Red-shirt leaders probably doomed: Jatuporn

[Eric Loh]

17 minutes ago, robblok said:

Do give me some links to those articles.. i don't recall them and I dont really believe the top of your head. 

Wallow in your own ignorance and have a great weekend. 

[JAG]

So what.. they wanted to vote.. that makes it OK to shoot at people.. nice sense of right and wrong you have. No wonder you support the reds. Besides this was way before the voting was blocked so your remarks are nuill and void.
 
The red shirts not involved.. who do you think did all the killing of the protesters... 

I think the point Candide is making is that the "Popcorn" fellow was shooting at people who wanted to vote, not citing their intention to vote as a justification for the violence.
Oh never mind...

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, JAG said:

I think the point Candide is making is that the "Popcorn" fellow was shooting at people who wanted to vote, not citing their intention to vote as a justification for the violence.
Oh never mind...

Then he is a liar... 

 

Thai general election 2 February, pop corn shooting was 1 February 

[JAG]

Then he is a liar... 

 

Thai general election 2 February, pop corn shooting was 1 February 

You know I am not sure that calling people liars is a frightfully good idea.

 

Apart from it being, I suspect, against forum rules, it might tempt some to be, umh, equally candid(e) in voicing their opinions of you...

 

[Shawn0000]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

Oh dear.. unfounded rumors that the army listens to the yellow shirts. I would like to see an article on that proving those rumors.

Also I was asking about 2010 and onward.. your now counting army casualties and I was asking about the yellows. You can't just count those together as there is no proof there is some secret agreement that the army does killing for the yellows. The army is a separate entity quite a few yellows don't like them at all and to even suggest that the yellows can tell the army what to do.. 

 

Unfounded?  As if one of their most prominent members isn't a general who supported the coup that ousted Thaksin?  Get up to speed!

 

[candide]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

So what.. they wanted to vote.. that makes it OK to shoot at people.. nice sense of right and wrong you have. No wonder you support the reds. Besides this was way before the voting was blocked so your remarks are nuill and void.

 

The red shirts not involved.. who do you think did all the killing of the protesters... 

"The abbot was leading protesters to seize the Laksi district office to prevent voters to go to the poll the next morning."

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/popcorn-gunman-says-paid-300-bahtday-provide-security/

[robblok]

30 minutes ago, candide said:

"The abbot was leading protesters to seize the Laksi district office to prevent voters to go to the poll the next morning."

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/popcorn-gunman-says-paid-300-bahtday-provide-security/

It was not the same day mate.. you can call it what you want.. those people did not go there to vote because they could not vote at that time. 

 

These were just people trying to scare others away.. red shirts wanting to break up the protest.  Not normal people wanting to vote.

 

That is a total misrepresentation of the facts. 

[robblok]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

You know I am not sure that calling people liars is a frightfully good idea.

 

Apart from it being, I suspect, against forum rules, it might tempt some to be, umh, equally candid(e) in voicing their opinions of you...

 

How do you call spreading untruths then ?

 

The voting was the next day.. so these people going there were not going to vote. .. correct or not.

 

These were just red shirts trying to clear a protest area .. in other words protesters against protesters violence against violence. 

 

Not peaceful voters turning up and getting shot at.

 

He could do a job interview at Thrump.. im sure they would have him. 

 

 

[robblok]

1 hour ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Unfounded?  As if one of their most prominent members isn't a general who supported the coup that ousted Thaksin?  Get up to speed!

 

Yes unfounded.. please give me some links that the army and the yellow shirts are the same and that the army takes orders from the yellows. 

[candide]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

It was not the same day mate.. you can call it what you want.. those people did not go there to vote because they could not vote at that time. 

 

These were just people trying to scare others away.. red shirts wanting to break up the protest.  Not normal people wanting to vote.

 

That is a total misrepresentation of the facts. 

They tried to prevent the PDRC from blocking the voting office because they had no intention to vote....

[robblok]

Just now, candide said:

They tried to prevent the PDRC from blocking the voting office because they had no intention to vote....

They were not peaceful protesters coming to vote like you said, voting was the next day. These were people trying to break up a protest with violence. Totally different then the picture you are trying to paint.

It was not innocent voters going to a voting station and getting shot at.. it was a violent group trying to break up an other group that responded violent. 

 

Not the run of the mill voters showing up and getting shot at. 

[thaiguzzi]

Robblok dude, cut down on the Yellow Medicine man. You need to change the Yellow tint in your shades dude, it aint healthy and it hides the truth...

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, thaiguzzi said:

Robblok dude, cut down on the Yellow Medicine man. You need to change the Yellow tint in your shades dude, it aint healthy and it hides the truth...

I wont cut it down i stand for what i believe in.. and that is not in Thaksin or the redshirts.

