Red-Shirt Chief Thida Seeks New Probe Into 2010 Arson Attack

[AleG]

This is like those nutters claiming the Twin Towers were demolished with explosives by the US government.

"Yes yes, we saw the protesters setting fire the the building, but it was actually the Army that burned it down, because fire doesn't spread and anyway the Red Shirts are not sophisticated enough to set a building on fire"

And so on and so forth...

One has to wonder it they do realize their arguments are rubbish, yet put them forward just to fly their colours as they charge on a forlorn hope or if they truly have such a twisted, dysfunctional logical wiring in their heads that makes them believe the nonsense they spew.

[rubl]

It's so obvious that a certain party has lighted all the fires that till now both DSI and RTP have missed it.

Fortunately we have foreigners paying attention, even TV members, to tell us what we are seeing, when, and where.

If only we could hand the arson case to the UDD as impartial party all would be well, of course.

So again, no new information since about December 2010 and only interpretations with lots of wishfull thinking, ignoring what is not liked and a sense of desperation in some who try again and again to press their opinion forward. Now please excuse me, I'm going to check how many times now we've been 'suggested' that obviously the army in control was part of the arson plan to make the UDD and red-shirts look bad as equally obviously those did look like 'peaceful, innocent protesters' and needed to be painted as bad guys

[rubl]

Oh my, a fire, needs to be kindled a bit more

All in daytime starting after the UDD leaders simply told their remaining supporters "it's over, please go home" and got a police escortd to protect them from angry supporters. Obviously the UDD leaders and especially those now in the Pheu Thai party as party list MPs are totally blameless. It wasn't me.

[Thaddeus]

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.

Those are to ward off the husband stealing spirits, really got your finger on the pulse there haven't you.

Instead of driving around and making assumptions that you have already formed a conclusion about, stop and ask 'why'

Edited April 7, 2013 by Thaddeus

[maidu]

It's like OJ, after he was acquitted of murder, claiming he was going to go and find who killed his wife and her friend. Thida is blowing smoke out of a place the sun don't shine on.

[maidu]

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.

Those are to ward off the husband stealing spirits, .....

And what does it mean if a married woman drapes a blue garment outside her house? .....Go and steal my husband, please. He's a drunk lazy fart, and not worth the rubber on his flip-flops.

[hellodolly]

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.

You are right once again

"

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."

Until Thailand gets a government willing to educate the people change will continue to happen.the change for sure will not be people are getting smarter and less gullible. The main change will be because of inflation it will cost more to buy votes and lets face it the people with their nose in the trough where the big money is that allows to pay the highest bribes to the most people for their vote is the PT and their armed red shirt allies.

All past governments are guilty of not providing education for the people.

[hellodolly]

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?

No answer from the mutt

But I see Philw has an answer,

Not a very educated one either some thing about red shirts not being worn. Instead hung out to dry.

No one walking around wearing them.

[philw]

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.

Those are to ward off the husband stealing spirits, really got your finger on the pulse there haven't you.

Instead of driving around and making assumptions that you have already formed a conclusion about, stop and ask 'why'

Sorry but you and the likee are incorrect.

The villages I was in are very strong red shirt supporters, display was nothing to with superstition.

Have you been to Thoen and surroundings ???

[rubl]

Never having been to Thoen and many other parts of Thailand yet may explain why I fail to see the relation with the topic on hand, the request to re-open the CWT arson case, that is.

May be the answer to the case can be found upcountry?

[Buchholz]

Never having been to Thoen and many other parts of Thailand yet may explain why I fail to see the relation with the topic on hand, the request to re-open the CWT arson case, that is.

May be the answer to the case can be found upcountry?

It can't be down-country.

I just spent a week driving around Satun and didn't encounter any Red Shirts draped on the fence or garden foliage.

.

[muttley]

Oh my, a fire, needs to be kindled a bit more

All in daytime starting after the UDD leaders simply told their remaining supporters "it's over, please go home" and got a police escortd to protect them from angry supporters. Obviously the UDD leaders and especially those now in the Pheu Thai party as party list MPs are totally blameless. It wasn't me.

So you completely ignore the fact that there was a second fire that started around/before 17.45 as photographed and timed by a TV member. That the first fire was put out. You do not question the fact that the fire brigade were not allowed in by the army, who said it wasn't safe, until around 21.30 - how inconvenient.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Rimmer
Flame

[muttley]

It's so obvious that a certain party has lighted all the fires that till now both DSI and RTP have missed it.

