Commission Says 'men In Black' May Have Got Cooperation From Red Shirts

[catweazle]

Also here, it takes two to Tango, even though thousands were involved...

To figure out the truth a simple question helps: "Qui bono?" (who profits from it?)

Edited September 21, 2012 by catweazle

[473geo]

Also here, it takes two to Tango, even though thousands were involved...

To figure out the truth a simple question helps: "Qui bono?" (who profits from it?)

Well the democrats did cling to power long enought to approve the military budget

And there are many on Tvisa that are confident that the management of the protest has cast no shadow on Abhisit, so no political benefit, as regards the electorate

So what do you think?

[Thaddeus]

Also here, it takes two to Tango, even though thousands were involved...

To figure out the truth a simple question helps: "Qui bono?" (who profits from it?)

Well the democrats did cling to power long enought to approve the military budget

And there are many on Tvisa that are confident that the management of the protest has cast no shadow on Abhisit, so no political benefit, as regards the electorate

So what do you think?

Hardly fair .... we asked first..... so, what do you think?

C'mon , give us your opinion, is a unified country or a fiefdom better, as the way things are going it is fiefdom all the way, give us your feelings, interested people want to know.

[catweazle]

Also here, it takes two to Tango, even though thousands were involved...

To figure out the truth a simple question helps: "Qui bono?" (who profits from it?)

Well the democrats did cling to power long enought to approve the military budget

And there are many on Tvisa that are confident that the management of the protest has cast no shadow on Abhisit, so no political benefit, as regards the electorate

So what do you think?

I believe someone (invisible force/entity) was working all sides simultaneously to simply let the situation escalate. In the end neither the so-called "freedom fighters" nor army, nor new or old government were standing in a positive limelight. I believe it was a try to destabilize Thailand as a whole and push it into a civil war. The plan (luckily) failed. I have a few theories, but believe it is pointless to discuss them here. Don't want to end up as the TV forum's conspiracy theorist... Certain to me is that the strings were pulled from overseas.

Edited September 21, 2012 by catweazle

[473geo]

Also here, it takes two to Tango, even though thousands were involved...

To figure out the truth a simple question helps: "Qui bono?" (who profits from it?)

Well the democrats did cling to power long enought to approve the military budget

And there are many on Tvisa that are confident that the management of the protest has cast no shadow on Abhisit, so no political benefit, as regards the electorate

So what do you think?

Hardly fair .... we asked first..... so, what do you think?

C'mon , give us your opinion, is a unified country or a fiefdom better, as the way things are going it is fiefdom all the way, give us your feelings, interested people want to know.

Let the people decide......

[Thaddeus]

Let the people decide......

I didn't ask the people, I asked you.

[whybother]

It is my understanding Thaddeus the failed 'crackdown' at Phan Fah resulting in 24 deaths and 800 injuries had already taken place before the"election" offer, you see the government had already escalated the violence, so your response contains misleading information in your poor attempt to insult Thansford.

Who escalated the violence?

The government decided that the protests needed to dispersed. The red shirts decided that they needed to blow up a colonel.

[catweazle]

Have to go to sleep, but all of a sudden, I have this two burning "off topic" questions in my head:

Where was the movie "Men in Black" produced? ... And is "BlackWater" actually a sports drink available in Thailand?

Just asking

They say a murderer likes to return to the scene of the crime. I say some just like to leave hints in the form of notes, names or scribbles, or riddles...

Good night!

Edited September 21, 2012 by catweazle

[473geo]

It is my understanding Thaddeus the failed 'crackdown' at Phan Fah resulting in 24 deaths and 800 injuries had already taken place before the"election" offer, you see the government had already escalated the violence, so your response contains misleading information in your poor attempt to insult Thansford.

Who escalated the violence?

The government decided that the protests needed to dispersed. The red shirts decided that they needed to blow up a colonel.

Which colonel was that then?

[whybother]

It is my understanding Thaddeus the failed 'crackdown' at Phan Fah resulting in 24 deaths and 800 injuries had already taken place before the"election" offer, you see the government had already escalated the violence, so your response contains misleading information in your poor attempt to insult Thansford.

Who escalated the violence?

The government decided that the protests needed to dispersed. The red shirts decided that they needed to blow up a colonel.

Which colonel was that then?

Wasn't it a colonel that got blown up by a grenade on April 10?

[473geo]

It is my understanding Thaddeus the failed 'crackdown' at Phan Fah resulting in 24 deaths and 800 injuries had already taken place before the"election" offer, you see the government had already escalated the violence, so your response contains misleading information in your poor attempt to insult Thansford.

Who escalated the violence?

The government decided that the protests needed to dispersed. The red shirts decided that they needed to blow up a colonel.

Which colonel was that then?

Wasn't it a colonel that got blown up by a grenade on April 10?

