Jatuporn unfazed with bail withdrawal prospect

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They rioted and caused deaths and mayhem, but they did not grab power, following all the trouble they were lawfully elected.  I do not condone what the Reds did in Bangkok but it is rather different, they were calling for an election after an unelected party were put into power by the military, they were fighting for democracy not against it like the other side.

No the military did not put Abisith in power.. he formed a coalition after the coalition that the PTP had with Newin broke down. Sure the army talked with the parties.. but did not force anyone. Newin just changed sides and formed a coalition with the democrats. All lawful 

[khunken]

51 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They rioted and caused deaths and mayhem, but they did not grab power, following all the trouble they were lawfully elected.  I do not condone what the Reds did in Bangkok but it is rather different, they were calling for an election after an unelected party were put into power by the military, they were fighting for democracy not against it like the other side.

 

Partially correct.

They were looking, on Thaksin's behalf, for Abhisit to step down. He had a public meeting with Jatuporn & Veera and offered to step down in 3 months which Veera agreed to but Japuporn didn't after receiving instructions by phone.

The notion that Abhisit was put in power by the military is yet another one of those conspiracy theories (propaganda really) put out by red shirt supporters. As Robblok says, Newin's party (or faction) changed sides enabling a new coalition to govern.

BTW changing sides is nothing new in Thai politics. Sondhi did it with Thaksin, so did Chamlong, the 'cobra group' did it with Samak back in the 90s and even the 2006 coup leader Sonthi ended up joining Thaksin's party.

Edited September 8, 2016 by khunken
small addition

[tbthailand]

4 hours ago, JAG said:

Abhisit  did not step down as a result of the street protests. He was defeated. In an election called some considerable time later.

 

robblock is clearly not much of a historian, ... 

[tbthailand]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

No the military did not put Abisith in power.. he formed a coalition after the coalition that the PTP had with Newin broke down. Sure the army talked with the parties.. but did not force anyone. Newin just changed sides and formed a coalition with the democrats. All lawful 

 

"No the military did not put Abisith in power."

 

[ramrod711]

I am also unfazed at the prospect of this inciter for arson, terrorist returning to jail. To be blunt, I'm happy about it.

[JAG]

17 minutes ago, tbthailand said:

robblock is clearly not much of a historian, ... 

Goes a bundle on the histrionics though...

[ianf]

1 hour ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They rioted and caused deaths and mayhem, but they did not grab power, following all the trouble they were lawfully elected.  I do not condone what the Reds did in Bangkok but it is rather different, they were calling for an election after an unelected party were put into power by the military, they were fighting for democracy not against it like the other side.

Fighting for democracy, eh? Does any Thai know what democracy is? Does the average red shirt supporters have a clue about what democracy is? 'Thaksin thinks, Puea Thai does.' Is that a democratic statement from their exiled leader? Paying members of the Senate monthly stipends in order to support Thaksin's manipulation of the existing laws. Is that democracy? Unilaterally making decisions away from his cabinet and not letting any member of his cabinet make decisions. Is that democracy? Defacing every Democratic Party poster during the past two elections. Is that democracy? We could go on but some people here just jump onto the Thaksin bandwagon without any understanding of Thai politics, Thai culture or the Thai way of doing things. There is no democracy in Thailand now or in the past. What we have now is an attempt to try and curtail the excesses of politicians who use their power to sneak every single baht into their own pockets whilst denying funds for health care and education. I'm sorry to disillusion some of you folks out there but there was no mention of democracy in Thaksin's political history until his farang advisers realised that hijacking this concept from Abhisit would give his reds a cause - even though it was one they did not and do not understand. Thaksin democratic? Off course not. He's an autocrat of the worst kind.

[ianf]

16 minutes ago, tbthailand said:

 

"No the military did not put Abisith in power."

 

No need to laugh. Shows the paucity of your thinking. Off course the military did not put Abhisit into power. Manipulating history is fun isn't it? But it's wrong.

[tbthailand]

2 hours ago, ianf said:

No need to laugh. Shows the paucity of your thinking. Off course the military did not put Abhisit into power. Manipulating history is fun isn't it? But it's wrong.

are you really trying to state - so bluntly - that you don't understand what happened in 2008?

