Bangkok: Central World Shopping Mall Destroyed By Fire

[lannarebirth]

Has anyone heard a rumour that the owners of Paragon made a last minute "donation" to the red shirts to prevent any damage to their center from rioters?

After looking at the damage to Siam square and Central world, I'm a little amazed at how Siam Paragon escaped, despite many vocalised threats against it during the last week.

Yes, indirectly. A reliable, educated Thai businessperson I know says, from personal sources as well as talk shows in the Thai media, that the red shirts were extorting the businesses in their control. Either they paid up or they got burned down. Central was told to pay 30 million and didn't so that's why it got burned, according to what I heard. I dunno if it's true or not, but it sure seems like it could very well be true!

If indeed the red shirts were deciding what buildings to burn down, I am fairly amazed they chose to torch Central World. As the King of Thailand is the landowner of Central World.......

So now I am wondering if they knew that, or not. Or perhaps it simply the crowds in a frenzy, burning whatever was in front of them.

Of course they know it. I think every Thai does.

[brahmburgers]

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?

What I am saying is that the posters herein summarily make broad brush strokes in their labeling of individual and group action. I am one of the few who will admit that I am not remotely prepared to cast judgment about events and people in which I do not have any circumstantial or forensic evidence to cast judgment. But that is the old way of doing things. Nowadays, the law enforcement agencies cast judgment upon people simply because they fill a profile, and then motive and intent is brought into the case; and most self-appointed jurists cast judgment for any amount of varying reasons; yet for reasons that make me glad that I am not the subject of their judgment.

To answer more clearly, to single out the actions of the red shirts and to interpret what their responsibility is; is, to say the least, irresponsible and obtuse. Yes, people committed crimes, as per the laws of the land, but to view these crimes without viewing what provoked them; and to also be even-handed at what provoked them and to be objective enough to admit that these people are very upset about their leader being ousted, and then a puppet put in his place without their vote; well, that would constitute a more lenient judgment process. After all, these people are all Thai and it is imperative that leniency be used to preserve the common good of the nations unity. I think the current government is void of this concept.

The government had the upper hand throughout all of this, and yet I am of the opinion that they bungled the matter terribly, abused their power, and that there will be unhealed wounds for a long time to come.

Obfuscate: to be evasive, unclear, or confusing

You can throw a whole slew of convoluted phrases at the issue, trying to dilute the gravity of what they did, but you can't change what's plain to see: SOME OF THE REDS RIOTED, AND BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS.

Some advocate blind leniency for the arsonists. I say fine them and put them behind bars for a long time.

[ericthai]

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!

Who kept changing their minds? The PM came out with his "peact plan", the reds accepted. Then added conditions, the government did what the reds wanted. Then the reds wanted more. It appears the reds were never going to accept any plan ecept total surrender by the government.

Spot on....

and on an off topic Go Steelers!!!

[Kna]

Red Shirt theme song......

:D

[iasian]

Firstly, The red shirts didn't exist in 2007.

Sorry, but you're quite wrong.

The only difference was they called themselves DAAD then. It was the same Red leaders then (Veera, Nattawut, Jatuporn and Jaran Dittha-apichai) as they have today and they were causing turmoil and pain back then same as now.

They led a rampaging and riotous mob of thugs on July 22, 2007 in Bangkok in front of Prem's house which resulted in hundreds of people being injured.

They are still waiting to be prosecuted on those charges.

Edited May 24, 2010 by iasian

[chadintheusa]

Looking at photos and videos published today or yesterday, much of Central World remains standing. I would presume a lot of the stores are still fine.

It looks like that this is another case of sensationalist journalism, as I think a lot of people, including myself, thought (or at least feared) that it was completely destroyed, especially when the only images we see are the burning or burned section.

If you'd read more than the headlines, you would have read that the main area that was gutted was ZEN at the south eastern corner.

The rest will definitely have smoke damage and maybe water damage. The hotel is undamaged and is planning to open on June 1.

