Wreath For House Speaker Sparks Red-Shirt Attack

[rubl]

p.s. Here's a video on Facebook of the aftermath of the incident. Note how the red shirts are provoked into continuously attacking the guy as he's being escorted away:

http://www.facebook....video_processed

I loved the section where the guy being led away provoked the red shirt by having his back turned to him trying to leave... no way the peaceful red shirt was going to stand for that so a good kick to his BACK will teach him to walk away... they truly are animals.. ..and herein we see the result of a horrible education system..

I assume you refer to the common Thai education system. Please don't provoke us by even borderline suggesting that red-schools run by Dr. weng and his wife are either horrible or might not teach the correct meaning and functioning of a democracy

[scorecard]

Some 10 red shirts rally in front of Prem's house

Published on August 26, 2011

Police took some ten red-shirt people into custody before freeing them after they rallied in front the Si Sao Theves residence of Privy Council President Gen Prem Tinsulanonda.

The people were not dressed in red shirts but they admitted to police at that they were red-shirt people.

Patrol policemen took the people to the Samsen police station for questioning and taking their photos for records. They were freed without being charged.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Some-10-red-shirts-rally-in-front-of-Prems-house-30163747.html

People not dressed in red-shirts admitted they were red-shirts. Goh, who would have thought red-shirts would stoop so low as to take off their red-shirts in an act of provocation.

Either they must be fake red-shirts, or if they are real they should be banned for taking of the sacred red-shirt without a good reason or permission from MP Jatuporn or Natthawut. Shame on them one way or another

Don't worry, geriatrickid will be here soon to explain how they were framed and they are fake. I'm looking forward to it.

[nicknostitz]

Lol, "eminent scholars". Or as I'm sure Thaksin refers to them, useful idiots

A very educated remark...

Some of the people i mentioned have written very critical papers and books on Thaksin, and are the last people that Thaksin would refer to.

Thailand is not just about Thaksin against ThaiVisa scholars...

[scorecard]

The idea of advanced notice is to allow the police to help with traffic redirection, space, etc., etc. That's needed when you get more than a handful of protesters, wreath-layers, or whatever.

Advance notice here has nothing to do with "requirement" in this case, but with how things are here usually handled in such situations, to prevent violence from happening. Such notice gives police the opportunity not just to regulate traffic, but also to have enough officers at hand to prevent attack of members of one group against the other. Well, unless provoking a violent incident is actually intended. Which is a common, and very dirty, strategy here.

You mean to imply that with the common knowledge of the mentality of the red-shirt supporter standing guard at parliament in mind, anyone who even only wants to walk past should phone the police of their intention first?

You do not really convince me, dear chap. Two men laying a wreath can hardly be reason to have them forcefully removed by self-appointed guardians of the red-shirt faith. Is it provoking red-shirts or their guards to lay a wreath? Did those who did, openly and vocally taunt the red-shirts? Till now not even 'alleged' they did so.

Had they popped-up in yellow-shirts though I would assume they would have asked the police to accompany them, for fear of their lives

The message of the wreath was quite clear - a wreath of the kind that is used in funerals, addressed at the house speaker, together with an actual clock that people mistook for a possible bomb. This was a clear provocation. If this would just have been a symbolic protest, and not a intended provocation they could have done that at another parliament entry just around the corner, where no Red Shirts were present.

"Common knowledge of the mentality of the Red Shirts"? Excuse me, care to explain where your insights of that "common knowledge" derive from? Have you attended many protests, and spoken with many Red Shirts? Or is it just what you read on this forum here?

Wreaths like this are used daily to indicate disgust of parliamentarians and more nothing new.

Certainly not justification to be beaten up.

If the reds were beaten up for doing this amsterdam would scream murder to the whole world.

[rubl]

Some 10 red shirts rally in front of Prem's house

Published on August 26, 2011

Police took some ten red-shirt people into custody before freeing them after they rallied in front the Si Sao Theves residence of Privy Council President Gen Prem Tinsulanonda.

The people were not dressed in red shirts but they admitted to police at that they were red-shirt people.

Patrol policemen took the people to the Samsen police station for questioning and taking their photos for records. They were freed without being charged.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Some-10-red-shirts-rally-in-front-of-Prems-house-30163747.html

People not dressed in red-shirts admitted they were red-shirts. Goh, who would have thought red-shirts would stoop so low as to take off their red-shirts in an act of provocation.

