International alarm mounts over Thai coup

[rubl]

If we apply the reasoning from the 'Fabulous Four School of Logic" about 98% of all posts should be removed as being 'no proof', but 'a pack of lies'. The mod's will be busy then.

Anyway, how do you know 'they' tried that and 'came up with nothing'? Any proof to your statement?

Maybe you should stick to googling wooden houses to be able to suggest that proves something

-- long list of quotes removed, see original post for that --

Now with all that activity you would have thought at least one link to "sponsoring terrorism" would have been found and the people responsible charged and tried in a court.

The result - no one has been charged with sponsoring the events of 2010, despite abhisit and sutheps posturings.

Maybe you should stick to subjects that you know about - at least that way you'll maybe have a better chance of winning an argument.

Apologies to northernjohn and others of the "hard of reading" fraternity.

Rumour has it that around September/October 2010 when the regular bomb attacks in Bangkok stopped a deal was made with Thaksin. Totally unfounded of course as according to some Thaksin wasn't involved in the first place. It's pure coincidence that regularly people from Pheu Thai happened to bump into Thaksin while they were going along their legitimate business.

No prove, just like no prove (yet) to Thaksin's control over Pheu Thai and Yingluck government. Only the words of the master himself and probably some (wiki) leaked stuff.

Apologies to all for the weakness of these arguments, but lots of information is simply difficult to come by and probably only in one or two decades we'll get to know the finer details. At least we know from Thaksin himself that an answer like "who am I to do such" will follow much later by an admission that he was someone to do such. Like the failed 'peace down South' he brokered

Don't apologise for the weakness of your arguments, rubl, with your posts I'm used to it.

I really have to thank you for your kind words. As you know I always appreciate your comments as they tend to give a clear indication when I'm on the right track.

[fab4]

If we apply the reasoning from the 'Fabulous Four School of Logic" about 98% of all posts should be removed as being 'no proof', but 'a pack of lies'. The mod's will be busy then.

Anyway, how do you know 'they' tried that and 'came up with nothing'? Any proof to your statement?

Maybe you should stick to googling wooden houses to be able to suggest that proves something

BANGKOK, Thailand -- Thailand's military-backed government has frozen bank accounts belonging to wealthy suspected supporters of Bangkok's bloody insurrection, amid fears that the Red Shirts are plotting revenge after their bamboo barricades were crushed and 90 people died.

More than 80 prominent Thais were publicly named in a government-issued financial blacklist, alongside details of how much money they allegedly withdrew from their bank accounts during the failed two-month-long protests.Officials demanded explanations for the monetary transfers -- totalling an equivalent of millions of dollars -- and alleged that the cash enabled thousands of protesters to survive behind barricades in the heart of Bangkok.

"I insist that the government has never intended to persecute anyone," said Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Sunday (June 20) after freezing the accounts.

One suspected Red Shirt leader, whose accounts were frozen, denied financing the protest and said her bank account showed large transfers because she sold her house and then withdrew some of the deposited money to pay for a factory.

The prime minister, however, remained wary.

"I still believe that there are attempts to financially support [the Red Shirts] by a network of supporters," Mr. Abhisit said.

The seven Red Shirt leaders on the list allegedly deposited large sums of money into their own accounts during September 2009 to May 2010, but information about withdrawals was described as "not available."

The seven Red leaders included three who were very outspoken during the protests: Veera Musikhapong, Kwanchai Praipana, and Weng Tojirakarn.

A handful of former police and military officers, plus several companies, round out the 83 names.

Companies on the list included S.C. Asset Corporation, P.T. Corporation, S.C.K. Estate, S.C. Office Park, and other Thai financial management services.

No evidence was made public linking any individuals' withdrawals to other people's deposits.No paper trail was offered to show where the withdrawals went.

The government, however, said the large sums involved were suspicious.

The immediate focus of the blacklist, however, appeared to be an attempt to link those names to the Reds' illegal barricading of central Bangkok, and take action against anyone found guilty of funding the siege.

"Was that money funding a terror attack?" said Deputy Prime Minister for Security Affairs, Suthep Thaugsuban.

"Those who are found to have supported terrorism will be prosecuted," Mr. Suthep warned.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1006/S00177.htm

Also

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/27/AR2010052705708.html and

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/05/19/business/Fresh-list-of-43-firms-individual-issued-by-CRES-30129712.html and this

http://asiancorrespondent.com/33982/are-these-the-red-shirt-funders/ and this

http://asiancorrespondent.com/34035/how-did-people-get-on-the-red-shirt-funding-list/

Now with all that activity you would have thought at least one link to "sponsoring terrorism" would have been found and the people responsible charged and tried in a court.

The result - no one has been charged with sponsoring the events of 2010, despite abhisit and sutheps posturings.

Maybe you should stick to subjects that you know about - at least that way you'll maybe have a better chance of winning an argument.

Apologies to northernjohn and others of the "hard of reading" fraternity.

