Military Reshuffle Prompts Red-Shirt Warning To Government

[DaamNaam]

"There's still a dark force that interferes with the government's work"....Help me Obi Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope.

[Tanaka]

So what do you suggest they do?

If we're to listen to Nattaput, the red shirts that were under investigations relating to last years (and probably previous) protests shouldn't have stood for parliament.

If we're to listen to Nattaput properly, as stated in the OP and not your interpretation of what he was saying, we would find that he was talking about the promotions of military officers involved in last years protests not the red shirts who stood for parliament.

Yes, all very one-sided like everything from the redshirts. And yourself. As for the alledged redshirts volunteering to denounce their immunity, very easy to do when you first check with your mates that they will deny your offer. Pathetic.

[serenitynow]

These darn Red Shirts continue to baffle me. They don't seem to have any objections to being assasinated by Thaksin's Black Shirts, in order to instigate a government overthrow, yet they hold it against the Army for engaing them after they started behaving in a militant manner? Probably nothing you could show those people to convince them they weren't duped and were only pawns in someone else's chess match.

[theanimaster]

"People died so they could come to power, right? Are they going to step on the bodies without caring?"

Errrrr....... Yes!!!!! Didn't they know this was going to happen???? It was obvious to me and many others who can see through their selfish and disingenuous intentions!!! They don't care one iota about their dispensible brothers (only Thaksin's welfare and ill-intentioned agenda counts). How stupid of them not to know this would happen - it's too late now though Ha Ha Ha .

Next question!!!

Hit the nail right on the head.

[phiphidon]

Some sad F's on here

[rubl]

"There's still a dark force that interferes with the government's work, especially in the military reshuffle," he said, vowing to accept nothing less than the naming and prosecution of those responsible for the 92 deaths. Most of the fatalities were red shirts.

In principle I can applaud the idea of naming all those responsible for the 92 deaths during the March - May 2010 terror, although I think in most of the cases it will be impossible.

I think there is a need to distinguish between those who ordered and those who did kill. Furthermore the legality of the government ordering a crackdown with ultimate means if necessary, is not the same as 'peaceful protesters' being helped by violent militants. Apples and oranges may look alike and mathematically have the same shape, in real life and before the law there are differences.

If a military reshuffle draws protest because some who were involved in the crackdown last year, I think we also need to protest the 'promotion' to MP of a handful of UDD leaders who seemingly took similar responsibilities without admitting any wrongdoing. Action UDD leader Ms. Thida said 'they acted in the name of democracy'. Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government.

As long as parties involved keep denying any wrongdoing nothing will happen.

Edited October 2, 2011 by rubl

[Siam Simon]

"There's still a dark force that interferes with the government's work, especially in the military reshuffle," he said, vowing to accept nothing less than the naming and prosecution of those responsible for the 92 deaths. Most of the fatalities were red shirts.

In principle I can applaud the idea of naming all those responsible for the 92 deaths during the March - May 2010 terror, although I think in most of the cases it will be impossible.

I think there is a need to distinguish between those who ordered and those who did kill. Furthermore the legality of the government ordering a crackdown with ultimate means if necessary, is not the same as 'peaceful protesters' being helped by violent militants. Apples and oranges may look alike and mathematically have the same shape, in real life and before the law there are differences.

If a military reshuffle draws protest because some who were involved in the crackdown last year, I think we also need to protest the 'promotion' to MP of a handful of UDD leaders who seemingly took similar responsibilities without admitting any wrongdoing. Action UDD leader Ms. Thida said 'they acted in the name of democracy'. Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government.

As long as parties involved keep denying any wrongdoing nothing will happen.

"Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government."

The legal government? You're taking the p1ss. The last government was out-and-out illegal. The only reason it existed as a government was because it was put in place by the military, and nobody was in a position to disagree with them at the time.

[rubl]

"Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government."

The legal government? You're taking the p1ss. The last government was out-and-out illegal. The only reason it existed as a government was because it was put in place by the military, and nobody was in a position to disagree with them at the time.

The Abhisit government was a coalition of parties with a majority and duly elected MPs. K. Abhisit was elected as PM. The two previous governments (k. Samak, k. Somchai) has clearly stated proxy PMs with k. Samak being really shaftedlet down when a fugitive criminal deeming his brother-in-law a bit more reliable than k. Samak. The current government with clone/puppet Ms. Yingluck and 'de facto' PM Thaksin is an affront to democracy of an order where k. Abhisit's support by the military is just a natural thing. The current government seems really illegal, 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts', 'democracy is not my goal'. Welcome back to the 1930s

Edited October 2, 2011 by rubl

[Siam Simon]

"Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government."

The legal government? You're taking the p1ss. The last government was out-and-out illegal. The only reason it existed as a government was because it was put in place by the military, and nobody was in a position to disagree with them at the time.

The Abhisit government was a coalition of parties with a majority and duly elected MPs. K. Abhisit was elected as PM. The two previous governments (k. Samak, k. Somchai) has clearly stated proxy PMs with k. Samak being really shaftedlet down when a fugitive criminal deeming his brother-in-law a bit more reliable than k. Samak. The current government with clone/puppet Ms. Yingluck and 'de facto' PM Thaksin is an affront to democracy of an order where k. Abhisit's support by the military is just a natural thing. The current government seems really illegal, 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts', 'democracy is not my goal'. Welcome back to the 1930s

The last government was an illegal coalition forced by the military with a banned politician without reference to the electorate. The current, elected government gained an outright majority in a general election. The current, elected government is sponsored by a banned politician, and was elected on a manifesto which had made clear reference to that banned politician's overwhelming influence on said current government.

