No Order To Open Fire On The Crowds In 2010: Abhisit

[ThaiOats]

What other scenario might there be?

that everyone who is not a red shirt isn't automatically opposed to them.

Guess I'll take it one by one. So why aren't they Red Shirts?

[nurofiend]

What other scenario might there be?

that everyone who is not a red shirt isn't automatically opposed to them.

Guess I'll take it one by one. So why aren't they Red Shirts?

listen, if you are seriously suggesting that everyone in thailand who is not a red shirt themself, therefore must oppose them, i'm not going to be the one to try and change your mind.

to me, it's a silly statement.

is everyone who is not pad opposed to them?

i don't think so, so why aren't they all pad?

[ThaiOats]

What other scenario might there be?

that everyone who is not a red shirt isn't automatically opposed to them.

Guess I'll take it one by one. So why aren't they Red Shirts?

listen, if you are seriously suggesting that everyone in thailand who is not a red shirt themself, therefore must oppose them, i'm not going to be the one to try and change your mind.

to me, it's a silly statement.

is everyone who is not pad opposed to them?

i don't think so, so why aren't they all pad?

You can cop out and not answer the question. I even said it, you can be someone who isn't a red shirt and doesn't oppose them. But the question is, why aren't you a Red Shirt? Answer this question and maybe you'll find out if it's really a People vs the Red Shirt or not in this political situation.

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for? But this isn't about the PAD. It's about the UDD, Red Shirt movement who claim to be fighting for Democracy against the elite, ammart, rich people (as proclaimed).

Edited July 3, 2012 by ThaiOats

[nurofiend]

You can cop out and not answer the question. I even said it, you can be someone who isn't a red shirt and doesn't oppose them. But the question is, why aren't you a Red Shirt? Answer this question and maybe you'll find out if it's really a People vs the Red Shirt or not in this political situation.

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for? But this isn't about the PAD. It's about the UDD, Red Shirt movement who claim to be fighting for Democracy against the elite, ammart, rich people (as proclaimed).

i'm not copping out for god sake, this is really boring me now because to me the answer is very obvious.

ok, why aren't people who are not opposed to red shirts not then red shirts themselves? was the question...

well just because they don't oppose them... doesn't mean they have to support them by becoming a member themselves.

just because they don't oppose them , doesn't mean they agree with everything they're about and are a supporter of them.

But the question is, why aren't you a Red Shirt?

what, this is the latest new question is it?

i'm not a red shirt because i'm not a red shirt supporter... does that mean i oppose them in your eyes?

you still don't have the courtesy just to answer my question without it being a 'first you tell me' question to me.

so you can say i'm copping out all you want from here on because i won't be answering any more of your questions on this, since you won't even give me a straight answer to the (two in) one question that i asked you in my post .. it's circles and circles and i don't have the patience.

Edited July 4, 2012 by nurofiend

[nurofiend]

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for?

ok say i stated that pad are fighting for the upholding of the monarchy and democracy in general.

by your definitions laid out previously, anyone who agrees with them must therefore be a member of pad, and everyone who is not a member of pad, opposes pad and it's views.

is it starting to sound a bit ludicrous to you yet?

[Buchholz]

do you believe there are 10 million members of the red shirts?

According to Red Shirt Leader Kwanchai, he was going to get 10 million up to the Laos border to escort and protect Thaksin back into Thailand.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Govt-must-block-plans-for-red-shirt-welcome-for-Th-30178403.html

.

[nurofiend]

do you believe there are 10 million members of the red shirts?

According to Red Shirt Leader Kwanchai, he was going to get 10 million up to the Laos border to escort and protect Thaksin back into Thailand.

http://www.nationmul...h-30178403.html

.

exactly and that's something that is laughable no matter what side of the coin you're on.

Edited July 4, 2012 by nurofiend

[chotthee]

Is it fair to say "Red Shirts" are mostly communist?

I think in the USA, it is not a crime to eliminate communism; I could be wrong.

However, this is Thailand, and our great Father forgave the communist back in the 1960s.

