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

[thaihome]

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 <deleted>, 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.

What gives you away as a full fledged UDD apologist is the fact you only want to discuss your conspiracy theories on the CW while refusing to discuss the numerous other arson attacks that took place at virtually the same time as the CW was set on fire.

There is ample information in the HRS report “Decent into Chaos” on the events of May 19th, it is likely the most objective report of the event of March-May 2010. It criticizes both the military personnel on ground for ignoring the rules of engagement set out by the government and the UDD leadership for inciting the riots and rioters themselves.

On the subject of the arson attacks, here is one of the more telling statements in the report:

Beginning in their public speeches in January 2010, UDD leaders appeared to consider acts of arson and looting as a potential defense against a military dispersal of the UDD rally, and used such threats to deter a repeat of the humiliating 2009 dispersal. The coordinated nature of the many arson attacks around Bangkok and the selection of the targets also indicate that the attacks were well planned and organized.

Descent into Chaos page 92

This is information, would care to comment?

TH

[yoshiwara]

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 <deleted>, 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.

Spin away with the 'maybe this , 'maybe that' confetti but other forum contributors are increasingly seeing that the hardline defence of the openly murderous UDD behind the unconvincing 'killing is wrong' liberal feint becomes more and more apparent with every contribution. There are a number of linked factors which are furiously worked upon to keep them either separated, or failing that thoroughly ignored. Together they are overwhelming. The job of the Thaksin apologist is not to let them meld and if getting into difficulty bring in faked up red data to escape the mesh. The first and most obvious of the 'we shall ignore this' events is Arisman's 'Burn Down Bangkok' speech. Never acknowledged. It doesn't exist. The men in black (seen on the red stage), Don't know who they are. Reds carrying armed weapons. Not seen. Reds burning down town halls and banks. Something else, somewhere else. Deny and lie. This is the Thaksin method. They know what they are doing. This is no ordinary campaign. It is part of an overall strategy to whitewash 2009, 2010 and bring Thaksin back smelling of roses. But first some heavy digging has to be done to obscure the smells from Arisman, Jatuporn, the UDD and Thaksin himself who bankrolled the whole exercise. That is one big disconnect project for them.

[nurofiend]

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

<snip

peaceful reds? yes there were plenty of peaceful reds - relative to their number, they were mainly peaceful... the majority were peaceful... unless you think that more than half of the many many thousands of red shirts there individually carried out acts of violence, do you?

fake reds? it's not something that i've ever argued but it's not outside the realms of possibility, or do you think it is beyond possibility in thailand?

but as i said it's not something i'd use in an argument.

mysterious blackshirts? unless you can tell us who they defnitely were, then yes that's exactly what they were...can you tell us?

mysterious burnings? i'd say red shirts did burn things.. i don't condone it but i don't blanket them all as..what's that tv catch-phrase... oh yeah 'red thugs'

you see protests all around the world, some that don't involve any citizens being shot dead and they commit arson... a normal person can act completely out of character during a protest...

a crowd of human beings with the same ideology going up against a force that they consider far stronger and oppressive against them, is a powerful thing (psychologically speaking) to the individual amongst the crowd.

understanding =/= condoning.

no attempt at understanding =/= reasonable thought.

i think a big part of why many people on here like to dehumanize the red shirts as thugs is because they don't agree with what they were protesting about and because of their personal feelings about thaksin.

Edited March 17, 2012 by nurofiend

[phiphidon]

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....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....92654?sk=photos

.

Another one for the rightie1 scrapbook, Buchholz, never know, might come in handy one day?

[maidu]

You get one guess on who will pay the fines - clandestinely, of course.

Also, the light sentences will be lightened yet more - 'til they (surprise!) virtually disappear.

Now, if you or I or your laundry lady went in and torched a bank, do you think we'd be let off so easily?

Thai justice is highly subjective.

[birdpooguava]

And how many yellows have gone to jail for the armed airport seizure??

[maidu]

Re; the torching of Central World in May 2010. The way I heard it, fire fighters couldn't get to Central World complex because Red Shirts were blocking their trucks.

