Red-shirts To Splash One Million Cc Of Blood On Govt House

[LuckyFive8888]

BBC is on now...interviewing a red shirt leader. The red shirt leader is saying that throwing the blood is an "experiment". He also said that they plan to throw this blood in various areas...not just government areas...but also Sukhumvit. This is a rather dramatic revelation.

Shall we now consider this terrorism?

Abhisit's house is on Sukhumvit Soi 31.

He didn't say Abhisit's house. He said "along Sukhumvit".

That was clearly intended to create an impression on BBC viewers. And it's called terrorism.

what are they experimenting? these people are joke!

[yoshiwara]

They could make a giant black pudding.

[steveromagnino]

As I am all keen to set up my wet t shirt party, I am thinking that instead of blood, I might propose to give a little of the white stuff instead.

After all, men love making it, and let's face it, there are more spitters than swallowers out there.

Again, it might seem to be biological warfare, but it's also a wonderful existential statement about how when one life ends, another begins.

As I suggested this to the first of my many million hot chicks march participants (hand picked), she berated me for the wastage between 'political movements' (mostly the in and out kind).

"Why those red shirts could be giving their blood to people who need it," she said. "and you could be giving your white load to a couple needing verile sperm. That load you are creating, why there could be a future Prime Minister, maybe even a decent one in that load."

As I tied up the condom in a tight knot and flushed it down the toilet, I could not help but feel that the odds of that little sperm escaping and managing to become Thailand's PM would be more likely than Thailand's richest man giving his fortune to his then high school graduate kids, becoming PM and then proceeding to lose everything in a coup, then following a PR fiasco involving blood, managing to somehow return to become PM yet again.

Seriously, it's blood.

BLOOD.

So now other than flinging faeces and rotten fish we also fling blood?

Seriously.?????

Come on!

[frodo]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

[dru2]

Steveromagnino Post 139: What else is there to say? A genius post.

[steveromagnino]

Steveromagnino Post 139: What else is there to say? A genius post.

read 153. That's my best work.

[Jingthing]

Steveromagnino Post 139: What else is there to say? A genius post.

read 153. That's my best work.

You must have meant 138. Don't be a fink ... link --

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=3418101

[hextac]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

Get a grip man.

[frodo]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

Get a grip man.

I have a grip, thanks.

[ukrules]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

This would be a mild annoyance, I generally judge people as terrorists once they have killed more than a few people. If they only kill one then they're just a murderer. If they kill none then they are an annoyance. Terrorists are the people who crash planes into buildings and blow up busy markets deliberately killing and maiming lots of people.

I hope this clears things up for you, for one day you may cross paths with a real terrorist and I assure you that if that ever does happen you won't make the same mistake again.

[dru2]

Jingthing -

Yep, I meant 138. But since I couldn't even get that right, how should I link? Just drop it in the fast reply box?

You'll see that in 2 years or so I have only posted four times. And I can't text. But I do appreciate your postings on the Thaksin situation more than most.

I'll try and avoid finkage in future...

[Lite Beer]

A post with references to HM The King has been deleted.

[bangkokrick]

I bet Jatuporn feels a right clot!

Cheers, Rick

[Jingthing]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

This would be a mild annoyance, I generally judge people as terrorists once they have killed more than a few people. If they only kill one then they're just a murderer. If they kill none then they are an annoyance. Terrorists are the people who crash planes into buildings and blow up busy markets deliberately killing and maiming lots of people.

I hope this clears things up for you, for one day you may cross paths with a real terrorist and I assure you that if that ever does happen you won't make the same mistake again.

Not exactly. I agree the blood throwing isn't terrorism. It is vandalism. I don't agree you need to kill anybody to be a terrorist. I think a terrorist is someone planning to commit violence (or has done it) with the intention of creating fear and panic among the public in their everyday life to make a political statement. So somebody even planning to bomb some public places or even has bombed them and doesn't kill anybody, is still a terrorist. They will have intended to or will have created the fear among the public to live their normal lives. Edited March 15, 2010 by Jingthing

[rainman]

Terrorists are terrorists.

Kind of an obvious statement there, don't you think? It's like saying "elephants are elephants".

