Thai Police Fire Tear Gas At Political Protest

[Cnxforever]

The police should now contact the rally organizer and tell him either you get your demonstrators under control or you stop the rally - if not - we break it up!

Not different from any other country.

yes, and if the break go out of control and 90 people died - what then? Then Yingluck go with Abhisit do ICC, Den Haag?

very simple..."you break it up now" by the police comander - if not arrest the leaders! You want to organise a political rally - you better stick to the rules and the law!

If you can't you will be held responsible!

And next time you want to change the government - which Mr. Boonlert has stated several times - try elections!

[chadintheusa]

This comment could be controversial: I actually think that firing tear gas in this way shows how Thai politics has actually moved forward, the last time there was civil unrest who's intention was to force a change of government or a coup was the red shirts in Patumwan, we all saw how that small protest turned out, at the time the government and police didn't know how to manage it, all Thai authorities still remember vividly how protests were crushed brutally in the past and recognize that it was wrong, at Patumwan they were rightly scared of hurting the people but didn't know what else to do, so they sat and watched and allowed things to spiral totally out of control, then of course people got hurt anyway. Using tear gas seems to be the way that more advanced democracies deal with civil unrest, nip it in the bud early, no guns or killing people, just trying to strike the balance between allowing protest and stopping anarchy, if the government is to change then its to change using a democratic process known as an election, not taking over a city, an airport, a coup etc

That would be fine, but as we have seen coups and protests are short cuts to changing the government to get the one you want. The fact is that they have worked. For the people funding the protests getting power is more important than successful democracy.

[Buchholz]

Why have so few entrances????? This will just drag out the protest and cause more clashes.

Answer : to provoke the protesters

Rubbish... the government has much more to gain by managing the protests well (ensuring weapons are not brought into the protest area, etc.) than by provoking the protesters. Under such fluid and uncertain circumstances, the police need to manage in-flows and people movement which means limiting access points. This is by no means an unusual technique among police services. Look at how protests are dealt with around IMF and World Bank summits...

Why do they need to manage inflows? If they've got enough police to block an entrance, surely they've got enough police to manage the people coming in.

The police are in numbers sufficient to provide 1:1 coverage with each protester. There's no need for any management of inflows in that regard.

Everyone gets patted down by his registered "buddy" and from there on, they're free to protest anywhere they want that's not prohibited directly. Their buddy just goes all around with him. They eat together. They talk together. They become.... buddies.

(just keep the unknown 23,000 police volunteers out of it)..... shun them like an Amish outcast

.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Buchholz

[Scott]

A lot of nonsense, off-topic and personal attacks have been deleted as well as replies.

[rixalex]

She is PM. She won. Everyone needs to get over that and move on.

You can go down to the protest site and tell everyone that, but the problem might be that they will accuse you in 2010 of having said something quite different with regards Abhisit.

Who cares about 2010. This is 2012. I don't care who is in power. I just think whoever was elected should be power and these childish protest every two years to overthrow government is a bad idea that needs to stop before it gets really messy.

The people who need persuading of what you say are not the people here, but the people down at the protest site, and my point was, if the people down at the protest site know that those people telling them: she is PM, go home and wait for elections, are the same people who in 2010 were saying; he is PM, but we don't like the way he became PM, don't go home and don't wait for elections, stay on the streets of Bangkok, cause mayhem and get him kicked out, well then they might be inclined to ignore what they are being told on the basis of complete hypocrisy.

Telling people to do something you didn't do yourself is always going to be tricky. That's the problem the current government now faces.

[h90]

as the police says 20.000 protestor they can have 2 buddies per 1 protester (or they lie again, but who would think that Thai police can do anything else beside being complete honest).

[jbrain]

Based on videos showing protestors as aggressors, firing tear gas into the police and the death threat to Yungluck, this should be treated as a national security issue warranting use of force. Bad situation and I think police showed great restraint. Their conduct makes the current government appear as the reasonable ones.

That is your point of view it looked like it was the police who fired first and most often.

Ask your self two questions

1 Who brings barbed wire to a peaceful demonstration and

2 Who brought the barbed wire?

Add another. who releases CCTV footage?

I think they are talking about the cctv news channel.

[catmac]

I saw teargas being fired by the police and thrown back by the protestors - don't know what video you are watching ?????

