Second Batch Of Airport Protesters Charged In Court: Bangkok 2008

[webfact]

Second batch of airport protesters charged in court
By Digital Media



BANGKOK, March 22 – Fourteen ‘Yellow Shirt’ People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) activists were formally charged in Thailand’s Criminal Court in connection with the 2008 invasions into Bangkok’s two major airports.

The prosecutor said the group was involved in a rebellious act in an attempt to change the law, forcibly topple the government, use force to coerce others and gather in groups of more than 10 persons to attack others, all of which led to unrest in the country.

The group allegedly invaded and caused damage to Don Meaung and Suvarnabhumi airports on Nov 29, 2008.

The 14 defendants were among 114 yellow shirt political activists allegedly implicated in the protest and illegal activity. Thirty-one of them were earlier charged in Criminal Court.

The Criminal Court accepted the case and set April 29 for the first hearing.

The defendants were released on bail after their lawyer posted a Bt600,000 bond for each of them. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2013-03-22

[Thait Spot]

Hang them high.

Then bring on the reds.

[waza]

"The prosecutor said the group was involved in a rebellious act in an attempt to change the law, forcibly topple the government, use force to coerce others and gather in groups of more than 10 persons to attack others, all of which led to unrest in the country."

Sounds familiar

[Shuggy]

The prosecutor said the group was involved in a rebellious act in an attempt to change the law, forcibly topple the government, use force to

coerce others and gather in groups of more than 10 persons to attack others, all of which led to unrest in the country.

Im wonder why they dont impose some of those laws on the taxi/ tuk tuk mafia in Phuket.

[FarangTalk]

"The prosecutor said the group was involved in a rebellious act in an attempt to change the law, forcibly topple the government, use force to coerce others and gather in groups of more than 10 persons to attack others, all of which led to unrest in the country."

Sounds familiar

It should because it set a dangerous precedent.

[SamMunich]

Yeah, it's pay-back time for the PT big-wigs. This whole airport thing was blown out of proportion in order to - successfully - blame the Yellow Shirts for creating havoc.

If my memory serves me right (and it usually does!), the CEO of the Suvannaphumi airport ordered the airput shut at 21:00 hours on the day the Yellowistas came to greet Somchai, the then PM of Thailand upon his return from overseas. This shut-down order was bringing everything to a stop and created the whole mess, that came out of it.

This is not to condone the action of the Yellow Shirts, BUT as is known protests at airports happen in Europe again and again, most times due to labour conflicts. But there nobody would bring the whole operation to a screeching halt over such a tussle.

If the Airport authority would have told the Yellow Shirts to protest in one corner of the departure hall or on the parking deck across the approach road, the operation of the airport would have gone on without much interference. But the airport boss, being a known Taksin friend, wanted to use this chance to beat the Yellow Shirts.

How 'dangerous" the Yellow Shirts were can be seen from the fact, that they went on patrol with the airport security staff during the time they stayed at the airport.

And let's not forget, while they stayed at the government house they were attacked on a nearly regular basis with grenades, resulting in several deaths, somthing that was not possible at Suvannaphumi.

Sam Munich

[55Jay]

The group allegedly invaded and caused damage to Don Meaung and Suvarnabhumi airports on Nov 29, 2008.

Allegedly? LOL. Next to a photo no less. Double LOL.

I guess pulling out the tanks twice in as many years might of been over the top even for them, so shutting down the airport, stranding thousands of residents and tourists.... just another day for the coup party.

[JetsetBkk]

The prosecutor said the group was involved in a rebellious act in an attempt to change the law, forcibly topple the government...

So why isn't the Army being prosecuted?

Oops, sorry , I'm new here.

[chainarong]

There's a limit to how far you can go before you break the law , now having said that, the weird off the planet decisions that Thai judges hand down or change, in some cases don't make the cut, so lets see all decisions from Judges without fear or favour, whether yellow or red shirt, be the full force of the law.

[MEL1]

Is it a Thai law that you can't attack another individual in a group of more than ten people?

Sounds consistent with attacks against Farang!

-mel.

[Locationthailand]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

[philw]

Yeah, it's pay-back time for the PT big-wigs. This whole airport thing was blown out of proportion in order to - successfully - blame the Yellow Shirts for creating havoc.