I was there yesterday. Zen is badly damaged and the center section beside Zen has basically collapsed. They were still spraying water on the building so I guess the fire may not be completely out yet. I think they need to do a more comprehensive analysis before giving opening dates. Clearly there will be some demolition, and months or years of rebuilding. If you want to stay at a hotel that is a construction site fine, but there are better choices all around. The whole area smells like burnt tires still. They could get the northern half open in a few months if they really wanted to, there is damage visible on the upper floors past the collapsed section. They really need to assess the entire building before rushing to reopen, you don't need a building to be full of shoppers if there is any risk of it collapsing.

[brahmburgers]

Firstly, The red shirts didn't exist in 2007.

Sorry, but you're quite wrong. The only difference was they called themselves DAAD then. It was the same Red leaders then (Veera, Nattawut, Jatuporn and Jaran Dittha-apichai) as they have today and they were causing turmoil and pain back then same as now. They led a rampaging and riotous mob of thugs on July 22, 2007 in Bangkok in front of Prem's house which resulted in hundreds of people being injured.

They are still waiting to be prosecuted on those charges.

Thanks for the history reminder. People in general, and Thais in particular need to be reminded what a harmful scourge the Reds have been for years. Thais have the memory capacity of little kids, and their court system moves at a glacial pace - not a good combination. Plus they're forgiving to a fault. If people like those Reds are given bail and or suspended prison sentences, then that makes it easier/quicker for them to get out and cause added harm to others and property.

[Zolt]

Spent a bit of time gawking in front of CW yesterday evening. Indeed the damage is extensive - and it might be worse inside than it looks from outside. The whole Zen part really burned hard, and only the stronger supports from the tower kept it from collapsing too. The shriveled trees on top and the huge, half burnt banner from Zense were a really sad sight.

Right of the collapsed section - looking from Ratchdamree road, things look much better - the glass panes in front are still in place and the commercials are unblemished, but when you look at the top part you see some fire damage: the inside of this whole section burned hard too, so the shops must be ravaged, and the structure might be weakened. So basically, only the section around Isetan - with the movie theaters and the foodland - seems free of damage.

Real shame. Some of my favorite places in the whole world were in the damaged section. Tokyo Bistro on 7th floor, with it's mix of fusion Japanese food and great Belgian beers must have been right in the middle of the collapsed section, and of course there's the fantastic Zense, which won't be reopening any time soon.

Apparently taking down at least the whole Zen part seems inevitable. I wonder how they're going to pull down that huge tower without damaging the BTS just meters away. Tearing down the undamaged parts of the building seems like a stupid waste, but TiT so you never know... Isetan could probably reopen in under a week if they had a mind to.

Most of all, I hope they don't leave the place to rot and join the empty husks from the 1997 crisis. Btw, how about blowing these up? We could even ask the red-shirt demolition expert for help!

[cup-O-coffee]

So, if it was not the red shirts firing rockets etc...... who was it?

FF

My best answer would be some "asiatic-looking" people; and not to seem racist, yet merely to make a point.

So, because they don't understand that the current government is as legitimate as the Thaksin, Samak, and Somchai governments, that gives them the excuse to burn down buildings?

"They" and "them" are undefined pronouns. It is imperative to discover exactly who these persons are, and where their loyalties are aimed towards. Whoever burned down the buildings should be punished severely. But the process involved in exacting the answer to this is what I am on about. On the one hand, a lot of "red" haters say the majority of these people were here because they were being paid. If so, then that makes them hooligans, and not legitimate "red" sympathizers unless they take an oath on it.

So the "red" haters are being double-minded when they say on the one hand that the people are just here because they are getting money, and on the other hand, they are hard-core "red" terrorists and should be strung up or jailed, etc. So, what's it gonna' be?

Does the government have the excuse to order soldiers to put a bullet in the head of an unarmed man conducting an interview on TV. That is cold blooded, premeditated murder; no matter how you slice it or dice it. How simple of you to summarily dismiss such alarming issues such as this, and others that the government carried out, and subsequently made a very peaceful solution become impossible to solve without acting out the very same sort of violence that the government was preaching against.

