It was reliably reported that Thai Amy snipers that shot the people in the Temple.

I am reliably reporting that you have either

(a) forgot what happened during that torrid time

( Have a mental health problem

© You weren't even here in Thailand at that time

Now. How reliable is that, compared to your recent post?

I'm gonna go with a + b ... but that is just my opinion and not backed up with any facts and therefore might not be very reliable.

Nice to see you back WB, care to address the earlier points I raised ???

I did. You even scored it.

It's interesting that you readily accept that the army shot everyone even though no individual soldier has been identified, but then deny that the red shirts burnt down Central World because no individual has been found guilty.

Where do i readily accept the army shot everyone ??

Please don't put words in my mouth or continue your innuendo.

Arrested, charged and put through due process is what should happen and that is what is now happening.

So, Abhisit/Suthep to face 700++ charges of attempted murder. Seriously!

How about the wounded soldiers? Will the duo be charged for that as well? May I add another obvious murder case, the one with the chap who failed 'bomb making 101'. Clearly for all to see, that again is the fault of our illustrious duo.

BTW checking the ICC site I noticed at least one case referring to an incident in Korea in November 2010. A few other in early stage regarding 'incidents' in 2011. Strange that the ICC seems to ignore the submission of Robert A. c.s. regarding a possible crime against humanity and red-shirts

Why is it that the yellow team (let's call them that for ease of reference) are allowed to get away with abusing other posters (the red team)?

"need your meds" "on another planet" "your (misspelt) a clown " "only in the minds of the ignorant" "anybody with a few braincells.."

I thought this was against forum rules.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

It was reliably reported that Thai Amy snipers that shot the people in the Temple.

It was also reliably reported that the red shirts burnt down Central World (among a number of other buildings).

Any evidence my dear chap ???

Like arrests, convictions etc ??

I suspect there will will soon be charges, arrests and quite probably convictions regarding the military folks who shot the people in the temple.

From the man who had trouble acknowledging the Arisman tape.

I suspect: Loose translation: making it up as we go along.

Why is it that the yellow team (let's call them that for ease of reference) are allowed to get away with abusing other posters (the red team)?

"need your meds" "on another planet" "your (misspelt) a clown " "only in the minds of the ignorant" "anybody with a few braincells.."

I thought this was against forum rules.

There isn't a yellow team, but there certainly is a 'Thaksin Should Be Locked Up Team'.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

The completely missing in action police force is a serious Achilles' Heal for the red apologists. They either don't like talking about it or resort to the usual deny and lie. The suggestion that the police force was/is in Thaksin's pocket makes them extremely uncomfortable and is not a part of the story of the day.

Nice to see you back WB, care to address the earlier points I raised ???

I did. You even scored it.

It's interesting that you readily accept that the army shot everyone even though no individual soldier has been identified, but then deny that the red shirts burnt down Central World because no individual has been found guilty.

Where do i readily accept the army shot everyone ??

Please don't put words in my mouth or continue your innuendo.

Arrested, charged and put through due process is what should happen and that is what is now happening.

Since you can't even accept that Arisman urged the burning down of Bangkok mostly everything else looks wonky as well.

Thailand has a duty to protect its citizens of all religions against violent insurgents.

And hence Abhisit is not guilty, but really, is a hero!

I think that it is the best news I have read in a long while. Heads of state should be held accountable for their acts. If this was done more often then there would be far fewer dead people in the world. The protests in Bangkok were peaceful, there was no danger, except from the military. As for the military in Thailand, Australia or anywhere else involving itself in civil affairs—this should never be done. The military are responsible for carrying out the actions of the psychotics who run the world.

