Erawan Shrine Destroyed

[camerata]

And now the truly silly stuff starts...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/03/23...es_20003407.php

Things to improve from now: Chidchai

The turmoil in Thailand will subside because the Brahma statue at the Erawan Shrine has made a self-sacrifice and borne the bad luck troubling the country, said Pol General Chidchai Wannasathid, acting deputy prime minister.

"I have talked to an astrologer who told me that the incident could be seen as a self-sacrifice of Phra Phrom. The situation should now start to improve," he said.

"I have also had a telephone conversation with Bovornsak Uwanno, the secretary of the Cabinet about this self sacrifice of Thao Maha Phrom. This time we have a sacrifice of love in a great way, which should help dispel the bad luck."

Chidchai was speaking at the Erawan Shrine yesterday during Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's inspection of the remnants of the four-faced statue, hammered to pieces by a man with a record of mental illness on Tuesday.

<snip>

The desecration of Phra Phrom has triggered widespread rumours in the capital about the ill omens hovering over Thailand. Sondhi Limthongkul, one of the leaders of the People's Alliance for Democracy, said yesterday during the anti-Thaksin rally that something fishy was going on with the desecration of Phra Phrom. "Why was the man stomped to death after he smashed the statue? I have in-depth information about someone who is deeply obsessed with superstition. He wants to destroy Thao Maha Phrom so that he can rebuild it by himself and then bury "his stuff" in the statue. This is a way to avert ill omens," Sondhi said.

"Anybody who messes with superstition will also perish by superstition ... we have a leader, who is obsessed with superstition. That's why we have to suffer," Sondhi said.

There is a rumour that a high-ranking politician has linked his own luck with Phra Phrom at both Government House and Erawan Shrine, so that when people worship the Brahma statues, they also pray for his long life and power.

[aaaaaa]

sling sling .... you are rating way up there with some of the other folks around here .... to suggest that understanding etc equals condoning is just as silly as stating The US isn't a Democracy

wow wow, now, friend, wait just a min ! take it easy, unless you don't mind to appear as a demagogue ! because obviously the argument you use here is twisted or switched. whcih is common fallacy in logic - here particularly I think it is Irrelevent conclusion ("ignoratio elenchi" = "ignorance of the issue"). A is equal B [is it realy ?], and since B is obviously [although "obvious to whom ?"] wrong, then A MUST be wrong. and it is more like blend of several fallacies together such as argumentum ad populum (= appeal to masses : from the sort "everybody knows that...") and even "ad hominem" (A makes claim B; there is something objectionable about A [who says X he is - silly !], therefore claim B is false.)

may be that is equal for you - doesn't mean for others, friend !

and then, what is so silly ? perhaps Constituion of USA (where Democracy is never mentioned even once) is "silly" or this source ? (just a very brief search ! ) . see there section "Government":

Government type:

Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition

only a "tradition", my friend ! tradition is not precisely a real thing, not 100% or what is called Pure democracy or Direct democracy.

I trust it is VERY good and reliable source, and it gives also references - if you click in those small icon of tiny book (Definitions) you can get evidence:

Federal republic - a state in which the powers of the central government are restricted and in which the component parts (states, colonies, or provinces) retain a degree of self-government; ultimate sovereign power rests with the voters who chose their governmental representatives.

Constitutional - a government by or operating under an authoritative document (constitution) that sets forth the system of fundamental laws and principles that determines the nature, functions, and limits of that government.

obviously, there is nothing here mentioned about it being Democracy. compare it with other given there definitions :

Constitutional democracy - a form of government in which the sovereign power of the people is spelled out in a governing constitution. {it is NOT spelled there - check it out !}

Democracy - a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but which is usually exercised indirectly through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed.

Democratic republic - a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.

Parliamentary democracy - a political system in which the legislature (parliament) selects the government - a prime minister, premier, or chancellor along with the cabinet ministers - according to party strength as expressed in elections; by this system, the government acquires a dual responsibility: to the people as well as to the parliament.

as you can see - it is none of these.

