Thaksin: I'll Return At End Of Year

[Buchholz]

It is with sureness that the love of my live, Khunying to be, Yingluck will NEVER allow her brother to go to the slammer! Never! Nor should he be in jail..

Khunying is only conferred to a married woman and at 43 with a kid born out of wedlock, time is not on her side.

[Pi Sek]

Many on this forum are grateful to the military for keeping people safe during the red shirt terrorism last year

The families of tens of unarmed dead civilians may take a rather different view.

...Or maybe not. Do you believe that all unarmed dead civilians from last year were killed by the military? I certainly don't. I can't back this up with facts or a link or whatever (unless you fancy a non-verifiable personal blog - too many of these pass for "news" these days), but I think that parts of the Red Shirt movement intentionally killed unarmed civilians to raise the body count.

[phiphidon]

Many on this forum are grateful to the military for keeping people safe during the red shirt terrorism last year

The families of tens of unarmed dead civilians may take a rather different view.

are you referring to the ones killed with M79 grenades by black shirts and the shield and batton wielding police and soldiers who were murdered by black guards paid for by Thaksin? Or maybe to Seh Daeng killed by a red shirt sniper after his argument with K Thaksin which is logged and has been played on Channel 3 TV news? or maybe to the erd shirts and the nurse who were shot by black shirt guards from the tracks of the BTS. or maybe to the security guard and the fireman beaten/shot respectrively and burned to death inside central world. the red shirts are quick to claim 100 people killed by the Government whilst they include these figures. But then just like you claim about the army. They lie, brutalise, murder etc

Surely you should get in touch with the DSI with your proof of the above. Even they, with all the resources they have access to, have not come this far along the line of solving the above incidents and that is after over a year of "exhaustive" investigation. Perhaps you have the same investigative genes possessed by the learned doctor who overturned a DSI report after an hour of deliberation.

[Pi Sek]

The personal grief brought upon you by those who were part of the red shirt movement prevents you from taking a broader view. It's wholly understandable and I wish there would be some kind of legal mechanism whereby you can gain restitution from those responsible. However, in the wider picture, your very sad experience must be weighed against the experience - and possible naivety - of millions of people who see the red shirt movement as the only catalyst of change in their lives.

You have no right to accuse those millions of a personal attack against you. I wish you and your family all the best. Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.

YES THEY ARE!! he who sees a crime and supports it for whatever reason is part of that crime. My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital. These people MUST be held to account for following the directives of a fugitive criminal who offers NOTHING for Thailand but his own greed. They need to be educated that red shirt=PTP=Thaksin is BAD for Thailand even if they lose out on 1000 baht bribery money. People like you bought up in western democracies should have more sense than to follow criminals and their organisations. The red shirts acted as one and must be held responsible as one. As were the Nazis.

So do you think that all Christians are part of the atrocities that have been carried out in the name of Christianity over the years? You need to get a grip.

What happened to your wife was totally out of order, but you would have others suffer for the crimes of a few.

hanuman1 is absolutely correct in his last sentence.

But, just to put Ian's answer into perspective, many believe that the 2008 Suvarnibhumi invasion was just that: the PAD shutting down the airport. The PAD say that the airport administrator closed the airport when the PAD peacefully demonstarted at the airport. Common sense prevailed in the end and the Law did not agree with the PAD's perspective.

Payap Panket - a lawmaker, so one would assume he knew the legal ramifications of his actions - says that the Red Shirts didn't force anyone out of bed, it was the hospital. According to your account, and the accounts of doctors and nurses at the time, this is an outright lie. However, given common sense was applied in the end against the PAD, I wonder if common sense would apply here - it's easier to prosecute this one than the PAD one because the Chulalongkorn Hospital invasion had far fewer participants and Payap Panket was the clear leader, acting on his own without the support of the UDD.

I expect that's why everyone in the Red Shirt movement, except seemingly Khattiya Sawasdiphol and a handful of Red Shirts who helped him enforce the barricades for 48 hours, publicly disagreed with it... so on that basis it's hard for Ian to chastise the entire Red Shirt movement for the violations against his wife and unborn child. However, if it was me, I'd be furious (maybe enough to spend some money if the Law wasn't doing anything) - so, well done to Ian for keeping it in perspective. You once contacted me about a lawsuit about this - did you go and see the public prosecutor as I recommended or was there "no grounds for a case"?

