Security Tightened As Red Shirt Rallies Return To Bangkok

[george]

Security Tightened as Red Shirt Rallies Return to Bangkok

File photo

Anti-government Red Shirt protesters are set to return to the streets of the Thai capital next week, with security forces instructed to ‘tightly monitor’ the situation, while following the terms of the emergency decree, according to Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban.

BANGKOK: -- Following reports that the ‘Red Sunday’ group of anti-government protesters have organised several demonstrations over 12-19th of September officials and concerned security agencies met to discuss the issue on Friday. The rallies will mark the first significant organised movement of Red Shirt protesters since the violent and destructive May 19 end to a 10-week long standoff with authorities in the heart of Bangkok.

During the meeting of the Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) on Friday, Mr. Thaugsuban, acting in his position at the head of the government agency, urged the close monitoring of impending anti-government gatherings, assigning Bangkok Metropolitan Police to oversee the September 12-19 events with significant reinforcement from the First Army Regiment.

In the first of four planned gatherings over the next week, the Red Sunday Group and aligned supporters on Sunday the 12th will stage a bicycle ride from the King Rama VI Monument through Ratchaprasong Intersection, Din Daeng Intersection past Victory Monument along the Phayathai Road before returning to Lumpini Park. The event is being held as a mark of respect for those that died in this years violent April/May confrontations.

September 17th will see the Red Sunday Group and the ‘June 24th’ Group combine in a flower laying ceremony at prisons nationwide and at the Metropolitan Police Station Headquarters in Bangkok.

Starting on the 18th of September, until the 19th, a motorcade of some 50 vehicles will travel from Bangkok’s Imperial World Department Store to the northern Thai province of Chiang Mai, where numerous ceremonies and events will take place to mark the fourth anniversary of the 2006 coup to oust Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Considered an iconic figure of the Red Shirts political movement, various other ceremonies to mark the important occasion will be staged nationwide, including at the Ratchaprasong Intersection in Bangkok.

Colonel Songpon Watthanachai (Bangkok Metropolitan Police Deputy Commander and spokesman) revealed that anti-riot police and specialist investigators will be deployed at the rally sites to maintain order, while rapid response units and army reinforcements will be on hand, should there be a requirement.

Despite the considerable attention be attributed to the situation, new National Police Chief General Wichean Potephosree stated that there had been no reports of any planned violence, noting the security measures being undertaken as a mere precautionary tactic.

Gen. Potephosree urged police to apply all appropriate laws to the protesters, while asking participants in the events to remain peaceful and abide by the instructions of authorities. “Violations of the concerned laws and/or the emergency decree in place on the capital will be punished appropriately,” according to the Gen. Potephosree.

Meanwhile, CRES officials also discussed the recent spate of grenade/bomb blasts and threats being carried out in Bangkok and several neighbouring provinces. The talks came on Friday; merely hours after five grenades were fired into a military compound in the northern Thai province of Chiang Mai. No injuries were reported in the incident, were the grenades landed on a ceremonial lawn of the facility.

Following the Chiang Mai attacks and numerous situations in the Thai capital over the last 2-months, Deputy PM Thaugsuban maintained that all possible and appropriate security measures were already in place to help prevent such attacks, although he admitted it was almost an impossible task to stop those actively seeking to cause terror.

The controversial emergency decree, recently lifted in the northern province, is allegedly not being considered in response to the most recent attacks according to numerous government sources including Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

-- Pattaya Daily News 2010-09-12

[george]

PM says it's fine for red shirts to stage symbolic protest at Rajprasong

BANGKOK: -- Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said Sunday that the red-shirt protesters could tie red ribbons at the Rajprasong Intersection on September 19 as their symbolic protest against the coup four years ago.

Abhisit said during his weekly TV programme that it would be fine for the red-shirt people to do stage the symbolic protest if they do not cause trouble to other people.

-- The Nation 2010-09-12

[Fookhaht]

I thought the Emergency Decree included a ban on political gatherings of 5 or more?