Edited March 24, 2017 by robblok

[candide]

16 minutes ago, robblok said:

They were not peaceful protesters coming to vote like you said, voting was the next day. These were people trying to break up a protest with violence. Totally different then the picture you are trying to paint.

It was not innocent voters going to a voting station and getting shot at.. it was a violent group trying to break up an other group that responded violent. 

 

Not the run of the mill voters showing up and getting shot at. 

People who block voting offices by force in order to prevent elections to happen and put in power an unelected government of their choice= peacefull protesters

People who want to prevent the so-called peaceful protesters from blocking the poll next day in order to allow themselves and others to exercise one of the most fundamental right guaranteed by the constitution=violent thugs

Edited March 24, 2017 by candide

[robblok]

Just now, candide said:

People who block voting offices by force in order to prevent elections to happen and put in power an unelected government of their choice= peacefull protesters

People who want to prevent the so-called peaceful protesters to block the poll next day in order to allow themselves and others to exercise one of the most fundamental right guaranteed by the constitution=violent thugs

http://www.newmandala.org/the-laksi-gunfight/

 

Lets see.. people have blocked voting station and are armed and then get an other armed group in red shirts going at them. Both sides shooting at each-other (read the article)

 

Who caused the attack.... the red shirts they came into the protest area armed wanting to vacate it. The yellows had to defend themselves, they were not the one attacking.

 

Totally different story than what your telling of peaceful protesters getting shot up. It was an armed redshirt group that tried to break up the yellow shirts that held protests at the voting area. 

 

Result a gun-battle that killed an innocent that was caught in the crossfire. 

 

Aftermath.. none of the red agressors that shot too arrested.. only the yellow shirts.. bias justice .. just like we have bias justice now that you moan about.

 

 

But the fact remains.. that it was the reds that started the confrontation. 

 

If I am hold up somewhere and you come to that place trying to kick me out.. who of us started the violence then ?

 

Anyway.. as I said.. you totally misrepresented the facts.. as these were not innocent voters that got shot at but armed redshirts wanting to break up a protests. 

[Shawn0000]

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

Yes unfounded.. please give me some links that the army and the yellow shirts are the same and that the army takes orders from the yellows. 

 

Go off and read about General Saprang Kalayanamitr, who spoke openly to press about giving orders directly to the yellow shirts, and read about Comander Anuphong Phaochinda, who was the force behind getting Abhisit into power, read about Prayuths role in the coup and how the yellow shirts very publicly called for the army to take a greater role in Thai politics, essentially inviting him to take over.

 

Their support of each other and their links are no secrets, the party has plenty of very prominent top military brass members and army commanders have admitted in press meetings that they give orders to the yellows.

 

Just because you are ignorant of something does not make it unfounded, lol.  

 

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Go off and read about General Saprang Kalayanamitr, who spoke openly to press about giving orders directly to the yellow shirts, and read about Comander Anuphong Phaochinda, who was the force behind getting Abhisit into power, read about Prayuths role in the coup and how the yellow shirts very publicly called for the army to take a greater role in Thai politics, essentially inviting him to take over.

 

Their support of each other and their links are no secrets, the party has plenty of very prominent top military brass members and army commanders have admitted in press meetings that they give orders to the yellows.

 

Just because you are ignorant of something does not make it unfounded, lol.  

 

Just because you state it its not true.. links please.. just like you always say to others.. Back your claims up. 

 

I said the yellows don't give orders to the army.. you are now talking about the army giving orders to the yellows.. that is the opposite of what i was asking about. I did not Know Abhisit was yellowshirt.. I thought he was a Democrat ? Your mixing your groups up to try to make your claims stick.

 

You stated the army kills for the yellows implying the yellows give orders to the army.. not the other way around.

 

Edited March 24, 2017 by robblok

[Shawn0000]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Just because you state it its not true.. links please.. just like you always say to others.. Back your claims up. 

 

I said the yellows don't give orders to the army.. you are now talking about the army giving orders to the yellows.. that is the opposite of what i was asking about. I did not Know Abhisit was yellowshirt.. I thought he was a Democrat ? Your mixing your groups up to try to make your claims stick.

 

You stated the army kills for the yellows implying the yellows give orders to the army.. not the other way around.

 

 

Did you go off and read about the people I told you about?  Did you think to try google like a big boy?  Abhisit was a key ally of the Yellow Shirts, you can't actually be interested in this and also be this ignorant, it just isn't possible!  The army, a fraction of them, irked by the leadership changes that had taken place, decided to take over, they had people in leadership roles in the yellow shirts and they used each other, first the army worked at getting the yellows into power as that put their generals in power anyway, but they couldn't achieve that miracle, so then the yellows invited the army to take power, they have become one in the same.

