Former Thai Pm Abhisit In Court Over 'red Shirt' Protest Deaths

[GentlemanJim]

To give you what you asked for?

There's no pleasing some people I suppose.

.

Well, for that argument to be true, Gentleman Jim would have had to provide the more graphic images as it was he who was asked.

I would imagine Philw meant that remark as a counterpoint to rubl already having lowered the tone of the thread by posting graphic images the post before to make some point or other.

Maybe military injuries are different to civilian injuries, I don't know, though there are certainly more civilian injuries to choose from.

Well if it was me that was asked and you think i should have answered then why are you answering for PhilW when Rubi was replying to him? Is this a double standard red kind of thing? Why do you need to imagine what PhilW meant?

Its all about timing, history, if you like, I know it's not your strong point but bear with me.

Rubl posted a graphic image first. Then you come along with your photo montage of dramatic 'bad man' red shirt photos. Philw jokingly/sarcastically asked you if you didn't have more graphic images to post.

In a seperate reply to rubl, continuing his discussion with him, philw asked what was the point he was trying to make with his graphic photos.

And then buchholz appears.

He decides to answers on your behalf and muddies the waters. I then explained where buchholzs "argument" was at fault. True to form, no doubt he will never accept that fact.

No double standards there, just "call and response".

(If you have a problem with me answering a post on a public forum,

1) you should also question buccholzs reply

2) keep your "private" posts private by using the PM system.)

It's all about timing, facts and accuracy if you like, I know it's not your strong point but bear with me.

You have been told repeatedly that I posted pictures before Rudi, yet you seem to fail to be able to grasp that.

Bucholz did not muddy any waters, you did. I do not need to question his reply, non of us had a problem with anyone answering anything on a public forum until you spouted off your objection concerning Rudi.

I don't have any problem with you answering a post on a public forum, but you seemed to have a problem with Rudi answering a post on a public forum. So there were no 'private' posts, nor will there be between you and I.

[phiphidon]

It's all about timing, facts and accuracy if you like, I know it's not your strong point but bear with me.

You have been told repeatedly that I posted pictures before Rudi, yet you seem to fail to be able to grasp that.

Bucholz did not muddy any waters, you did. I do not need to question his reply, non of us had a problem with anyone answering anything on a public forum until you spouted off your objection concerning Rudi.

I don't have any problem with you answering a post on a public forum, but you seemed to have a problem with Rudi answering a post on a public forum. So there were no 'private' posts, nor will there be between you and I.

Oh do behave and read the thread again. I'm not going to bore the forum explaining it to you again when you plainly don't understand.

[rubl]

It's all about timing, facts and accuracy if you like, I know it's not your strong point but bear with me.

You have been told repeatedly that I posted pictures before Rudi, yet you seem to fail to be able to grasp that.

Bucholz did not muddy any waters, you did. I do not need to question his reply, non of us had a problem with anyone answering anything on a public forum until you spouted off your objection concerning Rudi.

I don't have any problem with you answering a post on a public forum, but you seemed to have a problem with Rudi answering a post on a public forum. So there were no 'private' posts, nor will there be between you and I.

Oh do behave and read the thread again. I'm not going to bore the forum explaining it to you again when you plainly don't understand.

Now there's nicely phrased the difference between a phiphidon and a Dutch uncle. I would have no problem at all to explain to those who fail to understand even if I have to do it over and over again.

[phiphidon]

"....after the red shirt leaders had all surrendered and the protest was ended."

PPD are you trying to say that the ensuing rioting and fires in Bangkok and provincial centres were not part of the protest? Is this another example of "red thought"?

I posted a long reply to this but it has disappeared into the ether. I am not about to repeat it so the answer is

Yes of course, the ensuing rioting and fires were not part of the protest. What is the opposite of red thought? No thought whatsoever?

'Red thought' in one sense is ignoring the obvious - like that the rioting and burning were a planned part of the protest from its inception. Speech after speech ad nauseum promised mayhem and arson if their goals weren't achieved. Doesn't quite fit with the "peaceful protest" BS you espouse though, does it?

Talk about speech after speech ad nauseam.................An extract from the Democrat Governments own version of the events of April / May 2010 says the same as I do - the protest was ended around 1pm (they say 1.45pm) and "Violent incidents and rioting erupted elsewhere in the capital – with protesters setting on fire several buildings"

FACT SHEET

Chronology of events relating to the recent protests by the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) from March to May 2010

At around 13.45 hrs., the protest leaders called off their protests. The security force thus halted their operations. Some protest leaders turned themselves in with the police. The CRES asked protesters who wished to return home to go to the National Stadium from where transportation had been arranged for their safe passage home. Violent incidents and rioting erupted elsewhere in the capital – with protesters setting on fire several buildings, including the Stock Exchange, Thai TV Channel 3 Headquarter, and Central World Shopping Mall. Similar incidents spread to other parts of the country where several provincial town halls were set on fire.

http://www.thaiembassy.sg/announcements/chronology-of-events-relating-to-the-recent-protests-by-the-united-front-for-democracy

To be perfectly honest the whole paper is not fit to wipe my arris on but I know you believe government propaganda so thought the source would be ideal for you. Take one line for example, The security force thus halted their operations (referring to 1.45pm). Yes, of course they did all that shooting at the wat was a figment of everybodies imagination.

[rubl]

"At around 13.45 hrs., the protest leaders called off their protests. The security force thus halted their operations.

...

Violent incidents and rioting erupted elsewhere in the capital – with protesters setting on fire several buildings, including ..."

