Bangkok: Central World Shopping Mall Destroyed By Fire

[rixalex]

When I said timely I was actually thinking in the past tense. When 3 parties were dissolved early last year, a significant proportion of voters in the previous election no longer had a representative in the parliament. That was the proper time to dissolve parliament and let the people speak again.

If that had occurred then this would not be happening now.

To answer your question, no November was certainly not timely enough.

If every time a party broke the law it meant that government was dissolved do you not think that this would encourage increased law-breaking because the parties would know that should they be found out they could simply disband and reform (as we know they already do) and hey-presto, another general election to get voted back in again.

[yoshiwara]

Covards. Proves they are terrorist.

Used to symphatize with the red movements but all that is now gone.

I sincerely hope that all foreigners and thais take all this in consideration and do NOT vote for the reds in next election. That would be a clear signal.

Next election! When?

A timely election is precisely what would have prevented this.

November not timely enough?

Or maybe just do what huge majority of Thailand want and call an immediate election .... oh ... just a sec ... 100,000 isn't a huge majority is it? Certainly the 10,000 they had towards the end, and 3,000 on the last day, wasn't really the sort of majority you would consider following their demands for, would it.

When I said timely I was actually thinking in the past tense. When 3 parties were dissolved early last year, a significant proportion of voters in the previous election no longer had a representative in the parliament. That was the proper time to dissolve parliament and let the people speak again.

If that had occurred then this would not be happening now.

To answer your question, no November was certainly not timely enough.

Not true.

[KKvampire]

The Thai wife casually mentioned the other day that it wasn't the 'reds' that torched Central, but a bunch of drunk teenagers that were on the way out when the red rats escaped. Any truth to this????

It could have been mentioned in an earlier post, but 39 pages is hard to wade thru.

Surely there were security webcams, but maybe disabled with power cut?? but still many journalists and I'm sure the army had infiltrators. Surely some witnesses??

The Reds never really existed, they were an entirely causeless group of disparate elements to beigin with, funded by a megalomaniac underworld fugitive. In such terms, did the Reds torch the the buildings. Yes they did. But you must bear in mind, that the Red mob comprised bribed farmers, a small scattering of urban gang members, possibly a couple of pro fighters imported by Thaksin from ex-soviet states, and also a large contingent of European and American Rich Kids With Pop Toys. My money says most of the burning was the foreign rich kids getting to indulge their anarchist dreams at the expense of working-class Bkk citizens.

Bunch of fancy-pants Anarchists who put down their Xbox and nokia phone for a moment and don a black mask and scream "burn the system!" even though their Daddy in America is a millionaire and will give them a job in in the family legal firm in a few years when the boys hormones have died down.I would put around 1% of the red mob were foreign faux-anarchists, who think its cool and hip to travel to friendly developing nations and have exciting gun battles and burn down stores. Including that fat drunk uk boy on the Tv. But I saw hundreds of these MTV-kids fight the power types walking around looking to burn stuff, for the last few weeks.

A notable point is that : Starbucks, McDonalds, Stock exchange, and luxury good stores were hit ASAP. Infact they were going up so fast that the people torching them hadnt even been at the protest site recently. Those targets are a bibliography of the Western Spoiled Kid Anarchist School Of Coolness, it goes along with you have to have the Che Guevara poster, you have to hate starbucks, mcDs, shopping centres and stockmarkets.

They will fly back in their black anarchist designer T-shirt, to Us/ uk/ scandinavia or somewhere, back to their wealthy families and their doting girlfrend with the piercings who thinks her boy is so cool for taking on those Cops and The Suits, feeling all excited because they did "real anarchist stuff! yee-ha!" . Leaving behind just a lot of broken dreams, broken businesses, grieving families who's son was drafted into the military, street cleaners who have to work in the burning stench.

Amazing how Verbal diarrohea can be dressed up

[Gambles]

I think the reds are basically peacefull, but Abhisit always changes his mind saying I will desolve parliament and organise elections, the putting all this on hold!