Any prosecutions there? R U kidding? This is Thailand, all justice is hyper-subjective, and investigative prowess is on a level with Laurel and Hardy (but not as funny).

[phiphidon]

You get one guess on who will pay the fines - clandestinely, of course.

Also, the light sentences will be lightened yet more - 'til they (surprise!) virtually disappear.

Now, if you or I or your laundry lady went in and torched a bank, do you think we'd be let off so easily?

Thai justice is highly subjective.

Guess you did not read farangbanoks' post #37. It's well worth repeating

Obviously you are another TV critic who lives in isolation in Khrung Thepp and know nothing of the provinces and provincial people.

FACTS: (Eye witness facts).

1. The building was not destroyed

2. There was not extensive damage, only cosmetic damage to facias, screens and keypads of some of a bank of ATM/Paassbook update etc. machines.

3. I was able to use the bank two days after the attack. I probably could have used it the day after, but didn't need to do any transactions!

Inflamatory comments/criticism of provincial people, whatever their shirt colour, is unecessary and just brings down what SHOULD be an excellent forum.

Seems to me an inordinately large fine for a couple of burnt ATM's, but thats just my viewpoint.

[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....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....92654?sk=photos

.

Another one for the rightie1 scrapbook, Buchholz, never know, might come in handy one day?

I just wonder whether Piotr ever found the proper place to turn himself in.

.

[OzMick]

And how many yellows have gone to jail for the armed airport seizure??

The posts are getting a bit tough, quick change the subject. Yellows, squark, Airport, squark.

[473geo]

You get one guess on who will pay the fines - clandestinely, of course.

Also, the light sentences will be lightened yet more - 'til they (surprise!) virtually disappear.

Now, if you or I or your laundry lady went in and torched a bank, do you think we'd be let off so easily?

Thai justice is highly subjective.

Suffocatingly so.............apparently

[phiphidon]

And how many yellows have gone to jail for the armed airport seizure??

The posts are getting a bit tough, quick change the subject. Yellows, squark, Airport, squark.

Seems that way, do you have any information for Buchholz, apparently he's concerned about Piotr?

[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.

What gives you away as a full fledged UDD apologist is the fact you only want to discuss your conspiracy theories on the CW while refusing to discuss the numerous other arson attacks that took place at virtually the same time as the CW was set on fire.

There is ample information in the HRS report “Decent into Chaos” on the events of May 19th, it is likely the most objective report of the event of March-May 2010. It criticizes both the military personnel on ground for ignoring the rules of engagement set out by the government and the UDD leadership for inciting the riots and rioters themselves.

On the subject of the arson attacks, here is one of the more telling statements in the report:

Beginning in their public speeches in January 2010, UDD leaders appeared to consider acts of arson and looting as a potential defense against a military dispersal of the UDD rally, and used such threats to deter a repeat of the humiliating 2009 dispersal. The coordinated nature of the many arson attacks around Bangkok and the selection of the targets also indicate that the attacks were well planned and organized.

Descent into Chaos page 92

This is information, would care to comment?

TH

Thaihome, if we were sitting face to face, the it would be possible and natural to discuss many aspects of that day.

I don't "refuse" to discuss the other fires. Sorry 'bout that. It is enough work on TVF to try to address just one, thanks. And an "UDD apologist" would claim that the protesters did not attempt to burn CW, which I am not claiming.

Your last point is a good one - maybe not for the reason you meant - but when people look at the 2010 protests, it is important IMO to not take the event out of context. It is part of a series of events. The red shirts had reasons to believe that the gov't would use violence against them, and the gov't had reason to believe that the red shirts would do the same. In the end, it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, wasn't it? On the other hand, your information does not provide any details about the events of May 19th.

The Regarding the planned and organized arson - yes, a lot of fires were started. That is one reason that I used the first time line example. It shows that fires were started in CW while the red shirts were fleeing. According to the information available, that is not (apparently) the fires which finally burned CW, however. That is the point I'm interested in examining.