Perhaps you need a new pair of glasses. Perhaps you should see the videos showing the difference in tear gas being used. The video is clear as day that the first gas being launched is by protesters against the government.

the protestors also showed the different tear gas....but I was too late to hear what they told. Very unlikely that the protestors bring tear gas after being searched. If one hot head has a gun in the pocket and shoots would be probable. That the mob leadership brings tear gas to throw at the police, but uses a different brand and so discredit themself is very unlikely.

Do try to keep up with reality, H90. The old stock tear gas used by the protesters was NOT at the official rally site, but at the point where these peace-loving dears were trying to get in without being searched. People entering that site via the approved entry points were being checked, and such weaponry would have been confiscated and, no doubt, the carriers would have been arrested. That, and that alone, is why these thugs are so hell-bent on getting in by smashing their way through the police lines.

[ramrod711]

Fascism, pure fascism.

When the police disperse protesters it is fascism and when the army disperses the democratically elected government (again) what is that called?

Interesting question, the police have never done their duty before, so it's new to everyone.

[ttelise]

Based on videos showing protestors as aggressors, firing tear gas into the police and the death threat to Yungluck, this should be treated as a national security issue warranting use of force. Bad situation and I think police showed great restraint. Their conduct makes the current government appear as the reasonable ones.

That is your point of view it looked like it was the police who fired first and most often.

Ask your self two questions

1 Who brings barbed wire to a peaceful demonstration and

2 Who brought the barbed wire?

Police are charged with duty of keeping peace and they can legally use force to accomplish same. Protesters do not have legal right to lob tear gas at cops regardless as to who initiated.

Your say this was a peaceful protest so barb wire not needed. Apparently they needed more than just barb wire as those thugs cut through that stuff quickly.

Cops were actually in tune with what this really was meant to be. You seem in denial. The protester thugs seemed determined to escalate violence from the start and a peaceful demonstration was never on thug's agenda. Then pronouncing PM should be killed clearly illustrates their true nature.

[animatic]

On ASTV was shown a new tear gas attack (at least I understood so), and showing old women and old men suffering badly from the tear gas. Surely not people that would be able to brake the barricades. One unconscious.

If tear gas is justified can be discussed but there is no question the use way too much.

On the news they say five policemen have been injured including two seriously. The police also confiscated knife and bullets (guns ?) from protesters they have arrested. There's no question that the use of teargas was totally justified.

Or they are making the charges of knives and guns found to justify the clampdown.

Or are you so credulous as to actually believe Thai police never plant weapons to justify their actions?

Edited November 24, 2012 by animatic

[daninthai]

Photos on http://www.go6tv.com/ show the tear gas canisters fired/thrown by police. One reads 'Use by May 2012'.

Those in charge should be fired or moved to a cushy inactive post with double salary immediately.

[Cnxforever]

at 15.50 Kate Hodal from The Guardian reports on twitter from the prostest site:

quote:

"Guys making shrapnel bombs now - these all black dudes wandering around ominously....."

unquote

[h90]

I saw teargas being fired by the police and thrown back by the protestors - don't know what video you are watching ?????

Perhaps you need a new pair of glasses. Perhaps you should see the videos showing the difference in tear gas being used. The video is clear as day that the first gas being launched is by protesters against the government.

the protestors also showed the different tear gas....but I was too late to hear what they told. Very unlikely that the protestors bring tear gas after being searched. If one hot head has a gun in the pocket and shoots would be probable. That the mob leadership brings tear gas to throw at the police, but uses a different brand and so discredit themself is very unlikely.

Do try to keep up with reality, H90. The old stock tear gas used by the protesters was NOT at the official rally site, but at the point where these peace-loving dears were trying to get in without being searched. People entering that site via the approved entry points were being checked, and such weaponry would have been confiscated and, no doubt, the carriers would have been arrested. That, and that alone, is why these thugs are so hell-bent on getting in by smashing their way through the police lines.

Of course possible that the demonstrators bring their own tear gas .... but extremely unlikely..... Like police bring their own drugs to a drug raid....