Andorra, Aruba, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Irelend ..... these are democracies

US, UK - NO . not even "emerging democracy" as Albania. Canada - sort of ....

so, I mean, man, you might be trying to make a good point - that vilonence and murder mustn't be condoned (right ?) - but PLEASE present it convincinlgy!

anyway, all this talk of what is or not Democracy is technical and here is not even relevent. no need to switch main subject (religious sacriliege, murder by mob) to Democracy here ! especially if you use false, unproved or fallacious arguments.

Edited March 23, 2006 by aaaaaa

[aaaaaa]

And now the truly silly stuff starts...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/03/23...es_20003407.php

Things to improve from now: Chidchai

"Why was the man stomped to death after he smashed the statue? I have in-depth information about someone who is deeply obsessed with superstition. He wants to destroy Thao Maha Phrom so that he can rebuild it by himself and then bury "his stuff" in the statue. This is a way to avert ill omens," Sondhi said.

"Anybody who messes with superstition will also perish by superstition ... we have a leader, who is obsessed with superstition. That's why we have to suffer," Sondhi said.

There is a rumour that a high-ranking politician has linked his own luck with Phra Phrom at both Government House and Erawan Shrine, so that when people worship the Brahma statues, they also pray for his long life and power.

cool ! and spooky

so, who that "someone" can be, huh ? let's make a poll !

wow, more excitement in this trhead - Democracy, islamic extremism, now superstitious polititians - now it looks like the favorite beloved topic of T-bashing would be entwined here as well !

let me guess - perhaps that was Sondhi's "secret" weapon he's promised to unveil after 48 hours if his ultimatum isn't fulfilled ? then it's getting more interesting !

[naka]

If any of you know how important that shrine is you will understand the reaction of the Thai's.

Although sad the man died it does not surprise me in the least as to his fate........ And as far as the killers go they did what was the only expected reaction in that situation...... Total outrage and instant action, I hope they are vindicated of the crime this is clearly a case of diminished responsibility in my book.

Mess with sacred religeous shrines and thats what happens......... What do you think would have happened in a large number of other countries? ...........Possibly most depending on the shrine.

Pray enlighten us as to the shrine's importance englishoak ... that we might

understand their reaction.

Naka.

[backflip]

Along with something else, you have a very short memory. A simple cartoon caused an uproar in the Islamic community. A similar cartoon of Jesus would have been largely ignored. Some cultures hold their religious views much more seriously than modern Christians.

[jdinasia]

sling sling .... you are rating way up there with some of the other folks around here .... to suggest that understanding etc equals condoning is just as silly as stating The US isn't a Democracy

wow wow, now, friend, wait just a min ! take it easy, unless you don't mind to appear as a demagogue ! because obviously the argument you use here is twisted or switched. whcih is common fallacy in logic - here particularly I think it is Irrelevent conclusion ("ignoratio elenchi" = "ignorance of the issue"). A is equal B [is it realy ?], and since B is obviously [although "obvious to whom ?"] wrong, then A MUST be wrong. and it is more like blend of several fallacies together such as argumentum ad populum (= appeal to masses : from the sort "everybody knows that...") and even "ad hominem" (A makes claim B; there is something objectionable about A [who says X he is - silly !], therefore claim B is false.)

may be that is equal for you - doesn't mean for others, friend !

and then, what is so silly ? perhaps Constituion of USA (where Democracy is never mentioned even once) is "silly" or this source ? (just a very brief search ! ) . see there section "Government":

Government type:

Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition

only a "tradition", my friend ! tradition is not precisely a real thing, not 100% or what is called Pure democracy or Direct democracy.

I trust it is VERY good and reliable source, and it gives also references - if you click in those small icon of tiny book (Definitions) you can get evidence:

Federal republic - a state in which the powers of the central government are restricted and in which the component parts (states, colonies, or provinces) retain a degree of self-government; ultimate sovereign power rests with the voters who chose their governmental representatives.