[tbthailand]

2 hours ago, ianf said:

Fighting for democracy, eh? Does any Thai know what democracy is? Does the average red shirt supporters have a clue about what democracy is? 'Thaksin thinks, Puea Thai does.' Is that a democratic statement from their exiled leader? Paying members of the Senate monthly stipends in order to support Thaksin's manipulation of the existing laws. Is that democracy? Unilaterally making decisions away from his cabinet and not letting any member of his cabinet make decisions. Is that democracy? Defacing every Democratic Party poster during the past two elections. Is that democracy? We could go on but some people here just jump onto the Thaksin bandwagon without any understanding of Thai politics, Thai culture or the Thai way of doing things. There is no democracy in Thailand now or in the past. What we have now is an attempt to try and curtail the excesses of politicians who use their power to sneak every single baht into their own pockets whilst denying funds for health care and education. I'm sorry to disillusion some of you folks out there but there was no mention of democracy in Thaksin's political history until his farang advisers realised that hijacking this concept from Abhisit would give his reds a cause - even though it was one they did not and do not understand. Thaksin democratic? Off course not. He's an autocrat of the worst kind.

ok, so your other posts answer my last question.... 

 

When you say this: 

2 hours ago, ianf said:

What we have now is an attempt to try and curtail the excesses of politicians who use their power to sneak every single baht into their own pockets whilst denying funds for health care and education.

 it screams out: "I have no clue!"... 

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by tbthailand

[khunken]

24 minutes ago, tbthailand said:

are you really trying to state - so bluntly - that you don't understand what happened in 2008?

 

No he's (& I'm) stating that you don't know what happened over Newin's switch.

 

All you are doing is conspiracy spreading as there's no proof of your claim beyond some red shirt propaganda machine.

Edited September 8, 2016 by khunken
spelling

[halloween]

40 minutes ago, tbthailand said:

are you really trying to state - so bluntly - that you don't understand what happened in 2008?

History is written by the winners. Your loser's version didn't make it to the history books.

[worgeordie]

Thailand would be a lot more peaceful place with him inside,

once they get him in the cell, they should just lose the key.

Thaksin's Mr rent a gob

regards worgeordie

[Shawn0000]

11 minutes ago, khunken said:

 

No he's (& I'm) stating that you don't know what happened over Newin's switch.

 

All you are doing is conspiracy spreading as there's no proof of your claim beyong some red shirt propaganda machine.

 

Red Shirt propaganda machines and the world press...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/3831672/Thai-army-to-help-voters-love-the-government.html

 

And although much to the surprise of everyone else, the General who has been suspected by some of coercing the coalition together did actually appear to predict that it would happen as it did in a meeting with Ambassador Ralph L. Boyce.

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/07BANGKOK5696_a.html

[Wilsonandson]

Inside prison he's the working class hero. Out on the streets he's nobody now the boys in green run the show.

He loves his "orange is the new black" life style. Like Pablo Escobar in prison.

Why not give him community service instead. Litter picking on the busy highways and biways of Bangkok?

[khunken]

14 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Red Shirt propaganda machines and the world press...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/3831672/Thai-army-to-help-voters-love-the-government.html

 

And although much to the surprise of everyone else, the General who has been suspected by some of coercing the coalition together did actually appear to predict that it would happen as it did in a meeting with Ambassador Ralph L. Boyce.

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/07BANGKOK5696_a.html

Yes red shirt propaganda.

First the Telegraph (an extreme right-wing rag IMO) was not reporting any facts, just an exaggerated opinion expressed by the reporter. So nothing there.

Second I cannot find any confirmation or denial in the Wikileaks article. In fact the interview was staged before the election.

You'll have to do better than that as picking up half-baked opinions and irrelevancies is a long way from facts.

[Shawn0000]

1 minute ago, khunken said:

Yes red shirt propaganda.

First the Telegraph (an extreme right-wing rag IMO) was not reporting any facts, just an exaggerated opinion expressed by the reporter. So nothing there.

Second I cannot find any confirmation or denial in the Wikileaks article. In fact the interview was staged before the election.

You'll have to do better than that as picking up half-baked opinions and irrelevancies is a long way from facts.

 

Yes, the Telegraph is right wing, some might think this would encourage them not to report on Thailand's left propaganda, but anyway it is their wording that made me post it, they say it was being "widely reported", I am sure you know what widely means, yes, it means that the reports were coming from a variety of sources.

