Bangkok: Huge Turnout Expected At Red-Shirt Rally Today

[hellodolly]

Phiphidon, just a simple question - were you actually in Bangkok during the time if the riots?

I only ask because you talk like somebody who has sourced all of his facts from the western media. I remember watching the BBC world report about it and they presented it in a way that the Red Shirts were revolutionaries standing up to an oppressive government. They revelled in those signs saying "we are not terrorists, we are peaceful protestors". And yet, that very day Bangkok was being engulfed in the fumes of hundreds of tyres burning at heavily armed check points and there were grenades regularly being shot at civilians who had nothing to do with any of this. The western media reported a very twisted version of what I experienced at the time, and to what I saw the video footage of in the Thai news everyday.

There seems to be a very different viewpoint from people who were actually here and saw some of the riots first hand and had their life affected for one month, compared to the red shirt sympathisers on this forum who spout quotes from the UK Guardian of all sources.

Nick Nostitz (spelling) was on the ground on many occasions and his reports and observations have been rejected by many forum members here as biased.......so your thought process does not stand up to scrutiny

We'll see. Its getting late here so maybe PPD has called it a night (actually, I have no idea if he does in fact reside in Thailand).

If he posts again ignoring my basic question then Ill assume he was nowhere near the riots and only harbours his facts from TV (in this instance, both this forum and television!).

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

You justify any thing the red shirts do or say. But I have yet to hear you justify there rite to illegally seize a section of downtown Bangkok. All you seem to do is justify it by villonizing methods to get them out and restore the area to the people who rightfully belonged there.

Only a complete idiot would claim the army did not show a lot of patience and tolerance. If they had not the death count would have been in four figures not two. If the red shirts had any honesty they would have left after successfully negotiating a truce, In stead they reneged.

[hyperdimension]

The answer is - to a large part they were very disappointed. I leave it to you to find out what Thaksin has said, and why protesters were/are disappointed, a feeling that has already begun after the Siam Reap speech.

Isn't it sad that they are only starting to realize that they have been used by the madman as cannon fodder for his and his clan's own interests?

Nick, did you ever discuss with Red Shirts Thaksin's character and behaviour and the appropriateness of fighting to hand power back to him? Or did you only ever support them in their cries for "democracy"? Or were you as blinded as they were to what the protests and riots were really about? I have not yet read your "Red vs. Yellow" books, but how much do you cover about the elite power struggles in which Thaksin is one of the key players?

[rixalex]

There is another reason why it is much easier to form personal relationships with Red Shirts than with the other side. While the Red Shirts are much more open to western journalists and also to criticism, the Yellow Shirts from the start have been not overly welcoming and can be vile when faced with criticism.

Let me give you a few examples: already the backstage design of PAD 1 and 2 was such that there were several perimeters. Journalists were not allowed into the inner perimeter. Especially during PAD 2 there were whole areas which were completely closed off to us, especially during the government house occupation. During Red Shirt rallies we can freely mingle everywhere, and that was so from the beginning. It is much easier to meet Red Shirt leaders for background chats than Yellow Shirt leaders. These things improved though during the PAD rallies in 2011 in front of Government House, but by then the PAD was a spent force already and quite irrelevant.

As to criticism - after i wrote my story on the Oct. 7 incident, the PAD derided me from the stage, and accused me of having accepted a huge bribe from Thaksin, which made my life very difficult for quite some time. For a month i even needed a bodyguard when going out in public.

In many of my stories i have been critical of the Red Shirts as well, i have, for example, never bought the peaceful movement talk. That led to discussions with Red Shirt leaders, but nothing else. I have strongly criticized the Red Shirts for permanently occupying Rajaprasong, and told several leaders at the time that i will be critical over this action. This again led to discussion, but not to be shunned or accused of bribery and such.

It is more difficult for Thai journalists as they will get problems from both sides, yet if you ask the regular crowd of Thai political Thai journalists that work in the field, they will tell you that nevertheless, it is a much more pleasant experience to work in the Red Shirts than under their opponents, even though at times they have to work under very difficult conditions in the Red camp.

There are a few Yellow leaders with whom i have a very good relationship, especially with the Thai Patriot Network leaders, such as Chaiwat, etc.

And a basic point here: i am not in the habit of pretending to be somebody i am not. My ideals and values are formed by being a westerner, with all the luggage of humanism, the belief that all humans have an inherent equal worth, etc. The Yellow side's philosophy is quite opposed to many of those values. Their views on Thai society and where it should go in the future are, lets say, quite reactionary, and to a large part they reject western political systems and philosophy. This is made quite clear not just in speeches but also in personal conversations.

