Thailand charges 19 'red shirt' leaders with violating junta ban

[tbthailand]

"Thailand" charges these people?

 

Nah, it's the "generals" charging these people - because they can... 

[aussieinthailand]

5 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Oh, I am sorry. You must have some secret information that no one else have. That money controls what happens is known world wide, but from that to say it´s planned coups by the money elite is a little extreme.

At the same time you say that the military always sided with the ruling elite, and then say that they go in when someone decides that the ruling elite must be removed is a contradiction of astronomical meassures.
Who is deciding then? The Ruling Superior or?

Can you mention when the military take over the country without any unrest that puts people and country in danger and jeopardy both domestic and internationally? That´s the reason they go in, and off course that is what the ruling elite also want´s. The reason for that is they have investments both internationally and domestic that are in jeopardy of being ruined.

Well I'll be,, really thanks for the heads up mate, I never thought for amoment that MONEY controls what happens.

WOW thanks agian, Duh..

Money is one thing but power is a greater force. Check your Thai history, there have been a number of times the ruling elite have been removed, here's a hint for ya, one of the statues of the infamous park down Hua Hin way has a example of what I am saying...

So a "contradiction of astronomical messures"  seems not huh...

 

[LannaGuy]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

 

I don't drink sorry so no juice here.

 

Come on prove the other reasons.. you mean its rumored that..... 

 

The army could never have come in power without the stupidity of the amnesty law. I doubt they counted on that so there goes your theory. Unless you say that the PTP is so stupid that the army had planned in their stupidity. Without the large scale protests and the deaths there would not have been a coup. 

 

 law forbids me to say more but you can work it out and all the rest is smoke and mirrors and, surprisingly, you seem to have fallen for it

[Get Real]

14 minutes ago, aussieinthailand said:

Well I'll be,, really thanks for the heads up mate, I never thought for amoment that MONEY controls what happens.

WOW thanks agian, Duh..

Money is one thing but power is a greater force. Check your Thai history, there have been a number of times the ruling elite have been removed, here's a hint for ya, one of the statues of the infamous park down Hua Hin way has a example of what I am saying...

So a "contradiction of astronomical messures"  seems not huh...

 

We just keep to what you said. This is what you said:
" The military have alway's sided with the ruling elite, and when some one decides that the ruling elite need to be removed then the military are used agian regardless of the will of the people... "
 

The contradiction was. If they always side with one thing, how can they be used for remove the same thing. Are they siding with the thing that is not included in always. Hmm Are you for real?

You get yourself in to a more complicated discussion than you can handle. You also after say that money is one thing, but power is greater. Money gives people power! 
If it is like you say that power is greater than money, why do you then say that the military always side with the ruling elite, the ones with money. Then that will have no reason.

I did never say that the ruling elite never got removed. That was you saying by the comment that the military always side with the ruling elite. With your comment you also said that they can´t be removed, not me saying that just because I don´t agree with you. If the military always, in your contradiction, side with the ruling elite. Who can then remove them?

The contradiction still stands, and you brought nothing of value to the discussion table except a lot of talk and acusing me of things I did not say. Also without answering my questions, because that was probably too difficult. 
Duh and Huh, doesn´t say much.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Get Real

[FritsSikkink]

20 hours ago, jcsmith said:

 

Considering that they have not lost an election in 15 years yet spent much of that without power would say that they are on the right side of democracy. 

pretty easy with vote buying

[JAG]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

Indeed always misinformation its just stupid.  She stepped down before the coup was not even in power at that point. She stepped down after protests from the people forced her down for wanting to give amnesty to her corrupt brother in law. I wonder why they never mention that.. talking about bias.

Here we go again Roblock, bending the truth to suit your claims - again.

 

Yingluck was not forced to step down by force from "the people". Her response to those protests, made some time before she left office, was to call an election: an entirely constitutional and democratic response. That it was trashed by a campaign of intimidation and ballot preventing in order to prevent said election is another matter.

 

As caretaker prime minister she was removed from office by the courts in what may be regarded as a controversial decision in a carefully manufactured legal case,  after she replaced a senior civil servant who had, if I recall, point blank refused to work with her because he did not support her government.

 

Claiming that she was forced from office by "the people" is not true. I suspect you know that?

