Red Shirts Affirm Sunday's Rally In Bangkok To Be Staged Peacefully

[Buchholz]

Can't forget to include the children in any pictorial of the Red rally. Reds and children are inseparable...even on the front lines of May.

A boy joins Thai anti-government "red shirt" protesters as they gather at Bangkok's shopping district, decorated in red colours December 19, 2010.

REUTERS

The other aspect that refuses to be removed from the Red rallies are those that chant, "it's not about Thaksin"....

An anti-government "red shirt" protester wears a face mask of former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra as he joins fellow protesters in Bangkok's shopping district December 19, 2010.

REUTERS

.

[Buchholz]

Meanwhile, still other Reds are being in the news...

DSI arrests veteran, close aide of late Maj-Gen Khattiya for firing M-79 grenade at BTS

DSI arrests veteran, close aide of late Maj-Gen Khattiya 'Seh Daeng', for firing M-79 grenade at BTS Saladaeng station during Red Shirt protest.

-- TNA 2010-12-22

[hanuman1]

The red rallies have taken an emphatically non-violent tone over the last six months. I wonder why that is?

Are we to believe the security forces are so competent that they have caught exactly the right people who were responsible for the violence of 8 months ago? Or perhaps the once violent thugs who sat out at Rajprasong in their tens of thousands suddenly had a collective 'road to Damascus' style epiphany and turned to exclusively peaceful methods? Or maybe it's just possible that those criminals present at Rajprasong simply haven't been at any subsequent rally, the unwelcome (by all) minority that they are?

[phiphidon]

Interesting that one photo depicts a man who is dressing in a Communist uniform, while the other is trying to look like...well, can't quite tell from the pic whether it's Osama or Fidel. Either way...quite telling.

Now I suppose the pro-Red Shirts on the forum here will say those are government men faking it to stir up trouble.

OK, it's worth a reply. What is it about these photographs of 2 people out of 10,000 odd that is quite telling?

Well let's see now. We know that the only democracy that the Red Shirts really approve is the democracy where their side wins. Sort of sounds like elections in communist nations. Weng and others in the RED Shirt movement were, indeed, communists. They chose RED shirts as their symbol...a color symbol which, at various times and places in the world has symbolized communism. There is nothing about the Red Shirt movement that has anything to do with democracy, other than that they consistently say that word.

You know that for a fact, I presume, so now "we" are all now to assume from Bucholzs' c & p'd images of 2 people at the rally and your studied analysis of the red shirt movement (if it walks like a duck, they chose RED shirts as their symbol, etc.) that the redshirts are now communists to a man or woman or child?

As for your comments about Weng "and others" being communists;

Dr Weng Tojirakarn, a student leader activist in the 70's, did indeed flee into the hills and was sheltered by the Communist Party along with many others after theThammasat University massacre.

In 1976, the army along with the Border Patrol Police armed trained right wing paramilitary groups, among them the village scouts and the red guar (guar, wild buffalo, ironic,huh? and incidentally founded by an ISOC Colonel) both commanded by ISOC. They attacked the students on the 6th October, free fire on the campus students was announced (sound familiar) and despite calls for a ceasefire, students were shot, beaten to death or hanged. 46 died.

So yes, they did associate with the Communists, hardly suprising really?

[rubl]

Well let's see now. We know that the only democracy that the Red Shirts really approve is the democracy where their side wins. Sort of sounds like elections in communist nations. Weng and others in the RED Shirt movement were, indeed, communists. They chose RED shirts as their symbol...a color symbol which, at various times and places in the world has symbolized communism. There is nothing about the Red Shirt movement that has anything to do with democracy, other than that they consistently say that word.

You know that for a fact, I presume, so now "we" are all now to assume from Bucholzs' c & p'd images of 2 people at the rally and your studied analysis of the red shirt movement (if it walks like a duck, they chose RED shirts as their symbol, etc.) that the redshirts are now communists to a man or woman or child?