Fortunately we have foreigners paying attention, even TV members, to tell us what we are seeing, when, and where.

If only we could hand the arson case to the UDD as impartial party all would be well, of course.

So again, no new information since about December 2010 and only interpretations with lots of wishfull thinking, ignoring what is not liked and a sense of desperation in some who try again and again to press their opinion forward. Now please excuse me, I'm going to check how many times now we've been 'suggested' that obviously the army in control was part of the arson plan to make the UDD and red-shirts look bad as equally obviously those did look like 'peaceful, innocent protesters' and needed to be painted as bad guys

Well in case you missed it in your repeated calls of "no new information", the people the previous government had arrested were all aquitted so nobody knows who started the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

I'd say that was new information.

[AleG]

Oh my, a fire, needs to be kindled a bit more

All in daytime starting after the UDD leaders simply told their remaining supporters "it's over, please go home" and got a police escortd to protect them from angry supporters. Obviously the UDD leaders and especially those now in the Pheu Thai party as party list MPs are totally blameless. It wasn't me.

So you completely ignore the fact that there was a second fire that started around/before 17.45 as photographed and timed by a TV member. That the first fire was put out. You do not question the fact that the fire brigade were not allowed in by the army, who said it wasn't safe, until around 21.30 - how inconvenient.

So you say that Red Shirts set fire to Central World, the fire was stopped completely (I'd like to see a credible citation for that) and then the army relighted it to frame the Red Shirts for arson...even though they had already set fire to it earlier...

This forum deserves a better kind of apologist.

[rubl]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

[maidu]

Should have brought in farang forensic experts. Thais are too subjective (and dare I say, too inept) to do a proper investigation of the arson.

[Buchholz]

Oh my, a fire, needs to be kindled a bit more

All in daytime starting after the UDD leaders simply told their remaining supporters "it's over, please go home" and got a police escortd to protect them from angry supporters. Obviously the UDD leaders and especially those now in the Pheu Thai party as party list MPs are totally blameless. It wasn't me.

So you completely ignore the fact that there was a second fire that started around/before 17.45 as photographed and timed by a TV member. That the first fire was put out. You do not question the fact that the fire brigade were not allowed in by the army, who said it wasn't safe, until around 21.30 - how inconvenient.

So you say that Red Shirts set fire to Central World, the fire was stopped completely (I'd like to see a credible citation for that) and then the army relighted it to frame the Red Shirts for arson...even though they had already set fire to it earlier...

This forum deserves a better kind of apologist.

.

Much like the PTP is worse than TRT, the originals were better at what they did.

.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Buchholz

[muttley]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

It's not obvious that they were involved in the arson and nor did I say so, but more importantly, bearing in mind the tone of the posts over two years on this subject, amply demonstrated by your sarcastic posts like the one above, it is obvious that the authorities who have done so much to peddle "the red shirts did it" and some forum members to a certain extent, now ought to admit that they don't know who set the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

[rubl]

The authorities, being the courts relying on information collected by DSI and RTP in their investigations, do not have the right information to charge / convict anyone. That's correct, courts go by law and like to err on the side of caution.

Lots of people suspect the UDD to be involved, probably via their shadowry MiB, armed militant arm (the left arm to avoid the right from knowing). Alternatively some suggest the Army was involved. With UDD supporters setting fire to lots of buildings and a few provincial halls, all because those UDD leaders shoutcasted for months "to be burn it, it's on me" it seems the Army didn't really need to blacken the UDD more by helping with yet another fire.

No proof, still waiting for more info. Personally I doubt a new look on the available material will provide any new clues, but you'll never know. One thing should be clear, it wasn't does two just cleared and it wasn't Thaksin either because he was right behind, very far behind his supporters, in Paris shopping or so

[AleG]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

It's not obvious that they were involved in the arson and nor did I say so, but more importantly, bearing in mind the tone of the posts over two years on this subject, amply demonstrated by your sarcastic posts like the one above, it is obvious that the authorities who have done so much to peddle "the red shirts did it" and some forum members to a certain extent, now ought to admit that they don't know who set the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

What's the matter Mutt, don't have the (self edited out to stick to the rules) to openly say what you imply?

Just skip and dance around it on a poor attempt of plausible deniability?

Unless we know, for example the "protester" on post #93, by name then we have to admit we don't know who set that building on fire (among the other 40 or so torched at the same time). Is that it?

On the other hand you are quite happy to say the Army killed protesters during the riots, you have the names of those that pulled the trigger, I assume, no?

