whybother

Abhist ordered the Army in as both he and Suthep sh!t themselves. I think that is the correct political terminology?

Someone gave the order to shoot bullets, as they had no water cannons?

Someone gave the order to shoot bullets ... because the protesters were shooting bullets?

So you don't think there was excessive force used ? How many of the dead were actual terrorists . I do know what it was like down there actually because I had to get a new passport at UK Embassy , I picked it up a week after it was ready as the Embassy closed down because the Army declared a "Free fire zone" in the area.. So "Free fire zones" doesnot sound like they were just fighting back against Terrorists to me. More like they were trying to solve the issue by Military force

The Live Fire Zones were set up in attempt to contain the Redshirts within their fortress. As majority if not all the deaths occurred outside the rally site when the Redshirts engaged the Army.In their wisdom the Redshirts thought it was a good idea to box the Army in between the Rally Site and the other side of the live Fire Zones,hence the deaths that occurred on Rachaparop.We do not how many terrorist were killed and we also don't how many innocent protesters were killed by the terroists.

Actually, the "Live fire zone" (one of them) was in the Din Daeng area on the north side of the protest area only. This area had lots of small sois which allowed to red shirt militia to shoot at the army positions and then escape into and around the buildings.

<snip>

What’s the difference between shutting a major shopping and business precent down versus shutting down all incoming international flights to a country's capital? One gets shot and the other doesn't.

One has a militia armed with military weapons, blow up army personnel with grenades and sets up barricades with petrol soaked bamboo and tyres.

The other one doesn't.

Abhisit will argue that the shooting started because members of the Redshirt organization the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) opened fire on soldiers first, his lawyer said.

he will have a tough time of it then...

May 13-19 were 6 days of an assault by the military with APCs... The shooting began the day before with the assassination of Seh Daing. No one can argue that the solders were fired at first during this, the most violent and bloody episode in the 2 month protests.

Good luck, Mark... I am beginning to wonder if your military handlers are really going to put you out to pasture after all...

There is no evidence that Sae Daeng was killed on orders of Abhisit or CRES.

APCs were involved on May 19. I don't believe they weren't used before that. The army had positioned themselves well outside the red shirt barricades. The red shirts came out of their encampment and set tyres on fire and also shot at army positions.

The "Live fire zone" was well outside the red shirt protest area and it was set up because the army were being shot at by red shirts.

Well when the so called peaceful protesters are storming hospitals, rigging up oil trucks to explode, making fortified positions, and having their leaders openly say they'll burn the country down if they're challenged it would be incredibly negligent of a PM not to make steps to disperse the protest by any means necessary.

And the army had to battle back with guns only because the red camps had armed militants who had previously fired at soldiers in their camps. Anybody who doesn't get what was happening should check this video for a small overview

No matter who is right and who is wrong the army should never be firing live rounds at their own people. Its not what a nations army is used for.

Sent from my c64

How should a nation deal with armed protesters?

Not with live rounds from the army.

Water canons and tear gas from a properly trained Riot squad.. seem to work in the rest of the world.

You dont send the army in the fight its own people.. They are not the enemy or the reason a nation has an army.

Sent from my c64

Are you seriously suggesting that they should have used water cannons and riot shields against protesters with guns?

No defending violence in any form, but

Maybe the reds were there in the first place, because they over and over again had seen their votes being voided by the "juridical system" and/or the army.

And of course Abhisit and Suthep should face the music for allowing live rounds against their fellow Thais.

All to protect the wealth and power of the elite!!

Well when the so called peaceful protesters are storming hospitals, rigging up oil trucks to explode, making fortified positions, and having their leaders openly say they'll burn the country down if they're challenged it would be incredibly negligent of a PM not to make steps to disperse the protest by any means necessary.

And the army had to battle back with guns only because the red camps had armed militants who had previously fired at soldiers in their camps. Anybody who doesn't get what was happening should check this video for a small overview

No matter who is right and who is wrong the army should never be firing live rounds at their own people. Its not what a nations army is used for.

