Deaths From Stray Bullets 'shock' Group

[philw]

You came to the city with the intent to cause havoc and mayhem to the other citizens who live here and you got shot. You set fire to our business and rode through our streets like hooligans.. are you really surprised that you got shot.

Whats the morale of the story? You wanted to do harm and you got harmed. Karmas a !!!!!!!!!!!!

Excellent post Sayonarax. It seems that there are not many poeple left in this world that think they are responsible for their own actions. They cause mayhem, destruction, some die as a direct result of these actions and never admit to any fault or blame. It is always some one else's fault.

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

[whybother]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

[GentlemanJim]

You came to the city with the intent to cause havoc and mayhem to the other citizens who live here and you got shot. You set fire to our business and rode through our streets like hooligans.. are you really surprised that you got shot.

Whats the morale of the story? You wanted to do harm and you got harmed. Karmas a !!!!!!!!!!!!

Excellent post Sayonarax. It seems that there are not many poeple left in this world that think they are responsible for their own actions. They cause mayhem, destruction, some die as a direct result of these actions and never admit to any fault or blame. It is always some one else's fault.

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

How about the armed civilians opening fire on the Amy and the Government resulting in an entirely appropriate and justified response in the use of lethal force to restore order and prevent anarchy. This was a group of armed civilians that had spent the previous 3 weeks saying they were going to torch Bangkok and murder soldiers. I think THEIR actions (the armed civilians) are what need vilifying here.

[lovetotravel]

A lot of this would not have happened if the police had done their job.

And what job is that?

Prevent protests and the associated violence and mayhem such as this. Right?

[Pimay1]

You came to the city with the intent to cause havoc and mayhem to the other citizens who live here and you got shot. You set fire to our business and rode through our streets like hooligans.. are you really surprised that you got shot.

Whats the morale of the story? You wanted to do harm and you got harmed. Karmas a !!!!!!!!!!!!

Excellent post Sayonarax. It seems that there are not many poeple left in this world that think they are responsible for their own actions. They cause mayhem, destruction, some die as a direct result of these actions and never admit to any fault or blame. It is always some one else's fault.

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Do you agree that the red shirt leaders and the person/persons funding the occupation of Bangkok should also take responsibility for their actions keeping in mind that this occupation started only a few days after Thaksin's illgotten gains were siezed?

[philw]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

How many have been charged ?

How many are in prison ?

How many have charges pending ?

How many are currently in the court system ?

etc etc etc

[jayboy]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

Nothing like trying to divert away from the subject of the thread.The army has been caught out lying through its teeth, not only now but consistently when it has deigned to fully cooperate with any investigation.But the usual suspects refuse to acknowledge but bleat meaninglessly and irrelevantly about vague allegations of redshirts murdering unarmed civilians.Of course the redshirts actions must be investigated and charges made where appropriate, but the staggering dishonesty of the Thai generals concerned (and some of their foreign acolytes) is beyond belief.

[whybother]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

Nothing like trying to divert away from the subject of the thread.The army has been caught out lying through its teeth, not only now but consistently when it has deigned to fully cooperate with any investigation.But the usual suspects refuse to acknowledge but bleat meaninglessly and irrelevantly about vague allegations of redshirts murdering unarmed civilians.Of course the redshirts actions must be investigated and charges made where appropriate, but the staggering dishonesty of the Thai generals concerned (and some of their foreign acolytes) is beyond belief.

Divert attention from the subject? Isn't the subject about deaths during the protests?

Sent from my HTC phone.

[OzMick]

Nothing like trying to divert away from the subject of the thread.The army has been caught out lying through its teeth, not only now but consistently when it has deigned to fully cooperate with any investigation.But the usual suspects refuse to acknowledge but bleat meaninglessly and irrelevantly about vague allegations of redshirts murdering unarmed civilians.Of course the redshirts actions must be investigated and charges made where appropriate, but the staggering dishonesty of the Thai generals concerned (and some of their foreign acolytes) is beyond belief.

