Thai army chief: Political gatherings banned during UN chief's visit

[SergeiY]

Guess we cannot meet for a few beers and talk about Thai politics...

No, drinking a few beer and talks about politics don't mix.

[Colabamumbai]

Guess we cannot meet for a few beers and talk about Thai politics...

No, drinking a few beer and talks about politics don't mix.

Ok coffee and a smoke then.

[jhwest]

Hi Just wondering whether it is me and yes Political rallies are banned for the UN Chief's visit and is fine under the Emergency Laws and why not ban them all together, but does that mean the Constitution will have to be changed.

I thought that there were moves on this and perhaps someone can enlighten me on this..

Obviously people at present are allowed to demonstrate, but thanks anyway.

[Insight]

Insight - you ask:"......why do they pick the worst role-models imaginable as leaders?" Actually this is a good question. Me - personally? I detest Thaksin and much of what he stands for BUT....and it's a big BUT...I do support the Red-Shirts - the vast majority of which are ordinary and decent Thais.

Agreed many of the Red-Shirt leaders are cowboys - but I guess that was what was required when they were left with no other realistic option than to become more radical and militant in their approach to the government.

You can support the people, but supporting the red shirts means you support the leaders which means you support Thaksin.

The red shirts didn't need to become more radical and militant. They got their message across. They got their people on television to debate the PM. The PM gave them some of the things they were after. Why did they then have to get radical and militant?

They were militant from a very early stage. The collapse of the ASIAN conference in Pattaya, the attacking of Abhisit's car, the rioting, burning of buses along with threatening to immolate neighbourhoods around the city followed by the claims of "guerilla attacks" by Jakraprob and co. That was just last year. This year there are even more footage for people to watch over a much longer period of time.

Kwanchai, Arisman, Seh Daeng et al are all arguably militant (check out the speeches) and have all been part of the movement since its inception.

The sentence "left with no other realistic option than to become more radical and militant in their approach" also strongly suggests Bulmercke sympathises with such actions.

[OzMick]

I wonder if Mr. Moon will pick up on the generals comments and the context

A general telling the public not to demonstrate....hmm surely it's the governments job to do that, as the army (in any democratic country, or a country that aspires to be democratic) is subserviant to the civillian adminstration and as such should keep its snout out of civillian matters, which is what a public demonstration is.

As far as i'm aware (and i may be wrong) in european or N. american countries the army would never dream of telling people if and when it can demostrate.

The words of the general show just how democratic Thailand is and it is something that both red and yellow should be deeply worried about. And I hope the generals comments are something Mr. Moon questions the PM on

First, the man's name is Mr Ban.

Secondly, the RTA was obeying the orders of the civilian administration when asked to clear the Bkk demonstration this year. This was a legal order under the ED issued by the CRES.

Thirdly, have you never heard of Kent State (US) or Greenham Common (UK)? In both cases the army (Nat Guard at Kent) was used to clear a demonstration under the orders of the civilian administration.

I'll leave your suppositions alone, as they are based on fallacious arguments.

[bulmercke]

Insight - you ask:"......why do they pick the worst role-models imaginable as leaders?" Actually this is a good question. Me - personally? I detest Thaksin and much of what he stands for BUT....and it's a big BUT...I do support the Red-Shirts - the vast majority of which are ordinary and decent Thais.

Agreed many of the Red-Shirt leaders are cowboys - but I guess that was what was required when they were left with no other realistic option than to become more radical and militant in their approach to the government.

You can support the people, but supporting the red shirts means you support the leaders which means you support Thaksin.

The red shirts didn't need to become more radical and militant. They got their message across. They got their people on television to debate the PM. The PM gave them some of the things they were after. Why did they then have to get radical and militant?

They were militant from a very early stage. The collapse of the ASIAN conference in Pattaya, the attacking of Abhisit's car, the rioting, burning of buses along with threatening to immolate neighbourhoods around the city followed by the claims of "guerilla attacks" by Jakraprob and co. That was just last year. This year there are even more footage for people to watch over a much longer period of time.