Either they must be fake red-shirts, or if they are real they should be banned for taking of the sacred red-shirt without a good reason or permission from MP Jatuporn or Natthawut. Shame on them one way or another

Don't worry, geriatrickid will be here soon to explain how they were framed and they are fake. I'm looking forward to it.

I already found the answer, PM Yingluck might have been peeved!

BREAKINGNEWS

Yingluck says Prem not open house to welcome birthday well-wishers

Published on August 26, 2011

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said she did not visit Privy Council President Gen Prem Tinsulanonda to wish him a happy birthday Friday because Prem did not open his house to welcome well-wishers.

Reporters asked her at 1 pm whether she would visit Prem at his Si Sao Theves residence, Yingluck replied that Prem did not open his house so she did not visit him.

-- The Nation 2011-08-26

[gregb]

3. A wreath? This is what is sent for funerals. Does one not understand the message? It was the equivalent of a message saying you are dead.

Morally he is. Anyone who supports Thaksin is morally dead already.

There is no indication that it was a death threat or meant to be taken literally. I think it is a very valid message, that by supporting Thaksin in helping to oppress the Thai people he is killing his karma.

You are on a very slippery slope there geriatrickid if you think delivering a wreath of flowers is illegal. No death threat was implied, but the red shirt assault was most definitely criminal. I hope the red shirted attackers are well punished for their hatred of democracy and the threat they pose to peaceful freedom of expression.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. Posts containing copyrighted photos have been removed.

[rixalex]

The two yesterday have staged a stealth attack, directly where the Red Shirts were, just after they were seen talking with a Democrat MP, giving police no chance to properly deal with the situation. They have also reached what they most definitely intended to.

Frankly, i don't know how you have the audacity to lament the quality of journalism here, when you yourself in the above, have taken what can only be described as hearsay, word on the street mutterings, as complete gospel, as hardened fact.

...

The problem here in this topic is, that the whole discussion is based on shoddy journalism.

...

Not just in this topic. In nearly every piece in Thailand's English media.

That unfortunately is absolutely true.

[rubl]

You mean to imply that with the common knowledge of the mentality of the red-shirt supporter standing guard at parliament in mind, anyone who even only wants to walk past should phone the police of their intention first?

You do not really convince me, dear chap. Two men laying a wreath can hardly be reason to have them forcefully removed by self-appointed guardians of the red-shirt faith. Is it provoking red-shirts or their guards to lay a wreath? Did those who did, openly and vocally taunt the red-shirts? Till now not even 'alleged' they did so.

Had they popped-up in yellow-shirts though I would assume they would have asked the police to accompany them, for fear of their lives

The message of the wreath was quite clear - a wreath of the kind that is used in funerals, addressed at the house speaker, together with an actual clock that people mistook for a possible bomb. This was a clear provocation. If this would just have been a symbolic protest, and not a intended provocation they could have done that at another parliament entry just around the corner, where no Red Shirts were present.

"Common knowledge of the mentality of the Red Shirts"? Excuse me, care to explain where your insights of that "common knowledge" derive from? Have you attended many protests, and spoken with many Red Shirts? Or is it just what you read on this forum here?

The message was clear, but since when is expressing one's opinion a grave provocation? The clock might just a symbolic indication that time is ticking away for democracy. A clear provocation? The wreath was black instead of red, a clear provocation? You mean, they were obviously not one of us, so it must have been a provocation. They should have used a side entrance, this here in front is ours. Stay away all non-believers.

The 'common knowledge' was a bit of an exaggeration, everyone knows red-shirts are just peaceful and not terrorists, even when they attack two 'other flavour' protesters who want to lay a wreath.

You zigzag around the topic, dear friend. If we are to avoid attacks by one group on others simply because they think they have been provoked, or are in their right to do so, we need to crackdown. To go into 'yes, but' mood doesn't help.

Are you obstinate out of principle, or is it so difficult to understand that we have a very fragile and delicate situation here in Thailand? The authorities have to be very delicate in how they handle things. Provocations and/or over-reaction can easily result in a mess - the last thing we need here.

Dr. Tul's group positioned itself away from the Red Shirts, allowing the police and Red Shirt guards to deal with the situation, allowing the group to get what they wanted - media attention by handing over a letter to the government, and no violence occurred. The two yesterday have staged a stealth attack, directly where the Red Shirts were, just after they were seen talking with a Democrat MP, giving police no chance to properly deal with the situation. They have also reached what they most definitely intended to.

