Korkaew Says Red Shirts Have Their Rights To Protest Against Democrats

[kerryk]

True I guess. A terrorist occupation. Yup works for me. Or maybe billions of dollars were lost because Thai fanatics occupied Bangkok International airport?

I think in this case maybe occupation is worse than intimidation? See that was my point. The yellow shirts can dish it out but can't take it.

They were Thai people, in Thailand, doing sit-down peaceful protest against a Thai politician and his regime who stole billions from the state coffers and murdered thousands of innocent Thais. What makes you think you have the right to condemn them and call them terrorists in their own country.

Because they stole billions from simple Thai businessmen and women who were prevented from earning a living because the airport was closed.

[kerryk]

Thanks.

I take it no one was injured by the bottles. I hope that at least they were not glass.

Seriously, as noted in this OP, if they don't break the law, then they have every right to protest against Abhisit. Honestly, throwing water bottles, glass or not, must be some kind of infraction, as would be breaking into the compound.

I have to admit that I laughed when I saw the added condition that they don't lynch Abhisit either - as if that would not fall under the "breaking the law" condition.

Its called "intimidation". Something that has no place in democratic politics.

I agree. What do you call it when someone occupies an international airport? Intimidation or terrorism?

Very weak and weaselish response. What do you call it when sinners hide behind others' sins?

The pot calling the kettle black. Two wrongs do not make a right. Get it?

[tlansford]

just to be clear, the PAD also has a right to make their voice heard. I don't agree with and cannot "sympathize" with their position, but I respect the fact that they have strongly held beliefs, I understand how they can come to hold those beliefs, and I respect them at the very least for having the balls to get out there and do something.

But like everyone, it should be done without violence and that is unfortunately not so often the case in the current Thai political conflicts.

[muchogra]

My kids probably vote the same people as you. Oh, that's progress so you would say!...Is it really?

Why not enjoy Thailand for what it has been instead of pushing for what it's not ready for?

Yeah, you sound logical and impressive in your writings but there are underlying faults which is: you think like an American!

Correction: You don't think like an American. You know a lot more of Thailand than an average American. You often write good pieces which impress a lot, but to me, sound an ignorant American wanting to win on the keyboard while hurting the country that we live in. In fact, that something, xxxford, is in the same category!

The ultimate question here is: why do you want to transform Thailand into something like your own countries which you have apparenty seen faults?

[lungmi]

1. The symbol of the Lotus Flower in Buddhism.

a. Some people grow out to awakening by their own, the muddy waters gives them the power.

b. Some people grow out to awakening by their own with the help of "kalyanamitta" (good spiritual friends)

c. Some people love to stay in the muddy waters.

2. My preceptor for traditional medecine gave me the teaching: Do your job honestly, but don't waste your time with patients who use their sickness to undermine your good intentions.

3. My professor for education-psychology at the University of Freiburg: Don't waste your time with your good intentions. You have to accept that you can have students who use all their small intelligence

to stay stupid, to misuse you.

Posters, my point of view.

[Yunla]

Because they stole billions from simple Thai businessmen and women who were prevented from earning a living because the airport was closed.

For a few weeks. How curious that you don't have objections to your precious redmob blockading all central Bangkok for three whole months (four times as long) and harming far more small businesses than the short airport seige. I think thats called wearing your party hat over your eyes.

I believe your obsession with the airport has nothing to do with small Thai businesses as you say, but because it is the only example you can find of the DP supporters stepping remotely out of line.The fact that they did it to legitimately remove a dangerous corrupt regime, does not interest you because you wear that regimes party hat with such passionate loyalty.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Yunla

[lungmi]

Oh, I forgot. The two psychotherapists (students of mine in the grammar school), who analysed the behavior of the reds with me on the basis of videos (Al Jazeera and others) what I posted already)

told me, the psychological rehabilitation of criminals in jail or in drug clinics follows what I said in the post before.

[ThaiOats]

ah, there you go again - so kind of you to reinterpret my rather clear comments and distort them beyond recognition.

next time feel free to keep your incorrect interpretation of my statements to yourself. Thanks.

Sorry I didn't conform to your bias then, if that's what you call misinterpretation.

In regards to your other post about being clear about the PAD, then I don't see how them occupying the airport is NOT what you're suggesting? They held onto their beliefs, voiced out their position and didn't have violence, so what's the problem? Some people might want to call that terrorists though.

Edited July 4, 2012 by ThaiOats

[kerryk]

Because they stole billions from simple Thai businessmen and women who were prevented from earning a living because the airport was closed.

