Abhisit Vejjajiva Elected New Prime Minister Of Thailand

[justanothercybertosser]

You can post links and as it is your proffered "facts" it's on you to do so, not others.

No, i can't post links. Even links that are in a post i respond to i have to delete before posting.

So, to cut this short, i again would suggest to use google.

Unless you are, instead of having a conversation, just out for scoring cheap points on an internet forum. For which you have to find somebody else to play with.

[Steve2UK]

YH I dont think we disagree too much in reality.......... <snip>

[snipped only for brevity - full post is easily accessible]

Really excellent analysis from Hammered IMO - matches my own thoughts very closely. I also think that Abhisit's Eton/Oxford background will prove very useful. Others can do the knee-jerk "toff" scoff, but that kind of opportunity to mix with sons and (at Oxford) daughters of so many varied political/industrialist movers and shakers should serve to equip him better than any other past/potential Thai PM I can think of to find a pragmatic "balance". It may even have helped him with some insights as to how to manage the "down and dirty" aspects of Thai politics - though that's still to be seen.

[Ulysses G.]

Now it is so clear that PAD and Democ Rats are 2 in 1. The only trick is Abhisit himself didn't directly lead the terrorists to block Government House and airports.

The government shakes hand with terrorists. Must be the joke of the century.

Please remind me, who exactly did the PAD terrorise?

Apologist for PAD fascists speak with forked tongue!

BANGKOKIAN

PAD-initiated violence

By The Nation

Published on September 22, 2008

The People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) loves to point the finger at its opponents accusing them of using violence against its so-called peaceful assemblies, but it has done everything in its power to cover up the violence committed by its own members, particularly by PAD security guards.

PAD speakers and supporters consistently mention the incident in Udon Thani that saw a group of anti-government protesters attacked by a pro-government group. Likewise a minor clash that occurred between the PAD and police during the latter's first attempt to remove the group from Government House following a temporary order from the Civil Court is also brought up repeatedly to demonstrate how violence is being used against protesters.

However, the self-proclaimed peace-loving PAD has never taken the violence committed by its own side seriously. Protest leaders have made aggressive demands for officials who injured protesters last month to be brought to justice, but they have not uttered a word over the death of Narongsak Kobthaisong during a clash between the PAD and rival group the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship (DAAD) earlier this month. None of the PAD leaders called for justice for Narongsak, who was apparently from the DAAD side, never mind mentioning the possibility of an internal investigation to find the protesters responsible for the killing.

Violence on a different scale has taken place many times during the sit-in protest at Government House. Voluntary guards and the so-called Sri Wichai warriors have a deep mistrust for newcomers who join the protest and suspect them of being members of opposing groups there to infiltrate the protest.

Media representatives are not exempt from this treatment and must go through whole-body searches before entering the protest site. Many of them have also been harassed.

Mere suspicions have sometimes ended up in violence, as a video clip shot by a TV7 cameraman last week demonstrates. The station decided to broadcast the clip showing a group of PAD security guards beating a man at Makkhawan Bridge. The incident happened at about 5.30pm on September 17, when the man, later found out to be Nattaphong Thanetpaisan, walked among the protesters carrying a big bag. He was stopped by the guards, resisted their attempt to search him and was beaten as a result.

Once he realised that the beating was being filmed, one of the guards used a huge blue plastic tarp to block the scene, while the beating went on. The clip is now available on YouTube. A guard told reporters that Nattaphong had been struck because he had refused to allow guards to confiscate an air rifle that he had carried into the area. Nattaphong said he had not intended to carry the rifle onto the protest site but had been trying to walk through the protesters, who were blocking Ratchadamnoen Avenue, heading to Dusit Zoo.

Police said they could not arrest anybody since a complaint had not been filed over the incident. PAD's leaders paid the case no attention.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/22...on_30084032.php

I suggest you get yourself a dictionary, this is nowhere near terrorism.

I suggest you read your own words before giving anyone else any advice on using dictionaries. The word "terrorize" means to make others afraid, and I am pretty darn sure that the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him.

[justanothercybertosser]

YH I dont think we disagree too much in reality.......... <snip>

[snipped only for brevity - full post is easily accessible]

Really excellent analysis from Hammered IMO - matches my own thoughts very closely. I also think that Abhisit's Eton/Oxford background will prove very useful. Others can do the knee-jerk "toff" scoff, but that kind of opportunity to mix with sons and (at Oxford) daughters of so many varied political/industrialist movers and shakers should serve to equip him better than any other past/potential Thai PM I can think of to find a pragmatic "balance". It may even have helped him with some insights as to how to manage the "down and dirty" aspects of Thai politics - though that's still to be seen.