[hellodolly]

This comment could be controversial: I actually think that firing tear gas in this way shows how Thai politics has actually moved forward, the last time there was civil unrest who's intention was to force a change of government or a coup was the red shirts in Patumwan, we all saw how that small protest turned out, at the time the government and police didn't know how to manage it, all Thai authorities still remember vividly how protests were crushed brutally in the past and recognize that it was wrong, at Patumwan they were rightly scared of hurting the people but didn't know what else to do, so they sat and watched and allowed things to spiral totally out of control, then of course people got hurt anyway. Using tear gas seems to be the way that more advanced democracies deal with civil unrest, nip it in the bud early, no guns or killing people, just trying to strike the balance between allowing protest and stopping anarchy, if the government is to change then its to change using a democratic process known as an election, not taking over a city, an airport, a coup etc

That would be fine, but as we have seen coups and protests are short cuts to changing the government to get the one you want. The fact is that they have worked. For the people funding the protests getting power is more important than successful democracy.

I have to agree with you much as I dislike it.

Unfortunately the coups never work they eventually turn it over to elections and the same scum gets elected some times they have to change the party name but the money always comes from the same source. Lately it has been detoured through Dubai.

[whybother]

at 15.50 Kate Hodal from The Guardian reports on twitter from the prostest site:

quote:

"Guys making shrapnel bombs now - these all black dudes wandering around ominously....."

unquote

It's interesting that the picture she has linked to that twitter post doesn't show anything to do with shrapnel bombs.

http://twitter.com/katehodal/status/272254786345267200/photo/1

[Foggy Bottom]

Looks like they are thinking the best defense is to attack.

Notice the Red Neck Scarfs on these Police.

Click to enlarge.

To the left of your photo they are wearing light blue neckscarves - so it's probably divisional identification colours.

Having said that, your term "red neck scarves" may be more appropriate than "red neckscarves"

[Emptyset]

at 15.50 Kate Hodal from The Guardian reports on twitter from the prostest site:

quote:

"Guys making shrapnel bombs now - these all black dudes wandering around ominously....."

unquote

It's interesting that the picture she has linked to that twitter post doesn't show anything to do with shrapnel bombs.

http://twitter.com/k...5267200/photo/1

Why is it interesting? Clearly refers to the latter part of the tweet "these all black dudes wandering around ominously...." - the word "these" being used to indicate what the picture shows. Or do you think she's lying?

[hellodolly]

On ASTV was shown a new tear gas attack (at least I understood so), and showing old women and old men suffering badly from the tear gas. Surely not people that would be able to brake the barricades. One unconscious.

If tear gas is justified can be discussed but there is no question the use way too much.

On the news they say five policemen have been injured including two seriously. The police also confiscated knife and bullets (guns ?) from protesters they have arrested. There's no question that the use of teargas was totally justified.

Or they are making the charges of knives and guns found to justify the clampdown.

Or are you so credulous as to actually believe Thai police never plant weapons to justify their actions?

I would change one word in your post credulou. I would have said mindless.

Speaking of mindless did you see the one poster who said the protesters were thugs who had brought wire cutters. He forgot to mention the wire cutters were to cut through barbed wire brought by the police to keep people out of a peaceful protest.

This is not news It was obvious for days that the government was not going to allow a peaceful protest. It would make them look bad.

Thailand is in sad shape when a Government has to start spreading rumors that it's Prime Minister is in danger of being kidnapped and a former Prime Minister can not even visit a city in a foreign country for fear of assassination.

[MrSlatersParrot]

at 15.50 Kate Hodal from The Guardian reports on twitter from the prostest site:

quote:

"Guys making shrapnel bombs now - these all black dudes wandering around ominously....."

unquote

Yes this is circulating.

A claim that from the stage the protestors have been told to await a big event this evening.

Despite the small numbers and no rain!

They are not for leavimg

[carra]

Another thread full of the same suspects trying to justify everything with the argument ' but the reds................'.

We even have one saying the police plant guns so I guess with that logic the army could have done the same, or inserted men in black etc etc etc ad nauseum.

The fact is that today there is a violent faction, pitak Siam are trying to force a coup so this was always going to be violent, why do you think he is squealing already for army protection?

[MAJIC]

It will be interesting to compare how this govt deals with protests vs how Abhisit dealt with the 2010 shindig.

The Police did nothing for Abhisit,just stood around letting the Red Shirts take over Bangkok. Big difference when they actually do their job!

[DocN]

Based on videos showing protestors as aggressors, firing tear gas into the police and the death threat to Yungluck, this should be treated as a national security issue warranting use of force. Bad situation and I think police showed great restraint. Their conduct makes the current government appear as the reasonable ones.

That is your point of view it looked like it was the police who fired first and most often.

