Thai Democrats Ordered Use Of Snipers: Korkaew

[rubl]

You seem comically unaware that old style Trade Unions in Thailand are notoriously reactionary.EGAT's unions, often teamed with senior management !!, through restrictive practices, to put back Thailand's energy programme for decades.

I note that you seem to be an uncritical acolyte of PAD yet like many of your sort don't support many of their aims when it is impolitic or embarrasing to do so..Sorry you can't have it both ways or at least spell out what you don't like about them.The racism, the contempt for democracy, the Chinese triumphalism, the feudaliphilia, the exaltation of the army? Take your pick - there's a lot to choose from.

The PAD leadership - a truly ghastly group of old geezers - does have fascist characteristics, the rank and file less so.Not much influence now but could easily revive if the unelected elites decide to wind them up again.Useful idiots in Lenin's famous phrase.

The UDD leadership of which the subject of the topic k. Korkaew is or was one is just a group of well meaning, democracy minded gentlemen who just happen to 'weng around' just like some posters. Some of them hardline Marxist communists who never seem to loose their red streak, now do they?

It's interesting to read the semi-intellectual rhetoric so well known in certain English circles where it was close to fashionabel to be pro-CCCP and all it's antics. They even managed to explain away the popular uprisings in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslavakia as just a bunch of misguided capitalist lackeys. Those were the days. Stalin c.s. found them 'useful idiots'

[jayboy]

Ah, 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' The trouble with this contributor is that though he thinks his nit-picking paints him as Mr Reasonable, as a straight down the line Thaksin apologist, he has to keep the bile buttoned up or at least tries to, until every so often the mask comes off and the snarl is there for all to see. One can also see in response to the resulting comments that we migrated from it was only sarcasm (cover up) to the slow retreat, well they are a little bit fascist, well some of them are fascist, thugs and all and so on. A retreat from a viewpoint which is where he stands. This is from someone who to this day has refused to acknowledge the existence of Arisman's Burn Bangkok video and has defended to the death the 'peaceful reds' and 'unarmed reds' agenda. Korkaew's line of reasoning, Jatuporn et al. They are no strangers, they are a part of Thaksin's team and how he presents his arguments are peas in a pod. Maybe he picked up the phrase 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' from red TV. Certainly sounds like it.

I assume this bad tempered post has nothing to do with the mockery your comical and ridiculous Marxist analysis rightly attracted earlier today.However cross you may feel please dont confuse invective with impertinence.

On the PAD I don't think there's much confusion is there? I've always made it clear the PAD rank and file were at worst naive and at best admirably civic minded.The leadership is a fairly unpleasant bunch with fascist (I use the word with all due care) tendencies but that's not in dispute with most fair minded people.

If you can prove that I have refused to acknowledge Arisman's "burn video" I will ban myself from the forum forever.I can be fairly confident you would find this difficult because not only have I never heard of the video, I am actually barely aware of who Arisman is.Nor do I have any idea about Red TV whatever that is - certainly never watched it.

Edited October 24, 2012 by jayboy

[hellodolly]

The PAD leadership - a truly ghastly group of old geezers - does have fascist characteristics, the rank and file less so.

Rank and file less so? Have you ever met any rank and file yellows that you would truly describe of as being fascists? I have yet to, just as i have yet to meet any rank and file reds who i would truly describe of as being communists. Just another bit of the usual extreme hyperbole. Either that or some people really don't understand the terms they are banding about.

Yes I would be interested to in what he considers a fascists. While at it he might give his definition of communists. It would make it easier to understand what he is talking about.

[hellodolly]

And jayboy, i'm still interested in your response to this, if you care to give it:

So you are talking about the drugs war (I think!).To give you a straight answer I do believe that Abhisit's alleged involvement in murder of protestors would be judged by an impartial observer to be more serious than those of Thaksin in the ill considered and brutal drugs war which, given the misery the drugs trade causes, had the support of most Thais - from the pinnacle to the bottom.That is why he has never been charged - the objective was a sound one.

