Attorney general orders indictment against Abhisit, Suthep

[longway]

I just love red history, its so perverted.

"That's why they took the coup very personally and that's what's behind the anger you've seen at various times on the streets of Bangkok and elsewhere."

Thaksins money was behind the anger seen at various time on the streets of Bangkok. The redshirts movement was a Thaksin invention, it was funded by him to act as an agitation group to counter the yellowshirts, redshirt members were paid to attend rallies. If Thaksin hadn't done this there would have been no anti government protests against the Abihist government.

Quite so, and a point well proven when you consider the timing of the protests, that just happened to coincide with money being confiscated, and the fact that at the actual time of the coup, barely a soul stepped forward to protest on Thaksin's behalf. Why was that?

OK, let's look at the timing shall we?

Thaksin Assets seized February 29th 2010

First march to Bangkok starts March 12th

Major Rally held 14th March calls for dissolution of parliament and new elections

Government start talks with UDD about dissolution of parliament and new elections ( the topic of Thaksins confiscated assets are not discussed) on March 28th

Talks break down March 29th

And now at the time of the coup why did "barely a soul stepped forward to protest on Thaksin's behalf. Why was that?"

Mmmm, that took some thinking. Do you think it might be because Martial Law was slapped on all 76 Provinces in Thailand until the 26th January 2007, but then left active in 35 Provinces. Can you guess what provinces they were? That's right, the ones traditionally supporting Thaksin.

And you have the cheek to talk about perverted history............

More importantly in the first election directly after the coup when people would naturally be most likely to register their disapproval only 35% of the thai electorate voted for thaksin affiliated parties, 65% of the electorate very clearly did not care.

The red shirts represent only a minority of the country (and much less than that 35%), and as they are organised currently, cannot be viewed as a legitimate democracy movement.

First let them organise themselves into an movement that has elections to elect its leaders before it comes along to lecture thailand about democracy.

[Steve9]

A rather appalling misrepresentation of history...

The only two pure pro Thaksin groups of that early time were the "Saturday Group against Dictatorship" and the "Noc Pilap Khao" (White Dove) who initially protested separately against the military. Both of these groups had hardly any funding. I remember their first stages on Sanam Luang, which were a plastic chair with a handheld microphone, which then was upgraded into a tiny makeshift stage.

An even more appalling misrepresentation of history...

The "White Dove" reflected the early violence of the Red Shirts (even though at the time they wore black). They were "pure pro-Thaksin" alright. It was reflected in their attacks on police and injuring hundreds in 2007. Their street violence was the original street violence that pre-dates all other current groups. They were the ones that kicked off what turned into repeated red shirt violence in 2009 and 2010.

Rather than some down-home, grass-root members sitting in "plastic chairs"... they were thugs who used anything handy for a weapon.

Tony Clifton

Notice that the guy throwing a helmet is a proud t-shirt wearing member of ''White Dove'', a group that is actually known for creating turmoil. The white dove is usually a sign of peace but these opportunists simply use the image as a disguise

Sorry, but that is wrong.

I was there.

The protesters after pushing through several police lines arrived in the early afternoon at Si Sao Thewet, positioned their mobile stage there, and protested against Prem. For several hours nothing occurred other than speeches on the stage, until at sometime around 20.00 the government ordered the police to disperse the protesters and to arrest the leaders. When protesters resisted, clashes erupted. Without looking at my notes, there were three rounds of clashes, where protesters fought off the police. When police began firing tear gas grenades into protesters, the protest leaders called the protest off and retreat back to their encampment at Sanam Luang at around 23.00.

The violence during the Si Sao Thewet clashes was nothing more than some average clash in Europe, no dead or badly injured, and the only violent incident during the entire coup period.

Unsurprisingly, it was reported by unbiased real reporters (who were also there) at the time in a completely different manner.

eg.

The Associated Press

Published: July 26, 2007

BANGKOK, Thailand: Nine leaders of an anti-government protest in Thailand that turned violent and resulted in hundreds of injuries were jailed

Over 200 police were injured with far, far fewer misnamed White Doves/Red Shirts/UDD.

Several of the current Red Shirt leaders were arrested, eg. Weng, Natthawut.

Some year soon, they will have their cases from 2007 dealt with.

But hey, at least they can lay claim to being the first of many instances of street violence since.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Steve9

[waza]

I just love red history, its so perverted.