The government is starting down the same slippery slope that led to violence in both April and May of this year. The reds have already proven that they will take advantage of any government tolerance or hesitation to act decisively.

My, how memories quickly fade around here!

Edited September 12, 2010 by Fookhaht

[letitbe]

[These people are like some monster in a horror movie. They get beaten and killed many times only to rise up again from the deep. The leaders are evil nasty people who’s only thought is how they can get more for themselves and it is sad how so many poor are brainwashed into thinking they care one bit for the plight of the poor. They have proved themselves to be extremely violent and willing to destroy anything if they can in their way. And please don’t say yellows are as bad. During yellows protests I don’t think their was one serious injury let alone deaths. No serious harm was done to property and their was no great intimidation of people. Ok the airport was shut for 2 weeks, so what airports have been shut for long periods in lots of places. I can only hope for sake of Thai people and my Thia family that this monster is finally defeated and then maybe just maybe some party who really care about poor will rise up and peacefully effect change without being in it solely for good of one person and his minions. I doubt it, so the best of bunch at moment sadly is current government and I wish them well in dealing with this menace. Thai people have lived with corruption as a system for centuries which does not make it right but if the likes of Mr T ever get their way the real danger is a repeat of what has happened in Zimbabwie, Iraq and many other places. Of course by the time it is obvious that has happened it will take decades if ever for Thai society to ever recover. I am thankful that the army can and will and has acted to prevent total dictatorship even if this is at cost of a high degree of corruption. I wish forangs would stop trying to compare Thailand with their idea of how perfect west is.

[schmutzie]

If I'm not mistaken, these reassurances by the Police and CRES sound all too familiar, including the availability of "rapid response units".

I hope they somehow have the organisers tied down with huge legal and financial liabilities should this thing get out of hand.

I don't actually know what to say. Does anyone in Thailand have some original ideas or are we just gonna go on with the same soap opera?

[schmutzie]

I thought the Emergency Decree included a ban on political gatherings of 5 or more?

Exactly. They're making it up as they go along.

[Fookhaht]

I thought the Emergency Decree included a ban on political gatherings of 5 or more?

The government is starting down the same slippery slope that led to violence in both April and May of this year. The reds have already proven that they will take advantage of any government tolerance or hesitation to act decisively.

My, how memories quickly fade around here!

Don't get me wrong: I'm a firm believer in free speech and the right to protest. It's just the ability and will of the "protectors of the public" I'm worried about.

[wintermute]

I wonder how many foreign journalists are going to get sniped by each side this time around?

[domprz]

[These people are like some monster in a horror movie. They get beaten and killed many times only to rise up again from the deep. The leaders are evil nasty people who’s only thought is how they can get more for themselves and it is sad how so many poor are brainwashed into thinking they care one bit for the plight of the poor. They have proved themselves to be extremely violent and willing to destroy anything if they can in their way. And please don’t say yellows are as bad. During yellows protests I don’t think their was one serious injury let alone deaths. No serious harm was done to property and their was no great intimidation of people. Ok the airport was shut for 2 weeks, so what airports have been shut for long periods in lots of places. I can only hope for sake of Thai people and my Thia family that this monster is finally defeated and then maybe just maybe some party who really care about poor will rise up and peacefully effect change without being in it solely for good of one person and his minions. I doubt it, so the best of bunch at moment sadly is current government and I wish them well in dealing with this menace. Thai people have lived with corruption as a system for centuries which does not make it right but if the likes of Mr T ever get their way the real danger is a repeat of what has happened in Zimbabwie, Iraq and many other places. Of course by the time it is obvious that has happened it will take decades if ever for Thai society to ever recover. I am thankful that the army can and will and has acted to prevent total dictatorship even if this is at cost of a high degree of corruption. I wish forangs would stop trying to compare Thailand with their idea of how perfect west is.

The Thai government has more tolerance within emergency law than most Western governments have without a state of emergency - I respect that. As for corruption - I measure it by the amount a government costs me. Compare the tax burdens here against those imposed in the West where tax prosecutions outnumber all others combined. Thinly veiled protection money, whether legalised or not is still corruption in my view.