I'm aware we have a fragile situation in Thailand. Mondays I wear a yellow-shirt given to me by my company, there some others who do the same still. Never did I feel an urge to group us yellow-shirts and tell all with a 'wrong-colour-shirt' to leave 'our' BTS train and wait for another one. Bit over-the-top comparison, but you're suggestion is not much better. I have to give up some of my democratic rights because others will trample on them (and me) if I don't?

I really wonder about 'police and red shirt guards to deal with the situation'. What have the red-shirt guards to do with it? At the most they should take care of their flock and leave the police to handle others. Do we need to erect new placards, 'beware, red-shirts, stay away' or 'beware, red-shirts, come closer at own risk'.

Now, pray tell, two white-shirted men, a stealth attack? Neither stealth, nor attack. Police had no time to propely deal with it. I assume you mean, try to keep the red-shirts away from them, let them peacefully lay the wreath, allow them to leave unmolested and probably even allow the red-shirts to quietly remove the wreath again? Missing is the suggestion that reporters encouraged red-shirts to kick and trample for better footage on television.

Plain and simple, red-shirts seem to assume authority where they do not have. The election victory with many of their UDD leaders in parliament seem to have bolstered their courage. Now is the time to make clear what rights and duties they have in a democratic system.

(edit: add: look up appeasement, just for the fun of it)

Edited August 26, 2011 by rubl

[nicknostitz]

I really wonder about 'police and red shirt guards to deal with the situation'. What have the red-shirt guards to do with it? At the most they should take care of their flock and leave the police to handle others. Do we need to erect new placards, 'beware, red-shirts, stay away' or 'beware, red-shirts, come closer at own risk'.

Now, pray tell, two white-shirted men, a stealth attack? Neither stealth, nor attack. Police had no time to propely deal with it. I assume you mean, try to keep the red-shirts away from them, let them peacefully lay the wreath, allow them to leave unmolested and probably even allow the red-shirts to quietly remove the wreath again? Missing is the suggestion that reporters encouraged red-shirts to kick and trample for better footage on television.

Plain and simple, red-shirts seem to assume authority where they do not have. The election victory with many of their UDD leaders in parliament seem to have bolstered their courage. Now is the time to make clear what rights and duties they have in a democratic system.

(edit: add: look up appeasement, just for the fun of it)

Yes, i mean exactly that - let them lay the wreath, let journalists take the pictures, let the protesters make their statements, have Red Shirt guards there to hold the Red Shirt protester back from doing stupid things, let photographers take pics of angry and emotional Red Shirts , have a small police force present to keep up appearances...well, the way how these sort of things are usually dealt with here. It's all a bit of a theater performance done countless times.

This one though was different, because the aim was not to have the usual performance, but a different one, yet still part of the same theater. And it worked, of course, as it does almost always. Important were the first reports "evil red shirts beat up innocents". That the innocents have not been that innocent is not contained in the first reports, and therefore not that important anymore - the first reports have stuck in the minds of people, especially when "evidence" was presented during the debate screened life on TV.

All smoke and mirrors. Nothing is plain and simple here.

But yes - anybody wearing a yellow shirt, or expresses pro-yellow views, is ill-advised to come close to Red Shirt protesters. And anyone wearing a Red Shirt, or expresses what may be deemed as pro-red views, is ill-advised coming close to PAD protesters, multicoloreds, or Democrat Party supporters. Depending on the situation one may risk his/her life. This is the sad state of affairs here, and anybody involved in politics knows this very well.

These two people laying that wreath knew exactly what, where and why they were doing what they were doing.

[Buchholz]

The message of the wreath was quite clear - a wreath of the kind that is used in funerals, addressed at the house speaker, together with an actual clock that people mistook for a possible bomb. This was a clear provocation. If this would just have been a symbolic protest, and not a intended provocation they could have done that at another parliament entry just around the corner, where no Red Shirts were present.

"Common knowledge of the mentality of the Red Shirts"? Excuse me, care to explain where your insights of that "common knowledge" derive from? Have you attended many protests, and spoken with many Red Shirts? Or is it just what you read on this forum here?

