Pi Sek

as DPM he was responsible for the security actions. Please don't tell me that you don't know that.

How does Suthep being in charge of security have anything do with the organisation of the "blue shirts"?

The Blue Shirt incident was in April 2009. As head of CRES (not as DPM), Suthep was responsible for security... in early- to mid-2010. And he got replaced in this position by Anupong Paojinda on Abhisit's orders mid April 2010.

Direct quote from The Nation on 1 May 2009: "most analysts believe that the new blue-clad political group was playing a game at making political changes." - i.e. they were trying to force Abhisit to resign (although it did also say that the Blue Shirts could have also been goading the Reds into violence). With Suthep as Abhisit's #2, it's fairly unlikely Newin cleared this with Suthep, and it's even more unlikely that Suthep was involved in the organising at all.

There's some real BS being thrown around in this thread. Even on this page, we have someone making reference to the non-existent jury system in Thailand, and others trying to back-peddle to try and make some point that the jury reference was some kind of metaphor. No it wasn't. It was someone who doesn't know what they're talking about making an ass out of themselves.

Actually there's not much to disagree with in your first paragraphs though I'm unaware there are any serious people disputing there was an armed redshirt element.The questions I hope the trial clarifies are why it's taken so long to arrest them,who paid for them,who are they and what were they aiming to achieve.All this presupposes these are right people - very far from being proven.

You have got yourself in a muddle in your last paragraph.You might want to reread the relevant posts so you don't repeat the error.

Well, we definitely do agree that the trial MUST clarify the points you make here - especially that they are the right people, which has to be answered before the other ones. I'm naive, but not naive enough to believe anything in the Thai political pantomime without hard facts and complete transparency.

You are correct in that the dressing-up of the suspects influences public opinion and, while there isn't a jury system in Thailand, the dressing-up game was clearly intended to create some kind of emotional response and make their indictment a little harder to argue against. Unfortunately, as happens so often with the Law in Thailand, their decision to do this had the opposite effect!

Still, I stand by my comment - expert opinions coming from laminers aren't helpful, and they're everywhere (not you, jayboy ). The Churchill phrase "It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations" comes to mind... we were all uneducated once.

This topic has gone off the rails a little... although little surprise to that, all these topics on political violence tend to. I don't think anyone is denying the RTA shot a lot of people... it may sound callous, but whether or not the army was justified depends on your opinion (however, I do notice that it's only the UDD cheerleaders who seem to believe that the army were doing all of the shooting).

I find it very hard to believe that people who have enough intellectual resources to turn on a computer can still maintain that they believe the MiB were not acting in collusion with the Red Shirts in 2010. The question in this thread should not be "were the MiB working for the Abhisit-led coalition or the UDD?". We know very well that they were acting in collusion with the UDD, there is plenty of red-handed evidence that shows they were, even on this thread.

The question should be "are the people shown in the OP the "real" MiB who were responsible for attacks... and for exactly which attacks were they responsible?".

I find it very hard to believe that people who have enough intellectual resources to turn on a computer can still maintain that they believe the MiB were not acting in collusion with the Red Shirts in 2010.

I find it very hard to find a post which claims what you are claiming. Just for the record.

On the contrary, the existence of the MiB was denied at first... then came the UDD claims were that they were "fake" Red Shirts installed at the protests by the army...

If you look back at topics closer to the time, such claims are manifest. Even on the first page of this topic, there's one or two making the same claims.

The very informed jayboy (I accept he knows what he's talking about, even if we disagree) points out above that he doesn't think there are "serious" people making this claim... but the claim is not only out there, it's common (even if only non-serious people claim it!).

But it pleases me to see that people who do know what they're talking about unanimously acknowledge the presence of an organised paramilitary wing within the UDD.

as DPM he was responsible for the security actions. Please don't tell me that you don't know that.

How does Suthep being in charge of security have anything do with the organisation of the "blue shirts"?

The Blue Shirt incident was in April 2009. As head of CRES (not as DPM), Suthep was responsible for security... in early- to mid-2010. And he got replaced in this position by Anupong Paojinda on Abhisit's orders mid April 2010.

Direct quote from The Nation on 1 May 2009: "most analysts believe that the new blue-clad political group was playing a game at making political changes." - i.e. they were trying to force Abhisit to resign (although it did also say that the Blue Shirts could have also been goading the Reds into violence). With Suthep as Abhisit's #2, it's fairly unlikely Newin cleared this with Suthep, and it's even more unlikely that Suthep was involved in the organising at all.

