Government And Red Shirt Activists Blamed For 2010 Political Violence

[Buchholz]

Precisely! I fail how anyone could see any of the "governments" since 2006 as legitimate up until this currently democratically elected government that seems to take more cheap shots from TV members than the people that elected the government. I suspect most expats live here because it is a lot cheaper (or was anyway in the past) than their own countries but they insist on backing the people that rape the environment and extort the people including the people that staged the coup IT IS ILLEGAL and not a recognized government just like Burma was.

A coup is illegal, that's all there is to it, if you do not like a president or prime minister you impeach them not drive a tank to their house and tell them to leave the country (Thaksin was told to leave he did not run before they could get him). Obviously a lot of you did not like former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra but he was the legally elected leader of this nation and the law was broken meaning justice, freedom and democracy went out the window when it did not suit.

I would be curious what you would have to say if this happened in your country. To spite the animosity between the political parties in my country the people would rise up against a coup on either side because we value justice, freedom and democracy in some twisted way we haven't quite gotten right but nonetheless no coups. So, why do you think Thai people deserve less?

Why wasn't the Samak government legitimate?

he'll have to get back to you on that one after checking the script

.

[KireB]

I seem to recall both water cannon and tear gas were used in one of the early exchanges, might have been when the government shut down the TV stations of the Red shirts....

Good that you mention this closure of Red Shirt media.. and I would like to ask you whether you ever listened or watched their channels. Do you understand Thai?

Because if you would, you might understand the hatred and lies that were spread by these stations and you might understand why the government clamped down on them. Any other government in any other country would. Freedomn of speech stops when they become death threats and pure obscenity! But maybe not for your lot............

[MikeOboe57]

Precisely! I fail how anyone could see any of the "governments" since 2006 as legitimate up until this currently democratically elected government that seems to take more cheap shots from TV members than the people that elected the government. I suspect most expats live here because it is a lot cheaper (or was anyway in the past) than their own countries but they insist on backing the people that rape the environment and extort the people including the people that staged the coup IT IS ILLEGAL and not a recognized government just like Burma was.

A coup is illegal, that's all there is to it, if you do not like a president or prime minister you impeach them not drive a tank to their house and tell them to leave the country (Thaksin was told to leave he did not run before they could get him). Obviously a lot of you did not like former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra but he was the legally elected leader of this nation and the law was broken meaning justice, freedom and democracy went out the window when it did not suit.

I would be curious what you would have to say if this happened in your country. To spite the animosity between the political parties in my country the people would rise up against a coup on either side because we value justice, freedom and democracy in some twisted way we haven't quite gotten right but nonetheless no coups. So, why do you think Thai people deserve less?

Why wasn't the Samak government legitimate?

I guess he's having his Sarah Palin moment now (Samak, Samak?...)

[linuxuser010101]

Precisely! I fail how anyone could see any of the "governments" since 2006 as legitimate up until this currently democratically elected government that seems to take more cheap shots from TV members than the people that elected the government. I suspect most expats live here because it is a lot cheaper (or was anyway in the past) than their own countries but they insist on backing the people that rape the environment and extort the people including the people that staged the coup IT IS ILLEGAL and not a recognized government just like Burma was.

A coup is illegal, that's all there is to it, if you do not like a president or prime minister you impeach them not drive a tank to their house and tell them to leave the country (Thaksin was told to leave he did not run before they could get him). Obviously a lot of you did not like former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra but he was the legally elected leader of this nation and the law was broken meaning justice, freedom and democracy went out the window when it did not suit.

I would be curious what you would have to say if this happened in your country. To spite the animosity between the political parties in my country the people would rise up against a coup on either side because we value justice, freedom and democracy in some twisted way we haven't quite gotten right but nonetheless no coups. So, why do you think Thai people deserve less?

Why wasn't the Samak government legitimate?

I guess he's having his Sarah Palin moment now (Samak, Samak?...)

LMAO quite the contrary, most people here could get a job with Sarah Palin at FOX News. How do you find my statement as invalid? I don't want your opinion (like FOX News) I want you to look it up and READ.

I did make a mistake, an omission actually, there was a prime minister legally voted in after the coup two actually, Samak Sundaravej but he was kicked out because he had a cooking show many years ago and the upper class had a problem with him because he would stop for lunch on the road side and only pay 20B for a bowl of noodles, not high-so enough.