The message was clear, but since when is expressing one's opinion a grave provocation? The clock might just a symbolic indication that time is ticking away for democracy. A clear provocation? The wreath was black instead of red, a clear provocation? You mean, they were obviously not one of us, so it must have been a provocation. They should have used a side entrance, this here in front is ours. Stay away all non-believers.

The 'common knowledge' was a bit of an exaggeration, everyone knows red-shirts are just peaceful and not terrorists, even when they attack two 'other flavour' protesters who want to lay a wreath.

You zigzag around the topic, dear friend. If we are to avoid attacks by one group on others simply because they think they have been provoked, or are in their right to do so, we need to crackdown. To go into 'yes, but' mood doesn't help.

Are you obstinate out of principle, or is it so difficult to understand that we have a very fragile and delicate situation here in Thailand? The authorities have to be very delicate in how they handle things. Provocations and/or over-reaction can easily result in a mess - the last thing we need here.

Dr. Tul's group positioned itself away from the Red Shirts, allowing the police and Red Shirt guards to deal with the situation, allowing the group to get what they wanted - media attention by handing over a letter to the government, and no violence occurred. The two yesterday have staged a stealth attack, directly where the Red Shirts were, just after they were seen talking with a Democrat MP, giving police no chance to properly deal with the situation. They have also reached what they most definitely intended to.

I'm aware we have a fragile situation in Thailand. Mondays I wear a yellow-shirt given to me by my company, there some others who do the same still. Never did I feel an urge to group us yellow-shirts and tell all with a 'wrong-colour-shirt' to leave 'our' BTS train and wait for another one. Bit over-the-top comparison, but you're suggestion is not much better. I have to give up some of my democratic rights because others will trample on them (and me) if I don't?

I really wonder about 'police and red shirt guards to deal with the situation'. What have the red-shirt guards to do with it? At the most they should take care of their flock and leave the police to handle others. Do we need to erect new placards, 'beware, red-shirts, stay away' or 'beware, red-shirts, come closer at own risk'.

Now, pray tell, two white-shirted men, a stealth attack? Neither stealth, nor attack. Police had no time to propely deal with it. I assume you mean, try to keep the red-shirts away from them, let them peacefully lay the wreath, allow them to leave unmolested and probably even allow the red-shirts to quietly remove the wreath again? Missing is the suggestion that reporters encouraged red-shirts to kick and trample for better footage on television.

Plain and simple, red-shirts seem to assume authority where they do not have. The election victory with many of their UDD leaders in parliament seem to have bolstered their courage. Now is the time to make clear what rights and duties they have in a democratic system.

(edit: add: look up appeasement, just for the fun of it)

"stealth attack".... with flowers.

[Crushdepth]

I really wonder about 'police and red shirt guards to deal with the situation'. What have the red-shirt guards to do with it? At the most they should take care of their flock and leave the police to handle others. Do we need to erect new placards, 'beware, red-shirts, stay away' or 'beware, red-shirts, come closer at own risk'.

Now, pray tell, two white-shirted men, a stealth attack? Neither stealth, nor attack. Police had no time to propely deal with it. I assume you mean, try to keep the red-shirts away from them, let them peacefully lay the wreath, allow them to leave unmolested and probably even allow the red-shirts to quietly remove the wreath again? Missing is the suggestion that reporters encouraged red-shirts to kick and trample for better footage on television.

Plain and simple, red-shirts seem to assume authority where they do not have. The election victory with many of their UDD leaders in parliament seem to have bolstered their courage. Now is the time to make clear what rights and duties they have in a democratic system.

(edit: add: look up appeasement, just for the fun of it)

Yes, i mean exactly that - let them lay the wreath, let journalists take the pictures, let the protesters make their statements, have Red Shirt guards there to hold the Red Shirt protester back from doing stupid things, let photographers take pics of angry and emotional Red Shirts , have a small police force present to keep up appearances...well, the way how these sort of things are usually dealt with here. It's all a bit of a theater performance done countless times.

This one though was different, because the aim was not to have the usual performance, but a different one, yet still part of the same theater. And it worked, of course, as it does almost always. Important were the first reports "evil red shirts beat up innocents". That the innocents have not been that innocent is not contained in the first reports, and therefore not that important anymore - the first reports have stuck in the minds of people, especially when "evidence" was presented during the debate screened life on TV.

All smoke and mirrors. Nothing is plain and simple here.