Kwanchai, Arisman, Seh Daeng et al are all arguably militant (check out the speeches) and have all been part of the movement since its inception.

The sentence "left with no other realistic option than to become more radical and militant in their approach" also strongly suggests Bulmercke sympathises with such actions.

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

[bulmercke]

I wonder if Mr. Moon will pick up on the generals comments and the context

A general telling the public not to demonstrate....hmm surely it's the governments job to do that, as the army (in any democratic country, or a country that aspires to be democratic) is subserviant to the civillian adminstration and as such should keep its snout out of civillian matters, which is what a public demonstration is.

As far as i'm aware (and i may be wrong) in european or N. american countries the army would never dream of telling people if and when it can demostrate.

The words of the general show just how democratic Thailand is and it is something that both red and yellow should be deeply worried about. And I hope the generals comments are something Mr. Moon questions the PM on

This is correct. I'm sure we're not the only TV members to find the general's remarks extremely unnerving and worrisome. I almost inclined myself to put on a red shirt and go out and about just to defy his 'authority'.

[Insight]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

You make claims about deaths last year without providing any evidence whatsoever, and this year what deaths there were through protesters choosing to be in the company of heavily armed militants are being sensationalised for maximum political effect.

The intention behind such actions is incredibly clear to people who are not blindly red.

[SergeiY]

I wonder if Mr. Moon will pick up on the generals comments and the context

A general telling the public not to demonstrate....hmm surely it's the governments job to do that, as the army (in any democratic country, or a country that aspires to be democratic) is subserviant to the civillian adminstration and as such should keep its snout out of civillian matters, which is what a public demonstration is.

As far as i'm aware (and i may be wrong) in european or N. american countries the army would never dream of telling people if and when it can demostrate.

The words of the general show just how democratic Thailand is and it is something that both red and yellow should be deeply worried about. And I hope the generals comments are something Mr. Moon questions the PM on

First, the man's name is Mr Ban.

Secondly, the RTA was obeying the orders of the civilian administration when asked to clear the Bkk demonstration this year. This was a legal order under the ED issued by the CRES.

Thirdly, have you never heard of Kent State (US) or Greenham Common (UK)? In both cases the army (Nat Guard at Kent) was used to clear a demonstration under the orders of the civilian administration.

I'll leave your suppositions alone, as they are based on fallacious arguments.

jonclark is right. and you have the fallacious arguments. DOH.

[whybother]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

8 deaths? I can only find reference to 2, and I believe one of those was a civilian attacked by the protesters.

[bulmercke]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

You make claims about deaths last year without providing any evidence whatsoever, and this year what deaths there were through protesters choosing to be in the company of heavily armed militants are being sensationalised for maximum political effect.

The intention behind such actions is incredibly clear to people who are not blindly red.

There was a live feed on TNN - news network - from the Viphavadi - Din Daeng area shortly after the shootings which showed from a distance army personnel and others loading corpses into the back of some trucks. I didn't myself watch this live but have subsequently seen a recording of this on YouTube or somewhere else - I can't recall where - but I have seen the video and it's pretty damning.

Also - the following morning - just a few hours later I went to the Urapong intersection - near Phitsanalok road - to see for myself what was going on - where many Red-Shirts were gathered from the night before and they all told me the same story. They were extremely distraught and upset at what had happened to their comrades and friends. This was before I knew anything about the TNN footage. The army and the government covered up these deaths.

[SergeiY]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

8 deaths? I can only find reference to 2, and I believe one of those was a civilian attacked by the protesters.

They others are probably in news sources that are restricted to access in Thailand. Obviously is that the government has something to hide. If you talk about dead people or human right violations the army chief comes and tells you that is inappropriate.