The subject of the thread is about responsibility for deaths. Until the red shirts realise they are responsible for their own actions, and the ultimate responsibility lies with the mercenary agitators (and their paymaster) that led this insurgency, nothing can be resolved.

[craigt3365]

Two posts containing violations of forum rules have been removed. Please show respect to fellow members.

[WhizBang]

Another loony tune heard from.

Why is it that no red shirt (not a single one) is capable of accepting ANY responsibility for what happened?

[Pimay1]

Another loony tune heard from.

Why is it that no red shirt (not a single one) is capable of accepting ANY responsibility for what happened?

That's what is known as red shirt democracy.

[fasteddie]

Q: Do you accept that some people in the protest group were illegally carrying weapons, and that these were used to kill and injure security personnel?

A: we dun nuffink rong.

I can't recall you ever condemining the military / security forces for killing unarmed people. You must be aware it happened. Your riposte, the pathetic "we dun nuffink rong" or variations on that theme

Yet here you are , once again, on your high horse of "truth and the democratic way" and accusing others of something you are just as guilty of.

The usual suspects - the usual mantra. Have you ever considered an alternative viewpoint to the one that you hold might have some merit?

Do you have any sensible comment at all on the observation from yet another group of people that maintain that people were shot who were unarmed and were not posing a threat to the armed forces or that the government/military combined tactics used against those people protesting was way and beyond an "proportional response" as opined by the HRW in one of its less partisan moments.?

Please enlighten me as to what democratic country in the world would allow and armed insurgency to take over the central business district, allow confiscation of military weapons, tanks, allow a non-state militia to conduct road stops/searches, allow armed insurgents to take over a government hospital, allow the tossing of grenades at innocent civilians, allow the leading army officer to be assassinated with a bullet to the head, and on and on and on WITHOUT an armed intervention. Do you think the US government would allow such a thing? Do you think UK would allow? Do you think Norway would allow?

Jeez guys. Whatever use of live bullets was undertaken by the government, don't you think that maybe, just maybe it might have been justified no matter how unpalatable that may be to you, this group was clearly across the line and again if these actions took place in a "democratic" country such as the US, I am absolutely sure the crackdown would have been even more prompt and powerful.

Just putting things in perspective for those with short and/or selective memories.

No! can't think of any country that would let that happen, could you please inform us of where it did happen, because it certainly didn't happen in Bangkok.

You haven't got a selective memory, just a wild imagination!

[phiphidon]

How funny, so you say that although the video shows nothing and claims it was red shirts, your recollection is it was soldiers! Just what is your recollection based on?

I don't care if this is Thailand. Soldiers will follow their rules of engagement.

You say that you are sure the soldiers flaunted their rules of engagement because you have intellectual honesty !! it seems more like an intellectual disability.

Possibly because it seems the most likely scenario when eyewitness reports claim it was the military

Nelson Rand, a veteran reporter who was covering the clash between troops and protesters for the France 24 news channel, was “gravely wounded” after being hit by three bullets from a military assault rifle, his network reported.

Two other journalists were also reported hurt in the violence in Bangkok on Friday, including a photographer from the Thai newspaper Matichon.............

..............I’ve just come out of the hospital where I spoke to the surgeon,” Rand’s colleague Cyril Payen said in a live France 24 report monitored in Paris.

“It has been confirmed he was hit by three bullets. One hit his leg, one his torso and another his wrist, which has multiple fractures. The doctors say his condition is now stable but that he was gravely wounded.”

Payen also told France 24 that Rand was either shot at or hit by stray bullets fired by the army, adding that the Thai army was the only side firing gunshots.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/05/14/canadian-journalist-gravely-wounded-in-bankgkok-protests/

[khunken]

Who gives a shit? This has been going on for years now. No red shirt seizure of the city, no riot, no burning, no military therefore no deaths. Pretty simple equation really. Blame the people who caused it and the puppet master in Dubai. And get a life. Move on.

Unfortunately, with all the blaming, denials, one-sided groups emerging from the woodwork & propaganda, the originator & paymaster is the only one who has not been even investigated let alone charged with orchestrating the occupation of Rachaprasong & other areas of Bangkok. That, of course, would be 'political'.

