No NACC consensus on 2010 crackdown

[heybruce]

I love how they slowly are neutering the red shirts, with some luck they can damage the whole PTP and Thaksin in a way he can never again get back to power and ruin the country. Its also fun watching all the red shirt farangs suffering from high blood pressure and anger issues. But better this way as the other way around because most foreigners hate the PTP, its far easier to fool uneducated people as those with an education.

You love to see how the parties and people who consistently won elections are being dismantled by a military junta that came to power through a coup. That says a great deal about you.

[city]

They claim to have intervened to stop a bloodbath (after co-ordinating the whole unrest with Suthep- Sutheps admission) instead of supporting the democratically elected government. All they are in fact doing is postponing the inevitable bloodbath which is of the army's and their financial backers own making. Which ever side your allegiances lie, nobody can deny, that by their current actions reconcilliation is not on the agenda and never was. How can martial law be lifted, they will be swamped with protests about the changes they are making and how only one side benefits from those changes. Nobody is fooled, except a few on here

[robblok]

I love how they slowly are neutering the red shirts, with some luck they can damage the whole PTP and Thaksin in a way he can never again get back to power and ruin the country. Its also fun watching all the red shirt farangs suffering from high blood pressure and anger issues. But better this way as the other way around because most foreigners hate the PTP, its far easier to fool uneducated people as those with an education.

You love to see how the parties and people who consistently won elections are being dismantled by a military junta that came to power through a coup. That says a great deal about you.

No actually i love seeing parties that have an armed terrorist wing getting neutered.

The fact that they threatened and bullied everyone who came out with info about the rice scam was also not good.

Voting for others while its not allowed and when caught denying it even when it was on videotape.

Sending the opposition back home and then having secret votes is also not democratic

Having a convicted criminal lead the party by proxy also does not sound democratic

Leaving your own foot soldiers in jail because you want to have your leader included in an amnesty is also selfish.

These are just a few reasons why i like seeing your "democratic" party neutered. Maybe if they played by the rules they could avoid such things. Its a novel idea Don't break rules.. then you can't be kicked out or persecuted.

As i said before.. most intelligent people see this, but the average intelligence of redshirt supporters

I prefer not to have a coup actually.. but if I have to choose between a dictatorship by the PTP or junta.. then I prefer the junta.

I could point out the comparison of a party in Germany in the 1930 that was democratic and had an armed terrorist wing and the PTP.. Just to show how good a democracy is when the party itself is not democratic.

[robblok]

They claim to have intervened to stop a bloodbath (after co-ordinating the whole unrest with Suthep- Sutheps admission) instead of supporting the democratically elected government. All they are in fact doing is postponing the inevitable bloodbath which is of the army's and their financial backers own making. Which ever side your allegiances lie, nobody can deny, that by their current actions reconcilliation is not on the agenda and never was. How can martial law be lifted, they will be swamped with protests about the changes they are making and how only one side benefits from those changes. Nobody is fooled, except a few on here

Yes killing 4 kids by the reds was all because of Suthep.. You know they did not have to kill the children.. they did not have to shoot at protesters and throw grenades. But its their blood.. the red shirts are terrorist.. the burning of BKK showed that.

Redshirts are nothing more as bloodthirsty thugs, had they not started all the bloodshed and killing the army would have had no justification.

Had Thaksin not added himself (when he said he would not) to the amnesty they would be still in power.

This is all of their own doing only blind redshirts would say otherwise.

Actually redshirt leaders admitted that adding Thaksin to the amnesty list was the catalyst that brought the government down and started the protests.

Edited February 12, 2015 by robblok

[heybruce]

I love how they slowly are neutering the red shirts, with some luck they can damage the whole PTP and Thaksin in a way he can never again get back to power and ruin the country. Its also fun watching all the red shirt farangs suffering from high blood pressure and anger issues. But better this way as the other way around because most foreigners hate the PTP, its far easier to fool uneducated people as those with an education.

You love to see how the parties and people who consistently won elections are being dismantled by a military junta that came to power through a coup. That says a great deal about you.