Nevertheless, i do go to Yellow rallies whenever they are taking place. In 2011 i have spent more time at Yellow rallies than at Red rallies - i just didn't have the time to write about them, yet. Don't forget - i do not get paid for my stories on New Mandala.

All of the over simply reinforces the point i was making, about how i find it understandable that if one were to immerse oneself in a group that you yourself admit are generally very open and welcoming, in contrast to those on the other side of this dispute who are for the much part, anything but, that one could find oneself getting emotionally involved and attached with it all.

As for the bit about you making a stand in not buying the talk of the red movement as being a peaceful movement, forgive me but i really don't think that is an earth-shattering thing to be making a stand about. I mean, it would take a Stevie Wonder level of blindness to buy that twaddle.

[birdpooguava]

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

Well written PPD. Interesting you bring it up because it is an observation I have made frequently leading to a general theory. It seems the most vociferous and frequent anti-red / Thaksin falang posters are ones that were personally affected by the 2010 protests. They have consequently been festering to the point where they can't see the bigger picture & remain focused on their relatively small inconveniences, compared to the never ending suffering of the Thai peasantry.

[nicknostitz]

The question was raised a hundred posts ago...

http://www.thaivisa....00#entry5316820

.

Thanks a lot for your help and assistance, i actually have been looking for an article in English that quoted at least some part of Thaksin's speech on the 19th.

[OzMick]

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

Well written PPD. Interesting you bring it up because it is an observation I have made frequently leading to a general theory. It seems the most vociferous and frequent anti-red / Thaksin falang posters are ones that were personally affected by the 2010 protests. They have consequently been festering to the point where they can't see the bigger picture & remain focused on their relatively small inconveniences, compared to the never ending suffering of the Thai peasantry.

Gentlemen, you should read Gulliver's Travels again (?), not as a child's fable, but as the political satire it was intended to be. From your remote ivory towers the "little people" appear beautiful, but from up close they resemble the giants, and their flaws are all too bloody obvious.

The reds happen to fit your political view of the world, and their many faults can be ignored because of that, as you receive your information second hand.

FYI mobs are a particularly ugly phenomenon, especially when they are drunk/drugged up, convinced of the right of their cause, and inspired to hate anyone who stands in their way. From where you sit is looks like an inconvenience. When it's a foot from your face breathing halitosis and stale alcohol fumes in your face while screaming in some incomprehensible dialect, waving a machete and backed by another 6 or 7 thugs, who all believe they can do anything because they will do anything to win - it's a little more than an inconvenience. FYVM.

Edited May 21, 2012 by OzMick

[FOODLOVER]

Paid to riot, Paid to vote, Paid if you are a victim. As they say, follow the money.

That's a great question. It is obvious you have not been in Thailand long and certainly not on Thai Visa long. I don't see any great political savvy or understanding of national or international politics on your part. Why are you posting about Thai politics and always anti Red shirts? Why? What do you get out of it? What do you think will be the outcome of you jumping up and down and saying I agree I agree the Reds are bad. You don't say anything new or different. Why do you post? Do you think your actions will accomplish something? Anything? I'm not trying to critique you. I am curious why. Is there a group that funds the Farang anti Red shirts. I know your point about the Reds being paid has some validity but is there also a group that financially contributes to people who are opposed to them?

Im not getting payed to dislike the reds. But I certainly do

Awesome. Dead head!Cool Avatar. Edited May 21, 2012 by FOODLOVER

[metisdead]

Off topic posts have been removed. This topic is not about Nick Nostitz' books or his career. Back on topic please.

[birdpooguava]

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

Well written PPD. Interesting you bring it up because it is an observation I have made frequently leading to a general theory. It seems the most vociferous and frequent anti-red / Thaksin falang posters are ones that were personally affected by the 2010 protests. They have consequently been festering to the point where they can't see the bigger picture & remain focused on their relatively small inconveniences, compared to the never ending suffering of the Thai peasantry.

Gentlemen, you should read Gulliver's Travels again (?), not as a child's fable, but as the political satire it was intended to be. From your remote ivory towers the "little people" appear beautiful, but from up close they resemble the giants, and their flaws are all too bloody obvious.

The reds happen to fit your political view of the world, and their many faults can be ignored because of that, as you receive your information second hand.

FYI mobs are a particularly ugly phenomenon, especially when they are drunk/drugged up, convinced of the right of their cause, and inspired to hate anyone who stands in their way. From where you sit is looks like an inconvenience. When it's a foot from your face breathing halitosis and stale alcohol fumes in your face while screaming in some incomprehensible dialect, waving a machete and backed by another 6 or 7 thugs, who all believe they can do anything because they will do anything to win - it's a little more than an inconvenience. FYVM.