[Buchholz]

And how many yellows have gone to jail for the armed airport seizure??

The posts are getting a bit tough, quick change the subject. Yellows, squark, Airport, squark.

.

[tlansford]

Re; the torching of Central World in May 2010. The way I heard it, fire fighters couldn't get to Central World complex because Red Shirts were blocking their trucks.

Any prosecutions there? R U kidding? This is Thailand, all justice is hyper-subjective, and investigative prowess is on a level with Laurel and Hardy (but not as funny).

Regarding the CW fire, the protesters had been dispersed already or were taking refuge in the wat, and the military blocked the fire fighters.

[phiphidon]

What gives you away as a full fledged UDD apologist is the fact you only want to discuss your conspiracy theories on the CW while refusing to discuss the numerous other arson attacks that took place at virtually the same time as the CW was set on fire.

There is ample information in the HRS report “Decent into Chaos” on the events of May 19th, it is likely the most objective report of the event of March-May 2010. It criticizes both the military personnel on ground for ignoring the rules of engagement set out by the government and the UDD leadership for inciting the riots and rioters themselves.

On the subject of the arson attacks, here is one of the more telling statements in the report:

Beginning in their public speeches in January 2010, UDD leaders appeared to consider acts of arson and looting as a potential defense against a military dispersal of the UDD rally, and used such threats to deter a repeat of the humiliating 2009 dispersal. The coordinated nature of the many arson attacks around Bangkok and the selection of the targets also indicate that the attacks were well planned and organized.

Descent into Chaos page 92

This is information, would care to comment?

TH

Thaihome, if we were sitting face to face, the it would be possible and natural to discuss many aspects of that day.

I don't "refuse" to discuss the other fires. Sorry 'bout that. It is enough work on TVF to try to address just one, thanks. And an "UDD apologist" would claim that the protesters did not attempt to burn CW, which I am not claiming.

Your last point is a good one - maybe not for the reason you meant - but when people look at the 2010 protests, it is important IMO to not take the event out of context. It is part of a series of events. The red shirts had reasons to believe that the gov't would use violence against them, and the gov't had reason to believe that the red shirts would do the same. In the end, it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, wasn't it? On the other hand, your information does not provide any details about the events of May 19th.

The Regarding the planned and organized arson - yes, a lot of fires were started. That is one reason that I used the first time line example. It shows that fires were started in CW while the red shirts were fleeing. According to the information available, that is not (apparently) the fires which finally burned CW, however. That is the point I'm interested in examining.

There has been and still is doubt about the objectivity of HRW in Asia as this article by Andrew Spooner suggests:

For their part, Human Rights Watch, have taken a more nuanced stance. Yet, they too have made repeated and highly dubious statements, not least regarding the burning down of the Central World department store in Bangkok in May 2010.

In short, HRW have asserted, despite offering no credible or independent evidence whatsoever, that the Red Shirts burnt down Central World. This is completely in line with the Thai regime’s official version of events. What is most surprising is that HRW haven’t even bothered to wait for any investigation to conclude, instead they persist in making bold and unsubstantiated statements like Brad Adams, HRW’s Asia Director..........

http://asiancorrespondent.com/52803/who-watches-the-watchmen-human-rights-watch-and-thailand/

* ed.Andrew Marshalls link the entire cause of the Central World fire is shrouded in murk. provided later in the original article has been taken down since Marshall left Reuters.

[Buchholz]

Regarding the CW fire, the protesters had been dispersed already or were taking refuge in the wat, and the military blocked the fire fighters.

At least that what the always-interesting-perspective Worawut unproven claim was....

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4290881

From his abysmal comments regarding Yingluck's tablet procurement as well as an earlier effort

The new Education Minister went on to say that it would come out of the budget that was previously devoted to providing free school uniforms for students as well as free textbooks

The clueless guy Worawut, who obviously has never come close to caring for school-aged children, said,

"This will not affect students and the overall education program because... uniforms do not need to be changed to new ones every year."

