State Of Emergency Declared For Bangkok

[Old Man River]

This is about something far bigger than Thaksins money.

This we agree on, but it is still about money. It is just being sold to the public differently, but at the end of the day, it is about money, just not Thaksin's money, although he wants it to be.

[coconutmonkey]

Thaskin to return to Thailand with important people

The Easter Bunny on the left side and the Tooth Fairy on the Right

Yeh

In your dreams

The Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy have already jumped in bed with Abhisit. He's got their support, that's why he's so confident. Nobody messes with him while the Easter Bunny is supporting him, he thinks.

Oh, Rainman again.

You watch too many movies I think...

Change your name to drama queen, or maybe 'telepath' (or phsycopath). Honestly, how would you know what someone else is thinking?

[SpankyMcSpank]

Please show me the evidence where they say "Kill the Prime Minister"

Nobody is saying Kill Abhisit.

For anyone to try to suggest this is the case is a liar.

Jatuporn Promphan Sunday urged red-shirted protesters to rise up against the government and attack Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban as first sight.

He said there was no longer rule of law so the red-shirted people would attack the government.

He claimed that he had been arrested by the military to the Naresuan base in Prachuap Khiri Khan but red-shirted supporters in the base secured his release and sent him to the rally site at the Government House again.

Jatuporn urged red-shirted protesters to travel to Bangkok or seize provincial halls.

The Nation

Link:http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/30100332/Jatuporn-calls-red-shirts-to-descend-on-Bangkok-to

¹at·tack Pronunciation: \ə-ˈtak\ Function:verb Etymology:Middle French attaquer, from Old Italian *estaccare to attach, from stacca stake, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English stacaDate:1562 transitive verb 1 : to set upon or work against forcefully 2 : to assail with unfriendly or bitter words <a speech attacking her political enemies> 3 : to begin to affect or to act on injuriously <plants attacked by aphids> 4 : to set to work on <attack a problem> 5 : to threaten (a piece in chess) with immediate capture

That can't be right Elder. We all know that the Red Shirts are fighting for democracy! They would never harm anyone, or fall victim to base emotions like "retribution.

[Tango7]

I have just had a text from a mate on Koh Chang. He reckons Thaksin is there with some military figures.

Now come on Obercommando, get texting him back. If what you say us true it is the most significant thing on this forum. It would make a lot of sense. Cambodia would be more than willing to offer safe haven to Taksin if he promised to end the feud over the Temple dispute in Cambodias favour. His presence on Thai soil if unchallenged would make a huge symbolic call to arms for the red shirts. Time for the Thai navy to seal off Koh Chang. Get more info please.

This rumour is on Pantip.com which, for those of you who do not already know, is a Thai chat forum. It's either the same rumour or there might be some truth to it ?

Supposed to be staying in a 5 start resort but if he were, the staff would surely turn him in for the million Baht reward..

[RubbaJohnny]

Moderation from all and the moderators please encourage dmosratic debate

There willbe few winners in this scenario

[qualtrough]

I just heard from my friend in Nong Khai that they now have about 2000 - 3000 red shirts who are at the Friendship Bridge preventing anyone from passing either way.

Anyone else can confirm this?

I heard that on TV about 2 hours ago, so your friend is likely right.

[arthurriding]

Quite right jbhh.

Lets get some facts straight here. The Abhisit Government is the ONLY legitimate government in Thailand at present. It WAS properly elected, is defintely NOT the PAD party, and did not come to power because of the yellow shirt protests or any such machinations. It came to power because the Newin faction of the previous PPP government decided that it had had enough of Taksin's machinations and were disgusted at Taksin's treatment of Samak and were worried that they too would be marginalised by Taksin. So they jumped ship and joined the Democrats - and Abhisit came to power. Totally legitimately, no question whatsoever about it.

Well, you have most of it right, but you left out the part about first Samak and then Somchai being rendered helpless because the Army essentially mutinied -- they refused to obey the orders of the legitimate government of the time. Then they were both expelled from office by court judgments that were not shining examples of equity and fairness. And of course the judges were appointed by the CNS, the junta that conducted the coup of September 2006.