Besides, red shirts aren't terrorists.

[hextac]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

Get a grip man.

I have a grip, thanks.

On reality or "little frodo"?

[frodo]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

This would be a mild annoyance, I generally judge people as terrorists once they have killed more than a few people. If they only kill one then they're just a murderer. If they kill none then they are an annoyance. Terrorists are the people who crash planes into buildings and blow up busy markets deliberately killing and maiming lots of people.

I hope this clears things up for you, for one day you may cross paths with a real terrorist and I assure you that if that ever does happen you won't make the same mistake again.

Isn't the use of biological terrorism, contaminated blood, on civilians a form of terrorism? If deaths were to occur, it wouldn't be immediate, but over the long run deaths could occur. Is the blood being tested to make sure it's safe to throw along the streets. I think not.

[frodo]

If they do throw blood along the streets, each and every person involved in this terrorist movement will deserve whatever actions come from the government, military, or police. They will have garnered nothing but condemnation on the international stage. Terrorists are terrorists.

Get a grip man.

I have a grip, thanks.

On reality or "little frodo"?

Yes, newbie, I have both.

[Jingthing]

If they intend to throw blood directly at people, well it is a political attack, so maybe a kind of terrorism, kind of a grey area, but definitely a serious physical assault deserving of major prison time. My other comments were about property attacks only.

Edited March 15, 2010 by Jingthing

[anotherpeter]

Steveromagnino Post 139: What else is there to say? A genius post.

read 153. That's my best work.

You must have meant 138. Don't be a fink ... link --

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=3418101

BRILLIANT POST ... best laugh I've had in ages

[bubba]

If they do throw blood along

Not exactly. I agree the blood throwing isn't terrorism. It is vandalism. I don't agree you need to kill anybody to be a terrorist. I think a terrorist is someone planning to commit violence (or has done it) with the intention of creating fear and panic among the public in their everyday life to make a political statement. So somebody even planning to bomb some public places or even has bombed them and doesn't kill anybody, is still a terrorist. They will have intended to or will have created the fear among the public to live their normal lives.

I'm not sure. We all know that blood can contain pathogens, some of which can kill you. I just watched a read shirt leader on BBC, speaking English and talking to an English speaking audience, say that they planned to throw blood in Sukhumvit, which of course is an area associated with foreigners. That could well create fear among the general public, or tourists, in their normal lives. He wanted to scare you, and the act of spraying human blood around is disgusting of yes, potentially dangerous and life threatening if it is sprayed on you.

I realise it's a fine line, but is that terrorism?

[frodo]

If they do throw blood along

Not exactly. I agree the blood throwing isn't terrorism. It is vandalism. I don't agree you need to kill anybody to be a terrorist. I think a terrorist is someone planning to commit violence (or has done it) with the intention of creating fear and panic among the public in their everyday life to make a political statement. So somebody even planning to bomb some public places or even has bombed them and doesn't kill anybody, is still a terrorist. They will have intended to or will have created the fear among the public to live their normal lives.

I'm not sure. We all know that blood can contain pathogens, some of which can kill you. I just watched a read shirt leader on BBC, speaking English and talking to an English speaking audience, say that they planned to throw blood in Sukhumvit, which of course is an area associated with foreigners. That could well create fear among the general public, or tourists, in their normal lives. He wanted to scare you, and the act of spraying human blood around is disgusting of yes, potentially dangerous and life threatening if it is sprayed on you.

I realise it's a fine line, but is that terrorism?

I'm not sure 100% if it classified as terrorism, but a definition could fit it along those lines:

Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents (bacteria, viruses, or toxins); these may be in a naturally-occurring or in a human-modified form.

Given the scenario of throwing blood and let's say it does hit people. The act was intentional. The hard part is determining if bacteria or viruses were in that blood. If so, it may classify as a form of bioterrorism.

Edited March 15, 2010 by frodo

[Cayenne]

I'm not sure. We all know that blood can contain pathogens, some of which can kill you. I just watched a read shirt leader on BBC, speaking English and talking to an English speaking audience, say that they planned to throw blood in Sukhumvit, which of course is an area associated with foreigners. That could well create fear among the general public, or tourists, in their normal lives. He wanted to scare you, and the act of spraying human blood around is disgusting of yes, potentially dangerous and life threatening if it is sprayed on you.

