a long time...

if anyone has a better idea, shoot...

oz

[jdinasia]

JoeInSurin --- the article YOU posted stated that the police attacked with no notice. NOT that the police were attacked and responded.

Now --- to what you quote. Read it again. TAWP says

the first teargas grenade was captured on film and it's effect was clearly visible. Anyone with any training whatsoever handling the [less lethal] weapons could see what was happening.

The first RDX laced weapon EXPLODED and any reasonable trained professional should be able to see that result. Then to keep firing and firing and firing and firing on people with no access to an escape route .... THAT was what was criminal on Oct 7th

[Los78]

If the military govt. had accepted the EU's offer of election observers in 2007 then perhaps all of this could have been avoided.

If they were not confident of a clean election then why reject the offer?

With hindsight it seems they should have accepted and then perhaps we wouldn't be in this mess.

But then of course it would have prevented all this retrospective back biting that both sides love so much and it could have even led to the PAD pointing fingers at the EU if they didn't like the outcome. Well at least they might have appeared on international news every night, so maybe that was a bad diplomatic move by them. They could have "gone inter.."!

Well said and well observed !

LaoPo

Exactly. Why complain when the Junta rejected extra observers from the EU. Although I dont think it would of changed the result anyway.

[JoeInSurin]

Joe, sorry again but your premise that attacking people with lethal weapons is an acceptable way to disperse a crowd (that had been given no legal order to disperse) is asinine!

If you want a link that would be good reading for you and quotes Thailand's most respected and independent FORENSICS EXPERT as well as including quotes from a very important person in Thailand you should look at this.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/tops...s.php?id=131399

If their intent was to kill people why did they also us US made tear gas that worked as intended. My premise is that the China tear gas was faulty and did not work as intended. I would hold the Police at fault for not testing the product and it seems their was inadequate training. The people breaking the law are also at fault for breaking the law and taking on the police. Both are at fault. To think the PAD had nothing to do with making the police use force is asinane!!

[jdinasia]

Joe- you are chasing your tail again. Did you read the link from the post you made or the one from mine? The crowd was given no lawful order to disperse; they did not "take on the police". The crowd at Government House is there legally (at least until their appeal is heard).

You are sticking with your opinion and not even acknowledging the information contained in posts YOU make. remember opinions should be INFORMED and not arbitrary ...

Regarding EU observers --- I see people are still harping on that when cmsally's own link told why they could not be allowed in.

[animatic]

Do you think the police knew the cheap China tear gas would kill people and wanted that outcome.

It's part of their training to know what the effect of the equipment has.

Failure to do so makes them responsible for the outcome.

Oh, and so you know, the first teargas grenade was captured on film and it's effect was clearly visible. Anyone with any training whatsoever handling the [less lethal] weapons could see what was happening. Are you saying the police is so poorly trained they cannot even put two and two together and understand the risk of firing explosive teargas grenades directly at people? Perhaps then it isn't only training that is lacking, apparently atleast one digit of IQ...

It was caught on video, but more over, they kept it up for HOURS on end.

It was on TV showing severed limbs, and they STILL kept up for hours more.

It was intentional and if you have seen the videos,

that IS beyond a reasonable thinking persons dispute.

Not to mention the findings of both comittees, and Dr. Portip's findings.

I know there are some here who prefer dogma to reason,

and pedantry to logic, and Thaksinomics to rational thought

And what they already like to know to scientific findings.

I'm sure some day we can find you a Darwin Award to fit.

.

So the police in the middle of an mob while being assulted were watching TV. After watching TV while being assulted saw it and then kept it up for hours? Any reasonable person would not think someone in the middle of mayhem while being assulted by an illegal mob resisting arrest would be aware or have the full view of what was on the TV. If someone can do this they deserve the Darwin Award.

Wrong again.

The police were surrounding and blocking in the crowd and then firing into it from multiple sides.

And YES those 'in charge' certainly could see the TV, see the carnage, and make a call to the head of the riot squads.

No excuse.

If you can't rebutt with facts why bother?