[candide]

18 minutes ago, robblok said:

http://www.newmandala.org/the-laksi-gunfight/

 

Lets see.. people have blocked voting station and are armed and then get an other armed group in red shirts going at them. Both sides shooting at each-other (read the article)

 

Who caused the attack.... the red shirts they came into the protest area armed wanting to vacate it. The yellows had to defend themselves, they were not the one attacking.

 

Totally different story than what your telling of peaceful protesters getting shot up. It was an armed redshirt group that tried to break up the yellow shirts that held protests at the voting area. 

 

Result a gun-battle that killed an innocent that was caught in the crossfire. 

 

Aftermath.. none of the red agressors that shot too arrested.. only the yellow shirts.. bias justice .. just like we have bias justice now that you moan about.

 

 

But the fact remains.. that it was the reds that started the confrontation. 

 

If I am hold up somewhere and you come to that place trying to kick me out.. who of us started the violence then ?

 

Anyway.. as I said.. you totally misrepresented the facts.. as these were not innocent voters that got shot at but armed redshirts wanting to break up a protests. 

Well if one starts with the assumptions that it is acceptable for some people to prevent others from voting and to impose an unelected government, and unacceptable for others to dislodge them, you are right.

If one starts with the assumption that there are fundamental rights among which is the right to vote, and that people have the right to oppose those who want to force them not to vote, that's another story.

We base our argument on two incompatible starting assumptions, so it is better we stop now.

 

[robblok]

Just now, Shawn0000 said:

 

Did you go off and read about the people I told you about?  Did you think to try google like a big boy?  Abhisit was a key ally of the Yellow Shirts, you can't actually be interested in this and also be this ignorant, it just isn't possible!  The army, a fraction of them, irked by the leadership changes that had taken place, decided to take over, they had people in leadership roles in the yellow shirts and they used each other, first the army worked at getting the yellows into power as that put their generals in power anyway, but they couldn't achieve that miracle, so then the yellows invited the army to take power, they have become one in the same.

Why would i google it.. you are stating something and don't back it up with some news articles. That is what you asked of me and others but when its your time to deliver you dont. I just apply the same rules to you that you apply to me and others.so put it up or shut up. 

 

Your making pretty strong claims.. that are YOUR interpretation of things, now your stating the army is the same as the yellow-shirts. Your becoming more and more crazy. The yellow shirts were BKK citizen fed up with YL and her mob. There were some from the South later too. I knew many of the anti goverment protesters and i can tell you they had no links with the army at all. Many of them have no love of the army at all.

 

You still havent proven how the yellows control the army.. like you said. The army is the army and is controlled only by the army.

 

 

 

 

[robblok]

10 minutes ago, candide said:

Well if one starts with the assumptions that it is acceptable for some people to prevent others from voting and to impose an unelected government, and unacceptable for others to dislodge them, you are right.

If one starts with the assumption that there are fundamental rights among which is the right to vote, and that people have the right to oppose those who want to force them not to vote, that's another story.

We base our argument on two incompatible starting assumptions, so it is better we stop now.

 

No you stated innocent people wanting to vote got shot.. I just told you it was an armed group of redshirts and that is a total different thing. 

 

You do know that vigilante justice is not acceptable.. because that is what it was the police should have cleared the area.. that is their job.

 

People have no right to oppose them who block voting area's with violence that is the police their job. I guess you don't know how the law works. 

 

Yes I guess its better we stop because bend facts more like Thrump.

 

First implying its innocent voters  (wrong day was not voting day) that got shot at.. instead of an armed group of red shirts trying to break up the protesters, and by doing so causing the firefight.

 

Then when you have to change your story because i hit with facts you state that people have the right to attack others that stop them from voting. While that is not the case and its a job of the police to break up protests like this and it is not done by armed militia / vigilante justice. 

 

Your not really a trustworthy person to argue with I have found out, had i not looked up the facts here people would have believed your insinuation of people turning up to vote getting shot at, instead of an armed group attacking protesters who fought back. A two sided fight where only the yellow site had people arrested (quite bias but the other way around from how it is now.. and you do complain about that but not about this)

 

Lets leave it at this before I have to fight more alternate news. 

Edited March 24, 2017 by robblok

[tomta]

Read also, Robblok, about the Navy SEALS who were sent by their commanding admiral to act as guards for the PDRC, with the rather thin excuse when they were caught that they were hot on the trail of illicit drugs somewhere or other. You have also no doubt read of Suthep's boast that the army and he were in cahoots. The response to that from people like you has always been that Suthep is a liar and we shouldn't trust him. But even liars tell the truth sometimes and I see no reason that this would have been a lie. It was a proud boast in recognition of the fact that he had won.

