nurofiend

<snip

So what's the answer in such a situation - well if an elected government isn't it then there are only two other options

A ruling Monarchy

Or a Ruling Military

<snip

...and this is where i found out never to interact with you ever again.

i would see it as murder charge against abhisit/suthep designed to get at abhisit/suthep.

i see nothing wrong with him being grilled on everything with regards to his involvement, we don't know enough about the details and level of his involvement,

though unfortunately i'm not so sure this will make it any clearer.

i suppose we can compare it to the censure debate, they know it won't stick but at least he'll have to answer difficult questions.

ptp know it won't stick, this isn't a bargaining tool, it's simply to get at him.

and it's also to show their red supporters a symbolic image, if nothing else.

And of course when this has no more mileage left to hinder Abhisit and Suthep,PTP will dream up something else. As the old saying goes:"The best plan of defence is attack"

yes, and i hope you admit that both sides are guilty of that.

In the context of the OP with 'Murder charge designed to force compromise' you need to explain why both sides are guilty of 'best plan of defence is attack'

This will be a hard concept for Thaksin and his PTP lackeys to understand - that someone would take a stance on a moral position where there is no benefit to themselves.

no benefit to themselves? you must be joking!! public image maybe?

they know100% that they won't be convicted... brave men my ring.

Ah yes, Public image. With that and $5 you'll get a cup of coffee at Starbucks. OTOH it's one of the few assets of the PM. But i was referring to real, tactile, folding or bankable type benefits - the sort PTP understands, and lusts after despite its stench.

As to the likelihood of a conviction, it seems you have some faith in the Thai court system. Whether it is totally immune to political manipulation is another argument.

you'd be a fool to think abhist/suthep think they'd actualy see any jail time for this.

they know it........ you know it.............. we all know it...............

nothing brave about their reaction whatsoever.

fair enough re the lol, the ld50 of diazepam has far less meaning if they're downed with a load of booze though doesn't it?

that was my point... they could have taken a load of them and drank a lot of alcohol for all we know.

Lol, irresponsible to speculate about OD absent mass spec or gas chromograhpy, especially if only substances known are diazepam and alcohol. Lol, some never admit to being wrong.

The LD50 would be a starting point for any medical pathologist or medical doctor, unless perhaps the the intent is to simply classify as an OD without basing diagnosis on any documented proof or medical standard of care.

The guys would very likely be on the other side of the LD50 dose if they are not neophytes in ingesting alcohol or benzos. Let's not let that scientific stuff get in the way though when we can can speculate not only what they drank and took, but how much they ingested.

lol, lol, lol....what exactly am i wrong about?

"let's not get that scientific stuff get in the way"! is speculation on your behalf on the dosage they possibly took and whether they were mixing with a lot of booze or not.

i usually stay out of these type of threads, but suggesting diazepam may have been a factor since it was found in the room, is not exactly tinfoil hat material.

anyway, i don't enjoy people acting in a condescending manner, so carry on.

Too funny. You, not me, suggested they ODed an diazepam and booze. I said should wait until mass spec or gas choreography run and let science not forum room speculation decide it. So how the heck am I now the one speculating.

I guess you were just trying to save face by flipping that on me, otherwise I am communication with alzeheimers patient. Conversation we had went about like this: Dad, want go for a walk today. No, I am not hungry. I already ate. . .

i suggested the possibility of them od'ing on diazepam and boooze, WOW! if that's too far beyond your imagination then so be it, i won't waste anymore time trying to convinvce you that it is a possible reason.

Ciao.

i would see it as murder charge against abhisit/suthep designed to get at abhisit/suthep.

i see nothing wrong with him being grilled on everything with regards to his involvement, we don't know enough about the details and level of his involvement,

though unfortunately i'm not so sure this will make it any clearer.

i suppose we can compare it to the censure debate, they know it won't stick but at least he'll have to answer difficult questions.

ptp know it won't stick, this isn't a bargaining tool, it's simply to get at him.

and it's also to show their red supporters a symbolic image, if nothing else.