........prosecuted on terrorism charges

Nattawut co-organised the mass protests in 2009 and, together with the other UDD heads, led the "Red Shirts" in the fierce protests from March to May 2010 that led to the bloody military crackdowns of April and May.^[2] Nattawut, Jatuporn Prompan and other Red-Shirt leaders surrendered themselves to police to prevent further bloodshed during the violent military crackdown on 19 May 2010.^[4] Afterwards, Nattawut was prosecuted on terrorism charges.^[2] He was released on bail terms on 22 February 2011.^[5]

You obviously have reading comprehension problems. The entire context of the links provided were about alleged funding of the red shirt protests in 2010. Indeed suthep said:

"Those who are found to have supported terrorism will be prosecuted,"

i.e those found "sponsoring" terrorism will be prosecuted.

People being accused of and eventually being charged as being terrorists to further a political decision to lend "legitimacy" to a crackdown on UDD Protesters, resulting in an additional 60 odd civilian deaths ( 25 having already been killed on April 10th), is a different matter entirely.

[fab4]

and only because end of February 2010 a court ruled to confiscate 46 billion of Thaksin's ill gotten gains.

Anyway the international alarm seems to have been switched off except for a few TV posters who just go on and on about all those who will not see what they want them to see and believe.

PS 92 or 93 dead in 2010, thanks to armed militants mingling with peaceful protesters causing collateral damage. Thanks Thaksin.

Collateral damage - you really come across as a <deleted> at times.

[rubl]

You obviously have reading comprehension problems. The entire context of the links provided were about alleged funding of the red shirt protests in 2010. Indeed suthep said:

"Those who are found to have supported terrorism will be prosecuted,"

i.e those found "sponsoring" terrorism will be prosecuted.

People being accused of and eventually being charged as being terrorists to further a political decision to lend "legitimacy" to a crackdown on UDD Protesters, resulting in an additional 60 odd civilian deaths ( 25 having already been killed on April 10th), is a different matter entirely.

"being charged as being terrorists to further a political decision".

The sad thing is that you probably believe what you write here. Plus not having any problem with the anti-Yingluck government protesters immediately branded as terrorists only for protesting!

And of course we got into a rehash of 2010 riots with a topic which come into being because the Yingluck government tried to push through a modified blanket amnesty bill covering brother Thaksin's last two years in/out of office and the first two years of Yingluck (mis)administration. Personally I think that to have been a greater cause for alarm than the coup which has seen life stabilizing for Thai, even if not for a few rabid posters here.

[rubl]

and only because end of February 2010 a court ruled to confiscate 46 billion of Thaksin's ill gotten gains.

Anyway the international alarm seems to have been switched off except for a few TV posters who just go on and on about all those who will not see what they want them to see and believe.

PS 92 or 93 dead in 2010, thanks to armed militants mingling with peaceful protesters causing collateral damage. Thanks Thaksin.

Collateral damage - you really come across as a <deleted> at times.

Well, please ask those heavily armed militants or the UDD leaders how they interpret the unfortunate death of peaceful protesters because of those militants moving and executing from within grouped protesters.

With any respect possibly due,

B. Rubl, D.U.p.e, <deleted>

[Luger2]

Local international alarm seems to be lessening :

ASEAN will not intervene into Thailand's internal affairs

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Asean-will-not-intervene-into-Thailands-internal-a-30235361.html

This is a 100 year old policy so it's not news.

Just how long do you think ASEAN has been in existence?

Perhaps the next headline should be:

Grumpy Old Thaksinistas Not In Thailand Struggle To Find Fault In Positive Steps

[AleG]

Local international alarm seems to be lessening :

ASEAN will not intervene into Thailand's internal affairs

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Asean-will-not-intervene-into-Thailands-internal-a-30235361.html

This is a 100 year old policy so it's not news.

Try to keep up, thx.

I thought the ASEAN was going to slap the feudalist ammart in Thailand and reject the coup, I know because you said so.

You guys lost that thread decisively so I'd hoped you'd work on your comprehension and your feeble skills of argument, not to mention to lick your wounds, but I see now the damage is still ringing in your ears so here you are refighting a thread long gone.

Asean governments well know the most recent development means big trouble in and for this region for a long time to come. I'm afraid you're going to have to be patient cause things will take a while to organize and to implement.

In short, the matter is still open and it would be wildly immature to draw conclusions at this point of time or developments.

Lest we forget, this is how you guys misrepresented Asean at the thread:

JesseFrank, on 09 May 2014 - 09:58, said:

You want to know why the other ASEAN's still want to have to do with someone who is just convicted by a court.

I found a picture of the previous Asean meeting, I think Surapong is the one in the far left corner

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/724743-surapong-insists-he-is-still-deputy-pm-and-wants-to-attend-asean-summit/#entry7795376

I don't know why you do this to yourself.

In that thread you insisted that ASEAN would most likely endorse Surapong as the rightful FM of Thailand, that he would attend the summit and that ASEAN would deliver a slap to the "ammart feudalists" None of that happened yet in your head you "won" the thread.