Yes the yellow shirts were mainly a bunch of thugs, but so are the red shirts, and they seem to be a far bigger bunch of thugs than the yellow shirts. So, please, no more nonsense about how wonderful or hard done by are the red shirts. The only man so far who is coming out of all this with any inegrity is Abhisit. No, he was not weak in telling (as he did) the army and security services in Pattaya on Friday (before the attack by the red shirts) not to cause any sort of violence even if the red shirt attacked (as they did). It is a sign of his personal strength and integrity that he gave those orders. Unlike the red shirts (or the yellow shirts) his primary aim is achieving reconciliation between Thais. he knows perfectly well that once people start dying on the streets, positions on all sides will harden and it will become even more difficult to achieve reconciliation. So, he is desperate to avoid violence so that he can achieve reconciliation, even if it meant a major personal loss of face for the cancellation of the ASEAN summit. Yes, lawbreakers should be prosecuted (and not shot) and that is what he is doing currently. Abhisit in the past few days has shown his immense personal courage and deep integrity. He is one of the few people at present who seems to actually care about what is happening in Thailand and is trying for a peaceful solution. We should all stand up and cheer him for his efforts and actions, not cast dispariging comments on his actions.

I don't see Abhisit as coming out of this with any integrity at all. His deputy, Suthep, and Newin organized a bunch of plainclothes police and off-duty soldiers into a group wearing dark blue shirts and balaclava masks to hide their identities and provoked a scuffle in Pattaya. Suthep and Newin probably think Abhisit is shielded from blame for that, but they were too open about what they did.

Sorry Acharn, but your comments, while largely accurate, are actually completely irrelevant to what was being said.

The yellow shirt protests and court dissolution had nothing whatsoever to do with the change of Government. Samak and Somchai were quite rightly essentially ignoring the protests and once dissolution of the party by the courts took place, all Somchai (or whoever Taksin would have chosen for his new stooge) and his cronies had to do was simply to reform the government under a new name - which is what they fully intended to do. So to say that the change of government was due to the protests and then the court order is just absurd as at the end of the day the court order was meaningless. The MPs would just reform the party under a new name. The point is that the Newin faction changed sides - that is what changed the government, not the protests or the courts.

I am afraid that to blame the troubles in Pattaya on Newin is also quite absurd. Yes, he did organise a group to help defend the city and its inhabitents from the violent mob of red shirts - as many other concerned citizens have done. But to say that they provoked a scuffle and that caused the Pattaya attacks by the red shirts is bizarre in the extreme and completely the opposite of the truth. Throughout all of the past few days it has nearly always been the horrifying mobs of red shirts who have been doing the provoking. No, there is no question at all that Abhisit is the only person who is coming out of this whole sorry mess with any sort of integrity at all.

[Kan Win]

I think a 'curfew' is now in order, say from 9 pm (21.00 hrs) this evening till 6 am tomorrow morning

Kan Win safe and sound in Kan

source?

I think

my thinking and not from any sauce h90

Kan Win

[Plus]

Reds are also saying that Abhisit guards shot three reds when they tried to ....

I don't know what's the politically correct version that wouldn't offend the sensitivity of red supporters here.

"Talk to him"? "Beat the hel_l out of him"? "Detain him under people mandate"?

It's isurrection fair and square, charges of treason are in order (if the govt wins), and the army and the police have the mandate to do whatever is necessary to squash it.

Saying things like "let the guy who nearly killed the PM's driver to run in a free and fair elections rather than serve his time in jail for an assault is just bloody ridiculous.

[h90]

Please show me the evidence where they say "Kill the Prime Minister"

Nobody is saying Kill Abhisit.

For anyone to try to suggest this is the case is a liar.

Jatuporn Promphan Sunday urged red-shirted protesters to rise up against the government and attack Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban as first sight.

He said there was no longer rule of law so the red-shirted people would attack the government.