Your unfortunate (?induced?) experience of the reds is in contrast to mine & many others. I spent a great deal of time at the protests at Phan Fa & Ratchaprasong amongst various other rallies & events & have always found them to be extremely hospitable. We can only imagine the ugliness that would have happened if armed troops had been used to forcibly remove the yellows from their airport siege.

[gand]

There is another reason why it is much easier to form personal relationships with Red Shirts than with the other side. While the Red Shirts are much more open to western journalists and also to criticism, the Yellow Shirts from the start have been not overly welcoming and can be vile when faced with criticism.

Let me give you a few examples: already the backstage design of PAD 1 and 2 was such that there were several perimeters. Journalists were not allowed into the inner perimeter. Especially during PAD 2 there were whole areas which were completely closed off to us, especially during the government house occupation. During Red Shirt rallies we can freely mingle everywhere, and that was so from the beginning. It is much easier to meet Red Shirt leaders for background chats than Yellow Shirt leaders. These things improved though during the PAD rallies in 2011 in front of Government House, but by then the PAD was a spent force already and quite irrelevant.

As to criticism - after i wrote my story on the Oct. 7 incident, the PAD derided me from the stage, and accused me of having accepted a huge bribe from Thaksin, which made my life very difficult for quite some time. For a month i even needed a bodyguard when going out in public.

In many of my stories i have been critical of the Red Shirts as well, i have, for example, never bought the peaceful movement talk. That led to discussions with Red Shirt leaders, but nothing else. I have strongly criticized the Red Shirts for permanently occupying Rajaprasong, and told several leaders at the time that i will be critical over this action. This again led to discussion, but not to be shunned or accused of bribery and such.

It is more difficult for Thai journalists as they will get problems from both sides, yet if you ask the regular crowd of Thai political Thai journalists that work in the field, they will tell you that nevertheless, it is a much more pleasant experience to work in the Red Shirts than under their opponents, even though at times they have to work under very difficult conditions in the Red camp.

There are a few Yellow leaders with whom i have a very good relationship, especially with the Thai Patriot Network leaders, such as Chaiwat, etc.

And a basic point here: i am not in the habit of pretending to be somebody i am not. My ideals and values are formed by being a westerner, with all the luggage of humanism, the belief that all humans have an inherent equal worth, etc. The Yellow side's philosophy is quite opposed to many of those values. Their views on Thai society and where it should go in the future are, lets say, quite reactionary, and to a large part they reject western political systems and philosophy. This is made quite clear not just in speeches but also in personal conversations.

Nevertheless, i do go to Yellow rallies whenever they are taking place. In 2011 i have spent more time at Yellow rallies than at Red rallies - i just didn't have the time to write about them, yet. Don't forget - i do not get paid for my stories on New Mandala.

All of the over simply reinforces the point i was making, about how i find it understandable that if one were to immerse oneself in a group that you yourself admit are generally very open and welcoming, in contrast to those on the other side of this dispute who are for the much part, anything but, that one could find oneself getting emotionally involved and attached with it all.

As for the bit about you making a stand in not buying the talk of the red movement as being a peaceful movement, forgive me but i really don't think that is an earth-shattering thing to be making a stand about. I mean, it would take a Stevie Wonder level of blindness to buy that twaddle.

Is it true that the armed red/black shirts would not allow the unarmed red shirts leave?

[metisdead]

Completely off topic posts and replies have been removed as well as some baiting posts and replies.

[FOODLOVER]

I have incited my attack shiatsu to show at my coi pond with 20 baht of kibble. Guess what, he showed! As freaking tarded as one can be look who you have elected people they are stealing from you. The rich elites are screwing the population big time! Pleas wake!

[metisdead]

A post containing videos of the yellow shirts demonstrations has been removed, again. This topic is not about the yellow shirts.

Edit: A post containing comments on moderation has been removed. Read the forum rules. If you feel a post is objectionable, use the Report button to report the objectionable post and it will be dealt with accordingly.

Edited May 21, 2012 by metisdead

[phiphidon]

...

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

Inconvenienced for a month?

A city, nay, a country in the brink of civil war, daily bombings everywhere, daily life disrupted, shootings on the streets, promises to burn down the city... my GF could had been one of the victims of the Sala Daeng attack as she normally went through that station at that time returning from work. You call living in such a state an inconvenience?

So you were not here, you have no idea of what you are talking about; take your inconvenience and shove it.

Finished? Feel better? Instead of building yourself up to a state of apoplexy you could have used that time wisely and read the post I was replying to, the last sentence of which I leave you with...................

part post from KunMatt:

There seems to be a very different viewpoint from people who were actually here and saw some of the riots first hand and had their life affected for one month, compared to the red shirt sympathisers on this forum who spout quotes from the UK Guardian of all sources.