A less conservative Cambridge education might have been slightly more useful to tackle Thailand's pressing social conflicts. More useful might have been a bit more time spent in Thailand, and a wider exposure to the diversity of Thailand's population than his privileged family background and resulting foreign education gave him. Which though in turn prepared him well for Thailand's "down and dirty" aspects of politics, as we have seen in the way how his parliamentary election was engineered.

[Plus]

I seriously doubt they started the attack by shooting from the lorry, that's just the point when the camera started rolling.

As you can see from the video traffic on the other side was already stopped, I assume by the police, something impossible to achieve if you plan to park on the other side for an attack.

PAD guards were the armed militia of the PAD, founded, funded, sanctioned and commanded by the leadership, and therefore not to be separated from the PAD, as you somehow attempt to argue here.

They were not "militia" in any sense, and most episodes involving the guards were spontaneous acts of violence, like beating red attacker to death or shooting at TV crew vans.

And I must also stress that PAD had hired these guards only after PAD rallies were brutally attacked by reds throughout the country, and, as being hired help, many of them do not probably share the ideology with mainstream PAD movement, guys like vocational school students who are not strangers to guns and violence.

Don't forget that PAD let NBT attackers to face justice, no excuses.

[sriracha john]

You can post links and as it is your proffered "facts" it's on you to do so, not others.

No, i can't post links. Even links that are in a post i respond to i have to delete before posting.

So, to cut this short, i again would suggest to use google.

Unless you are, instead of having a conversation, just out for scoring cheap points on an internet forum. For which you have to find somebody else to play with.

Why you can't post links when every other member does?

I'm not attempting to score points, cheap or otherwise, just standard operating procedure to ask for source when previously unreported aspects of the news are posted, particularly when these are prefaced with "facts"... until such time, they are nothing more than speculative and unsupported personal theories.

Edited January 14, 2009 by sriracha john

[Steve2UK]

If they planned the attack they would have made a u-turn and go into the soi. Normally you don't even see the other side of the road on Viphavadi because of the divider and planted trees, and there are about five lanes of traffic on the other side, too.

And again, in your post you use "PAD" where you should stay with the facts and say "PAD guards". Vast majority of PAD protesters were probably not even aware of that incident and reached SW without any problems.

That would have been very stupid, from a tactical viewpoint, as they would have, in case of a armed counter assault, cut their escape route off. As you can see in the video - they have started their attack by shooting from the lorry, ran over the opposite lane, fired into the Soi while firing guns, burned motorcycles, and left.

This was a perfectly planned assault operation.

PAD guards were the armed militia of the PAD, founded, funded, sanctioned and commanded by the leadership, and therefore not to be separated from the PAD, as you somehow attempt to argue here.

[my bold emphasis above]

JACT, I can't agree that there is any evidence that what you describe was a "perfectly planned assault operation". Over the top reaction - IMO sure. But still a reaction. I don't agree with others minimising the scale of this reaction (e.g. saying the gun was only a "small crappy cheap" one a while back) any more than I agree with what IMO is sheer sophistry - i.e. implying that PAD have little or no responsibility for the action of their "guards". As has been pointed out countless times, there was/is a thug element on both sides - and both sides should condemn it for what it is.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Steve2UK

[Ulysses G.]

And I must also stress that PAD had hired these guards ... and, as being hired help, many of them do not probably share the ideology with mainstream PAD movement

You must mean like all the protesters who were paid to demonstrate for the PAD and had no idea of their true fascist agenda.

[Plus]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning. Was he ever told that there were about a thousand of PAD guards protecting the camp? I don't think so.

Red leaders KNEW the outcome of that little adventure from the start, they needed a few deaths and they got what they wanted. Even thier "sorry" to the family won't do here, if they ever apologised at all.

Another example of "irrefutable evidence"?

[justanothercybertosser]

I seriously doubt they started the attack by shooting from the lorry, that's just the point when the camera started rolling.

As you can see from the video traffic on the other side was already stopped, I assume by the police, something impossible to achieve if you plan to park on the other side for an attack.

You assume a lot so that events might be made to suit your views.

Rather disturbing how you talk away the killing of people and the shooting at journalists, as simple "acts of spontaneous violence" separated from the leadership or the mass of protesters of that group, while in your posts you condemn the violence of the side you do not support.