If my memory serves me right (and it usually does!), the CEO of the Suvannaphumi airport ordered the airput shut at 21:00 hours on the day the Yellowistas came to greet Somchai, the then PM of Thailand upon his return from overseas. This shut-down order was bringing everything to a stop and created the whole mess, that came out of it.

This is not to condone the action of the Yellow Shirts, BUT as is known protests at airports happen in Europe again and again, most times due to labour conflicts. But there nobody would bring the whole operation to a screeching halt over such a tussle.

If the Airport authority would have told the Yellow Shirts to protest in one corner of the departure hall or on the parking deck across the approach road, the operation of the airport would have gone on without much interference. But the airport boss, being a known Taksin friend, wanted to use this chance to beat the Yellow Shirts.

How 'dangerous" the Yellow Shirts were can be seen from the fact, that they went on patrol with the airport security staff during the time they stayed at the airport.

And let's not forget, while they stayed at the government house they were attacked on a nearly regular basis with grenades, resulting in several deaths, somthing that was not possible at Suvannaphumi.

Sam Munich

Thank you for this nonsense.

Amazing.

[philw]

The prosecutor said the group was involved in a rebellious act in an attempt to change the law, forcibly topple the government...

So why isn't the Army being prosecuted?

Oops, sorry , I'm new here.

Nice.

[muttley]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

The only people who were arrested and accused and charged with arson in Bangkok were released (eventually) due to lack of evidence. I'm sure you could google that for your own knowledge rather than just assume that there were "positively proved arsonists" and then you would know "why have they not been charged" and not need to ask the question here or post erroneous facts.

[A_Traveller]

Don't think that is correct, there's still the case against two defendants,who are still being sought for their alleged complicity in this specific arson attack. However the case against two teenagers was dropped owing to "lack of evidence and witnesses" at the end of last year.

[Thai at Heart]

Yeah, it's pay-back time for the PT big-wigs. This whole airport thing was blown out of proportion in order to - successfully - blame the Yellow Shirts for creating havoc.

If my memory serves me right (and it usually does!), the CEO of the Suvannaphumi airport ordered the airput shut at 21:00 hours on the day the Yellowistas came to greet Somchai, the then PM of Thailand upon his return from overseas. This shut-down order was bringing everything to a stop and created the whole mess, that came out of it.

This is not to condone the action of the Yellow Shirts, BUT as is known protests at airports happen in Europe again and again, most times due to labour conflicts. But there nobody would bring the whole operation to a screeching halt over such a tussle.

If the Airport authority would have told the Yellow Shirts to protest in one corner of the departure hall or on the parking deck across the approach road, the operation of the airport would have gone on without much interference. But the airport boss, being a known Taksin friend, wanted to use this chance to beat the Yellow Shirts.

How 'dangerous" the Yellow Shirts were can be seen from the fact, that they went on patrol with the airport security staff during the time they stayed at the airport.

And let's not forget, while they stayed at the government house they were attacked on a nearly regular basis with grenades, resulting in several deaths, somthing that was not possible at Suvannaphumi.

Sam Munich

Sam, I was stuck trying to get out to my mother's funeral.

I went to the airport, it was utter chaos, and there was no way it could operate. If the place had continued to operate and the situation escalated further against tourists, it could have got really hairy. So whether or not someone closed it, there was no way that international airlines were ever going to operate with maybe 5 to 10k protesters with TV cameras around. This was a time of very high tension in the country, and I was told by my Thai family to stay completely away from it, but I had to leave one way or another.

There was effectively no way that any responsible travel company was going to push their clients through the protesters, and very quickly the immigration cleared side had been comprimised. Once unchecked people get through to the cleared side, no responsible airline would even dare to fly.

The PAD was very stupid to have protested there, and whilst it maybe achieved their domestic aims, it has to represent a crime of some sort, even if it is blocking a public highway.. I got out through Utapao with the assistance of a truly brilliant travel agent, but what they did does deserve some sort of reckoning. Now that was a truly beautiful Thai experience. They had turned the carpark into a giant market. Tourists sitting around on their cases, with touts offering food and DVD's and all very jolly.