For a few weeks. How curious that you don't have objections to your precious redmob blockading all central Bangkok for three whole months (four times as long) and harming far more small businesses than the short airport seige. I think thats called wearing your party hat over your eyes.

I believe your obsession with the airport has nothing to do with small Thai businesses as you say, but because it is the only example you can find of the DP supporters stepping remotely out of line.The fact that they did it to legitimately remove a dangerous corrupt regime, does not interest you because you wear that regimes party hat with such passionate loyalty.

I have said it any number of times. You seem to ignore it. Or perhaps my posts go away. But I will say in again. It is the pot calling the kettle black. I don't like the red shirts because they cause destruction and violence and I don't like the yellow shirts because they cause destruction and violence. The only reason I post in favor of the reds is the yellow people are very impolite and never look at both sides of the issue. Get it? I don't like either one and I don't care who is handsome or who is not. I don't like violent behavior. I like freedom of the press. I like free elections. I don't like military coups. I like a rule of law and one constitution that all parties will stick to. I don't like the appointment of police and military to be political footballs. Get it? Ask me any time you want. You get the same answer.

[Yunla]

The only reason I post in favor of the reds is the yellow people are very impolite and never look at both sides of the issue. Get it?

No I really don't get it at all., but I am glad you wrote that line which I have quoted above. Because I've never heard of the redmob inferred to as being 'polite' or 'seeing both sides' before.

The thing is I don't vote in Thailand, and I'm sure if there was three or four other major parties I could find a better party than DP to put my in-spirit support with, but today of the two parties they are the least corrupt and they have the smaller list of crimes pinned to their name, including violent crimes, so I will side with DP in the absence of other better options. I support them when they have peaceful sitdown protest even when it is hijacked by intruders etc. because it is for the good of the country to have peaceful demonstrations.

I would not excuse DP if they had taken to the stage and told their followers to "burn all of Bangkok" (as the redmob leadership did in public onstage in 2010) which is to advocate mass-murder by citywide arson, causing danger to many innocents including my hundreds of friends and their families who live in Bangkok. If DP had said those things I would not support them, and I would certainly not describe them as being 'polite' or 'seeing both sides' for example.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Yunla

[lungmi]

Mr. T. is in his jail in Dubai.

Follow his speaking, no coherence, high gambling intelligence, therapy not possible.

TPP knows about.

In Lampang is an election for POS. (8 july)

Number 1 - PTP (A clean lady)

Number 2 - PTP hard core Red gangster (founder of a red shirts village in Lampang, involved in the examation cheating for police recruitment

Number 3 - PTP a young man, no one knows him, may be he takes the place of number two

The cheating for police recruitment is not only a tea money strategy.

Look to the police bosses.

The riots in Bangkok were possible only with the help of the "tomato cops". Some posters (I send them to my post before) blame the Gouvernment to kill the protestes.

The "tomato cops" didn't their job, underminded by M.T. In every democratic country of the world the cops would know what they have to do.

I was "street fighter" in France and in Germany against the war in Vietnam.

But we knew for what,

Daniel Cohn-Bendit in France, (President of th Green in Europe), Joschka Fischer in Germany (later one of the best Minister foreign-minister Germany ever had)

The reds know for what?

[fasteddie]

We're going to intimidate you with democracy and beat and bomb you with democracy until the streets run red with democracy. Yeah!

We're going to intimidate you with democracy and beat and bomb you with democracy until the streets run red with democracy. Yeah!

Isn't that the American way?

[Buchholz]

just to be clear, the PAD also has a right to make their voice heard. I don't agree with and cannot "sympathize" with their position, but I respect the fact that they have strongly held beliefs, I understand how they can come to hold those beliefs, and I respect them at the very least for having the balls to get out there and do something.

But like everyone, it should be done without violence and that is unfortunately not so often the case in the current Thai political conflicts.

In case you missed it, the thread is about how the Red Shirts used violence, verbal and physical, to disrupt a speech. And then... dismissing their actions as "their right to protest against Democrats".

I know kerryk loves to rehash an interpretation of "violence" as the airport closure of some five years ago, but besides that, when was the last time the Yellow Shirts used violence?

For the Red Shirts, we measure it, in this thread, in terms of a just a few days ago.

.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Buchholz

[lannarebirth]

ah, there you go again - so kind of you to reinterpret my rather clear comments and distort them beyond recognition.

next time feel free to keep your incorrect interpretation of my statements to yourself. Thanks.