How can anyone trust him?

I would get violent too

Abhisit has to resign if he wants peace back in Thailand!

yep

It is a good idea, whoever mentioned a 7 day grace period for new joiners before they can post. Everyday we get new users(probably the same few people who have been banned) posting the same useless messages.

LBK12 would be just as daft in 7 days time as he is now

how about a minimum IQ level

or at least whatever that question is that US immigration ask about "do you or have you ever supported or taken part in any acts of terrorism?" - that should at least enable us to screen out the really stupid terrorist sympthisers.....

[whybother]

Covards. Proves they are terrorist.

Used to symphatize with the red movements but all that is now gone.

I sincerely hope that all foreigners and thais take all this in consideration and do NOT vote for the reds in next election. That would be a clear signal.

Next election! When?

A timely election is precisely what would have prevented this.

November not timely enough?

Or maybe just do what huge majority of Thailand want and call an immediate election .... oh ... just a sec ... 100,000 isn't a huge majority is it? Certainly the 10,000 they had towards the end, and 3,000 on the last day, wasn't really the sort of majority you would consider following their demands for, would it.

When I said timely I was actually thinking in the past tense. When 3 parties were dissolved early last year, a significant proportion of voters in the previous election no longer had a representative in the parliament. That was the proper time to dissolve parliament and let the people speak again.

If that had occurred then this would not be happening now.

To answer your question, no November was certainly not timely enough.

There were by-elections. Everyone is represented.

[Gambles]

When I said timely I was actually thinking in the past tense. When 3 parties were dissolved early last year, a significant proportion of voters in the previous election no longer had a representative in the parliament. That was the proper time to dissolve parliament and let the people speak again.

If that had occurred then this would not be happening now.

To answer your question, no November was certainly not timely enough.

If every time a party broke the law it meant that government was dissolved do you not think that this would encourage increased law-breaking because the parties would know that should they be found out they could simply disband and reform (as we know they already do) and hey-presto, another general election to get voted back in again.

and wasn't the point that most of their votes had been bought and weren't truly democratic ?

Democracy was represented when the elections for those seats were reheld and or the candidates who weren't disqualified took their rightful seats...

Edited May 21, 2010 by Gambles

[banff]

I hope that the owners of this Mall sue the finacial backers of the Red Shirts for every penny they have!

I am sure the owners will be OK they will collect the insurance money. rebuild condos on this prime piece of real estate and come out ahead. Bangkok has a glut of malls.

[TAWP]

I hope that the owners of this Mall sue the finacial backers of the Red Shirts for every penny they have!

I am sure the owners will be OK they will collect the insurance money. rebuild condos on this prime piece of real estate and come out ahead. Bangkok has a glut of malls.

You honestly think they will get the full value of 20 billion to rebuild it from their insurance, and then each and every shop-owner get their loss back from their insurances?

And even if they did, it would just mean that you and I had to pay more later to cover or the losses somewhere...

[indothai]

I hope that the owners of this Mall sue the finacial backers of the Red Shirts for every penny they have!

I am sure the owners will be OK they will collect the insurance money. rebuild condos on this prime piece of real estate and come out ahead. Bangkok has a glut of malls.

You honestly think they will get the full value of 20 billion to rebuild it from their insurance, and then each and every shop-owner get their loss back from their insurances?

And even if they did, it would just mean that you and I had to pay more later to cover or the losses somewhere...

Rumor is the Central World building is insured and will be paid by the insurance company.

[AleG]

I heard that other 9 bodies were found in Central World, anyone can confirm this?

[Gambles]

I heard that other 9 bodies were found in Central World, anyone can confirm this?

this story's on mcot's website.....

[SomTumTiger]

Friend of mine owns a small ice cream shop in the center of the mall. They are hoping that their store wasn't completely burnt, so they can rescue their freezer units, but they were told that he mall is not salvageable.