[JoeInSurin]

Why does anyone waste their time and the forum space to argue with or attempt to inform joelinsurin is beyond my understanding... (If you think a PAD mob is the right thing for Thailand that would be beyond my understanding) Now looking back at a few of the people who on this forum keep defending T and PPP against all evidences of crimes and corruption (I have never done this and have always said the legal system and courts should decide this and not a mob), considering that they have some sort of education (the top schools in the USA) as they can express themselves in English and use a computer and internet, I find it easier to forgive the farmers from Isaan who did not have a chance to be educated nor were given the information to formulate some sort of opinion and ended up taking a few baht (previously stolen from them) to buy their vote in an election (Parroted from the PAD).

I am not pro anything, but I am against crime, dictators, corruption and the sort of behavior we see daily from our politicians, and even if PAD's idea on electoral system it is not the best proposition, I can't see the mass of Thai population vote in an informed manner and expressing a personal choice for a long time...

if anyone has a better idea, shoot...

oz

Edited November 24, 2008 by JoeInSurin

[bulmercke]

Do you think the police knew the cheap China tear gas would kill people and wanted that outcome.

It's part of their training to know what the effect of the equipment has.

Failure to do so makes them responsible for the outcome.

Oh, and so you know, the first teargas grenade was captured on film and it's effect was clearly visible. Anyone with any training whatsoever handling the [less lethal] weapons could see what was happening. Are you saying the police is so poorly trained they cannot even put two and two together and understand the risk of firing explosive teargas grenades directly at people? Perhaps then it isn't only training that is lacking, apparently atleast one digit of IQ...

It was caught on video, but more over, they kept it up for HOURS on end.

It was on TV showing severed limbs, and they STILL kept up for hours more.

It was intentional and if you have seen the videos,

that IS beyond a reasonable thinking persons dispute.

Not to mention the findings of both comittees, and Dr. Portip's findings.

I know there are some here who prefer dogma to reason,

and pedantry to logic, and Thaksinomics to rational thought

And what they already like to know to scientific findings.

I'm sure some day we can find you a Darwin Award to fit.

.

So the police in the middle of an mob while being assulted were watching TV. After watching TV while being assulted saw it and then kept it up for hours? Any reasonable person would not think someone in the middle of mayhem while being assulted by an illegal mob resisting arrest would be aware or have the full view of what was on the TV. If someone can do this they deserve the Darwin Award.

Wrong again.

The police were surrounding and blocking in the crowd and then firing into it from multiple sides.

And YES those 'in charge' certainly could see the TV, see the carnage, and make a call to the head of the riot squads.

No excuse.

If you can't rebutt with facts why bother?

Agreed.

Watch out for some new iniative from the PAD - tomorrow - that will give them a temporary advantage over the police -

Edited November 24, 2008 by bulmercke

[cmsally]

Joe- you are chasing your tail again. Did you read the link from the post you made or the one from mine? The crowd was given no lawful order to disperse; they did not "take on the police". The crowd at Government House is there legally (at least until their appeal is heard).

You are sticking with your opinion and not even acknowledging the information contained in posts YOU make. remember opinions should be INFORMED and not arbitrary ...

Regarding EU observers --- I see people are still harping on that when cmsally's own link told why they could not be allowed in.

The text that you pulled out of my link, was that the Thai Lawyers Council said to sign the document would require a public hearing and approval of parliament. So it would have been possible but with conditions.

The group said the Thai Election Commission was responsible for conducting the election and that is enough to insure a fair election. To sign such an agreement would be in violation of the constitution which requires a public hearing and approval of parliament, the statement said.

Last week, the EU sent a copy of a MoU to the Election Commission seeking the right of access and observation during the election process.

On Monday, election commissioner Sodsri Satayathum said she worried about the effect of a negative EU report perhaps leading to the EU not recognizing the newly elected government.

Now the election commissioner did not reiterate that argument but came up with a different reason. To argue the facts correctly you would really need to know the nature of the MoU as well as the part of the constitution that supposedly made it problematic. But an MoU (such as this) is normally an agreement which basically allows govt . agencies from different countries to cooperate.

Presuming that other agencies still cooperate in other ways, it would be interesting to see what exactly would make this cooperation so problematic. How would this agreement be so different to others.