But yes - anybody wearing a yellow shirt, or expresses pro-yellow views, is ill-advised to come close to Red Shirt protesters. And anyone wearing a Red Shirt, or expresses what may be deemed as pro-red views, is ill-advised coming close to PAD protesters, multicoloreds, or Democrat Party supporters. Depending on the situation one may risk his/her life. This is the sad state of affairs here, and anybody involved in politics knows this very well.

These two people laying that wreath knew exactly what, where and why they were doing what they were doing.

Evil red shirts did beat people up. They knew exactly what they were doing. Why apologise for violence? Frankly it just makes me sick, and even more frankly, it's just stupid.

[nicknostitz]

Evil red shirts did beat people up. They knew exactly what they were doing. Why apologise for violence? Frankly it just makes me sick, and even more frankly, it's just stupid.

I do not think that i have condoned the violence, i have just explained the reasons behind. I have also used the term 'stupid' in one of my posts as well when describing the Red Shirt's reaction. What i have stated though is, that all evidence points to the two wreath layers having been agent provocateurs connected to the Democrat Party - also supported by the statement of the police as posted at the beginning of the threat stating that the two were possibly hired - which means that they were not exactly what can be considered innocent in the resulting confrontation.

But i have the impression that you and some others here just look for any reason to continue hating the Red Shirts. If you like to go around the world full of hate, then please, be free to do so (but you know what they say that hate does...).

I will just continue to go around trying to understand what goes on, and to speak with people involved on all sides of the conflict. I find this far more satisfying than hating this or the other party. But that is just me.

Sorry to be so frank.

Edited August 26, 2011 by nicknostitz

[TAWP]

Two troublemakers were caught making what is tantamount to a death threat, and people are condemning those that stopped the troublemakers?

Your support of criminals and thugs is despicable.

You claim to have respect for the law but your posts show none.

You claim to have respect for freedom of speech and democracy but your posts show none.

Are you still advocating shooting the rioters in UK while complaining when police and military presumably did the same here in Thailand? Confused soul.

[TAWP]

There is no Democratic Student Group.

And you know this because...you couldn't find them by googling?

[TAWP]

And no - i never attended any journalism school.

Another point we are on opposite on. Because I did.

[TAWP]

p.s. Here's a video on Facebook of the aftermath of the incident. Note how the red shirts are provoked into continuously attacking the guy as he's being escorted away:

(คลิป)คนเสื้อแดงเข้าทำ...

ตัวแทนกลุ่มนักศึกษาผู้รักประชาธิปไตย ได้นำพวงหรีดมาให้ประธานฯรัฐสภา ที่กล่าวหาว่าไม่มีความเป็นกลาง จนทำให้คนเสื้อแดงที่มาชุมนุมให้กำลังใจ น.ส.ยิ่งลักษณ์ ชินวัตร นายกรัฐมนตรีและรัฐบาล ที่อยู่หน้ารัฐสภา เกิดความไม่พอใจเข้าทำลายหรีดและเข้าทำร้ายร่างกาย ภาพ สกล สนธิรัตน์

Posted by NationPhoto on Thursday, 25 August 2011

Here we clearly see how little respect they have for law and order.

[henryalleman]

Provocateurs, hiding identity,fake people, hitting them with an paper roll, Its all of no importance.

This was an assault on freedom of speech and opinion, and its worrying that some people on this forum find some excuses to apologize the assault.

I do wonder if those people know the true meaning of democracy.

They should read the 230 year old quote below.

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

Voltaire

If you reject this we will end up tiranny, but maybe thats just the red shirts ultimate goal.

But they should also remember some other old quotes

The revolution eats its children.

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep. Saul Bellow

Edited August 26, 2011 by henryalleman

[nicknostitz]

And no - i never attended any journalism school.

Another point we are on opposite on. Because I did.

Good for you.

And the point is .... ?

[phiphidon]

Evil red shirts did beat people up. They knew exactly what they were doing. Why apologise for violence? Frankly it just makes me sick, and even more frankly, it's just stupid.

I do not think that i have condoned the violence, i have just explained the reasons behind. I have also used the term 'stupid' in one of my posts as well when describing the Red Shirt's reaction. What i have stated though is, that all evidence points to the two wreath layers having been agent provocateurs connected to the Democrat Party - also supported by the statement of the police as posted at the beginning of the threat stating that the two were possibly hired - which means that they were not exactly what can be considered innocent in the resulting confrontation.