To top it off you have the gal to say "In short, the matter is still open and it would be wildly immature to draw conclusions at this point of time or developments". Pffff!!!

Even worse, here you do a 180 to save face saying that the 20something year old ASEAN has a 100 year old policy of not intervening on internal affairs, which completely contradicts what you were claiming ASEAN would do a few weeks ago.

So which one is it? ASEAN will continue their "100 year old" policy of not intervening in other members internal affairs or will it intervene?

[Luger2]

Local international alarm seems to be lessening :

ASEAN will not intervene into Thailand's internal affairs

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Asean-will-not-intervene-into-Thailands-internal-a-30235361.html

This is a 100 year old policy so it's not news.

Try to keep up, thx.

I thought the ASEAN was going to slap the feudalist ammart in Thailand and reject the coup, I know because you said so.

[ggold]

and only because end of February 2010 a court ruled to confiscate 46 billion of Thaksin's ill gotten gains.

Anyway the international alarm seems to have been switched off except for a few TV posters who just go on and on about all those who will not see what they want them to see and believe.

PS 92 or 93 dead in 2010, thanks to armed militants mingling with peaceful protesters causing collateral damage. Thanks Thaksin.

Collateral damage - you really come across as a <deleted> at times.

If all you can do is respond with personal attacks, them you have lost the argument.

[Publicus]

Local international alarm seems to be lessening :

ASEAN will not intervene into Thailand's internal affairs

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Asean-will-not-intervene-into-Thailands-internal-a-30235361.html

This is a 100 year old policy so it's not news.

Just how long do you think ASEAN has been in existence?

Perhaps the next headline should be:

Grumpy Old Thaksinistas Not In Thailand Struggle To Find Fault In Positive Steps

A 100 year old culture.

Ears are still ringing from the damage at the month old thread, eh.

You guys really got wounded at that thread - nay, demolished

I'm amazed you soreheads are still fighting the thing.

Don't know how to win and don't know how to lose.

[fab4]

You obviously have reading comprehension problems. The entire context of the links provided were about alleged funding of the red shirt protests in 2010. Indeed suthep said:

"Those who are found to have supported terrorism will be prosecuted,"

i.e those found "sponsoring" terrorism will be prosecuted.

People being accused of and eventually being charged as being terrorists to further a political decision to lend "legitimacy" to a crackdown on UDD Protesters, resulting in an additional 60 odd civilian deaths ( 25 having already been killed on April 10th), is a different matter entirely.

"being charged as being terrorists to further a political decision".

The sad thing is that you probably believe what you write here. Plus not having any problem with the anti-Yingluck government protesters immediately branded as terrorists only for protesting!

And of course we got into a rehash of 2010 riots with a topic which come into being because the Yingluck government tried to push through a modified blanket amnesty bill covering brother Thaksin's last two years in/out of office and the first two years of Yingluck (mis)administration. Personally I think that to have been a greater cause for alarm than the coup which has seen life stabilizing for Thai, even if not for a few rabid posters here.

Political decision? - yes I do believe it was. The government admitted it

THAILAND’S government said yesterday a crackdown on Red Shirt protesters will continue despite their plea for U.N-mediated talks.

Government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn said there was no reason for the army to withdraw since “authorities are not using weapons to crack down on civilians.”

The government maintained it was only targeting armed “terrorists” among the Red Shirts. http://szdaily.sznews.com/html/2010-05/17/content_1076581.htm

I do not recall making any statements about not having a problem with the anti-Yingluck government protesters immediately branded as terrorists only for protesting!

More lies.

I take it you missed this comment on who Yingluck called terrorists

A SIX-year-old girl died early today from wounds sustained during a grenade attack on a busy Bangkok shopping area, taking the number of children killed in Thai political violence over the weekend to three.

The attacks, which appear to mark an escalation of unrest in nearly four months of political crisis, earned condemnation from UN chief Ban Ki-moon while Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra labelled them “terrorist acts’’.

[Luger2]

Local international alarm seems to be lessening :

ASEAN will not intervene into Thailand's internal affairs

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Asean-will-not-intervene-into-Thailands-internal-a-30235361.html

This is a 100 year old policy so it's not news.

Just how long do you think ASEAN has been in existence?

Perhaps the next headline should be:

Grumpy Old Thaksinistas Not In Thailand Struggle To Find Fault In Positive Steps

A 100 year old culture.

Grumpy Old Thaksinistas Not In Thailand Struggle To Explain Their Misstatements

[fab4]

and only because end of February 2010 a court ruled to confiscate 46 billion of Thaksin's ill gotten gains.

Anyway the international alarm seems to have been switched off except for a few TV posters who just go on and on about all those who will not see what they want them to see and believe.

PS 92 or 93 dead in 2010, thanks to armed militants mingling with peaceful protesters causing collateral damage. Thanks Thaksin.

Collateral damage - you really come across as a <deleted> at times.

