Eight Red-Shirt Leaders In Khon Kaen Jailed And Fined Bt29 Million

[tlansford]

Torching central world was not easy. It is not clear that regular protesters would have the means to set the building on fire. Don't misunderstand, start fires inside, sure, but buildings like that are extremely difficult to light up and burn the way it did. Whoever set it on fire needed to know what they were doing.

But Suthep predicted before the protest began that buildings would be burnt in BKK. Amazing crystal ball he has.

You may want to clarify that, because it looks as if you are peddling the monumental BS that Suthep staged the burning of the buildings in Bangkok.

In any case, there was no need for a crystal ball to know that mass arsonism was to be expected, Red Shirt leaders threatened to do so from the stage in front of thousands of cheering idiots. Or are we to forget that inconvenient fact?

(sorry - the restore function lost much of the quote information)

Surthep's prediction came before the protests. Before the speeches.

Before the protest began in March, Surthep said that there would be grenade attacks and buildings would be burned. At the same point in time, he and Abhisit were stating that ammunition and fatigues had been getting bought up... before the protests had even started.

These are inconvenient facts. So yes, Suthep had some kind of a crystal ball.

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks. I do believe that the UDD should have decided from the start of the movement to disavow all violence. Personally think that would have been and still could be in the future the most powerful form of protest. But that is not what has happened.

So come back to the Central world, MiB, RPGs, etc.

No one knows who the MiB were, no one knows who fired the grenades, and no one knows who burned Central World. Period.

Several different groups would be motivated to burn Central World. Certainly the protesters would have been mad as hell. The military, gov't and others against the UDD would also want the protesters to appear as violent as possible. The gov't had been calling the protests terrorist acts before they even began.

Regardless, 2 points are clear, (1) whoever torched Central World knew what they were doing, and (2) we don't know who did it.

Do you remember the doctored/fabricated recording of Ahisit from Aug 2009 days before a big UDD demonstration? Completely faked... but professionally. Released anonymously through a multitude of channels.

Designed to throw fuel on the fire, no one knows who made and released the recording. Gov't, UDD, PAD, military? We don't know.

The topic of the fake recording? That the security forces should create incidents of violence so that the Emergency Decree would appear justified.

So the idea is not new.

There are "third hands" in this conflict. You and I do not know who they are.

Is it unreasonable to speculate that the Abhisit/Suthep gov't would try to make the UDD look like violent protesters to justify a crack down?

It's possible. I am not saying it is so, but that it is possible.

This is the same gov't that had already created the blue shirts. This is the gov't that spread rumors *before* the protests, and predicted grenade attacks and arson. The UDD sure helped them out with inflammatory speeches rather than going the civil disobedience path. IMO, the UDD played into the hands of those people (from all sides of the conflict) who wanted violence and conflict.

There are a lot of open points on the 2010 protests.

Does it seem obvious that the UDD torched Central World? Yeah, it looks obvious. But was it these defendants who were acquitted? Seems pretty unlikely, and there was no evidence for a conviction. Could it have been some other group than the UDD? I would say that is not impossible.

In any case, the violence, killing, and arson from all sides in 2010 was unnecessary and despicable.

Edited March 16, 2012 by tlansford

[AleG]

Torching central world was not easy. It is not clear that regular protesters would have the means to set the building on fire. Don't misunderstand, start fires inside, sure, but buildings like that are extremely difficult to light up and burn the way it did. Whoever set it on fire needed to know what they were doing.

But Suthep predicted before the protest began that buildings would be burnt in BKK. Amazing crystal ball he has.

You may want to clarify that, because it looks as if you are peddling the monumental BS that Suthep staged the burning of the buildings in Bangkok.

In any case, there was no need for a crystal ball to know that mass arsonism was to be expected, Red Shirt leaders threatened to do so from the stage in front of thousands of cheering idiots. Or are we to forget that inconvenient fact?

(sorry - the restore function lost much of the quote information)

Surthep's prediction came before the protests. Before the speeches.

Before the protest began in March, Surthep said that there would be grenade attacks and buildings would be burned. At the same point in time, he and Abhisit were stating that ammunition and fatigues had been getting bought up... before the protests had even started.

These are inconvenient facts. So yes, Suthep had some kind of a crystal ball.

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks. I do believe that the UDD should have decided from the start of the movement to disavow all violence. Personally think that would have been and still could be in the future the most powerful form of protest. But that is not what has happened.

So come back to the Central world, MiB, RPGs, etc.

No one knows who the MiB were, no one knows who fired the grenades, and no one knows who burned Central World. Period.

Several different groups would be motivated to burn Central World. Certainly the protesters would have been mad as hell. The military, gov't and others against the UDD would also want the protesters to appear as violent as possible. The gov't had been calling the protests terrorist acts before they even began.

Regardless, 2 points are clear, (1) whoever torched Central World knew what they were doing, and (2) we don't know who did it.

Do you remember the doctored/fabricated recording of Ahisit from Aug 2009 days before a big UDD demonstration? Completely faked... but professionally. Released anonymously through a multitude of channels.

Designed to throw fuel on the fire, no one knows who made and released the recording. Gov't, UDD, PAD, military? We don't know.

The topic of the fake recording? That the security forces should create incidents of violence so that the Emergency Decree would appear justified.

So the idea is not new.

There are "third hands" in this conflict. You and I do not know who they are.

Is it unreasonable to speculate that the Abhisit/Suthep gov't would try to make the UDD look like violent protesters to justify a crack down?

It's possible. I am not saying it is so, but that it is possible.

This is the same gov't that had already created the blue shirts. This is the gov't that spread rumors *before* the protests, and predicted grenade attacks and arson. The UDD sure helped them out with inflammatory speeches rather than going the civil disobedience path. IMO, the UDD played into the hands of those people (from all sides of the conflict) who wanted violence and conflict.

