2010 Red-Shirt Uprising: Clarity, Justice Remain Elusive

[yoshiwara]

Its as obvious as cancer that US capitalism supports Thaksin.

Think about it.jpgThink about it.

During the 2010 events, Thaksin's crew went ballistic when the US said they knew about his 'private' phone calls.

[waza]

Its as obvious as cancer that US capitalism supports Thaksin.

Think about it.jpgThink about it.

During the 2010 events, Thaksin's crew went ballistic when the US said they knew about his 'private' phone calls.

He was giving an update to the Carlyle group in New York the night before he was couped.

[metisdead]

An off topic nonsense trolling post has been removed.

[ZhouZhou]

During the 2010 events, Thaksin's crew went ballistic when the US said they knew about his 'private' phone calls.

The US never told anyone anything about Thaksin phone calls.

It was the then foreign minister Kasit who told the public something about that the CIA knows about Thaksin secret phone calls and tapping them.

But you have to keep in mind that Kasit is somewhat crazy, albeit one of the sanest member the Democrats have.

[moe666]

If the Dems want to win the next election promise land reform to the red shirts and have a plan to carry it out. This important item seems to be missing from Big Ts agenda

[animatic]

Unlike Sombath, Puangthong said emotions still run high and the level of mutual animosity may, in fact, have deepened over the three years as people like then prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva have still not been made accountable, she said.

Sadly that will never happen. But in the future, as long Thailand remains a democracy where the people decide in elections who should govern them, we will never see that Abhisit become a PM again. that is good.

A least not in Thailand, but he could try in the UK, because he is British too. Maybe people there don't mind his attitude, his stripped ranks and all the death. but is think its almost equally unlikely.

Zhou Zhou: Who is Thaksin? You appear to be unaware! Thaksin is an autocrat who tried to run this country in the same way as the late Chavez controlled Venezuela. There is only one difference between the two: Thaksin was (and still is) backed by the West (and the USA in particular) and Chavez was an outcast. They both ran populist/socialist schemes to grab and retain power and neither was a democrat. Thaksin was indeed a ruthless autocrat in power and now runs the country via a nepotist proxy. It is known that Thaksin has a grotesque human rights record and his misdeeds would have been amplified had he not been removed from power. He would not be able to scheme and retain control - as a criminal on the run, a fugitive from the law - if he did not have the backing of the West. You see the one difference between Chavez and Thaksin is that the former did not allow Washington to dictate to him whilst Thaksin embraced international business and power because ultimately he is driven by his twin demons - those of acquiring power and wealth. Abhisit is a common-garden politician, albeit one with an intelligence not often found amongst Thai power brokers. He remains the democratic choice for Thailand and the way he handled the red riots demonstrates his approach - it wasn't until Thaksin and his reds - with massive input from conspirators such as Amsterdam (and who knows - perhaps the CIA??) - was able to outwit the then Government did a clearing up operation proceed. In countries such as UK this would have happened so much sooner and probably with more deaths but Abhisit was aware that anything he did to restore decency, law and order, would be turned and used against him because that was Thaksin's ultimate plan. Off course the reds used violence, weapons and arson as part of their armoury. But their biggest strength was the ability to use black propaganda which was ultimately successful. If you watch and translate Red speeches from their Bangkok platforms, you'd understand that the rhetoric was about emotional manipulation. In their 'fight for democracy' there was nothing about democracy. The speeches were hate speeches designed to arouse the emotional feelings of the crowds who by then had mostly bonded into an 'oppressed mass'. What a wonderful piece of manipulation. Mussolini would have been proud! So Zhou Zhou - get a hold on understanding the nature of this political battle which is being waged even today as Thaksin gradually moves his family and trusted advsors into key positions. There's a lot more to come.

You might dislike both but you cannot compare Thaksin with Chavez. That makes no sense.

The democrats indeed are closer to a Mussulini model of a state. That helped them to survive all that many coups in the past.

Pretty much this whole chain of dialog, ianf excepted, goes from; under-informed, through ludicrous, to utterly absurd.

Next comment must likely come from extraterrestrials with no knowledge of Thailand.

Edited April 10, 2013 by animatic

[Buchholz]

- multiple messed up quotes removed -

.

nevermind, impossible to tell who said what in this and several other earlier posts

.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Buchholz

[Thai at Heart]

- multiple messed up quotes removed -

nevermind, impossible to tell who said what in this and several other earlier posts

.

Browser does it sometimes. Apologies.

[Buchholz]

- multiple messed up quotes removed -

nevermind, impossible to tell who said what in this and several other earlier posts

.

Browser does it sometimes. Apologies.

Sorry, the frustration wasn't aimed at you. Lots of other posts were the same.