If all you can do is respond with personal attacks, them you have lost the argument.

Do you have a better response to someone who calls murdered unarmed civilians, collateral damage?

[Publicus]

Ears are still ringing from the damage at the month old thread, eh.

You guys really got wounded at that thread - nay, demolished

I'm amazed you soreheads are still fighting the thing.

Don't know how to win and don't know how to lose.

Grumpy Old Thaksinistas Not In Thailand Struggle To Explain Their Misstatements

It would seem all your claims are baseless.

So give it up, at long last.

[rubl]

A 100 year old culture.

Ears are still ringing from the damage at the month old thread, eh.

You guys really got wounded at that thread - nay, demolished

I'm amazed you soreheads are still fighting the thing.

Don't know how to win and don't know how to lose.

So policy now is culture?

Anyway, we do know when someone obfuscates, tries to sidetrack, puts in half-truths and the odd statement of "because of this you are that" as absolute statements.

From your local, wounded, demolished, sore-headed, don't know how to win or lose, uncle rubl

[rubl]

and only because end of February 2010 a court ruled to confiscate 46 billion of Thaksin's ill gotten gains.

Anyway the international alarm seems to have been switched off except for a few TV posters who just go on and on about all those who will not see what they want them to see and believe.

PS 92 or 93 dead in 2010, thanks to armed militants mingling with peaceful protesters causing collateral damage. Thanks Thaksin.

Collateral damage - you really come across as a <deleted> at times.

If all you can do is respond with personal attacks, them you have lost the argument.

Do you have a better response to someone who calls murdered unarmed civilians, collateral damage?

Do you have a better term than 'terrorists' for people who use unarmed protesters to hide heavily armed militant and thereby showing total lack of compassion for possible injuries or deaths amongst those unarmed cannon fodder type of supporters?

[Publicus]

A 100 year old culture.

Ears are still ringing from the damage at the month old thread, eh.

You guys really got wounded at that thread - nay, demolished

I'm amazed you soreheads are still fighting the thing.

Don't know how to win and don't know how to lose.

So policy now is culture?

Anyway, we do know when someone obfuscates, tries to sidetrack, puts in half-truths and the odd statement of "because of this you are that" as absolute statements.

From your local, wounded, demolished, sore-headed, don't know how to win or lose, uncle rubl

Culture has transitioned and manifested in to policy.

It's rather a normal course of events for a nation state.

You got it backwards ruble.

But then everything is relative, eh

[AleG]

A 100 year old culture.

Ears are still ringing from the damage at the month old thread, eh.

You guys really got wounded at that thread - nay, demolished

I'm amazed you soreheads are still fighting the thing.

Don't know how to win and don't know how to lose.

So policy now is culture?

Anyway, we do know when someone obfuscates, tries to sidetrack, puts in half-truths and the odd statement of "because of this you are that" as absolute statements.

From your local, wounded, demolished, sore-headed, don't know how to win or lose, uncle rubl

Culture has transitioned and manifested in to policy.

It's rather a normal course of events for a nation state.

You got it backwards ruble.

But then everything is relative, eh

Asian cultures are 100 years old now? Talking about desperate spinning, how's the answer to my previous post coming along?

[rubl]

I do not recall making any statements about not having a problem with the anti-Yingluck government protesters immediately branded as terrorists only for protesting!

More lies.

I take it you missed this comment on who Yingluck called terrorists

A SIX-year-old girl died early today from wounds sustained during a grenade attack on a busy Bangkok shopping area, taking the number of children killed in Thai political violence over the weekend to three.

The attacks, which appear to mark an escalation of unrest in nearly four months of political crisis, earned condemnation from UN chief Ban Ki-moon while Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra labelled them “terrorist acts’’.

you can't help yourself, now can you?

The quote was in full

"Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra described these attacks as “terrorist acts for political gain” and reiterated that her government will not condone these criminal acts. She has ordered a full investigation on the matter.

...

With the escalating violence in the Thai capital of Bangkok, Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has left the capital and established office about 150 kilometers away.

Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/#WoqY2EQptTyXqsGb.99"

Now that's more like Ms. Yingluck speak. Frequently with one side doing the cowardly attacks Ms. Yingluck warned ALL including those who didn't do anything.

[rubl]

International alarm growing. Mind you, it would seem this chap didn't read the message from publicus:

Thailand Live Wednesday #61:

THAI-MALAYSIAN TIES
Malaysia's armed forces chief visits to boost bilateral military ties

BANGKOK: -- Malaysian Armed Forces chief Gen Zulkifeli bin Mohhd Zin is paying a two-day visit to Thailand to boost military relations between the two neighboring countries.

Gen Zulkifeli, who arrived in Thailand on Tuesday, was welcomed by General Prayuth Chan-ocha, Thai Army Chief and head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), at the Thai Army headquarters.

His visit to Thailand as the guest of the Royal Thai Armed Forces is the first ever by the Malaysian Armed Forces chief.