As to the NBT attack, i can remember that police has arrested the offenders in the TV station, and the PAD leadership has initially even denied that such an event happened, issued conflicting statements, blamed, as usual, Red Shirt or police agitators trying to discredit the PAD, only to grudgingly accept it as the evidence of it was overwhelming.

Denial is not a river in Egypt...

[Ulysses G.]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning.

Where is the link to your "evidence"?

Edited January 14, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[justanothercybertosser]

Why you can't post links when every other member does?

Well, it may come as a disappointment to you, but i am neither god nor the owner of this web forum, and therefore have not the slightest idea why i can't post links.

Again, google it, please.

[justanothercybertosser]

JACT, I can't agree that there is any evidence that what you describe was a "perfectly planned assault operation". Over the top reaction - IMO sure. But still a reaction. I don't agree with others minimising the scale of this reaction (e.g. saying the gun was only a "small crappy cheap" one a while back) any more than I agree with what IMO is sheer sophistry - i.e. implying that PAD have little or no responsibility for the action of their "guards". As has been pointed out countless times, there was/is a thug element on both sides - and both sides should condemn it for what it is.

From a tactical view, this assault was done very well, highly effective, and the only casualties were on the other side.

Anyhow, i agree very much with your statement that thuggish elements are on both sides. It would be helpful when some of the PAD supporters here would accept this fact. The sophistry of some here is indeed revolting.

[Plus]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning.

Where is the link to your "evidence"?

The story was all over the news, including the names of PPP MPs who were spotted at the scene.

It was also widely reported that there were drunk, though I admit that I don't know if this particular guy had any alcohol in his blood and what exactly he was armed with.

You assume a lot so that events might be made to suit your views.

It was reported in the media - PAD convoy was ambushed and provoked. Or do you imply that it wasn't the police who stopped the traffic there? Possibly, but who else did it? PAD? Motorcycle drivers?

There was clearly no traffic when the camera started, it wasn't the beginning of the incident.

[Steve2UK]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning.

Where is the link to your "evidence"?

UG, look at Plus' post in full again. Maybe he means it as irony and he has made up an example story to cite as "fact" just to illustrate a point about the need to always have evidence for a claim?

No? OK, well - I did say maybe.........

If he is presenting it as "fact", I too would like him to produce a credible source for his version - and also for....... what was it?....... "gas them to the last breath" or something like that a while back? Maybe he already did and I just missed it.

[Journalist]

Well, Samgrowth, what would YOU suggest them to be charged with?

WHO are you going to charge?

Do you know of any cases where the leaders directed the guards to break into secure areas, for example? I don't, but it could have happened.

All I know so far is that they blocked the roads and maintained the perimiter. The main PAD party was just camping there, in public areas, I must add.

Obstruction of the footpath and obstruction of an Hofficer of the Law.,

THB200 fine.

Possibly trespass.

...thats another THB200.

Littering

THB500

Causing a breach of the peace

THB1000

Urinating in a public place

THB 100

[justanothercybertosser]

It was reported in the media - PAD convoy was ambushed and provoked. Or do you imply that it wasn't the police who stopped the traffic there? Possibly, but who else did it? PAD? Motorcycle drivers?

There was clearly no traffic when the camera started, it wasn't the beginning of the incident.

PAD trucks and cars on the way to Don Muang were during the day fired upon by Red Shirts with slingshots from Soi 3. CTV images of such incidents were published. The particular truck that led the assault though came on the opposite lane, and was not fired upon. That would have been difficult, given that it was covered by the poles and bushes between the lanes. It was a clear revenge attack, and not self defense, as you imply.

The next attack at about 4 am was completely unprovoced, as was the next attack on Dec. 6th, at night.

Just accept it - PAD is not anymore a peaceful movement, even though it may have started as such 3 years ago.

[Plus]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning.

Where is the link to your "evidence"?

UG, look at Plus' post in full again. Maybe he means it as irony and he has made up an example story to cite as "fact" just to illustrate a point about the need to always have evidence for a claim?

No? OK, well - I did say maybe.........

If he is presenting it as "fact", I too would like him to produce a credible source for his version - and also for....... what was it?....... "gas them to the last breath" or something like that a while back? Maybe he already did and I just missed it.

Oh, terribly sorry, I was talking about the other guy, Narongsak or something.

This particular Nattaphong was caught by guards making a "shortcut" through PAD camp, it turned out he was carrying an air-rifle in his bag.

What "innocent victim" would even think about going to PAD site with a concealed weapon and start arguing with guards? It was a "shortcut". Shortcut my ass.

[Ulysses G.]

