Terrorism Trial Of Thai Red Shirt Leaders Postponed

[whybother]

Can someone fill me in on how the actions of the leaders of the 2010 protests constitutes terrorism? I'm perhaps not as informed on this as I should be, but I would say that terrorism involves the planned use (or explicit threat) of violence against civilians in order to create terror in the general population so as to further one's political/religious (etc) aims. Attacks on military targets, I would say, do not constitute terrorism. Spontaneous acts of destruction during protests (as happened during some of the 'Occupy' protests) do not constitute terrorism. Etc etc. So I am curious about what exactly these Red Shirt leaders did that rises to the charge of terrorism. I'm not arguing against it (yet)... simply want to know.

I would think that threatening to burn down a city would be an explicit threat of violence on civilians. Also, shooting grenades at train stations would be (not just planned, but actual ) use of violence against civilians.

[ableguy]

Again, a display of tremendous courage, which is the hallmark of most Thai men. They are willing to commit the act, whether it be stealing one billion baht from the water resources management project, or running over, and killing a policeman while speeding at 200KM. per hour on the streets of Bangkok, but when it comes time to face the piper, all courage is lost, and they start wimpering, and behaving like 12 year old girls. So typical. I have seen this for years. Where is the big man now? Who expected this trial to happen? Imaging a Thai person in a position of authority or wealth being held responsible for their actions, even if it is a so called act of terrorism, or shooting someone (and killing them) in a restaurant, with a machine gun, that was next to your table? How is Thai society ever going to evolve, if the Thai people cannot understand the most basic concepts of being responsible for your actions, and the tremendous degradation to society, when nobody accepts this responsibility? Where does that leave us, when it comes to the future? Especially with the latest generation of Thai men being brought with far less in the way of principles, and morals than earlier generations. The legal and judicial systems here seem to be completely broken. I am a bit afraid of the direction this country may be going in. Am I the only one?

with you all the way

[spidermike007]

Can someone fill me in on how the actions of the leaders of the 2010 protests constitutes terrorism? I'm perhaps not as informed on this as I should be, but I would say that terrorism involves the planned use (or explicit threat) of violence against civilians in order to create terror in the general population so as to further one's political/religious (etc) aims. Attacks on military targets, I would say, do not constitute terrorism. Spontaneous acts of destruction during protests (as happened during some of the 'Occupy' protests) do not constitute terrorism. Etc etc. So I am curious about what exactly these Red Shirt leaders did that rises to the charge of terrorism. I'm not arguing against it (yet)... simply want to know.

I would think that threatening to burn down a city would be an explicit threat of violence on civilians. Also, shooting grenades at train stations would be (not just planned, but actual ) use of violence against civilians.

Well, it may not be terrorism, but shutting down a major capital like Bangkok is crossing the line. Abhisit had a responsibility to crush this thing in the first two weeks, which he completely dropped. Something had to be done. The 91 deaths was tiny price to pay to have that thing end. The goombahs who held the nation up for 7 weeks had to pay eventually, right? Had it gone on much longer it would have threatened the long term stability of the nation.

[spidermike007]

Again, a display of tremendous courage, which is the hallmark of most Thai men. They are willing to commit the act, whether it be stealing one billion baht from the water resources management project, or running over, and killing a policeman while speeding at 200KM. per hour on the streets of Bangkok, but when it comes time to face the piper, all courage is lost, and they start wimpering, and behaving like 12 year old girls. So typical. I have seen this for years. Where is the big man now? Who expected this trial to happen? Imaging a Thai person in a position of authority or wealth being held responsible for their actions, even if it is a so called act of terrorism, or shooting someone (and killing them) in a restaurant, with a machine gun, that was next to your table? How is Thai society ever going to evolve, if the Thai people cannot understand the most basic concepts of being responsible for your actions, and the tremendous degradation to society, when nobody accepts this responsibility? Where does that leave us, when it comes to the future? Especially with the latest generation of Thai men being brought with far less in the way of principles, and morals than earlier generations. The legal and judicial systems here seem to be completely broken. I am a bit afraid of the direction this country may be going in. Am I the only one?

NO, if it weren't for my wife I would be gone already.

Not so sure I would be that harsh. I think Thailand has alot of wonderful qualities, even if most of the Thai men are deficient in nearly every department. They are simply infantile, spoiled brats, that have grown up to be without a sense of responsibility. Many Thai women I meet are the opposite. I believe if is were not for Thai women, this nation would never have gotten as far as it has. Let us give credit where credit is due. 95% to Thai women, and 5% to Thai men.

[Zooheekock]

The 91 deaths was tiny price to pay to have that thing end.

What a really offensive - and offensively stupid - thing to say.

[whybother]

Well, it may not be terrorism, but shutting down a major capital like Bangkok is crossing the line. Abhisit had a responsibility to crush this thing in the first two weeks, which he completely dropped. Something had to be done. The 91 deaths was tiny price to pay to have that thing end. The goombahs who held the nation up for 7 weeks had to pay eventually, right? Had it gone on much longer it would have threatened the long term stability of the nation.

I don't agree that Abhisit should have "crushed this thing in the first two weeks". I don't the police should have allowed the protesters to splash blood everywhere. I also don't think they should have been allowed to go on their mobile rally. They absolutely shouldn't have let them take over Ratchaprasong (prior to April 10) or let them into Parliament or Thaicom. Given that the red shirts had done those things, it was time to shut down the protests around April 10. Unfortunately the MIB hijacked that night.