[ThaiOats]

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for?

ok say i stated that pad are fighting for the upholding of the monarchy and democracy in general.

by your definitions laid out previously, anyone who agrees with them must therefore be a member of pad, and everyone who is not a member of pad, opposes pad and it's views.

is it starting to sound a bit ludicrous to you yet?

I even mentioned that you didn't have to be a Red Shirt to support their views. I just asked what's the difference between a Red Shirt and Non-Red Shirt in this case, other than the color of the shirt and affiliation?

"just because they don't oppose them , doesn't mean they agree with everything they're about and are a supporter of them."

"i'm not a red shirt because i'm not a red shirt supporter... does that mean i oppose them in your eyes?"

You're not a red-shirt because you're not a red shirt supporter. So you don't support their idea of them going against the elite and ammarts AND you don't oppose them. What exactly is it that you don't agree with them then?

My whole gripe with this idea that the Red propaganda is using, about it's the POOR vs the RICH/ELITE/AMMART is false, because within the Red Ranks, there are RICH/ELITE/AMMART. This Red movement is nothing more than a congregation of people who were manipulated to think that it's the POOR vs the Elite, especially when they're wearing a T-Shirt of the convicted manipulator. The other relationship is that the Yellows are Elitists who are rich and drives around in porsche is also wrong, which I already mentioned in my first post. If indeed it becomes an undisputed fact that this country is being unfairly ruled by CERTAIN individuals by certain I mean, by names, then I truly can sympathize with the PEOPLE.

I also mentioned that Thaksin has his hands in this movement. The difference between a non-red shirt and a Red-shirt believing that the country is ruled by ammart, is how the latter is manipulated into believing and how the former is independent of this manipulation. Why else would they be part of the Red Mob if not for the efforts of payouts and promised candy that Thaksin provides. Surely they can independently fight for their cause free from Thaksin, but instead they choose to (through manipulation) to join in the Red Shirts. You might argue that things get done in a big group, a majority voice and such, but you consent into being a Red Shirt, you are now a Thaksinite who can no longer deny the fact of being a tool. They can leave the Red Shirt movement and form another one free of Thaksin and set a clearer goal, but that's very unlikely. If they don't agree with burning down the city and bringing weapons into Bangkok, then why are they still calling themselves Red Shirts, unless they condone such actions. Thaksin is leading them around by the nose, this movement may not die with him if someone else can be just as good a manipulator.

To tie it with the topic, until there's clear evidence that Abhisit said "shoot the people" oppose to saying "deal with the enemy militias", I don't see why Red Shirt leaders must use this as a reason to provoke the masses. This Red Shirt movement wants to throw all the blame onto Abhisit, that's their agenda and goal now. If people are in the Red Shirt movement, they too must believe it's true even without CLEAR evidence. Let's not go back to speculating. Show me evidence. If evidence can't be provided, apply cause and effect, starting with why does the government feel it needs to use the military? Let's see some causal chains,

[ThaiOats]

exactly and that's something that is laughable no matter what side of the coin you're on.

But hey, they said it. Not us. Why ever would they make up such a number? I'm sure some think it's true. Look at how great of a movement you're a part of!

Edited July 4, 2012 by ThaiOats

[Yunla]

do you believe there are 10 million members of the red shirts?

According to Red Shirt Leader Kwanchai, he was going to get 10 million up to the Laos border to escort and protect Thaksin back into Thailand.

http://www.nationmul...h-30178403.html

.

The armed-escort school of reconciliation. How can ten million pairs of boots be wrong. I'm feeling reconciled already, where do I sign.

[binjalin]

Is it fair to say "Red Shirts" are mostly communist?

I think in the USA, it is not a crime to eliminate communism; I could be wrong.

However, this is Thailand, and our great Father forgave the communist back in the 1960s.

no the red shirts here are not communist and not everything 'red' is communist including Santa Claus (as far as I know), Man United and Strawberries. As for the USA 'it's not a crime to 'eliminate' communism?' go tell that to the Communist Party of the USA! I don't think most Thais would have a clue what a communist is let alone 'be one'.

[nurofiend]

exactly and that's something that is laughable no matter what side of the coin you're on.