So basically you are quoting the Lawyers point of view (and it is a point of view, or are you going to believe them just because they are lawyers?) without knowing the real facts.

Basically its jolly hard work if you really want to have a meaningful discussion on the issues, instead of making suppositions and voicing points of view.

[Moonrakers]

Just heard on the news that all state schools are closed from 2 days starting tomorrow.

Either somebody is feeling uneasy, or knows something that we don't.

[LaoPo]

Regarding EU observers --- I see people are still harping on that when cmsally's own link told why they could not be allowed in.

Well, jdinasia, I've read both articles and the WHY-reason, as explained by the then ruling powers is plain silly. The Powers in place just didn't WANT any observers on their soil, with or without a Memorandum of Understanding since the USA, Russia and Indonesia also offered to send observers WITHOUT a MoU (like the EU wanted)....and...did YOU see any observers from any country ?

Read them again if you please and form your -refreshed- opinion*:

http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=8483

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/30/...d-Elections.php

* but, knowing your opinion a little I doubt that you will ever change your opinion, no matter the evidence...am I wrong ?

LaoPo

Edited November 24, 2008 by LaoPo

[jdinasia]

CM Sally, Parliament was not in session at the time was it?

The EC knew there would be widespread cheating by the PPP and had their own concerns. The lawyers noted that there was no option for it at all

LaoPo ... again you are attempting to provoke confrontation with me (ah I see you edited-------)? Did I see any observers? No I was not upcountry. Would an observer have been able to ascertain much? No ... Were they needed? No ... would it have changed anything that is happening in Thailand now? No. To have caught corruption in the ballot process regarding vote buying would require being in the villages in the NE and elsewhere long enough to know the political machine there AND fluency in Thai.

I concur that the then gov't and the EC did not desire observers but I assume that you read for a group not associated with them why the EU observers could not be allowed in. That article did not discuss the non-EU observers legal status with regards to the Kingdom's laws.

Edited November 24, 2008 by jdinasia

[cmsally]

CM Sally, Parliament was not in session at the time was it?

The EC knew there would be widespread cheating by the PPP and had their own concerns. The lawyers noted that there was no option for it at all

IF that was the case why refuse the countries that would send without an MoU.

Where is your evidence to say that EU knew there would be widespread cheating on the part of one side.

And what precisely were the concerns?

Considering the choice of an election commission is normally a rather partisan affair I would have thought the the military govt. was off to a flying start.

[hungryhippo]

I totally agree with you that it is a setup job. Just just when PAD bomb themselves a few days ago. Also the NBT station violence where actually carried out by red in yellow shirt.

It's idiotic that people keep mentioning this. You keep repeating it over and over as though you are trying to make it true. If the PAD were blowing themselves up they would do it Muslim style, into a crowd of policemen, not into their own supporters.

I do not care what side you support in the debate however please refrain from posting dumb stuff like the above. I would not believe either side would blow themselves and their supporters up. It's like saying Bush did 9/11 you only make yourself look like a crazy idiot.

Do you really think that the police using the cheap China tear gas really wanted to kill people.

Why do you keep claiming the gas grenades are from china and if so which ones? Here is the thread about the grenades and it points to the grenades being US grenades, not Chinese. I read they modified the grenades to be more explosive, how much truth is in that I don't know, however I am sure the gas grenades are not suppose to blow off people's limbs.

The amount of explosive that needs to be in a grenade to do that much damage to someone would not have originally have been in the grenade. If you read up on the M47 which are the type of gas grenades used by the Thai police, this type of grenade is not suppose to explode.

I would just like to point out that when this happened we had the same old rubbish from the forum posters here, "Maybe the PAD are blowing themselves up, perhaps pipe bombs stuffed inside their socks?". Not a direct quote but very close from memory.

Also at the time the official police excuse was that "people were getting caught on razor wire fence" and that's why their limbs were coming off.

You can say what you like about the brits but the fact is that the UK government won't tolerate being used as a safe haven for convicted criminals hel_l bent on the political destablisation of friendly countries.

Not true as it has happened before with a certain Russian oil baron that if I remember correctly also bought a football team in the UK and was also escaping charges in Russia.

If you are not trying to ubstruct the government and are going about your daily life at home and let the court system work these things should not happen to you.