[rixalex]

So do you think that all Christians are part of the atrocities that have been carried out in the name of Christianity over the years? You need to get a grip.

What happened to your wife was totally out of order, but you would have others suffer for the crimes of a few.

When you support a movement you become a cog in what moves it forward and in what gives it power, in all the things it does. And if you disagree that strongly with certain acts of the movement, simple, you stop supporting it. If you don't, accept that your continued support makes you a part of it all.

[jdinasia]

And the most important one:

4. Those of us who suffered grievous injury under the Thaksin regime and don't appreciate the contemptible attitude shown by the Thaksin apologists towards the rest of us.

Anyone who supports Thaksin supports they way he harmed my family and my children through blatant violations of law and criminal acts. I don't care how much free stuff he gave you after stealing it from me and others like me. He is a criminal and you can not have him back. It is your duty as citizen of the planet to demand he be punished for his actions. If you don't accept this, then you have lost any moral authority to criticize anyone else. Don't tell me Thaksin's conviction were politically motivated. They weren't nearly harsh enough. I was the victim in his machinations.

If the red shirt sympathizers ever expect anyone to care about their own plight, they better start being responsible with their statements and start caring about those their patron ruthlessly injured.

The red shirt supporters are delusional if not downright evil. They are a group of people so caught up in lies that can't even see how truly harmful they are. It is a movement that must be defended against at all costs, even to the point of civil war. Tyranny such as the red shirts espouse can not be allowed to stand in this great nation.

Let us hope that sanity prevails during this next election, and that Thaksin and his supporters crawl back under the rock they crawled out from.

The personal grief brought upon you by those who were part of the red shirt movement prevents you from taking a broader view. It's wholly understandable and I wish there would be some kind of legal mechanism whereby you can gain restitution from those responsible. However, in the wider picture, your very sad experience must be weighed against the experience - and possible naivety - of millions of people who see the red shirt movement as the only catalyst of change in their lives.

You have no right to accuse those millions of a personal attack against you. I wish you and your family all the best. Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.

YES THEY ARE!! he who sees a crime and supports it for whatever reason is part of that crime. My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital. These people MUST be held to account for following the directives of a fugitive criminal who offers NOTHING for Thailand but his own greed. They need to be educated that red shirt=PTP=Thaksin is BAD for Thailand even if they lose out on 1000 baht bribery money. People like you bought up in western democracies should have more sense than to follow criminals and their organisations. The red shirts acted as one and must be held responsible as one. As were the Nazis.

So do you think that all Christians are part of the atrocities that have been carried out in the name of Christianity over the years? You need to get a grip.

What happened to your wife was totally out of order, but you would have others suffer for the crimes of a few.

"Brilliant"

1) Christians? Talk about off topic! (as was the Nazi comment)

2) No, it isn't fair that people so deluded that they gave tacit support only be held accountable ... but those at the illegal rally ... and particularly those active in the redshirt leadership and the redshirt guards should be held to account ... particularly since they are still trying to capitalize on the deaths of April and May 2010 --- many of which were directly at their hands and all of which were caused by them escalating the level of violence.

[animatic]

Many on this forum are grateful to the military for keeping people safe during the red shirt terrorism last year

The families of tens of unarmed dead civilians may take a rather different view.

Tens versus millions....

The lesser of two evils.

Running nations and governments is never an easy business.

[jdinasia]

It is with sureness that the love of my live, Khunying to be, Yingluck will NEVER allow her brother to go to the slammer! Never! Nor should he be in jail..

Khunying is only conferred to a married woman and at 43 with a kid born out of wedlock, time is not on her side.

I am not 100% sure that is accurate. I THINK (again I am not 100% sure) that the title Khunying may also be conferred to any woman for services to the country. The normal process of attaining the title seems to come simply from being the wife of a high ranked commoner, but Khunying Pornthip's title was bestowed upon her for direct service to the country.

[jdinasia]

Many on this forum are grateful to the military for keeping people safe during the red shirt terrorism last year

The families of tens of unarmed dead civilians may take a rather different view.

