whybother

A PR catastrophe to add to a very long list of PR catastrophes, but still, nothing to do with 2010.

It has everything very much to do with 2010. This person is of extreme interest. The conspiracy theory is that military heavies have put pressure on her to recant her testimony on the killings in 2010. I'll remain mute on that point. However because of her involvement in 2010 and her testomony and now her defiant three finger salute she is definitely in the spot lite, and under the gun, so to speak.

Everyone, red, white, blue or green should be able to agree on this. She is very important indeed, be she communist republican scum, anarchist, apostate or red shirt.

The only thing that it might have to do with 2010 is that the shootings might be the reason she got involved in these bombings. Other than that, she wasn't arrested for anything that happened in 2010.

possibly related to the current NACC case against Abhisit / Suthep for abuse of power ... That has just recently been launched...

Not likely. What more could she add after the inquest said it was the army that shot those in the wat? How would her evidence affect the case against Abhisit/Suthep that they gave orders to the army to kill people? Was she also in the war room to hear those orders?

you posed the question, why now after 5 years.

I provided a current event which is related.

You state, not likely,

so now my response is...

why bother...

Except it's a bit far fetched that she was detained in relation to that case. She has given her evidence to the courts. The courts have already decided that the army did the shooting. Were a hundred other people also recently detained because they were at the wat that day?

the current junta's tactics are archaic, .. .prehistoric... but then they are all dinosaurs from a different era and this entire exercise (reform, blah, blah, blah, ...) is just about keeping things they way that they have been for many, many decades... if not longer.

If they really try to pull off such a transparent lie as connecting this eye witness to the 2010 shootings by the military to a current attack in BKK, they will simply be showing (again) their true colors...

sad, sad, sad, ...

Who is connecting the 2010 shootings to the recent bombings? You, and other anti-government posters. No one else. Not the military. Not the police.

The only connection appears to be that someone who was a witness to the shootings also apparently had some connection to a person already arrested in relation to the bombings.

in reply to the question, "who", you will notice that it is not even necessary to read the entire article. Just read the post I replied to which states:

Nattathida was not heard from or seen until today, six days later, when she was transferred to police custody for her alleged connection to a “terrorism network” that organized a grenade attack at the Criminal Court earlier this month.

Now you should understand "who" in your question "who is connecting..."

OK?

No. The military is not connecting the two incidents. She was arrested in connection to the recent bombings.

She was also a witness to the wat shootings, but that has nothing to do with why she was arrested now.

Does this tie into the recent detention of a woman for several days?

Probably not.

the current junta's tactics are archaic, .. .prehistoric... but then they are all dinosaurs from a different era and this entire exercise (reform, blah, blah, blah, ...) is just about keeping things they way that they have been for many, many decades... if not longer.

If they really try to pull off such a transparent lie as connecting this eye witness to the 2010 shootings by the military to a current attack in BKK, they will simply be showing (again) their true colors...

sad, sad, sad, ...

Who is connecting the 2010 shootings to the recent bombings? You, and other anti-government posters. No one else. Not the military. Not the police.

The only connection appears to be that someone who was a witness to the shootings also apparently had some connection to a person already arrested in relation to the bombings.

I can't disagree that this person is definitely a "person of interest" and it is within the army's rights under martial law to legally take her into custody for not more than 7 days without a warrant or charge.

It has been a PR catastrophe for the govt. First denying she was under military custody, then flip-flopping and admitting it. Does the govt.'s left hand know what the right hand is doing? The answer seems to be no. FX. The finance minister not being informed that the PM had shelved the land tax bill. The PM has been complaining publicly about PR and showing his frustration about it by making off the cuff remarks about punching a reporter in the face, and yet the gaffs keep happening on a near daily basis. "Should they be wearing bikinis?"

A PR catastrophe to add to a very long list of PR catastrophes, but still, nothing to do with 2010.

the current junta's tactics are archaic, .. .prehistoric... but then they are all dinosaurs from a different era and this entire exercise (reform, blah, blah, blah, ...) is just about keeping things they way that they have been for many, many decades... if not longer.

If they really try to pull off such a transparent lie as connecting this eye witness to the 2010 shootings by the military to a current attack in BKK, they will simply be showing (again) their true colors...

sad, sad, sad, ...

Who is connecting the 2010 shootings to the recent bombings? You, and other anti-government posters. No one else. Not the military. Not the police.

The only connection appears to be that someone who was a witness to the shootings also apparently had some connection to a person already arrested in relation to the bombings.

possibly related to the current NACC case against Abhisit / Suthep for abuse of power ... That has just recently been launched...

Not likely. What more could she add after the inquest said it was the army that shot those in the wat? How would her evidence affect the case against Abhisit/Suthep that they gave orders to the army to kill people? Was she also in the war room to hear those orders?

Where do you get your information from that her detention don't have anything to do with 2010? This is just another case of someone lying or the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

There are suggestions in several reports that she was detained in relation to the recent court bombings.

There is nothing in any of the reports that her detention had anything to do with 2010. The likelyhood that she was detained in relation to 2010 is remote, given that that was 5 years ago, the inquest was 2-3 years ago (in which I assume she gave evidence), and the coup was a year ago. Why would she be detained in relation to that now?

Because talking about it is slanderous against the military... You fail to understand that truth is not necessarily a defense against slander or libel (not just specific to the military). She might have needed an "attitude adjustment" to talk about things that will return "happiness" to the Thai people and talking about things that won't.... are not acceptable....

Arresting and detaining her in relation to something that happened 5 years ago does not make sense. Why now?