[aussieinthailand]

9 minutes ago, Get Real said:

We just keep to what you said. This is what you said:
" The military have alway's sided with the ruling elite, and when some one decides that the ruling elite need to be removed then the military are used agian regardless of the will of the people... "
 

The contradiction was. If they always side with one thing, how can they be used for remove the same thing. Are they siding with the thing that is not included in always. Hmm Are you for real?

You get yourself in to a more complicated discussion than you can handle. You also after say that money is one thing, but power is greater. Money gives people power! 
If it is like you say that power is greater than money, why do you then say that the military always side with the ruling elite, the ones with money. Then that will have no reason.

I did never say that the ruling elite never got removed. That was you saying by the comment that the military always side with the ruling elite. With your comment you also said that they can´t be removed, not me saying that just because I don´t agree with you.

The contradiction still stands, and you brought nothing of value to the discussion table except a lot of talk and acusing me of things I did not say. Also without answering my questions, because that was probably too difficult. 
Duh and Huh, doesn´t say much.

Seems you have a problem with understanding that the powerful/military can change it's support from one person to another person therefor the elite/rulering faction can be removed... there you go lil fella all better now ;-)

"With your comment you said they can't be removed,"  What the???  don't think so mate, never said anything like that...

And lastly just what did I "accuse you of"???

"Money gives power" agian duh,,,  

Both money and powerful can be and have been removed and yet agian mate check your Thai history..

[robblok]

Here we go again Roblock, bending the truth to suit your claims - again.
 
Yingluck was not forced to step down by force from "the people". Her response to those protests, made some time before she left office, was to call an election: an entirely constitutional and democratic response. That it was trashed by a campaign of intimidation and ballot preventing in order to prevent said election is another matter.
 
As caretaker prime minister she was removed from office by the courts in what may be regarded as a controversial decision in a carefully manufactured legal case,  after she replaced a senior civil servant who had, if I recall, point blank refused to work with her because he did not support her government.
 
Claiming that she was forced from office by "the people" is not true. I suspect you know that?

She stepped down because of protests. Without those she would not have stepped down so she was forced to step down by the people.

[robblok]

 
 law forbids me to say more but you can work it out and all the rest is smoke and mirrors and, surprisingly, you seem to have fallen for it

I know what you speak off i just dont believe it. Because without protests the army would not have stepped in.

[Eric Loh]

26 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

pretty easy with vote buying

 

Pretty easy with guns too. Accounts for more years under coup than elected government. 

[JAG]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

She stepped down because of protests. Without those she would not have stepped down so she was forced to step down by the people.

 

Roblock. She did not step down, she was removed by the courts for an unrelated matter, as I described. If you don't believe me go and check the facts. If you persist in stating that she was forced from office by the people then I and everyone else here who remembers the events, and anyone who chooses to undertake the most cursory research into her departure from office, will be forced to conclude that you are deliberately stating an untruth.

[robertson468]

21 hours ago, jcsmith said:

 

Considering that they have not lost an election in 15 years yet spent much of that without power would say that they are on the right side of democracy. 

I would suggest that the "Red Shirts", which is the group being discussed, have NOT won an election EVER.  Pheu Thai have, but certainly by dubious means and funded by Khun Thaksin.

[billd766]

21 hours ago, jcsmith said:

 

Considering that they have not lost an election in 15 years yet spent much of that without power would say that they are on the right side of democracy. 

 

Consider this then.

 

The UDD is NOT a political party nor has it ever been so how you can state they have never lost an election is beyond me.

 

Now please explain how the UDD which was formed only 10 years ago and has never stood for an election has according to you never lost an election in 15 years?

 

You really need to do a little research on the subject before you post about it.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Front_for_Democracy_Against_Dictatorship

 

quote "

History

The UDD first formed in 2006 to oppose the military government and the military coup which overthrew former prime minister-in-exile, Thaksin Shinawatra, five weeks before scheduled elections. UDD organized anti-government rallies during the military government's rule in 2006–2007 and opposed the military's 2007 constitution.[citation needed] The UDD stopped protests after the 2007 general election, which the People's Power Party won. In response to violent anti-government PAD rallies and the yellow shirt seizure of Government House in May 2008, the UDD organized counter-demonstrations, which would sporadically result in injuries and deaths. After Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva took office, the UDD led major anti-government rallies in April 2009 and March–May 2010, leading to violent clashes with military forces.