[idiot farang]

am i the only one who thinks that these 'protests' are going to be a huge failure for the reds? recall that as things wore on in april and may the #'s that turned out dropped to a trickle. then a few hand fulls set fire to building- yes, i know. but the reality as i witnessed was, imo, the movement was dying out and but for a few thousand die hards with nowhere to go. everyone else had already pretty much packed it in when the govt. 'dispersed' the remainder.

i just don't think they're going to have much of a turnout anywhere and it will reveal the lack of vocal support remaining (i realize most outside of bkk agree with the reds, but the # of those Thai's who are willing to disrupt their lives to actively protest seems pretty small at this point.

without some sort of catalyst to REALLY bring out the masses, i see this thing dying out but for the militant wing which will try to wreak some havoc here and there, but not enough to bring about any sort of change. they should have taken the govt's deal of elections when they had it. now, they're a fringe group at best imo.

[Fookhaht]

The Thai government has more tolerance within emergency law than most Western governments have without a state of emergency - I respect that.

And look how Thailand has suffered as a result! Billions of baht in lost revenue from airport closures, lives lost in two violent-ridden Bangkok protests within the year, tourist visits plunging and Thai tour operators/resorts going out of business, etc.

I'm glad you respect that. I don't. I think it's shooting oneself in the foot.

[Fookhaht]

am i the only one who thinks that these 'protests' are going to be a huge failure for the reds? recall that as things wore on in april and may the #'s that turned out dropped to a trickle. then a few hand fulls set fire to building- yes, i know. but the reality as i witnessed was, imo, the movement was dying out and but for a few thousand die hards with nowhere to go. everyone else had already pretty much packed it in when the govt. 'dispersed' the remainder.

i just don't think they're going to have much of a turnout anywhere and it will reveal the lack of vocal support remaining (i realize most outside of bkk agree with the reds, but the # of those Thai's who are willing to disrupt their lives to actively protest seems pretty small at this point.

without some sort of catalyst to REALLY bring out the masses, i see this thing dying out but for the militant wing which will try to wreak some havoc here and there, but not enough to bring about any sort of change. they should have taken the govt's deal of elections when they had it. now, they're a fringe group at best imo.

I think most of us are hoping and praying you are right!

[Thai at Heart]

When will they realise that half enforcement of the law is what has got successive governments into trouble for the last 5 years with these protests. It has escalated from protesting here and there, to taking airports, or a few thousand sitting in a street, to eventually setting up barricades, arming themselves and street warfare.

Enforce the law or don't. If the law doesn't work or is overly or insufficiently strong then change it. But history has shown that to negotiate about the enforcement of a law means that people become progressively more and more daring and eventually flout it completely. If the authorities can't be bothered to enforce the "letter" of laws they have created, what is the point in having them.

No one minds peaceful assembly, but the SOE is in, so enforce the SOE. If you don't like the SOE law, modify it.

[ramrod711]

am i the only one who thinks that these 'protests' are going to be a huge failure for the reds? recall that as things wore on in april and may the #'s that turned out dropped to a trickle. then a few hand fulls set fire to building- yes, i know. but the reality as i witnessed was, imo, the movement was dying out and but for a few thousand die hards with nowhere to go. everyone else had already pretty much packed it in when the govt. 'dispersed' the remainder.

i just don't think they're going to have much of a turnout anywhere and it will reveal the lack of vocal support remaining (i realize most outside of bkk agree with the reds, but the # of those Thai's who are willing to disrupt their lives to actively protest seems pretty small at this point.

without some sort of catalyst to REALLY bring out the masses, i see this thing dying out but for the militant wing which will try to wreak some havoc here and there, but not enough to bring about any sort of change. they should have taken the govt's deal of elections when they had it. now, they're a fringe group at best imo.

I think most of us are hoping and praying you are right!