It almost makes the casual observer wonder why all this hatred and animosity towards Thai nationals who happen to disagree with a government that questionably stepped over the line; at least a percentage of the world thought so, and politely offered assistance. Making the "reds" into terrorists, and bogeymen is simply a cowards way out of dealing with human beings in a civilized fashion. It's funny, but the threads here regarding soi dogs exact more sympathy for the feral dogs than people express here for the "red terrorists".

Blah blah blah

Come off it animatic. I do not want to start a relationship here and pick out curtains with you, but please please don't start off with a smart-mouthed, and disrespectful comment towards another poster, and then come back - after they get upset - with a bunch of jabberwocky about your accomplishments. And then go on to further discredit the poster. Forgive me for not bowing to your accomplishments, because when you use them as a bludgeon you lose that respect instantly.

What you achieved and what you know has no influence with the investigation and the evidence gathering tactics that the authorities happened to gather (and questionable tactics at best when compared to the norm around here). What you achieved and what you know has nothing to do with what there is to examine; and since you are not the one conducting the investigations (yes?) and you do not have your hands on the evidence that was gathered, I trust that your word on this matter is just as objective as the others. To flaunt your past accomplishments and discredit my opinions is again not being original.

You seem like a knowledgeable person, and I respect that part, but sometimes one can get so far ahead of the pack that their only satisfaction is in self-congratulations only.

Obfuscate: to be evasive, unclear, or confusing

You can throw a whole slew of convoluted phrases at the issue, trying to dilute the gravity of what they did, but you can't change what's plain to see: SOME OF THE REDS RIOTED, AND BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS.

Some advocate blind leniency for the arsonists. I say fine them and put them behind bars for a long time.

Well, brahmburgers, I am glad that what you see is the absolute truth. You sure do seem to know for certain that these perpetrators are guilty. But guilty of what; hooliganism, or terrorism? And remember that terrorism is the new excuse by governments to perpetuate an endless and impossible war and genocide on anyone they deem as the enemy (translated: anyone who has something that that government wants for its own). A terrorist is really the bogeyman, an invisible enemy hiding under our beds, so that we stay afraid like little children, and let the governments take care of us after we give up all of our freedoms.

I will agree with you if you could only undeniably verify that these individuals that you are singling out are in fact "reds" (whatever that new and undefined definition comes out to), and that they were indeed acting on direct orders from the "red" bosses and not anything else, such a simple hooliganism, etc. I doubt that this movement is that structured and that loyalties run that deep; as deep as, say, a military sniper. Again, it is intersting that these buildings were ripe for the pickings, and that a few country bumpkins with petrol cans (terrorists, mind you) could progress their damage over a length of time without ever being noticed, detained, or shot in the head.

Just because soldiers are all dressed in matching uniforms, and they appear to act in unison, does not exclude their behaviors from the same discerning eyes that you all are singling the "reds' out for. I am simply on about the methods and the manner in which the results are achieved, and a lot of opinions in between.

Anyways, I am glad it seems to be all over; for now anyway. I hope no one minds my opinions or cheek.

[rixalex]

"They" and "them" are undefined pronouns. It is imperative to discover exactly who these persons are, and where their loyalties are aimed towards. Whoever burned down the buildings should be punished severely. But the process involved in exacting the answer to this is what I am on about. On the one hand, a lot of "red" haters say the majority of these people were here because they were being paid. If so, then that makes them hooligans, and not legitimate "red" sympathizers unless they take an oath on it.

So the "red" haters are being double-minded when they say on the one hand that the people are just here because they are getting money, and on the other hand, they are hard-core "red" terrorists and should be strung up or jailed, etc. So, what's it gonna' be?

Does the government have the excuse to order soldiers to put a bullet in the head of an unarmed man conducting an interview on TV. That is cold blooded, premeditated murder; no matter how you slice it or dice it. How simple of you to summarily dismiss such alarming issues such as this, and others that the government carried out, and subsequently made a very peaceful solution become impossible to solve without acting out the very same sort of violence that the government was preaching against.