 

Of course there is nothing in the meeting notes of a meeting held before the election to confirm that the General held meetings to coerce the coalition together, and if you read my post i didn't claim it did, how could it?  What he does in that meeting which is interesting, and what I did make clear in my original post, is predict the coalition.  The move came as a surprise to most as it was an unprecedented move in Thai politics, but here is the General, who many suspect of coercing the coalition, making that prediction exactly as it panned out.  Of course this is merely a coincidence but it is an interesting one, isn't it?

[debate101]

It seems that a lot of posters are unclear on the events that transpired between the coups, so here's a quick recap:

 

During his premiership, Thaksin lost the favor of a powerful inner circle, and they plotted his ouster. The implicit guarantee of their takeover to the PAD protestors and key royalists was that a post-military government would exclude him and his allies from power.

 

There was a military-authoritarian lite version of the events of the past two years. Bumbling, overwhelmed government, constitutional referendum under duress, and a quick passing of the baton due to rapidly-mounting discontent and the embarrassing memory of 1992. 

 

A court decision disbanded the entire PPP for several members having been convicted of voter fraud under an ex-post facto application of the new charter's election laws. The election was to be held without them, or with them splitting up and joining other parties. Thaksin found a loophole and re-registered  the entire party under a new banner. To the dismay and embarrassment of the coup makers, the TRT won the election.

 

The PAD took to the streets again, and courts disqualified Samak and then Somchai on dubious grounds.  Around this time, the red shirt movement, which first sprang into existence after the coup, began to coalesce and became active in protesting court decisions. Also around this time, Thaksin fled abroad to avoid a 2-year prison sentence for abuse of power that likely would have morphed into a much longer stay pending the results of several other cases against him. The military brokered a back-room deal between Newin's faction and the opposition Democrats to make Abhisit PM. 

 

Surmising they might never be included in forming a government again without the courts disallowing it, major red shirt demonstrations began each summer, asking for fresh elections and for Abhisit to seek a public mandate for his premiership. They were supported by and largely funded by Thaksin himself. 

 

The demonstrations of 2010 were the largest and longest-lasting. The army-owned national TV stations and Bangkok-centric media were openly hostile to the red shirts from the start. The military resented any attempt to have their machinations laid bare, and the Bangkok populus felt the invasion was intrusive and unwarranted, eating up the negative coverage while having been largely unaware of the events that had led to the increasing perceptions of injustice among many reds.

 

At the height of the tensions, Abhisit offered to dissolve parliament in several months (after the all-important military reshuffle) if the protestors disbanded, but the hard-core red faction led by Jatuporn declined, allegedly under orders from Thaksin. Finally, the army cracked down to clear the protest site, and blood was spilled. Overall, the carnage was not as extensive as many had feared. The main rally site folded like a house of cards, with Jatuporn telling the reds to surrender and live to fight another day. The red leadership, including Jatuporn, had told their followers to torch the city if the military came out to shoot at them, and burn they did. Everything after that I'm assuming you already know.

 

 

[khunken]

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Yes, the Telegraph is right wing, some might think this would encourage them not to report on Thailand's left propaganda, but anyway it is their wording that made me post it, they say it was being "widely reported", I am sure you know what widely means, yes, it means that the reports were coming from a variety of sources.

 

Of course there is nothing in the meeting notes of a meeting held before the election to confirm that the General held meetings to coerce the coalition together, and if you read my post i didn't claim it did, how could it?  What he does in that meeting which is interesting, and what I did make clear in my original post, is predict the coalition.  The move came as a surprise to most as it was an unprecedented move in Thai politics, but here is the General, who many suspect of coercing the coalition, making that prediction exactly as it panned out.  Of course this is merely a coincidence but it is an interesting one, isn't it?

 

Widely reported was What I referred to as 'exaggerated opinion' and it may well have been widely reported on red shirt forums but opinions, whether 'widely' reported remain just that - not fact.

 

Yes I know you referred to a prediction but the general didn't predict that the army would interfere. Quite the reverse. So why post it when it is of zero worth?

 

You can carry on posting meaningless ramblings from various sources if you like but they are nothing more than conspiracy spreading as I said in my original post. This is my last post in this thread as it's getting repetitive.

[tbthailand]

1 hour ago, khunken said:

 

No he's (& I'm) stating that you don't know what happened over Newin's switch.

 

All you are doing is conspiracy spreading as there's no proof of your claim beyond some red shirt propaganda machine.