Edited October 25, 2010 by SergeiY

[Insight]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

You make claims about deaths last year without providing any evidence whatsoever, and this year what deaths there were through protesters choosing to be in the company of heavily armed militants are being sensationalised for maximum political effect.

The intention behind such actions is incredibly clear to people who are not blindly red.

There was a live feed on TNN - news network - from the Viphavadi - Din Daeng area shortly after the shootings which showed from a distance army personnel and others loading corpses into the back of some trucks. I didn't myself watch this live but have subsequently seen a recording of this on YouTube or somewhere else - I can't recall where - but I have seen the video and it's pretty damning.

Also - the following morning - just a few hours later I went to the Urapong intersection - near Phitsanalok road - to see for myself what was going on - where many Red-Shirts were gathered from the night before and they all told me the same story. They were extremely distraught and upset at what had happened to their comrades and friends. This was before I knew anything about the TNN footage. The army and the government covered up these deaths.

If such a video did exist on YouTube, for sure there'll be other copies of it available somewhere. I really cannot imagine for a second the red PR machine letting this one slip.

Everything else you mention is simply hearsay. There's no shortage of examples where reds obfuscate the truth (and in some several cases spread outright lies) - this sounds like another story to add to the pile.

[whybother]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

8 deaths? I can only find reference to 2, and I believe one of those was a civilian attacked by the protesters.

They others are probably in news sources that are restricted to access in Thailand. Obviously is that the government has something to hide. If you talk about dead people or human right violations the army chief comes and tells you that is inappropriate.

The government restricts access to web sites. They don't affect what google can search. Obviously you're just making things up.

[bulmercke]

No, I don't - but I can see how they became more radicalised and militant. The shooting dead of protesters by the army - at least eight - last April 2009 at Din Daeng didn't help matters much either.

You make claims about deaths last year without providing any evidence whatsoever, and this year what deaths there were through protesters choosing to be in the company of heavily armed militants are being sensationalised for maximum political effect.

The intention behind such actions is incredibly clear to people who are not blindly red.

There was a live feed on TNN - news network - from the Viphavadi - Din Daeng area shortly after the shootings which showed from a distance army personnel and others loading corpses into the back of some trucks. I didn't myself watch this live but have subsequently seen a recording of this on YouTube or somewhere else - I can't recall where - but I have seen the video and it's pretty damning.

Also - the following morning - just a few hours later I went to the Urapong intersection - near Phitsanalok road - to see for myself what was going on - where many Red-Shirts were gathered from the night before and they all told me the same story. They were extremely distraught and upset at what had happened to their comrades and friends. This was before I knew anything about the TNN footage. The army and the government covered up these deaths.

If such a video did exist on YouTube, for sure there'll be other copies of it available somewhere. I really cannot imagine for a second the red PR machine letting this one slip.

Everything else you mention is simply hearsay. There's no shortage of examples where reds obfuscate the truth (and in some several cases spread outright lies) - this sounds like another story to add to the pile.

Actually - I saw with my own eyes and listened to these peoples' pleads for this news to get out. Remember this was before the events of this year - when in April 2009 the general populace though it inconceivable that their own military could open fire on its own people. But it did. The two deaths reported weren't related to this Din Daeng event but were possibly the actions of a pro-government vigilante group elsewhere a few days later.

[craigt3365]

Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha's announcement is like a red rag to a bull. The Red-Shirts might as well go the full hog (no pun intended) and throw caution to the wind. If you're going to protest - there's no point in protesting unless you're going to make your presence felt.

Thousands of Reds - motorcycles - pick-ups - private cars - charging around Bangkok for the entire duration of Mr. Ban's stay might just do the job.

I beg to differ. Mr. Baan has will learn nothing by there silly antics. He is no fool. He already knows they are nothing but a bunch of fools for hire working for a man who wants to commit more rape on Thailand.

Don't be worried, your are save. There will be no rout of thousand Thaksins and a mass rape orgy. Army chief says it is not allowed.