[rametindallas]

I supported the Yellow Shirts when they were peacefully protesting, They lost my support when they invaded and looted Government House. They became my enemy when they occupied the airports. The Red Shirts are a paid army that Dr. Thaksin raised to overthrow the government and have never had my respect. If justice were truely served, Yellows and Reds would share jail cells and Dr. Thaksin would be charged with treason against Thailand.

edit for spelling

[Locationthailand]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

The only people who were arrested and accused and charged with arson in Bangkok were released (eventually) due to lack of evidence. I'm sure you could google that for your own knowledge rather than just assume that there were "positively proved arsonists" and then you would know "why have they not been charged" and not need to ask the question here or post erroneous facts.

Perhaps, but of course you miss the point the ones who incited the riots and burning, fired the grenades and bullets were also released, meaning the whole BS deal here is the yellows may get a few sentences but the heads of the red still run free. As to 'lack of evidence' perhaps being complicit in the riot in the area at the time, the whole lot could have been charged but of course that would not enter into the foray in this country.

[AleG]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

The only people who were arrested and accused and charged with arson in Bangkok were released (eventually) due to lack of evidence. I'm sure you could google that for your own knowledge rather than just assume that there were "positively proved arsonists" and then you would know "why have they not been charged" and not need to ask the question here or post erroneous facts.

Yep, no arsonist in Bangkok, all those buildings just spontaneously combusted.

[backtonormal]

Yeah, it's pay-back time for the PT big-wigs. This whole airport thing was blown out of proportion in order to - successfully - blame the Yellow Shirts for creating havoc.

If my memory serves me right (and it usually does!), the CEO of the Suvannaphumi airport ordered the airput shut at 21:00 hours on the day the Yellowistas came to greet Somchai, the then PM of Thailand upon his return from overseas. This shut-down order was bringing everything to a stop and created the whole mess, that came out of it.

This is not to condone the action of the Yellow Shirts, BUT as is known protests at airports happen in Europe again and again, most times due to labour conflicts. But there nobody would bring the whole operation to a screeching halt over such a tussle.

If the Airport authority would have told the Yellow Shirts to protest in one corner of the departure hall or on the parking deck across the approach road, the operation of the airport would have gone on without much interference. But the airport boss, being a known Taksin friend, wanted to use this chance to beat the Yellow Shirts.

How 'dangerous" the Yellow Shirts were can be seen from the fact, that they went on patrol with the airport security staff during the time they stayed at the airport.

And let's not forget, while they stayed at the government house they were attacked on a nearly regular basis with grenades, resulting in several deaths, somthing that was not possible at Suvannaphumi.

Sam Munich

Now Ive stopped chuckling let me say How you can compare 10,000+ facists stopping an airport to an industrial dispute in another country is beyond the realms of anybodys imagination. The airport was closed down, and rightly so because of the dangers to the travelling public and incoming flights(yes your friends forced their way into the control tower). Surrounded by plain clothes army guys with arms amounts to terrorism.

Please sit down in the corner and protest and they would have. Did you miss the 30m stage out front. We are all entitled to opinions but it might be an idea to keep yours to yourself

[muttley]

Don't think that is correct, there's still the case against two defendants,who are still being sought for their alleged complicity in this specific arson attack. However the case against two teenagers was dropped owing to "lack of evidence and witnesses" at the end of last year.

Apparently the last two accused left in this debacle will hear the verdict on March 25th.

[muttley]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

The only people who were arrested and accused and charged with arson in Bangkok were released (eventually) due to lack of evidence. I'm sure you could google that for your own knowledge rather than just assume that there were "positively proved arsonists" and then you would know "why have they not been charged" and not need to ask the question here or post erroneous facts.

Yep, no arsonist in Bangkok, all those buildings just spontaneously combusted.

Do you have a problem with comprehension? I was replying to the phrase "positively proved arsonists" in Bangkok of which, to date, there are none. I was not denying the existence of arsonists in Bangkok. Is that clear enough for you? Sorry no cheap jokes here , move along.

[FarangTalk]

Some posters still cannot make a distinction between an international airport and a shopping mall.