"That's why they took the coup very personally and that's what's behind the anger you've seen at various times on the streets of Bangkok and elsewhere."

Thaksins money was behind the anger seen at various time on the streets of Bangkok. The redshirts movement was a Thaksin invention, it was funded by him to act as an agitation group to counter the yellowshirts, redshirt members were paid to attend rallies. If Thaksin hadn't done this there would have been no anti government protests against the Abihist government.

A rather appalling misrepresentation of history...

The only two pure pro Thaksin groups of that early time were the "Saturday Group against Dictatorship" and the "Noc Pilap Khao" (White Dove) who initially protested separately against the military. Both of these groups had hardly any funding. I remember their first stages on Sanam Luang, which were a plastic chair with a handheld microphone, which then was upgraded into a tiny makeshift stage.

An even more appalling misrepresentation of history...

The "White Dove" reflected the early violence of the Red Shirts (even though at the time they wore black). They were "pure pro-Thaksin" alright. It was reflected in their attacks on police and injuring hundreds in 2007. Their street violence was the original street violence that pre-dates all other current groups. They were the ones that kicked off what turned into repeated red shirt violence in 2009 and 2010.

Rather than some down-home, grass-root members sitting in "plastic chairs"... they were thugs who used anything handy for a weapon.

Tony Clifton

Notice that the guy throwing a helmet is a proud t-shirt wearing member of ''White Dove'', a group that is actually known for creating turmoil. The white dove is usually a sign of peace but these opportunists simply use the image as a disguise

Sorry, but that is wrong.

I was there.

The protesters after pushing through several police lines arrived in the early afternoon at Si Sao Thewet, positioned their mobile stage there, and protested against Prem. For several hours nothing occurred other than speeches on the stage, until at sometime around 20.00 the government ordered the police to disperse the protesters and to arrest the leaders. When protesters resisted, clashes erupted. Without looking at my notes, there were three rounds of clashes, where protesters fought off the police. When police began firing tear gas grenades into protesters, the protest leaders called the protest off and retreat back to their encampment at Sanam Luang at around 23.00.

The violence during the Si Sao Thewet clashes was nothing more than some average clash in Europe, no dead or badly injured, and the only violent incident during the entire coup period.

So these thugs aren't the poorly funded group with white plastic chairs and hello dolly mics. These are the street thugs Thaksin funded to harass the yellowshirts and formed the nucleus of the redshirts.

[nicknostitz]

Unsurprisingly, it was reported by unbiased real reporters (who were also there) at the time in a completely different manner.

eg.

The Associated Press

Published: July 26, 2007

BANGKOK, Thailand: Nine leaders of an anti-government protest in Thailand that turned violent and resulted in hundreds of injuries were jailed

Over 200 police were injured with far, far fewer misnamed White Doves/Red Shirts/UDD.

Several of the current Red Shirt leaders were arrested, eg. Weng, Natthawut.

Some year soon, they will have their cases from 2007 dealt with.

But hey, at least they can lay claim to being the first of many instances of street violence since.

Again wrong, most of them weren't there when it started, but arrived after.

I distinctly remember my AP colleague arriving during the second round of clashes, and leaving soon to file his stuff to make the deadlines. Several other colleagues who then later arrived i have called myself.

A few local Thai journos were there, but at the time, still under coup rules, local media was highly censored.

[nicknostitz]

So these thugs aren't the poorly funded group with white plastic chairs and hello dolly mics. These are the street thugs Thaksin funded to harass the yellowshirts and formed the nucleus of the redshirts.

This discussion has now reached yet again the point of unbearable inanity.

Have a nice day.

[rubl]

"Again wrong, most of them weren't there when it started, but arrived after."

sorry Nick, again wrong. Steve9 didn't say the reporters were there from the start, just that they reported from there

Unsurprisingly, it was reported by unbiased real reporters (who were also there) at the time in a completely different manner.

eg.

The Associated Press
Published: July 26, 2007
BANGKOK, Thailand: Nine leaders of an anti-government protest in Thailand that turned violent and resulted in hundreds of injuries were jailed

Over 200 police were injured with far, far fewer misnamed White Doves/Red Shirts/UDD.
Several of the current Red Shirt leaders were arrested, eg. Weng, Natthawut.
Some year soon, they will have their cases from 2007 dealt with.