Sorry I didn't conform to your bias then, if that's what you call misinterpretation.

In regards to your other post about being clear about the PAD, then I don't see how them occupying the airport is NOT what you're suggesting? They held onto their beliefs, voiced out their position and didn't have violence, so what's the problem? Some people might want to call that terrorists though.

In Amertica, we used to call that a "sit-in" in the 60's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sit-in

PAD.bmp

[animatic]

just to be clear, the PAD also has a right to make their voice heard. I don't agree with and cannot "sympathize" with their position, but I respect the fact that they have strongly held beliefs, I understand how they can come to hold those beliefs, and I respect them at the very least for having the balls to get out there and do something.

But like everyone, it should be done without violence and that is unfortunately not so often the case in the current Thai political conflicts.

In case you missed it, the thread is about how the Red Shirts used violence, verbal and physical, to disrupt a speech. And then... dismissing their actions as "their right to protest against Democrats".

I know kerryk loves to rehash an interpretation of "violence" as the airport closure of some five years ago, but besides that, when was the last time the Yellow Shirts used violence?

For the Red Shirts, we measure it, in this thread, in terms of a just a few days ago.

.

The times when the yellows were involved in actual violence, vs simple occupation by large numbers,

was ONLY when accosted or violently attacked by 'Red Agitators' or violently by 'Tomato Border-Patrol Police'. Still waiting on Somchai's court dates for that over-reaction to protestors.

Otherwise they attempted to have as little violence as possible and a lot of talk.

This was obvious from all media coverage. As obvious is that Reds have used

violence and physical intimidation as Standard Operating Procedure against all who disagree.

Edited July 5, 2012 by animatic

[nurofiend]

just to be clear, the PAD also has a right to make their voice heard. I don't agree with and cannot "sympathize" with their position, but I respect the fact that they have strongly held beliefs, I understand how they can come to hold those beliefs, and I respect them at the very least for having the balls to get out there and do something.

But like everyone, it should be done without violence and that is unfortunately not so often the case in the current Thai political conflicts.

In case you missed it, the thread is about how the Red Shirts used violence, verbal and physical, to disrupt a speech. And then... dismissing their actions as "their right to protest against Democrats".

I know kerryk loves to rehash an interpretation of "violence" as the airport closure of some five years ago, but besides that, when was the last time the Yellow Shirts used violence?

For the Red Shirts, we measure it, in this thread, in terms of a just a few days ago.

.

The times when the yellows were involved in actual violence, vs simple occupation by large numbers,

was ONLY when accosted or violently attacked by 'Red Agitators' or violently by 'Tomato Border-Patrol Police'. Still waiting on Somchai's court dates for that over-reaction to protestors.

Otherwise they attempted to have as little violence as possible and a lot of talk.

This was obvious from all media coverage. As obvious is that Reds have used

violence and physical intimidation as Standard Operating Procedure against all who disagree.

so historically, the only time pad ever got violent was to defend themselves and the udd only ever got violent to attack the pacifist others.

welcome to.. 'planet blinded by bias', please enjoy your stay and make sure to only wear yellow attire, thank you.

[kerryk]

The only reason I post in favor of the reds is the yellow people are very impolite and never look at both sides of the issue. Get it?

No I really don't get it at all., but I am glad you wrote that line which I have quoted above. Because I've never heard of the redmob inferred to as being 'polite' or 'seeing both sides' before.

The thing is I don't vote in Thailand, and I'm sure if there was three or four other major parties I could find a better party than DP to put my in-spirit support with, but today of the two parties they are the least corrupt and they have the smaller list of crimes pinned to their name, including violent crimes, so I will side with DP in the absence of other better options. I support them when they have peaceful sitdown protest even when it is hijacked by intruders etc. because it is for the good of the country to have peaceful demonstrations.

I would not excuse DP if they had taken to the stage and told their followers to "burn all of Bangkok" (as the redmob leadership did in public onstage in 2010) which is to advocate mass-murder by citywide arson, causing danger to many innocents including my hundreds of friends and their families who live in Bangkok. If DP had said those things I would not support them, and I would certainly not describe them as being 'polite' or 'seeing both sides' for example.

Number one you use the professional posters scam of cherrypicking my post and editing it down to one line to alter the meaning of the post. That in itself is impolite.