Constitutional - a government by or operating under an authoritative document (constitution) that sets forth the system of fundamental laws and principles that determines the nature, functions, and limits of that government.

obviously, there is nothing here mentioned about it being Democracy. compare it with other given there definitions :

Constitutional democracy - a form of government in which the sovereign power of the people is spelled out in a governing constitution. {it is NOT spelled there - check it out !}

Democracy - a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but which is usually exercised indirectly through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed.

Democratic republic - a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.

Parliamentary democracy - a political system in which the legislature (parliament) selects the government - a prime minister, premier, or chancellor along with the cabinet ministers - according to party strength as expressed in elections; by this system, the government acquires a dual responsibility: to the people as well as to the parliament.

as you can see - it is none of these.

Andorra, Aruba, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Irelend ..... these are democracies

US, UK - NO . not even "emerging democracy" as Albania. Canada - sort of ....

so, I mean, man, you might be trying to make a good point - that vilonence and murder mustn't be condoned (right ?) - but PLEASE present it convincinlgy!

anyway, all this talk of what is or not Democracy is technical and here is not even relevent. no need to switch main subject (religious sacriliege, murder by mob) to Democracy here ! especially if you use false, unproved or fallacious arguments.

aaa ... have made the point about True democracy before .. feel free to search it ... I was comparing one idiotic statement to another. Someone sayiny "to understand something is to condone it" and The US isn't a democracy..." you can feel free to find the quotes involved in the posts.

[Anek18]

It's common I'm afraid - I've seen people kick the sh*te out of a farang that disrespected one of the shrines. Mess w/Buddah or the Royals and the full wrath of Thai(s) will come upon you.

Then don't do it, what benefits do you gain out of from actions like that?

You knew it's bad when you are doing bad things, you are thought bad from good since kid.

I don't care if its buddha statue, hindu, muslim, a house, people car, properties you just don't do that. I think, the man deserved what he got and that should make an examble out of others.

[sjaak327]

Then don't do it, what benefits do you gain out of from actions like that?

You knew it's bad when you are doing bad things, you are thought bad from good since kid.

I don't care if its buddha statue, hindu, muslim, a house, people car, properties you just don't do that. I think, the man deserved what he got and that should make an examble out of others.

Actually it's the killers who would have to made an example of. They should be locked up for a long time. A society where "street justice" is not severly punished will eventually be doomed.

I was shocked with the destruction of the shrine, but even more shocked about the people who killed this guy.

[jdinasia]

Silliness abounds ... apparently Anek thinks that to kill the insane for being insane is OK. Anek also seems to think that there should be a death penalty for vandalising a car.

I see a real lack of compassion in that.

It is a very very sad thing that happened. I understand why it happened but it is still very sad!

[britmaveric]

Sad indeed, surprising No.

[Anek18]

Silliness abounds ... apparently Anek thinks that to kill the insane for being insane is OK. Anek also seems to think that there should be a death penalty for vandalising a car.

I see a real lack of compassion in that.

It is a very very sad thing that happened. I understand why it happened but it is still very sad!

Who let the insane man out to the society? What if that was your dougter instead of a statue?

[jdinasia]

are you really in Thailand? Have you seen a mental hospital here? Do you know of decent psychaitric care?

Did you even notice that you said you approve of death in the streets for common vandalism?

But you make a case for forced sterilization!

[Indo-Siam]

The Nation

Security will be beefed up at revered sites : Apirak

Published on Mar 22, 2006

Security will be upped at revered sites throughout Bangkok after a deranged man destroyed the Great Brahma statue at the Erawan Shrine with a hammer in the early hours of Tuesday morning.

Bangkok Governor Apirak Kosayothin said on Tuesday he had assigned Bangkok's cultural department to survey revered sites and shrines.