[fasteddie]

A difference, IMHO, would be that in those countries the Army (or whichever state organism charged with the operation) would had stuck to the Rules Of Engagement much more strictly. I have no doubt that soldiers flaunted those rules left and right . TiT after all

Of course recognizing that doesn't absolve the Red Shirts from their responsibility of instigating the chaos in the first place. Without their armed comrades running about taking potshots at soldiers, police, civilians and infrastructure (you know, as in an actual peaceful protest) nobody ought to have died.

Just why do you have no doubt that the soldiers flaunted their rules of engagement? What knowledge gives you the right to say that? It is very very rare for a soldier to flaunt his ROE. Where is your proof of this statement you make? You then make a mockery of your own statement by saying:

Of course recognizing that doesn't absolve the Red Shirts from their responsibility of instigating the chaos in the first place. Without their armed comrades running about taking potshots at soldiers, police, civilians and infrastructure (you know, as in an actual peaceful protest) nobody ought to have died.

Just what do you think rules of engagement are?? How about a rule of engagement to a soldier would be 'son, you are to stand here and defend this position. You are not to open fire unless you are fired upon. You are here to protect civilian life and the infrastructure of this city, you are permitted to defend your own life, the lives of your colleagues and the lives of innocent civilians by the use of lethal force only if you or those you are protecting are under fire and in danger of mortal injury. The rule of minimum force should be adhered to at all times unless your life, those you are protecting or the infrastructure you are protecting is in danger from the use of lethal force'.

Soldiers will not flaunt that! Thai soldiers and buddhist soldiers will not open fire on innocent Thai civilians running around the city, they just won't do it.

''Soldiers will not flaunt that! Thai soldiers and buddhist soldiers will not open fire on innocent Thai civilians running around the city, they just won't do it''

Not got a lot of knowledge about Thailand have you?. In the 46yrs I've been visiting Thailand, the Thai army have done just that on many occasions, what surprises me about 2010 is how restrained they were. And as for the Buddhist slant on things, take a look at the record of the Burmese and Sri Lankan armies!

[khunken]

Q: Do you accept that some people in the protest group were illegally carrying weapons, and that these were used to kill and injure security personnel?

A: we dun nuffink rong.

I can't recall you ever condemining the military / security forces for killing unarmed people. You must be aware it happened. Your riposte, the pathetic "we dun nuffink rong" or variations on that theme

Yet here you are , once again, on your high horse of "truth and the democratic way" and accusing others of something you are just as guilty of.

The usual suspects - the usual mantra. Have you ever considered an alternative viewpoint to the one that you hold might have some merit?

Do you have any sensible comment at all on the observation from yet another group of people that maintain that people were shot who were unarmed and were not posing a threat to the armed forces or that the government/military combined tactics used against those people protesting was way and beyond an "proportional response" as opined by the HRW in one of its less partisan moments.?

Please enlighten me as to what democratic country in the world would allow and armed insurgency to take over the central business district, allow confiscation of military weapons, tanks, allow a non-state militia to conduct road stops/searches, allow armed insurgents to take over a government hospital, allow the tossing of grenades at innocent civilians, allow the leading army officer to be assassinated with a bullet to the head, and on and on and on WITHOUT an armed intervention. Do you think the US government would allow such a thing? Do you think UK would allow? Do you think Norway would allow?

Jeez guys. Whatever use of live bullets was undertaken by the government, don't you think that maybe, just maybe it might have been justified no matter how unpalatable that may be to you, this group was clearly across the line and again if these actions took place in a "democratic" country such as the US, I am absolutely sure the crackdown would have been even more prompt and powerful.

Just putting things in perspective for those with short and/or selective memories.

No! can't think of any country that would let that happen, could you please inform us of where it did happen, because it certainly didn't happen in Bangkok.

You haven't got a selective memory, just a wild imagination!

Actually it did happen not very long ago in the UK - London & Manchester in particular. But it was nipped in the bud after the police organised themselves unlike the police here who allowed the red-shirts to take over the streets - which is why the government had to use the army.

