Red Shirt Faction Leader Warns Some Red Shirts May Become Suicide Bombers

[whybother]

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The Democrats currently have the support of the smaller coalition parties (as TRT - once - and PPP did when they formed government).

At the next election, why would the support change from what the Democrats have now?

[bulmercke]

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The Democrats currently have the support of the smaller coalition parties (as TRT - once - and PPP did when they formed government).

At the next election, why would the support change from what the Democrats have now?

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties. The Democrats won't be so lucky in the next election - that's if there is one -

Also since the last election the coup and the suppression of the Red-Shirts is also bound to increase the Peua Thai (PPP) vote.

[SergeiY]

Even in communist Russia some dissidents stayed alive to tell their story, why should it not be possible under the Thai Yuri Andropov?

As for the Russia link, I don't think it is related. Here in Thailand almost all 'dissidents' stayed alive. Only some militants died including the renegade general. Also some protesters who didn't want to disperse, really innocent bystanders, some army personel, a few policemen. Thai Y. Andropov? Didn't know Thailand had something like a KGB, also no president of a polit bureau. No known Thai person can be matched, or it should be one of the UDD leaders, some had their base training in Vietnam in the 70's.

Andropov was a much misunderstood leader ...

[rubl]

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The Democrats currently have the support of the smaller coalition parties (as TRT - once - and PPP did when they formed government).

At the next election, why would the support change from what the Democrats have now?

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties. The Democrats won't be so lucky in the next election - that's if there is one -

Also since the last election the coup and the suppression of the Red-Shirts is also bound to increase the Peua Thai (PPP) vote.

'the largest majority' is logically incorrect, If there is, there is only ONE majority. In the 2007 General Elections out of 480 MP's PPP got 232, Dem's 169, Chart Thai 37, Puea Pandin 24 and a bunch of smaller ones. PPP had the most MP's, but no majority, they needed to form a coalition and did so with k. Samak selected as PM.

As for what party may grow in the next election, sorry, crystal ball on the blink again.

[rubl]

Even in communist Russia some dissidents stayed alive to tell their story, why should it not be possible under the Thai Yuri Andropov?

As for the Russia link, I don't think it is related. Here in Thailand almost all 'dissidents' stayed alive. Only some militants died including the renegade general. Also some protesters who didn't want to disperse, really innocent bystanders, some army personel, a few policemen. Thai Y. Andropov? Didn't know Thailand had something like a KGB, also no president of a polit bureau. No known Thai person can be matched, or it should be one of the UDD leaders, some had their base training in Vietnam in the 70's.

Andropov was a much misunderstood leader ...

In this I'm willing to accept your judgment, Sergei Y.

[SergeiY]

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The Democrats currently have the support of the smaller coalition parties (as TRT - once - and PPP did when they formed government).

At the next election, why would the support change from what the Democrats have now?

Easy answer.

Because Abhisit is such a much misunderstood leader. Many people don't get it.

He couldn't establish a huge fan base and the support for the Democrats is maybe unfortunately not enough to win a coming/next election.

[bulmercke]

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The Democrats currently have the support of the smaller coalition parties (as TRT - once - and PPP did when they formed government).

At the next election, why would the support change from what the Democrats have now?

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties. The Democrats won't be so lucky in the next election - that's if there is one -

Also since the last election the coup and the suppression of the Red-Shirts is also bound to increase the Peua Thai (PPP) vote.

'the largest majority' is logically incorrect, If there is, there is only ONE majority. In the 2007 General Elections out of 480 MP's PPP got 232, Dem's 169, Chart Thai 37, Puea Pandin 24 and a bunch of smaller ones. PPP had the most MP's, but no majority, they needed to form a coalition and did so with k. Samak selected as PM.

As for what party may grow in the next election, sorry, crystal ball on the blink again.

I stand corrected. But you know what I mean. They had the most MPs.

Incidentally - I doubt there will be an election anytime soon. And certainly not any time before November or December 2011 - when an election must be called - or anytime before that. The Red-Shirt "threat" will be the excuse the government needs to postpone indefinitely. Welcome to the new Myanmar!

[TAWP]

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties.

I am sure you tried to say 'the largest minority party, just a few seats ahead of the democrats'...

[rubl]

The Democrats currently have the support of the smaller coalition parties (as TRT - once - and PPP did when they formed government).

At the next election, why would the support change from what the Democrats have now?