Tens versus millions....

The lesser of two evils.

Running nations and governments is never an easy business.

Another example of why I used the blessed "no-see-um" function. So far the highly vaunted (by some) HRW attributes the deaths of 4 (subject to correction) people to the military. They attribute a larger number of deaths to the reds and the black shirts that worked with the reds. The largest number of deaths have not been attributed to any specific group, but all-in-all ---- ALL of the deaths can be laid at the feet of Thaksin IMHO.

[hanuman1]

So do you think that all Christians are part of the atrocities that have been carried out in the name of Christianity over the years? You need to get a grip.

What happened to your wife was totally out of order, but you would have others suffer for the crimes of a few.

When you support a movement you become a cog in what moves it forward and in what gives it power, in all the things it does. And if you disagree that strongly with certain acts of the movement, simple, you stop supporting it. If you don't, accept that your continued support makes you a part of it all.

Your generalization on the nature of supporting movements is too simplistic in my view.

A few years ago, I remember not wanting to go out in public (even in Thailand) wearing an England football shirt because of the nauseating behaviour of some England fans. I didn't want to be identified as someone who was part of a group that was renowned for hooliganism. According to your belief, I was right to mothball my England shirt.

Whilst the analogy between the red shirt movement and English football may seem tenuous at first glance, it is similar in that there wasn't exactly another choice I could have made - wear another country's shirt? Not really an option. Similarly, for the disenfranchised red shirt followers there is no other show in town. You would have them give up any hope of representation with a realistic chance of electoral success because a few idiots chose the path of criminality in the name of the group they support.

[ballpoint]

Your generalization on the nature of supporting movements is too simplistic in my view.

A few years ago, I remember not wanting to go out in public (even in Thailand) wearing an England football shirt because of the nauseating behaviour of some England fans. I didn't want to be identified as someone who was part of a group that was renowned for hooliganism. According to your belief, I was right to mothball my England shirt.

Whilst the analogy between the red shirt movement and English football may seem tenuous at first glance, it is similar in that there wasn't exactly another choice I could have made - wear another country's shirt? Not really an option. Similarly, for the disenfranchised red shirt followers there is no other show in town. You would have them give up any hope of representation with a realistic chance of electoral success because a few idiots chose the path of criminality in the name of the group they support.

You are too simplistic in my view. If the England football team, and their management, went on a burning, killing and looting rampage because FIFA wouldn't award them the world cup, then yes, anyone continuing to support that group of "leaders", and not calling for their replacement and punishment, would have to share a measure of the blame. If any red leaders had been entirely peaceful, condemned the violence committed by their guards, and calls to violence by fellow leaders, and handed them over to the authorities, then yes, any peaceful followers of the reds would be justified in their following. However, any member of an organisation, however peaceful they themselves happen to be, that is violent from the top down, who doesn't take a stand against that violence, and make an attempt to change things, is guilty of supporting criminal activity. And any supporter of the ultimate leader of that organisation, who tries to tell a parent who lost a child due to the bird flu cover up, or due to being incorrectly targetted in the "war on drugs", or crammed into an army truck, or murdered for daring to expose crimes committed by that leader, or anyone else personally affected in a negative way by that leader, that they sympathise, but will continue to support that leader because "I am really only interested in myself and happened to make a few bucks due to the policies of that leader, so I'll continue to support the money grabbing, murdering, corrupt, life ruining sack of shit, because, well, basically we share the same traits" is hypocritical to the extreme.

[Buchholz]

It is with sureness that the love of my live, Khunying to be, Yingluck will NEVER allow her brother to go to the slammer! Never! Nor should he be in jail..

Khunying is only conferred to a married woman and at 43 with a kid born out of wedlock, time is not on her side.

I am not 100% sure that is accurate. I THINK (again I am not 100% sure) that the title Khunying may also be conferred to any woman for services to the country. The normal process of attaining the title seems to come simply from being the wife of a high ranked commoner, but Khunying Pornthip's title was bestowed upon her for direct service to the country.

Khunying Pornthip is married.

