If the Red Shirts had not been there with weapons, there would have been no need for live fire zones ...... hence they were created by the Red Shirts.

Of course. We all know that.

We all know that but only some of us will admit knowing it.

If the Red Shirts had not been there with weapons, there would have been no need for live fire zones ...... hence they were created by the Red Shirts.

Of course. We all know that.

We all know that but only some of us will admit knowing it.

Oh, dear.

NIce idea. Why not put the same cops on to this as are responsible for solving the murder that Chalerm's son was accused of? Perhaps for a modest fee the mystery man Puet can also be found to have torched these buildings. Case solved.

Correct. Most probably Thida and her friends at the police will sacrifice a few fellow Thai citizens and close the case.

Justice the Red way!

".......Of course it's their own fault, if they hadn't come to Bangkok, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

The faultless logic of some on Thaivisa.

".......Of course it's their own fault, if they hadn't come to Bangkok, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

The faultless logic of some on Thaivisa.

That should read "if they hadn't come to Bangkok ARMED, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

Peaceful protesters don't carry weapons, nor use them to kill security personnel. When they do they may be subject to violence for in excess of that which they initiated.

".......Of course it's their own fault, if they hadn't come to Bangkok, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

The faultless logic of some on Thaivisa.

That should read "if they hadn't come to Bangkok ARMED, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

Peaceful protesters don't carry weapons, nor use them to kill security personnel. When they do they may be subject to violence for in excess of that which they initiated.

Some? Is that carte blanche to shoot anyone because some people were armed or were they selective and only shot those that were armed? You know that would imply that at least 80 people were armed, that includes 14 year old boys, nurses, cameramen, journalists and ordinary thai civilians.

".......Of course it's their own fault, if they hadn't come to Bangkok, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

The faultless logic of some on Thaivisa.

That should read "if they hadn't come to Bangkok ARMED, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

Peaceful protesters don't carry weapons, nor use them to kill security personnel. When they do they may be subject to violence for in excess of that which they initiated.

Some? Is that carte blanche to shoot anyone because some people were armed or were they selective and only shot those that were armed? You know that would imply that at least 80 people were armed, that includes 14 year old boys, nurses, cameramen, journalists and ordinary thai civilians.

As the "they" that shot people is not proven in many cases, and many may have been wounded/killed in crossfire rather than deliberately targeted, your implication is based on a false premise. What is without argument is that deadly force would not have had to be used if the protesters were not armed with lethal weapons.

bugeyed.jpg

Looks like lovely Thida is about to make a move on Jatuporn.

It is sad that two years after the Rajaprasong Love-In, that the star of the show, DL, is still no closer to returning than before.

Maybe this year's planned memorial fest will help him?

DL, the Dalai Lama?

No the Dalai Lama is a respectable and revered man. Dear Leader, aka Thaksin Shinawatra, Is not a respectable man but is however much loved. Revered would be stretching it a bit.

".......Of course it's their own fault, if they hadn't come to Bangkok, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

The faultless logic of some on Thaivisa.

That should read "if they hadn't come to Bangkok ARMED, it wouldn't have been necessary to shoot some of them in the head..........."

Peaceful protesters don't carry weapons, nor use them to kill security personnel. When they do they may be subject to violence for in excess of that which they initiated.

Some? Is that carte blanche to shoot anyone because some people were armed or were they selective and only shot those that were armed? You know that would imply that at least 80 people were armed, that includes 14 year old boys, nurses, cameramen, journalists and ordinary thai civilians.

As the "they" that shot people is not proven in many cases, and many may have been wounded/killed in crossfire rather than deliberately targeted, your implication is based on a false premise. What is without argument is that deadly force would not have had to be used if the protesters were not armed with lethal weapons.

Oh I thought, not proven, meant guilty as sin - well apparently it does when applied to red shirts as many posts on this very thread attest.

I thought it would mean the same when applied to the military but apparently not.

So, after having revisited the past, can we at least agree on the 'fact' that till know nothing is known officially (apart from it not having been those two acquitted red-shirts). Furthermore no new information has come alight even after police, DSI and God knows who have investigated, leaked, suggested.

Obviously it's time for another fresh look, from the right side this time

Well nice work Thida! first the Reds have managed to get an aquittal,now she wants to change history and get the Red Shirts completely exonerated,by claiming some other persons or parties did the burning in Bangkok.Next she will be telling us:the Red Shirts never entered Bangkok.