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties. The Democrats won't be so lucky in the next election - that's if there is one -

Also since the last election the coup and the suppression of the Red-Shirts is also bound to increase the Peua Thai (PPP) vote.

'the largest majority' is logically incorrect, If there is, there is only ONE majority. In the 2007 General Elections out of 480 MP's PPP got 232, Dem's 169, Chart Thai 37, Puea Pandin 24 and a bunch of smaller ones. PPP had the most MP's, but no majority, they needed to form a coalition and did so with k. Samak selected as PM.

As for what party may grow in the next election, sorry, crystal ball on the blink again.

I stand corrected. But you know what I mean. They had the most MPs.

Incidentally - I doubt there will be an election anytime soon. And certainly not any time before November or December 2011 - when an election must be called - or anytime before that. The Red-Shirt "threat" will be the excuse the government needs to postpone indefinitely. Welcome to the new Myanmar!

That's your opinion, old chap. You are entitled to it. Will probably not surprise you that I believe next election WILL BE held on the 23rd of December 2011 at the latest (assuming I only need to add 4 years to the date of the last General Elections, 23rd of December 2007).

[SergeiY]

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties.

I am sure you tried to say 'the largest minority party, just a few seats ahead of the democrats'...

8 or 9 seats short of the majority and more than 60 ahead of the Democrats.

[Thai at Heart]

To scooter:

Thanks for the response. I never said that Abhisit wasn't rolling out policies to benefit the poor. I was simply trying to give an opinion on how Thaksin became such a successful Thai politician.

Abhisit is fighting against successful propaganda and fervent support, and the message is not yet (if it ever will) getting out there. The personality cult of Thaksin is still strong in many areas. How I believe it came to be, I tried to explain in my post. He successfully tapped a mechanism that has been set up in Thailand.

To a great degree, I do believe he got his supporters to blindly follow him. He did form the first ever majority government in the country's political history. People did die in support of the reds. A tragic sacrifice. There hasn't been some astonishing reduction in votes to his parties in the traditional strongholds, so people are still following him despite 5 years of exclusion and convictions. Are Thaksin and the red leadership a charlatans? Of course they are, but it doesn't matter what I say personally. Meanwhile, the Dems struggle to keep BJT under control and at the trough.

So where to from here? There is no way for the Dems to even start to engage a discussion in Isaan or the North partly because of the militant attitude of the reds. But did they ever? There will be an election some time, and will Abhisit's/the Dems largesse be rewarded with rural support? I doubt it.

It isn't my job to get the word out to the people about policies, it is the current government and so far, they aren't making much of a fist of it. They have every single piece of the national media in their hands, and yet their message doesn't fly. This is politics and if there is one thing that is extremely apparent, is that you don't have to tell the truth, you just have to be believed. Many stronger political systems have been commandeered by lesser political beasts than Thaksin.

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The integrity of the country will be damaged if there is a coup before the next election or the current coalition is allowed to continue beyond its terms. Depending on the army's opinion of the day, which is in no small amount related to whether there is any more civil insurrection before the next election, I think there is a good chance that it will be held as expected - end 2011. I reckon the reds only hope to save Thaksin is to go to the polls and buy off the smaller parties, so I don't think the reds are going to do something ridiculous as they did this year in Bangkok.

The tumult that will be caused if this coalition is empowered to hang around beyond his term will be enormous. If that happened, would be interesting to see what Abhisit might do. How do you swing a situation like that domestically or internationally?

Beyond that, if the Dems can't form a govt, reds will come in and a coup is pretty likely if their plan is to pardon Thaksin. So, as an unexpected possibility, a deal with Thaksin could be made to shut up and call off the hordes if they lose an election. Strange world Thai politics, but the system will never start running again unless they find some way to get Thaksin to shut up, as distasteful as that idea is.

Expect a lot of big promises to the minority parties from everyone to keep them onside. Newin is the kingmaker, as nasty as that sounds, and I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. He switched once, why not again?

Edited October 25, 2010 by Thai at Heart

[rubl]

The PPP had the largest majority in the last election and so were empowered to form the government with some coalition parties.

I am sure you tried to say 'the largest minority party, just a few seats ahead of the democrats'...

Sorry to correct you, but 233 versus 169 is a wee bit more than 'a few seats'. Interesting is that proportionally the PPP and Dem's both got about 39% of the votes, constituency wise PPP 36% versus Dem's 30%. As we have proportional representation in the Netherlands, I never really understood the constituency stuff. I understand even the Liberals in the UK have some issue with it

[SergeiY]

Expect a lot of big promises to the minority parties from everyone to keep them onside. Newin is the kingmaker, as nasty as that sounds, and I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. He switched once, why not again?

you should recount his 'switches', but that will it not make more predictable.