If we are talking objectives, i don't think there was anything unsound about Abhisit's objective in trying to clear Bangkok's streets of further rioting. Surely the problem wasn't with his objective, it was with how he is alleged to have gone about that task. Thaksin's alleged crime is surely the same. Nobody questions the soundness of the objective of clearing up the drugs problem, people question the methods that were employed, in particular, the alleged shoot to kill policy.

As for the old "it had the support of most Thais" chestnut (that is brought out each and every time the war on drugs is discussed here), it's a complete irrelevance. As if policy popularity with the public somehow removes culpability from those in charge when the policy turns out a tragic disaster. When the government unveils a plan to build a new bridge across the Gulf of Thailand, and it is warmly received by all, do we shift the blame away from the people who built it, when the bridge collapses and kills hundreds, because after all, it is what the people wanted?

Indignation about the war on drugs was generated very late in the day primarily as a means to attack Thaksin.There were some honourable people who criticised the policy at the time but they were rather few in number.It was an awful business but it's in a completely different category from the Bangkok 20120 deaths.I agree that because a policy is popular is not the same as a policy being morally correct.I tend to avoid discussion on this forum because of the infantile tendency of some -not you - to tot up deaths incurred by Abhisit and Thaksin, and conclude the latter was the wickedest because of the drugs war.The two are totally different and non comparable.

Yes the two are totally different and not comparable. One was stopping terrorists and the other was the indiscriminate killing of innocent citizens under the guise of stopping drugs. Here we are 8 or 9 years later and the problem is even bigger than when they just killed you because you had the PMs OK.

[hellodolly]

Ah, 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' The trouble with this contributor is that though he thinks his nit-picking paints him as Mr Reasonable, as a straight down the line Thaksin apologist, he has to keep the bile buttoned up or at least tries to, until every so often the mask comes off and the snarl is there for all to see. One can also see in response to the resulting comments that we migrated from it was only sarcasm (cover up) to the slow retreat, well they are a little bit fascist, well some of them are fascist, thugs and all and so on. A retreat from a viewpoint which is where he stands. This is from someone who to this day has refused to acknowledge the existence of Arisman's Burn Bangkok video and has defended to the death the 'peaceful reds' and 'unarmed reds' agenda. Korkaew's line of reasoning, Jatuporn et al. They are no strangers, they are a part of Thaksin's team and how he presents his arguments are peas in a pod. Maybe he picked up the phrase 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' from red TV. Certainly sounds like it.

I assume this bad tempered post has nothing to do with the mockery your comical and ridiculous Marxist analysis rightly attracted earlier today.However cross you may feel please dont confuse invective with impertinence.

On the PAD I don't think there's much confusion is there? I've always made it clear the PAD rank and file were at worst naive and at best admirably civic minded.The leadership is a fairly unpleasant bunch with fascist (I use the word with all due care) tendencies but that's not in dispute with most fair minded people.

If you can prove that I have refused to acknowledge Arisman's "burn video" I will ban myself from the forum forever.I can be fairly confident you would find this difficult because not only have I never heard of the video, I am actually barely aware of who Arisman is.Nor do I have any idea about Red TV whatever that is - certainly never watched it.

Personally I don't recall you saying that or matter of fact any thing on the subject. But if you denied there were burn videos that would include Arisman also. You might want to check some of your previous posts.

[TomTao]

I'm not surprised rixalex doesn't compare the 'yellow horde and their fascist leadership' with the 'twelve apostles'. If he did he would be really out of touch. You even just mentioning this seem to be out of it somewhat.

It's called sarcasm.He did compare the yellow mob with the occupiers at St Paul's which is lunacy beyond any sarcastic take down I have to agree.Next we'll be hearing that stale old mantra (so popular with dimmer kind of expat reactionary) about the AOT being responsible for the airport close down for elf and safety reasons

Not sure what all the shock horror indignation is all about in response to my reference to PAD fascism.The PAD and yellow shirt leadership showed many of the fascist characteristcs leadership - as does for example Dr Tui currently.To be fair I do not and in fact never have suggested this is the case with the PAD rank and file.Certainly there was a violent thuggish element but most in the early stages were decent if sometimes misguided citizens.