And of course when this has no more mileage left to hinder Abhisit and Suthep,PTP will dream up something else. As the old saying goes:"The best plan of defence is attack"

yes, and i hope you admit that both sides are guilty of that.

was there a need for the Lol?

all benzos are dangerous and potentially lethal mixed with alcohol, including valium and you certainly don't need to take 2000mgs and mix it with alcohol to get alcohol poisoning and od.

and let's remember i wrote "they could have"

My apologies if lol seemed to relate to the deaths. I am just laughing at conjecture regarding a very well documented drug with much information on contradictions. Do you know the LD50 of diazepam? Not sure I would jump to conclusion about diazepam OD being cause without such information. Hand full of APAP 500 plus alcohol would be potentially worse than a handful of blue Vs and alcohol.

fair enough re the lol, the ld50 of diazepam has far less meaning if they're downed with a load of booze though doesn't it?

that was my point... they could have taken a load of them and drank a lot of alcohol for all we know.

Lol, irresponsible to speculate about OD absent mass spec or gas chromograhpy, especially if only substances known are diazepam and alcohol. Lol, some never admit to being wrong.

The LD50 would be a starting point for any medical pathologist or medical doctor, unless perhaps the the intent is to simply classify as an OD without basing diagnosis on any documented proof or medical standard of care.

The guys would very likely be on the other side of the LD50 dose if they are not neophytes in ingesting alcohol or benzos. Let's not let that scientific stuff get in the way though when we can can speculate not only what they drank and took, but how much they ingested.

lol, lol, lol....what exactly am i wrong about?

"let's not get that scientific stuff get in the way"! is speculation on your behalf on the dosage they possibly took and whether they were mixing with a lot of booze or not.

i usually stay out of these type of threads, but suggesting diazepam may have been a factor since it was found in the room, is not exactly tinfoil hat material.

anyway, i don't enjoy people acting in a condescending manner, so carry on.

they could have both taken a load of the valium, fell asleep and never woke up... if there was alcohol involved then mixing them would be a big factor.

of course, the suspicions are there and it is suspicious.

i had a friend die a couple of years back in my home country from taken a few xanax (another benzo) and drinking a few beers, went to bed and never woke up, and he was only 23.

Lol, would have had to be load of Valium. Valium is a very poor choice for ODing. Literally, there have been reports of people taking crazy amounts. I want to say I read a documented report in a treatise about an individual taking upward of 2,000 mgs, going to sleep and then waking up without any issues.

Valium more commonly dispensed in 5mg or 2.5mg so that would be 400 to 800 pills at those strengths. Valium is essentially liquid alcohol, but higher threshold than alcohol induced poisoning.

Discussing Valium as cause without knowing amounts dispensed or available is a bit like speculating ibuprofen caused death if empty Motrin bottle found in the room. Tylenol would actually be more likely to cause death when mixed with alcohol than typical amounts of Valium ingested for recreational purposes.

Clonazepam, however, can be a dangerous benzo.

was there a need for the Lol?

all benzos are dangerous and potentially lethal mixed with alcohol, including valium and you certainly don't need to take 2000mgs and mix it with alcohol to get alcohol poisoning and od.

and let's remember i wrote "they could have"

My apologies if lol seemed to relate to the deaths. I am just laughing at conjecture regarding a very well documented drug with much information on contradictions. Do you know the LD50 of diazepam? Not sure I would jump to conclusion about diazepam OD being cause without such information. Hand full of APAP 500 plus alcohol would be potentially worse than a handful of blue Vs and alcohol.

fair enough re the lol, the ld50 of diazepam has far less meaning if they're downed with a load of booze though doesn't it?

that was my point... they could have taken a load of them and drank a lot of alcohol for all we know.

so ban the ones that WON'T give you cancer....