But i have the impression that you and some others here just look for any reason to continue hating the Red Shirts. If you like to go around the world full of hate, then please, be free to do so (but you know what they say that hate does...).

I will just continue to go around trying to understand what goes on, and to speak with people involved on all sides of the conflict. I find this far more satisfying than hating this or the other party. But that is just me.

Sorry to be so frank.

Nick, I admire your patience in dealing with certain members of the forum in all and any of your postings. At least you try and offer an alternative viewpoint on events in todays Thailand despite the constant bellittling and obfuscation attempts that result.

It appears even the "more debate concious" and "reasonable" posters are falling by the wayside and being influenced by the herd mentality of the majority of posters, each trying to up the ante and winding each other up over how "outraged" they are by a certain issue (not just this one!) and in the event completely missing the underlying implications of that event.

I can only suggest that this behaviour is exhibiting the traits of the well known 7 stages of grief.

We've had the first stage, "shock and denial" probably exasperated by the hopeful (to the Democrat Supporters) polls leading up to the election suggesting a close run thing. The denial stage can be evidenced by the sheer number of times that TV Forum readers are reminded the the PTP did not win the overall majority of the peoples votes.

The second stage, pain and guilt, seems to be reflected in the increased number of posts in support of the Democrats and perhaps wondering if they could have got more of the wifes relatives to vote for the Dems..............

The Third Stage, Anger and (bartering.............?) we seem to be at, and will seem to remain at for quite a while yet, witness the posts railing at anything and everything the PTP Party (which has been in power around a week) is or is reported to be doing or thinking - the fourth stage, Depression, just seems to add to the Third Stage.

One can only hope that the final stages will not be long in coming but I have to admit, if the viewpoints of some of the posters on here are taken as a microcosm of the Thai populaces thinking (though hopefully it is far, far away from being as nihilistic as that) the Reconstruction (read Reconcilliation) Stage is going to the toughest one to crack.........................

[rubl]

begin removed ...

This one though was different, because the aim was not to have the usual performance, but a different one, yet still part of the same theater. And it worked, of course, as it does almost always. Important were the first reports "evil red shirts beat up innocents". That the innocents have not been that innocent is not contained in the first reports, and therefore not that important anymore - the first reports have stuck in the minds of people, especially when "evidence" was presented during the debate screened life on TV.

All smoke and mirrors. Nothing is plain and simple here.

But yes - anybody wearing a yellow shirt, or expresses pro-yellow views, is ill-advised to come close to Red Shirt protesters. And anyone wearing a Red Shirt, or expresses what may be deemed as pro-red views, is ill-advised coming close to PAD protesters, multicoloreds, or Democrat Party supporters. Depending on the situation one may risk his/her life. This is the sad state of affairs here, and anybody involved in politics knows this very well.

These two people laying that wreath knew exactly what, where and why they were doing what they were doing.

There is 'alleged' provocation, there is 'alleged' a Dem's MP (with missing that his name sarts with an A-to-Z. There is 'alleged' that the wreath layers are not innocent (wreath laying beig a crime, especially in front of red-shirts).

At the same time it seems alleged 'yellow-shirts' should tread carefully around red-shirt visa verso. Multi-colored are included, but personally I doubt that. No idea why a red-shirt should be careful around DEm's supporters, unless it's meant that those Dem's supporters will talk so much the poor red-shirt might get deaf.

Those two people may have know what, where and why, but I still see no justification for them being beaten and forcefully removed.

Sorry to say, but this red-shirt democracy and the appeasement some here preach is really beyond me. Words start to fail me, imagine!

(edit: add: it seems that we will not be able to have these discussions much longer. Discussions would be needed to deal with any media outlets that were seen to be opposing the national reconciliation policies of the Pheu Thai-led government, PM's Office Minister Krissana Seehalak said on Friday, her first day on duty regulating the media.)

Edited August 26, 2011 by rubl

[rubl]

begin removed ...

It appears even the "more debate concious" and "reasonable" posters are falling by the wayside and being influenced by the herd mentality of the majority of posters, each trying to up the ante and winding each other up over how "outraged" they are by a certain issue (not just this one!) and in the event completely missing the underlying implications of that event.