[Eric Loh]

12 minutes ago, robertson468 said:

I would suggest that the "Red Shirts", which is the group being discussed, have NOT won an election EVER.  Pheu Thai have, but certainly by dubious means and funded by Khun Thaksin.

 

Are you suggesting that the EC was dubious since they certified and acknowledged the elections. Your opinion please.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, aussieinthailand said:

"What you say everyone knows is what every redshirt beleives."  

Well mate that would be because what I said is true and can be checked. 

regarding protests and new elections, YL followed the laws of the land and Suthep and the junta leader broke the laws of the land, somthing the Yellow shirts and junta huggers hate as they know it's the truth...

I agree that the amnisty bill (could) hve been revived. But it would have had to go through the motions agian which it did not...!

As for your cliam they did not have the people on their side any more, c'mon rob,  really...

The fact is YL followed the law by setting elections with in 60 day's of gov't being disolved.

Suthep had his thugs bloking polling boths and people from voting and bashing those that tried, men women and grandmothers, you remember the photo's don't you?  So who had let loose the dog's of war???

Yes there was violence and yes it was on both sides and yes, just ask the cop that had half his leg blow apart by a grenade thrown at them by the protesters...  Trying to tout one side as being violent and the other as inocent is rediculess.

 

 

 

Your last line is the most important in your post.

 

Quote " Trying to tout one side as being violent and the other as innocent is ridiculous". 

 

(Sorry but my spell checker lit up and corrected a couple of words).

 

 

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post has been removed. 

[Get Real]

56 minutes ago, aussieinthailand said:

Seems you have a problem with understanding that the powerful/military can change it's support from one person to another person therefor the elite/rulering faction can be removed... there you go lil fella all better now ;-)

"With your comment you said they can't be removed,"  What the???  don't think so mate, never said anything like that...

And lastly just what did I "accuse you of"???

"Money gives power" agian duh,,,  

Both money and powerful can be and have been removed and yet agian mate check your Thai history..

Get it, boy. You said that the military always side with the ruling elite. If it is like you say, how can they then remove them? Is it the elite that orders the military to remove themselfs. Sounds like a little bit impossible.
So, maybe you were wrong and the military not always side with the ruling elite, if they also can be moved by the same power. Do you get how you talk now. No history has to do with that you just mix up words and make contradictions.
Regarding accusing me of things, was that you turned around the things I said to something that suited you.

Still no use trying to make you understand what you have been saying, you just don´t want to or trying to get yourself out of a difficult situation. Just not going to try anymore. It´s useless. Take care and cheers!

Edited December 17, 2016 by Get Real

[George Graham]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

 

I don't drink sorry so no juice here.

 

Come on prove the other reasons.. you mean its rumored that..... 

 

The army could never have come in power without the stupidity of the amnesty law. I doubt they counted on that so there goes your theory. Unless you say that the PTP is so stupid that the army had planned in their stupidity. Without the large scale protests and the deaths there would not have been a coup. 

And the amnesty for the generals?

[473geo]

What is all the fuss about guys, the arrests are just every day law enforcement, as was the rounding up of Bridge players and Domino players.

[aussieinthailand]

57 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Your last line is the most important in your post.

 

Quote " Trying to tout one side as being violent and the other as innocent is ridiculous". 

 

(Sorry but my spell checker lit up and corrected a couple of words).

 

 

Yu'p having issues with sticky key's man  cheers...

Edited December 17, 2016 by aussieinthailand

[robblok]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

 

Roblock. She did not step down, she was removed by the courts for an unrelated matter, as I described. If you don't believe me go and check the facts. If you persist in stating that she was forced from office by the people then I and everyone else here who remembers the events, and anyone who chooses to undertake the most cursory research into her departure from office, will be forced to conclude that you are deliberately stating an untruth.

 

Your playing a semantics game JAG nothing more.. she called for new elections because of the people protesting against her (in result stepping down). She would never have done that had there not been such massive protests against the amnesty of her criminal brother.  I see the non completion of her term and early elections as stepping down. 

[Roadman]

22 hours ago, yellowboat said:

"violating a junta ban on political gatherings" .  A law imposed by a military government that usurped power from an elected government.    It is a law that is an abomination.  Farangs like you that believe in might makes right is extremely worrying.  Education is failing in the west.

Oh ain't that sweet...an elected government....makes it sound like ice wouldn't melt in Yinglucks sweet little mouth.