[Thait Spot]

Doesn't the term "stray bullets" imply that the injuries sustained were unintended and therefore will be recorded as accidental?

[phiphidon]

Q: Do you accept that some people in the protest group were illegally carrying weapons, and that these were used to kill and injure security personnel?

A: we dun nuffink rong.

I can't recall you ever condemining the military / security forces for killing unarmed people. You must be aware it happened. Your riposte, the pathetic "we dun nuffink rong" or variations on that theme

Yet here you are , once again, on your high horse of "truth and the democratic way" and accusing others of something you are just as guilty of.

The usual suspects - the usual mantra. Have you ever considered an alternative viewpoint to the one that you hold might have some merit?

Do you have any sensible comment at all on the observation from yet another group of people that maintain that people were shot who were unarmed and were not posing a threat to the armed forces or that the government/military combined tactics used against those people protesting was way and beyond an "proportional response" as opined by the HRW in one of its less partisan moments.?

Actually I think it is quite likely that unarmed people were caught in the crossfire, but they lose the claim to innocence and "peaceful protest" when they remain part of an illegally armed group.

BUT have you or the red shirts ever admitted that if the protesters had not arrived after a torrent of violent and vitriolic rhetoric and carrying weapons, there would be no need for the army or an armed response?

As soon as weapons were used against security personnel, it was inevitable that a harsh response was coming and justified. Not admitting that they had overstepped the bounds of peaceful protest and wisely retreating to reform was the height of stupidity. But fuelled by lies and ignorance of the democratic process, they demanded "rights" to which they had no claim.

And you can keep your HRW - they have a default position that violence is NEVER justified, even in response to illegal violent attacks.

I'll start off with your best "And you can keep your HRW".

Reminds me of the old Humphey Bogart film "Treasure of the Sierra Madre". (The original dialog is where Humph doubts a Mexican bandit leaders claim that he and his men are federales and asks him to show him his badge)

"Human Rights? We ain't got Human Rights. We don't need no Human Rights! I don't have to show you any stinkin' Human Rights.............

As to your loaded question - I can't answer it because it is a question based on false "facts". The very fact that the group are putting forward the point that I and several others have made, the fact that unarmed people were shot and killed or injured seems to have been completely overlooked by you. Instead we get

"Actually I think it is quite likely that unarmed people were caught in the crossfire, but they lose the claim to innocence and "peaceful protest" when they remain part of an illegally armed group" and "arrived after a torrent of violent and vitriolic rhetoric and carrying weapons"

which as far as I can work out, using your logic, then there would be no innocent red shirt protestors at all, because you lump everybody together - red shirts, journalists, medical workers, unidentified people carrying and using weapons, they're all the same to you. And thats actually what you do think isn't it? You don't have the capacity to seperate those people in your mind. Scary.

And that's why we need Human Rights................

[phiphidon]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

When and if they are found guilty of the murder of unarmed civilians they will have little choice and quite rightly so.

Several hundred Red Sirts have already spent up to 2 years in jail, some just waiting to get bail, some being freed after being found innocent at trial so a great deal of them have already taken responsibility for their actions - or did you forget they weren't yellow shirts.

The military on the other hand along with the government have the protection of the Emergency Decree............

[phiphidon]

You came to the city with the intent to cause havoc and mayhem to the other citizens who live here and you got shot. You set fire to our business and rode through our streets like hooligans.. are you really surprised that you got shot.

Whats the morale of the story? You wanted to do harm and you got harmed. Karmas a !!!!!!!!!!!!

Excellent post Sayonarax. It seems that there are not many poeple left in this world that think they are responsible for their own actions. They cause mayhem, destruction, some die as a direct result of these actions and never admit to any fault or blame. It is always some one else's fault.

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

How about the armed civilians opening fire on the Amy and the Government resulting in an entirely appropriate and justified response in the use of lethal force to restore order and prevent anarchy. This was a group of armed civilians that had spent the previous 3 weeks saying they were going to torch Bangkok and murder soldiers. I think THEIR actions (the armed civilians) are what need vilifying here.

Well how about you start vilifying the armed civilians when you identify them, instead of applying your hatred to all red shirt supporters.