[hyperdimension]

The Central World damages are covered by insurance.

"We have Industrial All Risks insurance of 13 billion baht ($400 million) and another $100 million for riot and terrorism," Chief Financial Officer Naris Cheyklin told Reuters.

"ZEN was badly hit but the back bit hasn't been much affected and can be renovated. The cost of rebuilding and renovating everything shouldn't reach 10 billion baht, within the insurance limits," he told TV Channel 9.

(http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSGE64K07A20100521)

Who then is the insurance company who will have to pay the billions?

[toenail]

Does anybody know why these targets were chosen?

For instance, they could have gone for Gaysorn, Amarin and Siam Paragon. Neither was targeted.

Why did they choose the two cinemas and Central World? Also, why Center One? Is that the big mall where everybody goes to buy clothes with the McDonalds on the ground floor?

The targets seem an odd choice to me.

.... I see somebody else has asked the same questions.

As for big C Rajadamari. It has a very popular food hall that's very busy at lunch times and is more reasonably priced than the one at Paragon in the basement.

_____________________

Though the Red farang supporters will disagree with me, I doubt that these Red thugs gave it much thought. According to one of the forums on this website, Central was mentioned before hand. The Siam Cinema was the first "modern" theater in BKK back in the 70's so it was valuable historical-wise... I still find it shocking that Central/Zen and Big C had not upgraded their security; after all, the RED PARTY demonstration sight was right next to them. Yes, I know the regular security guards would run away, but the corporations that own these places could have afforded to bring in some "experts" for protection. My Thai buddy says that BKK never experience this before, so how would the know what to do?

[chadintheusa]

Rest in Peace - an innocent businessman most likely, trying to protect his goods - becomes a victim of the Red terrorist's arson attack.

Just as likely it was a looter falling victim to his own greed.

[SomTumTiger]

Rest in Peace - an innocent businessman most likely, trying to protect his goods - becomes a victim of the Red terrorist's arson attack.

Just as likely it was a looter falling victim to his own greed.

Glass half full, glass half empty - we all know where most TV posters fall.

[animatic]

People running and people dancing can be doctored up in a movie clip to seem any way one might want it to seem.

Images - yes, video clips - not really, and certainly not with the level of technology that's being used. Of course that's not to say video clips can't and haven't been doctored, but those that have are obvious for what they are.

That the red shirts are responsible is, again, a view that I refuse to believe in.

Just to be clear, are you saying the reds shouldn't be held responsible for their actions, or are you saying that they are not responsible people - ie irresponsible?

NO he is saying he can't believe trhe red shirts are responsable for any violence.

Because the evil government must have doctored all the visual evidence.

Classic case of denial. Dreams shattered, no can't be... I'll stick with what I understand.

It is either a message from Perception Managment central, (yo Bobby A. fek off.)

Or from fantasy-land or amature troll-land.

Are the Redshirts responsible for this mess? Their leaders allowed their greed to run amok,

and created a monster they couldn't control, rabble rousers one an all.

They are grossly irresponsible in their actions,

but still to be held resonsible for their actions.

No matter what apologists can rant on about here, the evidence is there to be collected,

and the main problem will be sorting it out, because there is SO MUCH to prove culpability.

[hyperdimension]

Rest in Peace - an innocent businessman most likely, trying to protect his goods - becomes a victim of the Red terrorist's arson attack.

Just as likely it was a looter falling victim to his own greed.

Glass half full, glass half empty - we all know where most TV posters fall.

The mall was closed. I don't think there would be any businessman crazy enough to go in and "protect his goods" after the mall was broken into and set alight by the terrorists.

The looter got what he deserved. Unfortunately, other looters got away with their crimes.

Edited May 22, 2010 by hyperdimension

[hyperdimension]

Does anybody know why these targets were chosen?

For instance, they could have gone for Gaysorn, Amarin and Siam Paragon. Neither was targeted.