No actually i love seeing parties that have an armed terrorist wing getting neutered.

The fact that they threatened and bullied everyone who came out with info about the rice scam was also not good.

Voting for others while its not allowed and when caught denying it even when it was on videotape.

Sending the opposition back home and then having secret votes is also not democratic

Having a convicted criminal lead the party by proxy also does not sound democratic

Leaving your own foot soldiers in jail because you want to have your leader included in an amnesty is also selfish.

These are just a few reasons why i like seeing your "democratic" party neutered. Maybe if they played by the rules they could avoid such things. Its a novel idea Don't break rules.. then you can't be kicked out or persecuted.

As i said before.. most intelligent people see this, but the average intelligence of redshirt supporters

I prefer not to have a coup actually.. but if I have to choose between a dictatorship by the PTP or junta.. then I prefer the junta.

I could point out the comparison of a party in Germany in the 1930 that was democratic and had an armed terrorist wing and the PTP.. Just to show how good a democracy is when the party itself is not democratic.

Selective memory as well. That also says a great deal about you.

Violence was on both sides. No evidence has been reported showing that the elected government initiated or condoned the violence. No one disputes that Suthep's supporters used violence and intimidation to disrupt the elected government and elections. Yet you only condemn the violence against those opposed to democracy.

"I prefer not to have a coup actually.. but if I have to choose between a dictatorship by the PTP or junta.. then I prefer the junta."

An elected dictatorship? Have you actually warped your mind to the degree that you think that way? Do you also believe that, contrary to all logic and historical evidence, a military junta will make Thailand a better place?

[rubl]

well I guess after we've rehashed the 2010 events a few dozen times without any one being able to come with new information, discussing the 2013/2014 chaos is more interesting.

Mind you, history seems to show us that only one side loves to lob grenades and loves cowards shooting in the night.

[heybruce]

well I guess after we've rehashed the 2010 events a few dozen times without any one being able to come with new information, discussing the 2013/2014 chaos is more interesting.

Mind you, history seems to show us that only one side loves to lob grenades and loves cowards shooting in the night.

Your posts serve to remind us that some people think the violence committed by the anti-democracy forces to disrupt an elected government and elections was acceptable, that only the violence committed against them was wrong.

[tbthailand]

I love how they slowly are neutering the red shirts, with some luck they can damage the whole PTP and Thaksin in a way he can never again get back to power and ruin the country. Its also fun watching all the red shirt farangs suffering from high blood pressure and anger issues. But better this way as the other way around because most foreigners hate the PTP, its far easier to fool uneducated people as those with an education.

you manage to be condescending to foreigners and Thai people in a single paragraph.

congratulations.

[rubl]

well I guess after we've rehashed the 2010 events a few dozen times without any one being able to come with new information, discussing the 2013/2014 chaos is more interesting.

Mind you, history seems to show us that only one side loves to lob grenades and loves cowards shooting in the night.

Your posts serve to remind us that some people think the violence committed by the anti-democracy forces to disrupt an elected government and elections was acceptable, that only the violence committed against them was wrong.

True, true. violence by anti-government protesters is not acceptable even when they are not protected by police or army and suffer from cowardly attacks in the night.

Mind you, in 2010 the year this topic is concerned about, the anti-government protesters had the baddies on their side, as part of them. The grenade lobbing then was aimed at non-red-shirts, just like a year and so ago. The night attacks against non-red-shirts.

Imagine, there are some who try to distract from this simple truth.

[heybruce]

well I guess after we've rehashed the 2010 events a few dozen times without any one being able to come with new information, discussing the 2013/2014 chaos is more interesting.

Mind you, history seems to show us that only one side loves to lob grenades and loves cowards shooting in the night.

Your posts serve to remind us that some people think the violence committed by the anti-democracy forces to disrupt an elected government and elections was acceptable, that only the violence committed against them was wrong.

True, true. violence by anti-government protesters is not acceptable even when they are not protected by police or army and suffer from cowardly attacks in the night.