I found a post from you which gives just the right answer: yawn

His best troll post to date was:

Yawn :jerk: pfft

seems he's on a roll on this thread...lucky us.

[SergeiY]

Yes, but you can be sure that sooner or later someone would come up with that line or the EX-PM or the war on drugs. I just wanted to be first.

I'd call it trolling or taunting and irrelevant !

Then watch out. That board is full of trolls who dragging Thaksin into nearly every topic. Happy troll hunting and don't forget to bring a mirror.

Good call, To have different views here from others will get you labeled as a Troll,

as that's the easiest method to use to attempt to negate someones comments and big note ones self.

They are good for a laugh. Making fools of themselves. I don't mind having them around.

I even got one stalker, that dude is trying hard to get attention and is the most ridiculous.

[geriatrickid]

The UN overseer of institutionalized corruption does have a mandate to see what is going on in Thailand and the UN does stick its nose into the internal affairs of other nations. However, the meddling is limited only to those nations the corrupt majority of members choose. For example, The UN meddles in countries like Canada and Australia, passing judgement on aboriginal affairs. Or, it can weigh in on Israeli internal affairs. The UN will never discuss Pakisitan's tacit support of the taliban or Syria's abhorrent record on humman rights. The UN likes to pee on the country that picks up a large part of its operating expenses, the USA.When is the last time, the UN raised the subject of China or Russia's treatment of ethnic minority populations? I guess it makes the dictators in the 3rd world feel important.

I do not agree with the Thai government's decision to ban political rallies, however, I do understand why it is being done. Unfortunately, people cannot behave peacefully. Nor is this the time to divert resources away from the flood relief effort. Troops and police are better used trying to help the internal refugees. Protesting during the UN leader's visit would serve no benefit to anyone.

The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights. This announcement does more damage to Mr. Abhisit than any red rally could achieve. It's a sad admission of fear.

[OzMick]

I wonder if Mr. Moon will pick up on the generals comments and the context

A general telling the public not to demonstrate....hmm surely it's the governments job to do that, as the army (in any democratic country, or a country that aspires to be democratic) is subserviant to the civillian adminstration and as such should keep its snout out of civillian matters, which is what a public demonstration is.

As far as i'm aware (and i may be wrong) in european or N. american countries the army would never dream of telling people if and when it can demostrate.

The words of the general show just how democratic Thailand is and it is something that both red and yellow should be deeply worried about. And I hope the generals comments are something Mr. Moon questions the PM on

First, the man's name is Mr Ban.

Secondly, the RTA was obeying the orders of the civilian administration when asked to clear the Bkk demonstration this year. This was a legal order under the ED issued by the CRES.

Thirdly, have you never heard of Kent State (US) or Greenham Common (UK)? In both cases the army (Nat Guard at Kent) was used to clear a demonstration under the orders of the civilian administration.

I'll leave your suppositions alone, as they are based on fallacious arguments.

jonclark is right. and you have the fallacious arguments. DOH.

I have made no argument - I have simply stated fact. If you consider my facts to be wrong, please proove me wrong,and I will apologise profusely. you should learn to preface your opinions with IMO, the H being a waste of time in your case.

[bulmercke]

The UN overseer of institutionalized corruption does have a mandate to see what is going on in Thailand and the UN does stick its nose into the internal affairs of other nations. However, the meddling is limited only to those nations the corrupt majority of members choose. For example, The UN meddles in countries like Canada and Australia, passing judgement on aboriginal affairs. Or, it can weigh in on Israeli internal affairs. The UN will never discuss Pakisitan's tacit support of the taliban or Syria's abhorrent record on humman rights. The UN likes to pee on the country that picks up a large part of its operating expenses, the USA.When is the last time, the UN raised the subject of China or Russia's treatment of ethnic minority populations? I guess it makes the dictators in the 3rd world feel important.