Marital Status:

Married to Viroj Rojanasunand with one daughter, Yaravee Rojanasunand

http://teochiewkia.blogspot.com/2009/10/dr-pornthip-rojanasunand.html

AFAIK from what I've read on the matter, there are no single women, with or without children born out of wedlock, who have been conferred the title, Khunying.

Additionally, wiki (for what it's worth) adds this bit about Khunying:

An unmarried woman with a conferred title is styled Khun (courtesy title) (คุณ).

Sorry to disappoint kathukid regarding the love of his live [sic].

.

Edited May 13, 2011 by Buchholz

[jayboy]

Another example of why I used the blessed "no-see-um" function. So far the highly vaunted (by some) HRW attributes the deaths of 4 (subject to correction) people to the military. They attribute a larger number of deaths to the reds and the black shirts that worked with the reds. The largest number of deaths have not been attributed to any specific group, but all-in-all ---- ALL of the deaths can be laid at the feet of Thaksin IMHO.

I appreciate his silence.Long may it last.

However for others there is a singular piece of dishonesty in his post.The HRW report, which he rubbishes and then quotes as authority, is quite clear about which side was responsible for most of the killings - the Thai army.Don't take my word for it - read the report.But in the minds of the military cheerleaders, it's all Thaksin's fault.

[Pi Sek]

Your generalization on the nature of supporting movements is too simplistic in my view.

A few years ago, I remember not wanting to go out in public (even in Thailand) wearing an England football shirt because of the nauseating behaviour of some England fans. I didn't want to be identified as someone who was part of a group that was renowned for hooliganism. According to your belief, I was right to mothball my England shirt.

Whilst the analogy between the red shirt movement and English football may seem tenuous at first glance, it is similar in that there wasn't exactly another choice I could have made - wear another country's shirt? Not really an option. Similarly, for the disenfranchised red shirt followers there is no other show in town. You would have them give up any hope of representation with a realistic chance of electoral success because a few idiots chose the path of criminality in the name of the group they support.

You are too simplistic in my view. If the England football team, and their management, went on a burning, killing and looting rampage because FIFA wouldn't award them the world cup, then yes, anyone continuing to support that group of "leaders", and not calling for their replacement and punishment, would have to share a measure of the blame. If any red leaders had been entirely peaceful, condemned the violence committed by their guards, and calls to violence by fellow leaders, and handed them over to the authorities, then yes, any peaceful followers of the reds would be justified in their following. However, any member of an organisation, however peaceful they themselves happen to be, that is violent from the top down, who doesn't take a stand against that violence, and make an attempt to change things, is guilty of supporting criminal activity. And any supporter of the ultimate leader of that organisation, who tries to tell a parent who lost a child due to the bird flu cover up, or due to being incorrectly targetted in the "war on drugs", or crammed into an army truck, or murdered for daring to expose crimes committed by that leader, or anyone else personally affected in a negative way by that leader, that they sympathise, but will continue to support that leader because "I am really only interested in myself and happened to make a few bucks due to the policies of that leader, so I'll continue to support the money grabbing, murdering, corrupt, life ruining sack of shit, because, well, basically we share the same traits" is hypocritical to the extreme.

I would agree with your outlook as to the legitimacy of a non-peaceful protest, as would everyone else who is sensible. However, many pro-UDD types would say that your outlook doesn't apply to their protest because the leaders weren't calling for violence - don't you remember the big "peaceful protesters" sign? Many others, including myself, would call that a load of rubbish as they were clearly violent from the top down. I don't think I have to post any more video clips of the calls to arms, the calls for arson, the calls for various peoples' heads, or do I?

However, we're talking about the Chulalongkorn invasion here - and I'm saying you can't really pin that one on the UDD because everyone said Payap Panket was acting on his own.

With regards to your final point about the extreme hypocrisy of trying to say that collateral damage is acceptable if one's own personal economic conditions are good - I would use "barbaric" rather than "hypocritical", but I am biased.

[maewrocks]

My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital.

Genuinely sorry to hear this.But precisely who ordered her out of bed, the redshirts or the hospital administration?

Hope your wife is fine now. You should also ask the government/ army why they positioned snipers in the top floors of the hospital.