He claimed that he had been arrested by the military to the Naresuan base in Prachuap Khiri Khan but red-shirted supporters in the base secured his release and sent him to the rally site at the Government House again.

Jatuporn urged red-shirted protesters to travel to Bangkok or seize provincial halls.

The Nation

Link:http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/30100332/Jatuporn-calls-red-shirts-to-descend-on-Bangkok-to

¹at·tack Pronunciation: \ə-ˈtak\ Function:verb Etymology:Middle French attaquer, from Old Italian *estaccare to attach, from stacca stake, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English stacaDate:1562 transitive verb 1 : to set upon or work against forcefully 2 : to assail with unfriendly or bitter words <a speech attacking her political enemies> 3 : to begin to affect or to act on injuriously <plants attacked by aphids> 4 : to set to work on <attack a problem> 5 : to threaten (a piece in chess) with immediate capture

That can't be right Elder. We all know that the Red Shirts are fighting for democracy! They would never harm anyone, or fall victim to base emotions like "retribution.

by killing a driver of Abhisit?

[SpankyMcSpank]

Quite right jbhh.

Lets get some facts straight here. The Abhisit Government is the ONLY legitimate government in Thailand at present. It WAS properly elected, is defintely NOT the PAD party, and did not come to power because of the yellow shirt protests or any such machinations. It came to power because the Newin faction of the previous PPP government decided that it had had enough of Taksin's machinations and were disgusted at Taksin's treatment of Samak and were worried that they too would be marginalised by Taksin. So they jumped ship and joined the Democrats - and Abhisit came to power. Totally legitimately, no question whatsoever about it.

Well, you have most of it right, but you left out the part about first Samak and then Somchai being rendered helpless because the Army essentially mutinied -- they refused to obey the orders of the legitimate government of the time. Then they were both expelled from office by court judgments that were not shining examples of equity and fairness. And of course the judges were appointed by the CNS, the junta that conducted the coup of September 2006.

Yes the yellow shirts were mainly a bunch of thugs, but so are the red shirts, and they seem to be a far bigger bunch of thugs than the yellow shirts. So, please, no more nonsense about how wonderful or hard done by are the red shirts. The only man so far who is coming out of all this with any inegrity is Abhisit. No, he was not weak in telling (as he did) the army and security services in Pattaya on Friday (before the attack by the red shirts) not to cause any sort of violence even if the red shirt attacked (as they did). It is a sign of his personal strength and integrity that he gave those orders. Unlike the red shirts (or the yellow shirts) his primary aim is achieving reconciliation between Thais. he knows perfectly well that once people start dying on the streets, positions on all sides will harden and it will become even more difficult to achieve reconciliation. So, he is desperate to avoid violence so that he can achieve reconciliation, even if it meant a major personal loss of face for the cancellation of the ASEAN summit. Yes, lawbreakers should be prosecuted (and not shot) and that is what he is doing currently. Abhisit in the past few days has shown his immense personal courage and deep integrity. He is one of the few people at present who seems to actually care about what is happening in Thailand and is trying for a peaceful solution. We should all stand up and cheer him for his efforts and actions, not cast dispariging comments on his actions.

I don't see Abhisit as coming out of this with any integrity at all. His deputy, Suthep, and Newin organized a bunch of plainclothes police and off-duty soldiers into a group wearing dark blue shirts and balaclava masks to hide their identities and provoked a scuffle in Pattaya. Suthep and Newin probably think Abhisit is shielded from blame for that, but they were too open about what they did.

Sorry Acharn, but your comments, while largely accurate, are actually completely irrelevant to what was being said.

The yellow shirt protests and court dissolution had nothing whatsoever to do with the change of Government. Samak and Somchai were quite rightly essentially ignoring the protests and once dissolution of the party by the courts took place, all Somchai (or whoever Taksin would have chosen for his new stooge) and his cronies had to do was simply to reform the government under a new name - which is what they fully intended to do. So to say that the change of government was due to the protests and then the court order is just absurd as at the end of the day the court order was meaningless. The MPs would just reform the party under a new name. The point is that the Newin faction changed sides - that is what changed the government, not the protests or the courts.

