Govt Enforces Internal Security Act For Nine Days In Heart Of Bangkok

[JurgenG]

Watching the news on channel 7 now,see the scum already attacking the police

why are they scum? is it because they attacking police or because they are in the opposition of who you support?

for me they are scum because:

1/ they are attacking the Police who are there to keep order

2/ they are attacking the democratically elected government

enough said

Not scum but more frightened and deluded though there were certainly some violent thugs in the Pitak Siam ranks.Altogether a humiliating defeat for the fascists and their supporters.Two interesting points - firstly the almost complete absence of young people at the rally.Secondly some very clear signals from very influential highly placed sources that they reject the grotesque lie at the centre of Boonlert's platform.Is this the end? No, the yellow shirts and their allies will regroup but it will be difficult for them to make progress..I'm not in the numbers game but the max 30000 total was comically less than the 500000 projected.

And the vast red army of Thai patriots wasn't even mobilised.

Very little support from the young and educated indeed. If you monitor the social network that was very active in the past, at the moment it is very quiet. You have still the regular jokes about Yingluck but almost zero support for Pitak Siam.

Edited November 24, 2012 by JurgenG

[tominbkk]

Is it right to assume the protest was called off because of not enough protestors?

[rubl]

Is it right to assume the protest was called off because of not enough protestors?

Probably part of it. Also I think lots of people might be against the Yingluck government, but not necessarily through illegal means like a coup. Gen Boonlert may have caused the diminishing numbers by his continous remarks. IMHO

[Thai at Heart]

Watching the news on channel 7 now,see the scum already attacking the police

why are they scum? is it because they attacking police or because they are in the opposition of who you support?

for me they are scum because:

1/ they are attacking the Police who are there to keep order

2/ they are attacking the democratically elected government

enough said

Not scum but more frightened and deluded though there were certainly some violent thugs in the Pitak Siam ranks.Altogether a humiliating defeat for the fascists and their supporters.Two interesting points - firstly the almost complete absence of young people at the rally.Secondly some very clear signals from very influential highly placed sources that they reject the grotesque lie at the centre of Boonlert's platform.Is this the end? No, the yellow shirts and their allies will regroup but it will be difficult for them to make progress..I'm not in the numbers game but the max 30000 total was comically less than the 500000 projected.

And the vast red army of Thai patriots wasn't even mobilised.

Watching the previous PAD protests, it appeared that in the daytime the majority always were middle aged women.

Maybe people have worked out that protesting only one sides corruption is just a tad hypocritical.

[Thai at Heart]

Is it right to assume the protest was called off because of not enough protestors?

Probably part of it. Also I think lots of people might be against the Yingluck government, but not necessarily through illegal means like a coup. Gen Boonlert may have caused the diminishing numbers by his continous remarks. IMHO

I believe that too. possibly people have worked out that coups cause more damage than they're worth.

If that's the case, Thailand just passed from an infant to a toddler in developing a democracy. It only takes 70 of years.

[monkfish]

Watching the news on channel 7 now,see the scum already attacking the police

why are they scum? is it because they attacking police or because they are in the opposition of who you support?

for me they are scum because:

1/ they are attacking the Police who are there to keep order

2/ they are attacking the democratically elected government

enough said

Not scum but more frightened and deluded though there were certainly some violent thugs in the Pitak Siam ranks.Altogether a humiliating defeat for the fascists and their supporters.Two interesting points - firstly the almost complete absence of young people at the rally.Secondly some very clear signals from very influential highly placed sources that they reject the grotesque lie at the centre of Boonlert's platform.Is this the end? No, the yellow shirts and their allies will regroup but it will be difficult for them to make progress..I'm not in the numbers game but the max 30000 total was comically less than the 500000 projected.

And the vast red army of Thai patriots wasn't even mobilised.