Ask your self two questions

1 Who brings barbed wire to a peaceful demonstration and

2 Who brought the barbed wire?

Remember the G8- meetings?

Compared to that, this display of barbed wire is a joke!

And those meeting were in Germany or Italy or elsewhere in democratic countries and violence broke out, as it usually does, with some idiots, rioting.

So there you have it: many, many demonstrations are "garnished" with barbed wiire. Not only this one!

[whybother]

at 15.50 Kate Hodal from The Guardian reports on twitter from the prostest site:

quote:

"Guys making shrapnel bombs now - these all black dudes wandering around ominously....."

unquote

It's interesting that the picture she has linked to that twitter post doesn't show anything to do with shrapnel bombs.

http://twitter.com/k...5267200/photo/1

Why is it interesting? Clearly refers to the latter part of the tweet "these all black dudes wandering around ominously...." - the word "these" being used to indicate what the picture shows. Or do you think she's lying?

I would have thought that a serious comment like that wouldn't just be brushed off with "these all black dudes".

[Pimay1]

Another thread full of the same suspects trying to justify everything with the argument ' but the reds................'.

We even have one saying the police plant guns so I guess with that logic the army could have done the same, or inserted men in black etc etc etc ad nauseum.

The fact is that today there is a violent faction, pitak Siam are trying to force a coup so this was always going to be violent, why do you think he is squealing already for army protection?

None are so blind as those that refuse to see the truth.

[ttelise]

She is PM. She won. Everyone needs to get over that and move on.

You can go down to the protest site and tell everyone that, but the problem might be that they will accuse you in 2010 of having said something quite different with regards Abhisit.

Who cares about 2010. This is 2012. I don't care who is in power. I just think whoever was elected should be power and these childish protest every two years to overthrow government is a bad idea that needs to stop before it gets really messy.

The people who need persuading of what you say are not the people here, but the people down at the protest site, and my point was, if the people down at the protest site know that those people telling them: she is PM, go home and wait for elections, are the same people who in 2010 were saying; he is PM, but we don't like the way he became PM, don't go home and don't wait for elections, stay on the streets of Bangkok, cause mayhem and get him kicked out, well then they might be inclined to ignore what they are being told on the basis of complete hypocrisy.

Telling people to do something you didn't do yourself is always going to be tricky. That's the problem the current government now faces.

Huh? Do you really think this way? You guys incessantly whine about and bemoan anything Yingluck or Thaksin to the point of unhealthy obsession. This is beyond my ability to help. You guys either need intense psychotherapy or a priest who can excise that demon from your mind.

[Credo]

The government invoked the ISA, so there are broader powers than normal. There can be limits put on the media under the ISA.

This group, or at least its leader, has openly said that he wants a military coup. In order to bring the military out at this point, there is going to have to be violence, so I would not call this a peaceful protest. It isn't and it never was planned that way.

I hope the situation gets resolved without violence, however.

[chinthai]

Oh, I forgot. The reds shot themselves with the help of the mysterious dark figures.

yes, the red siams or Ronin Warriors shot Col. Romklao and many soldiers. After this, the Army start shot back.

[15Peter20]

It will be interesting to compare how this govt deals with protests vs how Abhisit dealt with the 2010 shindig.

The Police did nothing for Abhisit,just stood around letting the Red Shirts take over Bangkok. Big difference when they actually do their job!

I remember pro-Abhisit posters saying that his one and only mistake in the build up to the violence of 2010 was letting the protest go on for too long. That it was by Abhisit's own tolerant approach that the police 'just stood around letting the Red Shirts take over Bangkok'. Now that this government is trying to avoid the same mistake and avert an escalation, we are told by the same posters the action is unacceptable. Strange.

Edited November 24, 2012 by 15Peter20

[whybother]

The government invoked the ISA, so there are broader powers than normal. There can be limits put on the media under the ISA.

This group, or at least its leader, has openly said that he wants a military coup. In order to bring the military out at this point, there is going to have to be violence, so I would not call this a peaceful protest. It isn't and it never was planned that way.

I hope the situation gets resolved without violence, however.

I don't think the ISA includes media limits, especially since it's only in force in 3 districts.

I might include being able to cut telecom coverage in the area though.

For the last two hours since the tear gas attack I haven't been able to upload pics to twitter. Anyone else having problems? via /@richardbarrow

@Phop_RW: Cell phone coverage at the rally has problems. Can’t make calls, incl. 3G coverage very problematic!