[phiphidon]

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

Well written PPD. Interesting you bring it up because it is an observation I have made frequently leading to a general theory. It seems the most vociferous and frequent anti-red / Thaksin falang posters are ones that were personally affected by the 2010 protests. They have consequently been festering to the point where they can't see the bigger picture & remain focused on their relatively small inconveniences, compared to the never ending suffering of the Thai peasantry.

Gentlemen, you should read Gulliver's Travels again (?), not as a child's fable, but as the political satire it was intended to be. From your remote ivory towers the "little people" appear beautiful, but from up close they resemble the giants, and their flaws are all too bloody obvious.

The reds happen to fit your political view of the world, and their many faults can be ignored because of that, as you receive your information second hand.

FYI mobs are a particularly ugly phenomenon, especially when they are drunk/drugged up, convinced of the right of their cause, and inspired to hate anyone who stands in their way. From where you sit is looks like an inconvenience. When it's a foot from your face breathing halitosis and stale alcohol fumes in your face while screaming in some incomprehensible dialect, waving a machete and backed by another 6 or 7 thugs, who all believe they can do anything because they will do anything to win - it's a little more than an inconvenience. FYVM.

"When it's a foot from your face breathing halitosis and stale alcohol fumes in your face while screaming in some incomprehensible dialect, waving a machete and backed by another 6 or 7 thugs, who all believe they can do anything because they will do anything to win - it's a little more than an inconvenience"

Those red shirt grannies are something aren't they!

By the way do you live in Surat or were you just on holiday, seeing off those two red shirts at the railway station?

Edited May 21, 2012 by phiphidon

[KunMatt]

Phiphidon, just a simple question - were you actually in Bangkok during the time if the riots?

I only ask because you talk like somebody who has sourced all of his facts from the western media. I remember watching the BBC world report about it and they presented it in a way that the Red Shirts were revolutionaries standing up to an oppressive government. They revelled in those signs saying "we are not terrorists, we are peaceful protestors". And yet, that very day Bangkok was being engulfed in the fumes of hundreds of tyres burning at heavily armed check points and there were grenades regularly being shot at civilians who had nothing to do with any of this. The western media reported a very twisted version of what I experienced at the time, and to what I saw the video footage of in the Thai news everyday.

There seems to be a very different viewpoint from people who were actually here and saw some of the riots first hand and had their life affected for one month, compared to the red shirt sympathisers on this forum who spout quotes from the UK Guardian of all sources.

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

So, I am deficient in my assumptions but correct in the sole assumption I made about you. That makes no sense, however it fits in with the rest of your blinkered arguments to just twist and use whatever suits you.

Anyways, I explained why the western media were not an honest source for the riots, and I gave an example of the BBC's stance of buying into the Red Shirts propaganda at the time. What they reported was very different to what I experienced, and the subsequent facts and events that came out during the last two years since the riots only backup the view I formed at the time, and prove that the BBC was wrong with the way they presented the Red Shirts as peaceful protesters.

What I don't understand is why someone who doesn't even live in Bangkok is such a rabble rouser for the Red Shirt movement? It seems quite silly to me seeing as you are non-Thai, non resident and didn't even witness the riots first hand, and yet here you are all the time fighting their corner for them with speculations that are not even true. It's as ridiculous as me getting into a heated debate with someone from Burma, with me defending the junta because I have read a few articles about the situation. It's none of my business and I have no place even trying to argue with anyone about it.

Even though I live in BKK I hardly discuss this Red/Yellow shirt crap. The only reason I entered this thread is because last Saturday CentralWorld was shut when I went there to buy my son's birthday present and I would like to know why the hell this mob is allowed to shut down central BKK yet again seeing as they already got their way despite staging an illegal riot that killed nearly 100 people and destroyed 30 buildings. The reason I found is that they want to shift the blame for all the deaths and destruction they caused onto the other side, which is just typical of the victim mentality they always present even though they instigated all of this.

So that's the reason I ended up in this thread. What business do you have to be here??

Edited May 21, 2012 by KunMatt

[Siam Simon]

Phiphidon, just a simple question - were you actually in Bangkok during the time if the riots?

I only ask because you talk like somebody who has sourced all of his facts from the western media. I remember watching the BBC world report about it and they presented it in a way that the Red Shirts were revolutionaries standing up to an oppressive government. They revelled in those signs saying "we are not terrorists, we are peaceful protestors". And yet, that very day Bangkok was being engulfed in the fumes of hundreds of tyres burning at heavily armed check points and there were grenades regularly being shot at civilians who had nothing to do with any of this. The western media reported a very twisted version of what I experienced at the time, and to what I saw the video footage of in the Thai news everyday.

There seems to be a very different viewpoint from people who were actually here and saw some of the riots first hand and had their life affected for one month, compared to the red shirt sympathisers on this forum who spout quotes from the UK Guardian of all sources.