But hey, they said it. Not us. Why ever would they make up such a number? I'm sure some think it's true. Look at how great of a movement you're a part of!

ok, yeah... next.

Edited July 4, 2012 by nurofiend

[binjalin]

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for?

ok say i stated that pad are fighting for the upholding of the monarchy and democracy in general.

by your definitions laid out previously, anyone who agrees with them must therefore be a member of pad, and everyone who is not a member of pad, opposes pad and it's views.

is it starting to sound a bit ludicrous to you yet?

I even mentioned that you didn't have to be a Red Shirt to support their views. I just asked what's the difference between a Red Shirt and Non-Red Shirt in this case, other than the color of the shirt and affiliation?

"just because they don't oppose them , doesn't mean they agree with everything they're about and are a supporter of them."

"i'm not a red shirt because i'm not a red shirt supporter... does that mean i oppose them in your eyes?"

You're not a red-shirt because you're not a red shirt supporter. So you don't support their idea of them going against the elite and ammarts AND you don't oppose them. What exactly is it that you don't agree with them then?

My whole gripe with this idea that the Red propaganda is using, about it's the POOR vs the RICH/ELITE/AMMART is false, because within the Red Ranks, there are RICH/ELITE/AMMART. This Red movement is nothing more than a congregation of people who were manipulated to think that it's the POOR vs the Elite, especially when they're wearing a T-Shirt of the convicted manipulator. The other relationship is that the Yellows are Elitists who are rich and drives around in porsche is also wrong, which I already mentioned in my first post. If indeed it becomes an undisputed fact that this country is being unfairly ruled by CERTAIN individuals by certain I mean, by names, then I truly can sympathize with the PEOPLE.

I also mentioned that Thaksin has his hands in this movement. The difference between a non-red shirt and a Red-shirt believing that the country is ruled by ammart, is how the latter is manipulated into believing and how the former is independent of this manipulation. Why else would they be part of the Red Mob if not for the efforts of payouts and promised candy that Thaksin provides. Surely they can independently fight for their cause free from Thaksin, but instead they choose to (through manipulation) to join in the Red Shirts. You might argue that things get done in a big group, a majority voice and such, but you consent into being a Red Shirt, you are now a Thaksinite who can no longer deny the fact of being a tool. They can leave the Red Shirt movement and form another one free of Thaksin and set a clearer goal, but that's very unlikely. If they don't agree with burning down the city and bringing weapons into Bangkok, then why are they still calling themselves Red Shirts, unless they condone such actions. Thaksin is leading them around by the nose, this movement may not die with him if someone else can be just as good a manipulator.

To tie it with the topic, until there's clear evidence that Abhisit said "shoot the people" oppose to saying "deal with the enemy militias", I don't see why Red Shirt leaders must use this as a reason to provoke the masses. This Red Shirt movement wants to throw all the blame onto Abhisit, that's their agenda and goal now. If people are in the Red Shirt movement, they too must believe it's true even without CLEAR evidence. Let's not go back to speculating. Show me evidence. If evidence can't be provided, apply cause and effect, starting with why does the government feel it needs to use the military? Let's see some causal chains,

well 'someone' 'somewhere' ordered the killings right? shooting into the temple? killing innocent people sheltering there? the execution of Daeng? the killing of the journalist? you don't think the PM - as the authority in charge - had anything to do with it? whatever happened to 'the buck stops here'?

[Moruya]

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for?

ok say i stated that pad are fighting for the upholding of the monarchy and democracy in general.

by your definitions laid out previously, anyone who agrees with them must therefore be a member of pad, and everyone who is not a member of pad, opposes pad and it's views.

is it starting to sound a bit ludicrous to you yet?

I even mentioned that you didn't have to be a Red Shirt to support their views. I just asked what's the difference between a Red Shirt and Non-Red Shirt in this case, other than the color of the shirt and affiliation?

"just because they don't oppose them , doesn't mean they agree with everything they're about and are a supporter of them."

"i'm not a red shirt because i'm not a red shirt supporter... does that mean i oppose them in your eyes?"

You're not a red-shirt because you're not a red shirt supporter. So you don't support their idea of them going against the elite and ammarts AND you don't oppose them. What exactly is it that you don't agree with them then?