[Pi Sek]

The HRW report, which he rubbishes and then quotes as authority, is quite clear about which side was responsible for most of the killings - the Thai army.Don't take my word for it - read the report.But in the minds of the military cheerleaders, it's all Thaksin's fault.

I get all the academic protests that the Red Shirts put forward, and I recognise their validity and their value. But do you not think that the deaths - not the protest movement itself, but the deaths - are not directly attributable by Thaksin?

I mean, given that the first fatal bloodshed was a bunch of soldiers getting killed by a grenade attack followed by a pretty chaotic firefight, in a clearance operation in response to Kwanchai's April 9 attack on the 1st Infantry barracks; the second fatal violence was the Saladaeng grenade attack, where I was present; the third was Kwanchai's march to Pathum Thani where CNN witnessed "a major gun battle". Then came Payap's Chula invasion, but I wouldn't call the 4 fatalities caused by the evacuation "fatal violence", although some might. The fourth was 2 policemen's deaths caused by drive-by shootings and M79 grenade attacks on 8 May. Then came Seh Daeng's death on 13 May (very debatable who shot him) and then all hell broke loose, and I doubt that neither the army nor the Red Shirts were without blame throughout the ensuing week.

Regardless of who pulled the trigger in any of these events, it takes two to tango. Thaksin is clearly to blame for one of these sides tangoing. These deaths wouldn't have happened if the PTP paymaster - whoever that is - had not ordered his party to pull out of dialogue using political channels.

Thaksin is merely a factor of the Red Shirt movement's demands, as some of the more intelligent Red Shirts like Thida and Sombat claim. They just don't want their choice of PM invalidated by unnecessary red tape. But Thaksin is much more than a factor of the violence - he was the catalyst and the sponsor.

[Pi Sek]

My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital.

Genuinely sorry to hear this.But precisely who ordered her out of bed, the redshirts or the hospital administration?

Hope your wife is fine now. You should also ask the government/ army why they positioned snipers in the top floors of the hospital.

Firstly - you, maewrocks, are trolling. That is very rude. Have some consideration for your fellow posters.

Secondly, to offer you a chance to reprieve yourself, whom should he ask? The government or the army (given they're not always on the same page)? And why should he expect any answer other than "But there weren't any there", given that none were found?

[krangeek]

QUOTE: Taksin will go to jail if he enters Thailand UNQUOTE.

OH NO HE WON'T.

Edited May 13, 2011 by krangeek

[jayboy]

I get all the academic protests that the Red Shirts put forward, and I recognise their validity and their value. But do you not think that the deaths - not the protest movement itself, but the deaths - are not directly attributable by Thaksin?

No.

Of course Thaksin is largely responsible for the Redshirt movement, and must account to the Thai people for abuses.

But most the deaths were directly attributable to the Thai army which as always has rejected accountability and has refused to co-operate with any of the subsequent enquiries.Abhisit also as the civilian PM has a responsibility which I suspect may come back to haunt him.

[patjem]

So do you think that all Christians are part of the atrocities that have been carried out in the name of Christianity over the years? You need to get a grip.

What happened to your wife was totally out of order, but you would have others suffer for the crimes of a few.

"Get a grip": there is a distinct difference between the two cases you are drawing your comparison: one group (the red protesters) chose to be at, and remain at, the protest. The other group ("all Christians") were not involved in any way in whatever religious killings event you may be referring to. I would agree that anyone who was at any such event and remained would be as complicit to the crime as the attending red shirts at their rally. Other members of the collective "all Christians" do not have the same association, likewise neither do red shirts that were not at the rally, or chose to leave.

The legal term is "aiding and abetting".

[krangeek]

I get all the academic protests that the Red Shirts put forward, and I recognise their validity and their value. But do you not think that the deaths - not the protest movement itself, but the deaths - are not directly attributable by Thaksin?

No.

Of course Thaksin is largely responsible for the Redshirt movement, and must account to the Thai people for abuses.

But most the deaths were directly attributable to the Thai army which as always has rejected accountability and has refused to co-operate with any of the subsequent enquiries.Abhisit also as the civilian PM has a responsibility which I suspect may come back to haunt him.

Completely wrong. 'Most of the deaths' can be attributed to Taksin's cannon fodder. I know I live in that area.