[Thai at Heart]

Expect a lot of big promises to the minority parties from everyone to keep them onside. Newin is the kingmaker, as nasty as that sounds, and I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. He switched once, why not again?

you should recount his 'switches', but that will it not make more predictable.

he has turned coats that many times, he is technicolour. he sheds coats like snakes shed skin.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Thai at Heart

[Siam Simon]

There is quite a lot to agree with in this post. All that is needed now is for the OP and his little gang of forum bullys to apply the magnifying glass to the current bunch of uglies running the show. No need to panic, guys. Thailand won't collapse like a stack of cards if you do.

If the alternative wasn't considerably more ugly, that might be a bit easier.

And there is the crux of the problem.

Nope. Not even close to the crux of the problem. Thaksin was almost the Prodigal Son. He is the former golden boy who learned how to play the game better than his 'betters'. Sorting out Thaksin doesn't equate to sorting out The Problem: Thaksin is actually The Problem's finest creation. And the twits who post all the obsequious drivel on TV in defence of anybody but Thaksin are actually doing a minor disservice to the genuine reformers in the current regime.

[chantorn]

Expect a lot of big promises to the minority parties from everyone to keep them onside. Newin is the kingmaker, as nasty as that sounds, and I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. He switched once, why not again?

you should recount his 'switches', but that will it not make more predictable.

he has turned coats that many times, he is technicolour. he sheds coats like snakes shed skin.

Newin is indeed very nasty and ultra corrupted. However he is currently the best hope to unit the country to a single "BLUE" colour. Give the poor boy a chance to be the next Thaksin.

[Roamin47]

Whoever runs the PR operation for the red shirts sure knows what he is doing. Burning tires produce the most smoke, so that;s what they burned during their Bangkok occupation last spring. Now, the threat of suicide terror attacks creates a different kind of black cloud -- fear that any sidewalk in Bangkok could be bombed at anh moment. Thais will go about their lives; it is tourists who are most likely to take these threats seriously. Hard to reconcile such tactics with the reds' sworn dedication to the common man. Most everyday Thais that I know, from tuk-tup drivers to ad execs, depend to at least some extent on the tourist trade. If they stop coming, what is to become of the 7 percent of the national economy that tourism represents? Reasonabe political discussion is what is called for, it seems to me -- not more violence and/or threats thereof.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Reasonabe political discussion is what is called for, it seems to me -- not more violence and/or threats thereof.

Easy for you to say, old boy. From the comfort of your (no doubt elite-ly furnished) abode.

Have you ever tried reasoning with this Abhisit fellow? He won't let you get a word in sideways, what with his defence of your right to protest, his pleas for you to respect the rights of others affected by your protest, his blank refusal of your attempts to provoke him, his deference to the valid points you make, his concessions and compromises and self-sacrificing offers, his incessant worrying for your safety, his incessant calls for the safety of your children and elderly to be respected, his diplomatic nonsense...good heavens.

You could 'discuss' for seven weeks. Good luck getting a word in sideways. The man is simply not one who can be negotiated with. He simply budges in your direction with such force, you are - in turn - forced to flatly refuse to accept your own hostage demands.

"reasonable discussion" - hah! You cannot fight reason with reason. Are you insane? You know what would likely occur if you tried such foolishness?

Peaceful progress. That's what!

Some people are so naive.

By 'people', I am referring to the elites who gifted the disenfranchised Democracy following the Violent Revolution in Thailand in 1997.

[hanuman1]

There is quite a lot to agree with in this post. All that is needed now is for the OP and his little gang of forum bullys to apply the magnifying glass to the current bunch of uglies running the show. No need to panic, guys. Thailand won't collapse like a stack of cards if you do.

If the alternative wasn't considerably more ugly, that might be a bit easier.

And there is the crux of the problem.

Nope. Not even close to the crux of the problem. Thaksin was almost the Prodigal Son. He is the former golden boy who learned how to play the game better than his 'betters'. Sorting out Thaksin doesn't equate to sorting out The Problem: Thaksin is actually The Problem's finest creation. And the twits who post all the obsequious drivel on TV in defence of anybody but Thaksin are actually doing a minor disservice to the genuine reformers in the current regime.

Well said, that man.