My whole gripe with this idea that the Red propaganda is using, about it's the POOR vs the RICH/ELITE/AMMART is false, because within the Red Ranks, there are RICH/ELITE/AMMART. This Red movement is nothing more than a congregation of people who were manipulated to think that it's the POOR vs the Elite, especially when they're wearing a T-Shirt of the convicted manipulator. The other relationship is that the Yellows are Elitists who are rich and drives around in porsche is also wrong, which I already mentioned in my first post. If indeed it becomes an undisputed fact that this country is being unfairly ruled by CERTAIN individuals by certain I mean, by names, then I truly can sympathize with the PEOPLE.

I also mentioned that Thaksin has his hands in this movement. The difference between a non-red shirt and a Red-shirt believing that the country is ruled by ammart, is how the latter is manipulated into believing and how the former is independent of this manipulation. Why else would they be part of the Red Mob if not for the efforts of payouts and promised candy that Thaksin provides. Surely they can independently fight for their cause free from Thaksin, but instead they choose to (through manipulation) to join in the Red Shirts. You might argue that things get done in a big group, a majority voice and such, but you consent into being a Red Shirt, you are now a Thaksinite who can no longer deny the fact of being a tool. They can leave the Red Shirt movement and form another one free of Thaksin and set a clearer goal, but that's very unlikely. If they don't agree with burning down the city and bringing weapons into Bangkok, then why are they still calling themselves Red Shirts, unless they condone such actions. Thaksin is leading them around by the nose, this movement may not die with him if someone else can be just as good a manipulator.

To tie it with the topic, until there's clear evidence that Abhisit said "shoot the people" oppose to saying "deal with the enemy militias", I don't see why Red Shirt leaders must use this as a reason to provoke the masses. This Red Shirt movement wants to throw all the blame onto Abhisit, that's their agenda and goal now. If people are in the Red Shirt movement, they too must believe it's true even without CLEAR evidence. Let's not go back to speculating. Show me evidence. If evidence can't be provided, apply cause and effect, starting with why does the government feel it needs to use the military? Let's see some causal chains,

well 'someone' 'somewhere' ordered the killings right? shooting into the temple? killing innocent people sheltering there? the execution of Daeng? the killing of the journalist? you don't think the PM - as the authority in charge - had anything to do with it? whatever happened to 'the buck stops here'?

Abhisit and Suthep offered to trade their amnesty for Thaksin's. 2 for 1.

Thaksin refused.

[phiphidon]

rubbish - so you can't sympathize with the yellows without loving Abhisit and Suthep? or the Republicans without loving Mitt? or... or... or... there are many who sympathize with the red cause without wishing K. Thaksin's return and IF there were a credible alternative party who wished to see cultural and economic improvement then MAYBE most would switch but there is NOT and most would continue to support the PTP against the rich, elitist yellows as evidenced by their defeat (against TVF posters predictions) at the election.

I don't remember the Yellow Shirts wearing Abhisit T-Shirts en masse, or Abhisit giving speeches on their stages, or phone ins, or the Yellow Shirts pushing for legislation to favour Abhisit, or Yellow Shirt leaders expressing their love to Abhisit and running to visit him every possible opportunity, or Yellow Shirt publications waxing poetic about Abhisit, also I don't remember the Red Shirts campaigning to vote against Thaksin (and his proxie) as the Yellow Shirts did against the Democrats, furthermore I'm going out on a limb and say that, were Abhisit be hit by lightning today, the Yellow Shirt movement would continue ticking along just the same without him. Not quite the same bloody thing, is it?

Quite.

For the benefit of some others.

It is easily possible to sympathise with the rural poor, without supporting the Redmob or Thaksin in any way.

It is scarcely believable to sympathise with the Redmob without supporting Thaksin.

In all the Redmob rallies, I see nothing about PTP being called to quest on fulfilling all their pre-election promises, only one of them.

And just to bring it back on topic, the open fire on crowds argument is only happening for one reason.

I'll think you'll find that the correct terms are either Red Shirts or UDD. "redmob" is not a real word but apparently it is used by "ladies who lunch" as a refreshing alternative to kwai or phrai..............