But hey, at least they can lay claim to being the first of many instances of street violence since.

Again wrong, most of them weren't there when it started, but arrived after.

I distinctly remember my AP colleague arriving during the second round of clashes, and leaving soon to file his stuff to make the deadlines. Several other colleagues who then later arrived i have called myself.

A few local Thai journos were there, but at the time, still under coup rules, local media was highly censored.

Edited November 1, 2013 by rubl

[nicknostitz]

Amazing.

A made up explanation with zero validation/corroboration in a feeble attempt to discredit real reporters who work for real news agencies and file real news articles.

And to do so just because the real news differs from your version.

.

You wish....

http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/party-at-prems/

This story does corroborate the version of events i have presented.

sorry, several edits: in the Asia Sentinel Link the authors name was replaced with "our correspondent", but in the following relinked story the original version with the author named is to be found here:

https://hicomrade.wordpress.com/2007/07/24/

Dan Ten Kate, the author, works for Bloomberg.

Edited November 1, 2013 by nicknostitz

[rubl]

Not sure what two two are fighting over, but the topic is on the indictment of Abhisit/Suthep by the AG. It relates to the March - May 2010 fun only. The indictment for 'premeditated murder', imagine. With 'everybody' knowing this round started around the late February 2010 decision to confiscate 47 billion of Thaksin's ill-gotten gains. A few 'reconciliatory' grenades were lobbed to mark the intent of the UDD it would seem.

Amazing.

A made up explanation with zero validation/corroboration in a feeble attempt to discredit real reporters who work for real news agencies and file real news articles.

And to do so just because the real news differs from your version.

.

You wish....

http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/party-at-prems/

This story does corroborate the version of events i have presented.

Dan Ten Kate, the author, works now for Bloomberg.

[Steve9]

Not sure what two two are fighting over, but the topic is on the indictment of Abhisit/Suthep by the AG. It relates to the March - May 2010 fun only. The indictment for 'premeditated murder', imagine. With 'everybody' knowing this round started around the late February 2010 decision to confiscate 47 billion of Thaksin's ill-gotten gains. A few 'reconciliatory' grenades were lobbed to mark the intent of the UDD it would seem.

Not really intended as a fight, just pointing out some of the blatantly erroneous description of past events and the bias that comes out.

Goes to credibility on current events, but, as that's been established now, I agree, we should return to the Attorney-General aspect of indicting Abhisit and Suthep.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Steve9

[Thai at Heart]

Sorry, i misunderstood you.

I think that the main reason why it took a while to gather momentum is less the fact that people were scared (which people were, i was also initially somewhat careful when i photographed these protests - at the time i only made notes, but did not yet write publicly. Nobody really knew at the time what the reaction of the military towards those protests was going to be), but that the supporters of Thaksin, including the TRT were just not prepared to protest against a coup. TRT was a political party, not a street protest movement, and just did not have the organization in place back then, and had to build it from scratch.

By mid 2007 though there were protests with increasing numbers, often several ten thousands of protesters. The protests ceased when elections were announced, and the different parties concentrated on election campaigning. Which, as we know the TRT placeholder PPP won convincingly, even 111 of their most experienced politicians were banned. They began protesting again after the PAD decided to oust the elected government, in spring 2008.

For many people the Red Shirts came to their attention in 2009 and 2010, and it often is forgotten that already in 2007 they have had substantial mass protests (then though not under the label of "Red Shirts" but simply as UDD, or Nor Por Chor, and later Nor Por Kor), and from autumn 2008 onwards their mass gatherings dwarfed any previous and ongoing PAD protests, especially in the second mass gathering as Red Shirts in the Rajamangala Stadium.

The reasoning you give for why the protests didn't start the day after the coup, being mainly that the supporters of Thaksin were simply not prepared, is a good one, providing you buy into the idea that it is simply not possible for spontaneous protests in which a large mass of people are mobilized and take to the streets not after being given funding and instruction, but by pure strength of feeling, to occur.

Personally i believe they can occur, but what is required is a really strong ground swell of public opinion. Might not happen overnight, but after a few thousand congregate, gradually more people take it upon themselves to join, and before you know it, things have snowballed into a very large public demonstration.