I ask because I read one report that Colonel Romklao was shot in the head and the upper torso from behind, I also read that he was killed by a grenade, so just wondered if he was your topic of discussion. You think it was this action that prompted the ill thought out and violent 'crackdown' killing 24 and injuring 800, the 'crackdown' that could not afford to fail because of the potentially disastrous consequences.......but did...

Edited September 21, 2012 by 473geo

[whybother]

Who escalated the violence?

The government decided that the protests needed to dispersed. The red shirts decided that they needed to blow up a colonel.

Which colonel was that then?

Wasn't it a colonel that got blown up by a grenade on April 10?

I ask because I read one report that Colonel Romklao was shot in the head and the upper torso from behind, I also read that he was killed by a grenade, so just wondered if he was your topic of discussion. You think it was this action that prompted the ill thought out and violent 'crackdown' killing 24 and injuring 800, the 'crackdown' that could not afford to fail because of the potentially disastrous consequences.......but did...

I think it was this action in addition to the red shirt militia that led to protesters and military personnel bring killed. It may have been an ill thought out operation, but it didn't get violent until someone decided to take out the commander.

I never read that Romklao was shot from behind. Maybe you can share that report with everyone. Until then I'll go with the majority of troopers that say he was killed by a grenade.

Sent from my HTC phone.

[473geo]

I don't really care if you think I have not read material I mention.....if you haven't read it you will ignore the input.....no surprise there then, and I wasn't even questioning how he died only that I had read a differing version

Thanks for admitting one thing though.........Abhisit sending in the military escalated the violence....as per your following comment

"but it didn't get violent until someone decided to take out the commander"

[catweazle]

Thought the thread here was basically asking who the "Men in black" were...? Do we have an answer?

[chotthee]

MiB could be Seh Daeng.

Seh Daeng was believed to be neutralized by the Army sniper.

[Thaddeus]

Let the people decide......

I didn't ask the people, I asked you.

I summed up the feeling of my Thai friends in another thread, you probably were out of the country so maybe missed that as you would not be participating on Tvisa.

Barring visa runs I haven't been out of the country for almost eight years.

[whybother]

I don't really care if you think I have not read material I mention.....if you haven't read it you will ignore the input.....no surprise there then, and I wasn't even questioning how he died only that I had read a differing version

Thanks for admitting one thing though.........Abhisit sending in the military escalated the violence....as per your following comment

"but it didn't get violent until someone decided to take out the commander"

After the protesters had taken over Ratchaprasong, stormed parliament and stormed Thaicom, the government responded by trying to disperse them. Then the commander was blown up with a grenade.

[tlansford]

I don't really care if you think I have not read material I mention.....if you haven't read it you will ignore the input.....no surprise there then, and I wasn't even questioning how he died only that I had read a differing version

Thanks for admitting one thing though.........Abhisit sending in the military escalated the violence....as per your following comment

"but it didn't get violent until someone decided to take out the commander"

After the protesters had taken over Ratchaprasong, stormed parliament and stormed Thaicom, the government responded by trying to disperse them. Then the commander was blown up with a grenade.

what's involved in "storming" parliament? How long did they stay? Was it 3 months or 20 minutes? Did they leave peacefully?

There were other incidents more provocative from the protesters than that. No need to be a drama queen wrt the parliament.

Setting up camp (permanently) in Ratchaprasong - there is something that gave the government an excuse to act... (IMO)

[Buchholz]

The long-awaited final report from the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT) on the 2010 crackdown

,

Cabinet approves over 77 Million Baht to promote national reconciliation

BANGKOK, 20 March 2013 (NNT) – The Cabinet has resolved to allocate additional budget for the special committee in charge of national reconciliation to push ahead with its efforts to solve years of social and political conflicts in the country.

Permanent Secretary to the PM’s Office Tongthong Chandransu, on Tuesday, announced that the weekly Cabinet meeting has resolved to allocate another 77.9 million baht for the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT), which has earlier been granted 90.3 million baht in budget for the organization of public deliberations on national reconciliation.

With 168.2 million baht allocated, the TRCT is set to hold as many as 108 sessions of public deliberations across the country.

Mr. Tongthong said that, after the Songkran holiday, the commission plans to invite some 440 noted guest speakers and academics as well as professors from various universities to discuss how the deliberation session should be organized.

He added that public deliberations should be held across the country throughout May and June before the TRCT can present a summary on public opinions to the Cabinet and share everything with the people of Thailand.

The Permanent Secretary to the PM’s Office stated that the Cabinet will have the final say on which suggestions will be implemented in promoting reconciliation in Thailand.

Mr. Tongthong stated that the public deliberation plan was not conceived for any political purpose, but was implemented after several organizations called for academic approach to help TRCT carry out its duty. It is hoped that there will be more than 75,000 people to offer their creative ideas on how Thailand can rid itself of divisiveness and achieve reconciliation.

-- NNT 2013-03-20