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

So, I am deficient in my assumptions but correct in the sole assumption I made about you. That makes no sense, however it fits in with the rest of your blinkered arguments to just twist and use whatever suits you.

Anyways, I explained why the western media were not an honest source for the riots, and I gave an example of the BBC's stance of buying into the Red Shirts propaganda at the time. What they reported was very different to what I experienced, and the subsequent facts and events that came out during the last two years since the riots only backup the view I formed at the time, and prove that the BBC was wrong with the way they presented the Red Shirts as peaceful protesters.

What I don't understand is why someone who doesn't even live in Bangkok is such a rabble rouser for the Red Shirt movement? It seems quite silly to me seeing as you are non-Thai, non resident and didn't even witness the riots first hand, and yet here you are all the time fighting their corner for them with speculations that are not even true. It's as ridiculous as me getting into a heated debate with someone from Burma, with me defending the junta because I have read a few articles about the situation. It's none of my business and I have no place even trying to argue with anyone about it.

Even though I live in BKK I hardly discuss this Red/Yellow shirt crap. The only reason I entered this thread is because last Saturday CentralWorld was shut when I went there to buy my son's birthday present and I would like to know why the hell this mob is allowed to shut down central BKK yet again seeing as they already got their way despite staging an illegal riot that killed nearly 100 people and destroyed 30 buildings. The reason I found is that they want to shift the blame for all the deaths and destruction they caused onto the other side, which is just typical of the victim mentality they always present even though they instigated all of this.

So that's the reason I ended up in this thread. What business do you have to be here??

KhunMatt,

Do you have even a single shred of new evidence to add to these debates? You haven't presented any so far, but you keep claiming a superior position because you walked past the protest sites a few times. Did you witness anything that hasn't been reported? Did you take any photos that provide unique insights? You come across to me as being as ignorant as everybody else, offering your tuppence worth without providing anything even slightly out of the ordinary to back that tuppence up.

[phiphidon]

Phiphidon, just a simple question - were you actually in Bangkok during the time if the riots?

I only ask because you talk like somebody who has sourced all of his facts from the western media. I remember watching the BBC world report about it and they presented it in a way that the Red Shirts were revolutionaries standing up to an oppressive government. They revelled in those signs saying "we are not terrorists, we are peaceful protestors". And yet, that very day Bangkok was being engulfed in the fumes of hundreds of tyres burning at heavily armed check points and there were grenades regularly being shot at civilians who had nothing to do with any of this. The western media reported a very twisted version of what I experienced at the time, and to what I saw the video footage of in the Thai news everyday.

There seems to be a very different viewpoint from people who were actually here and saw some of the riots first hand and had their life affected for one month, compared to the red shirt sympathisers on this forum who spout quotes from the UK Guardian of all sources.

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

So, I am deficient in my assumptions but correct in the sole assumption I made about you. That makes no sense, however it fits in with the rest of your blinkered arguments to just twist and use whatever suits you.

Anyways, I explained why the western media were not an honest source for the riots, and I gave an example of the BBC's stance of buying into the Red Shirts propaganda at the time. What they reported was very different to what I experienced, and the subsequent facts and events that came out during the last two years since the riots only backup the view I formed at the time, and prove that the BBC was wrong with the way they presented the Red Shirts as peaceful protesters.

What I don't understand is why someone who doesn't even live in Bangkok is such a rabble rouser for the Red Shirt movement? It seems quite silly to me seeing as you are non-Thai, non resident and didn't even witness the riots first hand, and yet here you are all the time fighting their corner for them with speculations that are not even true. It's as ridiculous as me getting into a heated debate with someone from Burma, with me defending the junta because I have read a few articles about the situation. It's none of my business and I have no place even trying to argue with anyone about it.

Even though I live in BKK I hardly discuss this Red/Yellow shirt crap. The only reason I entered this thread is because last Saturday CentralWorld was shut when I went there to buy my son's birthday present and I would like to know why the hell this mob is allowed to shut down central BKK yet again seeing as they already got their way despite staging an illegal riot that killed nearly 100 people and destroyed 30 buildings. The reason I found is that they want to shift the blame for all the deaths and destruction they caused onto the other side, which is just typical of the victim mentality they always present even though they instigated all of this.

So that's the reason I ended up in this thread. What business do you have to be here??

You assumed I wasn't in Bangkok at the time - correct. You assumed I get all my information from western sources - incorrect. You tell me that you saw the "riots" first hand without explaining instances but you took your information from thai TV - correct. It wasn't the same as what the western media were portraying - did you bother to find out why? Did you believe everything you saw and heard on thai tv, including the army spokesmen? Or had your viewpoint been manipulated to enhance what "you" experienced.