Oh yes, UDD leaders said 'please go home' so all was over. With a few protestrs you oly needed to follow the blazing trail to see where they went.

[OzMick]

'Red thought' in one sense is ignoring the obvious - like that the rioting and burning were a planned part of the protest from its inception. Speech after speech ad nauseum promised mayhem and arson if their goals weren't achieved. Doesn't quite fit with the "peaceful protest" BS you espouse though, does it?

Talk about speech after speech ad nauseam.................An extract from the Democrat Governments own version of the events of April / May 2010 says the same as I do - the protest was ended around 1pm (they say 1.45pm) and "Violent incidents and rioting erupted elsewhere in the capital – with protesters setting on fire several buildings"

FACT SHEET

Chronology of events relating to the recent protests by the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) from March to May 2010

At around 13.45 hrs., the protest leaders called off their protests. The security force thus halted their operations. Some protest leaders turned themselves in with the police. The CRES asked protesters who wished to return home to go to the National Stadium from where transportation had been arranged for their safe passage home. Violent incidents and rioting erupted elsewhere in the capital – with protesters setting on fire several buildings, including the Stock Exchange, Thai TV Channel 3 Headquarter, and Central World Shopping Mall. Similar incidents spread to other parts of the country where several provincial town halls were set on fire.

http://www.thaiembas...t-for-democracy

To be perfectly honest the whole paper is not fit to wipe my arris on but I know you believe government propaganda so thought the source would be ideal for you. Take one line for example, The security force thus halted their operations (referring to 1.45pm). Yes, of course they did all that shooting at the wat was a figment of everybodies imagination.

Yes the red hero warriors put their hands up as soon as the RTA got close and called an end to the protest - but to whom? Who was there to listen? All the militant activists continued their protest EXACTLY as they had been told to do innumerable times.

Dodge, duck, dive and change the subject as usual - part it was part and parcel of what had been threatened, mindless destructive violence.

[rubl]

It was over, really over:

"Earlier, the Red Shirts ended their street protest campaign as leaders surrendered to police after a military offensive against their rally base.

Grenades exploded nearby as the leaders announced their decision this afternoon."

http://www.smh.com.a...00519-ver1.html

[philw]

"....after the red shirt leaders had all surrendered and the protest was ended."

PPD are you trying to say that the ensuing rioting and fires in Bangkok and provincial centres were not part of the protest? Is this another example of "red thought"?

I posted a long reply to this but it has disappeared into the ether. I am not about to repeat it so the answer is

Yes of course, the ensuing rioting and fires were not part of the protest. What is the opposite of red thought? No thought whatsoever?

+ 1

[KireB]

Yes of course, the ensuing rioting and fires were not part of the protest. What is the opposite of red thought? No thought whatsoever?

I agree with you, they riots and fires were indeed not part of the protest. The protesters burnt down the city but when they weren't technically protesters anymore, just criminals. And you seem to support them any chance you get.

[philw]

Yes of course, the ensuing rioting and fires were not part of the protest. What is the opposite of red thought? No thought whatsoever?

I agree with you, they riots and fires were indeed not part of the protest. The protesters burnt down the city but when they weren't technically protesters anymore, just criminals. And you seem to support them any chance you get.

Interesting that you attribute to me a quote I didn't make and then imply I support criminals.

What might your agenda be ?

[tlansford]

Army grenade perchance ??

Sad picture and horrible event, but who ???............etc.

And your reason for posting the picture is to make what point ??

The army were carrying grenades??

Sorry, my mistake.

Only rubber bullets.

Makes a lot of sense to put a marksman on the roof, give him a guy to help him sight, binocs and then arm him with rubber bullets...........

10 cc had a song about it.

"I'm not in love..........."

Yes ... that's normal for the TVF red shirts supporters. It's a bit like the "but the yellow shirts" excuse.

Anything but accepting that the red shirts were armed.

"Anything but accepting that the red shirts were armed."

Since no one here says that, except other UDD haters, you are making a dandy of a strawman argument.

[philw]

"call and response"

too funny

the call went out for damage control on phil's inconsistent remarks and you responded

.

..................the call went out for damage control ????

What world are you living in ???

It's all rather sad.

[Ricardo]

Yes of course, the ensuing rioting and fires were not part of the protest. What is the opposite of red thought? No thought whatsoever?

I agree with you, they riots and fires were indeed not part of the protest. The protesters burnt down the city but when they weren't technically protesters anymore, just criminals. And you seem to support them any chance you get.

Interesting that you attribute to me a quote I didn't make and then imply I support criminals.

What might your agenda be ?

Perhaps the simpler explanation might be, that KireB quoted post#338, and was careless in deleting your comment "+1" and your ID-header ?

Never underestimate the power of keyboard-cockup ! It happens to most of us. No need for an agenda.

[Buchholz]

"call and response"

too funny

the call went out for damage control on phil's inconsistent remarks and you responded

.

..................the call went out for damage control ????

What world are you living in ???

the world where phiphidon steps in after your verbal gaff in a feeble effort to diminish it

.

[whybother]

Yes ... that's normal for the TVF red shirts supporters. It's a bit like the "but the yellow shirts" excuse.

Anything but accepting that the red shirts were armed.

"Anything but accepting that the red shirts were armed."

Since no one here says that, except other UDD haters, you are making a dandy of a strawman argument.

Maybe you talk to Phil about that.

[rixalex]

"Anything but accepting that the red shirts were armed."

Since no one here says that, except other UDD haters, you are making a dandy of a strawman argument.

About as dandy of a strawman argument as the person who last week stated, "those people who blame everything on Thaksin". Do you recall perchance who it was that said that?