 

By the way, the idea that the Popcorn gunman was the sole PDRC gunman, or that he acted as a lone vigilante which you seem to have been implying, is not true. http://www.newmandala.org/the-myth-of-the-popcorn-gunman/

 

http://pattayatoday.net/news/thailand-news/popcorn-gunman-confesses/  "one of the gunmen"

 

http://www.pressreader.com/thailand/bangkok-post/20160312/281857232640054 

 

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/thai-popcorn-gunman-says-he-was-hired-by-protest-leader.html

 

I've done some of the work for you, Robblok. Look also at the fact that Suthep gave a big thumbs up to the popcorn gunman. 

 

[tomta]

2 minutes ago, tomta said:

Read also, Robblok, about the Navy SEALS who were sent by their commanding admiral to act as guards for the PDRC, with the rather thin excuse when they were caught that they were hot on the trail of illicit drugs somewhere or other. You have also no doubt read of Suthep's boast that the army and he were in cahoots. The response to that from people like you has always been that Suthep is a liar and we shouldn't trust him. But even liars tell the truth sometimes and I see no reason that this would have been a lie. It was a proud boast in recognition of the fact that he had won.

 

By the way, the idea that the Popcorn gunman was the sole PDRC gunman, or that he acted as a lone vigilante which you seem to have been implying, is not true. http://www.newmandala.org/the-myth-of-the-popcorn-gunman/

 

http://pattayatoday.net/news/thailand-news/popcorn-gunman-confesses/  "one of the gunmen"

 

http://www.pressreader.com/thailand/bangkok-post/20160312/281857232640054 

 

http://www.chiangraitimes.com/thai-popcorn-gunman-says-he-was-hired-by-protest-leader.html

 

I've done some of the work for you, Robblok. Look also at the fact that Suthep gave a big thumbs up to the popcorn gunman. 

 

 

[Shawn0000]

11 minutes ago, robblok said:

Why would i google it.. you are stating something and don't back it up with some news articles. That is what you asked of me and others but when its your time to deliver you dont. I just apply the same rules to you that you apply to me and others.so put it up or shut up. 

 

Your making pretty strong claims.. that are YOUR interpretation of things, now your stating the army is the same as the yellow-shirts. Your becoming more and more crazy. The yellow shirts were BKK citizen fed up with YL and her mob. There were some from the South later too. I knew many of the anti goverment protesters and i can tell you they had no links with the army at all. Many of them have no love of the army at all.

 

You still havent proven how the yellows control the army.. like you said. The army is the army and is controlled only by the army.

 

 

 

 

 

The yellow shirts go back to 2005, nothing to do with yinluck, they formed in opposition to Thaksin, I see the problem here, you know nothing about this at all!

 

Sometimes I ask for a link, but that's after I have tried and failed to find it myself, I have given you all the info you need, now go off and have a little read, you're embarrassing yourself.

[tominbkk]

21 minutes ago, robblok said:

Why would i google it.. you are stating something and don't back it up with some news articles. That is what you asked of me and others but when its your time to deliver you dont. I just apply the same rules to you that you apply to me and others.so put it up or shut up. 

 

Your making pretty strong claims.. that are YOUR interpretation of things, now your stating the army is the same as the yellow-shirts. Your becoming more and more crazy. The yellow shirts were BKK citizen fed up with YL and her mob. There were some from the South later too. I knew many of the anti goverment protesters and i can tell you they had no links with the army at all. Many of them have no love of the army at all.

 

You still havent proven how the yellows control the army.. like you said. The army is the army and is controlled only by the army.

 

 

 

 

Shawn0000000000000 uses this tactic.  Better not to feed the trolls.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

The yellow shirts go back to 2005, nothing to do with yinluck, they formed in opposition to Thaksin, I see the problem here, you know nothing about this at all!

 

Sometimes I ask for a link, but that's after I have tried and failed to find it myself, I have given you all the info you need, now go off and have a little read, you're embarrassing yourself.

No its not sometimes you ask for a link you ask it to frustrate others like me and when your treated to the same thing you refuse.

 

I did not say the yellow shirts were formed to get rid of YL, I said i spoke with them during the protests. I actually have a few among my friends who were there to get rid of YL and risked their lives to do so. I never claimed they did not exist before. you have trouble reading.

[robblok]

Just now, tominbkk said:

Shawn0000000000000 uses this tactic.  Better not to feed the trolls.

Yes that is the point he asks for links all the time and when treated to the same thing he just does not man up. So I am done with him. 

[Shawn0000]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

I wont cut it down i stand for what i believe in.. and that is not in Thaksin or the redshirts.

 

Fair enough, any reason why you are so taken by the yellows, though?  What is there to "believe in"  in that self serving bunch of corrupt bullies?

[Chip Allen]

The anti-redshirt sentiment here on TVF is astonishing. They are the only glimmer of democracy in a swamp of fascism.

[Shawn0000]

Just now, Chip Allen said:

The anti-redshirt sentiment here on TVF is astonishing. They are the only glimmer of democracy in a swamp of fascism.

 

They are just simple sheeple.