In your first paragraph you urge people to refrain from rushing to any hasty conclusions about the identity of certain guilty parties from the red side, and in your last paragraph you very confidently assert without hesitation acts that you have decided the government are guilty of.

[cpofc]

Sorry if this has been posted already. BTW, this guy is actually Irish. And a Military Wannabe. And a <deleted>.

Australian arrested over Red Shirt protests

By Peter Cave

Updated 1 hour 13 minutes ago

Conor Purcell was arrested at his apartment complex on Sunday.

Related Story: Curfew extended as volunteers scrub Bangkok Related Story: Thai army calls for extended curfew Related Link: Photo gallery: Thai clashes The Department of Foreign Affairs has confirmed Thai police have arrested a 30-year-old Australian man under the emergency decree used to end almost two months of Red Shirt protests in Bangkok.

The man has been identified as Conor David Purcell, an ex-soldier working in Bangkok as a language teacher.

Purcell was arrested at his apartment complex in the city on Sunday and appeared in court on Monday charged with immigration offences.

He has already been convicted of overstaying his visa.

Thai authorities say he incited unrest while speaking from the stage of the Red Shirt protest camp on two occasions.

Bangkok's Kom Chad Luek newspaper is quoting police sources as saying he served for seven years in the Australian Army and had received sniper training.

Thai media is reporting he is being questioned about possible involvement in last week's violence that left more than 50 people dead and hundreds injured.

Purcell is receiving consular assistance from the Australian Embassy.

He has been charged under Thailand's emergency decree - a charge which can result in a two-year jail

[iasian]

Multi-shirt Coordinator Petitions Police to Investigate Red Sympathizers in Uniform

UPDATE : 25 May 2010

Dr. Tul Sittisomwong, the coordinator of the multi-shirt movement, has petitioned Acting Police Chief Pateep Thanprasert to investigate alleged red sympathisers in the police force.

http://www.thailandoutlook.tv/tan/ViewData...?DataID=1029841

=============================================

coincidentally received a Thai mass emailing yesterday that demonstrates the above from a variety of sources including the Thai press and even UDD's own Truth Today. A sampling shows police seeking autographs and being active red cheerleaders and big fans of Seh Daeng:

[cup-O-coffee]

In your first paragraph you urge people to refrain from rushing to any hasty conclusions about the identity of certain guilty parties from the red side, and in your last paragraph you very confidently assert without hesitation acts that you have decided the government are guilty of.

That is very perceptive and true with the exception of the guilt part. The examples about the government are no secret, as they stated they would do the things they did, aside from the collateral damage that they brought about as well.

Forming an opinion is the result of a decision, so I miss your point on that one. The guilt part is merely of my opinion. Were I a governing body, then my opinion would hold more water and probably be above dispute and hence be enforceable by whatever means I determined justifiable. Isn't that the way it seems to work these days; governments surviving to perpetuate their own existence, and the common people be damned? Not that it matters any. There simply do not seem to be any heroes anymore; leaders that we can sincerely look up to, who are not puppets on a puppeteer's strings. Choosing the best of the worst of the lot takes a lot of getting used to.

[whybother]

In your first paragraph you urge people to refrain from rushing to any hasty conclusions about the identity of certain guilty parties from the red side, and in your last paragraph you very confidently assert without hesitation acts that you have decided the government are guilty of.

That is very perceptive and true with the exception of the guilt part. The examples about the government are no secret, as they stated they would do the things they did, aside from the collateral damage that they brought about as well.

Forming an opinion is the result of a decision, so I miss your point on that one. The guilt part is merely of my opinion. Were I a governing body, then my opinion would hold more water and probably be above dispute and hence be enforceable by whatever means I determined justifiable. Isn't that the way it seems to work these days; governments surviving to perpetuate their own existence, and the common people be damned? Not that it matters any. There simply do not seem to be any heroes anymore; leaders that we can sincerely look up to, who are not puppets on a puppeteer's strings. Choosing the best of the worst of the lot takes a lot of getting used to.

"Does the government have the excuse to order soldiers to put a bullet in the head of an unarmed man conducting an interview on TV."