There are a lot of open points on the 2010 protests.

Does it seem obvious that the UDD torched Central World? Yeah, it looks obvious. But was it these defendants who were acquitted? Seems pretty unlikely, and there was no evidence for a conviction. Could it have been some other group than the UDD? I would say that is not impossible.

In any case, the violence, killing, and arson from all sides in 2010 was unnecessary and despicable.

They said they'd burn it, they controlled the area, they piled incendiary materials, they were caught on tape burning the place, they cheered at the pyre and protesters were caught carrying loot from the place afterwards... but by golly!, it just may had been someone else!

It stretches credibility beyond the breaking point.

Were all the other burnt places the work of third hands too?

Saying that they needed expertise to burn down the place is just as ridiculous as the ones that claim the WTC was brought down by a controlled explosion.

As for Suthep and his crystal ball, you'll have to provide evidence that his comments predated the Red Shirt arson threats. Lest we forget the "Peaceful Protesters" threatened to set fire to a gas tanker in the middle of a neighbourhood in 2009.

[whybother]

Torching central world was not easy. It is not clear that regular protesters would have the means to set the building on fire. Don't misunderstand, start fires inside, sure, but buildings like that are extremely difficult to light up and burn the way it did. Whoever set it on fire needed to know what they were doing.

But Suthep predicted before the protest began that buildings would be burnt in BKK. Amazing crystal ball he has.

You may want to clarify that, because it looks as if you are peddling the monumental BS that Suthep staged the burning of the buildings in Bangkok.

In any case, there was no need for a crystal ball to know that mass arsonism was to be expected, Red Shirt leaders threatened to do so from the stage in front of thousands of cheering idiots. Or are we to forget that inconvenient fact?

(sorry - the restore function lost much of the quote information)

Surthep's prediction came before the protests. Before the speeches.

Before the protest began in March, Surthep said that there would be grenade attacks and buildings would be burned. At the same point in time, he and Abhisit were stating that ammunition and fatigues had been getting bought up... before the protests had even started.

These are inconvenient facts. So yes, Suthep had some kind of a crystal ball.

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks. I do believe that the UDD should have decided from the start of the movement to disavow all violence. Personally think that would have been and still could be in the future the most powerful form of protest. But that is not what has happened.

So come back to the Central world, MiB, RPGs, etc.

No one knows who the MiB were, no one knows who fired the grenades, and no one knows who burned Central World. Period.

Several different groups would be motivated to burn Central World. Certainly the protesters would have been mad as hell. The military, gov't and others against the UDD would also want the protesters to appear as violent as possible. The gov't had been calling the protests terrorist acts before they even began.

Regardless, 2 points are clear, (1) whoever torched Central World knew what they were doing, and (2) we don't know who did it.

Do you remember the doctored/fabricated recording of Ahisit from Aug 2009 days before a big UDD demonstration? Completely faked... but professionally. Released anonymously through a multitude of channels.

Designed to throw fuel on the fire, no one knows who made and released the recording. Gov't, UDD, PAD, military? We don't know.

The topic of the fake recording? That the security forces should create incidents of violence so that the Emergency Decree would appear justified.

So the idea is not new.

There are "third hands" in this conflict. You and I do not know who they are.

Is it unreasonable to speculate that the Abhisit/Suthep gov't would try to make the UDD look like violent protesters to justify a crack down?

It's possible. I am not saying it is so, but that it is possible.

This is the same gov't that had already created the blue shirts. This is the gov't that spread rumors *before* the protests, and predicted grenade attacks and arson. The UDD sure helped them out with inflammatory speeches rather than going the civil disobedience path. IMO, the UDD played into the hands of those people (from all sides of the conflict) who wanted violence and conflict.

There are a lot of open points on the 2010 protests.

Does it seem obvious that the UDD torched Central World? Yeah, it looks obvious. But was it these defendants who were acquitted? Seems pretty unlikely, and there was no evidence for a conviction. Could it have been some other group than the UDD? I would say that is not impossible.

In any case, the violence, killing, and arson from all sides in 2010 was unnecessary and despicable.

Lots of interesting conspiracy theories there.

Personally I don't remember Suthep predicting arson and grenades before the reds shirts started talking about it.

I do remember red shirts getting violent before the first crack down. I do remember red shirts shooting grenades and guns. And I do remember red shirts burning down buildings.

[ginjag]

Tiansford in denial at his best. OOOOh, please.

[tlansford]

Torching central world was not easy. It is not clear that regular protesters would have the means to set the building on fire. Don't misunderstand, start fires inside, sure, but buildings like that are extremely difficult to light up and burn the way it did. Whoever set it on fire needed to know what they were doing.

But Suthep predicted before the protest began that buildings would be burnt in BKK. Amazing crystal ball he has.

You may want to clarify that, because it looks as if you are peddling the monumental BS that Suthep staged the burning of the buildings in Bangkok.

In any case, there was no need for a crystal ball to know that mass arsonism was to be expected, Red Shirt leaders threatened to do so from the stage in front of thousands of cheering idiots. Or are we to forget that inconvenient fact?

(sorry - the restore function lost much of the quote information)

Surthep's prediction came before the protests. Before the speeches.

Before the protest began in March, Surthep said that there would be grenade attacks and buildings would be burned. At the same point in time, he and Abhisit were stating that ammunition and fatigues had been getting bought up... before the protests had even started.

These are inconvenient facts. So yes, Suthep had some kind of a crystal ball.

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks. I do believe that the UDD should have decided from the start of the movement to disavow all violence. Personally think that would have been and still could be in the future the most powerful form of protest. But that is not what has happened.

So come back to the Central world, MiB, RPGs, etc.

No one knows who the MiB were, no one knows who fired the grenades, and no one knows who burned Central World. Period.