And then Somchai Wongsawat who was also thrown out on non-proven charges of vote buying (he didn't have to buy votes because he had the majority). Then Chaovarat Chanweerakul, not legally elected and then Abhisit Vejjajiva also not legally elected. Now Thailand has a legally elected prime minister and she seems to make the people happy so, what right does any one of us have to say anything about it.

I assure you even in the right wing nuts win the election in my country with their religious delusions and raciest views I would stand against anyone that tried to stage a coup against the legally elected president of my country, I do not need to respect the man to respect the office and the vote of the people when we throw a coup because we don't get what we want we destroy democracy.

I do not believe Thai people were doing anything differently than I would do in my own country and it was the majority of Thai people that were angry not what the propaganda said if it were true Yingluck Shinawatra would not be the prime minister now. A little "Occupy Wall Street" goes a long way to get the worlds attention and let them know the people are not happy.

I would suggest that when you become a Thai citizen you can have an opinion other than that I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda by the people leading the coup other wise you risk looking the fool in the eyes of the majority. I also want to mention how shocked and a bit horrified I am that many of you are so out of touch with the average middle class Thai Citizen, there must me a lot of millionaires on TV that live in secluded compounds.

Edited September 19, 2012 by linuxuser010101

[whybother]

LMAO quite the contrary, most people here could get a job with Sarah Palin at FOX News. How do you find my statement as invalid? I don't want your opinion (like FOX News) I want you to look it up and READ.

I did make a mistake, an omission actually, there was a prime minister legally voted in after the coup tow actually, Samak Sundaravej but he was kicked out because he had a cooking show many years ago and the upper class had a problem with him because he would stop for lunch on the road side and only pay 20B for a bowl of noodles, not high-so enough.

And then Somchai Wongsawat who was also thrown out on non-proven charges of vote buying (he didn't have to buy votes because he had the majority). Then Chaovarat Chanweerakul, not legally elected and then Abhisit Vejjajiva also not legally elected. Now Thailand has a legally elected prime minister and she seems to make the people happy so, what right does any one of us have to say anything about it.

I assure you even in the right wing nuts win the election in my country with their religious delusions and raciest views I would stand against anyone that tried to stage a coup against the legally elected president of my country, I do not need to respect the man to respect the office and the vote of the people. I do not believe Thai people were doing anything differently than I would do in my own country. A little "Occupy Wall Street" goes a long way to get the worlds attention and let them know the people are not happy.

I would suggest that when you become a Thai citizen you can have an opinion other than that I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda by the people leading the coup other wise you risk looking the fool in the eyes of the majority.

"I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda"

The coup was illegal. There aren't many people who deny that.

But Thaksin wasn't the legally elected PM at the time. He had dissolved parliament to call an election.

I'm glad you support that PMs can have two jobs. The PM job isn't really important enough to have on it's own.

"non-proven charges of vote buying" ... another omission, it seems. The video evidence seemed pretty good proof.

"Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?

[linuxuser010101]

LMAO quite the contrary, most people here could get a job with Sarah Palin at FOX News. How do you find my statement as invalid? I don't want your opinion (like FOX News) I want you to look it up and READ.

I did make a mistake, an omission actually, there was a prime minister legally voted in after the coup tow actually, Samak Sundaravej but he was kicked out because he had a cooking show many years ago and the upper class had a problem with him because he would stop for lunch on the road side and only pay 20B for a bowl of noodles, not high-so enough.

And then Somchai Wongsawat who was also thrown out on non-proven charges of vote buying (he didn't have to buy votes because he had the majority). Then Chaovarat Chanweerakul, not legally elected and then Abhisit Vejjajiva also not legally elected. Now Thailand has a legally elected prime minister and she seems to make the people happy so, what right does any one of us have to say anything about it.

I assure you even in the right wing nuts win the election in my country with their religious delusions and raciest views I would stand against anyone that tried to stage a coup against the legally elected president of my country, I do not need to respect the man to respect the office and the vote of the people. I do not believe Thai people were doing anything differently than I would do in my own country. A little "Occupy Wall Street" goes a long way to get the worlds attention and let them know the people are not happy.

I would suggest that when you become a Thai citizen you can have an opinion other than that I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda by the people leading the coup other wise you risk looking the fool in the eyes of the majority.

"I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda"

The coup was illegal. There aren't many people who deny that.

But Thaksin wasn't the legally elected PM at the time. He had dissolved parliament to call an election.

I'm glad you support that PMs can have two jobs. The PM job isn't really important enough to have on it's own.

"non-proven charges of vote buying" ... another omission, it seems. The video evidence seemed pretty good proof.

"Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?

Show me.