So you're advocating that anyone who opposes the government is an enemy of the state? Opposition is obstruction of the government. That is dangerous talk you're using there.

Thailand is rapidly becoming like the Philippines, without political opposition you will see protesters being taken away and never heard from again. I for one do not want that, however I fear that is what is going to come because after Sondhi's TV station is gone what opposition would be left? A lot of Thai people are illiterate or don't read newspapers, the government channel is their only source of news, without a TV channel which is not owned by the government they can hide whatever they want and get away with it.

[khunjamespittman]

Why does anyone waste their time and the forum space to argue with or attempt to inform joelinsurin is beyond my understanding...

Now looking back at a few of the people who on this forum keep defending T and PPP against all evidences of crimes and corruption, considering that they have some sort of education as they can express themselves in English and use a computer and internet, I find it easier to forgive the farmers from Isaan who did not have a chance to be educated nor were given the information to formulate some sort of opinion and ended up taking a few baht (previously stolen from them) to buy their vote in an election.

I am not pro anything, but I am against crime, dictators, corruption and the sort of behavior we see daily from our politicians, and even if PAD's idea on electoral system it is not the best proposition, I can't see the mass of Thai population vote in an informed manner and expressing a personal choice for a long time...

if anyone has a better idea, shoot...

oz

I am always amazed that some people continue to believe or at least espouse the belief that that are smarter that the masses. the want that usurp the vote of these people. It seems to me a defensive act to conceal the fact that these people have a feeling that they are incapable of helping or at lease educating the people that they have so much contempt for. What are these people afraid of? Perhaps that the people for which they have contempt have more common sense than they do and may seek an education and then rule these pathetic people.

[canuckamuck]

The PAD has failed, or at least it seems so to me. After many months of whipping up the easily manipulated masses, Sondhi’s final battle achieved nothing of substance. Time has worked against him and now passion has turned to fatigue and apathy.

Aak by Sondhi, at least for now. I am sure you can find another way to force your face into the spotlight, but I am pleased to see that no more citizens have lost there lives today.

[LaoPo]

LaoPo ... again you are attempting to provoke confrontation with me (ah I see you edited-------)? Did I see any observers? No I was not upcountry. Would an observer have been able to ascertain much? No ... Were they needed? No ... would it have changed anything that is happening in Thailand now? No. To have caught corruption in the ballot process regarding vote buying would require being in the villages in the NE and elsewhere long enough to know the political machine there AND fluency in Thai.

I concur that the then gov't and the EC did not desire observers but I assume that you read for a group not associated with them why the EU observers could not be allowed in.

That article did not discuss the non-EU observers legal status with regards to the Kingdom's laws.

If I discuss I am not looking for a confrontation, not with you nor anyone else; I am looking for the truth and looking for an intelligent debate, not confrontation.

That we differ is nothing wrong with but please, don't make this so personal as to call upon me that I would be looking for a confrontation if I answer to an opinion by yourself.

I find it odd that you claim that you say they (observers) weren't needed....very odd indeed.

I'd say that a lot of problems could have been avoided if there would have been observers...BUT...the elite powers don't like honest observers from foreign countries, do they ?

Very understandable indeed from their points of view, to protect their powers. ......... but that you defend the attitude and weak arguments by the military powers in

charge (in 2007) is strange.

note about editing: I edited the word "Junta" and wrote "Powers in place" instead. Anything I shouldn't have done ?

LaoPo

[cmsally]

I concur that the then gov't and the EC did not desire observers but I assume that you read for a group not associated with them why the EU observers could not be allowed in. That article did not discuss the non-EU observers legal status with regards to the Kingdom's laws.

That brings us back full circle doesn't it. From the facts we have at hand the decision to reject observers was based on desire. The article did not discuss the legal details regarding observers/constitution/MoU so unless we have all the facts we cannot say what the legal status of this situation would be.

Whereas on your first reply you took the Lawyers rebuttal as prima facie evidence as to why the issue of observers could not be carried through.

Please take the time to separate fact from supposition. Even when things are reported in the media or come out of a government or professional mouth it doesn't always mean it is true , surprisingly enough.