UG, look at 'Plus' post in full again. Maybe he ... has made up an example story to cite as "fact"

You might have something here!

Edited January 14, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[sriracha john]

Chavalit testifies to NCCC over Oct 7 bloodbath

Former deputy prime minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh Wednesday morning testified to the National Counter Corruption Commission over the bloody crackdown on protesters in front of Parliament on October 7.

NCCC spokesman Klanarong Chanthik said Chavalit came to testify as a witness.

Klanarong said the NCCC cancelled its decision to appoint a subcommittee to investigate the issue but the nine NCCC members will themselves interrogate the persons involved in the bloodbath.

Chavalit was then the deputy prime minister in charge of security affairs when police fired teargas canisters at protesters, killing one of them and maiming several others. Another protester was killed in ensued violence and over 100 protesters were injured.

If implicated later, Chavalit would also be interrogated, Klanarong said.

- The Nation / today

[justanothercybertosser]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning.

Where is the link to your "evidence"?

The story was all over the news, including the names of PPP MPs who were spotted at the scene.

It was also widely reported that there were drunk, though I admit that I don't know if this particular guy had any alcohol in his blood and what exactly he was armed with.

The most widely cited eyewitness account of this particular episode has been written by Nirmal Gosh from the Straights Times, and in his blog. I would suggest reading it.

[Ulysses G.]

What "innocent victim" would even think about going to PAD site with a concealed weapon and start arguing with guards? It was a "shortcut". Shortcut my ass.

He probably intended to join PAD, but they beat the crap out of him first.

[Plus]

PAD trucks and cars on the way to Don Muang were during the day fired upon by Red Shirts with slingshots from Soi 3. CTV images of such incidents were published. The particular truck that led the assault though came on the opposite lane, and was not fired upon. That would have been difficult, given that it was covered by the poles and bushes between the lanes. It was a clear revenge attack, and not self defense, as you imply.

The next attack at about 4 am was completely unprovoced, as was the next attack on Dec. 6th, at night.

Oh, so because OTHER trucks were attacked so it's not an ambush? Is it possible that this particular truck came to the rescue?

Two next attacks were unprovoked, true, but it was clearly the continuation of the same feud, and only guards were involved.

I admit that there were thuggish elements among the guards but it would be a long stretch to paint the whole movement with the same brush, considering that guards were "outsiders" hired only in the last couple of months with a specific purposed - provide security to the mainstream protesters.

I remember typing a post where I said that PAD leaders should put their guards on a short leash as their actions are damaging the movement's reputation.

[justanothercybertosser]

PAD trucks and cars on the way to Don Muang were during the day fired upon by Red Shirts with slingshots from Soi 3. CTV images of such incidents were published. The particular truck that led the assault though came on the opposite lane, and was not fired upon. That would have been difficult, given that it was covered by the poles and bushes between the lanes. It was a clear revenge attack, and not self defense, as you imply.

The next attack at about 4 am was completely unprovoced, as was the next attack on Dec. 6th, at night.

Oh, so because OTHER trucks were attacked so it's not an ambush? Is it possible that this particular truck came to the rescue?

Two next attacks were unprovoked, true, but it was clearly the continuation of the same feud, and only guards were involved.

I admit that there were thuggish elements among the guards but it would be a long stretch to paint the whole movement with the same brush, considering that guards were "outsiders" hired only in the last couple of months with a specific purposed - provide security to the mainstream protesters.

I remember typing a post where I said that PAD leaders should put their guards on a short leash as their actions are damaging the movement's reputation.

Many things might be possible, but when there is no supporting evidence, these assumptions are highly unlikely. Especially because such a "rescue" of cars under attack by pedestrians were not even invented by the PAD in their statements. What though has been stated by PAD is that these attackers were Red Shirts in disguise who fired at fellow Red Shirts, even though the people on the truck have been known PAD members.

The PAD leadership has never distanced itself from its guards publicly, and only admitted to some of them having been fired after these particular guards were arrested with bombs and PAD guard ID cards. Therefore the whole movement is tarnished by these guards.

Not all guards were "hired" though.

According to Sondhi Limthongkul's interview with Crispin only his closest bodyguards were hired gummen with military background, the other guards were volunteers.

According to him.

[Jai Dee]

Why you can't post links when every other member does?

Well, it may come as a disappointment to you, but i am neither god nor the owner of this web forum, and therefore have not the slightest idea why i can't post links.

Again, google it, please.

Members with 5 or less posts cannot post links, as a forum anti-spam measure.

You should be able to post a link now.

Other argumentative posts have been deleted from this thread.