[ballpoint]

One thing that has puzzled me is where have all the red flags gone? Back in April and May they were being flown at many motorbike taxi spots, the one outside Robinson Sukhumvit being a good example, and red rags were tied to the aerials of many taxis. The pro red posters here were using them to argue that the movement had the support of half the city. And now where have they gone? Surely anyone flying the flag because they truly believed in the movement would still do so? The government hasn't declared it illegal. Or were they all just being paid to fly them? When the money stopped, the flags came crashing down, just like the "majority of the country support them" myth. And, for all the conspiracy theorists out there, is it any coincidence that 16 million baht was rather easily stolen from a money truck a week before this event is due to take place? If the red flags come out again we'll know that the money has started flowing again too.

...a motorcade of some 50 vehicles will travel from Bangkok's Imperial World Department Store to the northern Thai province of Chiang Mai...

Now why is it that if I were the owner of Imperial World I would be paying a large group of security guards to stand out front and forcibly remove anyone waving a red banner or picture of Thaksin? Oh yes, it's because I wouldn't want my shop to be burned down by this pack of terrorists. But then again, going by their "million man march" propaganda, the 50 vehicle parade will probably turn out to be a rollerskating fake monk accompanied by a lost tuk tuk driver, complete with scammed farang passengers.

Edited September 12, 2010 by ballpoint

[domprz]

The Thai government has more tolerance within emergency law than most Western governments have without a state of emergency - I respect that.

And look how Thailand has suffered as a result! Billions of baht in lost revenue from airport closures, lives lost in two violent-ridden Bangkok protests within the year, tourist visits plunging and Thai tour operators/resorts going out of business, etc.

I'm glad you respect that. I don't. I think it's shooting oneself in the foot.

To suppress dissent drives it underground and makes it more violent. The Thai economy has grown by 12% over the last year.

[ramrod711]

i believe that actions speak louder than words, these people have already shown that they will not hesitate to resort to violence and destruction of property. i think it is a mistake to let them hold rallies, they should be governed by the rules pertaining to emergency law.

[Thai at Heart]

What the authorities seem to lack is a way of breaking up a "peaceful" rally when it becomes a persistent public order offence.

In and of itself, it cannot be right to sit in a public highway ad infinitum. But what plans do the authorities have other than to resort to bullets?

[ballpoint]

What the authorities seem to lack is a way of breaking up a "peaceful" rally when it becomes a persistent public order offence.

In and of itself, it cannot be right to sit in a public highway ad infinitum. But what plans do the authorities have other than to resort to bullets?

Probably similar to how Western governments deal with "peaceful" rallies: water cannon, tear gas, baton charges, physically dragging them away. The bullets come out when the "peaceful" rally starts shooting.

[Fookhaht]

The Thai government has more tolerance within emergency law than most Western governments have without a state of emergency - I respect that.

And look how Thailand has suffered as a result! Billions of baht in lost revenue from airport closures, lives lost in two violent-ridden Bangkok protests within the year, tourist visits plunging and Thai tour operators/resorts going out of business, etc.

I'm glad you respect that. I don't. I think it's shooting oneself in the foot.

To suppress dissent drives it underground and makes it more violent. The Thai economy has grown by 12% over the last year.

So the alternative: let the protesters openly run amok: burning, looting, etc. is your preferable choice? And you give credit to that for the 12% growth? Your logic dumbfounds me...

Edited September 12, 2010 by Fookhaht

[Fookhaht]

What the authorities seem to lack is a way of breaking up a "peaceful" rally when it becomes a persistent public order offence.

In and of itself, it cannot be right to sit in a public highway ad infinitum. But what plans do the authorities have other than to resort to bullets?

Probably similar to how Western governments deal with "peaceful" rallies: water cannon, tear gas, baton charges, physically dragging them away. The bullets come out when the "peaceful" rally starts shooting.

I've personally observed two historical cases of civil unrest in the West: Berkeley "People's Park" riots in the late 1960's, and the WTO riots in Seattle (1999?). Both were effectively handled by the means you mention, and property damage as well as loss of life was kept to a minimum. I just can't understand the Thai authority's approach of "nothing" or "let it all loose!"