[whybother]

"I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda"

The coup was illegal. There aren't many people who deny that.

But Thaksin wasn't the legally elected PM at the time. He had dissolved parliament to call an election.

I'm glad you support that PMs can have two jobs. The PM job isn't really important enough to have on it's own.

"non-proven charges of vote buying" ... another omission, it seems. The video evidence seemed pretty good proof.

"Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?

Show me.

Show you what?

You didn't know that Thaksin dissolved parliament to call an election?

You didn't know that a PM was not allowed to have two jobs?

You didn't know that the PPP was found guilty of election fraud?

You didn't know that Abhisit was an elected MP?

You didn't know that Somchai was elected PM in parliament in the same way that Abhisit was elected? (and the same way all Thai PMs are elected)

[Buchholz]

"I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda"

The coup was illegal. There aren't many people who deny that.

But Thaksin wasn't the legally elected PM at the time. He had dissolved parliament to call an election.

I'm glad you support that PMs can have two jobs. The PM job isn't really important enough to have on it's own.

"non-proven charges of vote buying" ... another omission, it seems. The video evidence seemed pretty good proof.

"Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?

Show me.

Show you what?

You didn't know that Thaksin dissolved parliament to call an election?

You didn't know that a PM was not allowed to have two jobs?

You didn't know that the PPP was found guilty of election fraud?

You didn't know that Abhisit was an elected MP?

You didn't know that Somchai was elected PM in parliament in the same way that Abhisit was elected? (and the same way all Thai PMs are elected)

Even after consulting with the script, it doesn't seem to have helped him much.

.

[OzMick]

I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. then all bets are off. An adequate police force would also help. not some yahoo's that bought their gun and badge from their local pooyai. You and I have been here long enough to know that Thai's have a whole different outlook on life, politics, religion, etc and etc. I've said before, Thailand reminds me of Mexico back in the 60's and 70's. Mexico has evolved, kind of. Thailand, not so much. I get a little tired of hearing "you farangs just don't understand Thailand". Yes we do. Most of us have seen this kind of nonsense in other developing countries. When we throw in our two cents worth, it's because we've been there, done that, seen that and have the t-shirt.

"I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. "

Then why was the first death a protester?

I think the TVF timeline for the fatalities, which usually begin lobbing grenades and the death of the colonel, need to be updated.

But your timeline won't include the red's terrorist RPG attack on the Emerald Buddha on March 30, will it? Or the M-79 grenade launchings around the city which had a similarly high potential for fatalities.

And you will ignore that the first protester death was caused by "persons unknown".

Edited September 19, 2012 by OzMick

[OzMick]

I did make a mistake, an omission actually, there was a prime minister legally voted in after the coup two actually, Samak Sundaravej but he was kicked out because he had a cooking show many years ago and the upper class had a problem with him because he would stop for lunch on the road side and only pay 20B for a bowl of noodles, not high-so enough.

And then Somchai Wongsawat who was also thrown out on non-proven charges of vote buying (he didn't have to buy votes because he had the majority). Then Chaovarat Chanweerakul, not legally elected and then Abhisit Vejjajiva also not legally elected. Now Thailand has a legally elected prime minister and she seems to make the people happy so, what right does any one of us have to say anything about it.

2 rather large factual errors:

1/ Samak lost his PM position because he perjured himself, but could have been re-appointed the next day. Instead he was dumped. I wonder who made that decision?

2/ "he didn't have to buy votes because he had the majority" - so the end justifies the means? He and the party executive were clearly complicit and caught on video. I suppose you think Thaksin didn't have to be corrupt because he was already rich? Strangely enough, a lot of red shirts believe that too.

Multi-party electorates are just too hard for some brought up in a 2-party environment.

[Thaddeus]

I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. then all bets are off. An adequate police force would also help. not some yahoo's that bought their gun and badge from their local pooyai. You and I have been here long enough to know that Thai's have a whole different outlook on life, politics, religion, etc and etc. I've said before, Thailand reminds me of Mexico back in the 60's and 70's. Mexico has evolved, kind of. Thailand, not so much. I get a little tired of hearing "you farangs just don't understand Thailand". Yes we do. Most of us have seen this kind of nonsense in other developing countries. When we throw in our two cents worth, it's because we've been there, done that, seen that and have the t-shirt.

"I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. "

Then why was the first death a protester?

I think the TVF timeline for the fatalities, which usually begin lobbing grenades and the death of the colonel, need to be updated.