No prob they can just find a new color and have another go

[binjalin]

and here's the latest results just in

democracy and law and order 1

those calling for a coup who projected 1m protesters and only 12,000 turned up 0

democracy and law and order will proceed to the next round

NEWSFLASH * the general has resigned*

game over (for now)

[KKvampire]

Watching the news on channel 7 now,see the scum already attacking the police

why are they scum? is it because they attacking police or because they are in the opposition of who you support?

for me they are scum because:

1/ they are attacking the Police who are there to keep order

2/ they are attacking the democratically elected government

enough said

OF Course Terrorist supporting members of the Red Shirts in the current PT Government had a different view in 2010, Hypocrisy

Edited November 25, 2012 by KKvampire

[Buchholz]

those calling for a coup who projected 1m protesters and only 12,000 turned up

Did the 80,000 police that the National Police Chief said would be in place turn up? The 23,000 Police Volunteers?

It's one thing for a civilian rally organizer to make false claims (eg. Boonlert's claim or Jatuporn's repeated boasts of a 1,000,000 protesters, as well as million of this and a million of that, or in this topic, Issan Rambo's 200,000 Red Shirts in Bangkok).

It's an altogether different thing for an official representing authority at taxpayers' expense to make the exact same sort of outrageously bogus claims.

.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[Pimay1]

Watching the news on channel 7 now,see the scum already attacking the police

why are they scum? is it because they attacking police or because they are in the opposition of who you support?

for me they are scum because:

1/ they are attacking the Police who are there to keep order

2/ they are attacking the democratically elected government

enough said

OF Course Terrorist supporting members of the Red Shirts in the current PT Government had a different view in 2010, Hypocrisy

You bet. I think it is called people who live in glass houses........................................

[jayboy]

those calling for a coup who projected 1m protesters and only 12,000 turned up

Did the 80,000 police that the National Police Chief said would be in place turn up? The 23,000 Police Volunteers?

It's one thing for a civilian rally organizer to make false claims (eg. Boonlert's claim or Jatuporn's repeated boasts of a 1,000,000 protesters, as well as million of this and a million of that, or in this topic, Issan Rambo's 200,000 Red Shirts in Bangkok).

It's an altogether different thing for an official representing authority at taxpayers' expense to make the exact same sort of outrageously bogus claims.

.

Huh? Is he completely nuts?He's complaining that there weren't enough police around yesterday, or more specifically the numbers were fewer than the authorities had earlier suggested.Unbelievable and yet if there had been a disaster yesterday and the police had not done their job professionally he would have been crowing.

[binjalin]

those calling for a coup who projected 1m protesters and only 12,000 turned up

Did the 80,000 police that the National Police Chief said would be in place turn up? The 23,000 Police Volunteers?

It's one thing for a civilian rally organizer to make false claims (eg. Boonlert's claim or Jatuporn's repeated boasts of a 1,000,000 protesters, as well as million of this and a million of that, or in this topic, Issan Rambo's 200,000 Red Shirts in Bangkok).

It's an altogether different thing for an official representing authority at taxpayers' expense to make the exact same sort of outrageously bogus claims.

.

not at all - it's totally reasonable for him to look at what's required - and he assessed that 'if' those numbers were to arrive he could put 80,000 officers out there, but dear poster, they were not needed

[Buchholz]

those calling for a coup who projected 1m protesters and only 12,000 turned up

Did the 80,000 police that the National Police Chief said would be in place turn up? The 23,000 Police Volunteers?

It's one thing for a civilian rally organizer to make false claims (eg. Boonlert's claim or Jatuporn's repeated boasts of a 1,000,000 protesters, as well as million of this and a million of that, or in this topic, Issan Rambo's 200,000 Red Shirts in Bangkok).

It's an altogether different thing for an official representing authority at taxpayers' expense to make the exact same sort of outrageously bogus claims.

.

Huh? Is he completely nuts?He's complaining that there weren't enough police around yesterday, or more specifically the numbers were fewer than the authorities had earlier suggested.Unbelievable and yet if there had been a disaster yesterday and the police had not done their job professionally he would have been crowing.

Are you nuts? No where in my post did I ever complain there weren't enough police. I said the police should set the bar for credibility higher than the "fascist" leader of PS or the lunatic leaders of the Red Shirts. Do you disagree with that? If you do, than address that. If you don't, then what the heck does your reply have to do with what I posted? Nothing.

Save your crystal ball of how posters may respond to events that didn't occur and focus on what posters actually post on the here and now as you struggle to do that.

/

Edited November 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

those calling for a coup who projected 1m protesters and only 12,000 turned up

Did the 80,000 police that the National Police Chief said would be in place turn up? The 23,000 Police Volunteers?