By their rationale, arsonists, looters and vandals should be labelled terrorists while shutting down the country's main transportation hub is acceptable.

Then we have the revisionists who try to paint the airport takeover without the armed militant element (an element I witnessed personally).

Until we start to omit the lies fuelled by this irritating Thaksin obsession the sooner we can collectively condemn and recognise the airport seizure as an act of domestic terrorism.

[ginjag]

Why dont they give everyone a sentence----give them all INACTIVE posts, all officials, The BIB and the like get them when they commit serious offences, so what's the difference.

I am not a yellow, and CERTAINLY not a red, What some posters come out with about the yellows doing wrong but are so ignorant and stupid to be in denial about the reds is unbelieveable.

It's about time all brainwashed posters, told the truth about the miss-doings of certain factions here. Most were never taught right from wrong or else they would post honestly regarding ALL wrong doers.

Being in denial is not normal, whatever side of the fence you fancy.

Airport occupation and tourist SHUTDOWN was wrong, But the barracades in BKK and the burning of was way out of order. Yellows were stupid and caused the tourist industry grave disruption, the red army made their point but went crazy with their protest, whipped up and paid by red leeders who were on an EGO trip, driven from abroad, the only way to stop the spreading chaos was to get them out. period, alas they NEVER listened to the warnings given, and thought they could out gun the army---Stupid mistake.

[A_Traveller]

Whilst agreeing by and large with FarangTalks point, it is interesting to note how biases are rapidly introduced on all sides. A poster makes a statement which is incorrect, once corrected, I'd hazard politely, the reply as opposed to saying "Oh yes sorry I forgot the upcoming trial {really?}" it proceeds on the the now traditional tack of describing any action with which the poster disagrees as being somehow contemptuous.

Not helpful, but perhaps designed so to be, I do wonder why?

On the airport invasion it should/could have been managed by the security authorities without it becoming the fiasco it was. IIRC the origin was to confront the returning PM, which could again by negotiation have been dealt with but once there [and largely unopposed one suspects the "sit-in" took on a life all of its own.

I drew parallels contemporaneously with the francophone truck drivers passion for closing the channel ports to reinforce some demand or other which I still believe stands up to scrutiny today. It did ,of course, open the gateway to a form of civil [or uncivil] disobedience on a scale [and with tragic results both for the country and individuals, which few could have anticipated.

[muttley]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

The only people who were arrested and accused and charged with arson in Bangkok were released (eventually) due to lack of evidence. I'm sure you could google that for your own knowledge rather than just assume that there were "positively proved arsonists" and then you would know "why have they not been charged" and not need to ask the question here or post erroneous facts.

Perhaps, but of course you miss the point the ones who incited the riots and burning, fired the grenades and bullets were also released, meaning the whole BS deal here is the yellows may get a few sentences but the heads of the red still run free. As to 'lack of evidence' perhaps being complicit in the riot in the area at the time, the whole lot could have been charged but of course that would not enter into the foray in this country.

Released? Who has been released, that have been proven to incite riots and arson, firing grenades and bullets?

[bigbamboo]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

The only people who were arrested and accused and charged with arson in Bangkok were released (eventually) due to lack of evidence. I'm sure you could google that for your own knowledge rather than just assume that there were "positively proved arsonists" and then you would know "why have they not been charged" and not need to ask the question here or post erroneous facts.

Perhaps, but of course you miss the point the ones who incited the riots and burning, fired the grenades and bullets were also released, meaning the whole BS deal here is the yellows may get a few sentences but the heads of the red still run free. As to 'lack of evidence' perhaps being complicit in the riot in the area at the time, the whole lot could have been charged but of course that would not enter into the foray in this country.

Released? Who has been released, that have been proven to incite riots and arson, firing grenades and bullets?

To be fair the main culprit wasn't released. He just went on the run.

[muttley]

Whilst agreeing by and large with FarangTalks point, it is interesting to note how biases are rapidly introduced on all sides. A poster makes a statement which is incorrect, once corrected, I'd hazard politely, the reply as opposed to saying "Oh yes sorry I forgot the upcoming trial {really?}" it proceeds on the the now traditional tack of describing any action with which the poster disagrees as being somehow contemptuous.