Has anyone (besides conspiracy theorists) said anywhere that the government ordered this?

[edgarfriendly]

Bless u cup-o-coffee.

dont let em bring u down!

its a uphill struggle.

ef

[TAWP]

Thai wife told me tonight

her sistar tell her that the Government told the soldiers to burn Central shopping centre

She knows this as 2 soldiers who did it told her

The reason

Wait for it

They let the Red shirts use their toilets

Is there any end to the bullshxt they will try to spread to make themselves look like a peaceful protest

As seen on twitter, rumours are going around the red fans by word of mouth that the government put hundreds of protesters in the basement before they put the central world on fire...and the nightly curfews are there to allow them to sneak out the evidence of the mass murder.

[kaengk]

Thai wife told me tonight

her sistar tell her that the Government told the soldiers to burn Central shopping centre

She knows this as 2 soldiers who did it told her

The reason

Wait for it

They let the Red shirts use their toilets

Is there any end to the bullshxt they will try to spread to make themselves look like a peaceful protest

As seen on twitter, rumours are going around the red fans by word of mouth that the government put hundreds of protesters in the basement before they put the central world on fire...and the nightly curfews are there to allow them to sneak out the evidence of the mass murder.

Makes sense. It is the only explanation, besides extreme stupidity, for the Abhisit govt to disarm the fire suppression system before the final assault on Rajaprasong.

[yothai]

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!

so you are for burning and looting,blame Abhisit,and you trust thaskin

[yothai]

Sorry if this has been posted already. BTW, this guy is actually Irish. And a Military Wannabe. And a <deleted>.

Australian arrested over Red Shirt protests

By Peter Cave

Updated 1 hour 13 minutes ago

Conor Purcell was arrested at his apartment complex on Sunday.

Related Story: Curfew extended as volunteers scrub Bangkok Related Story: Thai army calls for extended curfew Related Link: Photo gallery: Thai clashes The Department of Foreign Affairs has confirmed Thai police have arrested a 30-year-old Australian man under the emergency decree used to end almost two months of Red Shirt protests in Bangkok.

The man has been identified as Conor David Purcell, an ex-soldier working in Bangkok as a language teacher.

Purcell was arrested at his apartment complex in the city on Sunday and appeared in court on Monday charged with immigration offences.

He has already been convicted of overstaying his visa.

Thai authorities say he incited unrest while speaking from the stage of the Red Shirt protest camp on two occasions.

Bangkok's Kom Chad Luek newspaper is quoting police sources as saying he served for seven years in the Australian Army and had received sniper training.

Thai media is reporting he is being questioned about possible involvement in last week's violence that left more than 50 people dead and hundreds injured.

Purcell is receiving consular assistance from the Australian Embassy.

He has been charged under Thailand's emergency decree - a charge which can result in a two-year jail

prob get away with it

[SomTumTiger]

"They" and "them" are undefined pronouns. It is imperative to discover exactly who these persons are, and where their loyalties are aimed towards. Whoever burned down the buildings should be punished severely. But the process involved in exacting the answer to this is what I am on about. On the one hand, a lot of "red" haters say the majority of these people were here because they were being paid. If so, then that makes them hooligans, and not legitimate "red" sympathizers unless they take an oath on it.

So the "red" haters are being double-minded when they say on the one hand that the people are just here because they are getting money, and on the other hand, they are hard-core "red" terrorists and should be strung up or jailed, etc. So, what's it gonna' be?

Does the government have the excuse to order soldiers to put a bullet in the head of an unarmed man conducting an interview on TV. That is cold blooded, premeditated murder; no matter how you slice it or dice it. How simple of you to summarily dismiss such alarming issues such as this, and others that the government carried out, and subsequently made a very peaceful solution become impossible to solve without acting out the very same sort of violence that the government was preaching against.

In your first paragraph you urge people to refrain from rushing to any hasty conclusions about the identity of certain guilty parties from the red side, and in your last paragraph you very confidently assert without hesitation acts that you have decided the government are guilty of.