Why did they choose the two cinemas and Central World? Also, why Center One? Is that the big mall where everybody goes to buy clothes with the McDonalds on the ground floor?

The targets seem an odd choice to me.

.... I see somebody else has asked the same questions.

As for big C Rajadamari. It has a very popular food hall that's very busy at lunch times and is more reasonably priced than the one at Paragon in the basement.

_____________________

Though the Red farang supporters will disagree with me, I doubt that these Red thugs gave it much thought. According to one of the forums on this website, Central was mentioned before hand. The Siam Cinema was the first "modern" theater in BKK back in the 70's so it was valuable historical-wise... I still find it shocking that Central/Zen and Big C had not upgraded their security; after all, the RED PARTY demonstration sight was right next to them. Yes, I know the regular security guards would run away, but the corporations that own these places could have afforded to bring in some "experts" for protection. My Thai buddy says that BKK never experience this before, so how would the know what to do?

Maybe the owners knew that they would be covered by insurance. Otherwise I'm quite sure they would have done as much as they could to prevent attacks on their own buildings, e.g. build fire-proof barriers.

In one of the UDD speeches, Arisman reads a list of targets (though Central world and other places that got burnt was not on the list):

Here's the longer version of the speech, which is quite funny; he starts off saying that Abhisit and Prem are sexually intimate.

Here are other videos of Arisman and Nattawut clearly inciting arson. I know these have already been posted but they really must be seen by everyone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vRhaHRzuo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELNZFcYbYsM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M9XiJoWSSs

I still also think that my theory that the arsons were allowed to take place in order to clearly paint the UDD as the villains is plausible. Remember that the US government used the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center as a prelude and justification to their war in Iraq (even though they could not find any link between Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein).

Possibly some of the attacks were not connected with the UDD at all; criminals may have simply taken the opportunity to break into stores and enter and steal.

[dhrobertson]

People running and people dancing can be doctored up in a movie clip to seem any way one might want it to seem.

Images - yes, video clips - not really, and certainly not with the level of technology that's being used. Of course that's not to say video clips can't and haven't been doctored, but those that have are obvious for what they are.

That the red shirts are responsible is, again, a view that I refuse to believe in.

Just to be clear, are you saying the reds shouldn't be held responsible for their actions, or are you saying that they are not responsible people - ie irresponsible?

NO he is saying he can't believe trhe red shirts are responsable for any violence.

Because the evil government must have doctored all the visual evidence.

Classic case of denial. Dreams shattered, no can't be... I'll stick with what I understand.

It is either a message from Perception Managment central, (yo Bobby A. fek off.)

Or from fantasy-land or amature troll-land.

Are the Redshirts responsible for this mess? Their leaders allowed their greed to run amok,

and created a monster they couldn't control, rabble rousers one an all.

They are grossly irresponsible in their actions,

but still to be held resonsible for their actions.

No matter what apologists can rant on about here, the evidence is there to be collected,

and the main problem will be sorting it out, because there is SO MUCH to prove culpability.

Well said indeed.

Horrified to see how the police are treating the leaders like royalty.

I would love to see Abhisit fire police enmasse for their incompetance and disloyalty

[SunbeltAsia]

Maybe the owners knew that they would be covered by insurance. Otherwise I'm quite sure they would have done as much as they could to prevent attacks on their own buildings, e.g. build fire-proof barriers.

Those speeches were given at the stage next to Central World. You think the red’s would have let construction workers to go in and build a "fire proof barrier"?

Also, pretty hard to let your five star water sprinkler system work when water and electricity has been turned off to that area.

Central was covered with all risks insurance for 13 billion baht and another $100 million dollars for riot and terrorism.

However almost 100% of the store owners inside the Central, that had insurance did not have the rider for terrorism or riots and are not covered. The insurance companies are saying its terrorism and the shop owners are saying arson which would mean they are covered. The insurance companies don't share the same viewpoint it was arson.