Several different groups would be motivated to burn Central World. Certainly the protesters would have been mad as hell. The military, gov't and others against the UDD would also want the protesters to appear as violent as possible. The gov't had been calling the protests terrorist acts before they even began.

Regardless, 2 points are clear, (1) whoever torched Central World knew what they were doing, and (2) we don't know who did it.

Do you remember the doctored/fabricated recording of Ahisit from Aug 2009 days before a big UDD demonstration? Completely faked... but professionally. Released anonymously through a multitude of channels.

Designed to throw fuel on the fire, no one knows who made and released the recording. Gov't, UDD, PAD, military? We don't know.

The topic of the fake recording? That the security forces should create incidents of violence so that the Emergency Decree would appear justified.

So the idea is not new.

There are "third hands" in this conflict. You and I do not know who they are.

Is it unreasonable to speculate that the Abhisit/Suthep gov't would try to make the UDD look like violent protesters to justify a crack down?

It's possible. I am not saying it is so, but that it is possible.

This is the same gov't that had already created the blue shirts. This is the gov't that spread rumors *before* the protests, and predicted grenade attacks and arson. The UDD sure helped them out with inflammatory speeches rather than going the civil disobedience path. IMO, the UDD played into the hands of those people (from all sides of the conflict) who wanted violence and conflict.

There are a lot of open points on the 2010 protests.

Does it seem obvious that the UDD torched Central World? Yeah, it looks obvious. But was it these defendants who were acquitted? Seems pretty unlikely, and there was no evidence for a conviction. Could it have been some other group than the UDD? I would say that is not impossible.

In any case, the violence, killing, and arson from all sides in 2010 was unnecessary and despicable.

They said they'd burn it, they controlled the area, they piled incendiary materials, they were caught on tape burning the place, they cheered at the pyre and protesters were caught carrying loot from the place afterwards... but by golly!, it just may had been someone else!

It stretches credibility beyond the breaking point.

Were all the other burnt places the work of third hands too?

Saying that they needed expertise to burn down the place is just as ridiculous as the ones that claim the WTC was brought down by a controlled explosion.

As for Suthep and his crystal ball, you'll have to provide evidence that his comments predated the Red Shirt arson threats. Lest we forget the "Peaceful Protesters" threatened to set fire to a gas tanker in the middle of a neighbourhood in 2009.

Suthep first. Already posted the link to the report on March 10th... here you go : http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/03/10/politics/-Govt-steps-up-security-but-personnel-will-not-be--30124331.html

As for burning CW, actually, you should check the timeline. The fire that burned the structure to the ground was set in the upper levels and after the military allegedly had control of the building.

So speculating that someone other than the UDD could possibly have torched CW ... well, perhaps it does not stretch credibility too far after all?

Again, I do not claim to know who torched CW. In contrast to many posters here.

[tlansford]

Torching central world was not easy. It is not clear that regular protesters would have the means to set the building on fire. Don't misunderstand, start fires inside, sure, but buildings like that are extremely difficult to light up and burn the way it did. Whoever set it on fire needed to know what they were doing.

But Suthep predicted before the protest began that buildings would be burnt in BKK. Amazing crystal ball he has.

You may want to clarify that, because it looks as if you are peddling the monumental BS that Suthep staged the burning of the buildings in Bangkok.

In any case, there was no need for a crystal ball to know that mass arsonism was to be expected, Red Shirt leaders threatened to do so from the stage in front of thousands of cheering idiots. Or are we to forget that inconvenient fact?

(sorry - the restore function lost much of the quote information)

Surthep's prediction came before the protests. Before the speeches.

Before the protest began in March, Surthep said that there would be grenade attacks and buildings would be burned. At the same point in time, he and Abhisit were stating that ammunition and fatigues had been getting bought up... before the protests had even started.

These are inconvenient facts. So yes, Suthep had some kind of a crystal ball.

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks. I do believe that the UDD should have decided from the start of the movement to disavow all violence. Personally think that would have been and still could be in the future the most powerful form of protest. But that is not what has happened.

So come back to the Central world, MiB, RPGs, etc.

No one knows who the MiB were, no one knows who fired the grenades, and no one knows who burned Central World. Period.

Several different groups would be motivated to burn Central World. Certainly the protesters would have been mad as hell. The military, gov't and others against the UDD would also want the protesters to appear as violent as possible. The gov't had been calling the protests terrorist acts before they even began.

Regardless, 2 points are clear, (1) whoever torched Central World knew what they were doing, and (2) we don't know who did it.

Do you remember the doctored/fabricated recording of Ahisit from Aug 2009 days before a big UDD demonstration? Completely faked... but professionally. Released anonymously through a multitude of channels.

Designed to throw fuel on the fire, no one knows who made and released the recording. Gov't, UDD, PAD, military? We don't know.

The topic of the fake recording? That the security forces should create incidents of violence so that the Emergency Decree would appear justified.

So the idea is not new.

There are "third hands" in this conflict. You and I do not know who they are.

Is it unreasonable to speculate that the Abhisit/Suthep gov't would try to make the UDD look like violent protesters to justify a crack down?

It's possible. I am not saying it is so, but that it is possible.

This is the same gov't that had already created the blue shirts. This is the gov't that spread rumors *before* the protests, and predicted grenade attacks and arson. The UDD sure helped them out with inflammatory speeches rather than going the civil disobedience path. IMO, the UDD played into the hands of those people (from all sides of the conflict) who wanted violence and conflict.

There are a lot of open points on the 2010 protests.

Does it seem obvious that the UDD torched Central World? Yeah, it looks obvious. But was it these defendants who were acquitted? Seems pretty unlikely, and there was no evidence for a conviction. Could it have been some other group than the UDD? I would say that is not impossible.

In any case, the violence, killing, and arson from all sides in 2010 was unnecessary and despicable.

Lots of interesting conspiracy theories there.