It's one thing for a civilian rally organizer to make false claims (eg. Boonlert's claim or Jatuporn's repeated boasts of a 1,000,000 protesters, as well as million of this and a million of that, or in this topic, Issan Rambo's 200,000 Red Shirts in Bangkok).

It's an altogether different thing for an official representing authority at taxpayers' expense to make the exact same sort of outrageously bogus claims.

.

not at all - it's totally reasonable for him to look at what's required - and he assessed that 'if' those numbers were to arrive he could put 80,000 officers out there, but dear poster, they were not needed

And when was it determined that they were not needed? He was speaking of those numbers the day before the rally. Do you really think 1/3 of all cops in this country were capable of being there and facilities were ready for them "if" they were needed?

It was just the same sort of nonsensical blustering.that was never going to happen, the same as Boonlert's million or Issan Rambo's 200,000.

People should have a right to expect more from the National Police Chief.

.

[jayboy]

Are you nuts? No where in my post did I ever complain there weren't enough police. I said the police should set the bar for credibility higher than the "fascist" leader of PS or the lunatic leaders of the Red Shirts. Do you disagree with that? If you do, than address that. If you don't, then what the heck does your reply have to do with what I posted? Nothing.

<< flame snipped>>

The sheer oddness of your post was that you thought it appropriate to splutter about police numbers - "outrageously bogus claims etc etc" as though the police was part of a protesting mob.It's quite common of course for discussion in the press and elsewhere to centre on estimates of redhirts, yellowshirts or whatever on the streets - but that's obviously a different matter.Astonishingly you say the police should have put the bar for credibility higher that Pitak Siam or the redshirts.I don't even know what that means let alone why you think it might be relevant or interesting

In the demonstrations on Friday the police appear to have acted very professionally and earned praise from all sides.If they had been incompetent (and let's agree they have been hopeless in the past) that would be a different matter and you would have had the right to question why for instance the authorities had not put more officers on the street or handled the demonstration more efficiently.But you had a different beef (and this seemed to be your main concern) - you complained that there were fewer officers on the ground than the authorities had earlier suggested.I find that completely inexplicable unless the real source of your concern is that the high numbers quoted in advance of the police authorities may have partly explained the relatively small Pitak Siam crowd and deterred troublemakers generally.I have no idea if this is correct or not but is the only rational explanation I can think of for your bizarre post.

[Buchholz]

Are you nuts? No where in my post did I ever complain there weren't enough police. I said the police should set the bar for credibility higher than the "fascist" leader of PS or the lunatic leaders of the Red Shirts. Do you disagree with that? If you do, than address that. If you don't, then what the heck does your reply have to do with what I posted? Nothing.

Save your crystal ball of how posters may respond to events that didn't occur and focus on what posters actually post on the here and now as you struggle to do that.

The sheer oddness of your post was that you thought it appropriate to splutter about police numbers - "outrageously bogus claims etc etc" as though the police was part of a protesting mob.It's quite common of course for discussion in the press and elsewhere to centre on estimates of redhirts, yellowshirts or whatever on the streets - but that's obviously a different matter.Astonishingly you say the police should have put the bar for credibility higher that Pitak Siam or the redshirts.I don't even know what that means let alone why you think it might be relevant or interesting

In the demonstrations on Friday the police appear to have acted very professionally and earned praise from all sides.If they had been incompetent (and let's agree they have been hopeless in the past) that would be a different matter and you would have had the right to question why for instance the authorities had not put more officers on the street or handled the demonstration more efficiently.But you had a different beef (and this seemed to be your main concern) - you complained that there were fewer officers on the ground than the authorities had earlier suggested.I find that completely inexplicable unless the real source of your concern is that the high numbers quoted in advance of the police authorities may have partly explained the relatively small Pitak Siam crowd and deterred troublemakers generally.I have no idea if this is correct or not but is the only rational explanation I can think of for your bizarre post.

How you extrapolate my post to infer the police were part of the protesters is odd. I never mentioned the press, only what the leaders of PS and Red Shirts claimed themselves as well as what the National Police Chief claimed. The similar theme of absurd numbers running through all of them I found interesting. While one can easily dismiss the first two as coming from people where extreme exaggerations can be expected, I think most people would expect something more realistic and honest from the last person, given his position.