The fact that Thaksin's supporters never did that, but instead waited to be funded and instructed, is perhaps how Thaksin will one day, reconcile himself with having to do the dirty on them; knowledge that his friends in Thailand have only ever truly been there for him, when he has opened his cheque book.

The only organisations known for spontaneous protest in Thailand are students.

Thaksin had virtually no student following. As for protesting during a coup, I think history would show that can be suicidal.

[Thai at Heart]

And do you honestly think that the NACC is any more independent than the DSI?

Well, look at the fact that the director of the DSI, Khun Tarit, was also a member of the "Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation" or CRES, who ordered the crack-down of the April 2010. Now, this same Tarit is investigating against the members of the CRES and conveniently forgets his own responsibility.

So much for the "Independence" of the DSI.

And about the independence of the Office of the Attorney General: The day after they indicted Abhisit and Suthep, the Yingluck government gave them a hefty raise of salary. Coincidence? Hardly.

Small correction, not a hefty raise of salary but a bonus.

Only in Thailand could you head up an organisation that is investigating something you were yourself part of and proclaim that I will conduct the investigation impartially.

[metisdead]

Posts that were discussing other members rather than the topic have been removed as well as the replies.

[rixalex]

The reasoning you give for why the protests didn't start the day after the coup, being mainly that the supporters of Thaksin were simply not prepared, is a good one, providing you buy into the idea that it is simply not possible for spontaneous protests in which a large mass of people are mobilized and take to the streets not after being given funding and instruction, but by pure strength of feeling, to occur.

Personally i believe they can occur, but what is required is a really strong ground swell of public opinion. Might not happen overnight, but after a few thousand congregate, gradually more people take it upon themselves to join, and before you know it, things have snowballed into a very large public demonstration.

The fact that Thaksin's supporters never did that, but instead waited to be funded and instructed, is perhaps how Thaksin will one day, reconcile himself with having to do the dirty on them; knowledge that his friends in Thailand have only ever truly been there for him, when he has opened his cheque book.

The only organisations known for spontaneous protest in Thailand are students.

Thaksin had virtually no student following. As for protesting during a coup, I think history would show that can be suicidal.

If we went back in time to a week before the coup, and asked Thaksin what he thought the reaction would be, were he ousted from power, what do you think he would have said?

Answer A: Seeing as an overwhelming majority of Thai people support and love me, i think if anyone tried to oust me, there would be nationwide protests and an uprising of the people. People wouldn't sit by and do nothing. People would be outraged. They would certainly do something immediately.

or

Answer B: I think nothing at all would really happen. Perhaps some people would go around and hand out flowers to soldiers. But that would be it. Nobody would protest on my behalf, save perhaps for on an internet discussion forum. Everyone would stay in there homes, and life would go on as normal.

Of course he would have said something along the lines of answer A, and i think if he was as overwhelmingly popular as we are always being told he is, that is what would have happened, on something along those lines. You say that protesting a coup can be suicidal, but so can taking over a capital city and taking on the army. Red shirts were happy to act in a suicidal manner in 2009 and 2010. So why weren't these same people prepared to put their lives on the line for him in 2006? I'll tell you why, because he hadn't yet opened his cheque book and given out the instructions. His support is and always has been, directly connected to his money and resources. Take those away, and he would become a nobody overnight.

[Thai at Heart]

The reasoning you give for why the protests didn't start the day after the coup, being mainly that the supporters of Thaksin were simply not prepared, is a good one, providing you buy into the idea that it is simply not possible for spontaneous protests in which a large mass of people are mobilized and take to the streets not after being given funding and instruction, but by pure strength of feeling, to occur.

Personally i believe they can occur, but what is required is a really strong ground swell of public opinion. Might not happen overnight, but after a few thousand congregate, gradually more people take it upon themselves to join, and before you know it, things have snowballed into a very large public demonstration.

The fact that Thaksin's supporters never did that, but instead waited to be funded and instructed, is perhaps how Thaksin will one day, reconcile himself with having to do the dirty on them; knowledge that his friends in Thailand have only ever truly been there for him, when he has opened his cheque book.

The only organisations known for spontaneous protest in Thailand are students.

Thaksin had virtually no student following. As for protesting during a coup, I think history would show that can be suicidal.

If we went back in time to a week before the coup, and asked Thaksin what he thought the reaction would be, were he ousted from power, what do you think he would have said?