Personally I don't remember Suthep predicting arson and grenades before the reds shirts started talking about it.

I do remember red shirts getting violent before the first crack down. I do remember red shirts shooting grenades and guns. And I do remember red shirts burning down buildings.

see post above with link to the Suthep report.

[tlansford]

Tiansford in denial at his best. OOOOh, please.

Thank you ginjag - denial of "certitude" not based on evidence....

Yes.

[whybother]

Suthep first. Already posted the link to the report on March 10th... here you go : http://www.nationmul...--30124331.html

As for burning CW, actually, you should check the timeline. The fire that burned the structure to the ground was set in the upper levels and after the military allegedly had control of the building.

So speculating that someone other than the UDD could possibly have torched CW ... well, perhaps it does not stretch credibility too far after all?

Again, I do not claim to know who torched CW. In contrast to many posters here.

And from March 9th.

The red-shirts hope to deliver a knock-out punch to the government by Sunday, a source close to the group's inner circle said but declined to go into details. Hardcore members of the group aim to create chaos in Bangkok with violence and perhaps explosions in many locations, the source said.

http://www.thaivisa....hai-government/

Also, the series of pictures taken on May 19 in and around Central World showed that the fires started before the military had control of the area.

Edited March 16, 2012 by whybother

[AleG]

Suthep first. Already posted the link to the report on March 10th... here you go : http://www.nationmul...--30124331.html

Red Shirt publications, before that date, threatening arson and grenade attacks, no need for crystal balls.

[tlansford]

Suthep first. Already posted the link to the report on March 10th... here you go : http://www.nationmul...--30124331.html

As for burning CW, actually, you should check the timeline. The fire that burned the structure to the ground was set in the upper levels and after the military allegedly had control of the building.

So speculating that someone other than the UDD could possibly have torched CW ... well, perhaps it does not stretch credibility too far after all?

Again, I do not claim to know who torched CW. In contrast to many posters here.

And from March 9th.

The red-shirts hope to deliver a knock-out punch to the government by Sunday, a source close to the group's inner circle said but declined to go into details. Hardcore members of the group aim to create chaos in Bangkok with violence and perhaps explosions in many locations, the source said.

http://www.thaivisa....hai-government/

Also, the series of pictures taken on May 19 in and around Central World showed that the fires started before the military had control of the area.

Ah, yes, The Nation was in fine form before the first protester arrived, referencing Mao-ist "forest surrounding the town" rhetoric.

Causing violence and chaos... Suthep was making the same claims, and that was also being reported by The Nation.

Even Abhisit made claims / repeated rumors, however you want to describe it, that fatigues were being bought up and ammunition was sold out in BKK. Before the first protester arrived, the government and its media were claiming this would bring violence and terrorism.

Funny how the protests went on for 3-4 weeks without becoming violent.

Central World : you must have read that the fires set before the army took control of the area were put out by the sprinkler systems. The army had control around 2-3pm and the fire that burned down the building started after that, and not on the lower levels but in the upper levels. When the firemen arrived on the scene, the army did not let them in to fight the fire - possibly justified - but at the same time the army claimed to have control of the area...

That doesn't mean automatically that I think that the army or someone complicit with the army torched the building. But it makes it much less likely that the rank & file UDD protesters are responsible for torching the building. That would have been very difficult both from a technical & accessibility viewpoint.

So the idea that fleeing red shirt protesters, like those just acquitted, started the fires that burned CW to the ground is not the most likely scenario.

[tlansford]

Suthep first. Already posted the link to the report on March 10th... here you go : http://www.nationmul...--30124331.html

Red Shirt publications, before that date, threatening arson and grenade attacks, no need for crystal balls.

A magazine cover from a "coup-anniversary" edition in Sept 2009 would certainly be relevant to protests 6 months later... One would hope that Suthep had more concrete and current information on which to base his statements.

[AleG]

In short, denial.

[SouthernMan3]

GOOD !

[SouthernMan3]

8 Red Shirt Leaders? Another example of political bias sh1tting over journalistic integrity from The Nation.

Identifiable red shirts clearly shown up as having done wrong? Call them Red Shirt Leaders!!!!

Nice going, Nation. You just brainwashed another few farangs into a state of hard-line, misinformed anti-red sentiment. Just as planned.

Good job Nation.

You get my vote !

[yoshiwara]

Suthep first. Already posted the link to the report on March 10th... here you go : http://www.nationmul...--30124331.html

As for burning CW, actually, you should check the timeline. The fire that burned the structure to the ground was set in the upper levels and after the military allegedly had control of the building.

So speculating that someone other than the UDD could possibly have torched CW ... well, perhaps it does not stretch credibility too far after all?

Again, I do not claim to know who torched CW. In contrast to many posters here.

And from March 9th.

The red-shirts hope to deliver a knock-out punch to the government by Sunday, a source close to the group's inner circle said but declined to go into details. Hardcore members of the group aim to create chaos in Bangkok with violence and perhaps explosions in many locations, the source said.

http://www.thaivisa....hai-government/

Also, the series of pictures taken on May 19 in and around Central World showed that the fires started before the military had control of the area.

Ah, yes, The Nation was in fine form before the first protester arrived, referencing Mao-ist "forest surrounding the town" rhetoric.

Causing violence and chaos... Suthep was making the same claims, and that was also being reported by The Nation.

Even Abhisit made claims / repeated rumors, however you want to describe it, that fatigues were being bought up and ammunition was sold out in BKK. Before the first protester arrived, the government and its media were claiming this would bring violence and terrorism.

Funny how the protests went on for 3-4 weeks without becoming violent.

Central World : you must have read that the fires set before the army took control of the area were put out by the sprinkler systems. The army had control around 2-3pm and the fire that burned down the building started after that, and not on the lower levels but in the upper levels. When the firemen arrived on the scene, the army did not let them in to fight the fire - possibly justified - but at the same time the army claimed to have control of the area...