As for your comments about Weng "and others" being communists;

Dr Weng Tojirakarn, a student leader activist in the 70's, did indeed flee into the hills and was sheltered by the Communist Party along with many others after theThammasat University massacre.

In 1976, the army along with the Border Patrol Police armed trained right wing paramilitary groups, among them the village scouts and the red guar (guar, wild buffalo, ironic,huh? and incidentally founded by an ISOC Colonel) both commanded by ISOC. They attacked the students on the 6th October, free fire on the campus students was announced (sound familiar) and despite calls for a ceasefire, students were shot, beaten to death or hanged. 46 died.

So yes, they did associate with the Communists, hardly suprising really?

You shouldn't have referred to the October 1976 massacre. The late k. Samak, PPP MP and PM, tried to whitewash his role and said in an interview in February 2008 'only one died'. Read about it from Thammasat students:

http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=87178

ISOC may still have the name ISOC, but that doesn't mean it's the same group of people, doesn't mean it does the same, doesn't mean it has the same mandate.

[Emptyset]

Well let's see now. We know that the only democracy that the Red Shirts really approve is the democracy where their side wins. Sort of sounds like elections in communist nations. Weng and others in the RED Shirt movement were, indeed, communists. They chose RED shirts as their symbol...a color symbol which, at various times and places in the world has symbolized communism. There is nothing about the Red Shirt movement that has anything to do with democracy, other than that they consistently say that word.

You know that for a fact, I presume, so now "we" are all now to assume from Bucholzs' c & p'd images of 2 people at the rally and your studied analysis of the red shirt movement (if it walks like a duck, they chose RED shirts as their symbol, etc.) that the redshirts are now communists to a man or woman or child?

As for your comments about Weng "and others" being communists;

Dr Weng Tojirakarn, a student leader activist in the 70's, did indeed flee into the hills and was sheltered by the Communist Party along with many others after theThammasat University massacre.

In 1976, the army along with the Border Patrol Police armed trained right wing paramilitary groups, among them the village scouts and the red guar (guar, wild buffalo, ironic,huh? and incidentally founded by an ISOC Colonel) both commanded by ISOC. They attacked the students on the 6th October, free fire on the campus students was announced (sound familiar) and despite calls for a ceasefire, students were shot, beaten to death or hanged. 46 died.

So yes, they did associate with the Communists, hardly suprising really?

You shouldn't have referred to the October 1976 massacre. The late k. Samak, PPP MP and PM, tried to whitewash his role and said in an interview in February 2008 'only one died'. Read about it from Thammasat students:

http://www.asiamedia...?parentid=87178

ISOC may still have the name ISOC, but that doesn't mean it's the same group of people, doesn't mean it does the same, doesn't mean it has the same mandate.

Why shouldn't he have referred to it? It's an event that many Thais know nothing about and it's good if people in general learn more about it.

[phiphidon]

Well let's see now. We know that the only democracy that the Red Shirts really approve is the democracy where their side wins. Sort of sounds like elections in communist nations. Weng and others in the RED Shirt movement were, indeed, communists. They chose RED shirts as their symbol...a color symbol which, at various times and places in the world has symbolized communism. There is nothing about the Red Shirt movement that has anything to do with democracy, other than that they consistently say that word.

You know that for a fact, I presume, so now "we" are all now to assume from Bucholzs' c & p'd images of 2 people at the rally and your studied analysis of the red shirt movement (if it walks like a duck, they chose RED shirts as their symbol, etc.) that the redshirts are now communists to a man or woman or child?

As for your comments about Weng "and others" being communists;

Dr Weng Tojirakarn, a student leader activist in the 70's, did indeed flee into the hills and was sheltered by the Communist Party along with many others after theThammasat University massacre.

In 1976, the army along with the Border Patrol Police armed trained right wing paramilitary groups, among them the village scouts and the red guar (guar, wild buffalo, ironic,huh? and incidentally founded by an ISOC Colonel) both commanded by ISOC. They attacked the students on the 6th October, free fire on the campus students was announced (sound familiar) and despite calls for a ceasefire, students were shot, beaten to death or hanged. 46 died.