Tell me where you think any of my "speculations" are untrue and we can have a reasonable debate, though somehow, I doubt it.

Oh and sorry your shopping experience was ruined - it must have been a bit of a shock finding that centralworld would be closed on the very day of the 2nd anniversary of the 19th May Army "Crackdown" would be commemorated, having been planned at the very last minute as it was with no prior warning.

Oh I believe I have as much right as you do to participate in this forum despite not living in Bangkok....................

[rubl]

After having stayed away from this topic for two days (did you miss me boys?) may I reminds all who care and those who don't that the topic is on "huge turnout expected at the rally". Well, while it was fun for mosts, the turnout was slightly less than expected by some and more than expected by others. The phone-in by k. Thaksin wasn't really covered much and may have been a bit of a disappointment.

To conclude, it' s time to ask the Greeks to build another wooden horse, IMHO

[OzMick]

You can assume all you like and judging by your posts that is not a skill you are deficient at.

I was not in Bangkok at the time of the riots and am thankful for that. Why? Because it does mean that I can observe, read articles, take part in forums etc without that chip of "I was there at the Bangkok Riots, I'm a victim too" consistently blurring my insight.

I understand that there are some non Thais on here that were genuinely personally affected by the events in Bangkok in 2010. I have read of westerners who hate Thaksin because they lost their job/money in a telecom business he set up, another whose wife gave birth prematurely because a red shirt "literally" threw her out of bed whilst looking for snipers in Chulakorn Hospital, yet another whose cousins' sister (or something like that) gave birth in a taxi because of traffic jams caused by red shirts setting up roadblocks, there's even one guy on here who posts regularly about how he's liquidating his considerable fortune (I say considerable, because he's been "liquidating" it for over a year now) in the fear of Thaksin coming back to Thailand and yet at least one more that has promised to leave Thailand the minute Taksin appears.

OK, I understand your stance. What I don't understand are members who diss anything they don't agree with. Case in point, Why is the Guardian or CNN or any other western media so laughable as a source? Have you fed into the belief that Thais are inscrutable (they are to an extent, but not totally) and that no westerners will ever understand. To the contrary the average westerner (if they wish to) has a far more vast access to knowledge regarding the situation than the average Thai. Certain banned articles are accessible, with their associated risks.

To rely on local sources (including this forum) is to deny yourself knowledge. Why do you think the economist is not distributed within Thailand on occasion? We can't even discuss the situation fully on any public forum in Thailand. Any media source associated with the UDD was shut down (only in some cases for genuine "threat" reasons). This left State (and in some cases Army run) TV to transmit what they wanted.Did you query the army spokesman when he stated that no live bullets were fired, the army was not responsible for any deaths, the 500 men in black?. When Suthep stated that the photographs and videos clearly showing soldiers on the tracks above the Wat were taken on the 20th May, not the 19th May?

No, all that is said is the red shirts are armed and deserved to be shot dead.

So, yes, I am biased towards the UDD but I'm upfront with it and provide examples why where I can. You, you were in Bangkok "when they tried to burn it down" and were inconvenienced for a month.

Well written PPD. Interesting you bring it up because it is an observation I have made frequently leading to a general theory. It seems the most vociferous and frequent anti-red / Thaksin falang posters are ones that were personally affected by the 2010 protests. They have consequently been festering to the point where they can't see the bigger picture & remain focused on their relatively small inconveniences, compared to the never ending suffering of the Thai peasantry.

Gentlemen, you should read Gulliver's Travels again (?), not as a child's fable, but as the political satire it was intended to be. From your remote ivory towers the "little people" appear beautiful, but from up close they resemble the giants, and their flaws are all too bloody obvious.

The reds happen to fit your political view of the world, and their many faults can be ignored because of that, as you receive your information second hand.

FYI mobs are a particularly ugly phenomenon, especially when they are drunk/drugged up, convinced of the right of their cause, and inspired to hate anyone who stands in their way. From where you sit is looks like an inconvenience. When it's a foot from your face breathing halitosis and stale alcohol fumes in your face while screaming in some incomprehensible dialect, waving a machete and backed by another 6 or 7 thugs, who all believe they can do anything because they will do anything to win - it's a little more than an inconvenience. FYVM.

"When it's a foot from your face breathing halitosis and stale alcohol fumes in your face while screaming in some incomprehensible dialect, waving a machete and backed by another 6 or 7 thugs, who all believe they can do anything because they will do anything to win - it's a little more than an inconvenience"

Those red shirt grannies are something aren't they!

By the way do you live in Surat or were you just on holiday, seeing off those two red shirts at the railway station?

I have lived in Thailand for over 10 years. You weren't in Bangkok for the riots, were you in the country? Have you ever lived here for more than a week at a time?