But that is where the bull Sh!t ends. Democratic governments don't change bills between readings in the lower and upper houses. Democratic governments don't have a thug for deputy PM who gives endless warnings to protesters before they are bombed and shot and then have the police play Shultz and "I know nothing". Democratic governments don't have AG's giving out legal documents to convicted cons on the run and ignoring endless calls to explain. Democratic governments don't have cops in their back pockets and on their pay rolls. Democratic governments don't have peoples courts convicted criminals running the country from abroad through their parrot sisters. Democratic governments don't have an armed set of thugs like the UDD at their beck and call. Democratic governments don't give out court judges names and address to their thugs so that can harass them and force them to bend into line. I could go on and on.

Might makes right!!! The Shinawatra's were the best at that. Remind us again how many were dying under their watch as to the Junta's. 

One thing I do agree with you though. Education is certainly failing in the west and certainly in your case.

[robblok]

@aussieinthailand,

 

The reds might have died in lager numbers, but not at the hands of the yellow shirt protesters. Also 4 kids, can you tell me how many kids the yellow shirts have killed ?. Can you give me any example of something as brutal as the trad massacre where a pickup truck drove into a crowd of protesters sprayed them with bullets and lobbed a few grenades in the crowd.. leaving 2 kids dead ? (sure people say there is no proof the reds did it.. though when it was announced on the red shirt gathering it was cheered for and acted as if it was done by their side. Had it been a false flag operation it would have shocked them there.. not elicit cheers . The only smart one was Tida seeing how this looked bad she silenced the truth. 

[aussieinthailand]

38 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Get it, boy. You said that the military always side with the ruling elite. If it is like you say, how can they then remove them? Is it the elite that orders the military to remove themselfs. Sounds like a little bit impossible.
So, maybe you were wrong and the military not always side with the ruling elite, if they also can be moved by the same power. Do you get how you talk now. No history has to do with that you just mix up words and make contradictions.
Regarding accusing me of things, was that you turned around the things I said to something that suited you.

Still no use trying to make you understand what you have been saying, you just don´t want to or trying to get yourself out of a difficult situation. Just not going to try anymore. It´s useless. Take care and cheers!

Just one more time for you ok popit.

OK here goe's,  Let's pretend there is a powerful leader that rules over in a magic land far far away, and that leader has an army that supports the leader.  (militry sides with the ruling faction)

Now one day the army is talking to some other people that are family or freinds or even oponents of the leader and they togerther decide to tell the leader it's time to give another person a turn rule in the magic land,  The End.

(military sidies with the new ruling fctction)  

I have not "accused you of anything mate, now you done  then?  I hope so cause thats 5 min's of my life I just won't get back. cheers.

[aussieinthailand]

8 minutes ago, robblok said:

@aussieinthailand,

 

The reds might have died in lager numbers, but not at the hands of the yellow shirt protesters. Also 4 kids, can you tell me how many kids the yellow shirts have killed ?. Can you give me any example of something as brutal as the trad massacre where a pickup truck drove into a crowd of protesters sprayed them with bullets and lobbed a few grenades in the crowd.. leaving 2 kids dead ? (sure people say there is no proof the reds did it.. though when it was announced on the red shirt gathering it was cheered for and acted as if it was done by their side. Had it been a false flag operation it would have shocked them there.. not elicit cheers . The only smart one was Tida seeing how this looked bad she silenced the truth. 

Ok rob, so first you say the red's are by far more violent than the yellows, but then admit that the reds have died in larger numbers than the yellows and then you say but not at the hands of the yellows, so all the red's that have been killed was at the hands of whom?

The military yes and....?    Surly your not suggessting the yellows would never hurt or kill a red shirt protesstor are you?

Rob it's not a contest of who is the most violent red or yellow, The problem is that some people refuse to accept the umpire's call,

and that is the people on election day, final.  they protested, they were heard by the PM so as explianed before so YL dissiolve the gov't called for elections that the opposition and minority knew they would loose so the blocked polling stations and intimidated threatened and beat those that tried to vote, Do you remember the photo's rob? is that justifiable? NO niether is bullet and grenades...