I am afraid that to blame the troubles in Pattaya on Newin is also quite absurd. Yes, he did organise a group to help defend the city and its inhabitents from the violent mob of red shirts - as many other concerned citizens have done. But to say that they provoked a scuffle and that caused the Pattaya attacks by the red shirts is bizarre in the extreme and completely the opposite of the truth. Throughout all of the past few days it has nearly always been the horrifying mobs of red shirts who have been doing the provoking. No, there is no question at all that Abhisit is the only person who is coming out of this whole sorry mess with any sort of integrity at all.

Agreed!

[eldar1]

Does it mean KILL ?

No.

Not at all. Nobody said KILL.

So forget it, you cannot put that word into peoples mouths, no matter how much you try to distort the truth.

I did not put the words kill in there, but when you attack someone you are tryong to hurt them or kill them, either way it's wrong.

I'm sorry levelhead, the game is up, you can protest all you want but the red shirts have openly called on their followers to hurt the PM of thailand. This is treason

Treason The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

Treason is a crime, therefore the leader of UDD are criminals and the UDD is a criminal organization. No amount of spin will change that fact.

Give it up, it's over

*edit, removed my nested comment

Edited April 12, 2009 by eldar1

[CrossBones]

The Nation seem to be supporting the communists at any rate

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/n...eid=1&id=45

[LevelHead]

AJE reports just now on the latest update.

Abhisit "shamed" into cancelling the ASEAN summit.

Abhisit called for strong response and said it would happen soon, "but nothing happening"

Is Abhisit in control ? Lost control over the police. Big question marks raised over whether Abhisit has any control of the military.

Policemen have been putting on red shirts and joining the demonstrations.

[SpankyMcSpank]

Does it mean KILL ?

No.

Not at all. Nobody said KILL.

So forget it, you cannot put that word into peoples mouths, no matter how much you try to distort the truth.

I did not put the words kill in there, but when you attack someone you are tryong to hurt them or kill them, either way it's wrong.

I'm sorry levelhead, the game is up, you can protest all you want but the red shirts have openly called on their followers to hurt the PM of thailand. This is treason

Treason The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

Treason is a crime, therefore the leader of UDD are criminals and the UDD is a criminal organization. No amount of spin will change that fact.

Give it up, it's over

*edit, removed my nested comment

Agreed. (What is the story with this emoticon? Why is it called Dave)?

Edited April 12, 2009 by SpankyMcSpank

[timekeeper]

Ok, i didn't see the words "Kill him" used by red leaders.

Was it "get him", "catch him"? I don't remember, it was on Nation's breaking news.

As if it makes any difference - it's treason either way.

And for anyone who's seen reds attacking his car and the dirver - "kill him" sounds like a proper description of their intentions. It was a lynch mob, no two ways to look at it, and you don't deal with it by holding elections - there must be respect for the law first and reds publicly abandoned it today. In fact I remember Nattawut reportedly telling them that they don't recognise the law in this coutrny anymore.

Thats better.

Its very wrong to accuse the Reds of saying they will kill him when they did no such thing.

They knew the car was empty, its said they smashed it up to retaliate against the force used on them.

So as they knew he was not in the car, how can there be any intent to "harm" someone who was not in it?

the car was not empty, the driver was in there, they knew that as it was moving.

he did not drive over them like he should have done and for his passive behaviour he was badly beaten by a guy who looked liked skeletor and was completely off his face.( i have been trained to recognise the signs of drug abuse)

i have just seen the driver on TV, bruised and bleeding from a head wound, obviously needing medical attention and in handcuffs detained by the reds as a hostage

it seemed like he was being forced to speak the red media.

he did not look well or happy

is this the kind of restraint they would have shown Aphisit had he been in the car?

or the civilised behaviour we can expect from these champions of democrasy?

[LevelHead]

Does it mean KILL ?

No.

Not at all. Nobody said KILL.