[TAWP]

Thai wife told me tonight

her sistar tell her that the Government told the soldiers to burn Central shopping centre

She knows this as 2 soldiers who did it told her

The reason

Wait for it

They let the Red shirts use their toilets

Is there any end to the bullshxt they will try to spread to make themselves look like a peaceful protest

As seen on twitter, rumours are going around the red fans by word of mouth that the government put hundreds of protesters in the basement before they put the central world on fire...and the nightly curfews are there to allow them to sneak out the evidence of the mass murder.

Makes sense. It is the only explanation, besides extreme stupidity, for the Abhisit govt to disarm the fire suppression system before the final assault on Rajaprasong.

Atleast your bias is clear.

[SiangDeeMahk]

Thai wife told me tonight

her sistar tell her that the Government told the soldiers to burn Central shopping centre

She knows this as 2 soldiers who did it told her

The reason

Wait for it

They let the Red shirts use their toilets

Is there any end to the bullshxt they will try to spread to make themselves look like a peaceful protest

As seen on twitter, rumours are going around the red fans by word of mouth that the government put hundreds of protesters in the basement before they put the central world on fire...and the nightly curfews are there to allow them to sneak out the evidence of the mass murder.

Right.

As if even one single story has hit either local, national, or international TV and/or electronic media, detailng (what would have to be hundreds of) missing persons reports filed with the police (yes, with the widely Red supporting police, who would be glad to help the Red cause), made by a thousand+ people on behalf of those "hundreds?!?" of missing Redshirt protesters, (now) a week after they (should have) returned home (on free busses) from Bangkok???

I'll tell ya'll; somm'a da peoples 'round here r'about'uz dumb azz'a bag of hammers, and so slow to catch on; it'ed take 'em 'bout 2 hours tuh watch a 60 minute show.. get what I'm saying at..?

The other problem is, some of these country-folk seem to get busier than a one eyed cat watchin 3 mice holes, with this gossip/rumour/conspiracy nonsense.

Edited May 26, 2010 by SiangDeeMahk

[SPIKECM]

anyone got that youtube link which has translation written on the screen regarding what the red leaders were saying? it has thaksin also. it was posted already but i can't find it again..

[Valentine]

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!

He made an offer to hold an early election along with the roadmap which the reds initially accepted but then back tracked for some reason & started making more demands. At this stage Mr A withdrew his offer while the reds continued with their hate & incite to violence speeches.

[hyperdimension]

anyone got that youtube link which has translation written on the screen regarding what the red leaders were saying? it has thaksin also. it was posted already but i can't find it again..

Do you mean this one:

Does anyone know where I can find the video of the government television announcement with subtitles that also showed the clips of the leaders inciting arson and looting? I saw it on television when it was broadcasted, but I'd like to watch it again and have a record of it.

Are the government television announcements available to download or view anywhere on the internet? Is there an official web site that archives the video announcements?

Edited May 27, 2010 by hyperdimension

[hyperdimension]

Does anyone know where I can find the video of the government television announcement with subtitles that also showed the clips of the leaders inciting arson and looting?

I managed to find it on youtube. They start showing the video clips that incite arson and looting near the end of the first part. Some of the clips have not been widely seen on this forum, such as one in which Veera speaks (who most seem to consider as a "moderate") and says "every inch of Thailand will be engulfed in flame".

I would still like to know if there is a complete collection of government television announcements that are available to view or download on the internet.

Edited May 27, 2010 by hyperdimension

[animatic]

...

Blah blah blah

Come off it animatic. I do not want to start a relationship here and pick out curtains with you, but please please don't start off with a smart-mouthed, and disrespectful comment towards another poster, and then come back - after they get upset - with a bunch of jabberwocky about your accomplishments. And then go on to further discredit the poster. Forgive me for not bowing to your accomplishments, because when you use them as a bludgeon you lose that respect instantly.

What you achieved and what you know has no influence with the investigation and the evidence gathering tactics that the authorities happened to gather (and questionable tactics at best when compared to the norm around here). What you achieved and what you know has nothing to do with what there is to examine; and since you are not the one conducting the investigations (yes?) and you do not have your hands on the evidence that was gathered, I trust that your word on this matter is just as objective as the others. To flaunt your past accomplishments and discredit my opinions is again not being original.