That doesn't mean automatically that I think that the army or someone complicit with the army torched the building. But it makes it much less likely that the rank & file UDD protesters are responsible for torching the building. That would have been very difficult both from a technical & accessibility viewpoint.

So the idea that fleeing red shirt protesters, like those just acquitted, started the fires that burned CW to the ground is not the most likely scenario.

Peaceful reds, fake reds, mysterious blackshirts, mysterious burnings.

Its all there, the Thaksin playbook line by line.

Once you realise that Thaksin's supporters view truth as just one option amongst many, then you will appreciate why the neo-fascist direction has a distinct flavour and why the return of Thaksin would represent an amplification of all the lying nastiness which the red apologists carry as their ideological bagmen.

Edited March 16, 2012 by yoshiwara

[yoshiwara]

Never let it be said that Thai justice is not delivered swift and sure...

Look what happened in comparison with the guys who torched CentralWorld in BKK.

Posted 2011-12-01 16:14:09

Six Sentenced to Jail in Red-shirt Unrest Case

Bangkok's South Criminal Court has handed down a six-month prison sentence to six red-shirt defendants for violating the Emergency Decree but dropped the charges of arson and looting of the Central World shopping mall during last year's unrest.

Bangkok's South Criminal Court has handed down a six-month prison sentence to each of the six red-shirt defendants charged with robbery, resisting arrest, looting and arson at the Central World shopping mall in Bangkok during last year's unrest on May 19.

The defendants were also charged with illegal possession of firearms and violation of the Emergency Decree for organizing unlawful assembly of three or more people and obstruction of justice.

The court dropped most charges even though the defendants were arrested at the crime scene because the prosecutor has failed to produce evidence showing that they have committed the crimes as accused.

Also, no stolen items were found on them except for some cellphone batteries and a mobile phone recovered from one of the defendants who was a security guard of the shopping mall.

The court has also ruled that there is no evidence showing that the M-60 ammunition found at the scene actually belonged to the defendants.

However, they were still found guilty of violating the Emergency Decree and sentenced to a one-year jail term.

The sentence was commuted to six months because they pleaded guilty. [Other articles said they were freed upon the court's ruling because they had already served six months in custody by the time their case was concluded].

Meanwhile, the security guard was handed down three years and six months in jail sentence for theft. Other charges against him were dismissed.

-- Tan Network 2011-12-01

Oh dear, they didn't torch centralworld, thats the point.

No, that would be the fake reds.

[whybother]

<snip>

Central World : you must have read that the fires set before the army took control of the area were put out by the sprinkler systems. The army had control around 2-3pm and the fire that burned down the building started after that, and not on the lower levels but in the upper levels. When the firemen arrived on the scene, the army did not let them in to fight the fire - possibly justified - but at the same time the army claimed to have control of the area...

That doesn't mean automatically that I think that the army or someone complicit with the army torched the building. But it makes it much less likely that the rank & file UDD protesters are responsible for torching the building. That would have been very difficult both from a technical & accessibility viewpoint.

So the idea that fleeing red shirt protesters, like those just acquitted, started the fires that burned CW to the ground is not the most likely scenario.

Actually, I read that the sprinkler systems weren't working because the water was turned off in the area.

Also, the army didn't have control over the area until late in the afternoon. The army didn't let the fire fighters in when the fire first started because there were still gun battles going on.

The idea that fleeing red shirt protesters started the fire IMO is the most likely scenario. Just because there isn't enough evidence to pin the charges on individuals, doesn't mean that there weren't protesters that had ample opportunity to light the fire. The idea that the army, who were still in a fire fight with protesters, had an opportunity to go in and light the fire, is just stupid.

[Buchholz]

Torching central world was not easy. It is not clear that regular protesters would have the means to set the building on fire. Don&#39;t misunderstand, start fires inside, sure, but buildings like that are extremely difficult to light up and burn the way it did. Whoever set it on fire needed to know what they were doing.

But Suthep predicted before the protest began that buildings would be burnt in BKK. Amazing crystal ball he has.

You may want to clarify that, because it looks as if you are peddling the monumental BS that Suthep staged the burning of the buildings in Bangkok.

In any case, there was no need for a crystal ball to know that mass arsonism was to be expected, Red Shirt leaders threatened to do so from the stage in front of thousands of cheering idiots. Or are we to forget that inconvenient fact?

(sorry - the restore function lost much of the quote information)

Surthep's prediction came before the protests. Before the speeches.

Before the protest began in March, Surthep said that there would be grenade attacks and buildings would be burned. At the same point in time, he and Abhisit were stating that ammunition and fatigues had been getting bought up... before the protests had even started.

These are inconvenient facts. So yes, Suthep had some kind of a crystal ball.

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks. I do believe that the UDD should have decided from the start of the movement to disavow all violence. Personally think that would have been and still could be in the future the most powerful form of protest. But that is not what has happened.

So come back to the Central world, MiB, RPGs, etc.

No one knows who the MiB were, no one knows who fired the grenades, and no one knows who burned Central World. Period.

Several different groups would be motivated to burn Central World. Certainly the protesters would have been mad as hell. The military, gov't and others against the UDD would also want the protesters to appear as violent as possible. The gov't had been calling the protests terrorist acts before they even began.

Regardless, 2 points are clear, (1) whoever torched Central World knew what they were doing, and (2) we don't know who did it.

Do you remember the doctored/fabricated recording of Ahisit from Aug 2009 days before a big UDD demonstration? Completely faked... but professionally. Released anonymously through a multitude of channels.

Designed to throw fuel on the fire, no one knows who made and released the recording. Gov't, UDD, PAD, military? We don't know.

The topic of the fake recording? That the security forces should create incidents of violence so that the Emergency Decree would appear justified.