[domprz]

The Thai government has more tolerance within emergency law than most Western governments have without a state of emergency - I respect that.

And look how Thailand has suffered as a result! Billions of baht in lost revenue from airport closures, lives lost in two violent-ridden Bangkok protests within the year, tourist visits plunging and Thai tour operators/resorts going out of business, etc.

I'm glad you respect that. I don't. I think it's shooting oneself in the foot.

To suppress dissent drives it underground and makes it more violent. The Thai economy has grown by 12% over the last year.

So the alternative: let the protesters openly run amok: burning, looting, etc. is your preferable choice? And you give credit to that for the 12% growth? Your logic dumbfounds me...

I prefer to allow protest unless it becomes violent. The 12% growth was merely to put the financial effect of the previous (regrettably violent) protests into a broader perspective. If peaceful protest is made illegal then an important barrier between passive and violent protest is removed.

[ballpoint]

What the authorities seem to lack is a way of breaking up a "peaceful" rally when it becomes a persistent public order offence.

In and of itself, it cannot be right to sit in a public highway ad infinitum. But what plans do the authorities have other than to resort to bullets?

Probably similar to how Western governments deal with "peaceful" rallies: water cannon, tear gas, baton charges, physically dragging them away. The bullets come out when the "peaceful" rally starts shooting.

I've personally observed two historical cases of civil unrest in the West: Berkeley "People's Park" riots in the late 1960's, and the WTO riots in Seattle (1999?). Both were effectively handled by the means you mention, and property damage as well as loss of life was kept to a minimum. I just can't understand the Thai authority's approach of "nothing" or "let it all loose!"

I agree with you in wondering why it was allowed to go on so long before any attempt was made to break it up, although there were a number of very publically made threats coming from the red leaders about what would happen to anyone who tried to do so. No doubt this influenced the decision. The reds also engaged in delaying tactics, such as their phoney peace talks. The government is also not given any credit for the fact that, by waiting so long, the number of protestors shrunk markedly from 10's of thousands to thousands, and many of the day trippers out for a free feed and a bit of entertainment had stopped attending. I must also ask was there an organised group of armed people shooting at the riot control police in either of your examples? I'd imagine a policeman carrying a perspex shield and a wooden baton wouldn't be too happy to be shot at, and an armed policeman standing on the edge wouldn't be too happy at seeing his colleagues killed by gun fire. The red protests were also a little different from civil riots in that, following any dispersal by water cannon or tear gas, they had the leadership structure and financial support to just regroup at some other location.

[Fookhaht]

And look how Thailand has suffered as a result! Billions of baht in lost revenue from airport closures, lives lost in two violent-ridden Bangkok protests within the year, tourist visits plunging and Thai tour operators/resorts going out of business, etc.

I'm glad you respect that. I don't. I think it's shooting oneself in the foot.

To suppress dissent drives it underground and makes it more violent. The Thai economy has grown by 12% over the last year.

So the alternative: let the protesters openly run amok: burning, looting, etc. is your preferable choice? And you give credit to that for the 12% growth? Your logic dumbfounds me...

I prefer to allow protest unless it becomes violent. The 12% growth was merely to put the financial effect of the previous (regrettably violent) protests into a broader perspective. If peaceful protest is made illegal then an important barrier between passive and violent protest is removed.

If you read my particular posts carefully, I'm not advocating banning legal protests.

I think most on here are concerned about the government's waffling of the rules under the SoE, and the inability to contain a protest once it turns violent. We've had several major failures of the "system" in just a short span of time, and people are justifiably jittery. Can you blame them?

[BKKjohan]

So next week they will tie red ribbons to remember the death next to the shopping mall they burned down?