[baht&sold]

General Kattiya Warns of More Attack against ASTV Headquarters

source: TOC 24 November 2008

General Kattiya Sawasdiphol has warned ASTV staff of more attacks against the ASTV headquarters on Phra Arthit Road.

Army specialist Maj General Kattiya Sawadipol has warned that more attacks are likely to be launched against the ASTV headquarters on Phra Arthit Road.

He also cautioned that unlike the two failed attempts before dawn this morning, the future attacks are likely to be more violent and guarantees to cause damages to the ASTV headquarters and even casulties to its staff.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Photo lovingly ripped from SJ (tanks)

PS: MAJOR Gen whacko Joe, er, Kattiya keeps this up and he just might replace Chalerm in the new upcoming Thaksin led Peua Thai Cabinet (Chalerm moves to Justice Minister)

[jdinasia]

CM Sally, Parliament was not in session at the time was it?

The EC knew there would be widespread cheating by the PPP and had their own concerns. The lawyers noted that there was no option for it at all

IF that was the case why refuse the countries that would send without an MoU.

Where is your evidence to say that EU knew there would be widespread cheating on the part of one side.

And what precisely were the concerns?

Considering the choice of an election commission is normally a rather partisan affair I would have thought the the military govt. was off to a flying start.

Read that post of mine again Sally,

the EC knew there would be cheating, it is systemic in many areas with local political machines. Also covered was the fact that the stories did not cover the legal situation for other observers.

regarding your next post ---- Sally, My agreeing that the EC nor the Gov't wanted observers in no way changes that they could not have allowed the MoU observers --- and I have no idea about the non MoU but I suspect the same.

second edit ---- I point out someone is chasing their tail ... you come back with full circle? You didn't address the fact that observers wouldn't have been able to see anything that didn't occur in the voting stations and that the language barriers and cultural barriers would have been all but insurmountable (unless they could find Thai speaking locals that knew the situation in any given political area and were willing to return to Thailand and run the risks of affronting those political machines in a place where they would likely still have family living!)

Edited November 24, 2008 by jdinasia

[baht&sold]

Protest leader vows to topple government by Wednesday

source: TNA Nov 23 2008

BANGKOK, Nov 24 (TNA) - Anti-government People’s Alliance for Democracy leader Chamlong Srimuang said on Monday protesters’ march to seal off different locations in Bangkok on Monday is simply a prelude, as the group planned more intense coordinated protests on Tuesday and vowed to topple the government by Wednesday.

Earlier Monday, key PAD leaders declared victory after their mass protests at Parliament prompted the cancellation of Monday's joint session of the House of Representatives and Senate.

Police arrested six men dressed as PAD protesters, who allegedly hijacked a Bangkok Mass Transit Authority bus and drove it to the PAD protest site to be used as a road blockade.

The protesters also marched to seize the Chart Thai Party Headquarters and Finance Ministry and later changed their target to the temporary seat of government at Don Mueang Airport.

The PAD protesters seized the rooftop of the terminal building and announced its victory. The protesters also booed and attacked Deputy Metropolitan Police Chief Police Col Patchara Boonyasit, while he was walking to the Government’s temporary office.

The protesters planned to camp out at Don Mueang airport Monday night while more supporters would join the group at 4 am on Tuesday. Scores of police were on standby to prevent a possible break-in by the demonstrators.

The group also announced it would rally at Suvarnabhumi Airport on Wednesday morning to protest against Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat from landing on his return to Thailand after attending the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Peru.

The Thai government, the opposition, House Speaker and the senate president jointly agreed to hold an extraordinary parliamentary session on December 8 and 9 and would confer only on drafted international conventions and treaties to be inked at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN summit in the northern province of Chiang Mai in December. (TNA)

+++++++++++++++++++

EDIT/ With the Border Patrol Police back in the mix and Major Gen Kattiya and the UDD likely getting direction from the 'war room', the PAD should tread very carefully indeed...

Thanks to the current political turmoil, 111 banned members of the defunct Thai Rak Thai (TRT) have found an opportunity to return to the political stage.

A few weeks ago they set up their war room in Shinawatra 3 Building.

