Dispute Over Red-Shirt Pavilion Fire Continues

[webfact]

RED VILLAGES

Dispute over red-shirt pavilion fire continues

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The dispute over who burned down the red-shirt movement's pavilion continues, with the Democrat Party insisting that the red shirts set it on fire themselves so they could blame their foes - the Democrats.

The incident took place in Songkhla's Chana district at 2am on Tuesday, after the village was officially inaugurated on Monday.

Songkhla Democrat MP Wiratana Kalayasiri denied that his party had anything to do with the arson attack, saying that the two sides were only fighting on the political front in Parliament.

"The locals have the right to voice their opposition, but they are not likely to resort to such violent acts, so I think it is the red shirts who set fire to their property to use it against us," the MP said.

Wiratana also said that the ruling Pheu Thai Party should be focusing on sorting out other problems, such as the rising cost of living, instead of setting up red-shirt villages, which will only cause disharmony.

"Does the government just want to show the power of the red shirts by setting up red-shirt villages across the country?" Wiratana asked.

Sirichok Sopha, another Songkhla Democrat MP, accused the red-shirt movement of setting up villages in order to expand in the South and government officials in the area were abusing their power in favour of the reds. He said he had received a letter from a government official saying that the Chana district chief had asked school administrators to send in the names of students who wanted to join a red-shirt training course.

"The government, especially the Interior Ministry, is supporting this. The Chana district chief, Narongporn na Phattalung, is the son of Swai Na Pattalung, the Songkhla red-shirt leader," Sirichok added.

However, core red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan insisted that the Democrat Party was to be blamed for the fire and challenged Democrat MPs to swear that they were not backing an anti-red-shirt movement in the South. "Why are the Democrats so much against anti-drugs and anti-graft villages? Why are they so worried about them? Do the Democrats want the South to listen only to them? People have the right to listen to both sides," he said.

Meanwhile, director of the Southern Border Provinces Administration Centre (SBPAC) Pol Colonel Tawee Sodsong said that though he did not know all the details about the incident in Chana, the red shirts should understand the local culture before setting up villages.

In response to Sirichok's allegations, Narongporn confirmed yesterday that he had not sent any letters asking to recruit students for a training course. He said the last time he was involved in a training course was four months ago, when the Public Health Ministry launched a project with 200 student participants.

"Everybody knows my ideologies differ from those of my father. We had a quarrel and I asked my father why he had to throw himself in [the political movement]," Narongporn said, adding that he had to be politically neutral because of his position as district chief. He also said that he had just moved to Chana from Rattaphum district four months ago and was acquainted with Democrat MPs Thaworn Senneam and Surin Palare.

Narongporn added that at the opening event of the red-shirt village on Monday, he had spoken to both supporters and protesters and urged them to not instigate any rows. He said both sides agreed to keep the peace. He also said that there were no Democrat MPs present at the event in support of the protesters as claimed by the red shirts. He said it was still unknown as to who had set fire to the pavilion, adding that the local people did not consider it a big deal because it was just an old thatched structure.

-- The Nation 2012-05-18

[mca]

One of the most depressing elements of Thai politics is the complete black and white view of a number of those involved. It's either the Dems setting up the fire or the reds doing it themselves to blame the Dems.

It could quite as easily been a few local pissed up hoodlums or an individual setting it on fire for a laugh.

[OzMick]

One of the most depressing elements of Thai politics is the complete black and white view of a number of those involved. It's either the Dems setting up the fire or the reds doing it themselves to blame the Dems.

It could quite as easily been a few local pissed up hoodlums or an individual setting it on fire for a laugh.

Their is evidence of a fire, not of arson, that is merely an assumption based on the timing AFAIK..

Apart from the symbolic, what is the value of this monument to red-shirt-ism, hardly the Taj Mahal is it. Worth the hoo-ha?

A red-shirt training course, what a novel concept. They should make it a uni degree, with subjects like Building Torching, Mob Intimidation, Public Defecation and Gross Exaggeration. Look ma, I've got a degree in Red-shirt-ism, majoring in Stupidity.

[jonclark]

This really shows how narrow the vision of the UDD really is. Everyday people are killed, maimed or injured in Southern Thailand in a wave of unrest triggered primarily (but not exclusively) by the massacre at Tak Bai mosque (which incidentally no one from the then ruling government has been held accountable for - uncannily similar the 2010 unrest in Bangkok) and the UDD moans about a crappy building being burnt down. What a way to show your solidarity with the suffering people of the South.