Jayboy, I have been reading your posts with a growing sense of confusion concerning what you would consider to be a fascist, from what I remember from my schooling and various documentaries as well as seeing some fascist ragimes in power in recent history (Idi Amin and Robert Mugabe come to mind), many of them stared out on a platform of popularist policies, and once elected cemented the people's loyalty by implimenting some of those policies, that is before letting thier true character show by repressing the people and ruthlessly eliminating any who opposed them, please tell me how this equades to the PAD, as far as I am aware there is only one colour here in Thailand that garners the people's loyalty with popularist policies, and they are not yellow shirts. Please share your view of what a fascist is, in a logical manner please, not in a idealogical rant. Thank you.

[MikeOboe57]

[...] I am actually barely aware of who Arisman is.[...]

So why don't you take some time off and familiarize yourself with the subject? You are so quick to stick the label "fascist" to each and everyone and yet you know hardly anything about the major players of the "red team".

Playing the White Knight in Shining Armour who comes to the aid of the red cause is ok, however admitting that you actually have no idea who you are defending makes you look ...hmm... unwise.

[OzMick]

And jayboy, i'm still interested in your response to this, if you care to give it:

So you are talking about the drugs war (I think!).To give you a straight answer I do believe that Abhisit's alleged involvement in murder of protestors would be judged by an impartial observer to be more serious than those of Thaksin in the ill considered and brutal drugs war which, given the misery the drugs trade causes, had the support of most Thais - from the pinnacle to the bottom.That is why he has never been charged - the objective was a sound one.

If we are talking objectives, i don't think there was anything unsound about Abhisit's objective in trying to clear Bangkok's streets of further rioting. Surely the problem wasn't with his objective, it was with how he is alleged to have gone about that task. Thaksin's alleged crime is surely the same. Nobody questions the soundness of the objective of clearing up the drugs problem, people question the methods that were employed, in particular, the alleged shoot to kill policy.

As for the old "it had the support of most Thais" chestnut (that is brought out each and every time the war on drugs is discussed here), it's a complete irrelevance. As if policy popularity with the public somehow removes culpability from those in charge when the policy turns out a tragic disaster. When the government unveils a plan to build a new bridge across the Gulf of Thailand, and it is warmly received by all, do we shift the blame away from the people who built it, when the bridge collapses and kills hundreds, because after all, it is what the people wanted?

Indignation about the war on drugs was generated very late in the day primarily as a means to attack Thaksin.There were some honourable people who criticised the policy at the time but they were rather few in number.It was an awful business but it's in a completely different category from the Bangkok 20120 deaths.I agree that because a policy is popular is not the same as a policy being morally correct.I tend to avoid discussion on this forum because of the infantile tendency of some -not you - to tot up deaths incurred by Abhisit and Thaksin, and conclude the latter was the wickedest because of the drugs war.The two are totally different and non comparable.

"Indignation about the war on drugs was generated very late in the day primarily as a means to attack Thaksin"

It had nothing to do with families mourning young ones, lottery winners being executed, elderly people hiding behind their 'fridge while police shot holes through their house, or civil libertarians asking what has our society become.

No, it was all those fascist yellow shirts using the murder of a few thousand people to get at Thaksin.

[Buchholz]

[...] I am actually barely aware of who Arisman is.[...]

So why don't you take some time off and familiarize yourself with the subject? You are so quick to stick the label "fascist" to each and everyone and yet you know hardly anything about the major players of the "red team".

Playing the White Knight in Shining Armour who comes to the aid of the red cause is ok, however admitting that you actually have no idea who you are defending makes you look ...hmm... unwise.

Indeed, knowing about a key player of May Mayhem 2010 would be essential in a discussion of the OP's topic. But, as is par, a dozen off-topic, derailing "PAD is fascist" posts are more to his liking.

Oh, and as is explaining away the thousands murdered in Thaksin's Drug War.