Thailand.

they could have both taken a load of the valium, fell asleep and never woke up... if there was alcohol involved then mixing them would be a big factor.

of course, the suspicions are there and it is suspicious.

i had a friend die a couple of years back in my home country from taken a few xanax (another benzo) and drinking a few beers, went to bed and never woke up, and he was only 23.

Lol, would have had to be load of Valium. Valium is a very poor choice for ODing. Literally, there have been reports of people taking crazy amounts. I want to say I read a documented report in a treatise about an individual taking upward of 2,000 mgs, going to sleep and then waking up without any issues.

Valium more commonly dispensed in 5mg or 2.5mg so that would be 400 to 800 pills at those strengths. Valium is essentially liquid alcohol, but higher threshold than alcohol induced poisoning.

Discussing Valium as cause without knowing amounts dispensed or available is a bit like speculating ibuprofen caused death if empty Motrin bottle found in the room. Tylenol would actually be more likely to cause death when mixed with alcohol than typical amounts of Valium ingested for recreational purposes.

Clonazepam, however, can be a dangerous benzo.

was there a need for the Lol?

all benzos are dangerous and potentially lethal mixed with alcohol, including valium and you certainly don't need to take 2000mgs and mix it with alcohol to get alcohol poisoning and od.

and let's remember i wrote "they could have"

i would see it as murder charge against abhisit/suthep designed to get at abhisit/suthep.

i see nothing wrong with him being grilled on everything with regards to his involvement, we don't know enough about the details and level of his involvement,

though unfortunately i'm not so sure this will make it any clearer.

i suppose we can compare it to the censure debate, they know it won't stick but at least he'll have to answer difficult questions.

ptp know it won't stick, this isn't a bargaining tool, it's simply to get at him.

and it's also to show their red supporters a symbolic image, if nothing else.

This will be a hard concept for Thaksin and his PTP lackeys to understand - that someone would take a stance on a moral position where there is no benefit to themselves.

no benefit to themselves? you must be joking!! public image maybe?

they know100% that they won't be convicted... brave men my ring.

they could have both taken a load of the valium, fell asleep and never woke up... if there was alcohol involved then mixing them would be a big factor.

of course, the suspicions are there and it is suspicious.

i had a friend die a couple of years back in my home country from taken a few xanax (another benzo) and drinking a few beers, went to bed and never woke up, and he was only 23.

Do the pro-reds on this thread really believe this is being done in the name of justice?

i get lumped in as being pro-red so often here that i may as well answer, well more like answer with a question, do the pro-yellows really believe that the thaksin land charge was really done in the name of justice?

I do actually.

Do you think Thaksin is not guilty of this crime? Or any others he stands accused of?

But Abhisit is somehow guilty of murder...?

This is nothing but a silly tit-for-tat, but with very potentially serious consequences. Not that the main player cares.

i don't, i think it was a charge to 'get at him' rather than in the name of 'honourable justice' and 'moral values'... just like the cooking show crime of the century against samak.

do i think thaksin was guilty of that 'terrible' crime, yes it seems so, but i don't think it was more than just something to get at him, rather than getting justice for the terrible deed itself.

yes, it is tit for tat.

Do the pro-reds on this thread really believe this is being done in the name of justice?

i get lumped in as being pro-red so often here that i may as well answer, well more like answer with a question, do the pro-yellows really believe that the thaksin land charge was really done in the name of justice?

To neuro

I can hear that 100 ton elephant in the corner of the room. Unless there is a bit of paper with sutheps name on it, who ordered what?

i thought suthep admitted ordering the live fire zone?

i think the charge is based on "giving orders that led to the death of others with intent", as said by the DSI chief.

which could be translated as he gave the live fire zone order as head of the cres, and that led to the death of others... the question is of the intent i suppose, which would be hard to prove whether true or not.

i have no belief that they will be convicted for this whatsoever.

Me neither. he ordered the allowance to use live rounds. Every copper in the country has a gun. since when does a soldier need legal permission to use his gun on home soil anyway, to prevent law breaking.