I said nothing in my post about how the police behaved at the demonstration, only on the public information their boss put out beforehand.

Perhaps if you just stick with what I posted instead of bizarrely trying to twist it into something else based on comments never said, you'd have less of "a beef" with it.

.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Buchholz

[binjalin]

Are you nuts? No where in my post did I ever complain there weren't enough police. I said the police should set the bar for credibility higher than the "fascist" leader of PS or the lunatic leaders of the Red Shirts. Do you disagree with that? If you do, than address that. If you don't, then what the heck does your reply have to do with what I posted? Nothing.

Save your crystal ball of how posters may respond to events that didn't occur and focus on what posters actually post on the here and now as you struggle to do that.

The sheer oddness of your post was that you thought it appropriate to splutter about police numbers - "outrageously bogus claims etc etc" as though the police was part of a protesting mob.It's quite common of course for discussion in the press and elsewhere to centre on estimates of redhirts, yellowshirts or whatever on the streets - but that's obviously a different matter.Astonishingly you say the police should have put the bar for credibility higher that Pitak Siam or the redshirts.I don't even know what that means let alone why you think it might be relevant or interesting

In the demonstrations on Friday the police appear to have acted very professionally and earned praise from all sides.If they had been incompetent (and let's agree they have been hopeless in the past) that would be a different matter and you would have had the right to question why for instance the authorities had not put more officers on the street or handled the demonstration more efficiently.But you had a different beef (and this seemed to be your main concern) - you complained that there were fewer officers on the ground than the authorities had earlier suggested.I find that completely inexplicable unless the real source of your concern is that the high numbers quoted in advance of the police authorities may have partly explained the relatively small Pitak Siam crowd and deterred troublemakers generally.I have no idea if this is correct or not but is the only rational explanation I can think of for your bizarre post.

How you extrapolate my post to infer the police were part of the protesters is odd. I never mentioned the press, only what the leaders of PS and Red Shirts claimed themselves as well as what the National Police Chief claimed. The similar theme of absurd numbers running through all of them I found interesting. While one can easily dismiss the first two as coming from people where extreme exaggerations can be expected, I think most people would expect something more realistic and honest from the last person, given his position.

I said nothing in my post about how the police behaved at the demonstration, only on the public information their boss put out beforehand.

Perhaps if you just stick with what I posted instead of bizarrely trying to twist it into something else based on comments never said, you'd have less of "a beef" with it.

.

nothing wrong in what he said, you are planting red herrings to divert from the main issues, move on from the fact that he mentioned a figure then changed his estimation to the fact of a General grasping for a coup and boasting 1m and getting 2% of that turn up - the Thai people do NOT support the Amarts yellow rabble and voted that way and, I believe, will vote that way again much to the arrogant annoyance of some TV posters who think they 'know best'

[Buchholz]

Are you nuts? No where in my post did I ever complain there weren't enough police. I said the police should set the bar for credibility higher than the "fascist" leader of PS or the lunatic leaders of the Red Shirts. Do you disagree with that? If you do, than address that. If you don't, then what the heck does your reply have to do with what I posted? Nothing.

Save your crystal ball of how posters may respond to events that didn't occur and focus on what posters actually post on the here and now as you struggle to do that.

The sheer oddness of your post was that you thought it appropriate to splutter about police numbers - "outrageously bogus claims etc etc" as though the police was part of a protesting mob.It's quite common of course for discussion in the press and elsewhere to centre on estimates of redhirts, yellowshirts or whatever on the streets - but that's obviously a different matter.Astonishingly you say the police should have put the bar for credibility higher that Pitak Siam or the redshirts.I don't even know what that means let alone why you think it might be relevant or interesting

In the demonstrations on Friday the police appear to have acted very professionally and earned praise from all sides.If they had been incompetent (and let's agree they have been hopeless in the past) that would be a different matter and you would have had the right to question why for instance the authorities had not put more officers on the street or handled the demonstration more efficiently.But you had a different beef (and this seemed to be your main concern) - you complained that there were fewer officers on the ground than the authorities had earlier suggested.I find that completely inexplicable unless the real source of your concern is that the high numbers quoted in advance of the police authorities may have partly explained the relatively small Pitak Siam crowd and deterred troublemakers generally.I have no idea if this is correct or not but is the only rational explanation I can think of for your bizarre post.