.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Buchholz

[yoshiwara]

Ah, 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' The trouble with this contributor is that though he thinks his nit-picking paints him as Mr Reasonable, as a straight down the line Thaksin apologist, he has to keep the bile buttoned up or at least tries to, until every so often the mask comes off and the snarl is there for all to see. One can also see in response to the resulting comments that we migrated from it was only sarcasm (cover up) to the slow retreat, well they are a little bit fascist, well some of them are fascist, thugs and all and so on. A retreat from a viewpoint which is where he stands. This is from someone who to this day has refused to acknowledge the existence of Arisman's Burn Bangkok video and has defended to the death the 'peaceful reds' and 'unarmed reds' agenda. Korkaew's line of reasoning, Jatuporn et al. They are no strangers, they are a part of Thaksin's team and how he presents his arguments are peas in a pod. Maybe he picked up the phrase 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' from red TV. Certainly sounds like it.

I assume this bad tempered post has nothing to do with the mockery your comical and ridiculous Marxist analysis rightly attracted earlier today.However cross you may feel please dont confuse invective with impertinence.

On the PAD I don't think there's much confusion is there? I've always made it clear the PAD rank and file were at worst naive and at best admirably civic minded.The leadership is a fairly unpleasant bunch with fascist (I use the word with all due care) tendencies but that's not in dispute with most fair minded people.

If you can prove that I have refused to acknowledge Arisman's "burn video" I will ban myself from the forum forever.I can be fairly confident you would find this difficult because not only have I never heard of the video, I am actually barely aware of who Arisman is.Nor do I have any idea about Red TV whatever that is - certainly never watched it.

From someone who thinks he should be taken at face value ie considered to tell the truth. Instead is in a hole and is digging furiously.

So, once more lets hear you say nothing about Arisman and his speech urging the burning of Bangkok.

(For other readers, note that this red apologist and the others have to blank out the message as it upsets their (false) story that the reds were on a peaceful pilgrimage).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vRhaHRzuo&feature=related

[hellodolly]

jayboy

I see time has not changed you one bit. Ramble on and if asked a question try to change the conversation to unrelated events. Then if still pressed for answers disappear.

[jayboy]

Personally I don't recall you saying that or matter of fact any thing on the subject. But if you denied there were burn videos that would include Arisman also. You might want to check some of your previous posts.

You guys are a piece of work.I don't have to check my posts because I have never mentioned (or even thought about) videos let alone denied the existence of any.

[yoshiwara]

Personally I don't recall you saying that or matter of fact any thing on the subject. But if you denied there were burn videos that would include Arisman also. You might want to check some of your previous posts.

You guys are a piece of work.I don't have to check my posts because I have never mentioned (or even thought about) videos let alone denied the existence of any.

The evasion continues. The key point readers is that he will not comment on Arisman's video urging the burning down of Bangkok even now. Stand by for more 'who is Arisman?' and 'I have have never evaded anything' and so on....

[jayboy]

jayboy

I see time has not changed you one bit. Ramble on and if asked a question try to change the conversation to unrelated events. Then if still pressed for answers disappear.

Ah, 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' The trouble with this contributor is that though he thinks his nit-picking paints him as Mr Reasonable, as a straight down the line Thaksin apologist, he has to keep the bile buttoned up or at least tries to, until every so often the mask comes off and the snarl is there for all to see. One can also see in response to the resulting comments that we migrated from it was only sarcasm (cover up) to the slow retreat, well they are a little bit fascist, well some of them are fascist, thugs and all and so on. A retreat from a viewpoint which is where he stands. This is from someone who to this day has refused to acknowledge the existence of Arisman's Burn Bangkok video and has defended to the death the 'peaceful reds' and 'unarmed reds' agenda. Korkaew's line of reasoning, Jatuporn et al. They are no strangers, they are a part of Thaksin's team and how he presents his arguments are peas in a pod. Maybe he picked up the phrase 'the yellow horde and their fascist leadership.' from red TV. Certainly sounds like it.

I assume this bad tempered post has nothing to do with the mockery your comical and ridiculous Marxist analysis rightly attracted earlier today.However cross you may feel please dont confuse invective with impertinence.

On the PAD I don't think there's much confusion is there? I've always made it clear the PAD rank and file were at worst naive and at best admirably civic minded.The leadership is a fairly unpleasant bunch with fascist (I use the word with all due care) tendencies but that's not in dispute with most fair minded people.

If you can prove that I have refused to acknowledge Arisman's "burn video" I will ban myself from the forum forever.I can be fairly confident you would find this difficult because not only have I never heard of the video, I am actually barely aware of who Arisman is.Nor do I have any idea about Red TV whatever that is - certainly never watched it.