Perhaps if the UDD started to pressure and demand those in charge [both at a governmental and military level] at the time of the Tak Bai slaughter to be brought to justice and face criminal charges at the ICC (like they demand of abhisit and suthep) they would get more votes in the South and then they wouldn't have to build pointless pavilions.

[MengWan]

One of the most depressing elements of Thai politics is the complete black and white view of a number of those involved. It's either the Dems setting up the fire or the reds doing it themselves to blame the Dems.

It could quite as easily been a few local pissed up hoodlums or an individual setting it on fire for a laugh.

Anyone knowing this place (Chana) a little bit and its inhabitants could have concluded the same thing !

I think this "red-shirt village" should have been even better settled somewhere in Pattani ... or in a reserve for wild bulls !

(in France's Camargue, for example)

[hyperdimension]

A red-shirt training course, what a novel concept. They should make it a uni degree, with subjects like Building Torching, Mob Intimidation, Public Defecation and Gross Exaggeration. Look ma, I've got a degree in Red-shirt-ism, majoring in Stupidity.

They could hold the course at Shinawatra University.

[Semper]

What is there to dispute about? They can rebuild the shack in a couple of days.

[Reasonableman]

What is there to dispute about? They can rebuild the shack in a couple of days.

Asbestos shacks don't come cheap.

[hellodolly]

Being as they built it themselves could have been faulty wiring.

Even the best electricians arn't up on safety standards.

[Semper]

What is there to dispute about? They can rebuild the shack in a couple of days.

Asbestos shacks don't come cheap.

Maybe, but 'the big boss' have plenty of dough.

[whybother]

Being as they built it themselves could have been faulty wiring.

Even the best electricians arn't up on safety standards.

Would a shack that small have wiring?

[hellodolly]

Just did a quick search.

Burning down buildings is one of the red shirt strong points.

They even managed to burn down a fire engine here in Chiang Mai.

A Pavilion should have been mere child's play for them.

A training exercise for new recruits.

[jayboy]

This really shows how narrow the vision of the UDD really is. Everyday people are killed, maimed or injured in Southern Thailand in a wave of unrest triggered primarily (but not exclusively) by the massacre at Tak Bai mosque (which incidentally no one from the then ruling government has been held accountable for - uncannily similar the 2010 unrest in Bangkok) and the UDD moans about a crappy building being burnt down. What a way to show your solidarity with the suffering people of the South.

Perhaps if the UDD started to pressure and demand those in charge [both at a governmental and military level] at the time of the Tak Bai slaughter to be brought to justice and face criminal charges at the ICC (like they demand of abhisit and suthep) they would get more votes in the South and then they wouldn't have to build pointless pavilions.

Tak Bai was a human rights crime of the worst kind.Thaksin was PM at the time but nobody suggests he was involved in or directed the operation.His comments afterwards were however crass and an honourable man would not only have taken responsibility for the army's crimes, but perhaps resigned as well.The comparison with the army's human rights crimes in 2010 is however misplaced.The ruling politicians, Abhisit specifically, were very closely involved with the army's suppression of the redshirts.

Incidentally the army senior officers involved in the Tak Bai killings have been brought to trial.They were tried by the Songhkla Provincial Court and found not guilty since they were just doing their duty, and in any case could not be held liable because they were operating under an emergency law at the time.

[Moruya]

In breaking news today, Red Shirt leader Maimaimai Meesamong announced that the charred remains of the palace of Saint Tiida, sadly burned to the ground this week in the province of Songkhla, will be relocated to a suitable resting place where visitors will be able to appreciate the true genius behind the design and the significance of a structure that clearly rivalled the Taj Mahal for scale and workmanship. "we are discussing possible locations" he said. "Udon Thani and Khon Khen provincial administrative grounds seem appropriate as does the land surrounding the Prea Wiharn temple".

A pick-up truck is on standby for its final journey.

[Buchholz]

the local people did not consider it a big deal because it was just an old thatched structure

One gets the notion the "Red Shirt Paviliion" was there even before the Red Shirts came to town

.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Buchholz

[ramrod711]

Seems likely that the red shirt goons (oops) I mean guards were in to Chalerms ear medicine and burned the pavillion down while practicing to burn down a city hall somewhere

[JohnAllan]

The Democrats against sensible and effective anti-drug – if not anti-graft – strategies of any kind seems highly unlikely, Jatuporn. Obvious, even to the likes of you. Yes, people do have the right to listen to both sides, and to decide for themselves how they vote, and attempting to impose a group's views on those people by declaring their community to be of a particular political hue is tantamount to intimidation.