Ordering the permission to use live rounds means nothing. He didn't command the operation minute by minute.

i would strongly disagree that ordering the permission to use live rounds 'means nothing'

the main reason i think there will be no conviction is because there will be a serious lack of irrefutable evidence to prove that the army killed with intent, that however doesn't make it untrue.

however he and suthep must take at least some responsibility that the deaths from april 10th and onwards were as a result of their declaration of an SOE and later the live fire zones... of course there were also aggressors on the other side, but he has to take at least some culpability, which he has so far refused to do.

it's like his quote, to paraphrase "i cannot believe that a government is blaming the protestors for the violence committed on them, i never thought i would see the day" something along those lines.

this was obviously pre-2010 and he wasn't talking about the red shirts.

To neuro

I can hear that 100 ton elephant in the corner of the room. Unless there is a bit of paper with sutheps name on it, who ordered what?

i thought suthep admitted ordering the live fire zone?

i think the charge is based on "giving orders that led to the death of others with intent", as said by the DSI chief.

which could be translated as he gave the live fire zone order as head of the cres, and that led to the death of others... the question is of the intent i suppose, which would be hard to prove whether true or not.

i have no belief that they will be convicted for this whatsoever.

What's it all about huh.

ha great pic, the facial expressions they used make them look like they're well on it

I don't see it that way at all. If the protesters are armed, and in breach of the law, you are entitled to break up the party.

You command the army or whatever force you need to carry out the job, with a paper order to say how they are entitled to do it.

Any organisation should follow the chain of command. Now if you tell them to use reasonable force and defend themselves, (a perfectly reasonable request), and someone shoots at them, they are entitled to shoot back.

This is a non case. The reds could have packed up and left, but they stayed to fight. A small percentage armed, but no force either police or army is going to risk themselves. So since, they have the overwhelming force, protesters are going to get hurt.

They had their chance to leave bit didn't. So, is abhisut guilty of murder? Of course not. Is a member of the armed forces responsible for excessive force. The court thinks so.

but when someone drives a car at a checkpoint and doesn't stop, bad things happen all over the world.

Are more soldiers guilty of excessive force, probably but very hard to prove? The reds broke the law, some of the army broke the law. Fingering abhisit for it is ridiculous

Well I differ from you - The troops started firing on protesters from 3.50pm on the 10th. Read the live timeline here

http://asiapacific.a...age-1/#comments

I'm not going to chang e any minds on this forum thats for sure.

Maybe the order was in place. I can't remember the exact timeline. were the protesters given warning?

And on that basis, if the order wasn't in place then the army arbitrarily broke the law, because, if they can't prove suthep or abhisit ordered it, then someone else did....

we all know the reality, no government is going to go after the army to hold them accountable.

Not sure if you have trouble reading or comprehending.

I never disputed the fact that they are both charged, what i said was, i can not believe how some people, ie you, can not see or understand the political motives behind it.

PS. Quoting UK news is even more irrelevant than most of your posts, unless of course you do not even reside in Thailand and are just bored .....so post on TV

Neither. I was using the UK and CNN news as background to the important info which seems to have passed you by - provided by Khao Sod. I take it you may have heard of it. Dont you think there may be some reason why suthep denied for 2 years the fact that the orders to use live ammunition where signed 3 days earlier than he had said they had done. Doesn't look to clever in a court of law does it when you insisted at the time that your troops were not firing live ammunition and you knew that was the case because the order wasn't signed until the 13th, 3 days after the deaths. Oops.

Political Motives? How about Human Rights, you believe in those dont you?

“It’s historic, this is a new standard for accountability in Thailand . . . to see legal consequences if a government decides to use lethal force against protesters and when that force is excessive and unnecessary,” said Sunai Phusak of Human Rights Watch.

Oh and what does where you think I live have to do with the relevance of my posting?

And you have any evidence or proof that he did give the order to use live ammunition? NOW why would someone sign an order to use live ammunition and then deny it, you do not think something does not add up?