The visit has demonstrated Kuala Lumpur's strong ties with Thailand, especially in defense, and Malaysia was the first country whose military top brass has visited Thailand since the coup.

Thailand has continued to maintain close military ties with countries, despite the United States and Australia having downgraded official ties, following the NCPO seizure of administrative power on May 22.


-- The Nation 2014-06-04

"

[fab4]

I do not recall making any statements about not having a problem with the anti-Yingluck government protesters immediately branded as terrorists only for protesting!

More lies.

I take it you missed this comment on who Yingluck called terrorists

A SIX-year-old girl died early today from wounds sustained during a grenade attack on a busy Bangkok shopping area, taking the number of children killed in Thai political violence over the weekend to three.

The attacks, which appear to mark an escalation of unrest in nearly four months of political crisis, earned condemnation from UN chief Ban Ki-moon while Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra labelled them “terrorist acts’’.

you can't help yourself, now can you?

The quote was in full

"Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra described these attacks as “terrorist acts for political gain” and reiterated that her government will not condone these criminal acts. She has ordered a full investigation on the matter.

...

With the escalating violence in the Thai capital of Bangkok, Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has left the capital and established office about 150 kilometers away.

Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/#WoqY2EQptTyXqsGb.99"

Now that's more like Ms. Yingluck speak. Frequently with one side doing the cowardly attacks Ms. Yingluck warned ALL including those who didn't do anything.

What's your point - she denounced the actions of people who killed the children as terrorist acts for political gain (in your link,). As for your Yingluck warning ALL - including those who did nothing - well, so what, the attacks weren't all one sided so why shouldn't she condemn ALL?

Really, you honestly think "they" did nothing - I presume you mean the anti government "side" when you came up with that fairy tale - you must be joking. From your link

Meanwhile, on Monday a police officer died after nearly a week in the hospital due to a fatal injury caused by a gunshot in the head. The police officer was shot during a gun battle last week with protesters in Bangkok which claimed the lives of five people, including another policeman. These violent attacks are mostly observed in the Thai capital, although several more attacks were recorded outside of the capital, particularly in the eastern province.

[djjamie]

I do not recall making any statements about not having a problem with the anti-Yingluck government protesters immediately branded as terrorists only for protesting!

More lies.

I take it you missed this comment on who Yingluck called terrorists

you can't help yourself, now can you?

The quote was in full

"Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra described these attacks as “terrorist acts for political gain” and reiterated that her government will not condone these criminal acts. She has ordered a full investigation on the matter.

...

With the escalating violence in the Thai capital of Bangkok, Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has left the capital and established office about 150 kilometers away.

Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/#WoqY2EQptTyXqsGb.99"

Now that's more like Ms. Yingluck speak. Frequently with one side doing the cowardly attacks Ms. Yingluck warned ALL including those who didn't do anything.

What's your point - she denounced the actions of people who killed the children as terrorist acts for political gain (in your link,). As for your Yingluck warning ALL - including those who did nothing - well, so what, the attacks weren't all one sided so why shouldn't she condemn ALL?

Really, you honestly think "they" did nothing - I presume you mean the anti government "side" when you came up with that fairy tale - you must be joking. From your link

Meanwhile, on Monday a police officer died after nearly a week in the hospital due to a fatal injury caused by a gunshot in the head. The police officer was shot during a gun battle last week with protesters in Bangkok which claimed the lives of five people, including another policeman. These violent attacks are mostly observed in the Thai capital, although several more attacks were recorded outside of the capital, particularly in the eastern province.

Terrorist attack in London. Tony Blair’s reaction was returning to London ASAP and doing a national press conference on TV. His statement was "Let no one be in doubt. The rules of the game have changed." He outlined 12 new measures that aimed to transform the landscape of counter terrorism in England. In other words he was being pro active. The population of England have a minimum standard of education that promulgated into a national awareness that is not propaganda driven and they would have not forgiven Blair if he wrote a statement on FB to address these terrorist attacks and left it at that. BTW – Not one single Britain clapped and cheered the terrorist attacks. They stood in unison like the police and denounced terrorism. Mind you the British govt does not have a deputy commerce minister that is accused of terrorism and is a leader of an organization that has been involved in recent weapon finds coupled with arrests of red shirts.

Terrorist attack in USA. George Bush JNR (as much as I dislike him) and AFTER his 6 minute silence in the school class room did a national press conference at 20:30 the same evening of the attack on TV. The after effects were a 9/11 commission, which led to the enabling of the patriot’s act. In other words he was being pro active. The population of America have a minimum standard of education that promulgated into a national awareness that is not propaganda driven and they would have not forgiven Bush if he wrote a statement on FB to address these terrorist attacks and left it at that. BTW – Not one single American clapped and cheered the terrorist attacks. They stood in unison like the police and denounced terrorism including the police. Mind you the American govt does not have a deputy commerce minister that is accused of terrorism and is a leader of an organization that has been involved in recent weapon finds and arrests of red shirts.