So yes, they did associate with the Communists, hardly suprising really?

You shouldn't have referred to the October 1976 massacre. The late k. Samak, PPP MP and PM, tried to whitewash his role and said in an interview in February 2008 'only one died'. Read about it from Thammasat students:

http://www.asiamedia...?parentid=87178

ISOC may still have the name ISOC, but that doesn't mean it's the same group of people, doesn't mean it does the same, doesn't mean it has the same mandate.

Why shouldn't I have mentioned the Student massacre? I am well aware of Samaks comments as they have been well documented and reported. However, whatever K. Samak did or said back then has no relevance whatsoever to my reply. I was talking about Dr. Weng and her communist associations and the background to that. Lets just hope ISOC doesn't have the same mandate.

[Insight]

The red rallies have taken an emphatically non-violent tone over the last six months. I wonder why that is?

Are we to believe the security forces are so competent that they have caught exactly the right people who were responsible for the violence of 8 months ago? Or perhaps the once violent thugs who sat out at Rajprasong in their tens of thousands suddenly had a collective 'road to Damascus' style epiphany and turned to exclusively peaceful methods? Or maybe it's just possible that those criminals present at Rajprasong simply haven't been at any subsequent rally, the unwelcome (by all) minority that they are?

Well we do know that one of the would-be red bombers didn't quite RTFM properly and had himself an occupational accident.

It was considered a massive PR blunder at the time given his links to the red shirts and the amounts of explosives which went pop. People also consider it beyond coincidence that the random bombings which were occurring around Bangkok also ceased after this accident.

So the red shirts have been repeatedly linked with groups intent on arson and terrorism. How many more peaceful one day rally jobs like this are required before the world forgets?

Might take a considerable number more for me.

[rubl]

Well let's see now. We know that the only democracy that the Red Shirts really approve is the democracy where their side wins. Sort of sounds like elections in communist nations. Weng and others in the RED Shirt movement were, indeed, communists. They chose RED shirts as their symbol...a color symbol which, at various times and places in the world has symbolized communism. There is nothing about the Red Shirt movement that has anything to do with democracy, other than that they consistently say that word.

You know that for a fact, I presume, so now "we" are all now to assume from Bucholzs' c & p'd images of 2 people at the rally and your studied analysis of the red shirt movement (if it walks like a duck, they chose RED shirts as their symbol, etc.) that the redshirts are now communists to a man or woman or child?

As for your comments about Weng "and others" being communists;

Dr Weng Tojirakarn, a student leader activist in the 70's, did indeed flee into the hills and was sheltered by the Communist Party along with many others after theThammasat University massacre.

In 1976, the army along with the Border Patrol Police armed trained right wing paramilitary groups, among them the village scouts and the red guar (guar, wild buffalo, ironic,huh? and incidentally founded by an ISOC Colonel) both commanded by ISOC. They attacked the students on the 6th October, free fire on the campus students was announced (sound familiar) and despite calls for a ceasefire, students were shot, beaten to death or hanged. 46 died.

So yes, they did associate with the Communists, hardly suprising really?

You shouldn't have referred to the October 1976 massacre. The late k. Samak, PPP MP and PM, tried to whitewash his role and said in an interview in February 2008 'only one died'. Read about it from Thammasat students:

http://www.asiamedia...?parentid=87178

ISOC may still have the name ISOC, but that doesn't mean it's the same group of people, doesn't mean it does the same, doesn't mean it has the same mandate.

Why shouldn't I have mentioned the Student massacre? I am well aware of Samaks comments as they have been well documented and reported. However, whatever K. Samak did or said back then has no relevance whatsoever to my reply. I was talking about Dr. Weng and her communist associations and the background to that. Lets just hope ISOC doesn't have the same mandate.

You use the '76 massacre as example to condemn the ISOC in it's current form. So you give it relevance to your reply.