What a moron.

Another gem from the Chief of Educating the Youth of Thailand, "The tablets will not completely replace textbooks. They will act like calculators the help the student to calculate faster."

Education Minister Worawat Ua-apinyakul previously was the genius as Culture Minister, when he came up with idea of producing black magic amulets, including phallus and buffalo-shaped ones, as souvenirs for tourists.

Phallus Symbols And Buffaloes To Attract More Tourists

http://www.thaivisa....-more-tourists/

Edited March 17, 2012 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

Might be timely to bring this document to the discussion - that referring to the Army Intelligences role last year. An article was written by Colonel Boonrod Srisombat at the Army Training Command and published in Senathipat in the first quarter of 2011 entitled

Lessons learned from Intelligence Operation: A Case of Intelligence Operation in an Urban Area (March-May 2010)” (Vol.60, No.1, pp.69-81)

It demonstrates techniques employed by the military to persuade people to believe in the government’s position during the political unrest in Bangkok during March-May 2010.

The original in Thai is here;

http://asiapacific.a...;ม-53.pdf

but salient points are discussed here;

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/06/29/intelligence-operations-against-the-red-shirts/

Amongst them

The objective of the IO was to show the public that the government wanted to maintain the rule of law and did not intend to use force against the protesters prior to the clash on 10 April 2010. After that event, the IO was used to convince the public that hard-line measures were increasingly appropriate.

The author states that the chaos after the surrender of the Red Shirt leaders leading to arson in Bangkok was the highlight for the IO. The IO team produced a series of video clips that were edited from public speeches of the Red Shirt’s leaders on different occasions to create a narrative that they had planned and instigated Red Shirt protesters to prepare for arson. This was to convince the public that the burning was well arranged and supported by terrorists (pp.72, 76).

The author also believes that the cyber network of the “multi-coloured shirts” assisted this intelligence operation without any intervention from the state. The network became a new force in opposing the Red Shirt on the internet by distributing pictures and opinions through forwarded mails, social network pages and web boards.

[tlansford]

- deleted text -

Thaihome, if we were sitting face to face, the it would be possible and natural to discuss many aspects of that day.

I don't "refuse" to discuss the other fires. Sorry 'bout that. It is enough work on TVF to try to address just one, thanks. And an "UDD apologist" would claim that the protesters did not attempt to burn CW, which I am not claiming.

Your last point is a good one - maybe not for the reason you meant - but when people look at the 2010 protests, it is important IMO to not take the event out of context. It is part of a series of events. The red shirts had reasons to believe that the gov't would use violence against them, and the gov't had reason to believe that the red shirts would do the same. In the end, it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, wasn't it? On the other hand, your information does not provide any details about the events of May 19th.

The Regarding the planned and organized arson - yes, a lot of fires were started. That is one reason that I used the first time line example. It shows that fires were started in CW while the red shirts were fleeing. According to the information available, that is not (apparently) the fires which finally burned CW, however. That is the point I'm interested in examining.

There has been and still is doubt about the objectivity of HRW in Asia as this article by Andrew Spooner suggests:

For their part, Human Rights Watch, have taken a more nuanced stance. Yet, they too have made repeated and highly dubious statements, not least regarding the burning down of the Central World department store in Bangkok in May 2010.

In short, HRW have asserted, despite offering no credible or independent evidence whatsoever, that the Red Shirts burnt down Central World. This is completely in line with the Thai regime’s official version of events. What is most surprising is that HRW haven’t even bothered to wait for any investigation to conclude, instead they persist in making bold and unsubstantiated statements like Brad Adams, HRW’s Asia Director..........

http://asiancorrespo...h-and-thailand/

* ed.Andrew Marshalls link the entire cause of the Central World fire is shrouded in murk. provided later in the original article has been taken down since Marshall left Reuters.