Answer A: Seeing as an overwhelming majority of Thai people support and love me, i think if anyone tried to oust me, there would be nationwide protests and an uprising of the people. People wouldn't sit by and do nothing. People would be outraged. They would certainly do something immediately.

or

Answer B: I think nothing at all would really happen. Perhaps some people would go around and hand out flowers to soldiers. But that would be it. Nobody would protest on my behalf, save perhaps for on an internet discussion forum. Everyone would stay in there homes, and life would go on as normal.

Of course he would have said something along the lines of answer A, and i think if he was as overwhelmingly popular as we are always being told he is, that is what would have happened, on something along those lines. You say that protesting a coup can be suicidal, but so can taking over a capital city and taking on the army. Red shirts were happy to act in a suicidal manner in 2009 and 2010. So why weren't these same people prepared to put their lives on the line for him in 2006? I'll tell you why, because he hadn't yet opened his cheque book and given out the instructions. His support is and always has been, directly connected to his money and resources. Take those away, and he would become a nobody overnight.

That's as maybe.

The coup mainly occurred in bangkok. The army stepped in. Bangkokians aren't Thaksin biggest support, and this it was quick. Thaksin was out of the country and no one knew how to react.

His support is very geographically concentrated. Also possible he thought he could get the army to split or get enough international condemnation of the coup to be able to get back.

[rixalex]

The coup mainly occurred in bangkok. The army stepped in. Bangkokians aren't Thaksin biggest support, and this it was quick. Thaksin was out of the country and no one knew how to react.

"People didn't know how to react"

Back to the, "outraged citizens aren't capable of acting outraged by themselves, with simple actions such as congregating en masse, they need to be instructed, organised and funded", excuse for why nobody lifted a finger on Thaksin's behalf in September 2006.

[waza]

The reasoning you give for why the protests didn't start the day after the coup, being mainly that the supporters of Thaksin were simply not prepared, is a good one, providing you buy into the idea that it is simply not possible for spontaneous protests in which a large mass of people are mobilized and take to the streets not after being given funding and instruction, but by pure strength of feeling, to occur.

Personally i believe they can occur, but what is required is a really strong ground swell of public opinion. Might not happen overnight, but after a few thousand congregate, gradually more people take it upon themselves to join, and before you know it, things have snowballed into a very large public demonstration.

The fact that Thaksin's supporters never did that, but instead waited to be funded and instructed, is perhaps how Thaksin will one day, reconcile himself with having to do the dirty on them; knowledge that his friends in Thailand have only ever truly been there for him, when he has opened his cheque book.

The only organisations known for spontaneous protest in Thailand are students.

Thaksin had virtually no student following. As for protesting during a coup, I think history would show that can be suicidal.

If we went back in time to a week before the coup, and asked Thaksin what he thought the reaction would be, were he ousted from power, what do you think he would have said?

Answer A: Seeing as an overwhelming majority of Thai people support and love me, i think if anyone tried to oust me, there would be nationwide protests and an uprising of the people. People wouldn't sit by and do nothing. People would be outraged. They would certainly do something immediately.

or

Answer B: I think nothing at all would really happen. Perhaps some people would go around and hand out flowers to soldiers. But that would be it. Nobody would protest on my behalf, save perhaps for on an internet discussion forum. Everyone would stay in there homes, and life would go on as normal.

Of course he would have said something along the lines of answer A, and i think if he was as overwhelmingly popular as we are always being told he is, that is what would have happened, on something along those lines. You say that protesting a coup can be suicidal, but so can taking over a capital city and taking on the army. Red shirts were happy to act in a suicidal manner in 2009 and 2010. So why weren't these same people prepared to put their lives on the line for him in 2006? I'll tell you why, because he hadn't yet opened his cheque book and given out the instructions. His support is and always has been, directly connected to his money and resources. Take those away, and he would become a nobody overnight.

That's as maybe.

The coup mainly occurred in bangkok. The army stepped in. Bangkokians aren't Thaksin biggest support, and this it was quick. Thaksin was out of the country and no one knew how to react.

His support is very geographically concentrated. Also possible he thought he could get the army to split or get enough international condemnation of the coup to be able to get back.

Interesting proposition, however, the military didn't have a large presence in Issan and like Bangkok, no one was so morally outraged that they hopped in the D-max and drove to town to protest over their beloved caretaker tyrant being deposed.