But on another note, the PAD has lost a lot of support owing to their veering towards ultra nationalism and their total lack of concern for the plight of the poor. The word 'untermenschen' springs to mind. And the 'Reds' have not a viable party leader.

[Pi Sek]

I get all the academic protests that the Red Shirts put forward, and I recognise their validity and their value. But do you not think that the deaths - not the protest movement itself, but the deaths - are not directly attributable by Thaksin?

No.

Of course Thaksin is largely responsible for the Redshirt movement, and must account to the Thai people for abuses.

But most the deaths were directly attributable to the Thai army which as always has rejected accountability and has refused to co-operate with any of the subsequent enquiries.Abhisit also as the civilian PM has a responsibility which I suspect may come back to haunt him.

This is one of those things that we will have to cordially disagree about. In the most extreme case - if it turns out that the army really did pull the trigger for all of the fatalities - I would still put the blame squarely (excuse the pun!) at Thaksin's feet. I suspect that, without his involvement, there would not have been a single death.

The RTA has a questionable record, no doubt, especially with regards to accountability. They have traditionally and historically been a law unto themselves, which is obviously not a perfect state of affairs (this certainly doesn't absolve Abhisit, but his instructions were very clear - I don't think blame can be apportioned to Abhisit if the army decided to overrule him). Were they overly heavy-handed in the May clearance operation? Very likely. Did the Red Shirt movement want a peaceful solution? The mainstay, yes. Did the UDD want a peaceful solution? No, if their non-lawful demands were not met. The key factor of their unlawful demands was Thaksin (not to mention he was the one paying for it - not proven fact, but my very strong belief).

Your points are valid, don't get me wrong. The army should speak up and say sorry when asked if they could have done anything better in last year's clearance operation. But to say the army is directly responsible for innocent deaths is pushing the boat a little far if you ask me... the deaths could have been prevented by the Red Shirt movement's insistence on peaceful protest. That didn't happen, so the army went in.

Also, you say that "most the deaths were directly attributable to the Thai army" - were they? Who really knows? And... what of the deaths that weren't directly attributable to the Thai army? Were they the army's fault too? If not, then whose? If the individuals responsible were acting as individuals, and the police couldn't/wouldn't arrest them, are the army wrong to take them out with extreme prejudice? (Having said that, of course, justification for using extreme prejudice does not mean justification for immense collateral damage, as I think might have been the case.)

We've done this to death over the last year; I don't think either of us will change our views. I've always thought that accountability is key to reconciliation, but noone has been made accountable and we are having civil discourse about something we both feel strongly about, are we not? Are we not both interested in the ethical advance of this country? I'd love to be able to put this to bed and say the deaths were 43/48 or whatever - but we don't have the facts and unfortunately it doesn't look like we ever will have (my guess is due to non-cooperation, incompetence and time elapsed; faults on all sides).

Also, please forgive me for bringing the topic off-topic. We're going back to the same discussion that goes with most of these UDD/Thaksin threads which, as mentioned in the paragraph above, isn't getting us anywhere!

[rixalex]

When you support a movement you become a cog in what moves it forward and in what gives it power, in all the things it does. And if you disagree that strongly with certain acts of the movement, simple, you stop supporting it. If you don't, accept that your continued support makes you a part of it all.

Your generalization on the nature of supporting movements is too simplistic in my view.

A few years ago, I remember not wanting to go out in public (even in Thailand) wearing an England football shirt because of the nauseating behaviour of some England fans. I didn't want to be identified as someone who was part of a group that was renowned for hooliganism. According to your belief, I was right to mothball my England shirt.

Whilst the analogy between the red shirt movement and English football may seem tenuous at first glance, it is similar in that there wasn't exactly another choice I could have made - wear another country's shirt? Not really an option. Similarly, for the disenfranchised red shirt followers there is no other show in town. You would have them give up any hope of representation with a realistic chance of electoral success because a few idiots chose the path of criminality in the name of the group they support.

Your analogy supports my belief. As an England supporter you saw other "fellow" supporters acting badly, and no longer wanted to associate yourself with them. As you say, you couldn't switch your support to another country, so you simply stopped supporting any team.