It gets more like a kids way of getting off the hook, e.g. you can't blame us,because you are all liars,we wasn't there!

The people arrested and charged were aquitted due to lack of evidence. If you look beyond that bias chip on your shoulder and read about the case you'd find out why they were aquitted, but you're unlikely to do that I know, your knowledge base and comfort zone is here on this board. I'll leave you to your thoughts..................

I'm quite comfortable with the my thoughts and the truth,and I don't need to argue with those that refuse to accept the all too obvious truth.

Oh I thought, not proven, meant guilty as sin - well apparently it does when applied to red shirts as many posts on this very thread attest.

I thought it would mean the same when applied to the military but apparently not.

You do love to twist arguments to suit your own narrow view.

The military have already been implicated in some of the cases that have gone to court. Some of your like minded posters have also twisted that to try to prove deliberate targeting of unarmed protestors & media.

Now you are defending the red shirts as though they were totally innocent of any violence that occurred.

The red shirts had armed & violent individuals among the protestors. The red shirt leaders incited violence & burning as well as brainwashing the 'masses' into believing that they had a just cause & Thaksin's money removal was just a coincidence.

The police totally failed to control the protestors, rioters & arsonists & they failed to convince the courts that those in the act of arson were guilty. I can't say if this was deliberate or just incompetence, as they have a history of both bias & failure to see justice done.

Headlines: Man acquited of arson. Thiida says "that proves a woman must have done it".

Oh I thought, not proven, meant guilty as sin - well apparently it does when applied to red shirts as many posts on this very thread attest.

I thought it would mean the same when applied to the military but apparently not.

You do love to twist arguments to suit your own narrow view.

The military have already been implicated in some of the cases that have gone to court. Some of your like minded posters have also twisted that to try to prove deliberate targeting of unarmed protestors & media.

Now you are defending the red shirts as though they were totally innocent of any violence that occurred.

The red shirts had armed & violent individuals among the protestors. The red shirt leaders incited violence & burning as well as brainwashing the 'masses' into believing that they had a just cause & Thaksin's money removal was just a coincidence.

The police totally failed to control the protestors, rioters & arsonists & they failed to convince the courts that those in the act of arson were guilty. I can't say if this was deliberate or just incompetence, as they have a history of both bias & failure to see justice done.

I don't twist arguments - I use the words as they are written and then challenge those same words using the evidence available in the public domain. You and others are equally free to do so.

However you and others deem there is only one truth, yours - anybody elses' views are to be subject to disbelief and scorn such as your post above.

Your very first line sets the tone "You do love to twist arguments to suit your own narrow view"

How condescending is that?

So, after having revisited the past, can we at least agree on the 'fact' that till know nothing is known officially (apart from it not having been those two acquitted red-shirts). Furthermore no new information has come alight even after police, DSI and God knows who have investigated, leaked, suggested.

Obviously it's time for another fresh look, from the right side this time

Apart from it not being proven to have been those two acquitted red shirts.

If the Red Shirts had not been there with weapons, there would have been no need for live fire zones ...... hence they were created by the Red Shirts.

They also wouldn´t been there if Thaksin didn´t pay them to go to Bangkok.

Oh I thought, not proven, meant guilty as sin - well apparently it does when applied to red shirts as many posts on this very thread attest.

I thought it would mean the same when applied to the military but apparently not.

You do love to twist arguments to suit your own narrow view.

The military have already been implicated in some of the cases that have gone to court. Some of your like minded posters have also twisted that to try to prove deliberate targeting of unarmed protestors & media.

Now you are defending the red shirts as though they were totally innocent of any violence that occurred.

The red shirts had armed & violent individuals among the protestors. The red shirt leaders incited violence & burning as well as brainwashing the 'masses' into believing that they had a just cause & Thaksin's money removal was just a coincidence.

The police totally failed to control the protestors, rioters & arsonists & they failed to convince the courts that those in the act of arson were guilty. I can't say if this was deliberate or just incompetence, as they have a history of both bias & failure to see justice done.

Well for one thing the muttley has already admitted that he was only joking when he posted a post as fact.

Now he is trying to portray people building barricades and fires to hide behind cooking and washing for the armed protestors who are firing rockets at civilian transportation centers as well as soldiers.