They meet twice a week to analyse the political situation to enable the Somchai Wongsawat government cope with the turmoil. They reportedly play a vital role in giving directions to the PM. If events go bad, they are ready to hold urgent meetings.

The war room brings together all the 111 banned TRT members, together with key men from the People Power Party. Together, they form a grouping powerful enough to decide the fate of the government. All the government's enemies are scrutinised thoroughly.

A study of the names of all key members reveals they belong to the party royalty, with direct links to the man in London. Yaowapa, wife of the prime minister and Thaksin Shinawatra's sister, chairs the group.

Key banned politicians like Sudarat Keyuraphan, Yongyuth Tiyapairat, Warathep Rattanakorn, Pongthep Thepkanchana, and Chaturon Chaisaeng share the stage. Government spokesman Natthawut Saikua and Chatuporn Promphan - leaders of the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship (DAAD) - are ready to mobilise supporters and counter-attack opponents every time they are needed. PM's Office Minister Supon Fongngam, who oversees the Public Relations Department, regularly attends the meetings.

source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/21...cs_30086484.php OCT 21 2008

Edited November 24, 2008 by baht&sold

[LaoPo]

General Kattiya Warns of More Attack against ASTV Headquarters

source: TOC 24 November 2008

General Kattiya Sawasdiphol has warned ASTV staff of more attacks against the ASTV headquarters on Phra Arthit Road.

baht&sold: can you please provide other news-links, other than from the TOC/ASTV who are owned/co-owned by Sondhi Limthongkul the founder of PAD, since I didn't read of any of such ''warnings'' in the other press sources.

Thanks.

LaoPo

[cmsally]

The EC knew there would be cheating, it is systemic in many areas with local political machines. Also covered was the fact that the stories did not cover the legal situation for other observers.

regarding your next post ---- Sally, My agreeing that the EC nor the Gov't wanted observers in no way changes that they could not have allowed the MoU observers --- and I have no idea about the non MoU but I suspect the same.

That is not a substantive argument.

If the EC knew there was electoral cheating it doesn't follow logically that they would not want observers (in fact vice versa should be the case).

We still have no proof that they COULD not allow observers, from the evidence that we have it was more likely would not.

The only way to prove they COULD not is to read and take apart the appropriate clause of the constitution (difficult as the lawyers didn't quote it or make a reference to a particular section), see the wording of the MoU and work from there.

This is a good illustration how the debate of politics all its accoutrements can become more like a game of Chinese whispers.

[Bangyai]

If the military govt. had accepted the EU's offer of election observers in 2007 then perhaps all of this could have been avoided.

If they were not confident of a clean election then why reject the offer?

With hindsight it seems they should have accepted and then perhaps we wouldn't be in this mess.

But then of course it would have prevented all this retrospective back biting that both sides love so much and it could have even led to the PAD pointing fingers at the EU if they didn't like the outcome. Well at least they might have appeared on international news every night, so maybe that was a bad diplomatic move by them. They could have "gone inter.."!

Well said and well observed !

LaoPo

Yes, I don't suppose the military govournment would have welcomed what the EU might have said about soldiers in the 9th infantry division being told how to vote by their commanding officers:

http://www.imeem.com/people/e2YmZDJ/blogs/...o_voted_for_ppp

Not that it did the democrats any good. Nice to see the ordinary soldiery taking an independant stance. Makes you wonder what they might refuse to do in the event of a coup.

[baht&sold]

General Kattiya Warns of More Attack against ASTV Headquarters

source: TOC 24 November 2008

General Kattiya Sawasdiphol has warned ASTV staff of more attacks against the ASTV headquarters on Phra Arthit Road.

baht&sold: can you please provide other news-links, other than from the TOC/ASTV who are owned/co-owned by Sondhi Limthongkul the founder of PAD, since I didn't read of any of such ''warnings'' in the other press sources.

Thanks.

LaoPo

Don't even try, I am not one of your lambs... fish n bait elsewhere

Cheers!

EDIT/ PS: I also posted the article 'Ex-Thai PM hits out at UK' which was THEN picked up by the Bkk Post & Nation, credible or made up?

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/539193-ex-t...-hits-out-at-uk

Edited November 24, 2008 by baht&sold