I get what you say about some red shirt supporters feeling that there is no other movement out there to get behind, but if the option is support a group that you feel does have your interests in mind, but that also is guilty of considerable damage, destruction and death, or support nobody, to my mind, supporting nobody is the infinitely better option.

And i would say the same of those who support the yellow shirts. Yes it may align with some of your beliefs - for many that would be those concerning bringing Thaksin to justice - but what about the airport take-over, what about the leader and his background and his motives - are you prepared to put your support behind all that as well? I know i couldn't.

[timekeeper]

My own wife was ordered out of bed whilst in hospital during the red shirts attack on the hospital.

Genuinely sorry to hear this.But precisely who ordered her out of bed, the redshirts or the hospital administration?

Hope your wife is fine now. You should also ask the government/ army why they positioned snipers in the top floors of the hospital.

i hope so too

so where's your sources for the snipers comment maewrocks?

if you have no sources, its just more red propaganda and posting unsubstantiated rumour as if it is fact, is against the forum rules on TV............

[rixalex]

so where's your sources for the snipers comment maewrocks?

Perhaps mc2 told him.

[jdinasia]

The HRW report, which he rubbishes and then quotes as authority, is quite clear about which side was responsible for most of the killings - the Thai army.Don't take my word for it - read the report.But in the minds of the military cheerleaders, it's all Thaksin's fault.

I get all the academic protests that the Red Shirts put forward, and I recognise their validity and their value. But do you not think that the deaths - not the protest movement itself, but the deaths - are not directly attributable by Thaksin?

I mean, given that the first fatal bloodshed was a bunch of soldiers getting killed by a grenade attack followed by a pretty chaotic firefight, in a clearance operation in response to Kwanchai's April 9 attack on the 1st Infantry barracks; the second fatal violence was the Saladaeng grenade attack, where I was present; the third was Kwanchai's march to Pathum Thani where CNN witnessed "a major gun battle". Then came Payap's Chula invasion, but I wouldn't call the 4 fatalities caused by the evacuation "fatal violence", although some might. The fourth was 2 policemen's deaths caused by drive-by shootings and M79 grenade attacks on 8 May. Then came Seh Daeng's death on 13 May (very debatable who shot him) and then all hell broke loose, and I doubt that neither the army nor the Red Shirts were without blame throughout the ensuing week.

Regardless of who pulled the trigger in any of these events, it takes two to tango. Thaksin is clearly to blame for one of these sides tangoing. These deaths wouldn't have happened if the PTP paymaster - whoever that is - had not ordered his party to pull out of dialogue using political channels.

Thaksin is merely a factor of the Red Shirt movement's demands, as some of the more intelligent Red Shirts like Thida and Sombat claim. They just don't want their choice of PM invalidated by unnecessary red tape. But Thaksin is much more than a factor of the violence - he was the catalyst and the sponsor.

Quite right ---- the very fact that the two way support (thaksin supporting the reds and the reds supporting Thaksin) existed all during the time of Arisaman's calls for the burning of BKK well before the beginning of the red rally in March 2010 --- and continue until the present day, places the violence at the feet of one man and one man only. Thaksin. The escalation of the violence was one-sided (escalated by the reds) in an attempt to prevent the current government from being in place in October 2010 to name the new army chief.

[jayboy]

The escalation of the violence was one-sided (escalated by the reds) in an attempt to prevent the current government from being in place in October 2010 to name the new army chief.

I won't comment on the first part of this sentence, but the latter in hindsight seems a laudable objective given Prayuth's appalling start.

What happened to the "ignore function" ? Did you miss me?

[rametindallas]

I will be very happy to see him back.

This government has done nothing for us. I think that corruption is the number 1 problem here from small time street vendors right up to Government officials and Army allowing drugs to come into my country. When they let them in, they get richer. The way to stop or at least begin to stop corruptin in Thailand is to give good salaries and so people can live good life. This way there will be less chance of corruptions. When my childrens come from University they can only get low paying jobs. If children can finish University and get a good job that give them enough money to live a decent life then it will help their journy in life to take the middle path and go away from direction of corruption.