"We will reinforce our security and provide security for [all revered sites] to prevent attacks on them," Apirak said.

Thanakorn Pakdithanapon, 27, who was believed to have had mental problems and been a regular patient at public hospitals, attacked the respected Great Brahma statฌue with a hammer.

Immediately after the incident two city cleaners beat Thanakorn to death.

Apirak announced the new security measures after visiting the Erawan Shrine. He said the city's Fine Arts Department would renovate the statue and work should be completed within two months.

"Until that time, people will be able to come to the shrine to worship. It will still be open to the public," the governor said.

Meanwhile, Surakiat Limcharoen, Patumwan district director, said he had paid bail for the two city cleaners accused of murdering Thanakorn and they were back at work today.

"We will seek ways to help them out, because what they did was aimed at protecting the Great Brahma statue. They did not intend to kill the man," said Surakiat

I am absolutely stunned at the pattern of thought expressed throughout this long posting thread. A violent criminal - possibly with some mental problems (but I have yet to see a shred of evidence suggesting that he was ever diagnosed mentally ill by a qualified professional) gets heaps of sympathy and undesrtanding, but two ordinary men - not gangsters, but simple, hard-working street sweepers assigned to clean up around the Erawan shrine - respond courageously agaisnt an armed, violent maniac - to try to protect their place of work - and to aprehend the violent criminal before hecan harm anyone - and the perpetrator is still armed and dangerous - and to protect themselves, the two minor city employees strike back at him - and the perpetrator dies - and then the posters on this board crucify the poor workers.

I just wonder - what altternate universe do most of you people live in? Read above what the Patumwam district director said - and he put his money behind his statement - does it even occur to you people that he just might be a bit better informed than you are? Do you think that district director wants violent dangerous thugs bcak on the street in his district? Or maybe that these two streetweepers have powerful friends and important political connections?

I have a company office on Soi Asoke. If some Thai man with a sledgehammer enters my office and begins destroying the computers that hold important information supporting the livelihood for me, my employees, our families, and our customers - and in the process of destroying the livelihoods of my hard-working employees, he is also terrorizing them - workers who look up to me to give them a safe place to work - and I then walk in the door - that attacker is in mortal peril. I don't know him, I'm not personally angry at him, but he has stepped across the line, and I am going to decisively stop him. As such, killing the man will not be by objective - my objective will be to render him utterly unable to harm me, my employees, and my business. If I have a big metal pipe available to me, I will use it - without hesitation. But - I will err on the side of my team - and if the attacker dies, too bad.

The oft-repeated refrain here has been - if someone is mentally ill and viciously violent - then the person is primarily mentally ill. What makes that true? Why is he not primarily a violent criminal. Uday and Qusay Hussein were sadistic, torturing, evil tyrants - and I have no doubt in my mind that they were mentally ill. But - mental illness was not their defining quality - the defining quality was that they were evil, violent men. They are now worm food - and that is great by me - and by millions of Iraqis.

I note that the family of the shrine destroyer has indicated that they do not seek any compensation from the streetsweepers. I understand that the family was offered compensation - and they turned it down, saying something to the effect that they understood the danger that their son had posed to the workers, and they supported the actions that the workers took.

A violent criminal unfortunately launched an attack - and attack that HAS IN FACT DESTROYED THE PERSONAL LIVELIHOODS OF DOZENS OF HARD-WORKING FAMILY BREADWINNERS. I haven't seen even one peep - not one word by the liberal whiners on this thread - commiserating with the perhaps 200 family members - perhaps half of then children - who will go hungry for two months. You are all too busy crying over the body of the criminal, and condemning the men who stopped the criminal's rampage.

Personally, I like the way the Thais did handle this incident. I admire the small, unimportant men who stood up and confronted the evil attacker - put themselves at risk for no gain - just to try to protect their community.

And I have no respect whatsoever for you people who villify the brave defenders, and cannonize the dead criminal. I would be happy to have the streetwseepers as my neighbors - and I sure would not want the perpetrator anywhere nera my home and family.