Terrorist attacks in Trat and Bangkok, Thailand. Yingluck Shinawatra posted on her official FB page that she denounced the attacks as ``terrorist acts for political gain”, stating the children’s deaths ``were particularly saddening and disturbing’’. FULLSTOP. End of issue. (within 6 days of the general running things they have captured 2 suspects, while the 3rd got away and they have weapon matches…7 days they got results) See the picture below for what yingluck did the day after the terrorist attacks. YEP. Inspected fruit! Of yinglucks supporters 68% of the people have completed less than 7 years of formal education and have a national awareness that is propaganda driven and they don’t care that yingluck wrote a statement on FB to address these terrorist attacks because they got 40% above market value for their rice and most don’t even have internet. At the “Beat the war drum” meeting red shirt clapped and cheered the terrorist attacks upon the police chief stating the “good news”. They stood in unison with the police chief promoting terrorism. Mind you the PTP does have it’s own UDD wing with its leaders being accused of terrorism one of which IS a deputy commerce minster of the PTP.

[rubl]

you can't help yourself, now can you?

The quote was in full

"Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra described these attacks as “terrorist acts for political gain” and reiterated that her government will not condone these criminal acts. She has ordered a full investigation on the matter.

...

With the escalating violence in the Thai capital of Bangkok, Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has left the capital and established office about 150 kilometers away.

Read more at http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/#WoqY2EQptTyXqsGb.99"

Now that's more like Ms. Yingluck speak. Frequently with one side doing the cowardly attacks Ms. Yingluck warned ALL including those who didn't do anything.

What's your point - she denounced the actions of people who killed the children as terrorist acts for political gain (in your link,). As for your Yingluck warning ALL - including those who did nothing - well, so what, the attacks weren't all one sided so why shouldn't she condemn ALL?

Really, you honestly think "they" did nothing - I presume you mean the anti government "side" when you came up with that fairy tale - you must be joking. From your link

Meanwhile, on Monday a police officer died after nearly a week in the hospital due to a fatal injury caused by a gunshot in the head. The police officer was shot during a gun battle last week with protesters in Bangkok which claimed the lives of five people, including another policeman. These violent attacks are mostly observed in the Thai capital, although several more attacks were recorded outside of the capital, particularly in the eastern province.

Still having problem with quoting and providing links, I see. Quote seems from the link I provided

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/

The "so what" clearly marks your comments as biased. Ms. Yingluck frequently 'admonished' ALL sides when only ONE side had been guilty of attacks. Somehow only ONE side was warned in case of PDRC violence against agressors (like the LakSi attack by red-shirts) and ALL sides in case 'unknowns' cowardly fired guns in the night, dropped 100 grenades or killed innocent children.

BTW the article is about the Feb 23rd attacks, but already begin of November 2013 anti-government protesters were being harassed, shot at, etc., etc.

[fab4]

Still having problem with quoting and providing links, I see. Quote seems from the link I provided

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/

The "so what" clearly marks your comments as biased. Ms. Yingluck frequently 'admonished' ALL sides when only ONE side had been guilty of attacks. Somehow only ONE side was warned in case of PDRC violence against agressors (like the LakSi attack by red-shirts) and ALL sides in case 'unknowns' cowardly fired guns in the night, dropped 100 grenades or killed innocent children.

BTW the article is about the Feb 23rd attacks, but already begin of November 2013 anti-government protesters were being harassed, shot at, etc., etc.

No problem with quoting and providing links from my side, rubl. What do you think I meant when I wrote "From your link"?

Your attempt to make political points out of the fact that Yingluck "admonished" ALL sides is frankly laughable.

[heybruce]

"sponsors of domestic terrorism"

Could you give an example of the PTP sponsoring terrorism?

"manipulation of the law"

Well the PTP isn't allowed to write, re-write and ignore the constitution the way the military does, so they do what they can.

"rampant nepotism, corruption."

Let's discuss the military's qualifications and credibility in solving these problems. Oh wait, we can't, can we?

Well, since you ask ... ...

PTP sponsored the UDD led riots in 2010. For those actions UDD leaders are charged with terrorism.

PTP doing what it can is trying to pushed through a amnesty bill modified to be a blanket amnesty bill and even covered Thaksin's last two years in/out of office and the first two disaster years of the Yingluck administration.

Ms. Yingluck has been found guilty of "conflict of interest" by the NACC, relative Surapong gave Thaksin a new passport while the nation was occupied with floodwaters.

So, let's conclude that politicians and especially Pheu Thai wasn't interested in solving the countries problems, just those of Thaksin and a few others. Now that's an issue some would rather not discuss it would seem.

Let's start with the obvious; you only addressed the first point, presumably because you didn't want to address the second, and couldn't address the third.

I'll ask for evidence of PTP sponsoring UDD led riots in 2010.

The amnesty bill may have been a bad idea, but it's a stretch to call it an act of terrorism.

The conflict of interest was re-assigning a minister appointed by her predecessor, Abhisit. I've never known that to be described as an act of terrorism.