That would likely be referring to this quote (p22)

At the same time, UDD supporters began an apparently coordinated campaign of arson attacks throughout Bangkok. For months, UDD leaders had urged followers to turn the city into “a sea of fire” if the army tried to disperse the protest camps. Apparently following such directives, pro-UDD elements targeted buildings, banks, stores, and small businesses linked to the government or anti-Thaksin associates, including the Thai Stock Exchange, Central World shopping complex (one of the biggest in Asia), and the Maleenont Tower Complex housing Channel 3 Television. The attacks caused billions of dollars in damage.

TBH for a long time, I just assumed that the UDD torched CW along with the other fires.

[rubl]

CWT photo analysis, December 2010

https://docs.google....mNz&hl=en&pli=1

Another battle over the truth is being fought in Thailand., February 2011

http://www.zenjourna...th-in-thailand/

And a bit more here, maybe #76, #82, #92, total 443 replies:

http://www.thaivisa....er-court-hears/

Of course this moves a bit from the OP of 'red shirts jailed and fined in Khon Kaen'

Edited March 17, 2012 by rubl

[AleG]

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.

Oh, I get it!, it's the Zen Fire Riddle!

"If a fire burns in a department store and no one is around to see it, does it burn?"

The answer is yes, it bloody well does.

[tlansford]

Might be timely to bring this document to the discussion - that referring to the Army Intelligences role last year. An article was written by Colonel Boonrod Srisombat at the Army Training Command and published in Senathipat in the first quarter of 2011 entitled

Lessons learned from Intelligence Operation: A Case of Intelligence Operation in an Urban Area (March-May 2010)” (Vol.60, No.1, pp.69-81)

It demonstrates techniques employed by the military to persuade people to believe in the government’s position during the political unrest in Bangkok during March-May 2010.

The original in Thai is here;

http://asiapacific.a...;ม-53.pdf

but salient points are discussed here;

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/06/29/intelligence-operations-against-the-red-shirts/

Amongst them

The objective of the IO was to show the public that the government wanted to maintain the rule of law and did not intend to use force against the protesters prior to the clash on 10 April 2010. After that event, the IO was used to convince the public that hard-line measures were increasingly appropriate.

The author states that the chaos after the surrender of the Red Shirt leaders leading to arson in Bangkok was the highlight for the IO. The IO team produced a series of video clips that were edited from public speeches of the Red Shirt’s leaders on different occasions to create a narrative that they had planned and instigated Red Shirt protesters to prepare for arson. This was to convince the public that the burning was well arranged and supported by terrorists (pp.72, 76).

The author also believes that the cyber network of the “multi-coloured shirts” assisted this intelligence operation without any intervention from the state. The network became a new force in opposing the Red Shirt on the internet by distributing pictures and opinions through forwarded mails, social network pages and web boards.

yes.

The objectives & results of their work were obvious: The photos, video clips and press conferences.

I am actually able to sympathize with a government facing a situation like that one, because it is a very difficult situation to be in, but what has bugged me from the start was the impression that the gov't was interested in justifying itself, and not interested in resolving the issues regarding the protesters. That is reinforced by these reports on their IO.

IMO, it was that point of departure which caused them to make poor decisions up to the end, eg: declining the Senators offer the day before the crack down.

[yoshiwara]

yes.

The objectives & results of their work were obvious: The photos, video clips and press conferences.

I am actually able to sympathize with a government facing a situation like that one, because it is a very difficult situation to be in, but what has bugged me from the start was the impression that the gov't was interested in justifying itself, and not interested in resolving the issues regarding the protesters. That is reinforced by these reports on their IO.

IMO, it was that point of departure which caused them to make poor decisions up to the end, eg: declining the Senators offer the day before the crack down.