But what I said is not that the red shirts are impolite or polite. I don't like the red shirts because they cause destruction and violence and I don't like the yellow shirts because they cause destruction and violence That is what I said. I don't like violent behavior. I like freedom of the press. I like free elections. I don't like military coups. I like a rule of law and one constitution that all parties will stick to. That is what I said.

I think you are a yellow person. You never post anything except anti red words and thoughts and only in the Thai news forum. Looking at your posting history I found only one post out of 629 that was not anti red and in the Thailand news forum.

I see both good and bad in the present administration and I see both good and bad in the previous administration and think both should have an opportunity to protest in public in a non violent way. Get it?

[kerryk]

We're going to intimidate you with democracy and beat and bomb you with democracy until the streets run red with democracy. Yeah!

We're going to intimidate you with democracy and beat and bomb you with democracy until the streets run red with democracy. Yeah!

Isn't that the American way?

No Egyptian. No just kidding. I think you are way off topic.

Edited July 5, 2012 by kerryk

[kerryk]

1. The symbol of the Lotus Flower in Buddhism.

a. Some people grow out to awakening by their own, the muddy waters gives them the power.

b. Some people grow out to awakening by their own with the help of "kalyanamitta" (good spiritual friends)

c. Some people love to stay in the muddy waters.

2. My preceptor for traditional medecine gave me the teaching: Do your job honestly, but don't waste your time with patients who use their sickness to undermine your good intentions.

3. My professor for education-psychology at the University of Freiburg: Don't waste your time with your good intentions. You have to accept that you can have students who use all their small intelligence

to stay stupid, to misuse you.

Posters, my point of view.

What did they say about psycho babble as opposed to clear literate communication?

[rubl]

^#139 kerryk:

Not Egyptian, American

http://www.borowitzr...y-from-florida/

[Yunla]

Number one you use the professional posters scam of cherrypicking my post and editing it down to one line to alter the meaning of the post. That in itself is impolite.

But what I said is not that the red shirts are impolite or polite. I don't like the red shirts because they cause destruction and violence and I don't like the yellow shirts because they cause destruction and violence That is what I said. I don't like violent behavior. I like freedom of the press. I like free elections. I don't like military coups. I like a rule of law and one constitution that all parties will stick to. That is what I said.

I think you are a yellow person. You never post anything except anti red words and thoughts and only in the Thai news forum. Looking at your posting history I found only one post out of 629 that was not anti red and in the Thailand news forum.

I see both good and bad in the present administration and I see both good and bad in the previous administration and think both should have an opportunity to protest in public in a non violent way. Get it?

I have stated that remob have a 100% right to protest under laws of free democracy, as it says in the thread title. And that other parties have the right to protest in peace too. The problem is violent demonstrations. Free peaceful protest includes freedom from being intimidated by the opposing followers.

You responded (above). So I will answer your points above in order.

You said you like the red shirts and not the yellow shirts because the yellow shirts are impolite and one sided. That infers 100% that the red shirts are polite and see both sides. But as always you do not back up your grandoise sweeping statements with either reasoning or facts.

You said you like "rule of law and one constitution all parties will stick to", but you then tie your flag to the PTP despite their long history of law-breaking, extreme violence and their defacto leader Thaksin who is guilty of at least 3000 deaths and robbing 30% of the Thai state funds for his own family businesses. That makes your judgement incredibly flawed.

You have no room to call other people professional posters, you are the classic example of this because when people including myself and a few dozen others, have posted to you with salient points and replies to your posts, you completely ignore any points made if those points are remotely anti-red, even if the facts and figures are against you, you refuse to listen to reason and you simply change the subject ASAP.

By contrast I have said repeatedly Abhisit had corruption in his government, he is not perfect, etc. and I'm sure if there was a better option on the table I would take it. That is impartial. He hasn't killed 2500 people or stolen 400bn, but he is not perfect either and his leadership was not well-recieved and was considered weak and in addition his party had some corruption issues. I accept his pros and his cons. That is not something a professional poster would do. You, by contrast, are the most relentlessly one sided poster I've ever seen.

Also, if you have sat and read through my back catalogue of 629 posts as you claim in your post above, then you are a "stalker". No other word for it. Secondly I have talked about hospital matters and tourist matters which are entirely non-political, for around a hundred or more posts, and other subjects too which were not relating to redmob. Also in world news I have posted maybe thirty times not relating to redmob.