Just out of interest the HRW report made it a major point to decry the excessive and disproportionate use of lethal force during clashes with protesters - hardly what you call a "appropriate and justified response".......................

[rubl]

From our democracy lover, Democrats eradicator and Pheu Thai party list MP and UDD red-shirt leader Dr. weng:

""We are being surrounded. We are being crushed. The soldiers are closing in on us. This is not a civil war yet, but it's very, very cruel," Weng Tojirakarn, a protest leader, told The Associated Press."

[whybother]

When and if they are found guilty of the murder of unarmed civilians they will have little choice and quite rightly so.

Several hundred Red Sirts have already spent up to 2 years in jail, some just waiting to get bail, some being freed after being found innocent at trial so a great deal of them have already taken responsibility for their actions - or did you forget they weren't yellow shirts.

The military on the other hand along with the government have the protection of the Emergency Decree............

There is as much evidence of the army killing protesters, as the armed red shirts killing protesters. So the army mustn't have done anything wrong either.

Edited September 2, 2012 by whybother

[Thait Spot]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

When and if they are found guilty of the murder of unarmed civilians they will have little choice and quite rightly so.

Several hundred Red Sirts have already spent up to 2 years in jail, some just waiting to get bail, some being freed after being found innocent at trial so a great deal of them have already taken responsibility for their actions - or did you forget they weren't yellow shirts.

The military on the other hand along with the government have the protection of the Emergency Decree............

Its very duplicitous of the Red Shirt leaders to push for the prosecution of the leaders of the government whilst at the same time never showing an iota of contrition for their own barbarity

[hellodolly]

Are you not confident that state impunity will end?

I have no confidence. But we can't just sit idly and do nothing. We hope that if we do not accept [state impunity] then it will be shaken. What we are doing is to challenge the culture of impunity.

Bravo, well said, why not start with the current incumbents and work outwards, it'll be easier. And much more productive.

You beat me to it. I wonder what she calls red shirts having nothing to do with it or Thaksin not testifying. The committee is obviously made up of red shits fans and PT fans.

Did she even try to explain how a unarmed civilian can knowingly reside in a war zone beside a man caring a rifle to shoot at the army and call them innocent.

The whole world saw it and she talks about it all being the Governments fault. She gives new meaning to the word impunity.

[khunken]

Well put.

That is exactly what a lot of people want.

The Army and government of the time to take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians.

Will the red shirts take responsibility for their actions, including the murder of unarmed civilians?

Sent from my HTC phone.

When and if they are found guilty of the murder of unarmed civilians they will have little choice and quite rightly so.

Several hundred Red Sirts have already spent up to 2 years in jail, some just waiting to get bail, some being freed after being found innocent at trial so a great deal of them have already taken responsibility for their actions - or did you forget they weren't yellow shirts.

The military on the other hand along with the government have the protection of the Emergency Decree............

None of the red-shirt 'leaders' have taken responsibility let alone an admission of guilt for their actions. In particular the instigator, far from taking responsibility, has defended every single one of his actions. Most of the red-shirts that are in jail are those found guilty of arson - up country.

I don't defend either side that is responsible for DELIBERATELY shooting innocent civilians. But I don't blame the Thai army for giving as little cooperation to one-sided 'investigations' of the violence. Yes, the previous government didn't do very much to provide an independent enquiry but the current lot are only interested in fixing blame on one side of a two-sided issue &, ultimately, giving the ringmaster a free pardon for his conviction & the outstanding cases against him.

[phiphidon]

How many have been charged ?

How many are in prison ?

How many have charges pending ?

How many are currently in the court system ?

etc etc etc

Not many new ones since their sponsors took power. However, most of the red shirt faction MPs are facing charges along with Arisman and the other moron who just had his bail revoked. Not many inside because of the liberal bail laws, not to mention assistance from the sponsors, again. Charges are pending against Thaksin for one, and from memory a few others in Cambodia or otherwise on the lam. The court system is delayed because of the MP status gained by party list (a truly corrupt scam) of many of those facing charges.