I do not agree with the Thai government's decision to ban political rallies, however, I do understand why it is being done. Unfortunately, people cannot behave peacefully. Nor is this the time to divert resources away from the flood relief effort. Troops and police are better used trying to help the internal refugees. Protesting during the UN leader's visit would serve no benefit to anyone.

The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights. This announcement does more damage to Mr. Abhisit than any red rally could achieve. It's a sad admission of fear.

QUOTE:"The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights."

geriatrickid - what makes you think Thailand is any different nowadays?

[rubl]

begin removed ...

The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights. This announcement does more damage to Mr. Abhisit than any red rally could achieve. It's a sad admission of fear.

Either you just made up the 'prescreened', or you can point out to me where you found it. I can only find

Regarding the plan of the Red Shirt to present a complaint letter to Mr Ban on the death of the red-clad demonstrators during the army operations in May, Gen Prayuth said they should consider whether it is appropriate to hand in such letter as this is internal affairs and the army had strictly followed the law.

Without the 'prescreened' your comment doesn't make sense of course

[SergeiY]

begin removed ...

The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights. This announcement does more damage to Mr. Abhisit than any red rally could achieve. It's a sad admission of fear.

Either you just made up the 'prescreened', or you can point out to me where you found it. I can only find

Regarding the plan of the Red Shirt to present a complaint letter to Mr Ban on the death of the red-clad demonstrators during the army operations in May, Gen Prayuth said they should consider whether it is appropriate to hand in such letter as this is internal affairs and the army had strictly followed the law.

Without the 'prescreened' your comment doesn't make sense of course

Maybe he knows more, maybe he gets his informations from more than one source. maybe he reads the other comments to this topic ...

Because you don't know it doesn't mean he made it up.

Edited October 25, 2010 by SergeiY

[rubl]

begin removed ...

The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights. This announcement does more damage to Mr. Abhisit than any red rally could achieve. It's a sad admission of fear.

Either you just made up the 'prescreened', or you can point out to me where you found it. I can only find

Regarding the plan of the Red Shirt to present a complaint letter to Mr Ban on the death of the red-clad demonstrators during the army operations in May, Gen Prayuth said they should consider whether it is appropriate to hand in such letter as this is internal affairs and the army had strictly followed the law.

Without the 'prescreened' your comment doesn't make sense of course

Maybe he knows more, maybe he gets his informations from more than one source. maybe he reads the other comments to this topic ...

Because you don't know it doesn't mean he made it up.

Still not really reading comments, do you? I said 'can't find'.

I wonder more and more whether I should just ignore you, or keep answering dumb questions. I'm leaning towards ignore, let you play with yourself.

[bulmercke]

begin removed ...

The Thai government is making a fool of itself when it announces that only prescreened questions will be accepted. That is something done by totalitarian countries which limit freedom of speech and deny basic human rights. This announcement does more damage to Mr. Abhisit than any red rally could achieve. It's a sad admission of fear.

Either you just made up the 'prescreened', or you can point out to me where you found it. I can only find

Regarding the plan of the Red Shirt to present a complaint letter to Mr Ban on the death of the red-clad demonstrators during the army operations in May, Gen Prayuth said they should consider whether it is appropriate to hand in such letter as this is internal affairs and the army had strictly followed the law.

Without the 'prescreened' your comment doesn't make sense of course

Maybe he knows more, maybe he gets his informations from more than one source. maybe he reads the other comments to this topic ...

Because you don't know it doesn't mean he made it up.

Re: pre-screened questions. Check my earlier post on this thread. #19

[SergeiY]

Still not really reading comments, do you? I said 'can't find'.

I wonder more and more whether I should just ignore you, or keep answering dumb questions. I'm leaning towards ignore, let you play with yourself.

You asked for a 'pointing out to you'. I just did that.

A comment in this thread contains a quote from a journalist stating exactly that what you cannot find.

I cannot help you with reading or your selective perception.