You seem like a knowledgeable person, and I respect that part, but sometimes one can get so far ahead of the pack that their only satisfaction is in self-congratulations only.

...

Anyways, I am glad it seems to be all over; for now anyway. I hope no one minds my opinions or cheek.

Of course you narrow the reply down to an irrelevancy and ignore the real discussion.

Tangential deflection. And attempt to diminish the poster...

while you try and accuse of the same.

The ability to tell an edit from non-edit is

quite germain to the validity of these videos as sources.

I can tell the ones I have seen that are edited,

seems you can't, but that doesn't lessen the factual validity of the videos.

Stating a professional ability to make a judgment is not a bludgeon,

unless you are threatened by professional abilities in others.

Such as a defense lawyer needing to discredit a consulting professional in a court of law.

Originality is not a necessity, but ascertaining fact is.

I will not be judge and jury, but neither will you.

If you don't know the capabilities of current technology,

then you can't tell if it's legitimate or not,

so maybe better to stay silent.

Oh yes,

you reduced a quote from me to something that was NEVER SAID: 'Blah blah blah'.

Changing a posters quote without ellipses and adding content not originally there

is against forum rules. Not that I am perfectly in the rules 24/7

[yoshiwara]

My best answer would be some "asiatic-looking" people; and not to seem racist, yet merely to make a point.

So, because they don't understand that the current government is as legitimate as the Thaksin, Samak, and Somchai governments, that gives them the excuse to burn down buildings?

"They" and "them" are undefined pronouns. It is imperative to discover exactly who these persons are, and where their loyalties are aimed towards. Whoever burned down the buildings should be punished severely. But the process involved in exacting the answer to this is what I am on about. On the one hand, a lot of "red" haters say the majority of these people were here because they were being paid. If so, then that makes them hooligans, and not legitimate "red" sympathizers unless they take an oath on it.

So the "red" haters are being double-minded when they say on the one hand that the people are just here because they are getting money, and on the other hand, they are hard-core "red" terrorists and should be strung up or jailed, etc. So, what's it gonna' be?

Does the government have the excuse to order soldiers to put a bullet in the head of an unarmed man conducting an interview on TV. That is cold blooded, premeditated murder; no matter how you slice it or dice it. How simple of you to summarily dismiss such alarming issues such as this, and others that the government carried out, and subsequently made a very peaceful solution become impossible to solve without acting out the very same sort of violence that the government was preaching against.

It almost makes the casual observer wonder why all this hatred and animosity towards Thai nationals who happen to disagree with a government that questionably stepped over the line; at least a percentage of the world thought so, and politely offered assistance. Making the "reds" into terrorists, and bogeymen is simply a cowards way out of dealing with human beings in a civilized fashion. It's funny, but the threads here regarding soi dogs exact more sympathy for the feral dogs than people express here for the "red terrorists".

Blah blah blah

Come off it animatic. I do not want to start a relationship here and pick out curtains with you, but please please don't start off with a smart-mouthed, and disrespectful comment towards another poster, and then come back - after they get upset - with a bunch of jabberwocky about your accomplishments. And then go on to further discredit the poster. Forgive me for not bowing to your accomplishments, because when you use them as a bludgeon you lose that respect instantly.

What you achieved and what you know has no influence with the investigation and the evidence gathering tactics that the authorities happened to gather (and questionable tactics at best when compared to the norm around here). What you achieved and what you know has nothing to do with what there is to examine; and since you are not the one conducting the investigations (yes?) and you do not have your hands on the evidence that was gathered, I trust that your word on this matter is just as objective as the others. To flaunt your past accomplishments and discredit my opinions is again not being original.

You seem like a knowledgeable person, and I respect that part, but sometimes one can get so far ahead of the pack that their only satisfaction is in self-congratulations only.