[Thai at Heart]

Maybe the owners knew that they would be covered by insurance. Otherwise I'm quite sure they would have done as much as they could to prevent attacks on their own buildings, e.g. build fire-proof barriers.

Those speeches were given at the stage next to Central World. You think the red’s would have let construction workers to go in and build a "fire proof barrier"?

Also, pretty hard to let your five star water sprinkler system work when water and electricity has been turned off to that area.

Central was covered with all risks insurance for 13 billion baht and another $100 million dollars for riot and terrorism.

However almost 100% of the store owners inside the Central, that had insurance did not have the rider for terrorism or riots and are not covered. The insurance companies are saying its terrorism and the shop owners are saying arson which would mean they are covered. The insurance companies don't share the same viewpoint it was arson.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

Hence why rhetoric from positions of power is extremely important at times like these.

I wonder if the government will become insurers of last resort. Didn't they just come into a couple of billion dollars from someone. I wouldn't expect an insurance company to want to pay one baht and they will squirm as much as they can.

I don't notice anyone standing up to set up charitable donation to help with this situation either.

[rixalex]

However almost 100% of the store owners inside the Central, that had insurance did not have the rider for terrorism or riots and are not covered.

With the prevalence of terrorist acts these days, can't help wondering why those taking out insurance accept having this disclaimer.

[hyperdimension]

Maybe the owners knew that they would be covered by insurance. Otherwise I'm quite sure they would have done as much as they could to prevent attacks on their own buildings, e.g. build fire-proof barriers.

Those speeches were given at the stage next to Central World. You think the red’s would have let construction workers to go in and build a "fire proof barrier"?

If billions of baht of their own money were at stake, I think they would have at least tried to make some attempt.

Also, pretty hard to let your five star water sprinkler system work when water and electricity has been turned off to that area.

This supports my theory that the government let it burn. Surely someone would have thought that during the time when tires were being burnt everywhere and buildings had been set on fire (e.g. in Din Daeng), that it would not be a good idea to have water in Ratchaprasong to be left off. Then some elite(s) who have some power may have responded to such a warning a bit like this: "let them burn it, it will be good PR; the media will portray the UDD as terrorists and we will get a lot of sympathy from most innocent civilians, many who would have enjoyed Central World at least some time in their lives and would there fore have some connection with it. As a result, our support base will grow."

[stingray]

People running and people dancing can be doctored up in a movie clip to seem any way one might want it to seem.

Images - yes, video clips - not really, and certainly not with the level of technology that's being used. Of course that's not to say video clips can't and haven't been doctored, but those that have are obvious for what they are.

That the red shirts are responsible is, again, a view that I refuse to believe in.

Just to be clear, are you saying the reds shouldn't be held responsible for their actions, or are you saying that they are not responsible people - ie irresponsible?

Slum peaple are never responsable for their acting. Tis is the same case in Europe, where "greenies" and "lefties" smashing SUV's and High End Cars, over night. Noone go after them, because you can't get anything from them because they have nothing, so the officials don't care. That's the (sh...) way the system works.

Similar like the Ant and the Elephant. If both animal doe something bad, the ant you'll never find.

Basicly the "reds" should get caught and build it back, what they destroyed. Free labour of corse, take cash from selling their land to pay for the damages.

[SomTumTiger]

Slum peaple are never responsable for their acting. Tis is the same case in Europe, where "greenies" and "lefties" smashing SUV's and High End Cars, over night. Noone go after them, because you can't get anything from them because they have nothing, so the officials don't care. That's the (sh...) way the system works.

Similar like the Ant and the Elephant. If both animal doe something bad, the ant you'll never find.

Basicly the "reds" should get caught and build it back, what they destroyed. Free labour of corse, take cash from selling their land to pay for the damages.

They destroyed a hel_l of a lot - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhDZ9-OHfC8

[SunbeltAsia]

However almost 100% of the store owners inside the Central, that had insurance did not have the rider for terrorism or riots and are not covered.