[muttley]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

It's not obvious that they were involved in the arson and nor did I say so, but more importantly, bearing in mind the tone of the posts over two years on this subject, amply demonstrated by your sarcastic posts like the one above, it is obvious that the authorities who have done so much to peddle "the red shirts did it" and some forum members to a certain extent, now ought to admit that they don't know who set the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

What's the matter Mutt, don't have the (self edited out to stick to the rules) to openly say what you imply?

Just skip and dance around it on a poor attempt of plausible deniability?

Unless we know, for example the "protester" on post #93, by name then we have to admit we don't know who set that building on fire (among the other 40 or so torched at the same time). Is that it?

On the other hand you are quite happy to say the Army killed protesters during the riots, you have the names of those that pulled the trigger, I assume, no?

Well he certainly was feeding a fire on the ground floor which had already been lit. Was he responsible for burning down Central World? Who knows? There were two fires.

Yes I am quite happy to say that the army killed protesters in the riots as the inquests, in some cases, back that statement up. I don't have the names of the people that pulled the trigger,nor do the inquests as the army has not provided the names of the troops involved but they know which platoon etc was responsible but have taken no action as far as I am aware.

[AleG]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

It's not obvious that they were involved in the arson and nor did I say so, but more importantly, bearing in mind the tone of the posts over two years on this subject, amply demonstrated by your sarcastic posts like the one above, it is obvious that the authorities who have done so much to peddle "the red shirts did it" and some forum members to a certain extent, now ought to admit that they don't know who set the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

What's the matter Mutt, don't have the (self edited out to stick to the rules) to openly say what you imply?

Just skip and dance around it on a poor attempt of plausible deniability?

Unless we know, for example the "protester" on post #93, by name then we have to admit we don't know who set that building on fire (among the other 40 or so torched at the same time). Is that it?

On the other hand you are quite happy to say the Army killed protesters during the riots, you have the names of those that pulled the trigger, I assume, no?

Well he certainly was feeding a fire on the ground floor which had already been lit. Was he responsible for burning down Central World? Who knows? There were two fires.

...

So they start a fire... but are not responsible for the place burning. This is pathetic.

[sbk]

Personal attacks deleted, Play nice in the sandbox please boys.

[OzMick]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

It's not obvious that they were involved in the arson and nor did I say so, but more importantly, bearing in mind the tone of the posts over two years on this subject, amply demonstrated by your sarcastic posts like the one above, it is obvious that the authorities who have done so much to peddle "the red shirts did it" and some forum members to a certain extent, now ought to admit that they don't know who set the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

What's the matter Mutt, don't have the (self edited out to stick to the rules) to openly say what you imply?

Just skip and dance around it on a poor attempt of plausible deniability?

Unless we know, for example the "protester" on post #93, by name then we have to admit we don't know who set that building on fire (among the other 40 or so torched at the same time). Is that it?

On the other hand you are quite happy to say the Army killed protesters during the riots, you have the names of those that pulled the trigger, I assume, no?

Well he certainly was feeding a fire on the ground floor which had already been lit. Was he responsible for burning down Central World? Who knows? There were two fires.

...

So they start a fire... but are not responsible for the place burning. This is pathetic.

As is the assertion that there were 2 fires, and not a continuation of the first. It would take days to thoroughly check a multi-storey shopping complex for possible hot spots after a large fire. But the red goggled one's claim is that a second group of arsonists decided to finish the work of the earlier group, because they were too busy burning other buildings.

[AleG]

As is the assertion that there were 2 fires, and not a continuation of the first. It would take days to thoroughly check a multi-storey shopping complex for possible hot spots after a large fire. But the red goggled one's claim is that a second group of arsonists decided to finish the work of the earlier group, because they were too busy burning other buildings.

Maybe it was like in The Life of Brian? The army moves in, see Red Shirts lighting the fires and give them a lesson on how to properly torch a building:

"Now go on and burn a 100 buildings more, and if it's not done by sunrise I'll cut your b### off"

[Buchholz]

The authorities, being the courts relying on information collected by DSI and RTP in their investigations, do not have the right information to charge / convict anyone. That's correct, courts go by law and like to err on the side of caution.

Lots of people suspect the UDD to be involved, probably via their shadowry MiB, armed militant arm (the left arm to avoid the right from knowing). Alternatively some suggest the Army was involved. With UDD supporters setting fire to lots of buildings and a few provincial halls, all because those UDD leaders shoutcasted for months "to be burn it, it's on me" it seems the Army didn't really need to blacken the UDD more by helping with yet another fire.