I've said my piece - I will let the hand-wringers here have the last word. Thank god you people aren't in charge of this place, where I have chosen to raise my family.

Indo-Siam

Edited March 24, 2006 by Indo-Siam

[englishoak]

Well said Indo-Siam.

[chuchok]

Well said Indo-Siam.

Assumptions are a plenty here.

Let me make some as well.

I wonder how many times this chap was kicked in the head before he died.20-30 times??I bet he was unconcious on the ground at the time these blows were delivered.You would have had blood from ar$hole to breakfast time.I have always thought that kicking somebody on the ground was the lowest form of cowerdice.

Now assuming the bloke had a screw loose, it is obvious from previous posts, that most people here have no understanding of mental illness at all, yet they are quick to judge.Nice!

[sriracha john]

I'll just say that I'm glad people who gruesomely club a man to death, with a metal bar, without the threat of personal harm and continue to do so well past the point of disabling him from damaging property aren't in charge either.

[phibunmike]

Government type:

Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition

only a "tradition", my friend ! tradition is not precisely a real thing, not 100% or what is called Pure democracy or Direct democracy.

I trust it is VERY good and reliable source, and it gives also references - if you click in those small icon of tiny book (Definitions) you can get evidence:

Federal republic - a state in which the powers of the central government are restricted and in which the component parts (states, colonies, or provinces) retain a degree of self-government; ultimate sovereign power rests with the voters who chose their governmental representatives.

Constitutional - a government by or operating under an authoritative document (constitution) that sets forth the system of fundamental laws and principles that determines the nature, functions, and limits of that government.

obviously, there is nothing here mentioned about it being Democracy. compare it with other given there definitions :

Democracy - a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but which is usually exercised indirectly through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed.

Democratic republic - a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.

Parliamentary democracy - a political system in which the legislature (parliament) selects the government - a prime minister, premier, or chancellor along with the cabinet ministers - according to party strength as expressed in elections; by this system, the government acquires a dual responsibility: to the people as well as to the parliament.

Well aaaaaa, interesting side-topic, but I disagree with the conclusions you draw from your own quotations:

Your quotation defining "Federal republic" says "ultimate sovereign power rests with the voters"

Then your definition for a Democracy says "a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people".

Therefore, from your evidence, USA is a democracy (and the same arguments can be applied to the parliamentary democracy of the UK - I'll leave that as an exercise for you to do at home ).

Edited March 24, 2006 by phibunmike

[Plus]

I think I should repeat that for deeply religious people the "statue" holds a lot more value than lives of ordinary men. That what makes it GOD.

We can argue that Phra Prom wasn't the GOD, and it's actually a Buddhist country, but peoples reaction to violent destruction of their object of worship is only natural. Civil laws don't govern their relationships with God.

I looked up Manu Samhita, the old hindu code of conduct, and there's nothing about punishment for those who destroy temple images, but it recommends death for killers of temple priests. I guess it was unimaginable that someone would hammer temple deities to pieces. SJ would go very violent for destruction of his office and his livelyhood. God means more than that to religious people.

Of course there are grades of response, perhaps if lawers got the guy first, they wouldn't kick him to death (they'd probably run in the opposite direction).

More in the guys defence - they didn't know he was mentally ill, and they didn't kick him to death, he died of injuries later.

[dan10400]

I'll just say that I'm glad people who gruesomely club a man to death, with a metal bar, without the threat of personal harm and continue to do so well past the point of disabling him from damaging property aren't in charge either.

ok, they are not in charge. but apparently people who condone such behavior are.

it is not entirely clear, but it sure seems that the two that beat the guy with iron bars, well past incapacitating the guy, until he was dead were possibly more interested in how they might be perceived as heros than protecting anything (material or human). just have to wonder where that logic comes from.

[sriracha john]

SJ Indo-Siam would go very violent for destruction of his office and his livelyhood. God means more than that to religious people.