Not helpful, but perhaps designed so to be, I do wonder why?

On the airport invasion it should/could have been managed by the security authorities without it becoming the fiasco it was. IIRC the origin was to confront the returning PM, which could again by negotiation have been dealt with but once there [and largely unopposed one suspects the "sit-in" took on a life all of its own.

I drew parallels contemporaneously with the francophone truck drivers passion for closing the channel ports to reinforce some demand or other which I still believe stands up to scrutiny today. It did ,of course, open the gateway to a form of civil [or uncivil] disobedience on a scale [and with tragic results both for the country and individuals, which few could have anticipated.

I presume you mean my reply. First of all the original poster has not corrected his post. You chose to do so for him fair enough. You mention the ongoing trial which I acknowledged. I have contempt for that court action because of the very way it has been carried out e.g the prosecution have rested their case against one of the remaining two defendants on an image supposedly of one of the accused which is clearly not him - clue a tattoo is involved, google pratachai for a more detailed resume of the case so far. I hope this explains my position.

[55Jay]

The OP article is about the airport and as I expected, some quickly steer hard left and start in with righteous indignation on the baddie reds in BKK.

My question is always from the 5,000' view - Why did the "Reds" do what they did?

You can't excuse a political party for engineering a coup(s) because they don't like the guy who was voted in (even if he's shown to be a scum bag or is just a threat to your way of life), and then hamstring government house when they don't like the next guy who was elected in, and then take over and shut down the country's main int'l airport in order to force him to step down and put their own guy in (Abe). Period. While you are doing that, and the international community is slamming you and withholding foreign aid in attempt to get you to stop, you say bugger off, this is our own affair. Mmm, OK, but further, you expect everyone else to just wai, mai pen rai and stay in their proper pay grade in the caste society, and just suck it up like they've always done. Well, i guess so if you are betting on Thais avoid conflict, but you can't keep folks down and take away their voice in the on-going illusion we call democracy, before the whole thing blows up in your face. Thailand was actually the first in what years later the media calls "The Arab Spring". Circumstances and devil in the details always present, but from the 5,000' view, that's what it is.

Back around to this post about yellows and Swampy. You just can't cherry pick. The so called "Yellows" ignited a powder keg, whether they anticipated the reaction or not depends on how you view it, I certainly wasn't in the room but I would of loved to be a fly on the wall behind some closed doors around 2006/2007.

I for one believe in classic manipulation 101, even if they didn't realize what would happen at first, once it started, any clever person would capitalize on it, let it go to fever pitch and utilize the media to turn public opinion - "See how bad these people are, look what they are doing, oh my, we are so shocked!". Once you feel confident you've laid the right ground work, at the calculated expense of propery damage and death on both sides, then even a coup installed government / PM is justified in restoring order to put them pesky farmers thugs and terrorists back in their place. Well, it worked but not for long. Abe drug his feet as long as he could and still lost the election.

I'm not saying Reds are better than Yellows or vice versa, the whole affair from coup to burning buildings and dead people in the street, was a travesty. My point is you can't cherry pick end-state events whilst ignoring the catalyst(s) and not that the previous dude in power was any better than any of the others after him, or even Abe, that's not the point. It's how you make changes necessary and when things don't go your way, you don't roll out the tanks nor do you raze the country's main city. Both sides were wrong but IMO, if I had to chose a side that is more righteous in their ideas and actions in the purest sense, it wouldn't be the Yellows.

[indyuk]

"Alleged" airport damage as opposed to positive proof of torching the city? So where are the Bangkok positively proved arsonists and why have they not been charged? Typical Thailand law, barking up the wrong tree - yet again. Yes charge them for seizure of property, but then go get the red shirt <deleted> who fired grenades and guns on the public as well as inciting to riot. That never happened by the yellows but I agree wholeheartedly - they need to be charged for civil disobedience - a far cry from destruction of property, terrorism and first degree murder. Will there ever be any legality upheld here?

Certainly no Justice in Thailand if the advice you offer would be respected. To over simply or to ignore the behaviour of one side or the other acording to ones individuel prejudice be amount to abandoning the laws of the country and the guidance of it's law makers.