[Plus]

Bangkok is awash with hot blooded males who'd join any adrenalin inducing fun without any payment. Not all PAD guards needed to be paid, but they were invited/founded/funded for a specific purpose anyway.

Also, when under attack, ALL PAD members stood up to face the adversaries, be it police or reds on that fateful night Narongsak was killed. Doesn't mean they are responsible for whatever guards did on their own.

"A PAD leader Suriyasai Katasila said some of the pro-government protesters were armed with guns and they fired at PAD demonstrators...

He claimed that one of his men was shot and was rushed to a hosptial nearby."

I don't think Suriyasai made that up. I mention it because Nirmal Ghosh reports shooting only from PAD side.

[TAWP]

You can post links and as it is your proffered "facts" it's on you to do so, not others.

No, i can't post links. Even links that are in a post i respond to i have to delete before posting.

So, to cut this short, i again would suggest to use google.

You cannot or are incapable of?

If you claim that the forum software is censoring your urls, please post a set of keywords to get to the pages right away via google, preferably via the 'Feeling lucky'-alternative.

[Steve2UK]

the "peaceloving" PAD made Nattaphong Thanetpaisan fear for his life when they beat the holy heck out of him

That guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades" so that Samak could declare State of Emergency in the morning.

Where is the link to your "evidence"?

UG, look at Plus' post in full again. Maybe he means it as irony and he has made up an example story to cite as "fact" just to illustrate a point about the need to always have evidence for a claim?

No? OK, well - I did say maybe.........

If he is presenting it as "fact", I too would like him to produce a credible source for his version - and also for....... what was it?....... "gas them to the last breath" or something like that a while back? Maybe he already did and I just missed it.

Oh, terribly sorry, I was talking about the other guy, Narongsak or something.

This particular Nattaphong was caught by guards making a "shortcut" through PAD camp, it turned out he was carrying an air-rifle in his bag.

What "innocent victim" would even think about going to PAD site with a concealed weapon and start arguing with guards? It was a "shortcut". Shortcut my ass.

Got to admit, I'm confused as to which one you're talking about now. About the air-rifle guy......... my reaction reading about it at the time was between "c'mon - pull the other one" and "this is some special kind of idiot". So, if I understand your post correctly - we pretty much agree about this aspect. Amazing, but true........

I'm still left with what to make of your original statement: 'that guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades"'........... when you later say "I don't know if this particular guy had any alcohol in his blood and what exactly he was armed with". My point is - what are we now to make of the rest of your original version of events.

Different guys? Bit of exaggeration and interpretation - presented as "fact"? You've lost me.

Now, we all (should) know that "absence of evidence" is not "evidence of absence" - but it's still "absence of evidence". I call out JACT on his interpretation of the shooting scene being pre-planned rather than a reaction - where IMO there is plainly "absence of evidence" to support it (IMO it also just doesn't look likely). And anyone else likewise. Suspect/expect is not........... "it happened".

I surely can't be the first to quote this here - "The first casualty of war is truth". That's true about Gaza now - and applies equally to the "war of words" on ThaiVisa. Surely there are enough verifiable facts for everyone to use (however selectively) - and then add whatever strongly held (and expressed) opinions/comments/inferences from those facts they choose. But - always trying to keep the two clearly separate.

[Ulysses G.]

You cannot or are incapable of?

If you claim that the forum software is censoring your urls, please post a set of keywords to get to the pages right away via google, preferably via the 'Feeling lucky'-alternative.

Why you can't post links when every other member does?

Well, it may come as a disappointment to you, but i am neither god nor the owner of this web forum, and therefore have not the slightest idea why i can't post links.

Again, google it, please.

Members with 5 or less posts cannot post links, as a forum anti-spam measure.

You should be able to post a link now.

Mr. TAWP, do you actually read any other posts than your own?

Edited January 14, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[Plus]

I'm still left with what to make of your original statement: 'that guy was given alcohol, a machete, a few enouraging words and sent to attack the smaller PAD camp in the middle of the night with a couple of dozen of equally drunk "comrades"'........... when you later say "I don't know if this particular guy had any alcohol in his blood and what exactly he was armed with". My point is - what are we now to make of the rest of your original version of events.

Different guys? Bit of exaggeration and interpretation - presented as "fact"? You've lost me.

Different guy, different episode.

It was widely reported that the guys armed with sticks and machetes who attacked PAD camp that night were drunk. One of them was beaten to death, I'm pretty sure he wasn't unarmed and that he was under the influence but it's not a fact as such.

Don't be so nitpicky.