If anyone is interested in reading a book on this subject, Geoff Robertson "

The Tyrannicide Brief: The Story of the Man Who Sent Charles I to the Scaffold"

Peaceful? I guess you were on a different planet at the time. My workplace was literally in the middle of this "peaceful" protest (Rajadamri Road) and on one occasion I had a gun pointed at me at a roadblock manned by the men in black whilst trying to get to work to earn a living. On the day of the army assault I was at home next to to the Channel 3 building on Rama 4 Road which the "peaceful" protesters tried to burn down by setting fire to cars in the car park below the building (I have photos). I had to leave my home which is next to Channel 3, not knowing if I'd have a home to come back to had the fire taken hold. Helicopters lifting people from the roof of the building was a scene I'll never forget (I have photos). When I did return home I found a spent bullet in the compound of my condominium. Peaceful? Look it up in the dictionary.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

Well instead of subjecting us to your verbal diarrhea go back and read post #67 where I explained both the cause of the problem and AV's appropriate response to the reds turning up in Bangkok.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

Well instead of subjecting us to your verbal diarrhea go back and read post #67 where I explained both the cause of the problem and AV's appropriate response to the reds turning up in Bangkok.

Pot ... Kettle ... Black

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

The completely missing in action police force is a serious Achilles' Heal for the red apologists. They either don't like talking about it or resort to the usual deny and lie. The suggestion that the police force was/is in Thaksin's pocket makes them extremely uncomfortable and is not a part of the story of the day.

Not a problem Yoshiwawa. The police force rightly agreed with the red shirts and the majority of the country that TS was vilified and persecuted by the army, Dems and bent courts. It was touch and go whether the army would follow Dem orders also. They only scraped home after bringing in foreign soldiers (see tape of soldiers at lumpinipark speaking Cambodian) and embarking on a daily brainwashing program at the barracks where it was instilled in them that the reds were out to overthrow certain establishments. A majority of army conscripts are poor red supporters.

If the police did not support AV's illegitimate government it is no different than when Anupong refused Somchai 's orders to clear out the airport and told him he should stand down as PM.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

Well instead of subjecting us to your verbal diarrhea go back and read post #67 where I explained both the cause of the problem and AV's appropriate response to the reds turning up in Bangkok.

Pot ... Kettle ... Black

Another intellectual reply. Sigh

Why is it that the yellow team (let's call them that for ease of reference) are allowed to get away with abusing other posters (the red team)?

"need your meds" "on another planet" "your (misspelt) a clown " "only in the minds of the ignorant" "anybody with a few braincells.."

I thought this was against forum rules.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

Well instead of subjecting us to your verbal diarrhea go back and read post #67 where I explained both the cause of the problem and AV's appropriate response to the reds turning up in Bangkok.

Pot ... Kettle ... Black

Another intellectual reply. Sigh

And another intellectual put down by you by anyone who doesn't agree with the party line. Next.

I have not read all the verbal sh##t on this thread for about 5 pages

would any of you 3 Thaksin paid posters like to suggest how you would have restored law and order to bangkok given the the behavior of the protestors (and I use that word lightly) and the serious lack of police response

I leave this thread open to any solutions that may have resolved the situation in a peaceful manner

waiting.........and uderstanding that there were people in Bangkok that were trying to get on with their lives while the thugs (not all) preceeded to try and thwart law and order and the police stood by and did nothing......................go for it

Well instead of subjecting us to your verbal diarrhea go back and read post #67 where I explained both the cause of the problem and AV's appropriate response to the reds turning up in Bangkok.

I read your post #67 and it doesn't explain at all. The protests only began after half of Thaksin assets had been seized, Apisit had been in power since December 2008, 17 months previously.

Thaksin used the red shirts, violence and riots to try to force an election.

It was good to see the Appeal court uphold the jail sentence of two and a half years on Kwanchai, the so called lover of Udon.

Only the Supreme Court now, he should be in jail before Christmas next year

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

I don't disagree that the large majority of the reds were peaceful, but it's the minority that caused all the problems and made the overall impression of the "occupation" to be non-peaceful.

As for your evidence that Thaksin initiated this, well I would have thought the statements he made that were reported, the fact that all his top cronies that lead the protests visited with him before and during the protests, and his constant phone-ins whilst it was going on would answer that question.

Or because it never went to Court, that means it didn't happen?