I realise it's a fine line, but is that terrorism?

Bio-terrorism? But seriously, if they spray blood near Sukumvit road they should be arrested for vandalism. What right do they have to deface areas where people live?

[bubba]

If they do throw blood along

Not exactly. I agree the blood throwing isn't terrorism. It is vandalism. I don't agree you need to kill anybody to be a terrorist. I think a terrorist is someone planning to commit violence (or has done it) with the intention of creating fear and panic among the public in their everyday life to make a political statement. So somebody even planning to bomb some public places or even has bombed them and doesn't kill anybody, is still a terrorist. They will have intended to or will have created the fear among the public to live their normal lives.

I'm not sure. We all know that blood can contain pathogens, some of which can kill you. I just watched a read shirt leader on BBC, speaking English and talking to an English speaking audience, say that they planned to throw blood in Sukhumvit, which of course is an area associated with foreigners. That could well create fear among the general public, or tourists, in their normal lives. He wanted to scare you, and the act of spraying human blood around is disgusting of yes, potentially dangerous and life threatening if it is sprayed on you.

I realise it's a fine line, but is that terrorism?

I'm not sure 100% if it classified as terrorism, but a definition could fit it along those lines:

Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents (bacteria, viruses, or toxins); these may be in a naturally-occurring or in a human-modified form.

Given the scenario of throwing blood and let's say it does hit people. The act was intentional. The hard part is determining if bacteria or viruses were in that blood. If so, it may classify as a form of bioterrorism.

Good thought. If we were to take blood from, say, 10,000 random people and mixed it all up, wouldn't there be a degree of certainty that the blood would be contaminated with one or more pathogens?

I would say that it probably would be, thus classifying the act of spraying it on people as bioterrorism. This would be particularly true when the impending act is publicised in a way that is likely to create fear. At the very least, it is an act of reckless and malevolent carelessness, with no regard for the health of either the perpetrators or the targets.

[ukrules]

Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents (bacteria, viruses, or toxins); these may be in a naturally-occurring or in a human-modified form.

Given the scenario of throwing blood and let's say it does hit people. The act was intentional. The hard part is determining if bacteria or viruses were in that blood. If so, it may classify as a form of bioterrorism.

Have you ever left your house when you knew you had a cold or flu and sneezed before you returned home ?

[animatic]

As Animatic eluded to earlier, we really are getting into the realm of bizarre goth-like cult.

In front of the world's media also - bonus!

LOL,

Sorry to be a grammar nazi,... but I didn't escape from it., eluding capture. LOL.

I alluded to it or made reference.. ROTFLOL.

Thanks Insight I am still laughing.

Yes it is like a demented gothic thriller run amok.

Anne Rice does Bangkok maybe.

[rainman]

Now every sex tourist and sexpat in Sukhumvit that tests positive for HIV is going to claim he got it because of the red shirts spilling blood on the streets.

For you own safety, if you see people walking near you with huge buckets of blood, try and don't walk in front of them.

[Netfan]

Terrorists are terrorists.

Kind of an obvious statement there, don't you think? It's like saying "elephants are elephants".

Besides, red shirts aren't terrorists.

You get in the way of them throwing blood everywhere and get hit, let us know if you change your mind. BTW, Nice to see by post above you think throwing blood is all a big joke.

Edited March 15, 2010 by Netfan

[britmaveric]

Come on Thai(s) are rather superstitious - this sort of mumbo jumbo is in their blood. The feces/urine/blood/tampax... this sort of stuff isnt new, I find it rather amusing, but hey this is thailand.

[rainman]

Terrorists are terrorists.

Kind of an obvious statement there, don't you think? It's like saying "elephants are elephants".

Besides, red shirts aren't terrorists.

You get in the way of them throwing blood everywhere and get hit, let us know if you change your mind.

They didn't say that they were going to randomly throw it at people, did they? Maybe something got lost in translation? I read something else.