Human rights you speak about, how about human rights for the rest of us mere mortals(yes us, those who reside here permanently who had to live blockaded for 2 months? how about those who lost money, businesses, jobs, offices, and more?

"how about those who lost money, businesses, jobs, offices, and more?"

indeed it's a big aspect of peoples hatred for the reds and a big reason of why the government said enough is enough, let's get rid of these guys now.

well you'll find that during the av administration a lot of our abhisit/suthep supporting posters were sourcing evidence from the dsi to back up their arguments.

it's correct when it suits them, it's incorrect when it doesn't.

May be because back then during av administration DSI was not led by Thaksin proxy

yes? who's side were they on then or were they neutral then but not now?

no offence but you seem a bit wet behind the ears regarding some aspects of this, i recall a post where you were asking for evidence of something that everyone and their soi dog knew about, i even gave you a couple of 'likes' for your persistence.

LOL, You really are a class act.

unarmed bystander in the middle of the mob

or but wait, it is ok to injury a few trying to break through the police line, but is not ok to kill armed ones trying to burn down the city

Perhaps it is time to say good bye and leave the discussion for people with more sanity

unarmed bystander in the middle of the mob

from the other thread: http://thailand.asia...otest-crackdown

the only mention i've seen of him being armed (with a slingshot) is from someone elses reading of a nick nostitz article, which when i read it, i don't know where they got it from.

According to the verdict read by the criminal court on the 17th of September, the taxi driver run out of the house to see who was shooting and got caught in crossfire. No mention of him carrying any arms (or brain for that matter).

classy rubl, very classy.

anyway, yes all info i've seen says he was unarmed.

LOL, You really are a class act.

unarmed bystander in the middle of the mob

or but wait, it is ok to injury a few trying to break through the police line, but is not ok to kill armed ones trying to burn down the city

Perhaps it is time to say good bye and leave the discussion for people with more sanity

unarmed bystander in the middle of the mob

from the other thread: http://thailand.asia...otest-crackdown

the only mention i've seen of him being armed (with a slingshot) is from someone elses reading of a nick nostitz article, which when i read it, i don't know where they got it from.

quote from the link "Three witnesses concurred that Pan was a bystander, according to a leaked report from the Department of Special Investigation (DSI)"

DSI are the most honest, not corrupt agency led by Thaksins proxy, so they leaked reports must be true, just as 3 witnesses.

PS. He may of been shot by accident and not being targeted , and again i have serious doubt Abhisist gave an order to shoot a taxi driver

well you'll find that during the av administration a lot of our abhisit/suthep supporting posters were sourcing evidence from the dsi to back up their arguments.

it's correct when it suits them, it's incorrect when it doesn't.

Oh dear,

There is a massive difference between murdering an unarmed protestor, or in this case an unarmed bystander, and a few bruises while trying to force through a police line.

If however the police injured someone that was not a threat to them then they would be in the wrong and should be dealt with, but trying to compare the two just reeks of desperation and not a real grasp of the circumstances.

LOL, You really are a class act.

unarmed bystander in the middle of the mob

or but wait, it is ok to injury a few trying to break through the police line, but is not ok to kill armed ones trying to burn down the city

Perhaps it is time to say good bye and leave the discussion for people with more sanity

unarmed bystander in the middle of the mob

from the other thread: http://thailand.asia...otest-crackdown

the only mention i've seen of him being armed (with a slingshot) is from someone elses reading of a nick nostitz article, which when i read it, i don't know where they got it from.

or one million pitak siam members.

anyway, this isn't about political bias... is it?

I would have thought that being labelled corrupt would be more of a threat to this government than PS. More so given their hypocritical War on Corruption, where it is difficult to tell which side they are fighting on.

yeah, pitak siam was just a joke.. me saying it there and just in general.

but these students are talking about anti-corruption in all aspects of thai society, unless i'm mistaken it's not a rally aimed particularly at the current government.

or one million pitak siam members.

anyway, this isn't about political bias... is it?