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

So while soldiers in green are being attacked (I refer you to the video where soldiers who refused to drive over or shoot protesters were dragged from their truck and badly beaten, one shot), you suggest that others put on black and suddenly get a free pass to wander through the red ranks? Is that likely or rational?

Is it not more likely that the protesters had been told they had "protectors" dressed in black and not to hinder them?

In Thailand it is legal for lobbyists to attempt to sway an MPs stance (short of outright bribery), it is legal for Thaksin to literally buy minor parties after elections - but if the military influence an MPs decision it is "for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief." Wake up.

AV is guilty of taking a leading role in siding with Army Chief Poajinda to force a coalition of the unwilling, that he knew would be widely despised and cause serious social unrest, but for the sake of power (and it was his only way to power) he underhandedly carried through with the undemocratic deed. He, the elite backers and the army are responsible for the consequent mayhem. He shouldn't have done it in the first place, but certainly at the first sign of serious civil unrest, for the sake of his country he should have dissolved parliament immediately. Shame on his greedy lust for power and efforts to pervert democracy for the sake of those who he and his privileged associates see as being worthy.

Your posts are a laugh a minute.

You may brush it aside, but Abhisit was instrumental in causing the mess in this country with his selfish, greedy, bigoted behaviour, even if you & his other supporters mistakenly consider him to be a beacon of virtue.

From your initial post, above, I thought you were kidding. Now I see you seriously believe the pap smear that Abhisit was the culprit. So, according to your warped logic, what should Abhisit have done when Thaksin's paid thugs came to descend on Bangkok? Should Abhisit have immediately run away and hid his head in the sand? Should he instead run to the phone to beg Thaksin to dictate policy and/or have Thaksin march triumphantly in to Bangkok to put himself in the top power seat?

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

So while soldiers in green are being attacked (I refer you to the video where soldiers who refused to drive over or shoot protesters were dragged from their truck and badly beaten, one shot), you suggest that others put on black and suddenly get a free pass to wander through the red ranks? Is that likely or rational?

Is it not more likely that the protesters had been told they had "protectors" dressed in black and not to hinder them?

In Thailand it is legal for lobbyists to attempt to sway an MPs stance (short of outright bribery), it is legal for Thaksin to literally buy minor parties after elections - but if the military influence an MPs decision it is "for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief." Wake up.

The military should play no part in politics full stop. You defending it is wrong. Wake up.

And for what is 'likely' or not regarding the unsolved elements during the protests, it it pure speculation.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

So while soldiers in green are being attacked (I refer you to the video where soldiers who refused to drive over or shoot protesters were dragged from their truck and badly beaten, one shot), you suggest that others put on black and suddenly get a free pass to wander through the red ranks? Is that likely or rational?

Is it not more likely that the protesters had been told they had "protectors" dressed in black and not to hinder them?

In Thailand it is legal for lobbyists to attempt to sway an MPs stance (short of outright bribery), it is legal for Thaksin to literally buy minor parties after elections - but if the military influence an MPs decision it is "for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief." Wake up.

The military should play no part in politics full stop. You defending it is wrong. Wake up.

And for what is 'likely' or not regarding the unsolved elements during the protests, it it pure speculation.

A very naive statement- the army should play no part in politics. This is Thailand where an MP can buy up all the MPs of another party,(Thaksin with NAP), where a man who has hidden millions in his servants' names for years( with the funds constantly being transfered in and out- stock manipulation perhaps?) is found not guilty.

Everyone knows what the deputy Prime Minister and his son did several years ago.

Thai politicians cannot be trusted. If the checks and balances fail, as they did under Thaksin, then the army has to step in to save the country. Unfortunate but true.

You need to wake up, you're not in Kansas now.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Apologies for any mis-spellings, the keyboard is rather small, it auto-corrects badly sometimes and I have big fingers.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

So while soldiers in green are being attacked (I refer you to the video where soldiers who refused to drive over or shoot protesters were dragged from their truck and badly beaten, one shot), you suggest that others put on black and suddenly get a free pass to wander through the red ranks? Is that likely or rational?