The ISOC has been re-organised a few times, just like the ISA has been adapted. At least we no longer have warmongering politicians like the late k. Samak. Only former communists who have been pardoned officially for their '70 activities and which therefor should no longer be hold against them, even if it still seems to color their views

[Insight]

Two people have now told me they don't want to celebrate New Year in Bangkok owing to the risk of bombs. Growing up during the 80's and 90's in the UK with the constant threat from the IRA I find this attitude somewhat defeatist, but can't really blame the Thais as the threat of terrorism is something which is very new for them.

[thaihome]

...

This makes it easier to see that the violent element was just that - a small group of individuals - like our camp friends here, or the gay-haters - rather than the movement as a whole.

For those of us living near Rama IV/Sathorn/Din Daeng outside the encampment in the last week of the protest, it sure didn't seem like a small group of individuals. Much more like a large, well organized group, with the full logistic support of the UDD leadership (at least those that had not quit in disgust).

TH

[hanuman1]

...

This makes it easier to see that the violent element was just that - a small group of individuals - like our camp friends here, or the gay-haters - rather than the movement as a whole.

For those of us living near Rama IV/Sathorn/Din Daeng outside the encampment in the last week of the protest, it sure didn't seem like a small group of individuals. Much more like a large, well organized group, with the full logistic support of the UDD leadership (at least those that had not quit in disgust).

TH

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

[phiphidon]

You use the '76 massacre as example to condemn the ISOC in it's current form. So you give it relevance to your reply.

The ISOC has been re-organised a few times, just like the ISA has been adapted. At least we no longer have warmongering politicians like the late k. Samak. Only former communists who have been pardoned officially for their '70 activities and which therefor should no longer be hold against them, even if it still seems to color their views

I used the Student massacre of 1976 as an example as to why Dr Weng subsequently associated with the Communist Party. The brief background to that massacre stated quite correctly that those directly responsible were under command of ISOC. ISOC at that time quite rightly deserved to be condemned. If you wish to read this as my using the massacre to condemn the current ISOC, you are wrong, as this was not my intention at all. As a balance of views I understand that an official pardon was given to the perpetrators of the massacre as well, so yes the former communists and their compatriots may not have fond memories of that period of Thai history.

[Insight]

...

This makes it easier to see that the violent element was just that - a small group of individuals - like our camp friends here, or the gay-haters - rather than the movement as a whole.

For those of us living near Rama IV/Sathorn/Din Daeng outside the encampment in the last week of the protest, it sure didn't seem like a small group of individuals. Much more like a large, well organized group, with the full logistic support of the UDD leadership (at least those that had not quit in disgust).

TH

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

What percentage of them have publicly condemned the actions of the violent protesters?

[hanuman1]

...

This makes it easier to see that the violent element was just that - a small group of individuals - like our camp friends here, or the gay-haters - rather than the movement as a whole.

For those of us living near Rama IV/Sathorn/Din Daeng outside the encampment in the last week of the protest, it sure didn't seem like a small group of individuals. Much more like a large, well organized group, with the full logistic support of the UDD leadership (at least those that had not quit in disgust).

TH

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

What percentage of them have publicly condemned the actions of the violent protesters?

Answering a question with a question? Answer mine, then I'll be happy to answer yours.

[thaihome]

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

If the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) did not support the behavior they could have stopped it.

Not only did they not stop it, but were encouraging and supporting it. Lots of video of the speeches being given the avid support they received from the audience.

Don't get me wrong. The protestors themselves were victimized by their own UDD leaders who intentionally lead them into a confrontation in order to maximize the causalities. The UDD leadership are probably disappointed to this day that hundreds were not killed.

TH

[Insight]

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

What percentage of them have publicly condemned the actions of the violent protesters?

Answering a question with a question? Answer mine, then I'll be happy to answer yours.

I suddenly don't feel the need to

[termad]

Interesting that one photo depicts a man who is dressing in a Communist uniform, while the other is trying to look like...well, can't quite tell from the pic whether it's Osama or Fidel. Either way...quite telling.

Now I suppose the pro-Red Shirts on the forum here will say those are government men faking it to stir up trouble.

OK, it's worth a reply. What is it about these photographs of 2 people out of 10,000 odd that is quite telling?