So forget it, you cannot put that word into peoples mouths, no matter how much you try to distort the truth.

I did not put the words kill in there, but when you attack someone you are tryong to hurt them or kill them, either way it's wrong.

I'm sorry levelhead, the game is up, you can protest all you want but the red shirts have openly called on their followers to hurt the PM of thailand. This is treason

Treason The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

Treason is a crime, therefore the leader of UDD are criminals and the UDD is a criminal organization. No amount of spin will change that fact.

Give it up, it's over

*edit, removed my nested comment

So the Coup in 2006 was "treason".

The Yellows were "treasonous".

Now you are getting to the root of the problem. The coup in 2006 was a treasonous act.

[timekeeper]

AJE reports just now on the latest update.

Abhisit "shamed" into cancelling the ASEAN summit.

Abhisit called for strong response and said it would happen soon, "but nothing happening"

Is Abhisit in control ? Lost control over the police. Big question marks raised over whether Abhisit has any control of the military.

Policemen have been putting on red shirts and joining the demonstrations.

how much are you getting paid for this LH and how much will it cost to get you to stop?

[SpankyMcSpank]

Does it mean KILL ?

No.

Not at all. Nobody said KILL.

So forget it, you cannot put that word into peoples mouths, no matter how much you try to distort the truth.

I did not put the words kill in there, but when you attack someone you are tryong to hurt them or kill them, either way it's wrong.

I'm sorry levelhead, the game is up, you can protest all you want but the red shirts have openly called on their followers to hurt the PM of thailand. This is treason

Treason The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

Treason is a crime, therefore the leader of UDD are criminals and the UDD is a criminal organization. No amount of spin will change that fact.

Give it up, it's over

*edit, removed my nested comment

So the Coup in 2006 was "treason".

The Yellows were "treasonous".

Now you are getting to the root of the problem. The coup in 2006 was a treasonous act.

Feel free to beat this dead horse LH, but tonight, there are more pressing concerns on most of our minds, then to listen to your broken record arguments, repeated ad nauseum

[rainman]

The Nation seem to be supporting the communists at any rate

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/n...eid=1&id=45

In the case of Thailand, what good does the 'capitalism' of a few rich and the elite do for the rest of the people?

[tomo22]

Please show me the evidence where they say "Kill the Prime Minister"

Nobody is saying Kill Abhisit.

For anyone to try to suggest this is the case is a liar.

Jatuporn Promphan Sunday urged red-shirted protesters to rise up against the government and attack Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban as first sight.

He said there was no longer rule of law so the red-shirted people would attack the government.

He claimed that he had been arrested by the military to the Naresuan base in Prachuap Khiri Khan but red-shirted supporters in the base secured his release and sent him to the rally site at the Government House again.

Jatuporn urged red-shirted protesters to travel to Bangkok or seize provincial halls.

The Nation

Link:http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/30100332/Jatuporn-calls-red-shirts-to-descend-on-Bangkok-to

¹at·tack Pronunciation: \ə-ˈtak\ Function:verb Etymology:Middle French attaquer, from Old Italian *estaccare to attach, from stacca stake, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English stacaDate:1562 transitive verb 1 : to set upon or work against forcefully 2 : to assail with unfriendly or bitter words <a speech attacking her political enemies> 3 : to begin to affect or to act on injuriously <plants attacked by aphids> 4 : to set to work on <attack a problem> 5 : to threaten (a piece in chess) with immediate capture

Does it mean KILL ?

No.

Not at all. Nobody said KILL.

So forget it, you cannot put that word into peoples mouths, no matter how much you try to distort the truth.

Attack thats what was said. Kill no but who is he telling this too. When you tell someone or some people to attack the government and you do not qualify what you meen by attack it can mean what ever including KILL !!!!

If they are attacking the goverment the way they are with an order to attack then every person so doing is guilty of treason.

So dont try and defend the undefendable

[LevelHead]

Please show me the evidence where they say "Kill the Prime Minister"

Nobody is saying Kill Abhisit.

For anyone to try to suggest this is the case is a liar.