*corrected*

[Plus]

Sorry, my mistake, I actually looked up it was Indo-Siam, but somehow put SJ in the post. Sorry.

When the guys heard what happened to the statue they went running after the guy, initial story said it was taxi drivers who cornered him, I think. They were obviously outraged and jumped on him and kicked him to the ground and continued beating him until their rage subsided and the guy looked like he had enough. Had they stopped a few blows earlier, he'd possible had survived.

They didn't beat him for their personal gains or their livelihoods, not even to protect their families and children - they beat him to protect their religion - the pillar of the whole society.

In fact, should they be found guilty and jailed, they should take in stride, if their motives were truly unselfish.

[dan10400]

They didn't beat him for their personal gains or their livelihoods, not even to protect their families and children - they beat him to protect their religion - the pillar of the whole society.

In fact, should they be found guilty and jailed, they should take in stride, if their motives were truly unselfish.

I agreed with you for questioning those who started focusing on the Muslim angle as this fact has never really been established concretely (having only been mentioned in passing without source in one news article).

However, your claim above appears to be conjecture on your part, and it seems to be a bit of a stretch at that.

I stand corrected that they did not beat the guy to death (initially). However, they were clearly the cause of it and in no way did this beating/death protect their religion and/or the pillar of their society. if anything, this does quite the opposite.

[StateSix]

thick as a brick ... i give up

I will assume that you have realised that the quotes you attributed to me were actually made by Sing_Sling, and so were referring to yourself here

[StateSix]

Silliness abounds ... apparently Anek thinks that to kill the insane for being insane is OK. Anek also seems to think that there should be a death penalty for vandalising a car.

I see a real lack of compassion in that.

It is a very very sad thing that happened. I understand why it happened but it is still very sad!

Who let the insane man out to the society? What if that was your dougter instead of a statue?

But it wasn't anyones daughter, was it. Turn it the other way. What if your daughter did something stupid like that, and was violently kicked to death for it. Would you still feel that she deserved it and the murderers should be let off?

[Plus]

in no way did this beating/death protect their religion and/or the pillar of their society

There must be some reaction for destroying religious symbols - you can't expect any religious followers just sit back and relax. Any such action can be considered "protection of religion", even postfact. We might disagree on what the proper justice is, but there must be something.

[StateSix]

I am absolutely stunned at the pattern of thought expressed throughout this long posting thread. A violent criminal - possibly with some mental problems (but I have yet to see a shred of evidence suggesting that he was ever diagnosed mentally ill by a qualified professional) gets heaps of sympathy and undesrtanding, but two ordinary men - not gangsters, but simple, hard-working street sweepers assigned to clean up around the Erawan shrine - respond courageously agaisnt an armed, violent maniac - to try to protect their place of work - and to aprehend the violent criminal before hecan harm anyone - and the perpetrator is still armed and dangerous - and to protect themselves, the two minor city employees strike back at him - and the perpetrator dies - and then the posters on this board crucify the poor workers.

I just wonder - what altternate universe do most of you people live in? Read above what the Patumwam district director said - and he put his money behind his statement - does it even occur to you people that he just might be a bit better informed than you are? Do you think that district director wants violent dangerous thugs bcak on the street in his district? Or maybe that these two streetweepers have powerful friends and important political connections?

I have a company office on Soi Asoke. If some Thai man with a sledgehammer enters my office and begins destroying the computers that hold important information supporting the livelihood for me, my employees, our families, and our customers - and in the process of destroying the livelihoods of my hard-working employees, he is also terrorizing them - workers who look up to me to give them a safe place to work - and I then walk in the door - that attacker is in mortal peril. I don't know him, I'm not personally angry at him, but he has stepped across the line, and I am going to decisively stop him. As such, killing the man will not be by objective - my objective will be to render him utterly unable to harm me, my employees, and my business. If I have a big metal pipe available to me, I will use it - without hesitation. But - I will err on the side of my team - and if the attacker dies, too bad.