They know it, we know it; and as obtuse as your rhetoric often makes you appear … you know it!

[jaidam]

This really shows how narrow the vision of the UDD really is. Everyday people are killed, maimed or injured in Southern Thailand in a wave of unrest triggered primarily (but not exclusively) by the massacre at Tak Bai mosque (which incidentally no one from the then ruling government has been held accountable for - uncannily similar the 2010 unrest in Bangkok) and the UDD moans about a crappy building being burnt down. What a way to show your solidarity with the suffering people of the South.

Perhaps if the UDD started to pressure and demand those in charge [both at a governmental and military level] at the time of the Tak Bai slaughter to be brought to justice and face criminal charges at the ICC (like they demand of abhisit and suthep) they would get more votes in the South and then they wouldn't have to build pointless pavilions.

Tak Bai was a human rights crime of the worst kind.Thaksin was PM at the time but nobody suggests he was involved in or directed the operation.His comments afterwards were however crass and an honourable man would not only have taken responsibility for the army's crimes, but perhaps resigned as well.The comparison with the army's human rights crimes in 2010 is however misplaced.The ruling politicians, Abhisit specifically, were very closely involved with the army's suppression of the redshirts.

Incidentally the army senior officers involved in the Tak Bai killings have been brought to trial.They were tried by the Songhkla Provincial Court and found not guilty since they were just doing their duty, and in any case could not be held liable because they were operating under an emergency law at the time.

Nobody suggests he was involved? You must have a short memory, the last time you tried to sell this lie you were helpfully corrected by Ballpoint. It might be worth taking 5 minutes to re-read his post 195 in this thread.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/507706-thaksin-to-definitely-return-in-december-kwanchai/page__st__175

[JohnAllan]

Just did a quick search.

Burning down buildings is one of the red shirt strong points.

They even managed to burn down a fire engine here in Chiang Mai.

A Pavilion should have been mere child's play for them.

A training exercise for new recruits.

They also, before the 2010 demonstrations, towed a fuel tanker to one particular Bangkok community with the intention of setting it on fire. One young man's attempts to stop them resulted in his being shot and killed. Seems that little incident has been conveniently forgotten by Jatuporn and the government, and I wonder whether his family is in line for any compensation?

[JohnAllan]

This really shows how narrow the vision of the UDD really is. Everyday people are killed, maimed or injured in Southern Thailand in a wave of unrest triggered primarily (but not exclusively) by the massacre at Tak Bai mosque (which incidentally no one from the then ruling government has been held accountable for - uncannily similar the 2010 unrest in Bangkok) and the UDD moans about a crappy building being burnt down. What a way to show your solidarity with the suffering people of the South.

Perhaps if the UDD started to pressure and demand those in charge [both at a governmental and military level] at the time of the Tak Bai slaughter to be brought to justice and face criminal charges at the ICC (like they demand of abhisit and suthep) they would get more votes in the South and then they wouldn't have to build pointless pavilions.

Tak Bai was a human rights crime of the worst kind.Thaksin was PM at the time but nobody suggests he was involved in or directed the operation.His comments afterwards were however crass and an honourable man would not only have taken responsibility for the army's crimes, but perhaps resigned as well.The comparison with the army's human rights crimes in 2010 is however misplaced.The ruling politicians, Abhisit specifically, were very closely involved with the army's suppression of the redshirts.

Incidentally the army senior officers involved in the Tak Bai killings have been brought to trial.They were tried by the Songhkla Provincial Court and found not guilty since they were just doing their duty, and in any case could not be held liable because they were operating under an emergency law at the time.

You know all this for fact, do you?

[OzMick]

The red shirts of Khon Kaen have decided to form a nocturnal equestrian club to raise awareness of the red shirt movement, its goals and past achievements. To be known as the Khon Kaen Klub (KKK) members will hold twice weekly night-time rides carrying burning torches and wearing their traditional red shirts as well as conical red hoods as suggested by an affiliated club in the Southern US.

Due to a shortage of horses, they will ride buffaloes.