So the idea is not new.

There are "third hands" in this conflict. You and I do not know who they are.

Is it unreasonable to speculate that the Abhisit/Suthep gov't would try to make the UDD look like violent protesters to justify a crack down?

It's possible. I am not saying it is so, but that it is possible.

This is the same gov't that had already created the blue shirts. This is the gov't that spread rumors *before* the protests, and predicted grenade attacks and arson. The UDD sure helped them out with inflammatory speeches rather than going the civil disobedience path. IMO, the UDD played into the hands of those people (from all sides of the conflict) who wanted violence and conflict.

There are a lot of open points on the 2010 protests.

Does it seem obvious that the UDD torched Central World? Yeah, it looks obvious. But was it these defendants who were acquitted? Seems pretty unlikely, and there was no evidence for a conviction. Could it have been some other group than the UDD? I would say that is not impossible.

In any case, the violence, killing, and arson from all sides in 2010 was unnecessary and despicable.

Lots of interesting conspiracy theories there.

Personally I don't remember Suthep predicting arson and grenades before the reds shirts started talking about it.

I do remember red shirts getting violent before the first crack down. I do remember red shirts shooting grenades and guns. And I do remember red shirts burning down buildings.

And with a long history of violence going back to July 2007 when hundreds were injured by their riot in Bangkok...

which makes his

The 2010 protests were non-violent for weeks.

nonsense... they already had a string of repeated violence for 3 years running continuously before 2010.

.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Buchholz

[tlansford]

<snip>

Central World : you must have read that the fires set before the army took control of the area were put out by the sprinkler systems. The army had control around 2-3pm and the fire that burned down the building started after that, and not on the lower levels but in the upper levels. When the firemen arrived on the scene, the army did not let them in to fight the fire - possibly justified - but at the same time the army claimed to have control of the area...

That doesn't mean automatically that I think that the army or someone complicit with the army torched the building. But it makes it much less likely that the rank & file UDD protesters are responsible for torching the building. That would have been very difficult both from a technical & accessibility viewpoint.

So the idea that fleeing red shirt protesters, like those just acquitted, started the fires that burned CW to the ground is not the most likely scenario.

Actually, I read that the sprinkler systems weren't working because the water was turned off in the area.

Also, the army didn't have control over the area until late in the afternoon. The army didn't let the fire fighters in when the fire first started because there were still gun battles going on.

The idea that fleeing red shirt protesters started the fire IMO is the most likely scenario. Just because there isn't enough evidence to pin the charges on individuals, doesn't mean that there weren't protesters that had ample opportunity to light the fire. The idea that the army, who were still in a fire fight with protesters, had an opportunity to go in and light the fire, is just stupid.

here is one timeline with the part relevant to the fire at CW.

13.30-13.45 Mr. Chatuporn Promphan announced on stage to stop protesting and surrendered to the Royal Thai Police department. Then Nattawut Saigua a protest leader got up on stage to announce the end of protest and turned himself in to the police.

14.10 Thousands of women, children and news reporters left the protest area to take refuge inside Pratum Wanaram Temple, the designated sanctuary.

14.15 After the fire broke out on the first floor of Zen, Central World (opposite to the Police Hospital) at

14.15, the sprinkler system came on and the fire was completely distinguished at 15.25.

14.45 The soldiers took complete control of the protest and all the surrounding area.

15.20 Siam Theater was set on fire. The sound of gunshots and bomb blasts were heard around the protest area.

16.02 Fire broke out for the second time at Central World. However, this time the originated location of the fire was on the fourth floor. At that time, soldiers had complete control of the protest area.

16.30 Some Fire engines attempted to enter the area of the fire but were ordered to stay away by soldiers giving a reason for the safety of the firemen despite the fact that soldiers had complete control of the area.

[whybother]

here is one timeline with the part relevant to the fire at CW.

13.30-13.45 Mr. Chatuporn Promphan announced on stage to stop protesting and surrendered to the Royal Thai Police department. Then Nattawut Saigua a protest leader got up on stage to announce the end of protest and turned himself in to the police.

14.10 Thousands of women, children and news reporters left the protest area to take refuge inside Pratum Wanaram Temple, the designated sanctuary.

14.15 After the fire broke out on the first floor of Zen, Central World (opposite to the Police Hospital) at

14.15, the sprinkler system came on and the fire was completely distinguished at 15.25.

14.45 The soldiers took complete control of the protest and all the surrounding area.

15.20 Siam Theater was set on fire. The sound of gunshots and bomb blasts were heard around the protest area.

16.02 Fire broke out for the second time at Central World. However, this time the originated location of the fire was on the fourth floor. At that time, soldiers had complete control of the protest area.

16.30 Some Fire engines attempted to enter the area of the fire but were ordered to stay away by soldiers giving a reason for the safety of the firemen despite the fact that soldiers had complete control of the area.

Source? From a facebook page.

[ZeroDesire]

The 8 Red Shirts who lost their appeal today are:

Chaiyong Thurapee, 18 months prison, 8.3 Million Baht fine

Veerapat Chaichanda, 6 months prison, 1.8 Million Baht fine

Suthas Singbuakhao, 12 months prison, 5.3 Million Baht fine

Adisai Wiboonseth, 12 months prison, 5.3 Million Baht fine

Suchart Rakchanda, 6 months prison, 3.5 Million Baht fine

Banchong Kamhongsa, 6 months prison, 3.5 Million Baht fine

Parichart Poonokyung, 12 months prison, 5.3 Million Baht fine

Udom Kammoon, 6 months prison, 3.5 Million Baht fine

All the defendants confessed and all had their prison sentences halved because of it.

The fines were restitution/compensation for the extensive damage their arson did to the bank.

The arson was committed AFTER the Red Shirts in Bangkok declared an end to their protest.

This is a joke. The jail time is so short for a severe crime like arson.