That means your quote above ; "Looking at your posting history I found only one post out of 629 that was not anti red and in the Thailand news forum" is actually nothing less than a lie by you. You have just lied openly in this thread, and for once it is a numerical lie that even your trademark squirming and issue-dodging, can not save you from. The evidence of what you said is on this page for all to see, and my back history of posts in the Thai and world forum, and on subjects relating to Bangkok hospitals, Phi Phi, Pattaya, tourism, driving, etc. which are non-political posts by me, and that means what you just said was a lie and you are undoubtably a total liar kerryk.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Yunla

[tlansford]

Because they stole billions from simple Thai businessmen and women who were prevented from earning a living because the airport was closed.

For a few weeks. How curious that you don't have objections to your precious redmob blockading all central Bangkok for three whole months (four times as long) and harming far more small businesses than the short airport seige. I think thats called wearing your party hat over your eyes.

I believe your obsession with the airport has nothing to do with small Thai businesses as you say, but because it is the only example you can find of the DP supporters stepping remotely out of line.The fact that they did it to legitimately remove a dangerous corrupt regime, does not interest you because you wear that regimes party hat with such passionate loyalty.

Yunla, you have a way with exaggeration.

March 14 to may 19 when the army's multi-day assault finally ended is a bit more like 2 months and 5 days compared to 3 whole months. The dates are part of the public record.

Central World might be critically important for the Fendi shopper in Thailand, but it hardly qualifies as "all central Bangkok".

We could easily get into a tit-for-tat, eg: closing the airport closes 90% or more of the international traffic to Thailand and a great deal of the domestic air traffic. Or you forget about the also illegal occupation of the government house - how long did that last. Or you forget conveniently that the PAD simply called for the overthrow of yet another elected government with whom they disagreed where as the UDD called for free elections after an event which they viewed as a judicial coup - and a good case can be made to support their point of view whether one agrees or not.

[Yunla]

Yunla, you have a way with exaggeration.

March 14 to may 19 when the army's multi-day assault finally ended is a bit more like 2 months and 5 days compared to 3 whole months. The dates are part of the public record.

February 18 2010 News :

http://www.nationmul...Q-30122876.html

Unlike you I can process the concept of red shirts mobilising in several continuous protests in Bangkok over a 3 month period even if they were not in the same place all the time. They had a presence there long before your March 14, sonnyjim and please stop attacking my posts until you've done some background reading. I was there in January 2010 in Bangkok too, and the previous six months and the following six months.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Yunla

[tlansford]

just to be clear, the PAD also has a right to make their voice heard. I don't agree with and cannot "sympathize" with their position, but I respect the fact that they have strongly held beliefs, I understand how they can come to hold those beliefs, and I respect them at the very least for having the balls to get out there and do something.

But like everyone, it should be done without violence and that is unfortunately not so often the case in the current Thai political conflicts.

In case you missed it, the thread is about how the Red Shirts used violence, verbal and physical, to disrupt a speech. And then... dismissing their actions as "their right to protest against Democrats".

I know kerryk loves to rehash an interpretation of "violence" as the airport closure of some five years ago, but besides that, when was the last time the Yellow Shirts used violence?

For the Red Shirts, we measure it, in this thread, in terms of a just a few days ago.

.

The times when the yellows were involved in actual violence, vs simple occupation by large numbers,

was ONLY when accosted or violently attacked by 'Red Agitators' or violently by 'Tomato Border-Patrol Police'. Still waiting on Somchai's court dates for that over-reaction to protestors.

Otherwise they attempted to have as little violence as possible and a lot of talk.

This was obvious from all media coverage. As obvious is that Reds have used

violence and physical intimidation as Standard Operating Procedure against all who disagree.

more Bucholz-speak - and animatic, your position regarding the yellow shirts and violence is in la-la land and you have read the reports over the years of their violence on this forum itself but chose to ignore it.

Get real - there was violence from the UDD, and from the men in black, there was violence from the PAD and attacks by them on innocents. There were the government-created "blue shirts" - Military and PAD guards hired to attack red shirt protesters.

You've read all this from credible sources and then you spout this "yellows are not violent" stuff.

[animatic]

Getting in peoples faces with topics they do not like, is not causing violence.

Confrontation divisiveness, sure, no question.

Coming at people with fists, chairs and weapons that

are being actively using on them to silence their opinions, is political violence.

Regardless of the attempts to diminish my observations, they still stand true.

The evidence is not there to show the yellows as an overtly violent group.

There IS a great deal of evidence to show the reds are regularly violent,

and overtly intimidating to any and all who disagree with them,

and it is a continuing pattern, if not every day and every rally.