[pegman]

22 hours ago, bangrak said:

Though it was confronting and hard to accept, during classes I have been learning about a lot of 'necessary evil' in History, as some famous university professor called it... Or do you imply that the general situation in Thailand had not degraded to a dangerous point, and that the eventuality of a worse(!) insurrection was just a far-fetched doom scenario, not even thinking of 'civil war'...? I would without a doubt, though deploring its existence, characterize the present 'regime' as 'a lesser evil', but that's IMO.

Your out of your bloody mind. Dangerous point? Are you calling all those blue haired ladies demonstrating in Bangkok for the YellowShirts  a theat of insurrection?  Stop this nonsense your embarrassing yourself. 

[billd766]

57 minutes ago, aussieinthailand said:

Yu'p having issues with sticky key's man  cheers...

 

On my old lap top the k key has stopped completely.

[Xonax]

Being ruled by elected or appointed greedy politicians, has nothing to do with true democracy.

[JAG]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

 

Your playing a semantics game JAG nothing more.. she called for new elections because of the people protesting against her (in result stepping down). She would never have done that had there not been such massive protests against the amnesty of her criminal brother.  I see the non completion of her term and early elections as stepping down. 

Semantics? No sir. You  made a post criticising Reuters for inaccurate reporting. In that post you made the claim that Yingluck was forced out by popular protest, a claim that is manifestly and significantly false; at least as misleading and frankly untrue as you allege Reuters to be. Semantics implies that by changing a form of words you can alter an interpretation. I am not challenging an interpretation, I am challenging a fundamental and blatant falsehood.

 

You do have some form on this though don't you? Twice in recent months, on separate threads on this forum you have stated that Abhisit was forced from office by the Redshirt protests in 2010, whereas he was defeated in a general election a significant time later. You were called out by me and several others on that as I recall.

 

I'm sure that you wish to be regarded as a well informed commentator on the current political situation.  You post vociferously, as I do. albeit from a diametrically opposing viewpoint. You surely can't expect to be considered as a serious commentator if you regularly make false claims,  criticise others (in this case Reuters) for being inaccurate., and defend rebuttal of your false claims as being mere semantics.

 

So one last time. Yingluck was not forced from office by the "peoples protests". She was removed by the courts for a separate reason.

Edited December 17, 2016 by JAG

[bangrak]

23 hours ago, yellowboat said:

The junta is the cause of the degrade and it will be responsible for it continuing.   The Army and the elites only believe in their own power.  They care little for the population as a whole.  Reform is non existent. The courts and the civil services are still largely a joke.  The evil you speak of is expediency and opportunism.  Things that have held Thailand back for decades, rendering it uninteresting to foreign investment and entrepreneurs. 

'yellowboat', maybe you misread that post of mine you quoted? Not saying that the situation in Thailand had improved in any way during the tenure of, most of, the Dems' governments, Chuan's an exception, before, IMO, it's after these it has degraded a lot, since the start of the Shins' clan long planned throw to total power. May I remind you about them, before founding a party of their own, TRT, being strongly involved in DP, Thaksin's father and an uncle having f.i. MPs for DP many years long, and Thaksin himself, with the support of his powerfull clan, being for years 'under the wings of' Chuan, who later declared: 'My biggest mistake has been to have bread a snake...'. The Shins' strategic campaign was 'brilliant', and probably patiently prepared many years long, with this Trojan horse, and swift moves to take the 'fort Thailand' by its badly protected backside: the millions of Thais having been left out in N. and E., as being too poor to contribute in a meaningfull way to the construction of the country, blindly ignoring they were millions of potential voters... And even cheap to buy off too, directly with own money first, to 'prime the pump' getting elected, then more globally, using the Central and S. taxpaying middleclass (who else is...?) money, while still letting those uneducated masses believe the money came out of Thaksin's pockets. By their, very clever and successfull, campaign, the Shins' clan had turned the whole, old, stiff, rules from 'the establishment' upside-down. Not bad at all in itself, was it not that... it destroyed all form of national cohesion. And worse, was hiding a totalitarian model. As IMO clearly inspired by History. Didn't dictator Julius Caesar f.i., not yet an emperor then, have his 'pretorian guard', like the Shins made the R.T.Police Thaksin's? And, really on-topic this, as a mean to become by force what couldn't be got (ab-)using 'democratical processes', create the UDD, the 'activists'' red-shirts movement, with violent militia extensions, 'a bit' like what the black-shirts and S.A.s were for two ugly midgets of fascist dictators called Mussolini and Hitler... 

Edited December 17, 2016 by bangrak