[Thaddeus]

For the benefit of some others.

It is easily possible to sympathise with the rural poor, without supporting the Redmob or Thaksin in any way.

It is scarcely believable to sympathise with the Redmob without supporting Thaksin.

In all the Redmob rallies, I see nothing about PTP being called to quest on fulfilling all their pre-election promises, only one of them.

And just to bring it back on topic, the open fire on crowds argument is only happening for one reason.

I'll think you'll find that the correct terms are either Red Shirts or UDD. "redmob" is not a real word but apparently it is used by "ladies who lunch" as a refreshing alternative to kwai or phrai..............

Oh, well, that makes the situation totally different then, doesn't it.

[phiphidon]

rubbish - so you can't sympathize with the yellows without loving Abhisit and Suthep?

Yellow shirts AKA PAD, campaigned at the last election for people to NOT vote for Abhisit and Suthep. When have the red shirts ever campaigned for people to NOT vote for Thaksin's party?

I'm sorry that's not true. The PAD campaigned for a NO vote in a protest against all politicians not just the democrat party so your point about the red shirts is invalid.

BANGKOK - The pro-establishment People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) would start a nationwide campaign for "vote no" from June 4, PAD core leader Maj Gen Chamlong Srimuang said on Thursday.

"We see that the coming general election will make no betterment for the country and therefore we would urge voters to vote 'No' at the July 3 polls", the retired general said...................

......................The PAD, aka yellow-shirt movement, has proposed 'vote no' campaign as an alternative for the upcoming election, citing Thai people should not let wicked politicians to enter the parliament. They believe this measure will finally lead to political reform in the country.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2011-05/26/content_12587654.htm

[phiphidon]

off topic text snipped

Enough, please. It's not about the PAD, you're right. It's about "no order to fire on the crowds in 2010 - abhisit"

[phiphidon]

Abhisit and Suthep offered to trade their amnesty for Thaksin's. 2 for 1.

Thaksin refused.

Because they knew they were already covered by the emergency decree act that they had enacted 3 days before the first deaths on the 10th April.

Section 17. A competent official and a person having identical powers and duties as a competent official under this Emergency Decree shall not be subject to civil, criminal or disciplinary liabilities arising from the performance of functions for the termination or prevention of an illegal act if such act was performed in good faith, non-discriminatory, and was not unreasonable in the circumstances or exceed the extent of necessity, but this does not preclude the right of a victim to seek compensation from a government agency under the law on liability for wrongful act of officials.

Read more: Thailand State of Emergency Act - SOE Royal decree http://photo-journ.com/downloadable-documents/thailand-state-of-emergency-act/2/#ixzz1zceaXqVP

Easy to throw down the gauntlet when your a$se is covered isn't it?

[Yunla]

I'll think you'll find that the correct terms are either Red Shirts or UDD. "redmob" is not a real word but apparently it is used by "ladies who lunch" as a refreshing alternative to kwai or phrai..............

Actually the words "red" and "mob" are both real words, and can be combined to make "redmob" to describe - yes you've guessed it - a red mob.

But its nice that you've found another straw to grasp at.

I prefer jacket potatoes for lunch as it happens.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Yunla

[Buchholz]

no the red shirts here are not communist

you mean besides communist Red Shirt Leaders Thida, Weng, and Surachai?

[Moruya]

rubbish - so you can't sympathize with the yellows without loving Abhisit and Suthep? or the Republicans without loving Mitt? or... or... or... there are many who sympathize with the red cause without wishing K. Thaksin's return and IF there were a credible alternative party who wished to see cultural and economic improvement then MAYBE most would switch but there is NOT and most would continue to support the PTP against the rich, elitist yellows as evidenced by their defeat (against TVF posters predictions) at the election.

I don't remember the Yellow Shirts wearing Abhisit T-Shirts en masse, or Abhisit giving speeches on their stages, or phone ins, or the Yellow Shirts pushing for legislation to favour Abhisit, or Yellow Shirt leaders expressing their love to Abhisit and running to visit him every possible opportunity, or Yellow Shirt publications waxing poetic about Abhisit, also I don't remember the Red Shirts campaigning to vote against Thaksin (and his proxie) as the Yellow Shirts did against the Democrats, furthermore I'm going out on a limb and say that, were Abhisit be hit by lightning today, the Yellow Shirt movement would continue ticking along just the same without him. Not quite the same bloody thing, is it?

