Foward by Tony Cartalucci
1. The International Crisis Group is a US based “think tank” with some of the highest level globalists making up its membership.
Kenneth Adelman: Former US Ambassador to the UN,former lobbyist for Thaksin Shinawtra, the very man behind Thailand’s “red shirt” protesters, the riots, and the ongoing political instability in the country.
Wesley Clark: Council on Foreign Relations member, former NATO supreme allied commander.
Carla Hills; Council on Foreign Relations member, Trilateral Commission member, signatory of the CFR’s “Building a North American Community” aka the North American Union.
George Soros:globalist extraordinaire, a personal and corporate member of the CFR.
Fidel Ramos: Former President of the Philippines, Carlyle Group member.
Richard Armitage:Council on Foreign Relations member, signatory of the Project for a New American Century,
Zbigniew Brzezinski: CFR member, Bilderberg member, Trilateral Commission member/director/co-founder.
This think tank is hardly an objective organization – as everything these men and women do in the CFR and Trilateral Commission revolve around the geopolitical manipulation of foreign nations and the extra-legal production of US policy. Kenneth Adelman’s involvement alone derides any legitimacy ICG might have on the topic, as he is the former lobbyist of the “red shirt’s” leader.
Nearly all of the ICG’s “recommendations” are also, verbatim, Thaksin’s ultimatums given to the government via his new pet lobbyist, Robert Amsterdam.
If you are wondering why the globalists are so interested in Thaksin Shinwatra and the despoiling of Thailand via a communist “people’s revolution,” look no further than neighboring Cambodia where globalist shill, dictator for life “PM” Hun Sen has literally sold over half of his country right out from under his own people to foreign investors. Thaksin is the globalists’ Thai “PM Hun Sen” in waiting.
3. BBC also features the “persecuted” Samyos Phruksakasemsuk, author of “Voice of Taksin.” Samyos claims that the curbs on media are unreasonable and will force people underground. Of course, BBC makes no mention that Samyos’s publication regularly featured death threats, calls to arms, and violent rhetoric that served as the blueprint for the violence that struck the city in April and May of 2010. Let’s take a look at a few selections from Samyos’ “Voice of Taksin” and see if this sort of hatred would be protected under any nation’s “freedom of speech” provisions.
Translations can be found here.
Obviously calls to kill people, burn down people’s property, and otherwise destroy society at the expense of 65 million people’s rights isn’t protected under freedom of speech. Typically, if you threaten to kill someone or destroy someone’s property, this is called “conspiracy to commit a felony/conspiracy to commit murder.” Not only do you have no right to threaten others, you also face serious jail time for doing so.
4. And finally, not even a month went by after this article was published with its “stark warnings” that two bombs went off in the city, claiming the life of one, and seriously injuring 9 others.
Stark warnings over Thai emergency laws
By Alastair Leithead
With a state of emergency extended, there have been suggestions that underground groups are getting prepared to use violence in Thailand.
The details are unspecific and hard to verify, but pose a stark warning for the government to act with caution.
A “red-shirt” security guard during the protest in Bangkok city centre, who has been in hiding since the army ended the demonstrations six weeks ago, has told the BBC he has been asked to join an organisation training to make bombs.
“We have been approached by two or three groups who used violence during the protest and shot at soldiers,” he said, over the telephone from an unknown location.
“They said they are operating underground and would like us to join them but we are waiting for now.
“I understand from the discussions among these groups that there will be bombs. There are 30 to 40 people being trained in how to use petrol to make a big explosion.”
Most protesters on the streets of Bangkok from March to May were peaceful, but there was a violent element responsible for firing grenades and automatic weapons at soldiers and police.
There have been a number of small blasts in the last week, but it is not known who is responsible. A grenade attack on an empty gas storage vessel in Bangkok is suspected to have been carried out by serving troops.
‘No more instability’
Fears over security was the reason given by the Thai government for extending a State of Emergency in Bangkok and 18 other provinces for another three months.
Five provinces previously under the Emergency Decree, which gives security forces extra powers, had the laws relaxed.
A recent report from the International Crisis Group recommended the government remove these laws, described as “draconian”, across the whole country in order to prevent forcing opposition underground.
It also called on protest leaders to have charges of terrorism dropped in order to achieve effective reconciliation.
Ahead of the cabinet decision, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva told the BBC: “There will be a gradual lifting of the state of emergency in the various provinces.
“We need to restore order, the last thing we need now is a repeat of violence or clashes,” he said.
“We will do all we can to get back to normalcy as soon as possible. The last thing the country wants now is more instability.”
The account from the unnamed former red-shirt security worker suggests the government has reason to worry about the threat of violence, but Thitinan Pongsudhirak, director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, disagrees.
“The continued imposition of the State of Emergency is alarming, it violates basic civil liberties,” he said, speaking before the cabinet decision.
“It is being used increasingly as a political instrument of the government and the powers-that-be in Thailand to maintain control, to try to put a lid on the opposition, to stifle dissent.
“It will not allow space for dissent, disagreements and grievances to be expressed. If those exist they will be pent up and when they have a chance to come back they will be much more furious than we have seen.”
Opposition media has also been silenced in much of north-eastern Thailand, where the red-shirt movement originates.
It is here the former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra focused his spending efforts and gained popular support while in power.
He is seen as a hero by many poorer people who gained from his populist policies of cheap healthcare and credit, but treated as a manipulative and corrupt leader by his opponents, who removed him from power in a coup in 2006. He has been convicted of abuse of power while in office.
Thaksin is blamed by the government for funding and encouraging the anti-government rallies in Bangkok and the efforts to force the current prime minister to stand down.
Many of the community radio and TV stations which were platforms for the anti-government red-shirt message have been shut down by the government and there is anger among people there who feel they have been silenced.
Samyos Phruksakasemsuk is an activist who produced a magazine called Voice of Thaksin, which was also banned, and has recently brought out a new publication called Red Power.
He expects it to be banned as well, but warned the government: “People feel repressed as they can’t voice their opinions openly, so the fear is they will go underground and there’ll be more violence.”
Mr Abhisit said more space would be provided for opposition media.
“The stations closed have been involved in incitement of violence. That’s not something I think the country can afford.”
A number of commissions have been set up to look at national, constitutional and media reform, as well as a truth inquiry to establish exactly what happened during the protests. He says reconciliation is a priority.
But the red-shirt security guard sent a stark warning.
“What happens depends on what the government does against us. How much pressure they put on us and how patient we will be.
“I don’t want anything to happen to our country, but when that day comes it might not be as we hope – the violence will be double what we have seen in the past.”
The original article can be foundhere on BBC’s website.