But your timeline won't include the red's terrorist RPG attack on the Emerald Buddha on March 30, will it? Or the M-79 grenade launchings around the city which had a similarly high potential for fatalities.

And you will ignore that the first protester death was caused by "persons unknown".

It isn't difficult is it.

Battles start when the first shots are fired, not when the first fatality occurs.

Not a difficult concept except when faced with an unwillingness to grasp it.

[tlansford]

LMAO quite the contrary, most people here could get a job with Sarah Palin at FOX News. How do you find my statement as invalid? I don't want your opinion (like FOX News) I want you to look it up and READ.

I did make a mistake, an omission actually, there was a prime minister legally voted in after the coup tow actually, Samak Sundaravej but he was kicked out because he had a cooking show many years ago and the upper class had a problem with him because he would stop for lunch on the road side and only pay 20B for a bowl of noodles, not high-so enough.

And then Somchai Wongsawat who was also thrown out on non-proven charges of vote buying (he didn't have to buy votes because he had the majority). Then Chaovarat Chanweerakul, not legally elected and then Abhisit Vejjajiva also not legally elected. Now Thailand has a legally elected prime minister and she seems to make the people happy so, what right does any one of us have to say anything about it.

I assure you even in the right wing nuts win the election in my country with their religious delusions and raciest views I would stand against anyone that tried to stage a coup against the legally elected president of my country, I do not need to respect the man to respect the office and the vote of the people. I do not believe Thai people were doing anything differently than I would do in my own country. A little "Occupy Wall Street" goes a long way to get the worlds attention and let them know the people are not happy.

I would suggest that when you become a Thai citizen you can have an opinion other than that I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda by the people leading the coup other wise you risk looking the fool in the eyes of the majority.

"I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda"

The coup was illegal. There aren't many people who deny that.

But Thaksin wasn't the legally elected PM at the time. He had dissolved parliament to call an election.

I'm glad you support that PMs can have two jobs. The PM job isn't really important enough to have on it's own.

"non-proven charges of vote buying" ... another omission, it seems. The video evidence seemed pretty good proof.

"Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?

""Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?"

Is it intentional your consistent misunderstanding of the intentions of posters on this issue?

Do you still, after all this time, not understand the difference between the Somchai & Abhisit governments?

Do you think a cooking show was justification to remove a PM?

Do you think it was better to have a coup or to have gone through with the scheduled elections?

[ginjag]

"I suggest sticking to facts not propaganda"

The coup was illegal. There aren't many people who deny that.

But Thaksin wasn't the legally elected PM at the time. He had dissolved parliament to call an election.

I'm glad you support that PMs can have two jobs. The PM job isn't really important enough to have on it's own.

"non-proven charges of vote buying" ... another omission, it seems. The video evidence seemed pretty good proof.

"Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?

Show me.

Show you what?

You didn't know that Thaksin dissolved parliament to call an election?

You didn't know that a PM was not allowed to have two jobs?

You didn't know that the PPP was found guilty of election fraud?

You didn't know that Abhisit was an elected MP?

You didn't know that Somchai was elected PM in parliament in the same way that Abhisit was elected? (and the same way all Thai PMs are elected)

Even after consulting with the script, it doesn't seem to have helped him much.

.

Hey you guys your knocking your head against a brick wall---old Lincolnshire saying-' you can't put nowt where there aint nowt'

[Nickymaster]

I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. then all bets are off. An adequate police force would also help. not some yahoo's that bought their gun and badge from their local pooyai. You and I have been here long enough to know that Thai's have a whole different outlook on life, politics, religion, etc and etc. I've said before, Thailand reminds me of Mexico back in the 60's and 70's. Mexico has evolved, kind of. Thailand, not so much. I get a little tired of hearing "you farangs just don't understand Thailand". Yes we do. Most of us have seen this kind of nonsense in other developing countries. When we throw in our two cents worth, it's because we've been there, done that, seen that and have the t-shirt.

"I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. "

Then why was the first death a protester?

I think the TVF timeline for the fatalities, which usually begin lobbing grenades and the death of the colonel, need to be updated.

But your timeline won't include the red's terrorist RPG attack on the Emerald Buddha on March 30, will it? Or the M-79 grenade launchings around the city which had a similarly high potential for fatalities.

And you will ignore that the first protester death was caused by "persons unknown".

I really don't want to post this list anymore but Mr. Tlansford always forces me to do it.