Etc, etc - it adds up to political interference with the course of justice. But I'm sure Yingluk will tackle that in her crackdown.

Liberal bail laws !! - once again you surpass yourself - the average bail put on the red shirts was 1 Million Baht.....

Since Yingluck was sworn in as Thailand’s 28th prime minister, her party has made securing the release of 132 Red Shirts from various prisons throughout the country a priority. Jarupong Reaungsuwan, Pheu Thai Secretary, views such action as instrumental in putting the country on the road to national reconciliation.

From early August on, more than 40 Red Shirts – mostly detained on charges of terrorism – have been successfully bailed out by Pheu Thai MPs. More are in the process of being released.

Bailing out supporters was never an official job description for MPs – at least until now. Even previously, only the very top Red Shirt leaders, some of whom were also Pheu Thai members, were rescued. Unlike attending weddings or funerals, securing Red Shirts’ release from jail comes at a much higher cost. Pheu Thai Ubon Ratchathani MP, Vorasit Kalthinand, has used his title deed – worth 16 million baht – as well as salaries and political positions of 9 other MPs from southern Isarn, to get bail for 4 Red Shirts who were sentenced to 33 years in prison for (allegedly) torching Ubon City Hall.Other MPs have spent a minimum of 1 million baht to secure freedom for each Red Shirt in jail.

http://asiapacific.a...the-red-shirts/

[rubl]

In a latest newsflash PIC coordinator and co-editor of the report, Puangthong Pawakapan has just added a minor addendum to the report:

"Of course we also shocked by the deaths from 'stray grenades', but after consultation with experts decided not to mention that as that part was minimal and seen as not relevant in relation to the scope of our investigation and report."

BTW the PIC's website is (in Thai only) http://www.peaceandjusticenetwork.org/

[Buchholz]

A lot of this would not have happened if the police had done their job.

And what job is that?

Their job is to be congratulated, cheered, and back-patted for not doing their job.... (of enforcing the law).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRSPKGZQ26c

[hellodolly]

Q: Do you accept that some people in the protest group were illegally carrying weapons, and that these were used to kill and injure security personnel?

A: we dun nuffink rong.

I can't recall you ever condemining the military / security forces for killing unarmed people. You must be aware it happened. Your riposte, the pathetic "we dun nuffink rong" or variations on that theme

Yet here you are , once again, on your high horse of "truth and the democratic way" and accusing others of something you are just as guilty of.

The usual suspects - the usual mantra. Have you ever considered an alternative viewpoint to the one that you hold might have some merit?

Do you have any sensible comment at all on the observation from yet another group of people that maintain that people were shot who were unarmed and were not posing a threat to the armed forces or that the government/military combined tactics used against those people protesting was way and beyond an "proportional response" as opined by the HRW in one of its less partisan moments.?

Have you ever considered that it took a lot of unarmed people backing the armed ones. You may not have the sharpest mind in the world but I am sure you realize that it took a lot of civilians without guns and rocket launchers to hold down town Bangkok as a hostage. You can't really believe the barricades were only built by armed men. That only armed men did the washing and cooking. That only armed men brought in all the supplies.

They all knew what was going on and out of their own choice choose to stay there where they knew gunfire would occur. Were you standing there with them or did you choose to stay away from them because they were shooting at soldiers and the soldiers were shooting back at them? The result being that naturally people were killed on both sides.

Do you think Thaksin putting up most of the funds for the red shirts was OK.

I will agree it was up to a point. But they went way beyond that point. You are a business man or so you claim. Would you feel the same way if your business was in the red shirt camp and got closed down and turned into a garbage dump?

My money says you stayed far away from it and were very grateful your business wasn't there.

But then I wonder you as a business man have never shown any remorse for the small ones that got shut down or the big ones that were burned down. No remorse for the honest citizens who lost their life savings in some cases and in others over a months wages. The big businesses probably recouped their losses by insurance which will affect the cost of all insurances and by raising their prices.

Not that any other red shirt has shown a bit of remorse for the loss of the really honest citizens. You are all alike.

Edited September 3, 2012 by sbk