Sent from my c64

How should a nation deal with armed protesters?

Quite a difference in how they treat Abhisit Vejjajiva and his former deputy Suthep Thaugsuban compared to Yingluck, the red shirts, the MP's that tried to get a senate that was 100% voted and other's associated with Pheu Thai...quite a difference. That's OK Abhisit...99 people were killed and all you have to do is write your answer and submit it, because we don't want to stress you too much and we want you as next PM again. Oh, and don't worry about that military mix-up stuff either.

Different?

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/705678-rice-pledging-scheme-pm-yingluck-wont-acknowledge-charges-in-person/

I like the way that you highlight the words that include vote buying etc.

Do you think that this is a red only policy?

Didn't Mark say that the yellows/democrats spent more on vote buying than the reds?

I lived in the south for many along year and I saw more corruption and vote buying there than I have seen in the north.

Where do you live? In the same yellow tower as a lot of people on here.

Once again I state " I am not a redshirt supporter " I like to read factual comments and not fiction from those with selective memories, either red or yellow, thank you

"Didn't Mark say that the yellows/democrats spent more on vote buying than the reds?"

No, Mark didn't say that.

Korn said that the Democrats spent more on the election, but didn't say vote buying. Spending on the election would include advertising, rallies etc.

You've made some excellent posts over the years and some of the other extreme. But at least you look up facts. Then go and spoil it by claiming "Jatuporn to be a self made man and Nattawut to be representing the shopkeepers of Thailand".

They are groomed, appointed by and serve Thaksin. Remember how Jatuporn got his wealth and all those amulets and artifacts? And wasn't Natuwatt's transport company doing well during the rice pledging scam - moving loads of rice around to mysterious destinations at the dead of night. Who paid for all that?

Weng and Thida - communists. Trained by and still believe. Forget religion - many communists were orthodox or Catholics in countries were those superstitions were strong.

Now, in the UDD can you tell us how these leaders of this democratic umbrella organization were actually elected to their roles?

You enthusiastically support a military junta, which has taken power in an unconstitutional manner, and has appointed a legislative assembly to replace an elected parliament, and you criticise the internal electoral processes of the party which has convincingly won every general election this century. Extraordinary double standards!

And as for this nonsense about rhem being communists, we're getting close to destroying the village in order to save ir" territory

Which general election did the UDD win?

OK, then to avoid pedantry let's call them "Thaksins faction". It doesn't make any difference to the point I'm making.

Except that Baerboxer was specifically talking about the UDD, not PTP.

Good ....people should be held accountable.

Now...question is......will any of the present government administrators be held accountable for their misdeeds and malfeasance when they are exposed.

Or is this judicial system legitimized only for the people who have the means to control its direction.

Cheers

It seems you've found them guilty of misdeeds and malfeasance before they've even been exposed.

You've made some excellent posts over the years and some of the other extreme. But at least you look up facts. Then go and spoil it by claiming "Jatuporn to be a self made man and Nattawut to be representing the shopkeepers of Thailand".

They are groomed, appointed by and serve Thaksin. Remember how Jatuporn got his wealth and all those amulets and artifacts? And wasn't Natuwatt's transport company doing well during the rice pledging scam - moving loads of rice around to mysterious destinations at the dead of night. Who paid for all that?

Weng and Thida - communists. Trained by and still believe. Forget religion - many communists were orthodox or Catholics in countries were those superstitions were strong.

Now, in the UDD can you tell us how these leaders of this democratic umbrella organization were actually elected to their roles?

You enthusiastically support a military junta, which has taken power in an unconstitutional manner, and has appointed a legislative assembly to replace an elected parliament, and you criticise the internal electoral processes of the party which has convincingly won every general election this century. Extraordinary double standards!

And as for this nonsense about rhem being communists, we're getting close to destroying the village in order to save ir" territory

Which general election did the UDD win?