The distortions and lies continue. The reds had cut a deal with the government. There was even a date agreed for the election. The reds had even checked with Thaksin: 'Can we make a deal to make peace?' 'of course you can' he said, but he was talking only with one side of his mouth. They weren't bright enough to spot that. And Thaksin failed to stop them make the deal. Panic. Obviously the fools couldn't be trusted. Play for time. Ask for more conditions after the deal was made. Serious loss of face. While that was going on start shipping arms into the red area and bring out Seh Daeng to stiffen up the troops. Bang! and then it all went off. The key to Thaksin not agreeing to an election (supposedly the objective of the exercise), was that he wanted an election prior to the appointments of the army leaders in November. The election was never the target of the demonstrations. Capturing the army leadership was. The violence, the burnings, the attacks, the unmitigated thuggery was Thaksin's relentless message that unless Thailand is presented to him on a plate he will destroy. If I can't have it, nobody will. The forum handmaidens are just gofers in that exercise.

[Siam Simon]

yes.

The objectives & results of their work were obvious: The photos, video clips and press conferences.

I am actually able to sympathize with a government facing a situation like that one, because it is a very difficult situation to be in, but what has bugged me from the start was the impression that the gov't was interested in justifying itself, and not interested in resolving the issues regarding the protesters. That is reinforced by these reports on their IO.

IMO, it was that point of departure which caused them to make poor decisions up to the end, eg: declining the Senators offer the day before the crack down.

The distortions and lies continue. The reds had cut a deal with the government. There was even a date agreed for the election. The reds had even checked with Thaksin: 'Can we make a deal to make peace?' 'of course you can' he said, but he was talking only with one side of his mouth. They weren't bright enough to spot that. And Thaksin failed to stop them make the deal. Panic. Obviously the fools couldn't be trusted. Play for time. Ask for more conditions after the deal was made. Serious loss of face. While that was going on start shipping arms into the red area and bring out Seh Daeng to stiffen up the troops. Bang! and then it all went off. The key to Thaksin not agreeing to an election (supposedly the objective of the exercise), was that he wanted an election prior to the appointments of the army leaders in November. The election was never the target of the demonstrations. Capturing the army leadership was. The violence, the burnings, the attacks, the unmitigated thuggery was Thaksin's relentless message that unless Thailand is presented to him on a plate he will destroy. If I can't have it, nobody will. The forum handmaidens are just gofers in that exercise.

Yes, the distortions and lies do indeed continue, Yoshi. Abhisit had only agreed to a provisional election date subject to a series of provisos/caveats, and refused to set a date for house dissolution despite repeated requests from the media to do so. And then, later, Korn made that slip of the tongue about the election offer never really being on the table. The word that lovers, such as yourself, of political jargon best describes your post is, i believe, "revisionism". Next you'll be telling us that the army wasn't involved in forming the last government .

[rixalex]

Abhisit had only agreed to a provisional election date subject to a series of provisos/caveats,

Do you think those provisos were unreasonable? My memory of them is that they seemed pretty fair.

Or do you think he had no right to include any provisos at all? If so that seems a bit one sided. He was bending to their demands considerably, should they not be expected to do some bending themselves?

and refused to set a date for house dissolution despite repeated requests from the media to do so.

Could never fully understand why he was reluctant to give a date, but i guess having offered the short time frame for elections that he had, it was his prerogative to hold a little something back, and i can't see why anyone was particularly worried about it, apart from the ones desperate to claim his early election offer as being in some way a trick.

And then, later, Korn made that slip of the tongue about the election offer never really being on the table.

Any link for that?

[maidu]

Regarding the CW fire, the protesters had been dispersed already or were taking refuge in the wat, and the military blocked the fire fighters.

At least that what the always-interesting-perspective Worawut unproven claim was....

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4290881

Even if the protesters had been dispersed, it's not a stretch to imagine a few rogue punks milling around the shadows at Central, at least partly egged on by inflamatory speeches broadcast during the previous 5 weeks. I wish European or Israeli or US investigative specialists had been called in to investigate. It's just too easy for local investigators to do their typically slovenly 'mai pen rai' subjective bit of hasty work. (yeah I know, a lot of adjectives, sorry).

As for the bank torching: it's not so important how much damage was done, the important issue is the act itself.

Someone watching Thai events for the past five years might rationally assume the following:

>>> it's ok to riot in Bkk. and ok to storm a hotel in Pattaya (2009)

>>> It's ok to erect barricades and stymie downtown for six to eight weeks, while tossing truckloads of trash everywhere. Don't worry, someone else will clean up after you.