Sorry it dosen't work that way they were doing every thing in there power to aid and abet the ones who had guns. They were receiving pay for it as the video pimay 1 shows. They are not innocent bystanders. The only innocent ones were the ones in the hospital they invaded and transportation terminals they fired rockets at.

Also the street vendors who had to leave their means of lively hood.

One of the slime balls actually used his kid as a shield.

Thida added that she wanted police to bring those responsible for arson and for killing people during the political mayhem to justice.

i can see nothing wrong with that.

There is nothing wrong with that.

The problem is that if that happened and the persons responsible were brought to justice, she would cry foul, as that wouldn't be who she meant.

sure?

so why not investigate and nail those responsible.

If the reds did not set any fires (all acquitted) logic says the army set them and the army never get prosecuted for diddly squat. For those that dont understand the relationship between the army, the amart (of which central world owners are amart), the dems and the invisible hand etc please do some research because I dont like to keep typing it as I can only type with 4 fingers

If the Red Shirts had not been there with weapons, there would have been no need for live fire zones ...... hence they were created by the Red Shirts.

They also wouldn´t been there if Thaksin didn´t pay them to go to Bangkok.

Dont have a problem with the vid. I feel sorry for all the misinformed people who posted comments on youtube. The elite have actually indoctrinated people to believe if you are a red you cant be a royalist. So Sad

If the reds did not set any fires (all acquitted) logic says the army set them and the army never get prosecuted for diddly squat. For those that dont understand the relationship between the army, the amart (of which central world owners are amart), the dems and the invisible hand etc please do some research because I dont like to keep typing it as I can only type with 4 fingers

Logic says that just because some individuals haven't been found guilty of setting fire to Central World, that doesn't mean that they or other red shirts didn't do it, just that there isn't enough evidence to convict them. There is even less/no evidence that the army lit any fires, so by your logic, who does that mean that did it?

Red shirts HAVE been convicted of lighting other fires.

If the reds did not set any fires (all acquitted) logic says the army set them and the army never get prosecuted for diddly squat. For those that dont understand the relationship between the army, the amart (of which central world owners are amart), the dems and the invisible hand etc please do some research because I dont like to keep typing it as I can only type with 4 fingers

Logic says that just because some individuals haven't been found guilty of setting fire to Central World, that doesn't mean that they or other red shirts didn't do it, just that there isn't enough evidence to convict them. There is even less/no evidence that the army lit any fires, so by your logic, who does that mean that did it?

Red shirts HAVE been convicted of lighting other fires.

Oh come on whybother haven't you read the background to the aquittals? Get over it, it wasn't them.

Who was it, logic would say anybody who was in that area around the time the 2nd fire took hold (the previous fire having been put out by Central World employees / security guards) No prizes for guessing who was in charge of the area then. If you look back through the thai visa "as it happened" tweets about the fire and read some other sources you can put a timeline together as to when the second fire happened and who had the area under its control then.

I would imagine that Central World / Zen is a difficult building to burn down just using tyres and a few molotov's especially if it's under armed guard.

I see there's again a suggestion oh so subtle that because a certain group was (supposed to be) in control already they must have something to do with the arson. Next we'll get suggestions that the grenades still dropping were actually fired by non-red-shirt militants who were just having fun.

So, nothing changed in people's history rewriting since those new photo's were leaked in December 2010?

I see there's again a suggestion oh so subtle that because a certain group was (supposed to be) in control already they must have something to do with the arson. Next we'll get suggestions that the grenades still dropping were actually fired by non-red-shirt militants who were just having fun.

So, nothing changed in people's history rewriting since those new photo's were leaked in December 2010?

I see there's again a suggestion oh so subtle that because a certain group was (supposed to be) in control already they must have something to do with the arson. Next we'll get suggestions that the grenades still dropping were actually fired by non-red-shirt militants who were just having fun.

So, nothing changed in people's history rewriting since those new photo's were leaked in December 2010?

But if you follow the tweets very carefully, you should realize the RTA set fire to everything in BKK including banks, TV and radio stations and several shop houses they were particularly angry at.

If the reds did not set any fires (all acquitted) logic says the army set them and the army never get prosecuted for diddly squat. For those that dont understand the relationship between the army, the amart (of which central world owners are amart), the dems and the invisible hand etc please do some research because I dont like to keep typing it as I can only type with 4 fingers

Logic says that just because some individuals haven't been found guilty of setting fire to Central World, that doesn't mean that they or other red shirts didn't do it, just that there isn't enough evidence to convict them. There is even less/no evidence that the army lit any fires, so by your logic, who does that mean that did it?