Mind you, in 2010 the year this topic is concerned about, the anti-government protesters had the baddies on their side, as part of them. The grenade lobbing then was aimed at non-red-shirts, just like a year and so ago. The night attacks against non-red-shirts.

Imagine, there are some who try to distract from this simple truth.

You think people who used violence to disrupt the election should have been protected by the police while they were going about it?

Or do you just think that people illegally occupying government property should be protected by the police while they were breaking the law? I thought they hired Navy Seals and thugs for protection. Of course if the military had assisted the police in clearing illegal protests sites, or even threatened a 2010 style crackdown, I think the violence would have quickly ended and an election could have been held.

Regarding 2010, I don't approve of the violence from either side, and there was violence from both sides. However I think it could and should have been ended by having elections.

Of course many people don't approve of elections because they don't like the way the majority votes.

[rubl]

well I guess after we've rehashed the 2010 events a few dozen times without any one being able to come with new information, discussing the 2013/2014 chaos is more interesting.

Mind you, history seems to show us that only one side loves to lob grenades and loves cowards shooting in the night.

Your posts serve to remind us that some people think the violence committed by the anti-democracy forces to disrupt an elected government and elections was acceptable, that only the violence committed against them was wrong.

True, true. violence by anti-government protesters is not acceptable even when they are not protected by police or army and suffer from cowardly attacks in the night.

Mind you, in 2010 the year this topic is concerned about, the anti-government protesters had the baddies on their side, as part of them. The grenade lobbing then was aimed at non-red-shirts, just like a year and so ago. The night attacks against non-red-shirts.

Imagine, there are some who try to distract from this simple truth.

You think people who used violence to disrupt the election should have been protected by the police while they were going about it?

Or do you just think that people illegally occupying government property should be protected by the police while they were breaking the law? I thought they hired Navy Seals and thugs for protection. Of course if the military had assisted the police in clearing illegal protests sites, or even threatened a 2010 style crackdown, I think the violence would have quickly ended and an election could have been held.

Regarding 2010, I don't approve of the violence from either side, and there was violence from both sides. However I think it could and should have been ended by having elections.

Of course many people don't approve of elections because they don't like the way the majority votes.

Let's start with ignoring two leading question which seem to aim to distract from the 2010 crackdown topic.

Now the third sentence, indeed it could have been ended by elections, but the UDD leaders shot down the negotiations in the end. didn't want to trust the Abhisit government, allegedly had a phone call "hey, what about me". So no elections as the UDD leaders didn't approve.

Of course the topic is touching different aspects.

[heybruce]

Your posts serve to remind us that some people think the violence committed by the anti-democracy forces to disrupt an elected government and elections was acceptable, that only the violence committed against them was wrong.

True, true. violence by anti-government protesters is not acceptable even when they are not protected by police or army and suffer from cowardly attacks in the night.

Mind you, in 2010 the year this topic is concerned about, the anti-government protesters had the baddies on their side, as part of them. The grenade lobbing then was aimed at non-red-shirts, just like a year and so ago. The night attacks against non-red-shirts.

Imagine, there are some who try to distract from this simple truth.

You think people who used violence to disrupt the election should have been protected by the police while they were going about it?

Or do you just think that people illegally occupying government property should be protected by the police while they were breaking the law? I thought they hired Navy Seals and thugs for protection. Of course if the military had assisted the police in clearing illegal protests sites, or even threatened a 2010 style crackdown, I think the violence would have quickly ended and an election could have been held.

Regarding 2010, I don't approve of the violence from either side, and there was violence from both sides. However I think it could and should have been ended by having elections.

Of course many people don't approve of elections because they don't like the way the majority votes.

Let's start with ignoring two leading question which seem to aim to distract from the 2010 crackdown topic.

Now the third sentence, indeed it could have been ended by elections, but the UDD leaders shot down the negotiations in the end. didn't want to trust the Abhisit government, allegedly had a phone call "hey, what about me". So no elections as the UDD leaders didn't approve.

Of course the topic is touching different aspects.

"allegedly" again. Could you provide a source for your alleged information?