The oft-repeated refrain here has been - if someone is mentally ill and viciously violent - then the person is primarily mentally ill. What makes that true? Why is he not primarily a violent criminal. Uday and Qusay Hussein were sadistic, torturing, evil tyrants - and I have no doubt in my mind that they were mentally ill. But - mental illness was not their defining quality - the defining quality was that they were evil, violent men. They are now worm food - and that is great by me - and by millions of Iraqis.

I note that the family of the shrine destroyer has indicated that they do not seek any compensation from the streetsweepers. I understand that the family was offered compensation - and they turned it down, saying something to the effect that they understood the danger that their son had posed to the workers, and they supported the actions that the workers took.

A violent criminal unfortunately launched an attack - and attack that HAS IN FACT DESTROYED THE PERSONAL LIVELIHOODS OF DOZENS OF HARD-WORKING FAMILY BREADWINNERS. I haven't seen even one peep - not one word by the liberal whiners on this thread - commiserating with the perhaps 200 family members - perhaps half of then children - who will go hungry for two months. You are all too busy crying over the body of the criminal, and condemning the men who stopped the criminal's rampage.

Personally, I like the way the Thais did handle this incident. I admire the small, unimportant men who stood up and confronted the evil attacker - put themselves at risk for no gain - just to try to protect their community.

And I have no respect whatsoever for you people who villify the brave defenders, and cannonize the dead criminal. I would be happy to have the streetwseepers as my neighbors - and I sure would not want the perpetrator anywhere nera my home and family.

I've said my piece - I will let the hand-wringers here have the last word. Thank god you people aren't in charge of this place, where I have chosen to raise my family.

Indo-Siam

I am absolutely stunned that supposedly educated people believe it is acceptable to violently kick someone to death in the street for committing criminal damage. Painting the arrested suspects as

"simple, hard-working street sweepers" who were "respond(ing) courageously agaisnt an armed, violent maniac" is a distortion of the facts. The guy was found 50 yards away from the Shrine after being chased and caught. As he was being chased, where was the danger to these 'heroes'?

They were perfectly right to attempt to apprehend this guy for the criminal act he had committed, but they should use reasonable, proportionate force. I would argue that kicking someone on the floor or hitting him with a metal bar is not reasonable. If he still had the hammer and was acting threateningly with it and one of the guys picked up a metal bar and hit him with it causing his death, then, yes I would accept that he was acting in self defence. But surely you dont believe this is what happened in this case. A group of people decided to mete out their own brand of justice, and it went wrong. This is why mob justice should not be acceptable. If you think it is acceptable, where do you think we should draw the line? What acts do you believe merit being murdered for, without any judicial proceedings?

Re your claim about all the people whose livelihood has been destroyed by this incident. Rubbish. They will still be there, people will not stop going there anymore, so sales will barely be affected. In fact, in the short term, it could be that sales go up as people go to see the damage for themselves, and to pay their respects.

[StateSix]

in no way did this beating/death protect their religion and/or the pillar of their society

There must be some reaction for destroying religious symbols - you can't expect any religious followers just sit back and relax. Any such action can be considered "protection of religion", even postfact. We might disagree on what the proper justice is, but there must be something.

That is why we have laws and a judicial system.

[dan10400]

in no way did this beating/death protect their religion and/or the pillar of their society

There must be some reaction for destroying religious symbols - you can't expect any religious followers just sit back and relax. Any such action can be considered "protection of religion", even postfact. We might disagree on what the proper justice is, but there must be something.

i agree - but i think that something is "jail time", "restitution" or Thailand can enact their own version of Sharia law - not a death sentence carried out by a pair of vigilantes.

[marshbags]

Well said Indo-Siam.

Assumptions are a plenty here.