*corrected spelling mistake*

Edited September 12, 2010 by BKKjohan

[Thai at Heart]

I agree with you in wondering why it was allowed to go on so long before any attempt was made to break it up, although there were a number of very publically made threats coming from the red leaders about what would happen to anyone who tried to do so. No doubt this influenced the decision. The reds also engaged in delaying tactics, such as their phoney peace talks. The government is also not given any credit for the fact that, by waiting so long, the number of protestors shrunk markedly from 10's of thousands to thousands, and many of the day trippers out for a free feed and a bit of entertainment had stopped attending. I must also ask was there an organised group of armed people shooting at the riot control police in either of your examples? I'd imagine a policeman carrying a perspex shield and a wooden baton wouldn't be too happy to be shot at, and an armed policeman standing on the edge wouldn't be too happy at seeing his colleagues killed by gun fire. The red protests were also a little different from civil riots in that, following any dispersal by water cannon or tear gas, they had the leadership structure and financial support to just regroup at some other location.

Whilst it is probable that the numbers involved were reduced by waiting so long, the complete inactivity to prevent the reds or yellows setting up their own mini city is part of the problem. If the 'get together' is deemed illegal, delivering supplies to it should be too. Most of the barricades that the reds set up required hundreds of tyres and masses of bamboo? This was delivered for days and days with no apparent effort to stop it at the beginning. All of the stages needed scaffolds, electrical power, people to put it together.

To have set up what the reds and the yellows did took massive logistical efforts and yet the authorities did nothing. It is a right to sit down or stand up and protest, it isn't a right to set Woodstock behind your own private barricades.

Maybe this is covered by laws that allow pooyais to put up tents in the road whenever they want a party at the house.

[hagler]

I have just returned from a few days in Chiang Mai. On 2 separate days whilst buying goods in Wororat Markets we listened to 2 different policeman lecturing the street traders on "the false promises made by Abhisit about holding an election in November". There were a lot of nodding heads...

[Fookhaht]

What the authorities seem to lack is a way of breaking up a "peaceful" rally when it becomes a persistent public order offence.

In and of itself, it cannot be right to sit in a public highway ad infinitum. But what plans do the authorities have other than to resort to bullets?

Probably similar to how Western governments deal with "peaceful" rallies: water cannon, tear gas, baton charges, physically dragging them away. The bullets come out when the "peaceful" rally starts shooting.

I've personally observed two historical cases of civil unrest in the West: Berkeley "People's Park" riots in the late 1960's, and the WTO riots in Seattle (1999?). Both were effectively handled by the means you mention, and property damage as well as loss of life was kept to a minimum. I just can't understand the Thai authority's approach of "nothing" or "let it all loose!"

I agree with you in wondering why it was allowed to go on so long before any attempt was made to break it up, although there were a number of very publically made threats coming from the red leaders about what would happen to anyone who tried to do so. No doubt this influenced the decision. The reds also engaged in delaying tactics, such as their phoney peace talks. The government is also not given any credit for the fact that, by waiting so long, the number of protestors shrunk markedly from 10's of thousands to thousands, and many of the day trippers out for a free feed and a bit of entertainment had stopped attending. I must also ask was there an organised group of armed people shooting at the riot control police in either of your examples? I'd imagine a policeman carrying a perspex shield and a wooden baton wouldn't be too happy to be shot at, and an armed policeman standing on the edge wouldn't be too happy at seeing his colleagues killed by gun fire. The red protests were also a little different from civil riots in that, following any dispersal by water cannon or tear gas, they had the leadership structure and financial support to just regroup at some other location.

Astute observations. The differentiation you make is well-taken. In the civil disturbances I witnessed---just a lot of rocks and bricks thrown from the protesters' sides.

Edited September 12, 2010 by Fookhaht

[IAMSOBAD]

People came to Bkk to protest and some were killed.

So to honor them Jatuporn and the other leaders order them back to Bkk. To start trouble and get killed.

Same action and same results is the definition of a Retard.

[rheinwiese]

...a motorcade of some 50 vehicles will travel from Bangkok's Imperial World Department Store to the northern Thai province of Chiang Mai...

..Now why is it that if I were the owner of Imperial World I would be paying a large group of security guards to stand out front and forcibly remove anyone waving a red banner or picture of Thaksin?

The Imperial owners has nothing to fear. Mr. T's friends!

They are Red Shirt to the core.

There is even a red shirt office in Imperial Samrong.