Jatuporn Promphan Sunday urged red-shirted protesters to rise up against the government and attack Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban as first sight.

He said there was no longer rule of law so the red-shirted people would attack the government.

He claimed that he had been arrested by the military to the Naresuan base in Prachuap Khiri Khan but red-shirted supporters in the base secured his release and sent him to the rally site at the Government House again.

Jatuporn urged red-shirted protesters to travel to Bangkok or seize provincial halls.

The Nation

Link:http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/30100332/Jatuporn-calls-red-shirts-to-descend-on-Bangkok-to

¹at·tack Pronunciation: \ə-ˈtak\ Function:verb Etymology:Middle French attaquer, from Old Italian *estaccare to attach, from stacca stake, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English stacaDate:1562 transitive verb 1 : to set upon or work against forcefully 2 : to assail with unfriendly or bitter words <a speech attacking her political enemies> 3 : to begin to affect or to act on injuriously <plants attacked by aphids> 4 : to set to work on <attack a problem> 5 : to threaten (a piece in chess) with immediate capture

Does it mean KILL ?

No.

Not at all. Nobody said KILL.

So forget it, you cannot put that word into peoples mouths, no matter how much you try to distort the truth.

Attack thats what was said. Kill no but who is he telling this too. When you tell someone or some people to attack the government and you do not qualify what you meen by attack it can mean what ever including KILL !!!!

If they are attacking the goverment the way they are with an order to attack then every person so doing is guilty of treason.

So dont try and defend the undefendable

The poster ealier said

Reds want to Kill Anhisit.

This is not true. And this is why the ongoing debate has been happening.

The OP of that comment has since corrected their mistake, and said that it was wrong, and nobody said they wanted to kill the PM.

[RegularReader]

AJE reports just now on the latest update.

Abhisit "shamed" into cancelling the ASEAN summit.

Abhisit called for strong response and said it would happen soon, "but nothing happening"

Is Abhisit in control ? Lost control over the police. Big question marks raised over whether Abhisit has any control of the military.

Policemen have been putting on red shirts and joining the demonstrations.

I think you might have been watching a replay of yesterday's events ?

[Guest Reimar]

Army to deploy 56 companies of soldiers to help police

The Army, Navy and Air Force will deploy 56 companies of soldiers to help police protect key government offices in the provinces, which are under the state of emergency.

The Nation

[Mosha]

Level Head, your older brother Jonathon Head said on the BBC at 7 PM Thai time. Several members of the government had been physically attacked and injured. Where do you draw the line?

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

I can confirm that LH's recital of AJE's reporting is accurate. And the unmentionable was very interesting.

Edited April 12, 2009 by zaphodbeeblebrox

[SpankyMcSpank]

The poster ealier said

Reds want to Kill Anhisit.

This is not true. And this is why the ongoing debate has been happening.

The OP of that comment has since corrected their mistake, and said that it was wrong, and nobody said they wanted to kill the PM.

The red leadership did tell their minions to assault Abhisit, however. What is your reaction to that LH? Inquiring minds want to know.

[kevkev1888]

&lt;deleted&gt; drop it will ya!!!

[LevelHead]

I can confirm that LH's recital of AJE's reporting is accurate.

Thank you.

I do not lie.

[h90]

Reds are also saying that Abhisit guards shot three reds when they tried to ....

I don't know what's the politically correct version that wouldn't offend the sensitivity of red supporters here.

"Talk to him"? "Beat the hel_l out of him"? "Detain him under people mandate"?

It's isurrection fair and square, charges of treason are in order (if the govt wins), and the army and the police have the mandate to do whatever is necessary to squash it.

Saying things like "let the guy who nearly killed the PM's driver to run in a free and fair elections rather than serve his time in jail for an assault is just bloody ridiculous.

Usually in such situations, you decide the punishment (which is of course dead), than you form a tribunal and make a fair trial (which may need 5 min or so) and than you tell the punishment. Than you kill fast. That way it is not murder.

In most of the revolutions it was made like that......