Actually, there is quite a bit of good, solid, reliable information available about the protesting in 2008 and the judicial coup that followed in December. 

 

Try information, it can be so much more rewarding than dogma.

[tbthailand]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

History is written by the winners. Your loser's version didn't make it to the history books.

ah, your version of history, like much of the current Thai version of Thai history, has little relationship to what actually occurred. 

 

Fortunately, 2008 was pretty well documented as it happened.

[Shawn0000]

14 minutes ago, khunken said:

 

Widely reported was What I referred to as 'exaggerated opinion' and it may well have been widely reported on red shirt forums but opinions, whether 'widely' reported remain just that - not fact.

 

Yes I know you referred to a prediction but the general didn't predict that the army would interfere. Quite the reverse. So why post it when it is of zero worth?

 

You can carry on posting meaningless ramblings from various sources if you like but they are nothing more than conspiracy spreading as I said in my original post. This is my last post in this thread as it's getting repetitive.

 

"Widely reported" in journalist speak does not mean "said by a lot by people with a single political affiliation", it means it is reported from a wide range of sources.

 

No, the general didn't predict that the army would interfere, and no one said they did, they said that the general interfered alone, the one person in the world who predicted what did actually happen and happened much to the shock of everyone who knows Thai politics, that is not of zero worth, that is an incredible coincidence, perhaps he didn't interfere but is actually a mystic.

[SABloke]

...he was unfazed with the prospect that he may return to the detention cell if his bail is withdrawn...

Return??? This is the man on perpetual suspended sentences...the last time his sentence was suspended, because he had never been to jail before (difficult when you always get your sentences suspended)

[debate101]

As far as the military-brokered deal to sponsor Abhisit, I have never seen the hard evidence, either, but this seems like a solid inference to make based on the military's long, documented history of overt and covert interference in civilian governance, the ostensible reasons for the 2006 coup (and why they keep talking about it "going to waste"), the leaked cables, and the number of high-ranking military power-players in his cabinet. Plus the fact that they came out on his orders to defend his government with the use of lethal force while having just refused to act on Somchai's orders to clear PAD from the airports.

 

 

[ianf]

1 hour ago, debate101 said:

As far as the military-brokered deal to sponsor Abhisit, I have never seen the hard evidence, either, but this seems like a solid inference to make based on the military's long, documented history of overt and covert interference in civilian governance, the ostensible reasons for the 2006 coup (and why they keep talking about it "going to waste"), the leaked cables, and the number of high-ranking military power-players in his cabinet. Plus the fact that they came out on his orders to defend his government with the use of lethal force while having just refused to act on Somchai's orders to clear PAD from the airports.

 

 

Oh dear Debate! You really have swallowed the red line.

[ableguy]

16 hours ago, The stuttering parrot said:

Why wouldn't he be unfazed he speaks the truth about the yellows trying to seize power unlawfully opening up the opportunity for a military coup.

Unfortunatley Sutep and his cronies are unfazed to and hid away in a temple until  it was deemed safe that enough time had passed.

Some monks and pollies are Teflon coated and get a free pass to bring down a democratically elected government.

Utter rubbish nonsense.

[ableguy]

12 hours ago, xineohp said:

One thing is certain, with the return to democracy Jatuporn will have accumulated a whole lot of material and evidence to give him a very strong case for wrongful arrest and detention etc.  Given that a new democratic government will replace the current political/military judiciary with fresh faces, Jatuporn has plenty to look forward to.   

You live in a dream world.

[Shawn0000]

20 minutes ago, ianf said:

Oh dear Debate! You really have swallowed the red line.

 

Are you sure you haven't swallowed a line?

 

"I asked about reports of documents produced by the Council for National Security (Ref discussing the strategies to discredit the pro-Thaksin People's Power Party (PPP). Anupong admitted the military had drafted these documents while General Sonthi Boonyaratglin was Army commander."

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/07BANGKOK5696_a.html

Edited September 8, 2016 by Shawn0000

[HOOD Robin]

14 hours ago, wvavin said:

This big-mouthed Jatuporn has to be put away for the well being of a more harmonious society.

 

No Mercy with GANGSTERS !!    

[Shawn0000]

2 hours ago, tbthailand said:

ah, your version of history, like much of the current Thai version of Thai history, has little relationship to what actually occurred. 

 

Fortunately, 2008 was pretty well documented as it happened.

 

It would have been all that much better documented had the press not been fired upon.