It is la-la-land to think otherwise.

And it has nothing to do with liking either sides reasonings,

or liking ANY of them at all.

Edited July 5, 2012 by animatic

[FOODLOVER]

Because they stole billions from simple Thai businessmen and women who were prevented from earning a living because the airport was closed.

For a few weeks. How curious that you don't have objections to your precious redmob blockading all central Bangkok for three whole months (four times as long) and harming far more small businesses than the short airport seige. I think thats called wearing your party hat over your eyes.

I believe your obsession with the airport has nothing to do with small Thai businesses as you say, but because it is the only example you can find of the DP supporters stepping remotely out of line.The fact that they did it to legitimately remove a dangerous corrupt regime, does not interest you because you wear that regimes party hat with such passionate loyalty.

I have said it any number of times. You seem to ignore it. Or perhaps my posts go away. But I will say in again. It is the pot calling the kettle black. I don't like the red shirts because they cause destruction and violence and I don't like the yellow shirts because they cause destruction and violence. The only reason I post in favor of the reds is the yellow people are very impolite and never look at both sides of the issue. Get it? I don't like either one and I don't care who is handsome or who is not. I don't like violent behavior. I like freedom of the press. I like free elections. I don't like military coups. I like a rule of law and one constitution that all parties will stick to. I don't like the appointment of police and military to be political footballs. Get it? Ask me any time you want. You get the same answer.

The yellow shirts have better table manners, which always trumps politeness. Edited July 5, 2012 by FOODLOVER

[phiphidon]

Yunla, you have a way with exaggeration.

March 14 to may 19 when the army's multi-day assault finally ended is a bit more like 2 months and 5 days compared to 3 whole months. The dates are part of the public record.

February 18 2010 News :

http://www.nationmul...Q-30122876.html

Unlike you I can process the concept of red shirts mobilising in several continuous protests in Bangkok over a 3 month period even if they were not in the same place all the time. They had a presence there long before your March 14, sonnyjim and please stop attacking my posts until you've done some background reading. I was there in January 2010 in Bangkok too, and the previous six months and the following six months.

nice little link

my comment stands. 2 months.

Exaggerate all you want yunla, it is just expected, and helps you fit into the typical off-the-chart-right-wing posting profile.

I'm glad you liked the link showing redmob protesting during February in their warm-up phase getting ready for the main part of their 3-month stay there.

You think that early February to mid May is two months. That is your problem really.

I am not right wing either, I am a meritocratic democrat and a life-long pacifist and disability-rights campaigner. If you want to see real right-wing people, you should take a closer look at the PTP you so vigorously defend.

I'm suprised you didn't go back to songkran 2009 and say that was part of the rally as well. OK just out of interest as a meritocratic democrat how does that fit in with the thai dems party? Kasit, Suthep, massage parlour tycoon Pornthiva Nakasai are a few who came to mind....

[Yunla]

I'm suprised you didn't go back to songkran 2009 and say that was part of the rally as well. OK just out of interest as a meritocratic democrat how does that fit in with the thai dems party? Kasit, Suthep, massage parlour tycoon Pornthiva Nakasai are a few who came to mind....

I included the link with February redmob Bangkok Bank protest, but also as you know there were several smaller redmob rallies in February, it was part of the limbering-up for the big event. For that reason I accurately say that redmob were mobilised from February to May in the capital. Red-dressed, mob meaning crowd or mob from a "mob-ilised" group. However you like it. As mentioned before, it was my working-class DP-voting pro-monarchist Thai friends who first used the phrase 'redmob' and I liked it and I use it.

To answer your second qusestion I've said many times I am not in the DP, have never voted for them, have only been to one demo by them, and their views are not my own. There are two main parties opposing with bulk of votes. PTP and DP, I prefer DP because the DP leader understands and participates in political debate, procedure and protocol and imo he shows integrity and restraint. Also I like DP better because they have committed less crimes in office and less violent crimes too. That does not mean I agree with everything they do. My views on meritocratic democracy were formed in the 1980s and have not changed a whole lot since, just got better informed. I don't expect DP to echo them at all. My point which has been skated over by a succession of people, is that there are two parties and imo DP is the least threatening to democracy and the lives of the unrepresented working-class.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Yunla

[rubl]

Time for this cable again, methinks. I know phiphidon likes it

http://www.cablegate...d=09BANGKOK3009

[metisdead]

Very few posts are discussing the topic at hand, the discussion of other posters is off topic, posts have been removed. Back to the topic please.