With the prevalence of terrorist acts these days, can't help wondering why those taking out insurance accept having this disclaimer.

1. Most business owners never bother to read the policy.

2. If they did happen to read, and asked the agents, in most cases, they would respond " riot coverage not available in Thailand".... what happen to me.

3. The other few that did read, thought "Mai Pen Rai" It won't happen here.

Central World went outside Thailand to get the insurance coverage after 9/11/ 2001

Most owners are not going to even know where to go to buy this riot insurance outside Thailand.

Insurance companies will find every excuse not to pay 100%. I had a restaurant fire in Jan. Damage was 1.7 million and they paid 1.2 million. Thats just the way it is.

By the way, Central Food Hall and TOPS on 7th floor did not get burnt, but might be effected from smoke and water. Noone is allowed to go and check the damage themselves yet until the engineering department of Bangkok Metropolitan checks the structure of the building and make sure that it is safe to go inside.

The Offices at Central ( located next to Central World) have no damage from the 7th floor upwards. A restaurant I own on the third floor was not damaged from the fire but was looted for meat, cookies and coke. Guess da boys were hungry.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

[wolf5370]

Maybe the owners knew that they would be covered by insurance. Otherwise I'm quite sure they would have done as much as they could to prevent attacks on their own buildings, e.g. build fire-proof barriers.

Those speeches were given at the stage next to Central World. You think the red's would have let construction workers to go in and build a "fire proof barrier"?

If billions of baht of their own money were at stake, I think they would have at least tried to make some attempt.

Also, pretty hard to let your five star water sprinkler system work when water and electricity has been turned off to that area.

This supports my theory that the government let it burn. Surely someone would have thought that during the time when tires were being burnt everywhere and buildings had been set on fire (e.g. in Din Daeng), that it would not be a good idea to have water in Ratchaprasong to be left off. Then some elite(s) who have some power may have responded to such a warning a bit like this: "let them burn it, it will be good PR; the media will portray the UDD as terrorists and we will get a lot of sympathy from most innocent civilians, many who would have enjoyed Central World at least some time in their lives and would there fore have some connection with it. As a result, our support base will grow."

It will be a while before we know (if ever). However, we have heard from reds (and one stupid farang) that this was set up - incendiaries, gas cannisters and the like had been previously placed, who is to say that [a] the incendiaries burn too hot/fast for the spinklers to have much affect or that they were not bypassed somehow (turned off, made useless, whatever). I guess things will come out as the wreckage is investigated. I thought sprinkler system worked from tanks on gravity systems so compromised electrics or mains water do not have effect (at least initially until tank are empty).

PS: As to insurance - insurance companies are experts at delaying and avoiding payouts, only those with the clout and money to stay in the game will have any chance of recourse.

Edited May 22, 2010 by wolf5370

[Royk]

A friend sent me this link. It's in Thai but the pictures speak for themselves.

http://www.pantip.com/cafe/camera/topic/O9...7/O9269457.html

Best regards,

Roy

[DrThomas]

Next election! When?

A timely election is precisely what would have prevented this.

November not timely enough?

Or maybe just do what huge majority of Thailand want and call an immediate election .... oh ... just a sec ... 100,000 isn't a huge majority is it? Certainly the 10,000 they had towards the end, and 3,000 on the last day, wasn't really the sort of majority you would consider following their demands for, would it.

When I said timely I was actually thinking in the past tense. When 3 parties were dissolved early last year, a significant proportion of voters in the previous election no longer had a representative in the parliament. That was the proper time to dissolve parliament and let the people speak again.

If that had occurred then this would not be happening now.

To answer your question, no November was certainly not timely enough.

There were by-elections. Everyone is represented.

There were some by-elections. Many MPs just swithed party.

Democracy is not about the MPs. Its about the people. How would you feel if you voted for your local Tory candidate, then his party is dissolved, then he joins the Lib Dems. You would feel cheated because you voted Tory, not Lib Dem.

The proper thing to do at that time was call a fresh election.