[Pi Sek]

Nope. Not even close to the crux of the problem. Thaksin was almost the Prodigal Son. He is the former golden boy who learned how to play the game better than his 'betters'. Sorting out Thaksin doesn't equate to sorting out The Problem: Thaksin is actually The Problem's finest creation. And the twits who post all the obsequious drivel on TV in defence of anybody but Thaksin are actually doing a minor disservice to the genuine reformers in the current regime.

Well said, that man.

I respectfully disagree, even though I do get the point - if the system wasn't so damned dirty, then Thaksin would never have been able to do the unequalled damage to the country that he did. It follows that Thaksin has seriously damaged Thailand in the short-to-medium term but the country may actually benefit in the long term, after they have covered the holes in "the system" which were only exposed to this degree because of Thaksin's actions.

I do think that Siam Simon's post would be much better if he had italicised the words "almost" and "former".

[ianbaggie]

How pathetic that these retards use the most cowardly of all tactics to terrorise their fellow Thais and murder anyone within a yard of their stupidity.

Stupidity is of course the trademark of the Red Shirt Movement, their leader, the craven Shinawatra reptile, the stupidist and most cowardly of them all.

This most recently banal of threats undeniably bears the Shinawatra trademark.

Take the reptile out.

NOW!

You know how stupid this post is ?

I think the post expresses the way that MANY of us feel about red shirt terrorists - your own post on the other hand - hmmmmm!!!

[ianbaggie]

Why don't the red shirt leaders come out and say "Red shirt people. We don't want you to do this."

Instead all they do is say "They are going to do this and we can't stop them."

They don't seem to care that innocent people will be killed.

Ever tried to reasoning with someone ready to become a "sucide bomber"?

How about getting to them before they are ready.

A statement from the red shirt leaders now telling their supporters that bombs (suicide or not) are not what the way that the red shirts want to fight.

Unless of course, that's what the leaders DO want.

I think you are putting words in their mouth and base you theory or your claims or accusations on the limited knowledge what the "red leaders" (there are so many of them) might have said or might have not said.

Like at the protest a couple of month ago. there were also voices on stage who said : 'Don't loot. Don't burn buildings down.' Don't use weapons.'

But this just doesn't made it into the headlines.

So how do you know what they have not said? Because it isn't reported in The Nation?

Perhaps you could provide a link and evidence of the leaders telling their followers NOT to loot etcx - or is this just another SergeiY claim gone wrong?

[hammered]

To scooter:

Thanks for the response. I never said that Abhisit wasn't rolling out policies to benefit the poor. I was simply trying to give an opinion on how Thaksin became such a successful Thai politician.

Abhisit is fighting against successful propaganda and fervent support, and the message is not yet (if it ever will) getting out there. The personality cult of Thaksin is still strong in many areas. How I believe it came to be, I tried to explain in my post. He successfully tapped a mechanism that has been set up in Thailand.

To a great degree, I do believe he got his supporters to blindly follow him. He did form the first ever majority government in the country's political history. People did die in support of the reds. A tragic sacrifice. There hasn't been some astonishing reduction in votes to his parties in the traditional strongholds, so people are still following him despite 5 years of exclusion and convictions. Are Thaksin and the red leadership a charlatans? Of course they are, but it doesn't matter what I say personally. Meanwhile, the Dems struggle to keep BJT under control and at the trough.

So where to from here? There is no way for the Dems to even start to engage a discussion in Isaan or the North partly because of the militant attitude of the reds. But did they ever? There will be an election some time, and will Abhisit's/the Dems largesse be rewarded with rural support? I doubt it.

It isn't my job to get the word out to the people about policies, it is the current government and so far, they aren't making much of a fist of it. They have every single piece of the national media in their hands, and yet their message doesn't fly. This is politics and if there is one thing that is extremely apparent, is that you don't have to tell the truth, you just have to be believed. Many stronger political systems have been commandeered by lesser political beasts than Thaksin.

QUOTE(Thai at heart):"There will be an election some time...."

Will there? I'm not so sure. The Democrats never do particularly well and are seldom - if ever - able to form a government outright without the assistance of some of the smaller coalition parties. My thinking is that the next election will be indefinitely delayed because of the supposed threat of "violent tumult" occurring as a consequence of a general election being called.

The integrity of the country will be damaged if there is a coup before the next election or the current coalition is allowed to continue beyond its terms. Depending on the army's opinion of the day, which is in no small amount related to whether there is any more civil insurrection before the next election, I think there is a good chance that it will be held as expected - end 2011. I reckon the reds only hope to save Thaksin is to go to the polls and buy off the smaller parties, so I don't think the reds are going to do something ridiculous as they did this year in Bangkok.