There's some real BS being thrown around in this thread. Even on this page, we have someone making reference to the non-existent jury system in Thailand, and others trying to back-peddle to try and make some point that the jury reference was some kind of metaphor. No it wasn't. It was someone who doesn't know what they're talking about making an ass out of themselves.

CRES, sure, that is understood - lack of attention to 'detail' in my writing. It was obvious that it was not part of the DPM responsibilities, but as DPM, he was in charge of the security at the time, etc, ... OK?

2009, that was already clear to the people discussing the topic. It can be hard to follow the thread discussion with the quote limits.

But are you quoting the Nation to make a suggestion that the blue shirts were some kind of political group and working against the AV government?

That would be a rather odd thing to say.

Yes, that is exactly what was suggested... not by me, by the way, by "most analysts" (according to Somroutai Sapsomboon of The Nation).

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/05/01/politics/politics_30101785.php

Not really odd to me either, as BJT are the epitome of opportunistic politics... they ditched PPP to get the Interior Ministry in a Democrat-led government, after all, so it doesn't sound like such a stretch of the imagination that they would try to use any situation to try and strengthen their position at the trough. All the Thai political dinosaurs who "control factions" tried to have some sort of say in the aftermath of the protests... Sanoh, Banharn, the list is very long, and their collective aim was to show how good they were as individual politicians by getting opposing sides to see eye to eye (or at least show the public they tried).

Also, the scope of responsibilities of DPM does not normally cover security. And, at the time, I don't think Suthep was in charge of security (in fact, as BJT got the Interior Ministry, I'm pretty sure one of the Chidchobs were - which probably explains why Newin tried to deny any involvement in the Blue Shirts, who were supposedly "civilian" but got their blue shirts directly from the Interior Ministry!). The only source I can find that anyone higher than the Interior Ministry was involved is a vague comment attributed to Nick Nostitz in Chris Askew's book "Legitimacy Crisis in Thailand"; I'm sure Nick's a nice guy, but I don't find him credible for reasons that I've put to him myself. But, hey, I don't find Michael Yon credible either and I get on fine with him.

as DPM he was responsible for the security actions. Please don't tell me that you don't know that.

How does Suthep being in charge of security have anything do with the organisation of the "blue shirts"?

The Blue Shirt incident was in April 2009. As head of CRES (not as DPM), Suthep was responsible for security... in early- to mid-2010. And he got replaced in this position by Anupong Paojinda on Abhisit's orders mid April 2010.

Direct quote from The Nation on 1 May 2009: "most analysts believe that the new blue-clad political group was playing a game at making political changes." - i.e. they were trying to force Abhisit to resign (although it did also say that the Blue Shirts could have also been goading the Reds into violence). With Suthep as Abhisit's #2, it's fairly unlikely Newin cleared this with Suthep, and it's even more unlikely that Suthep was involved in the organising at all.

There's some real BS being thrown around in this thread. Even on this page, we have someone making reference to the non-existent jury system in Thailand, and others trying to back-peddle to try and make some point that the jury reference was some kind of metaphor. No it wasn't. It was someone who doesn't know what they're talking about making an ass out of themselves.

This topic has gone off the rails a little... although little surprise to that, all these topics on political violence tend to. I don't think anyone is denying the RTA shot a lot of people... it may sound callous, but whether or not the army was justified depends on your opinion (however, I do notice that it's only the UDD cheerleaders who seem to believe that the army were doing all of the shooting).

I find it very hard to believe that people who have enough intellectual resources to turn on a computer can still maintain that they believe the MiB were not acting in collusion with the Red Shirts in 2010. The question in this thread should not be "were the MiB working for the Abhisit-led coalition or the UDD?". We know very well that they were acting in collusion with the UDD, there is plenty of red-handed evidence that shows they were, even on this thread.

The question should be "are the people shown in the OP the "real" MiB who were responsible for attacks... and for exactly which attacks were they responsible?".

Unfortunately for the sake of stability and peace direct election is the only way to go for the time being.

Indeed unfortunate... as the Democrats & Peua Thai (the two mainstream parties) and Chart Thai Pattana and Bhum Jai Thai (the two parties who won enough seats to have made up a significant coalition factor in the last 10 years) disagree with you.