Well let's see now. We know that the only democracy that the Red Shirts really approve is the democracy where their side wins. Sort of sounds like elections in communist nations. Weng and others in the RED Shirt movement were, indeed, communists. They chose RED shirts as their symbol...a color symbol which, at various times and places in the world has symbolized communism. There is nothing about the Red Shirt movement that has anything to do with democracy, other than that they consistently say that word.

Considering the way that Abhisit came to power (after the previous democratically elected government was overthrown by the Military) I don't really understand why you accuse the red shirt movement of being anti democracy. I wonder what you will say when/if Phuea Thai win the next election with an overall majority? Will you trot out the same old accusation about the election being bought or will you accept that the Thai electorate have democratically elected a new goverment?

[Emptyset]

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

If the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) did not support the behavior they could have stopped it.

Not only did they not stop it, but were encouraging and supporting it. Lots of video of the speeches being given the avid support they received from the audience.

Don't get me wrong. The protestors themselves were victimized by their own UDD leaders who intentionally lead them into a confrontation in order to maximize the causalities. The UDD leadership are probably disappointed to this day that hundreds were not killed.

TH

Well, if your last assertion is true then they made a big mistake in giving up when they did. Those in the "war room" apparently estimated that there'd be 200 to 500 deaths and that this was acceptable. Much if not most of the violence took place when/where the leaders were not present. Many of those involved were Bangkok residents, presumably the "underclass", there was nothing to stop them from simply going home. Why deny these people any agency? They were riled up & willing to fight. It's likely mostly due to frustration that comes from years of being screwed by those with more money & privilege than them. Riots like this take place in Europe often enough, especially in Paris during recent times. Yes, they were violent, but the violence is on a par with or at least not that much worse than used recently in Greece, Toronto and London. Protesters with rocks, molotovs & home-made missiles.

Now normally, these people wouldn't have died in great numbers because they could've been dealt with by riot police, water cannons and so on. But the presence of - just a few, possibly less than ten - armed men was enough to ensure that security forces would have to use live rounds. Now they might've turned to this option anyway, we simply don't know. And when it became clear to the protest leaders that there were armed men moving amongst them, even if they didn't have anything to do with them, they should've disbanded immediately to avoid putting lives at risk. That's unforgivable, even if not by design. But why keep talking about those that died as pawns with no agency? They've likely been described as stupid & brainless their whole lives, at least accord them some dignity in death, I'm sure they made their own choices, such as they were.

Anyway, there's a lot of focus here on the red shirt violence but little on the state violence, it's highly unlikely that the army acted responsibly as a whole and that all of the shootings on their part were justified. Whereas if you go on red shirt forums it's the opposite, focus is wholly on the state's role. Shame there's little middle ground. Both sides need to take responsibility and be brought to justice. But the government is doing something about the red shirt's part in the violence, what is it doing about its own sides part? So far we seem to have heard nothing but blanket denials.

[Pi Sek]

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

What percentage of them have publicly condemned the actions of the violent protesters?

Answering a question with a question? Answer mine, then I'll be happy to answer yours.

I suddenly don't feel the need to

Allow me to.

What %age of the Reds were involved in violent actions? I'd say 2-10% - 2% actually insurgents, 8% drunk and on the looting bandwagon - so let's say 6%.

What %age of the Red leaders have condemned violent actions? Well, none have - some say they are violently fighting for a good cause, some say there was no violence from the UDD and it was all govt infiltrators. The only incident of acceptance of wrongdoing was when the Red leaders apologised for Payap's incursion of Chula hospital which, due to Payap's leadership, was directly attributable to the UDD (unlike all of the incidents involving fake reds!).

Really, hanuman1 is right. You can't pin the violent intentions of a few thousand on a hundred thousand people, many of whom weren't there and certainly not in support of violent protest. Even though the Red leaders told them about the 'armed element' in their ranks in advance, it wouldn't have been the first time that Jatuporn and Nattawut had lied to create hysteria, so you can't really be all that surprised if the average reds didn't believe that such bloodshed was on its way. Besides, the Red Shirt movement is a lot bigger than the 100,000 or so that turned up at Rajprasong. Just as the PAD is a lot bigger than the similar numbers that went to Suvarnibhumi.