The tumult that will be caused if this coalition is empowered to hang around beyond his term will be enormous. If that happened, would be interesting to see what Abhisit might do. How do you swing a situation like that domestically or internationally?

Beyond that, if the Dems can't form a govt, reds will come in and a coup is pretty likely if their plan is to pardon Thaksin. So, as an unexpected possibility, a deal with Thaksin could be made to shut up and call off the hordes if they lose an election. Strange world Thai politics, but the system will never start running again unless they find some way to get Thaksin to shut up, as distasteful as that idea is.

Expect a lot of big promises to the minority parties from everyone to keep them onside. Newin is the kingmaker, as nasty as that sounds, and I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. He switched once, why not again?

Its like deja vue for the election after the coup. The current government have had a few years to get themselves popular etc but never learnt a couple of important Thaksin tactics, ie the use of PR/marketing to amplify/exaggerate what you have done and the bypassing of the bureacracy to actually get money or initiatives to the people quickly and efficiently. Add to that the floods and their chances in the next election have diminshed form where they could have been. Since the end of the red event the PTP have acteda lot more like an opposition criticising government corruption and inefficency and that helps them. Being in opposition and criticising those with powerr is an easy game but also an effective one.

There are also divisions within the government and parties who couldnt give a toss who they back as long as they are in power.

Then we have the PAD now having turned on the government as well. Plus the bureacracy clearly having their own game and not liking it when the government tried to auction off the 3G rights to their disadvantage. The old alliances across the board are breaking down and as they do a deal becomes a possibility especially with the military solidly where the establishment want it. If PTP were to accept that they could easily run the country as long as the Thaksin issue was sorted and no interference was made in the military which would allow a potential but probably not used veto to exist as reassurance to the establishment.

The time frame is the election. If the ground rules arent worked out across a plurality of the powerful on all sides before that time chaos and a coup become more likely, but if things are agreed than an election can be held and the country can move forward. The latter is clearly a better choice.

[ianbaggie]

The OP said:

A red-shirt leader warned Thursday certain red-shirt people may turn suicide bombers to avenge the government crackdowns and fight for democracy. The warning was made by Somyos Prueksakasemsuk

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

Somyos is the editor of such intelligently heady publications as Red Power, Red News, and the Voice of Taksin:

Do any of these rags show naked ladies on Page 3?

I think theres one of Mrs Thaksin with her "baps" out

[ianbaggie]

But some Reds would prefer to have their toddlers die for the cause:

Human shield: A tiny child wails from a perch high on the barricade of tyres and bamboo protecting protesters

The Daily Mail (UK) - May 19, 2010

Buchholz, that's despicable cheap point scoring from you.

Of course the Dad knew that the soldiers weren't firing indiscriminately. His kid would have flashed in their sights, and they'd probably immediately put away their rifles. Everyone wins.

And the kid grows up knowing he likely saved his Dad from a bullet. Talk about a bond between father and son.

I mean, sure it is a Live Fire Zone where things can go horribly wrong with live rounds and smoke and chaos and whatnot. But are you going to wrap your children up in cotton wool their entire childhood? Refuse to let them play outside for fear they'll get a scratch? Come on...

Kid wanted to climb those tyres. Inshallah. Let him climb. He's only crying cause he's so happy. I think it's a very sweet photo and I think the Red Shirts bringing their children to war was admirable (live together, die together - as TIME.com feel-good story of the year pointed out. It brought a tear to my eye - I wish my 7 year olds were willing to die for my cause. But no. I ask them to grab something from the fridge, you'd think I was asking them to fly a plane into a ship or something....sigh.

I should ask the Red Shirt parents how they manage it. You know, without being arrested for despicable child abuse and that.... [/url]

Kampit Jooncha, a farmer from the same province, agreed that she would not take her ten-year-old son Chalor and abandon the protest no matter who asked. "We want democracy," she said. "If I have to die for it, I want my children to die with me."

Hongfah and Chalor both said they were not afraid, although Hongfah said she wished she were back in Mukdahan. Asked if they understood that something bad could happen at the protest, they both said no, they did not understand.