[jonclark]

This really shows how narrow the vision of the UDD really is. Everyday people are killed, maimed or injured in Southern Thailand in a wave of unrest triggered primarily (but not exclusively) by the massacre at Tak Bai mosque (which incidentally no one from the then ruling government has been held accountable for - uncannily similar the 2010 unrest in Bangkok) and the UDD moans about a crappy building being burnt down. What a way to show your solidarity with the suffering people of the South.

Perhaps if the UDD started to pressure and demand those in charge [both at a governmental and military level] at the time of the Tak Bai slaughter to be brought to justice and face criminal charges at the ICC (like they demand of abhisit and suthep) they would get more votes in the South and then they wouldn't have to build pointless pavilions.

Tak Bai was a human rights crime of the worst kind.Thaksin was PM at the time but nobody suggests he was involved in or directed the operation.His comments afterwards were however crass and an honourable man would not only have taken responsibility for the army's crimes, but perhaps resigned as well.The comparison with the army's human rights crimes in 2010 is however misplaced.The ruling politicians, Abhisit specifically, were very closely involved with the army's suppression of the redshirts.

Incidentally the army senior officers involved in the Tak Bai killings have been brought to trial.They were tried by the Songhkla Provincial Court and found not guilty since they were just doing their duty, and in any case could not be held liable because they were operating under an emergency law at the time.

If the army weren't responsible for Tak Bai (as they were working under emergency law and following orders) surely they weren't responsible for the killings in the 2010 as they were following orders, doing their duty and working under emergency law??

Both incidents are similar inasmuch that they both involved armed and unarmed civilians rising up against the rule of law and in both cases the police were completely ineffectual in bringing either to a peaceful conclusion. In both instances someone higher up the food chain (probably a politician) gave the initial order for the army to get involved, however we all know those individuals on either side of the political divide are teflon coated.

[whybother]

If the army weren't responsible for Tak Bai (as they were working under emergency law and following orders) surely they weren't responsible for the killings in the 2010 as they were following orders, doing their duty and working under emergency law??

Both incidents are similar inasmuch that they both involved armed and unarmed civilians rising up against the rule of law and in both cases the police were completely ineffectual in bringing either to a peaceful conclusion. In both instances someone higher up the food chain (probably a politician) gave the initial order for the army to get involved, however we all know those individuals on either side of the political divide are teflon coated.

One difference is, the Tak Bai deaths happened after the protest was subdued.

[hyperdimension]

the local people did not consider it a big deal because it was just an old thatched structure

One gets the notion the "Red Shirt Paviliion" was there even before the Red Shirts came to town

That's what I was thinking, as it looks like there is an old stone chair beside it. So just because they put some red banners on an old bus shelter, it suddenly became theirs.

Edited May 18, 2012 by hyperdimension

[1bbcd5]

this is really cool, I like here!

[jayboy]

Nobody suggests he was involved? You must have a short memory, the last time you tried to sell this lie you were helpfully corrected by Ballpoint. It might be worth taking 5 minutes to re-read his post 195 in this thread.

http://www.thaivisa....i/page__st__175

I have reviewed the reference to Ballpoint as you suggested.However it only served to confirm my impression at the time that his post simply doesn't make the point you suggest.There is no evidence and the accounts of the Tak Bai tragedy I have read, none by admirers of Thaksin, do not suggest that Thaksin was involved.Of course there are always conspiracy theorists.However consider this.If Thaksin was genuinely believed to have played a central role in organising the Tak Bai massacre do you think for a moment that his enemies would have not pursued him on those grounds?

If you had suggested that Thaksin should have taken responsibility as PM at the time or that his hardline policy for Southern Provinces created an environment permitting such military abuse to take place, it would be am interesting argument which I would support.Certainly he was guilty of refusing to condemn the army commanders involved and making stupid and cruel remarks that the victims had been weakened by Ramadan fasting

Instead you accuse me of "selling a lie" without evidence or apparently much knowledge of the details of the incident.You will no doubt be supported by the tiny few on the forum for whom Thaksion is guilty of every crime and the army guilty of none.Perhaps you find that kind of support satisfying.

Finally Whybother made the very relevant observation that the deaths occurred after the victims had been captured and subdued.If you can focus on the detail sufficiently to be coherent, are you suggesting that Thaksin was responsible for what followed? In the politest possible way it probably makes sense for you to think harder, read more, and be more self critical before accusing others of "selling lies".

Edited May 19, 2012 by jayboy