And... Insight is right too. You can't justify the UDD leadership's denial and deflection tactics whenever it is put to them that their movement actually did anything wrong.

I've seen this same argument argued elsewhere, with the same people involved. And you essentially agree! It just goes to show how divisive the situation has become, even amongst intelligent guests to the country who have no political input.

[Pi Sek]

Considering the way that Abhisit came to power (after the previous democratically elected government was overthrown by the Military)

Well, that's a lie, as you're fully aware. It's a lie because Abhisit came to power democratically and without any interference by the army.

I don't really understand why you accuse the red shirt movement of being anti democracy.

No, the Red Shirt movement is not anti-democracy. They are definitely more pro-democracy than the PAD... but democracy is the reason that we're in this mess in the first place. Democracy requires education for the masses and free and fair elections, which we've never had in Thailand before. Yet.

I wonder what you will say when/if Phuea Thai win the next election with an overall majority? Will you trot out the same old accusation about the election being bought or will you accept that the Thai electorate have democratically elected a new goverment?

Surely that depends on how it was won, not who won it. And what on earth makes you think that PTP will win the next election? All sources show exactly the opposite, and have done for a couple of years. The PTP are just not popular at the moment, and it's of their own doing!

[termad]

Are you saying that the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) at Rajprasong were behaving in this deplorable way? If not, then what percentage of them would you say were involved?

If the tens of thousands of protesters (or even the majority of them) did not support the behavior they could have stopped it.

Not only did they not stop it, but were encouraging and supporting it. Lots of video of the speeches being given the avid support they received from the audience.

Don't get me wrong. The protestors themselves were victimized by their own UDD leaders who intentionally lead them into a confrontation in order to maximize the causalities. The UDD leadership are probably disappointed to this day that hundreds were not killed.

TH

Cab you substantiate the above accusations? i.e. Can you say if the Red Shirt leaders were to blame for the soldiers killing reporters and people taking refuge in a Temple. Can you say if the Red Shirt leaders were to blame for the thuggery committed by the troops and shown in detail on U-tube? Can you say that the Red Shirt leaders were responsible for forty people still missing (and still not officially numbered amongst the dead) and presumed dead by their relatives?

It's no wonder the British Prime minister cancelled his holiday in Thailand. You should also remember that Phuea Thai have an excellent chance of winning the next election and then there wil be a real enquiry into what happened.

[termad]

Considering the way that Abhisit came to power (after the previous democratically elected government was overthrown by the Military)

Well, that's a lie, as you're fully aware. It's a lie because Abhisit came to power democratically and without any interference by the army.

I don't really understand why you accuse the red shirt movement of being anti democracy.

No, the Red Shirt movement is not anti-democracy. They are definitely more pro-democracy than the PAD... but democracy is the reason that we're in this mess in the first place. Democracy requires education for the masses and free and fair elections, which we've never had in Thailand before. Yet.

I wonder what you will say when/if Phuea Thai win the next election with an overall majority? Will you trot out the same old accusation about the election being bought or will you accept that the Thai electorate have democratically elected a new goverment?

Surely that depends on how it was won, not who won it. And what on earth makes you think that PTP will win the next election? All sources show exactly the opposite, and have done for a couple of years. The PTP are just not popular at the moment, and it's of their own doing!

You must be reading different sources to everybody else. The majority of the Thai press are saying that Bhumjaithai's hopes for the next election are bleak. That means that the forty MPs who were bought by the military and Amataya in order to install Abhisit most probably won't be around to support him any more. Do you think that they will be replaced by Democrats?