... end removed

Well, at least you didn't mention any names, so you should be safe, my dear friend

[nicknostitz]

One can only hope that the final stages will not be long in coming but I have to admit, if the viewpoints of some of the posters on here are taken as a microcosm of the Thai populaces thinking (though hopefully it is far, far away from being as nihilistic as that) the Reconstruction (read Reconcilliation) Stage is going to the toughest one to crack.........................

Thanks, and very interesting thoughts.

I often wonder about the extreme emotional involvement (and resulting extreme reaction to people that present a different view than theirs) of the mostly foreign posters here over this purely Thai socio-political conflict. I have difficulties to understand this.

Me, personally - i am glad that we finally had elections here, and that the result has so far been accepted by Thai society, and therefore giving a shimmer of hope that at least for some time things can remain relatively calm. If the Democrats would have won - it would not make much difference to me other that my long held theories on the political views of Thais would have been wrong and that i would have had to re-evaluate my analyses.

Why is it so difficult to for some to accept that Thais have made their own choice over who will govern their country?

The era of colonialism is over, the cold war is over, and it is bloody time that citizens of non-western countries are allowed as well to make their choice in how and by whom they want to be governed without being belittled as "stupid" or "uneducated" when they have chosen differently than some westerners or unelected local institutions such as the military would have hoped for.

Just beats me...

[nicknostitz]

At the same time it seems alleged 'yellow-shirts' should tread carefully around red-shirt visa verso. Multi-colored are included, but personally I doubt that. No idea why a red-shirt should be careful around DEm's supporters, unless it's meant that those Dem's supporters will talk so much the poor red-shirt might get deaf.

As i said before - i have photographed such attacks by every side of the conflict. Somewhere at Prachatai you can see some photos i took of a vicious attack by multicoloreds at passing Red Shirts last year, in which the Red Shirts were nearly lynched. I have photographed Red Shirts nearly lynching opponents on several occasions. I have photographed PAD members doing the same with Red Shirts many times, and also with ordinary folks they mistook as Red Shirts. On occasions i have stepped in, when i felt that i will not get killed for doing so.

Every side is as violent as the other to their opponents. Me, as a foreign photographer, i have to be far more careful with Yellow Shirts than with Red Shirts. Thai journalists have it worse - they get attacked equally by both sides.

Edited August 26, 2011 by nicknostitz

[nurofiend]

p.s. Here's a video on Facebook of the aftermath of the incident. Note how the red shirts are provoked into continuously attacking the guy as he's being escorted away:

http://www.facebook....video_processed

Here we clearly see how little respect they have for law and order.

i know of some muslims who've done some pretty bad things in recent times.... do i think most muslims are bad? no

in other words you shouldn't be so quick to tar so many people with the one brush

and just for clarification, i hope you won't insult everyone's intelligence and say you meant 'they' as in the people in the video and not 'they' as in 'the redshirts'

[hanuman1]

Evil red shirts did beat people up. They knew exactly what they were doing. Why apologise for violence? Frankly it just makes me sick, and even more frankly, it's just stupid.

I do not think that i have condoned the violence, i have just explained the reasons behind. I have also used the term 'stupid' in one of my posts as well when describing the Red Shirt's reaction. What i have stated though is, that all evidence points to the two wreath layers having been agent provocateurs connected to the Democrat Party - also supported by the statement of the police as posted at the beginning of the threat stating that the two were possibly hired - which means that they were not exactly what can be considered innocent in the resulting confrontation.

But i have the impression that you and some others here just look for any reason to continue hating the Red Shirts. If you like to go around the world full of hate, then please, be free to do so (but you know what they say that hate does...).

I will just continue to go around trying to understand what goes on, and to speak with people involved on all sides of the conflict. I find this far more satisfying than hating this or the other party. But that is just me.

Sorry to be so frank.

Nick, I admire your patience in dealing with certain members of the forum in all and any of your postings. At least you try and offer an alternative viewpoint on events in todays Thailand despite the constant bellittling and obfuscation attempts that result.

It appears even the "more debate concious" and "reasonable" posters are falling by the wayside and being influenced by the herd mentality of the majority of posters, each trying to up the ante and winding each other up over how "outraged" they are by a certain issue (not just this one!) and in the event completely missing the underlying implications of that event.

I can only suggest that this behaviour is exhibiting the traits of the well known 7 stages of grief.

We've had the first stage, "shock and denial" probably exasperated by the hopeful (to the Democrat Supporters) polls leading up to the election suggesting a close run thing. The denial stage can be evidenced by the sheer number of times that TV Forum readers are reminded the the PTP did not win the overall majority of the peoples votes.