-the firing of an M79 into the 11th Infantry Regiment on January 28, 2010;

-the firing of grenades during the incidents at Kok Wua intersection on April 10, 2010, which caused 5 deaths of soldiers (including that of Col Romklao);

-the firing into the oil depot at Prathum Thani on April 21, 2010;

-the firing of an M79 into the BTS station at Sala-Daeng on April 22, 2010, which caused 2 deaths and 78 injuries;

-the firing of an M16 on police officers and soldiers in front of the Krung Thai Bank, Sala-Daeng Branch, on May 7, 2010, which caused 1 death and 2 injuries of policemen;

-the firing into the UCL building on May 14, 2010, causing 1 deaths and 4 injuries of police officers.

-the firing of an RPG into Dusit-Thani Hotel on May 17, 2010

-the firing attack into the police flat at Lumpini Police Station on May 19, 2010, causing deaths and injuries of police officers

Please update us with your timeline Mr. Tlansford.

[whybother]

""Abhisit not legally elected" ... what was illegal about both his election as MP and his election as PM? What was the difference between Somchai's election to PM and Abhisit's election to PM?"

Is it intentional your consistent misunderstanding of the intentions of posters on this issue?

Do you still, after all this time, not understand the difference between the Somchai & Abhisit governments?

Do you think a cooking show was justification to remove a PM?

Do you think it was better to have a coup or to have gone through with the scheduled elections?

The coup is irrelevant.

I think a PM should be removed for being paid for other jobs and for lying about it in court.

The only difference between the election of Somchai and Abhisit was that some MPs and smaller parties had shifted their support. Have you never heard of coalition parties changing their support?

[473geo]

I seem to recall both water cannon and tear gas were used in one of the early exchanges, might have been when the government shut down the TV stations of the Red shirts....

Good that you mention this closure of Red Shirt media.. and I would like to ask you whether you ever listened or watched their channels. Do you understand Thai?

Because if you would, you might understand the hatred and lies that were spread by these stations and you might understand why the government clamped down on them. Any other government in any other country would. Freedomn of speech stops when they become death threats and pure obscenity! But maybe not for your lot............

Would not be difficult to accept that the closure of the Red Shirt stations could give the perception the government were the antagonists in this particular situation, after all the response should have been all too predictable, to all except the innocent government who were only trying to protect the populace from viewing such outrageous propaganda.

[473geo]

I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. then all bets are off. An adequate police force would also help. not some yahoo's that bought their gun and badge from their local pooyai. You and I have been here long enough to know that Thai's have a whole different outlook on life, politics, religion, etc and etc. I've said before, Thailand reminds me of Mexico back in the 60's and 70's. Mexico has evolved, kind of. Thailand, not so much. I get a little tired of hearing "you farangs just don't understand Thailand". Yes we do. Most of us have seen this kind of nonsense in other developing countries. When we throw in our two cents worth, it's because we've been there, done that, seen that and have the t-shirt.

"I agree with you HD.. a water canon works wonders at crowd control, until some one tries to shoot the guy operating the canon. "

Then why was the first death a protester?

I think the TVF timeline for the fatalities, which usually begin lobbing grenades and the death of the colonel, need to be updated.

But your timeline won't include the red's terrorist RPG attack on the Emerald Buddha on March 30, will it? Or the M-79 grenade launchings around the city which had a similarly high potential for fatalities.

And you will ignore that the first protester death was caused by "persons unknown".

I really don't want to post this list anymore but Mr. Tlansford always forces me to do it.

-the firing of an M79 into the 11th Infantry Regiment on January 28, 2010;

-the firing of grenades during the incidents at Kok Wua intersection on April 10, 2010, which caused 5 deaths of soldiers (including that of Col Romklao);

-the firing into the oil depot at Prathum Thani on April 21, 2010;

-the firing of an M79 into the BTS station at Sala-Daeng on April 22, 2010, which caused 2 deaths and 78 injuries;

-the firing of an M16 on police officers and soldiers in front of the Krung Thai Bank, Sala-Daeng Branch, on May 7, 2010, which caused 1 death and 2 injuries of policemen;

-the firing into the UCL building on May 14, 2010, causing 1 deaths and 4 injuries of police officers.

-the firing of an RPG into Dusit-Thani Hotel on May 17, 2010

-the firing attack into the police flat at Lumpini Police Station on May 19, 2010, causing deaths and injuries of police officers

Please update us with your timeline Mr. Tlansford.

One incident you highlight before

"On 10 April, troops unsuccessfully cracked down at Phan Fah, resulting in 24 deaths, including one Japanese journalist and five soldiers, and more than 800 injuries. The Thai media called the crackdown "Cruel April" (Source WiKi)