[yellow1red1]

QUOTE:"......the first thing they would have to do is admit where they were wrong." Those nasty Red-Shirts. They brought it all upon themselves. How dare they stand-up to the sickening inequality - rampant corruption - political and military oppression that now exists in this country.

If this is really their aim - to stand up against what you mention - why do they pick the worst role-models imaginable as leaders?

The red shirt movement is ethically bankrupt. Have a quick scan through this news section for reminders of why.

Insight - you ask:"......why do they pick the worst role-models imaginable as leaders?" Actually this is a good question. Me - personally? I detest Thaksin and much of what he stands for BUT....and it's a big BUT...I do support the Red-Shirts - the vast majority of which are ordinary and decent Thais.

Agreed many of the Red-Shirt leaders are cowboys - but I guess that was what was required when they were left with no other realistic option than to become more radical and militant in their approach to the government.

Where to find someone in Thailand with power and influence to make positive change, that is not Corrupt? Who? Name 1!

They should just do the UN visit by teleconfernce show videos of peaceful scenes. Some 'impression' Baan will get, the military is in full control AS NORMAL.

[rubl]

Either you just made up the 'prescreened', or you can point out to me where you found it. I can only find

Regarding the plan of the Red Shirt to present a complaint letter to Mr Ban on the death of the red-clad demonstrators during the army operations in May, Gen Prayuth said they should consider whether it is appropriate to hand in such letter as this is internal affairs and the army had strictly followed the law.

Without the 'prescreened' your comment doesn't make sense of course

Maybe he knows more, maybe he gets his informations from more than one source. maybe he reads the other comments to this topic ...

Because you don't know it doesn't mean he made it up.

Re: pre-screened questions. Check my earlier post on this thread. #19

Your quote from 'New Mandela' (which start today with an article from fugitive Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy) has nothing to do with the ban on rallies when UN Chief Ban is here. Neither has it any relation to 'but representatives can instead present a letter to the UN chief.'

Next you'll be saying that k. Thaksin twittered to Mr. Ban that the government was mean to him referring many times to the 'legitimate war on drugs'.

Don't try to confuse the issue. Even if the quote from NM was related, many press conferences with PM's, presidents, etc. ONLY allow pre-screened questions. Like it or not, but that's done in democracies as well.

[SergeiY]

Re: pre-screened questions. Check my earlier post on this thread. #19

Your quote from 'New Mandela' (which start today with an article from fugitive Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy) has nothing to do with the ban on rallies when UN Chief Ban is here. Neither has it any relation to 'but representatives can instead present a letter to the UN chief.'

Next you'll be saying that k. Thaksin twittered to Mr. Ban that the government was mean to him referring many times to the 'legitimate war on drugs'.

Don't try to confuse the issue. Even if the quote from NM was related, many press conferences with PM's, presidents, etc. ONLY allow pre-screened questions. Like it or not, but that's done in democracies as well.

Yes and in many democracies protest ends with a list of 90 dead people and the government cannot present any official investigation results but its all normal and legal because the SoE.

[yellow1red1]

Gen Prayuth said the army had strictly followed the law.

<<< the most important point to consider. the investgation is OVER . the army did the killing but were in the rightnow live with it!!!

yechhh

Xxxx Xxx!!!

[rubl]

Your quote from 'New Mandela' (which start today with an article from fugitive Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy) has nothing to do with the ban on rallies when UN Chief Ban is here. Neither has it any relation to 'but representatives can instead present a letter to the UN chief.'

Next you'll be saying that k. Thaksin twittered to Mr. Ban that the government was mean to him referring many times to the 'legitimate war on drugs'.

Don't try to confuse the issue. Even if the quote from NM was related, many press conferences with PM's, presidents, etc. ONLY allow pre-screened questions. Like it or not, but that's done in democracies as well.

Yes and in many democracies protest ends with a list of 90 dead people and the government cannot present any official investigation results but its all normal and legal because the SoE.

Not related to the OP.