The second stage, pain and guilt, seems to be reflected in the increased number of posts in support of the Democrats and perhaps wondering if they could have got more of the wifes relatives to vote for the Dems..............

The Third Stage, Anger and (bartering.............?) we seem to be at, and will seem to remain at for quite a while yet, witness the posts railing at anything and everything the PTP Party (which has been in power around a week) is or is reported to be doing or thinking - the fourth stage, Depression, just seems to add to the Third Stage.

One can only hope that the final stages will not be long in coming but I have to admit, if the viewpoints of some of the posters on here are taken as a microcosm of the Thai populaces thinking (though hopefully it is far, far away from being as nihilistic as that) the Reconstruction (read Reconcilliation) Stage is going to the toughest one to crack.........................

Nice one We're definitely at an unusually angry stage. Does this stage include loss of objectivity and balance or did that come earlier?

[rubl]

At the same time it seems alleged 'yellow-shirts' should tread carefully around red-shirt visa verso. Multi-colored are included, but personally I doubt that. No idea why a red-shirt should be careful around DEm's supporters, unless it's meant that those Dem's supporters will talk so much the poor red-shirt might get deaf.

As i said before - i have photographed such attacks by every side of the conflict. Somewhere at Prachatai you can see some photos i took of a vicious attack by multicoloreds at passing Red Shirts last year, in which the Red Shirts were nearly lynched. I have photographed Red Shirts nearly lynching opponents on several occasions. I have photographed PAD members doing the same with Red Shirts many times, and also with ordinary folks they mistook as Red Shirts. On occasions i have stepped in, when i felt that i will not get killed for doing so.

Every side is as violent as the other to their opponents. Me, as a foreign photographer, i have to be far more careful with Yellow Shirts than with Red Shirts. Thai journalists have it worse - they get attacked equally by both sides.

Now that you mention the multi-color-shirts ... As you know, you were there a bit later, the Saladaeng grenade attack on the pink-shirts on the 23rd of april 2010 was not only a bit off aim, but hit BTS station, killing a totally innocent and wounded 80 other innocents, it also shows a difference in level of violence and willingness to confess. Don't bother to go into who fired those grenades and from where. Obfuscation not required, just believe in the reconciliation program of the current government

[nurofiend]

begin removed ...

It appears even the "more debate concious" and "reasonable" posters are falling by the wayside and being influenced by the herd mentality of the majority of posters, each trying to up the ante and winding each other up over how "outraged" they are by a certain issue (not just this one!) and in the event completely missing the underlying implications of that event.

... end removed

Well, at least you didn't mention any names, so you should be safe, my dear friend

i think most people who frequent this site know exactly of the people he's talking about :lol:

i'm sure You know too eh?

[MikeOboe57]

My personal resumé:

Don't tease buffaloes.

[nicknostitz]

Now that you mention the multi-color-shirts ... As you know, you were there a bit later, the Saladaeng grenade attack on the pink-shirts on the 23rd of april 2010 was not only a bit off aim, but hit BTS station, killing a totally innocent and wounded 80 other innocents, it also shows a difference in level of violence and willingness to confess. Don't bother to go into who fired those grenades and from where. Obfuscation not required, just believe in the reconciliation program of the current government

I was not talking about the grenade attack (and no - i will not get dragged back into another endless debate on last year), but the first open appearance of Dr. Tul's group then wearing pink shirts on April the 2nd, the same group that on their next appearance just after the April 10 mess relabeled themselves as "multi-colored".

Every side has spilled blood, and killed people in the past five years. Every side has had dead and maimed on their own side. That is the nature of such a conflict - no side stays clean. And no, i will not get into the numbers argument, as this is only one factor here when judging levels of violence.

Point here in this threat is - Red Shirts have attacked the two men. Because of this some posters make negative summary judgements over all Red Shirts, yet ignoring that also there are more than a few Red Shirts who do not engage in such incidents, and that every side in this conflict has engaged on numerous occasions in the same ways, often with far worse results, and ignoring that there were certain contributing factors to this (as police has stated as well).

Yet you continue to desperately try to obfuscate these facts - such doubting that "multi-coloreds" have engaged in such violence (even though i have stated i i was not just present during such an attack, but have also photographed it).

Who is really biased here?