I am 50 year Thai and think government must start with:

1. Education at International standards for ALL Thai. Not only rich. English language must be good.
2. Good health care for ALL Thai people.
3. Thailand MUST have good internet if we want to compete Internationally.
4. Labor standards to be set so people can be to make good money for future
5. Stop corruption in Thailand at the same time as raising salaries.
6. Stop drugs here and even if people need to die. The drug dealers will know a law and if continue then they know have death penalty.
7. Have better anf fast system set up to help victoms of disasters because it seems to happen more these days.
8. Make peace with our neighbours even if it mean to give temple rights away in Cambodia and allow access for tourist.

I also have many foreign friend who complain about the visa rules etc so maybe if government can take the fee for visas and apply it direct to Education or war on drugs then the foreigner can feel good about where the visa money goes.

I know in the world all government have corruption but when Thaksin was our PM he did not hide it like many other governments. I can accept this. Maybe if Abhisit have more money and experience he could have done the good job but it is proved that he did not and he have his chance already.

It's good to see that 50-year-old Thais educated enough to have a perfect command of English are empassioned enough about Thai politics to conclusively put down their political thoughts on a first-ever Thavisa post along with a series of suggestions to fix Thailand's problems. Did you know that your bullet points are almost exactly Thaksin's own ideas, word for word? I can see why you would vote for him.

But, hang on, you're saying that corruption is bad, and then you're saying that Thaksin was nice and open about it. You want to get rid of corruption but want the most corrupt guy at the head of your country? That doesn't seem to make sense to me. You talk about drugs and corruption, referencing the army and government. But Thaksin oversaw this whole operation, and he didn't want to change it back then - he just wanted his share. Some might argue that he was kicked out because he wanted more than his share.

And I agree, drug dealers are the scum of the earth. They are all murderers, pimps and rapists and they all deserve to die; it's a myth that the network of drug dealing is full of victims of social circumstances. And those drug mules in particular should be subject to death by genital electrocution. But, hang on, the most recent investigation - you know, the one first shelved by Thaksin and then by the Samak administration - show that less than half of the people killed had any ties whatsoever with the drug industry. Would a collateral damage rate of 60%+ be acceptable to you in the next war on drugs?

You make a lot of interesting points in your post, much like the Quadrangled Prophet himself, but really no indication of how it's going to be executed.

+1

[rubl]

The escalation of the violence was one-sided (escalated by the reds) in an attempt to prevent the current government from being in place in October 2010 to name the new army chief.

I won't comment on the first part of this sentence, but the latter in hindsight seems a laudable objective given Prayuth's appalling start.

To comment on the first part would mean going into the red-shirt / UDD build up of intimidation and violence which by now is reasonably documented. Unless your main source of information is Robert A.'s website of course.

As for 'Gen. Phayuth's appalling start', please elaborate ?

[jdinasia]

The escalation of the violence was one-sided (escalated by the reds) in an attempt to prevent the current government from being in place in October 2010 to name the new army chief.

I won't comment on the first part of this sentence, but the latter in hindsight seems a laudable objective given Prayuth's appalling start.

To comment on the first part would mean going into the red-shirt / UDD build up of intimidation and violence which by now is reasonably documented. Unless your main source of information is Robert A.'s website of course.

As for 'Gen. Phayuth's appalling start', please elaborate ?

Obviously some people can't deal with the fact that the reds chose to escalate the violence in an attempt to force the army onto the streets based upon the historical evidence that governments in Thailand don't survive when the army takes action in BKK. The fact that this government not only survived but didn't lose much support at all would indicate to some that not only was the crackdown on the armed and violent redshirt insurrection that has oft been mislabeled as a "protest" justified, it was also "widely popular". In fact, many people were upset that it didn't happen sooner. Trying to fault the current army commander for things that happened in 1972 or 1992 or even 2004 falls a bit short unless you are a one-trick pony that overlooks everything in an attempt to blame the army

Prayuth, overall, did a pretty remarkable job at minimizing the loss of life while accomplishing the goal of getting the red insurrectionists out of BKK. He, along with the police, did fail in protecting property in the immediate aftermath. Personally, those that committed the acts of arson shouldn't have been given the chance and because they were deliberately risking the lives of even more Thai people should have been dealt with severely on the spot.