[Buchholz]

here is one timeline with the part relevant to the fire at CW.

13.30-13.45 Mr. Chatuporn Promphan announced on stage to stop protesting and surrendered to the Royal Thai Police department. Then Nattawut Saigua a protest leader got up on stage to announce the end of protest and turned himself in to the police.

14.10 Thousands of women, children and news reporters left the protest area to take refuge inside Pratum Wanaram Temple, the designated sanctuary.

14.15 After the fire broke out on the first floor of Zen, Central World (opposite to the Police Hospital) at

14.15, the sprinkler system came on and the fire was completely distinguished at 15.25.

14.45 The soldiers took complete control of the protest and all the surrounding area.

15.20 Siam Theater was set on fire. The sound of gunshots and bomb blasts were heard around the protest area.

16.02 Fire broke out for the second time at Central World. However, this time the originated location of the fire was on the fourth floor. At that time, soldiers had complete control of the protest area.

16.30 Some Fire engines attempted to enter the area of the fire but were ordered to stay away by soldiers giving a reason for the safety of the firemen despite the fact that soldiers had complete control of the area.

Source? From a facebook page.

Written on Facebook by

UDD International News

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=140538592642203

Which also includes this revealing and informative entry:

Piotr Sowiński

UDD International News

June 29, 2010

Becouse some westerners are facing trials for inciting the crowd and breaking the CRES I want to admit that I am guilty and ask where can I hand myself to the authorities.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/UDD-International-News/126372967392654?sk=photos

.

[rubl]

here is one timeline with the part relevant to the fire at CW.

13.30-13.45 Mr. Chatuporn Promphan announced on stage to stop protesting and surrendered to the Royal Thai Police department. Then Nattawut Saigua a protest leader got up on stage to announce the end of protest and turned himself in to the police.

14.10 Thousands of women, children and news reporters left the protest area to take refuge inside Pratum Wanaram Temple, the designated sanctuary.

14.15 After the fire broke out on the first floor of Zen, Central World (opposite to the Police Hospital) at

14.15, the sprinkler system came on and the fire was completely distinguished at 15.25.

14.45 The soldiers took complete control of the protest and all the surrounding area.

15.20 Siam Theater was set on fire. The sound of gunshots and bomb blasts were heard around the protest area.

16.02 Fire broke out for the second time at Central World. However, this time the originated location of the fire was on the fourth floor. At that time, soldiers had complete control of the protest area.

16.30 Some Fire engines attempted to enter the area of the fire but were ordered to stay away by soldiers giving a reason for the safety of the firemen despite the fact that soldiers had complete control of the area.

Alternate History, or history as we would like to have seen it.

I can recommend some of Harry Turtledove's novels, the Southern Victory and Day of Infamy series. Still waiting for a good book on Peter Stuyvesant beating the English and keeping New Amsterdam in the right hands

Edited March 16, 2012 by rubl

[tlansford]

here is one timeline with the part relevant to the fire at CW.

13.30-13.45 Mr. Chatuporn Promphan announced on stage to stop protesting and surrendered to the Royal Thai Police department. Then Nattawut Saigua a protest leader got up on stage to announce the end of protest and turned himself in to the police.

14.10 Thousands of women, children and news reporters left the protest area to take refuge inside Pratum Wanaram Temple, the designated sanctuary.

14.15 After the fire broke out on the first floor of Zen, Central World (opposite to the Police Hospital) at

14.15, the sprinkler system came on and the fire was completely distinguished at 15.25.

14.45 The soldiers took complete control of the protest and all the surrounding area.

15.20 Siam Theater was set on fire. The sound of gunshots and bomb blasts were heard around the protest area.

16.02 Fire broke out for the second time at Central World. However, this time the originated location of the fire was on the fourth floor. At that time, soldiers had complete control of the protest area.

16.30 Some Fire engines attempted to enter the area of the fire but were ordered to stay away by soldiers giving a reason for the safety of the firemen despite the fact that soldiers had complete control of the area.

Source? From a facebook page.

your point being ... what exactly? Just having a laugh?

Here is one from a website, not social media, ... you know, http:// some respected news agency... (clue, reuters)

I'll help you with the timing by highlighting 2 times...

0454 - Anti-government protest leader tells supporters to be ready to fight.

0611 - Troops mass in Bangkok's main business district and fire warning shots into the air ahead of a possible operation to evict anti-government protesters from their encampment.

0709 - Thai troops use tear gas to try to disperse demonstrators massed close to fortified entrance of an encampment held by anti-government protesters.

0748 - Thick black smoke billows from main protest site in central Bangkok as protesters start burning tyre barricades.

0811 - Adviser to prime minister says government is ready to talk to anti-government protesters if they call off their protest.

0812 - Two people shot in a gunfight near main protest site, as protesters fire back at troops.

0815 - Thai troops use an armoured vehicle to break through the main barricade into the camp of anti-government protesters.

0850 - Adviser to prime minister calls on "red shirt" protesters to surrender as troops pour through their barricade and gunfighting erupts.

0925 - Four people are wounded in clashes between "red shirt" protesters and troops.

0937 - Thai government says military operation to continue throughout the day.

1036 - At least two people are killed in fighting between "red shirt" protesters and troops.

1218 - One journalist, identified as an Italian, is believed killed, media reports.

1335 - Senior Thai "red shirt" protest leader offers to surrender after major military offensive to disperse protesters.

1338 - Three grenades explode close to main protest camp in Bangkok, badly wounding at least two soldiers and one Canadian journalist.

1343 - Four senior "red shirt" protest leaders seen in police custody on television after bloody military offensive to disperse protesters. Senior protest leader urges all supporters to go home, end protest.

1402 - Army says situation under control at protest site and halts military operation.

1502 - Second town hall in northeast is set ablaze.