Where do you get your information from that her detention don't have anything to do with 2010? This is just another case of someone lying or the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

There are suggestions in several reports that she was detained in relation to the recent court bombings.

There is nothing in any of the reports that her detention had anything to do with 2010. The likelyhood that she was detained in relation to 2010 is remote, given that that was 5 years ago, the inquest was 2-3 years ago (in which I assume she gave evidence), and the coup was a year ago. Why would she be detained in relation to that now?

The problem with this proposed law is the definition of terrorism.

Anyone donating money to ANY of the protest groups in Thailand over the last 10 years could fall foul of this law.

The Junta is picking up people out of their homes, detaining them without reason or cause. lying about it and some people here who support the Junta think this kind of stuff is okay. She was brave given the three finger salute, I am sure that will be another 7 days of re-education.

Being involved in the recent court bombings is the reason/cause.

Ok. Let's hear it from the junta followers that this is totally reprehensible.

Or will you be saying there must be more to it.

Ahh the sound of those ducking for cover.

So you know why she was "arrested"?

Does it matter why? The fact is she was arrested but the Junta apologists harped on about it being red shirts in disguise.

And many others were suggesting that the military had killed her off.

It appears that her arrest has nothing to do with 2010. It could actually bring into question her whole 2010 wat story.

Ok. Let's hear it from the junta followers that this is totally reprehensible.

Or will you be saying there must be more to it.

Ahh the sound of those ducking for cover.

So you know why she was "arrested"?

They can't hurt car sales much more, can they?

Bangkok Post and others picking this up and running with it now. NCPO issuing denials....

Other possibilities are some reds abducting her (why? Unless she is changing her tune in court) or completely unrelated to this case situation (hmm).

The absolute denial of some that it could be the military on here is laughable. Read up on a bit of history from 1932 until now and you can see the army are not these paragons of virtue you make them out to be.

Prachatai suggested it might have been related to the recent court bombings. http://prachatai.org/english/node/4865

I'm not sure why she would need to be picked up 5 years after the wat deaths, 3 (?) years after the inquest and a year after the coup. The idea that the military would need to draw her out with a phone call seems a bit far fetched too.

Yes they would be questioned for details and make sure its not conjecture. But in any court case against an individual her story would not be taken as gospel and I would assume the defense would like a go at her story or not to turn up and present it. They just cannot take something from a witness at an inquest and present it as fact

They can present it as evidence. Even if they were cross examining her in a future court case, they couldn't take what she said as fact.

Well in any trail she would have to be cross examined I suppose . I wont pretend to know how they carry on with their Judicial process , if there is one , here

She would have been cross examined in the inquest. They don't just come in and tell a story without it being challenged in some way.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Surely, given that the deaths in the wat have already gone through the courts, this woman already gave all her evidence in court?

Only for an inquest, Interesting Read , some Factw people find hard to fit in with their anti red shirt rhetoric

Yes. For an inquest. But it was in court under oath. So there would be no point making her disappear if she has already given evidence in court.

Surely, given that the deaths in the wat have already gone through the courts, this woman already gave all her evidence in court?

Sorry, but there were tens of thousands of witnesses to this event. Its actually not too hard to determine what happened. Its just hard for some to admit it.

Tens of thousands?

The latest trend in urban anti-guerilla warfare. Form in column and march forward. Impress and frighten the opponent with numbers and a monotone drum play and frequent shouts of "vive l'empereur". Step over shot and fallen comrades and march on to glory.

Anyway, the final day may have had 2,000 to 5,000 soldiers active in the Radchaprasong crackdown.

Rather than blank out my mistake, let me just acknowledge I made a mistake. I read 'tens of thousands of soldiers', but actually 'tens of thousands of witnesses' was written. Embarrassing, somewhat.

Anyway, it's difficult to guestimate the number of witnesses and the limit to what they saw and didn't see. I still don't think anyone witnessed who dumped a grenade on vanderGrift and a few soldiers. Nearby reporters and journalist did witness the effect though. Same with people dropping, see them drop, but don't see who shot.

Of course between sunset and sunrise no real witnesses except does involved. As some reporters wrote, the militants mostly emerged in the night.

Considering there wasn't even tens of thousands of protesters there in the last days, I doubt there were tens of thousands of witnesses to anything.

There is a suggestion that she was connected to the recent court bombings.

A volunteer medic during the 2010 military crackdown on the red shirts, Nattatida worked alongside Kamonked Akhad, another volunteer, who was shot dead in Pathum Wanaram temple on 19 May 2010. An unconfirmed report says she is connected with “Ms Dear,” a woman accused of planning an explosion in front of Ratchada Criminal Court early this month. Winyat said it could be either incident which led to the detention.

http://prachatai.org/english/node/4865

Yes, but who can believe those damn foreigners. Just because there are lots of video of Thai soldiers shooting protesters, and thousands of rounds were expended, and their are no pictures of red shirts with guns, alive or dead, doesn't mean the red shirts didn't concoct this whole story. Surely at the behest of Thaksin they were ordered to run into bullets to gain sympathy for the cause? And of course the Red Shirts, with Thaksin's backing, can operate anywhere in the country, and impersonate soldiers with impunity. We should all be very afraid...

Yet there are plenty of pictures of redshirts who are armed and they did kill people. Knowingly posting lies breaks the forum rules.

There are no pictures of armed red shirts shot dead by the military, but a hell of a lot of dead unarmed ones

There were photos of maybe 10 dead protesters. That leaves about 60-70 protesters that were killed where there was no photos, armed or unarmed. Many of those that were killed, were taken to hospitals by their friends. If they were armed, I am sure their friends didn't take the guns to the hospitals with them.