Now a request--please address my third point and explain the military's competence and credibility in eliminating corruption in Thailand. You're defending the current government, you needn't worry about censorship. Have fun. But be careful, if all you can do is attack the former government, you'll be announcing that you have nothing.

English is a difficult language, isn't it.

My second line addressed corruption and nepotism, so did the third line.

Evidence, well first ask fab4 for a proper definition of what constitutes evidence.

The 'conflict of interest' was in 'promoting' a chap to an inactive post and get a relative on the vacant spot.

As for your third point, please note that you are not supposed to bait people into making statements for or against at this time. When you are not in Thailand you might not be concerned, but some of us (myself included) are living and working in Thailand and bound by it's law. Today that means the Martial Law.

Now if all you can do is denying the Yingluck government did much wrong, if you think the amnesty bill was 'a bad idea' only ignoring the amnesty part on 'political offences' even covering Yingluck's first two years, you obviously are starting to get desperate. I expect obfuscation and half truths to be replaced by outright lies and personal attacks soon.

When English isn't used correctly it is difficult. I'll have to ignore "if you think the amnesty bill was 'a bad idea' only ignoring the amnesty part on 'political offences' even covering Yingluck's first two years" because I don't know what you mean.

I realize many people have been making a lot of charges regarding terrorism, but I'm not aware of any hard evidence and convictions.

I never disputed that there was corruption or nepotism in Yingluck's government, or at any other time in Thailand's history. I asked you to explain the military's competence and credibility in eliminating it. While I can not explain why I don't think the military is qualified for this job, there is nothing preventing you from explaining why the military is qualified to eliminate corruption.

What gave you the idea that I'm not in Thailand?

[heybruce]

Hey, Bruce either the amnesty bill was a bad idea or it wasn't. No may have been about it.

Your point being? Are you suggesting that whenever a Prime Minister, with the support of some members of his or her government, submits a bad idea that a military coup is the correct response?

A bad idea only?

A sneakily modified amnesty bill which suddenly became a blanket amnesty bill including politically influenced criminal acts AND suddenly covering Thaksin's last two years in/out of office and the first two years of Yingluck administration? A Ms. Yingluck urging anti-government protesters to go home? A Ms. Yingluck saying "it's up to the senate, please go home"? A Ms. Yingluck leaving in to the Senate with the Senate speaker suddenly trying to get a quorum together days before planned? A Ms. Yingluck who with her fellow Pheu Thai MPs branded the anti-government protests as undemocratic, put the police on them, called then terrorists, etc., etc.

All because of a 'bad idea' only?

The coup was a response on the seven months of political bickering and a total lack of even a will to co-operate. Now with alarm only abroad, but a slowly back to normal situation in Thailand, finally we can really start to work on reforms and reconciliation. That is, all those in Thailand.

Yes, a bad idea. Many redshirts were outraged because of the yellowshirts that would have received amnesty. Protesters shutting down an elected government is undemocratic and illegal, setting the police on them is the correct response, a Prime Minister asking them to "please go home" is a display of restraint.

An election in July would have shown a significant drop in support for the PTP, it might have put them out of office, and it would have allowed a cooling off and genuine reconciliation. As I've already explained in as much detail as I can (not much) I have no faith in the reforms. Seven months of political bickering was the pretext for the coup. If you took the time to inform yourself using uncensored news sources you'd get a much better grasp of what's going on.

[ggold]

and only because end of February 2010 a court ruled to confiscate 46 billion of Thaksin's ill gotten gains.

Anyway the international alarm seems to have been switched off except for a few TV posters who just go on and on about all those who will not see what they want them to see and believe.

PS 92 or 93 dead in 2010, thanks to armed militants mingling with peaceful protesters causing collateral damage. Thanks Thaksin.

Collateral damage - you really come across as a <deleted> at times.

If all you can do is respond with personal attacks, them you have lost the argument.

Do you have a better response to someone who calls murdered unarmed civilians, collateral damage?

Actually, You have taken it out of context! rubl is not talking about people being murdered, the collateral damage was the burning of bangkok was it not. Your problem is that you can not accept that Abhisit and Suthep are innocent of the charges of ordering the killing of Protestors. They acted in accordance with the law. It was the armed malitia of the redshirt factions that caused the deaths. If they had not started burning Bangkok the troop might not have had to use force to clear them off the streets. It was Thaksin hoping they would behave like he did and flee the country. An own goal by the reds nothing less.

[rubl]

A bad idea only?

A sneakily modified amnesty bill which suddenly became a blanket amnesty bill including politically influenced criminal acts AND suddenly covering Thaksin's last two years in/out of office and the first two years of Yingluck administration? A Ms. Yingluck urging anti-government protesters to go home? A Ms. Yingluck saying "it's up to the senate, please go home"? A Ms. Yingluck leaving in to the Senate with the Senate speaker suddenly trying to get a quorum together days before planned? A Ms. Yingluck who with her fellow Pheu Thai MPs branded the anti-government protests as undemocratic, put the police on them, called then terrorists, etc., etc.