Scooter - there is none so blind as he who WILL NOT SEE!! - if i have to die i want to kill my child - dont even bother to look for a shred of decency in that statemnet - you belittle your own principles

[TheyCallmeScooter]

But some Reds would prefer to have their toddlers die for the cause:

Human shield: A tiny child wails from a perch high on the barricade of tyres and bamboo protecting protesters

The Daily Mail (UK) - May 19, 2010

Buchholz, that's despicable cheap point scoring from you.

Of course the Dad knew that the soldiers weren't firing indiscriminately. His kid would have flashed in their sights, and they'd probably immediately put away their rifles. Everyone wins.

And the kid grows up knowing he likely saved his Dad from a bullet. Talk about a bond between father and son.

I mean, sure it is a Live Fire Zone where things can go horribly wrong with live rounds and smoke and chaos and whatnot. But are you going to wrap your children up in cotton wool their entire childhood? Refuse to let them play outside for fear they'll get a scratch? Come on...

Kid wanted to climb those tyres. Inshallah. Let him climb. He's only crying cause he's so happy. I think it's a very sweet photo and I think the Red Shirts bringing their children to war was admirable (live together, die together - as TIME.com feel-good story of the year pointed out. It brought a tear to my eye - I wish my 7 year olds were willing to die for my cause. But no. I ask them to grab something from the fridge, you'd think I was asking them to fly a plane into a ship or something....sigh.

I should ask the Red Shirt parents how they manage it. You know, without being arrested for despicable child abuse and that.... http://www.time.com/...1989543,00.html

Kampit Jooncha, a farmer from the same province, agreed that she would not take her ten-year-old son Chalor and abandon the protest no matter who asked. "We want democracy," she said. "If I have to die for it, I want my children to die with me."

Hongfah and Chalor both said they were not afraid, although Hongfah said she wished she were back in Mukdahan. Asked if they understood that something bad could happen at the protest, they both said no, they did not understand.

Scooter - there is none so blind as he who WILL NOT SEE!! - if i have to die i want to kill my child - dont even bother to look for a shred of decency in that statemnet - you belittle your own principles

I assure you Sir, that my fury is of a level so great, I am forced to mask it in cheap sarcasm or else it will likely breach the forum rules governing how one addresses or comments on sheer Evil.

One must do so with cordiality. And respect. And civility. I learned this very recently when I responded to Evil sans flowery civility. My post was deleted, in it's entirety - and I was banned for a week. To be fair to the mods, I was really quite furious at Evil that day. I even used a colourful word or two. And was less than complimentary with my choice of descriptive adjectives.

One must remember that even Evil's Opinions are valid. And cannot be ridiculed. No matter how ridiculous - or evil - they may be.

It's mere common courtesy. If we cannot RECONCILIATE with Evil on a forum, how can we hope to achieve RECONCILIATION with Evil in the Real World? I admit I dropped the ball recently, and am ashamed of my failure to set an example...one can view.

[MikeyIdea]

Red skirt suicide bombers

Absurd - If you read Wiki's definition of terrorism and compare it with what the red skirts have done this far, then they've already passed the exam. No need for suicide bombers too to persuade the world, the world already know.

It may persuade Bangkokians protesting only for the good money it brings though...

[MikeyIdea]

Commenting on the kid that Buchholts posted a picture of above and TheyCallmeScooters answer

I find TheyCallmeScooters answer appalling, I hope there is more sarcasm in it than I see. If the boy as an adult had been shown the picture and explained what happened, the then adult would of course have understood why he never had a father after that moment

- Because the courts immediately took away his custody and visitation rights

People who deliberately do things like that to their children should NEVER be allowed to see their child again, ever. Not so bonding perhaps

Too bad it never happened the way I described it

Edited November 8, 2010 by MikeyIdea

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Commenting on the kid that Buchholts posted a picture of above and TheyCallmeScooters answer

I find TheyCallmeScooters answer appalling, I hope there is more sarcasm in it than I see.

I unequivocally assure you that there is.

[Pi Sek]

Commenting on the kid that Buchholts posted a picture of above and TheyCallmeScooters answer

I find TheyCallmeScooters answer appalling, I hope there is more sarcasm in it than I see.

I unequivocally assure you that there is.

I'm sorry, I just can't see how some people can't see the sarcasm in TheyCallMeScooter's posts after just a few lines.

When I first read that paragraph, I was thinking, "He can't be serious"... then I realised he wasn't serious.

They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.. some say it's the highest form of intelligence. I find this sarcasm very witty as, if taken with the sarcasm with which it was meant, it makes one smile in a situation that encourages only frowns.

There is clearly no justification for any parent putting their unwitting child unhappily in the line of live ammunition.