How you extrapolate my post to infer the police were part of the protesters is odd. I never mentioned the press, only what the leaders of PS and Red Shirts claimed themselves as well as what the National Police Chief claimed. The similar theme of absurd numbers running through all of them I found interesting. While one can easily dismiss the first two as coming from people where extreme exaggerations can be expected, I think most people would expect something more realistic and honest from the last person, given his position.

I said nothing in my post about how the police behaved at the demonstration, only on the public information their boss put out beforehand.

Perhaps if you just stick with what I posted instead of bizarrely trying to twist it into something else based on comments never said, you'd have less of "a beef" with it.

.

nothing wrong in what he said, you are planting red herrings to divert from the main issues, move on from the fact that he mentioned a figure then changed his estimation to the fact of a General grasping for a coup and boasting 1m and getting 2% of that turn up - the Thai people do NOT support the Amarts yellow rabble and voted that way and, I believe, will vote that way again much to the arrogant annoyance of some TV posters who think they 'know best'

sheesh... your extrapolation of all that from a short observation regarding the factual comments from the leaders of PS, RS, and RTP all similarly exaggerating numbers.

Amazing Thaivisa.

As for red herring, the wild claims from those in charge of the 3 entities prior to the rally were the subject of many dozens of posts in at least a half dozen threads.

The conflicting information from officials with wildly vacillating numbers drew a good many of those posts and rightfully so.

.

[rubl]

As the government is a bit busy at the moment I guess the ISA will be revoked AFTER the censure debate has concluded? Assuming we still have a government then of course

[binjalin]

forget about extrapolating numbers its irrelevant TIT they all do it - stick to facts - 12,000 showed up and they were controlled well by the Police (for once) let's rejoice at that! I hope any future demos, by any side, are as well controlled

[binjalin]

As the government is a bit busy at the moment I guess the ISA will be revoked AFTER the censure debate has concluded? Assuming we still have a government then of course

haha a bit of humour from you dear Rubl I guess you're right on both counts (for once)

[Buchholz]

forget about extrapolating numbers its irrelevant TIT they all do it - stick to facts - 12,000 showed up and they were controlled well by the Police (for once) let's rejoice at that! I hope any future demos, by any side, are as well controlled

My comment about extrapolation wasn't in regards to the the numbers, but never mind.

I can appreciate that none of the leaders of the three entities stuck to the facts that they claimed.

I hope any future demos, by any side, also similarly include cessation of activities when violence occurs and that demo leaders quit their position afterwards.

.

Edited November 26, 2012 by Buchholz

[bigbamboo]

What happend to the 1,000,000 turn out

The same thing that happened with Thaksin's turn outs I guess.

Politicians egos are bigger than their supports.

[soundman]

Settle down please.

[binjalin]

forget about extrapolating numbers its irrelevant TIT they all do it - stick to facts - 12,000 showed up and they were controlled well by the Police (for once) let's rejoice at that! I hope any future demos, by any side, are as well controlled

My comment about extrapolation wasn't in regards to the the numbers, but never mind.

I can appreciate that none of the leaders of the three entities stuck to the facts that they claimed.

I hope any future demos, by any side, also similarly include cessation of activities when violence occurs and that demo leaders quit their position afterwards.

.

we don't disagree on that point - all demos should be peaceful and controlled

[jayboy]

forget about extrapolating numbers its irrelevant TIT they all do it - stick to facts - 12,000 showed up and they were controlled well by the Police (for once) let's rejoice at that! I hope any future demos, by any side, are as well controlled

My comment about extrapolation wasn't in regards to the the numbers, but never mind.

I can appreciate that none of the leaders of the three entities stuck to the facts that they claimed.

I hope any future demos, by any side, also similarly include cessation of activities when violence occurs and that demo leaders quit their position afterwards.

.

Unfortunately the history of demonstrations in Thailand shows, with a notable exception on Saturday, the violence has usually been initiated by the security forces.As to the Pitak Siam demonstration the leaders called it off not because of the violence, which they had encouraged, but because of the paltry numbers, the bad weather and the refusal of the army to get involved on their side.