From someone who thinks he should be taken at face value ie considered to tell the truth. Instead is in a hole and is digging furiously.

So, once more lets hear you say nothing about Arisman and his speech urging the burning of Bangkok.

(For other readers, note that this red apologist and the others have to blank out the message as it upsets their (false) story that the reds were on a peaceful pilgrimage).

https://www.youtube....feature=related

You incorrectly said that I denied the existence of a video urging the burning of Bangkok.I pointed out politely that I had never commented on any such video, and had barely heard of Arisman.

Now you are saying I am digging a hole by saying nothing.Strange because I know nothing, have never commented on, nor frankly am very interested in this video you seem so preoccupied by.

Returning to the theme you refer to anyone with a liberal outlook as red apologists (or a Thaksin apologist).It's an attitude which is commonly known in the older universities as intellectually impoverished, but I suppose passes muster in the blue collar world of internet forums where nuance and scepticism are not prized commodities..I would of course, if asked, be foolish to deny there are some intemperate agitators on all sides of the political spectrum.That includes the redshirts though for sheer nastiness and bloodlust I have seen nothing to compare with PAD supporters remarks in the social media.

Edited October 25, 2012 by jayboy

[jayboy]

The evasion continues. The key point readers is that he will not comment on Arisman's video urging the burning down of Bangkok even now. Stand by for more 'who is Arisman?' and 'I have have never evaded anything' and so on....

The fact that you have been made a fool of can't really be evaded.If there is any substance to what you say you would be able to show at least one post where I have referred to your beloved Arisman video or indeed any video or redshirt speech at all.You can't.There are many areas where my views can be reasonably argued with or even disproved.You however invented a a position of mine.Some would say essentially lied - and now have to scurry around cleaning up your mess.I knew you were intellectually incoherent.I was slightly surprised to see you are dishonest as well.

[metisdead]

An off topic discussion regarding PAD and the airport blockade has been removed.

[yoshiwara]

The evasion continues. The key point readers is that he will not comment on Arisman's video urging the burning down of Bangkok even now. Stand by for more 'who is Arisman?' and 'I have have never evaded anything' and so on....

The fact that you have been made a fool of can't really be evaded.If there is any substance to what you say you would be able to show at least one post where I have referred to your beloved Arisman video or indeed any video or redshirt speech at all.You can't.There are many areas where my views can be reasonably argued with or even disproved.You however invented a a position of mine.Some would say essentially lied - and now have to scurry around cleaning up your mess.I knew you were intellectually incoherent.I was slightly surprised to see you are dishonest as well.

See if you can make a comment on the Arisman video now. Here it is again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vRhaHRzuo&feature=related

You can't and you won't.

[jayboy]

See if you can make a comment on the Arisman video now. Here it is again:

https://www.youtube....feature=related

You can't and you won't.

On the contrary, I can and I will (after having studied the clip).

However before doing so given the false accusations you have made, I'm afraid I shall be demanding my metaphorical "pound of flesh", namely an apology from you and recognition that your accusation (see below) was completely untrue

" This is from someone who to this day has refused to acknowledge the existence of Arisman's Burn Bangkok video and has defended to the death the 'peaceful reds' and 'unarmed reds' agenda."

An apology and absence of any sarcasm, reservation or qualification will result in my considered view on your video within 24 hours.I further undertake that my response will be as fair and reasonable as I can make it and will contain no smart alec comments or unhelpful debating points. Any response which does not comply will I am afraid be ignored.

Edited October 25, 2012 by jayboy

[Buchholz]

, but I suppose passes muster in the blue collar world of internet forums where nuance and scepticism are not prized commodities..

Always funny to see the self-professed elite of thaivisa lower themselves to wallow in the same muck of Internet forums that the unwashed, uneducated heathens of the common folk do.

[yoshiwara]

, but I suppose passes muster in the blue collar world of internet forums where nuance and scepticism are not prized commodities..

Always funny to see the self-professed elite of thaivisa lower themselves to wallow in the same muck of Internet forums that the unwashed, uneducated heathens of the common folk do.