I wonder how many times this chap was kicked in the head before he died.20-30 times??I bet he was unconcious on the ground at the time these blows were delivered.You would have had blood from ar$hole to breakfast time.I have always thought that kicking somebody on the ground was the lowest form of cowerdice.

Now assuming the bloke had a screw loose, it is obvious from previous posts, that most people here have no understanding of mental illness at all, yet they are quick to judge.Nice!

100 % correct chuchok

Further observations from marshbags

News Quote:-

Man lynched to death after breaking apart much-revered Phra Prom statue

A 27-year-old man was lynched to death early Tuesday morning after he completely destroyed the much-revered statue of Brahma god of creator or Pra Prom at Hyatt Erawan Hotel.

Police said the man used a hammer to break apart the statue at around 1 am and tried to flee but were caught up by taxi drivers and other people in the area and were assaulted and killed about 50 metres away from the shrine.

Two hours later, his father, Sayan Pakdeepol, told police at the Lumpini Police station, that his son Thanakorn Pakdeepol, 27, had been suffering from depression since he was conscripted into military service when he was 21 years old.

Quoted by Indo Siam

A violent criminal unfortunately launched an attack - and attack that HAS IN FACT DESTROYED THE PERSONAL LIVELIHOODS OF DOZENS OF HARD-WORKING FAMILY BREADWINNERS. I haven't seen even one peep - not one word by the liberal whiners on this thread - commiserating with the perhaps 200 family members - perhaps half of then children - who will go hungry for two months. You are all too busy crying over the body of the criminal, and condemning the men who stopped the criminal's rampage.

Personally, I like the way the Thais did handle this incident. I admire the small, unimportant men who stood up and confronted the evil attacker - put themselves at risk for no gain - just to try to protect their community.

And I have no respect whatsoever for you people who villify the brave defenders, and cannonize the dead criminal. I would be happy to have the streetwseepers as my neighbors - and I sure would not want the perpetrator anywhere nera my home and family.

I've said my piece - I will let the hand-wringers here have the last word. Thank god you people aren't in charge of this place, where I have chosen to raise my family.

Indo-Siam............................................................................

....quote ended

So i you reckon they where defending society and protecting them from this mentally ill man and did the right thing ( He was running away not continuing to harm anything and more improtant, " anyone. ")

You also think the murderers are brave defenders against a violent criminal. " You What "

Please let,s recap, did the man kill, maim and injure anyone ...................... No

Was he mentally ill and his only offence was to destroy a statue because for some reason it disturbed him ..................................Yes

I cannot begin to understand your reasoning or that of posters who have made comments of a similar nature.

Indo Siam perhaps you think you,d be happy with these brave murderers living next door to you.

I think not because they are dangerous people who see violence as the answer to sad incidents like this, with very short fuses and no brain.

Do you reckon they would re act in a friendly way should you have a dispute/ difference of opinoin

and be reasonable about it with you in a civilised manner.

I think not.

What happened to the compassion and understanding T.Visa members are known for ?

For once I find it impossible to glean anything positive from the many posts that have taken this uncivilized conclusion of what is after all very tragic incident.

So this is action is to be expected in Thailand and oh well because of this it,s acceptable.

It does not excuse the thoughts of your posts and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

This stuff is worthy only of uneducated people who do not know better.

In my humble opinion, most of T.Visa members do know better from many past observations.

I offer no apologies for taking this line of thought and do not give one iota what your thoughts are on my offering.

My priorities are more important and humanely understanding to the victim of this murder and his family.

marshbags

Edited March 24, 2006 by marshbags

[Plus]

That is why we have laws and a judicial system.

The case was clear cut and people were enraged. I doubt anyone even thought about judicial system, and people here don't have much faith in it anyway. I think obligations to protecting religion, especially in a shocking case like this, stand higher than civil laws for many people here in Thailand.

It's nice to sit here and weigh various options, but, like one of the previous poster said - if you ask what will happen to someone who commit such an offence in Thailand, ten out of ten people would say you'll get lynched on the spot. That's the reality.