[Siam Simon]

After having stayed away from this topic for two days (did you miss me boys?) may I reminds all who care and those who don't that the topic is on "huge turnout expected at the rally". Well, while it was fun for mosts, the turnout was slightly less than expected by some and more than expected by others. The phone-in by k. Thaksin wasn't really covered much and may have been a bit of a disappointment.

To conclude, it' s time to ask the Greeks to build another wooden horse, IMHO

I, for one, missed your input, Uncle. Where've you been?.

edit: How about I add a question mark to a question?

Edited May 21, 2012 by Siam Simon

[rubl]

begin remove (quote from member rixalex) ...

You watched it on TV and read the newspapers, and can't provide bog-all useful personal witness evidence, the same as the rest of us on this forum apart from nicknostitz. Get over yourself and try to keep an open mind. A sharp mind such as yours fixated with petty hate is an ugly sight.

Now, now, young master Simon, don't be hasty.

A few more posters here not only were in Bangkok at the time, but even walked around a bit. Not all of us are photographers like NN, or feel like joining the fray for the fun of it, but we still walk around, watch, see it in 3D, hear it in surround-all sound and smell it, all on a personal level. Except for the last week I walked past RamaIV, Saladaeng myself, (wearing a pink shirt) going to the office, smiling to police and soldiers in full kits feeling hot. I past BTS Saladeang a few hours before the grenade attack, saw those multicolor shirts. I watched from SiamCenter and Chitlom stations and walkovers, wondering about the shoutcasts.

(corrected typo in member name)

Edited May 21, 2012 by rubl

[rubl]

After having stayed away from this topic for two days (did you miss me boys?) may I reminds all who care and those who don't that the topic is on "huge turnout expected at the rally". Well, while it was fun for mosts, the turnout was slightly less than expected by some and more than expected by others. The phone-in by k. Thaksin wasn't really covered much and may have been a bit of a disappointment.

To conclude, it' s time to ask the Greeks to build another wooden horse, IMHO

I, for one, missed your input, Uncle. Where've you been?.

edit: How about I add a question mark to a question?

Just home, trying not to let TV fun spoil my Sunday

Working at Bangkok Bank today, a lady seeing I had a cold asked if I'd been at the rally Saturday evening. When I said (jokingly) I 'd thought about it, using the opportunity to buy a nice, new red shirt with PM Yingluck and her brother watching from behind her. The lady told me I looked much better in my usual pink, yellow or green

Edited May 21, 2012 by rubl

[rixalex]

In 2008 i had more publications on Yellow, as Yellow was more active. From then on Red was more active, therefore i have naturally more publications on Red. I can't write or photograph anything when there is nothing to write or photograph about. That should not be too difficult to understand, at least i hope so...

It is absolutely understandable and i don't blame you for it, but it highlights precisely the point i was making. Whilst you have met people from all sides of the divide, your time and attention over the last three or four years has been focused on the red side, and the opportunity to form attachments and personal feelings on that side has therefore obviously been much greater.

And yes, i do judge other writers negatively write when they are do sloppy research, or even worse - distort facts. Without naming names - on both sides of the political divide there are those to be found, especially under those who are never or hardly ever seen in the field and base their stories only on what is fed to them during lunches and dinners.

But you are not a writer, you have never even been close to any event you have strong opinions about...so excuse me if i do not give too much importance on what you have to say to me here.

You have no idea who i am, what i do, or what my experiences have been in Thailand regarding the protests, yet you make assumptions about all those things in the above. Just because you decide to advertise who you are and what you do, doesn't mean we all must. And no, that doesn't mean i have shameful things to hide, it just means that i am wary of how personal details can be used on the net and am not in the habit of sharing this stuff. Kudos to you that you take that risk, but doesn't give you the right to belittle the opinions of others because they don't wish to. This is a public forum in which 99% of users remain anonymous. Everyone's opinion is equal here.

You watched it on TV and read the newspapers, and can't provide bog-all useful personal witness evidence, the same as the rest of us on this forum apart from nicknostitz. Get over yourself and try to keep an open mind. A sharp mind such as yours fixated with petty hate is an ugly sight.

Well you got one thing right. I can't provide bog-all. You can... and consistently do... as the above demonstrates.

[OzMick]

You watched it on TV and read the newspapers, and can't provide bog-all useful personal witness evidence, the same as the rest of us on this forum apart from nicknostitz. Get over yourself and try to keep an open mind. A sharp mind such as yours fixated with petty hate is an ugly sight.

Personal evidence - I'll give you some. I was in BKK to meet friends at the airport and went for a look. At a "checkpoint" manned by 6 or 7 men on a public street I was asked for a B500 "donation" by a semi-paralytic moron armed with a machete. When I refused he became incensed and it was only when it appeared he was actually going to strike me that he was pulled away. A broad daylight (attempted) street mugging in front of at least 100 red shirts, who seemed amused. Fun times at the jolly rally.