Red shirts HAVE been convicted of lighting other fires.

Oh come on whybother haven't you read the background to the aquittals? Get over it, it wasn't them.

Who was it, logic would say anybody who was in that area around the time the 2nd fire took hold (the previous fire having been put out by Central World employees / security guards) No prizes for guessing who was in charge of the area then. If you look back through the thai visa "as it happened" tweets about the fire and read some other sources you can put a timeline together as to when the second fire happened and who had the area under its control then.

I would imagine that Central World / Zen is a difficult building to burn down just using tyres and a few molotov's especially if it's under armed guard.

And of course it is absolutely inconceivable that a fire put out by security guards may have re-ignited, or that embers carried by the updraft may have been missed? As a 20 year member of a power station fire team, may I assure that fires are much more difficult to extinguish than you may ever imagine.

I see there's again a suggestion oh so subtle that because a certain group was (supposed to be) in control already they must have something to do with the arson. Next we'll get suggestions that the grenades still dropping were actually fired by non-red-shirt militants who were just having fun.

So, nothing changed in people's history rewriting since those new photo's were leaked in December 2010?

Grenades still dropping eh rubl? At Central World - stopping the fire brigade from getting at the fire?

Posted 2010-05-19 17:12:44

Details of Fires in Bangkok as Red-shirt Renegades Lashed out

A number of fires and chaotic incidents broke out in Bangkok after the red-shirt core leaders have called off the red-shirt protest earlier today. The firefighting department has been able to put the fire under control at some areas but others remain unreachable and unsafe for firemen to entire. These areas include;

1. Siam Square and Paragon: firefighters are unable to enter the area, red-shirt protesters are armed and are shooting at will

2. Centara Grand: fire has been put out

3. Stock Exchange of Thailand office: firemen unable to enter the area

4. Mahachon Plaza (entrance of Wireless Rd-Ploenchit Rd):

firemen also unable to approach the area

5. Krung Thai and Bangkok Bank (Asoke Branch)

6. Narcotics Control Board

7. Bangkok Bank (Din Daeng): fire under control

8. Maleenont Building: firemen unable to enter the area

9. Bangkok Bank and Lotus Rama 4: firemen unable to get in

10. EGAT Klongtoey: fire under control

11. Central World: currently being put out by firefighters

12. Bangkok Bank (Victory Monument)

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/366679-bangkok-red-shirt-rally-live-wednesday/page-6#entry3618820

You may wonder when you see videos of Central World burning, and it is clear that the video was taken during daylight hours, how those videographers managed to walk around and film in an area that was so dangerous due to grenades and shooting that the fire brigade couldn't get in?

and then there's this:

Posted 2010-05-19 18:04:32

Thaivisa Member:

now we see big flames coming from centralworld; now only from below but also higher up

several heavy explosions around centralworld

photo taken at 17.45

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/366679-bangkok-red-shirt-rally-live-wednesday/page-7#entry3619123

The second fire - started by red shirts?

History re-writing? - all from readily available sources on TV you just have to put them in context.

If the reds did not set any fires (all acquitted) logic says the army set them and the army never get prosecuted for diddly squat. For those that dont understand the relationship between the army, the amart (of which central world owners are amart), the dems and the invisible hand etc please do some research because I dont like to keep typing it as I can only type with 4 fingers

Logic says that just because some individuals haven't been found guilty of setting fire to Central World, that doesn't mean that they or other red shirts didn't do it, just that there isn't enough evidence to convict them. There is even less/no evidence that the army lit any fires, so by your logic, who does that mean that did it?

Red shirts HAVE been convicted of lighting other fires.

Oh come on whybother haven't you read the background to the aquittals? Get over it, it wasn't them.

Who was it, logic would say anybody who was in that area around the time the 2nd fire took hold (the previous fire having been put out by Central World employees / security guards) No prizes for guessing who was in charge of the area then. If you look back through the thai visa "as it happened" tweets about the fire and read some other sources you can put a timeline together as to when the second fire happened and who had the area under its control then.

I would imagine that Central World / Zen is a difficult building to burn down just using tyres and a few molotov's especially if it's under armed guard.

And of course it is absolutely inconceivable that a fire put out by security guards may have re-ignited, or that embers carried by the updraft may have been missed? As a 20 year member of a power station fire team, may I assure that fires are much more difficult to extinguish than you may ever imagine.