Quite frankly, it is embarrassing every time he has his back to the wall he thinks he can play education as a Get Out Of Jail card.

However it is a useful backdrop to the claimed-for support for so-called liberation struggles against the Thailand Hi-Sos.

It is not unusual for some expats to indulge in left-wing tourism from the sidelines. However their left-wingism isn't worth the paper it is printed on.

Not for them the blue-collar working class, but rather the romanticised peasantry (but without land reform)

And then, when they are called to account for their support of individuals such as Arisman claim to hardly know them and bluster around the Burn Bangkok slogan

They/he hasn't got a clue and as result sink into the pit of Thaksin apologetics. With an 'I am a Liberal' T-shirt to add to the Che one of course. A full wardrobe.

Edited October 25, 2012 by yoshiwara

[rubl]

, but I suppose passes muster in the blue collar world of internet forums where nuance and scepticism are not prized commodities..

Always funny to see the self-professed elite of thaivisa lower themselves to wallow in the same muck of Internet forums that the unwashed, uneducated heathens of the common folk do.

Quite frankly, it is embarrassing every time he has his back to the wall he thinks he can play education as a Get Out Of Jail card.

However it is a useful backdrop to the claimed-for support for so-called liberation struggles against the Thailand Hi-Sos.

It is not unusual for some expats to indulge in left-wing tourism from the sidelines. However their left-wingism isn't worth the paper it is printed on.

Not for them the blue-collar working class, but rather the romanticised peasantry (but without land reform)

And then, when they are called to account for their support of individuals such as Arisman claim to hardly know them and bluster around the Burn Bangkok slogan

They/he hasn't got a clue and as result sink into the pit of Thaksin apologetics. With an 'I am a Liberal' T-shirt to add to the Che one of course. A full wardrobe.

And the occasional Ghandi Tshirt to express the 'peaceful' aspect while shouting in Thai to fight the government with whatever means till the last drop of your blood

[yoshiwara]

See if you can make a comment on the Arisman video now. Here it is again:

https://www.youtube....feature=related

You can't and you won't.

On the contrary, I can and I will (after having studied the clip).

However before doing so given the false accusations you have made, I'm afraid I shall be demanding my metaphorical "pound of flesh", namely an apology from you and recognition that your accusation (see below) was completely untrue

" This is from someone who to this day has refused to acknowledge the existence of Arisman's Burn Bangkok video and has defended to the death the 'peaceful reds' and 'unarmed reds' agenda."

An apology and absence of any sarcasm, reservation or qualification will result in my considered view on your video within 24 hours.I further undertake that my response will be as fair and reasonable as I can make it and will contain no smart alec comments or unhelpful debating points. Any response which does not comply will I am afraid be ignored.

Putting up more evasions and blah-blah to justify your inaction. Now it is 'I will if.....' And as for the suggestion you haven't seen the video before. Piffle.

I and I am sure others on this form are fascinated the lengths you will go to not to acknowledge the Arisman Burn Down Bangkok video which not only hears him urging the audience to burn the place down, but also tells them not to bother carrying petrol to Bangkok, but that the petrol will be there waiting for them (ie the reds have organised this). The peaceful! audience claps.

The video is absolute poison for the red apologists who deny, ignore and evade the evidence of what is there. No wonder Arisman is still kept out of sight.

We are not holding our breaths. We know the dodging, one way, or another, will continue. As you do.

Edited October 25, 2012 by yoshiwara

[yoshiwara]

I was and am prepared to look at the video link you provided and comment honestly and in full, without evading or dodging any awkward issues.I made a not very onerous caveat that you acknowledge your lie (or even "misunderstanding" if that's what is more comfortable for you).This is what you apparently refuse to do.Oh dear I broke my own stipulation that I would not acknowledge a surly untruthful response.Ah well.Anyway you have until 6.00pm Bangkok time tomorrow to reconsider

A rather pathetic attempt to put up a condition in order for you to evade acknowledging the content of the video.

As I said before, you can't and you won't and will evade doing so any time the issue of the reds preparing violent action in Bangkok in 2010 ahead of the violent events which broke out.

This thread began as they always do with a red spokesman making made-up assertions and openly lying, but primarily pushing the line that the reds are a peaceful force.