Is it not more likely that the protesters had been told they had "protectors" dressed in black and not to hinder them?

In Thailand it is legal for lobbyists to attempt to sway an MPs stance (short of outright bribery), it is legal for Thaksin to literally buy minor parties after elections - but if the military influence an MPs decision it is "for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief." Wake up.

The military should play no part in politics full stop. You defending it is wrong. Wake up.

And for what is 'likely' or not regarding the unsolved elements during the protests, it it pure speculation.

Why should the military have no part in politics? Where except in your warped view of the world does this exist? 12 US presidents were generals, UK s House of Lords has many ex-military.

Pure speculation - when not one red shirt said "Oy, <deleted> are you doing?" Sherlock Holmes taught us that there is a reason why the dog didn't bark.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but as I've said many times I'm not on any "team". I'm neither a supporter of the reds or the yellows and I think that both/all are as bad as each other.

I do dislike it when people talk crap however whilst either ignoring or misunderstanding the blatantly obvious.

By any stretch of the imagination, it was not a peaceful protest. It caused untold problems and chaos and damage and went on far too long. Thaksin initiated this, Arisman promoted it including inciting his followers to riot and burn. Which they did.

The criticism I have of Abhisit is that he let it go too far for too long. In any other western country, things would have been stopped far quicker before they escalated and got entrenched.

For those that don't remember or choose to ignore, the rioters burned buildings, burned cars, threatened people, prevented businesses and a huge section of central Bangkok to operate normally, they stormed buildings, the list goes on.

Where is your evidence that 'Thaksin initiated this'? The Dems tried hard but could pin nothing on him. Most of the violence you report remains unsolved, including the identity of the black-shirts, and could certainly be the work of the authorities looking for an excuse to end the protests. The great majority of the reds were peaceful and justified to be protesting against what was for all purposes a military-installed administration thanks to the explicit influence of the Army chief.

There is a lot of evidence that Thaksin paid for and incited the rioters. Here are just two: Money openly handed out to p.u. drivers and protesters in the provinces - to pay them to attend the rallies. Many large money transfers from Thaksin's overseas accounts to Red coordinators in Thailand. Granted, many protesters appeared peaceful, though they chanted encouragement to trouble-makers. Sae Daeng (the head of MIB was killed, we don't know by whom) which is sad because he can't be hauled before a tribunal to tell his story. Even though several MIB were ID'd by photos, none will venture to tell the truth, which is keeping with their paymaster, Thaksin, who couldn't tell the truth if he tried.

As for Reds being peaceful - how peaceful is it to launch a grenade to a BTS platform and kill an innocent woman? How peaceful is it to torch large department stores, or raid hospitals?

Many large money transfers from Thaksin's overseas accounts to Red coordinators in Thailand.

Evidence?

Why should the military have no part in politics?

Were you born in a democratic country?

Remember that! There was a report from 'Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT)', which was not agreed by red-shirt & PTP. And they banned them to publish in English.

The military should play no part in politics full stop. You defending it is wrong. Wake up. And for what is 'likely' or not regarding the unsolved elements during the protests, it it pure speculation.

The police were told to do their jobs. They didn't. People and property needed protection. The next resort was the military. The military is trained to kill and destroy, they're not trained to do police duty. Even so, the military did an exemplary job. If they hadn't had such commendable restraint, many more demonstrators would have been harmed.

If the military weren't called in to do the job the cops weren't able to do, then the petrol-soaked tires and sharpened bamboo spiked perimeter of the protesters would have been enlarged to gobble up ever-more sectors of Bangkok - and the powderkeg atmosphere would have been exacerbated. As it was, many protesters who wanted to leave, were not allowed to do so. Thaksin and the Red leaders wanted confrontation and they got it. They also got T's sister in the power seat. Now they want to witch hunt against Abhisit and others they don't like. It's the opposite of reconciliation, and nothing good will come out of it.