Obfuscate: to be evasive, unclear, or confusing

You can throw a whole slew of convoluted phrases at the issue, trying to dilute the gravity of what they did, but you can't change what's plain to see: SOME OF THE REDS RIOTED, AND BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS.

Some advocate blind leniency for the arsonists. I say fine them and put them behind bars for a long time.

Well, brahmburgers, I am glad that what you see is the absolute truth. You sure do seem to know for certain that these perpetrators are guilty. But guilty of what; hooliganism, or terrorism? And remember that terrorism is the new excuse by governments to perpetuate an endless and impossible war and genocide on anyone they deem as the enemy (translated: anyone who has something that that government wants for its own). A terrorist is really the bogeyman, an invisible enemy hiding under our beds, so that we stay afraid like little children, and let the governments take care of us after we give up all of our freedoms.

I will agree with you if you could only undeniably verify that these individuals that you are singling out are in fact "reds" (whatever that new and undefined definition comes out to), and that they were indeed acting on direct orders from the "red" bosses and not anything else, such a simple hooliganism, etc. I doubt that this movement is that structured and that loyalties run that deep; as deep as, say, a military sniper. Again, it is intersting that these buildings were ripe for the pickings, and that a few country bumpkins with petrol cans (terrorists, mind you) could progress their damage over a length of time without ever being noticed, detained, or shot in the head.

Just because soldiers are all dressed in matching uniforms, and they appear to act in unison, does not exclude their behaviors from the same discerning eyes that you all are singling the "reds' out for. I am simply on about the methods and the manner in which the results are achieved, and a lot of opinions in between.

Anyways, I am glad it seems to be all over; for now anyway. I hope no one minds my opinions or cheek.

Looks like a red cheerleader with a Third in law chancing his arm.

Let us recap.

Readers should throw their minds back to the red violence in Songkran 2009.

After the violence was discredited, Thaksin lied and denied that it was the reds who organised the violence.

Thaksin said it was fake reds.

The key point here is that he lied and continues to lie about this event.

....

Now push your minds forward to the Bangkok burnings.

The reds openly said they were going to do it.

They did it.

But Thaksin failed in his political objectives.

Just like Songkran 2009.

And like Songkran 2009 he is faced with his red movement discredited by their violence.

So what to do?

Lie, lie and lie again.

The first effort was to suggest that the violence was caused by only 1% of reds who were misguided youth.

The second step was to suggest that since the violence discredited the reds, they surely would not do it.

(Yes, good one eh?)

The third step is to provide meally-mouthed obfuscation like our ersatz coffee friend here.

You can be sure that the only regret the forum red cheerleaders including our new friend have is that the Bangkok burning did not succeed.

That Thaksin's reds attacked the working people of Bangkok and continue with their lying and dissembling.

Is proof enough that continued vigilance against both the thugs and their warblers is required.

The one above included.

[JetsetBkk]

...

Blah blah blah

Come off it animatic.

<snip>

Of course

<snip>

Oh yes,

you reduced a quote from me to something that was NEVER SAID: 'Blah blah blah'.

Changing a posters quote without ellipses and adding content not originally there

is against forum rules. Not that I am perfectly in the rules 24/7

Yes, I wasted so much time looking for "Blah, blah, blah" in your post, Animatic.

I can't believe you're wasting time quoting rules about such a trivial matter. Do you think any reader of this forum believed for a second that you actually wrote "Blah, blah, blah"?

By the way, you didn't write "<snip>" either.

[JetsetBkk]

I will comment on only a couple of points raised, which means I have little objection to the rest:

<snip>

The first effort was to suggest that the violence was caused by only 1% of reds who were misguided youth.

Of course it was only a minority. You do your cause no good by exaggerating.

Whether you call 30 or 40 years olds "youths" or not is up to you. They were certainly misguided, if not brainwashed and incensed into violence. For that, the leadership and maybe free Lao Khao must be blamed.

<snip>

You can be sure that the only regret the forum red cheerleaders including our new friend have is that the Bangkok burning did not succeed.

<snip>

Pity. You think all red "cheerleaders" think the same? You are wrong, you know it, so why write it?