1524 - ... Central World, Southeast Asia's second biggest department store, on fire, says fire department.

1528 - First floor of Thai stock exchange on fire, says exchange president.

1608 - Prime minister imposes overnight curfew in Bangkok.

1622 - Central World fire brought under control.

1711 - TV stations ordered to broadcast only govt sanctioned programmes

1713 - Thursday and Friday declared national bank holidays, stock exchange to close

CW on fire 1 1/2 hours after the military halts its operation.

The times are not the same in the 2 lists, but the sequences are... Army in control, then fire in CW...

[Roadman]

If you have worked in such emergency situations you would know the difference between "situation under control" and "situation stand down".

"Situation under control" is where the resources you have are dealing to the event and it is not exculating. It is one of the most common used short communication update from the front line to command HQ. It allows then for updating of the plan, whether you are going to hold at or get more resources. I would understand fully if my front line officer called in and stated "there are still some of the Reds running around but we have the saituation under control with the resources we have".

Try and engage some brain matter and actually look at the time line data that you are presenting. At 1402 according to your thinking the Army has the situation under control (but for Red apologists that is "all over total control" to make their garbage work) yet only 24 minutes early there were Reds (and don't spin your garbage that its not) bombing and injuring Army troops and a Canadien journalist. In those circumstances I would not see "all over total control" being celivered from bomb attacks in 24 minutes flat.

The defending of Thaksins paid mercenaries on this site, whether they be his Black Army, his UDD thugs or his Red pawns, by westerners is ridiculous to say the least.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Roadman

[rubl]

vanderGrift and two soldiers were seriously injured in a grenade attack by 'peaceful protesters, not terrorists',

Army in control, CWT on fire.

'obviously' the army got angry

Edited March 16, 2012 by rubl

[tlansford]

If you have worked in such emergency situations you would know the difference between "situation under control" and "situation stand down".

"Situation under control" is where the resources you have are dealing to the event and it is not exculating. It is one of the most common used short communication update from the front line to command HQ. It allows then for updating of the plan, whether you are going to hold at or get more resources. I would understand fully if my front line officer called in and stated "there are still some of the Reds running around but we have the saituation under control with the resources we have".

Try and engage some brain matter and actually look at the time line data that you are presenting. At 1402 according to your thinking the Army has the situation under control (but for Red apologists that is "all over total control" to make their garbage work) yet only 24 minutes early there were Reds (and don't spin your garbage that its not) bombing and injuring Army troops and a Canadien journalist. In those circumstances I would not see "all over total control" being celivered from bomb attacks in 24 minutes flat.

The defending of Thaksins paid mercenaries on this site, whether they be his Black Army, his UDD thugs or his Red pawns, by westerners is ridiculous to say the least.

Your last line is interesting. I was not aware that trying to understand when different events happened was "the defending of thaksin's paid mercenaries".

The 2 time lines are not mine. Engage your brain, too, please and recognize that the question being discussed is the likelihood of the fire being started by different elements involved. The conventional wisdom is that red shirts torched the building before fleeing from the army. I don't think that is the most likely scenario for the 2 reasons described earlier, technical ability and access.

All of the timelines I have seen, show that the military controlled the area at the time the CW fires were set. That indicates that access to the upper levels of CW where the fires were set would have been difficult for red shirts.

As for reuters, they use the term "halt military operation"... whatever that means, after all there were still protesters taking refuge in the wat and being shot at by the military later that night.

And in both the time-lines posted, over an hour after the military claimed "situation under control" or "halted military operation" or what ever you prefer to call it, that the fire which burned CW broke out. Everyone agrees that it was in the upper levels, and so far, it happened after the protesters had been dispersed and while the military was there.

There were also reports of gun-fire. Maybe the MiB infiltrated CW and set it on fire... Seems like an unlikely scenario as well to me, but &lt;deleted&gt;, the reality is we don't know who the MiB were, nor do we know who torched CW (yet). Maybe we will know some day.

But if you have some information - not just opinion - that would illuminate the different possibilities, then post away.

[OzMick]

It"s a pity that Tom's timelines don't show the timing of the last "fight to the death, burn the city down" speech, as well as " Senior protest leader urges all supporters to go home, end protest."

Would the time difference be measured in days, hours or minutes?

Tom's excuses have changed from they were too stupid, to they weren't there (busy burning the Stock Exchange apparently).

I wonder how many professional fire-fighters would express disbelief that a first floor fire could re-ignite less than 2 hours later on a higher floor. I wouldn't class myself as a professional, but after 20 years on a fire team, and actually putting out a couple of serious fires, I wouldn't be surprised too much if it re-ignited in another place after 2 DAYS.

[Buchholz]

If you have worked in such emergency situations you would know the difference between "situation under control" and "situation stand down".

"Situation under control" is where the resources you have are dealing to the event and it is not exculating. It is one of the most common used short communication update from the front line to command HQ. It allows then for updating of the plan, whether you are going to hold at or get more resources. I would understand fully if my front line officer called in and stated "there are still some of the Reds running around but we have the saituation under control with the resources we have".

Try and engage some brain matter and actually look at the time line data that you are presenting. At 1402 according to your thinking the Army has the situation under control (but for Red apologists that is "all over total control" to make their garbage work) yet only 24 minutes early there were Reds (and don't spin your garbage that its not) bombing and injuring Army troops and a Canadien journalist. In those circumstances I would not see "all over total control" being celivered from bomb attacks in 24 minutes flat.

The defending of Thaksins paid mercenaries on this site, whether they be his Black Army, his UDD thugs or his Red pawns, by westerners is ridiculous to say the least.

It is amazing, isn't it?

However, in the context of the sort of people like the farang red shirt in Post # 82, as well as the Jeff Savage types, it should not be all that surprising.

.

.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Buchholz

[waza]

I wonder if the sprinklers work when the water is syphoned off?