[thaihome]

Well, if your last assertion is true then they made a big mistake in giving up when they did. Those in the "war room" apparently estimated that there'd be 200 to 500 deaths and that this was acceptable. Much if not most of the violence took place when/where the leaders were not present. Many of those involved were Bangkok residents, presumably the "underclass", there was nothing to stop them from simply going home. Why deny these people any agency? They were riled up & willing to fight. It's likely mostly due to frustration that comes from years of being screwed by those with more money & privilege than them. Riots like this take place in Europe often enough, especially in Paris during recent times. Yes, they were violent, but the violence is on a par with or at least not that much worse than used recently in Greece, Toronto and London. Protesters with rocks, molotovs & home-made missiles.

Now normally, these people wouldn't have died in great numbers because they could've been dealt with by riot police, water cannons and so on. But the presence of - just a few, possibly less than ten - armed men was enough to ensure that security forces would have to use live rounds. Now they might've turned to this option anyway, we simply don't know. And when it became clear to the protest leaders that there were armed men moving amongst them, even if they didn't have anything to do with them, they should've disbanded immediately to avoid putting lives at risk. That's unforgivable, even if not by design. But why keep talking about those that died as pawns with no agency? They've likely been described as stupid & brainless their whole lives, at least accord them some dignity in death, I'm sure they made their own choices, such as they were.

Anyway, there's a lot of focus here on the red shirt violence but little on the state violence, it's highly unlikely that the army acted responsibly as a whole and that all of the shootings on their part were justified. Whereas if you go on red shirt forums it's the opposite, focus is wholly on the state's role. Shame there's little middle ground. Both sides need to take responsibility and be brought to justice. But the government is doing something about the red shirt's part in the violence, what is it doing about its own sides part? So far we seem to have heard nothing but blanket denials.

You hid behind a veneer of rationality, giving lip service to being even handed, when you in fact you are being nothing but disingenuous. Sneaking in your little bits of misinformation.

Please document the “war room” acceptability of 200-500 deaths? You throw that out as it is a fact, when you just made it up or are repeating UDD generated propaganda.

The reason the violence took place away from where the leadership was because most of the violence took place outside the barricades. But you again, are ignoring what was being said on the stage during that time. The Army did not attack the protestors, when the Army started setting up blockades to cutoff supplies, they were attacked by people mobilized and organized by the UDD leadership. The UDD leadership was in full control of the armed elements. They were not operating on their own.

I stood in my office on the afternoon of the 19th and watched Arisman, with an armed escort, organize the tire fires (and attempting to burn the buses they towed there) at the Asok/Suk intersection in order to block the road before they moved down to SET to burn it down.

Don’t try to be disingenuous with me, I personally watched this easily avoided tragedy unfold and nothing pisses me off more then an apologist like you trying to rationalize it by saying this was the work of just a few and was not the goal all along of certain factions within the UDD.

TH

[whybother]

You must be reading different sources to everybody else. The majority of the Thai press are saying that Bhumjaithai's hopes for the next election are bleak. That means that the forty MPs who were bought by the military and Amataya in order to install Abhisit most probably won't be around to support him any more. Do you think that they will be replaced by Democrats?

How can you say that BJT's hopes in the next election are bleak?

They just won a by-election quite easily over the PTP.

[termad]

You must be reading different sources to everybody else. The majority of the Thai press are saying that Bhumjaithai's hopes for the next election are bleak. That means that the forty MPs who were bought by the military and Amataya in order to install Abhisit most probably won't be around to support him any more. Do you think that they will be replaced by Democrats?

How can you say that BJT's hopes in the next election are bleak?

They just won a by-election quite easily over the PTP.

They won aby-election. WOW!

[rubl]

Well, if your last assertion is true then they made a big mistake in giving up when they did. Those in the "war room" apparently estimated that there'd be 200 to 500 deaths and that this was acceptable. Much if not most of the violence took place when/where the leaders were not present. Many of those involved were Bangkok residents, presumably the "underclass", there was nothing to stop them from simply going home. Why deny these people any agency? They were riled up & willing to fight. It's likely mostly due to frustration that comes from years of being screwed by those with more money & privilege than them. Riots like this take place in Europe often enough, especially in Paris during recent times. Yes, they were violent, but the violence is on a par with or at least not that much worse than used recently in Greece, Toronto and London. Protesters with rocks, molotovs & home-made missiles.