Quite.

For the benefit of some others.

It is easily possible to sympathise with the rural poor, without supporting the Redmob or Thaksin in any way.

It is scarcely believable to sympathise with the Redmob without supporting Thaksin.

In all the Redmob rallies, I see nothing about PTP being called to quest on fulfilling all their pre-election promises, only one of them.

And just to bring it back on topic, the open fire on crowds argument is only happening for one reason.

I'll think you'll find that the correct terms are either Red Shirts or UDD. "redmob" is not a real word but apparently it is used by "ladies who lunch" as a refreshing alternative to kwai or phrai..............

It's red and it's a mob when congregated

[Moruya]

Abhisit and Suthep offered to trade their amnesty for Thaksin's. 2 for 1.

Thaksin refused.

Because they knew they were already covered by the emergency decree act that they had enacted 3 days before the first deaths on the 10th April.

Section 17. A competent official and a person having identical powers and duties as a competent official under this Emergency Decree shall not be subject to civil, criminal or disciplinary liabilities arising from the performance of functions for the termination or prevention of an illegal act if such act was performed in good faith, non-discriminatory, and was not unreasonable in the circumstances or exceed the extent of necessity, but this does not preclude the right of a victim to seek compensation from a government agency under the law on liability for wrongful act of officials.

Read more: Thailand State of Emergency Act - SOE Royal decree http://photo-journ.com/downloadable-documents/thailand-state-of-emergency-act/2/#ixzz1zceaXqVP

Easy to throw down the gauntlet when your a$se is covered isn't it?

They have repeatedly said that they don't want amnesty.

Thaksin just fled.

[phiphidon]

Abhisit and Suthep offered to trade their amnesty for Thaksin's. 2 for 1.

Thaksin refused.

Because they knew they were already covered by the emergency decree act that they had enacted 3 days before the first deaths on the 10th April.

Section 17. A competent official and a person having identical powers and duties as a competent official under this Emergency Decree shall not be subject to civil, criminal or disciplinary liabilities arising from the performance of functions for the termination or prevention of an illegal act if such act was performed in good faith, non-discriminatory, and was not unreasonable in the circumstances or exceed the extent of necessity, but this does not preclude the right of a victim to seek compensation from a government agency under the law on liability for wrongful act of officials.

Read more: Thailand State of Emergency Act - SOE Royal decree http://photo-journ.c.../#ixzz1zceaXqVP

Easy to throw down the gauntlet when your a$se is covered isn't it?

They have repeatedly said that they don't want amnesty.

Thaksin just fled.

They wouldn't have known beforehand that they needed amnesty (obviously). Therefore they could only have said they didn't want amnesty after the event. Therefore they knew that they had amnesty already (by virtue of the emergency decree) when they supposedly "repeatedly said that they don't want amnesty."

As I say, it's easy to throw down the gauntlett when your a$se is covered.

"Thaksin just fled"

From what? The challenge from abhisit and suthep to give up amnesty (even though they had it from a different source)?

No, he had already gone several years ago to avoid a dubious charge and conviction pronounced by a Junta set up investigation committee and Junta imposed judges, neither of whom known to be great fans of thaksin.

So the sentence "Thaksin just fled" is of no value to your "argument"

Edited July 4, 2012 by phiphidon

[binjalin]

no the red shirts here are not communist

you mean besides communist Red Shirt Leaders Thida, Weng, and Surachai?

a few there maybe but not as a 'movement' as well you know - unless you brand Thaksin as a 'communist' too? or the PM? it's absurd

[tlansford]

To answer your question, you'd first have to tell me, what is PAD and what are they fighting for?

ok say i stated that pad are fighting for the upholding of the monarchy and democracy in general.

by your definitions laid out previously, anyone who agrees with them must therefore be a member of pad, and everyone who is not a member of pad, opposes pad and it's views.

is it starting to sound a bit ludicrous to you yet?