That red forum cheerleaders wish to defend one way or another the red thugs ('oh Arisman, who he' to 'oh, yes there may be a few violent types') is transparent.

That this one is just trying to give himself another day to say nothing is not surprising. Its always another day to dodge this bullet.

Spend two minutes typing your apology and I'll respond very shortly thereafter.Your excuses are sounding increasingly lame.

Any stratagem will do in order not to acknowledge the video.

Leopards rarely change their spots and certainly not this one.

Korkaew, Jatuporn, Arisman, Thaksin: deny and lie.

Some followers have learned well.

Forum red supporters denying the reds set light to Bangkok requires that the Arisman video doesn't exist (haven't seen it, don't know about it)

Once it is acknowledged all the the other forum contributions defending the red thuggery, sorry peacefulness are further exposed for what they are. Namely rubbish.

That is what is at stake and he knows it. The evasion will continue till Doomsday.

[metisdead]

Posts with threatening undertones have been removed.

[maidu]

Yet further proof of how Mr. "I'm through with politics" is continuing to divide the country. He's also hamstringing any attempts for Thais to progress and get on with their lives. If a person chooses to toe the Thaksin line of "there were no MIB, there were no weapons among the Red demonstrators, The Reds were peaceful protestors, etc" ....then that's their choice. Accusing the gov't of the time of placing snipers is purely diversionary. Given the gravity of the situation, it would be remiss if the Abhisit gov't DIDN"T place snipers to check armed and angry demonstrators.

[Fuschia]

Yet further proof of how Mr. "I'm through with politics" is continuing to divide the country. He's also hamstringing any attempts for Thais to progress and get on with their lives. If a person chooses to toe the Thaksin line of "there were no MIB, there were no weapons among the Red demonstrators, The Reds were peaceful protestors, etc" ....then that's their choice. Accusing the gov't of the time of placing snipers is purely diversionary. Given the gravity of the situation, it would be remiss if the Abhisit gov't DIDN"T place snipers to check armed and angry demonstrators.

How about Mr. " I am above politics"? Would you care to elaborate on him ?

[whybother]

How about Mr. " I am above politics"? Would you care to elaborate on him ?

You don't plan on staying here long, do you?

[TruthEyes]

Yet further proof of how Mr. "I'm through with politics" is continuing to divide the country.

Thing is , its the existing historical divide of pro and anti-democracy supporters.

And until the dems realise and accept they are allied with the dark forces of thailand, it will remain so

[rixalex]

The PAD leadership - a truly ghastly group of old geezers - does have fascist characteristics, the rank and file less so.

Rank and file less so? Have you ever met any rank and file yellows that you would truly describe of as being fascists? I have yet to, just as i have yet to meet any rank and file reds who i would truly describe of as being communists. Just another bit of the usual extreme hyperbole. Either that or some people really don't understand the terms they are banding about.

It's fairly standard English for "not really", isn't it.As it happens however I have met yellowshirt supporters who are as close to being fascists as makes no difference.But I agree most aren't.

Not wishing to get into a debate over semantics, but i don't really agree that "less so" does mean "not really". Personally think it would have been more accurate to simply say that the rank and file yellows are not fascists, at least no more fascist than anybody else. Still, you have apparently met some yellows who you say are as close to being fascists as makes no difference, so either i'm wrong or you have a different interpretation of what that word means.

As someone else has requested, perhaps it would be useful for those who are labelling certain people as being fascist/communist to explain precisely how they define the word.

[rixalex]

Indignation about the war on drugs was generated very late in the day primarily as a means to attack Thaksin.There were some honourable people who criticised the policy at the time but they were rather few in number.It was an awful business but it's in a completely different category from the Bangkok 20120 deaths.I agree that because a policy is popular is not the same as a policy being morally correct.I tend to avoid discussion on this forum because of the infantile tendency of some -not you - to tot up deaths incurred by Abhisit and Thaksin, and conclude the latter was the wickedest because of the drugs war.The two are totally different and non comparable.

You state that the deaths during the war on drugs were in a completely different category to the deaths during the 2010 protests, but give absolutely no indication of why that is.