All because of a 'bad idea' only?

The coup was a response on the seven months of political bickering and a total lack of even a will to co-operate. Now with alarm only abroad, but a slowly back to normal situation in Thailand, finally we can really start to work on reforms and reconciliation. That is, all those in Thailand.

Yes, a bad idea. Many redshirts were outraged because of the yellowshirts that would have received amnesty. Protesters shutting down an elected government is undemocratic and illegal, setting the police on them is the correct response, a Prime Minister asking them to "please go home" is a display of restraint.

An election in July would have shown a significant drop in support for the PTP, it might have put them out of office, and it would have allowed a cooling off and genuine reconciliation. As I've already explained in as much detail as I can (not much) I have no faith in the reforms. Seven months of political bickering was the pretext for the coup. If you took the time to inform yourself using uncensored news sources you'd get a much better grasp of what's going on.

The 'display of restraint' was actually just a display of being devious. Had the protesters gone home to wait the Senate might have concluded 'no comments, no protests, no complaints' so why not. Of course the whole process of gradually getting a blanket amnesty bill, extended coverage period and trying to push it through is close to criminal and very undemocratic.

Now as to the topic, I can feel that the international community of Thaksin c.s. supporters here on TV is indeed getting alarmed by the diminishing interest shown by other countries and a Thai population being somewhat happy that all shenanigans of the last seven months have stopped, all violence has stopped, no more grenades being lobbed, etc., etc. Must be alarming to some.

[rubl]

Still having problem with quoting and providing links, I see. Quote seems from the link I provided

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/yingluck-shinawatra-left-bangkok-in-the-wake-of-escalating-violence/

The "so what" clearly marks your comments as biased. Ms. Yingluck frequently 'admonished' ALL sides when only ONE side had been guilty of attacks. Somehow only ONE side was warned in case of PDRC violence against agressors (like the LakSi attack by red-shirts) and ALL sides in case 'unknowns' cowardly fired guns in the night, dropped 100 grenades or killed innocent children.

BTW the article is about the Feb 23rd attacks, but already begin of November 2013 anti-government protesters were being harassed, shot at, etc., etc.

No problem with quoting and providing links from my side, rubl. What do you think I meant when I wrote "From your link"?

Your attempt to make political points out of the fact that Yingluck "admonished" ALL sides is frankly laughable.

Good you can still laugh, even while getting alarmed.

As for political points, you lost me. What political points? Just telling the truth is making political points? Ms. Yingluck obfuscating and Pheu Thai MPs threatening, Ms. Yingluck warning ALL sites and Pheu Thai MPs c.s threatening one side, Ms. Yingluck ready to talk and Pheu Thai MPs insisting there's nothing to talk about because it's against what they want, Ms. Yingluck the smiling angel and her Pheu Thai henchmen.

That's a non-political observation.

[ginjag]

Hey, Bruce either the amnesty bill was a bad idea or it wasn't. No may have been about it.

Your point being? Are you suggesting that whenever a Prime Minister, with the support of some members of his or her government, submits a bad idea that a military coup is the correct response?

A bad idea only?

A sneakily modified amnesty bill which suddenly became a blanket amnesty bill including politically influenced criminal acts AND suddenly covering Thaksin's last two years in/out of office and the first two years of Yingluck administration? A Ms. Yingluck urging anti-government protesters to go home? A Ms. Yingluck saying "it's up to the senate, please go home"? A Ms. Yingluck leaving in to the Senate with the Senate speaker suddenly trying to get a quorum together days before planned? A Ms. Yingluck who with her fellow Pheu Thai MPs branded the anti-government protests as undemocratic, put the police on them, called then terrorists, etc., etc.

All because of a 'bad idea' only?

The coup was a response on the seven months of political bickering and a total lack of even a will to co-operate. Now with alarm only abroad, but a slowly back to normal situation in Thailand, finally we can really start to work on reforms and reconciliation. That is, all those in Thailand.

Yes, a bad idea. Many redshirts were outraged because of the yellowshirts that would have received amnesty. Protesters shutting down an elected government is undemocratic and illegal, setting the police on them is the correct response, a Prime Minister asking them to "please go home" is a display of restraint.

An election in July would have shown a significant drop in support for the PTP, it might have put them out of office, and it would have allowed a cooling off and genuine reconciliation. As I've already explained in as much detail as I can (not much) I have no faith in the reforms. Seven months of political bickering was the pretext for the coup. If you took the time to inform yourself using uncensored news sources you'd get a much better grasp of what's going on.

It's like listening to an old scratched 78 record, Government governing illegally is better. Your explanations are not needed, as near everyone has heard the rants 1000 times. elections this elections that---PTP were slung out and rightly so even if it could be classed as not the in thing to do--it had to be--accept it move on.

Quote--" you said--" yellow shirts would have received amnesty" this was making the red shirts angry ?????

Wait now for that response from the ones you class as wrongly informed.