I even mentioned that you didn't have to be a Red Shirt to support their views. I just asked what's the difference between a Red Shirt and Non-Red Shirt in this case, other than the color of the shirt and affiliation?

"just because they don't oppose them , doesn't mean they agree with everything they're about and are a supporter of them."

"i'm not a red shirt because i'm not a red shirt supporter... does that mean i oppose them in your eyes?"

You're not a red-shirt because you're not a red shirt supporter. So you don't support their idea of them going against the elite and ammarts AND you don't oppose them. What exactly is it that you don't agree with them then?

My whole gripe with this idea that the Red propaganda is using, about it's the POOR vs the RICH/ELITE/AMMART is false, because within the Red Ranks, there are RICH/ELITE/AMMART. This Red movement is nothing more than a congregation of people who were manipulated to think that it's the POOR vs the Elite, especially when they're wearing a T-Shirt of the convicted manipulator. The other relationship is that the Yellows are Elitists who are rich and drives around in porsche is also wrong, which I already mentioned in my first post. If indeed it becomes an undisputed fact that this country is being unfairly ruled by CERTAIN individuals by certain I mean, by names, then I truly can sympathize with the PEOPLE.

I also mentioned that Thaksin has his hands in this movement. The difference between a non-red shirt and a Red-shirt believing that the country is ruled by ammart, is how the latter is manipulated into believing and how the former is independent of this manipulation. Why else would they be part of the Red Mob if not for the efforts of payouts and promised candy that Thaksin provides. Surely they can independently fight for their cause free from Thaksin, but instead they choose to (through manipulation) to join in the Red Shirts. You might argue that things get done in a big group, a majority voice and such, but you consent into being a Red Shirt, you are now a Thaksinite who can no longer deny the fact of being a tool. They can leave the Red Shirt movement and form another one free of Thaksin and set a clearer goal, but that's very unlikely. If they don't agree with burning down the city and bringing weapons into Bangkok, then why are they still calling themselves Red Shirts, unless they condone such actions. Thaksin is leading them around by the nose, this movement may not die with him if someone else can be just as good a manipulator.

To tie it with the topic, until there's clear evidence that Abhisit said "shoot the people" oppose to saying "deal with the enemy militias", I don't see why Red Shirt leaders must use this as a reason to provoke the masses. This Red Shirt movement wants to throw all the blame onto Abhisit, that's their agenda and goal now. If people are in the Red Shirt movement, they too must believe it's true even without CLEAR evidence. Let's not go back to speculating. Show me evidence. If evidence can't be provided, apply cause and effect, starting with why does the government feel it needs to use the military? Let's see some causal chains,

well 'someone' 'somewhere' ordered the killings right? shooting into the temple? killing innocent people sheltering there? the execution of Daeng? the killing of the journalist? you don't think the PM - as the authority in charge - had anything to do with it? whatever happened to 'the buck stops here'?

I would have to believe that the shooting of Daeng was not just random luck on the part of the military. Given the timing of his shooting, it seems to be planned, ie: ordered.

As for some of the other shootings, one has to wonder why these people were killed. It is hard to believe that some one ordered the military to shoot journalists, monks, and medics. On the other hand, it is not hard to believe that once the shootings began, that the individual military members went over the line.

[Buchholz]

no the red shirts here are not communist

you mean besides communist Red Shirt Leaders Thida, Weng, and Surachai?

a few there maybe but not as a 'movement' as well you know - unless you brand Thaksin as a 'communist' too? or the PM? it's absurd

Why mention Thaksin, or his clone sister, in a discussion of Red Shirt Leaders? I thought the script was that it's not about Thaksin.

Anyway, there's much more than a few, but less than "10 million" amongst the Red Shirts.

They are represented very well in the Leaders, of which you can add Somyot and his Marxist/Leninist magazines.

There's also Giles and also all the communist red stars imagery present at all Red Shirt gatherings.

If the Red Shirts don't want to be associated with the communists, denounce their involvement and exclude them... rather than disingenuously attempt to downplay their participation, which, bizarrely, somehow includes a number of their Leaders.