No proof, still waiting for more info. Personally I doubt a new look on the available material will provide any new clues, but you'll never know. One thing should be clear, it wasn't does two just cleared and it wasn't Thaksin either because he was right behind, very far behind his supporters, in Paris shopping or so

indeed, "right behind" as he claimed

[hellodolly]

Should have brought in farang forensic experts. Thais are too subjective (and dare I say, too inept) to do a proper investigation of the arson.

Right on the mark

To many people sit here and watch American crime shows with there state of the art equipment which is for ever improving and can not understand why Thailand does not have equipment and technology to equal it.

Heck some of the shows showed the forensic trams solving all the crimes police were only used to make arrests.

[Nickymaster]

The authorities, being the courts relying on information collected by DSI and RTP in their investigations, do not have the right information to charge / convict anyone. That's correct, courts go by law and like to err on the side of caution.

Lots of people suspect the UDD to be involved, probably via their shadowry MiB, armed militant arm (the left arm to avoid the right from knowing). Alternatively some suggest the Army was involved. With UDD supporters setting fire to lots of buildings and a few provincial halls, all because those UDD leaders shoutcasted for months "to be burn it, it's on me" it seems the Army didn't really need to blacken the UDD more by helping with yet another fire.

No proof, still waiting for more info. Personally I doubt a new look on the available material will provide any new clues, but you'll never know. One thing should be clear, it wasn't does two just cleared and it wasn't Thaksin either because he was right behind, very far behind his supporters, in Paris shopping or so

With UDD supporters setting fire to lots of buildings and a few provincial halls, all because those UDD leaders shoutcasted for months "to be burn it, it's on me" it seems the Army didn't really need to blacken the UDD more by helping with yet another fire.

Yep, a lot of places were set on fire.

[hellodolly]

Well, at least we know that we don't know. A few fires, non-identified snipers shooting at the fire brigade, the army holding them (i.e. the fire brigade) back.

Obviously the army was involved in the arson.

Now please excuse me, a discussion with Marvin the manically depressive robot seems like a better alternative.

It's not obvious that they were involved in the arson and nor did I say so, but more importantly, bearing in mind the tone of the posts over two years on this subject, amply demonstrated by your sarcastic posts like the one above, it is obvious that the authorities who have done so much to peddle "the red shirts did it" and some forum members to a certain extent, now ought to admit that they don't know who set the fire that was responsible for the burning down of Central World.

What's the matter Mutt, don't have the (self edited out to stick to the rules) to openly say what you imply?

Just skip and dance around it on a poor attempt of plausible deniability?

Unless we know, for example the "protester" on post #93, by name then we have to admit we don't know who set that building on fire (among the other 40 or so torched at the same time). Is that it?

On the other hand you are quite happy to say the Army killed protesters during the riots, you have the names of those that pulled the trigger, I assume, no?

Well he certainly was feeding a fire on the ground floor which had already been lit. Was he responsible for burning down Central World? Who knows? There were two fires.

Yes I am quite happy to say that the army killed protesters in the riots as the inquests, in some cases, back that statement up. I don't have the names of the people that pulled the trigger,nor do the inquests as the army has not provided the names of the troops involved but they know which platoon etc was responsible but have taken no action as far as I am aware.

"Yes I am quite happy to say that the army killed protesters in the riots

as the inquests, in some cases, back that statement up. I don't have

the names of the people that pulled the trigger,nor do the inquests as

the army has not provided the names of the troops involved but they know

which platoon etc was responsible but have taken no action as far as I

am aware."

That is quite a statement

"Yes I am quite happy to say that the army killed protesters in the riots"

How do you feel about the protestors who instigated the whole incident with illegal actions killing soldiers.

Invading hospitals

Firing rockets at transportation centers.

Are you also happy with those things.

Or is this just another one of your jokes?

[hellodolly]

Buchholz

Makes no difference how many posts there are or are not.

His claim is that they gave him the "tone".

He makes no claim to have received any knowledge of the truth behind the events.

If I wanted to be argumentative just for the sake of it I also would do some thing.

The difference being I was a red shirt supporter up until they started pouring blood with no thought of
the disease they could be spreading all over. Then proceeded to
illegally block off a section of Bangkok with no regards to the peoples
life's they effected. The incident with the blood was enough for me to see through them.

[Yes there are times when I can be slow or mistaken but not stupid]

Edited April 8, 2013 by hellodolly