It's a commonly encountered situation since the forum software "upgrade."

.

[animatic]

Its as obvious as cancer that US capitalism supports Thaksin.

Think about it.jpgThink about it.

During the 2010 events, Thaksin's crew went ballistic when the US said they knew about his 'private' phone calls.

Thanks in isn't Chavez, not even remotely close. He is a corrupt capitalist who resents that whilst he was chased out of his privileged business no one else was.

Classifying Thai politics on left and right wing is pointless. The unions support the democrats for gods sake. He is an opportunist businessman who can manipulate the Thai population better than the dems because he actually gives a bit back.

Left wing? Right wing? Socialist? Capitalist? But a dictator is a dictator.

The political spectrum is such that right meets left at the other end of the circle.

So Chavez (socialist) - Thaksin (capitalist) same same in that they are both power hungry human rights abusers.

Going back to the original topic: In my humble opinion there is no possibility of reconciliation or anything similar. The reconciliation topic is all part of the same hoax - Thaksin has no intention of true reconciliation but uses the word to ensure that Thailand remains divided and to try and show that Abhisit is the problem when we all know where and how the problem started. Thaksin is happy to wait for the momentous events that he dreams will sweep him into power. Meanwhile, it keeps the reds happy to think that the constitution will change and that as a result they will have happy democratic and wealthy lives. The illusion continues.

Thaksin has zero principles. He has made his billions. Chavez nationalised the oil industry, Thaksin will be an enabler for international oil.

This country is so contradictory that it doesn't fit normal western business and political thinking. There are hugely powerful business blocks who are stanch democrats hoping to hang onto their exploitative oligarchies and there are supporters of Thaksin who want their share of that pie.

This is a very tightly regulated economy with an order and a place at the table. The problem is that for the economic development of the country these barriers should be broken down, but the solution is neither palatable or acceptable.

Take the banks. 400 baht for a printed statement. Wouldn't you love to see some competition? Take agriculture. Wholly owned foreign companies excluded, but maybe they pay the farmers 10 cents more? All staunch Democrats.

So, ptp of they stay long enough will eventually shake it up, but what will they offer? The same deal. Partner with us and we exploit it the same way that these old buggars did.

What does Thaksin or abhisit represent? The only difference is who's bank account gets rich, the Democrat older establish Thai Chinese money, or thaksins the nouveau riche Thai Chinese money.

I go with Thaksin on this point because the old moneyed group have taken Thailand ahead so far and they can't go any further with their love of restrictive practices. Out with old and in with new. A Thai Chinese business coup is what we are watching.

The editor of Tatler will need to get some new photos.

I agree with the vast majority of this analysis except the final conclusion.

If Thaksin we a stable personality, then there might be a valid 'out with the old because they can't change' argument,

but Thaksin has shown multiple times he is extremely unstable, and as an absolute leader this bodes ill.

Even as change is in the cards, this means the change will be wildly mercurial and unpredictable, since the driving force is unstable to a fare thee well, and tends to isolation behind walls of yes-men sycophants...

If there was someone less irrational under pressure as figurehead/controller this might be the best approach, but at the moment that is not the case. And because of the finger in every pie, megalomaniac approach of Thaksin, if he does die, the whole shooting match will crash down in infighting till another, until then subjugated leader can kill off his enemies and rise above the fray. Of course the little people will bear the brunt of even worse conditions than under the current regime till that happens, including the need to survive a low profile civil clan war.

Edited April 11, 2013 by animatic

[billd766]

Unlike Sombath, Puangthong said emotions still run high and the level of mutual animosity may, in fact, have deepened over the three years as people like then prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva have still not been made accountable, she said.

Sadly that will never happen. But in the future, as long Thailand remains a democracy where the people decide in elections who should govern them, we will never see that Abhisit become a PM again. that is good.

A least not in Thailand, but he could try in the UK, because he is British too. Maybe people there don't mind his attitude, his stripped ranks and all the death. but is think its almost equally unlikely.

Your comments are as biased, ill-informed and misleading as Puangthongs. Abhist is on murder charges over the Thaksin financed redshirt riots. While Thaksin, who also financed the death squad called the blackshirts and his red henchmen, who called for violence an arson, remains uncharged?

"Thailand remains a democracy where the people decide in elections who should govern them.." But they cant vote on amending their constitution.

Red democracy in action

this is incorrect, Suthep financed them to make it look like Thaksin.

Got any proof of what you say, again?

If you do please present it, otherwise don't spread rumours or tell lies.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. This topic is not about capitalism, it is about the "2010 Red-Shirt Uprising: Clarity, Justice Remain Elusive." Stay on the topic.