Now normally, these people wouldn't have died in great numbers because they could've been dealt with by riot police, water cannons and so on. But the presence of - just a few, possibly less than ten - armed men was enough to ensure that security forces would have to use live rounds. Now they might've turned to this option anyway, we simply don't know. And when it became clear to the protest leaders that there were armed men moving amongst them, even if they didn't have anything to do with them, they should've disbanded immediately to avoid putting lives at risk. That's unforgivable, even if not by design. But why keep talking about those that died as pawns with no agency? They've likely been described as stupid & brainless their whole lives, at least accord them some dignity in death, I'm sure they made their own choices, such as they were.

Anyway, there's a lot of focus here on the red shirt violence but little on the state violence, it's highly unlikely that the army acted responsibly as a whole and that all of the shootings on their part were justified. Whereas if you go on red shirt forums it's the opposite, focus is wholly on the state's role. Shame there's little middle ground. Both sides need to take responsibility and be brought to justice. But the government is doing something about the red shirt's part in the violence, what is it doing about its own sides part? So far we seem to have heard nothing but blanket denials.

You hid behind a veneer of rationality, giving lip service to being even handed, when you in fact you are being nothing but disingenuous. Sneaking in your little bits of misinformation.

Please document the �war room� acceptability of 200-500 deaths? You throw that out as it is a fact, when you just made it up or are repeating UDD generated propaganda.

The reason the violence took place away from where the leadership was because most of the violence took place outside the barricades. But you again, are ignoring what was being said on the stage during that time. The Army did not attack the protestors, when the Army started setting up blockades to cutoff supplies, they were attacked by people mobilized and organized by the UDD leadership. The UDD leadership was in full control of the armed elements. They were not operating on their own.

I stood in my office on the afternoon of the 19th and watched Arisman, with an armed escort, organize the tire fires (and attempting to burn the buses they towed there) at the Asok/Suk intersection in order to block the road before they moved down to SET to burn it down.

Don�t try to be disingenuous with me, I personally watched this easily avoided tragedy unfold and nothing pisses me off more then an apologist like you trying to rationalize it by saying this was the work of just a few and was not the goal all along of certain factions within the UDD.

TH

Bravo! IMHO I already detected a seemingly neutral, but carefully crafted red-shirt leaning attitude. Emptyset is certainly not emptyhead.

[Insight]

You must be reading different sources to everybody else. The majority of the Thai press are saying that Bhumjaithai's hopes for the next election are bleak. That means that the forty MPs who were bought by the military and Amataya in order to install Abhisit most probably won't be around to support him any more. Do you think that they will be replaced by Democrats?

How can you say that BJT's hopes in the next election are bleak?

They just won a by-election quite easily over the PTP.

They won aby-election. WOW!

Do they not count?

[thaihome]

You must be reading different sources to everybody else. The majority of the Thai press are saying that Bhumjaithai's hopes for the next election are bleak. That means that the forty MPs who were bought by the military and Amataya in order to install Abhisit most probably won't be around to support him any more. Do you think that they will be replaced by Democrats?

How can you say that BJT's hopes in the next election are bleak?

They just won a by-election quite easily over the PTP.

I wouldn't bother responding to these types of posts. All the poster is doing is regurgitating fully discredited Amsterdam written propaganda. Facts and reality mean nothing to them.

TH

[whybother]

You must be reading different sources to everybody else. The majority of the Thai press are saying that Bhumjaithai's hopes for the next election are bleak. That means that the forty MPs who were bought by the military and Amataya in order to install Abhisit most probably won't be around to support him any more. Do you think that they will be replaced by Democrats?

How can you say that BJT's hopes in the next election are bleak?

They just won a by-election quite easily over the PTP.

They won aby-election. WOW!

A single by-election. Over the PTP. Which was previously a PTP seat. Certainly not an indication of their election hopes being bleak.

Why are the Thai press saying BJT's hopes are bleak? Do they have reasons for saying that?