The same can be said of the terrorist element in the Red Shirts as well as the anti-monarchists... who coincidentally include a number of the same communists.

The Red Shirts can feebly boast we don't have these elements or these elements don't represent the Red Shirts..... but yet, there they are, commonly and routinely seen in the Red Shirt literature, the red star uniforms, the anti-monarchy rhetoric from stage and in print, and their inciting violence speeches, their convicted Red Shirt Bombers, and the Red Shirt Arsonists burned out buildings.

It's all ringing up a big.... No Sale.

.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Buchholz

[tlansford]

- deleted -

Because they knew they were already covered by the emergency decree act that they had enacted 3 days before the first deaths on the 10th April.

Section 17. A competent official and a person having identical powers and duties as a competent official under this Emergency Decree shall not be subject to civil, criminal or disciplinary liabilities arising from the performance of functions for the termination or prevention of an illegal act if such act was performed in good faith, non-discriminatory, and was not unreasonable in the circumstances or exceed the extent of necessity, but this does not preclude the right of a victim to seek compensation from a government agency under the law on liability for wrongful act of officials.

Read more: Thailand State of Emergency Act - SOE Royal decree http://photo-journ.c.../#ixzz1zceaXqVP

Easy to throw down the gauntlet when your a$se is covered isn't it?

They have repeatedly said that they don't want amnesty.

Thaksin just fled.

They wouldn't have known beforehand that they needed amnesty (obviously). Therefore they could only have said they didn't want amnesty after the event. Therefore they knew that they had amnesty already (by virtue of the emergency decree) when they supposedly "repeatedly said that they don't want amnesty."

As I say, it's easy to throw down the gauntlett when your a$se is covered.

"Thaksin just fled"

From what? The challenge from abhisit and suthep to give up amnesty (even though they had it from a different source)?

No, he had already gone several years ago to avoid a dubious charge and conviction pronounced by a Junta set up investigation committee and Junta imposed judges, neither of whom known to be great fans of thaksin.

So the sentence "Thaksin just fled" is of no value to your "argument"

I believe that NN noted some questions about the issuing of the SOE *before* the 10th. I don't recall the exact context / issue, but I recall it being at least unusual, if not against the intention of the declaration, to invoke the SOE prior to having an actual emergency.

As for the Thaksin conviction, this is the one point where I can honestly admit to "supporting" Thaksin's position - anyone who looks at the case and the situation can reasonably conclude that it is or at least "could be" a politically motivated conviction. In other words, he was just framed by his political enemies. That is not to say that there may not be other things for which he could or should be convicted (although if true, he would not be the only politician in that position), but the case for which The Nation labels him a convicted fugitive ex-PM is just nonsense. If I were him, I would not serve time for that conviction either.

The problem, IMO, for Thaksin's opponents is that the precedent of a politically motivated conviction will make further attempts to hold Thaksin accountable for other issues more easily deflected as also being politically motivated - whether true or not.

As for Abhisit and Suthep, they authorized the use of lethal force against their own citizens. Whether they ordered the army to shoot medics, monks, and journalists or not, I don't see how they can escape at least a moral responsibility for that.

[phiphidon]

no the red shirts here are not communist

you mean besides communist Red Shirt Leaders Thida, Weng, and Surachai?

a few there maybe but not as a 'movement' as well you know - unless you brand Thaksin as a 'communist' too? or the PM? it's absurd

Why mention Thaksin, or his clone sister, in a discussion of Red Shirt Leaders? I thought the script was that it's not about Thaksin.

Anyway, there's much more than a few, but less than "10 million" amongst the Red Shirts.

They are represented very well in the Leaders, of which you can add Somyot and his Marxist/Leninist magazines.

There's also Giles and also all the communist red stars imagery present at all Red Shirt gatherings.

If the Red Shirts don't want to be associated with the communists, denounce their involvement and exclude them... rather than feebly attempt to downplay their participation?

The same can be said of the terrorist element in the Red Shirts as well as the anti-monarchists... who coincidentally include a number of the same communists.

.

If communists are not welcome with this so-called movement, why

They allow insane people into PAD so why not communists into the UDD?