Aint democracy a bitch?

[rubl]

"Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government."

The legal government? You're taking the p1ss. The last government was out-and-out illegal. The only reason it existed as a government was because it was put in place by the military, and nobody was in a position to disagree with them at the time.

The Abhisit government was a coalition of parties with a majority and duly elected MPs. K. Abhisit was elected as PM. The two previous governments (k. Samak, k. Somchai) has clearly stated proxy PMs with k. Samak being really shaftedlet down when a fugitive criminal deeming his brother-in-law a bit more reliable than k. Samak. The current government with clone/puppet Ms. Yingluck and 'de facto' PM Thaksin is an affront to democracy of an order where k. Abhisit's support by the military is just a natural thing. The current government seems really illegal, 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts', 'democracy is not my goal'. Welcome back to the 1930s

The last government was an illegal coalition forced by the military with a banned politician without reference to the electorate. The current, elected government gained an outright majority in a general election. The current, elected government is sponsored by a banned politician, and was elected on a manifesto which had made clear reference to that banned politician's overwhelming influence on said current government.

Aint democracy a bitch?

In a democracy we allow any kind of well meaning person, fool and idiot to reflect on current affairs. Saying 'illegal coalition' doesn't make it so. I'm willing to accept your description of the current government although I would have said 'sponsored by a fugitive criminal'. Ain't democracy fun?

Just to put things in perspective

- 35,000 protest in Manchester, UK against policies of PM Cameron

- 'Gucci-Helle' new and first female PM of Denmark after loosing second election in a row and forming a minority coalition cabinet

[Siam Simon]

"Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government."

The legal government? You're taking the p1ss. The last government was out-and-out illegal. The only reason it existed as a government was because it was put in place by the military, and nobody was in a position to disagree with them at the time.

The Abhisit government was a coalition of parties with a majority and duly elected MPs. K. Abhisit was elected as PM. The two previous governments (k. Samak, k. Somchai) has clearly stated proxy PMs with k. Samak being really shaftedlet down when a fugitive criminal deeming his brother-in-law a bit more reliable than k. Samak. The current government with clone/puppet Ms. Yingluck and 'de facto' PM Thaksin is an affront to democracy of an order where k. Abhisit's support by the military is just a natural thing. The current government seems really illegal, 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts', 'democracy is not my goal'. Welcome back to the 1930s

The last government was an illegal coalition forced by the military with a banned politician without reference to the electorate. The current, elected government gained an outright majority in a general election. The current, elected government is sponsored by a banned politician, and was elected on a manifesto which had made clear reference to that banned politician's overwhelming influence on said current government.

Aint democracy a bitch?

In a democracy we allow any kind of well meaning person, fool and idiot to reflect on current affairs. Saying 'illegal coalition' doesn't make it so. I'm willing to accept your description of the current government although I would have said 'sponsored by a fugitive criminal'. Ain't democracy fun?

Just to put things in perspective

- 35,000 protest in Manchester, UK against policies of PM Cameron

- 'Gucci-Helle' new and first female PM of Denmark after loosing second election in a row and forming a minority coalition cabinet

Whatever, Uncle.

[Buchholz]

Good to read that Nattaputt has smelled the coffee and woken up.

Too bad it was after the election.

.

[Siam Simon]

Good to read that Nattaputt has smelled the coffee and woken up.

Too bad it was after the election.

.

wb, btw. did you do anything interesting during your hiatus?

[Buchholz]

Good to read that Nattaputt has smelled the coffee and woken up.

Too bad it was after the election.

.

wb, btw. did you do anything interesting during your hiatus?

What did you do?

.

[JohnAllan]

So it's all about disappointing - or rather, not disappointing - the red shirts - again! And will those who are seeking justice also insist it is extended to the redshirts who murdered and maimed? Such as those who, just a year earlier, shot and killed a young man trying to stop them from setting a fuel tanker ablaze . . . Or is that an irrelevance, Nattaput? A casualty of war?And to keep ua all guessing, there is another dark force at work . . . it is sometimes referred to as paranoia.

[Emptyset]

So it's all about disappointing - or rather, not disappointing - the red shirts - again! And will those who are seeking justice also insist it is extended to the redshirts who murdered and maimed? Such as those who, just a year earlier, shot and killed a young man trying to stop them from setting a fuel tanker ablaze . . . Or is that an irrelevance, Nattaput? A casualty of war?And to keep ua all guessing, there is another dark force at work . . . it is sometimes referred to as paranoia.

Link to the story about the young man?

Anyway, your point is that Nattaput and his family deserve no justice because of the actions of other red shirts in 2009?

[Cayenne]

"There's just three or four [families] left. The rest will call it quits when they receive the money. Most just want money."

That just about sums up Thaksin's strategy- once in power just pay off to make everything go away. I can see now that the government will set up a special compensation fund for these victim in return for keeping their mouths shut.

[TAWP]

"Fine, so did the military acting in the name of the legal government."

The legal government? You're taking the p1ss. The last government was out-and-out illegal. The only reason it existed as a government was because it was put in place by the military, and nobody was in a position to disagree with them at the time.

Please define how the last, as oppose to the current and past before the last, was illegal. Provide proof if possible.

[MILT]

Cracks showing around the edges and only 2 months old...

When you create a monomaniacal group with tunnel vision to use as a pressure group, after it does your bidding it can easily become hard to control. We are seeing that now, and it will not get less.

Large cracks at that! It won't be long now before we see real reconciliation. Patience is a virtue.