Of course that could happen, but on the day comments and timing don't add up to the army story, see my post above. I know I'm not going to convince you as you know it was the red shirts but it may be worthwhile to keep an open mind.

I see there's again a suggestion oh so subtle that because a certain group was (supposed to be) in control already they must have something to do with the arson. Next we'll get suggestions that the grenades still dropping were actually fired by non-red-shirt militants who were just having fun.

So, nothing changed in people's history rewriting since those new photo's were leaked in December 2010?

Grenades still dropping eh rubl? At Central World - stopping the fire brigade from getting at the fire?

Posted 2010-05-19 17:12:44[/size]

Details of Fires in Bangkok as Red-shirt Renegades Lashed out[/size]

A number of fires and chaotic incidents broke out in Bangkok after the red-shirt core leaders have called off the red-shirt protest earlier today. The firefighting department has been able to put the fire under control at some areas but others remain unreachable and unsafe for firemen to entire. These areas include;

1. Siam Square and Paragon: firefighters are unable to enter the area, red-shirt protesters are armed and are shooting at will

2. Centara Grand: fire has been put out

3. Stock Exchange of Thailand office: firemen unable to enter the area

4. Mahachon Plaza (entrance of Wireless Rd-Ploenchit Rd):

firemen also unable to approach the area

5. Krung Thai and Bangkok Bank (Asoke Branch)

6. Narcotics Control Board

7. Bangkok Bank (Din Daeng): fire under control

8. Maleenont Building: firemen unable to enter the area

9. Bangkok Bank and Lotus Rama 4: firemen unable to get in

10. EGAT Klongtoey: fire under control[/size]

11. Central World: currently being put out by firefighters[/size]

12. Bangkok Bank (Victory Monument)[/size]

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/366679-bangkok-red-shirt-rally-live-wednesday/page-6#entry3618820[/size]

You may wonder when you see videos of Central World burning, and it is clear that the video was taken during daylight hours, how those videographers managed to walk around and film in an area that was so dangerous due to grenades and shooting that the fire brigade couldn't get in?

and then there's this:

Posted 2010-05-19 18:04:32

Thaivisa Member:

now we see big flames coming from centralworld; now only from below but also higher up

several heavy explosions around centralworld

photo taken at 17.45

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/366679-bangkok-red-shirt-rally-live-wednesday/page-7#entry3619123

The second fire - started by red shirts?

History re-writing? - all from readily available sources on TV you just have to put them in context.

It's interesting that the isn't one soldier seen in the video.

It's interesting that the isn't one soldier seen in the video.

Ever heard of perimeters? I don't know, but what is interesting is you don't see red shirts, or grenades raining down, or red shirts firing "war weapons", but most significantly NO Fire Brigade. What you do see is emptiness with a guy pushing his bike, a guy taking photographs and the videographer wandering around filming. Not exactly the war zone the army and government were telling us - Don't you find that interesting?

It's interesting that the isn't one soldier seen in the video.

Ever heard of perimeters? I don't know, but what is interesting is you don't see red shirts, or grenades raining down, or red shirts firing "war weapons", but most significantly NO Fire Brigade. What you do see is emptiness with a guy pushing his bike, a guy taking photographs and the videographer wandering around filming. Not exactly the war zone the army and government were telling us - Don't you find that interesting?

Seems like a lot of work to build barricades and burn tires for that.

Are you in an alternate universe?

It's interesting that the isn't one soldier seen in the video.

Ever heard of perimeters? I don't know, but what is interesting is you don't see red shirts, or grenades raining down, or red shirts firing "war weapons", but most significantly NO Fire Brigade. What you do see is emptiness with a guy pushing his bike, a guy taking photographs and the videographer wandering around filming. Not exactly the war zone the army and government were telling us - Don't you find that interesting?

Too logical.

And immediately follows the predictable insult.......Dolly's alternate universe where crazed redshirts murdered countless Bangkokians, razed the city and were justifiably shot in the head for being nurses, journalists or bringing children to gunfights or something...........

Sooner or later there will be accountability for all concerned, and the sooner the better.

I just spent two days driving around Thoen and adjacent areas and was very surprised to see the number of houses with red shirts draped on the fence or garden foliage.

A lot.

Change is happening.

Must ask my half Italian mate what he thinks.