>>> It's ok to storm a hospital and terrorize doctors, nurses and patients.

>>> it's ok to toss a rpg and kill a woman on a nearby train platform

>>> it's not ok to torch a bank, but you might get a fine and less than 2 years in jail

>>> it's not ok to torch a large department store complex, just make sure you don't leave any blatant clues.

>>> it's ok to incite others to burn Bangkok.

In other words, if your excuse is pretty good, and you're part of a political crowd whose leaders are now the top politicians, you can pretty much flaunt the law, without much legal consequences.

However, be careful about getting accused of dropping a spent cigg butt on a sidewalk (even if you don't smoke, doesn't matter) - because you stand to get fined 2,000 baht by gruff pseudo police, who only pick on people with pointy noses and hairy arms.

Edited March 17, 2012 by maidu

[473geo]

Regarding the CW fire, the protesters had been dispersed already or were taking refuge in the wat, and the military blocked the fire fighters.

At least that what the always-interesting-perspective Worawut unproven claim was....

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4290881

Even if the protesters had been dispersed, it's not a stretch to imagine a few rogue punks milling around the shadows at Central, at least partly egged on by inflamatory speeches broadcast during the previous 5 weeks. I wish European or Israeli or US investigative specialists had been called in to investigate. It's just too easy for local investigators to do their typically slovenly 'mai pen rai' subjective bit of hasty work. (yeah I know, a lot of adjectives, sorry).

As for the bank torching: it's not so important how much damage was done, the important issue is the act itself.

Someone watching Thai events for the past five years might rationally assume the following:

>>> it's ok to riot in Bkk. and ok to storm a hotel in Pattaya (2009)

>>> It's ok to erect barricades and stymie downtown for six to eight weeks, while tossing truckloads of trash everywhere. Don't worry, someone else will clean up after you.

>>> It's ok to storm a hospital and terrorize doctors, nurses and patients.

>>> it's ok to toss a rpg and kill a woman on a nearby train platform

>>> it's not ok to torch a bank, but you might get a fine and less than 2 years in jail

>>> it's not ok to torch a large department store complex, just make sure you don't leave any blatant clues.

>>> it's ok to incite others to burn Bangkok.

In other words, if your excuse is pretty good, and you're part of a political crowd whose leaders are now the top politicians, you can pretty much flaunt the law, without much legal consequences.

However, be careful about getting accused of dropping a spent cigg butt on a sidewalk (even if you don't smoke, doesn't matter) - because you stand to get fined 2,000 baht by gruff pseudo police, who only pick on people with pointy noses and hairy arms.

>>> the government did not possess the acumen or ability to control the above actions

[Buchholz]

Abhisit had only agreed to a provisional election date subject to a series of provisos/caveats,

Do you think those provisos were unreasonable? My memory of them is that they seemed pretty fair.

Your memory is good. All of them were reasonable.

And then, later, Korn made that slip of the tongue about the election offer never really being on the table.

Any link for that?

None so far.

.

[waza]

The issue is an agreements was made by both sides of the negotiation teams. "After 54 days of protest and 27 deaths, Thailand's bloody political standoff appeared almost at an end today, with the redshirt protesters agreeing to a government offer of an election this year.

The redshirt leadership agreed to a proposal from embattled Thai prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva for a "reconciliation road map" that included the dissolution of parliament before a general election on 14 November........ Today, on the stage at their main protest site in the heart of Bangkok's shopping district, leader Veera Musikapong announced: "Redshirt leaders unanimously agree to join, and welcome, the reconciliation roadmap proposed by the prime minister to prevent further loss of life." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/04/thai-redshirts-accept-reconciliation-election

.

[Buchholz]

^ thank you for posting.

It's amazing how much re-posting of factual past events has been needed throughout these many threads to re-establish what was previously posted and established.

The litany of distortions that has prompted this is staggering.

.