Some people are only alive because it's illegal to kill them. And sometimes it's not. and if those boyos ended up on a slab, do you think I give a tuppenny toss?

[Siam Simon]

begin remove (quote from member rixalex) ...

You watched it on TV and read the newspapers, and can't provide bog-all useful personal witness evidence, the same as the rest of us on this forum apart from nicknostitz. Get over yourself and try to keep an open mind. A sharp mind such as yours fixated with petty hate is an ugly sight.

Now, now, young master Simon, don't be hasty.

A few more posters here not only were in Bangkok at the time, but even walked around a bit. Not all of us are photographers like NN, or feel like joining the fray for the fun of it, but we still walk around, watch, see it in 3D, hear it in surround-all sound and smell it, all on a personal level. Except for the last week I walked past RamaIV, Saladaeng myself, (wearing a pink shirt) going to the office, smiling to police and soldiers in full kits feeling hot. I past BTS Saladeang a few hours before the grenade attack, saw those multicolor shirts. I watched from SiamCenter and Chitlom stations and walkovers, wondering about the shoutcasts.

(corrected typo in member name)

I know you walked past the Silom (?) BTS not long after the grenade attack, but were you in the thick of the firefights, Uncle?

[hellodolly]

After having stayed away from this topic for two days (did you miss me boys?) may I reminds all who care and those who don't that the topic is on "huge turnout expected at the rally". Well, while it was fun for mosts, the turnout was slightly less than expected by some and more than expected by others. The phone-in by k. Thaksin wasn't really covered much and may have been a bit of a disappointment.

To conclude, it' s time to ask the Greeks to build another wooden horse, IMHO

I believe from the stand point of the red leaders it was a huge disappointment. Nowhere near the turn out they were expecting. The call from Thaksin had to be a huge loss.

For myself I enjoyed some of the bantering but when a person claims they are rite and sites secret sources and denies what was clearly shown many times in u tube and continues post after post with his non knowledge it does get a bit tiring.

I have an idea that they will not be planning such a big rally next year. That presumes that the Government does not give the paymaster a free pass. With him on the stage I feel quite sure there would be a lot of money to bring in well over one hundred thousand from the north and other out laying areas.

Edited May 21, 2012 by hellodolly

[cdnvic]

I've removed several posts/posters. Please try to keep it a bit more civil.

[Thaddeus]

Well, this is entertaining.

//edit/

Last comment removed.

Thanks Vic

Edited May 21, 2012 by Thaddeus

[rubl]

begin remove (quote from member rixalex) ...

You watched it on TV and read the newspapers, and can't provide bog-all useful personal witness evidence, the same as the rest of us on this forum apart from nicknostitz. Get over yourself and try to keep an open mind. A sharp mind such as yours fixated with petty hate is an ugly sight.

Now, now, young master Simon, don't be hasty.

A few more posters here not only were in Bangkok at the time, but even walked around a bit. Not all of us are photographers like NN, or feel like joining the fray for the fun of it, but we still walk around, watch, see it in 3D, hear it in surround-all sound and smell it, all on a personal level. Except for the last week I walked past RamaIV, Saladaeng myself, (wearing a pink shirt) going to the office, smiling to police and soldiers in full kits feeling hot. I past BTS Saladeang a few hours before the grenade attack, saw those multicolor shirts. I watched from SiamCenter and Chitlom stations and walkovers, wondering about the shoutcasts.

(corrected typo in member name)

I know you walked past the Silom (?) BTS not long after the grenade attack, but were you in the thick of the firefights, Uncle?

It seems time to pull you up by one of your ears, young master Simon.

If you had read rather than glanced over you'd have noticed the "I past BTS Saladeang a few hours before the grenade attack" in my post. Just like NN, who arrived after hearing about the attack, we missed it (if you can really say 'we missed' that is). I also wrote "Not all of us are photographers like NN, or feel like joining the fray for the fun of it, but we still walk around" which should have indicated I didn't look for a fight. However I might feel about it, I'm a legal alien and supposed to stay away from such 'peaceful' activities. Mind you on the 10th of May in pink and on the back of a motorcycle going to Chamchuri to do the 90-day reporting all of a sudden I found myself in the midst of a red caravan. We smiled at each other, good fun.

BTW the shirts I wear, because in 2006 (or was it 2007?) companies started handing out yellow shirts in honor of H.M. the King. When working in Bangkok and getting the choice of a dress shirt with tie or a <any color> Polo/T-shirt with the King's symbol on the left breast pocket, what would you choose ?

Edited May 21, 2012 by rubl