I understand both Peua Thai and the Democrats eventually want a totally elected Senate (or so they have publicly claimed), but Peua Thai want the upper and lower houses to be elected under the same terms (effect: governments are autocratic and self-scrutinising) and the Democrats want controls in place to make sure the lower house is accountable to the upper house (effect: governments are accountable and forced to act democratically, but "old" power trumps an elected government).

This isn't as easy as "letting the people decide".

Who cares what pt want. There would be no doubt they will push whatever system is ultimately good for the trough, not what's good for Thailand and for the benefit of all Thais.

Some other parties the same.

Some?

It's easy to demonise jdinasia for the slightly callous observations on legalities.

However, the assumptions are not altogether incorrect. Circumstantial evidence is accepted by courts, although with not as much weight as material evidence.

And, if there is a police source who can say "we tested the DNA", it's admissible evidence, even if the police didn't have the will or means to make a reliable DNA test. The fact is they made whatever test they decided to make.

I was at a case once where the three arresting officers gave three completely different stories, the lawyer for the accused found gaping holes in all of them. The verdict - guilty, because it was the defendant's word against the police. Even though the word from the three police was far from consistent! Even the Appeals Court upheld the guilty verdict, because they "did not find the defendant's evidence credible". Looked very suss, but not worth going to the Supreme Court for a by-then-expired 3 month suspended sentence and a 6k Baht fine.

Having taught magistrates in Thailand, I think it worth mentioning that Thai justice does not work on the 'innocent until proven guilty' concept.

Magistrates I have spoken to use the 'no smoke without fire' principle.

Meaning if the police bring it to court, then the party must be guilty, or why did they bother in the first place.

Thai QED.

Having been a court-appointed translator in the past, I fully concur with your summary of "Thai QED", but I am 99% sure it is written into the Law (I've seen it, or wording to that effect) that Thai court justice is supposed to work on the 'innocent until proven guilty' concept - although I've just had a quick flick-through my Criminal Code book and can't find it (!).

However, throughout the text of the Criminal Code, the phrase "if the Court is of the opinion that..." appears very regularly. That's a big problem right there.

<snip>

What is it with the people in the south?, It's not just me as I've spoken with a lot of people that feel the same, seems to be full of low lives out for anything they can get and if they have to kill you then that's no problem, don't get me wrong plenty of low lives in the north as well just seems the % is higher the more south you go, yet they proclaim their superiority over the people in the north, ie, the beer Singer <deleted> who loves the sound of her own voice, and the former miss Thailand comments all northerners should be shot, the BIB's currently being investigated for corruption, the BIB in charge of the Kho Tao murders, claiming there's no mafia in Kho Tao and three weeks later Suthep pins a medal on him for his most excellent work, and were do most of these crocked politicians come from? the south.

Maybe I could do an experiment, for one month list any shootings, bashings, thefts, and corruption reports and note where these people come from.

Ridiculous.

The South is full of low-lives, as is the North and Centre.

But the reason you and I are posting here is because we like it here. I don't know about you, but my experience is that places like Australia are also full of low-lives.

As a prime minister it does matter what your family is doing. Wasn't this not the biggest reason why YL was overthrown for. (Because of her brother)..

Anyway it sounds quite strange..and this all after the inheritance tax tax is on the way. And a company which has been formed and immediately took over the land.

No "what her family was doing" wasn't the biggest reason for which YL was overthrown. She was overthrown because of what she and her government was doing.

If a politician was legally accountable for what their relatives were doing, we would have seen Chalerm, Suthep, Yinglak (just to name a few) in prison long ago.

However - in the interests of fairness, especially given we're under Martial Law in order to restrict civilian freedoms and empower the government, I think questions like this should be in the public eye. Otherwise, what's the point in having Martial Law?

Lets be clear - this is not a 'clean-up', but a 'clean-out' of political opponents.

Clean up, clean out, clean down, clean in... I don't really care, as long as it's clean.

"Pol.Col. Sathit hasnt allowed the press to take pictures inside Pom Lamai police booth which raised questions among the press and other media outlets, Pol.Col. Sathit answered shortly that while the investigation is underway nobody would be allowed inside the crime scene."

Are they really learning from the death island Koh Tao ?

Or only because it's one of them?

They may actually realise that it is not a good idea to sell tickets at a crime scene so every tom, dick and Harry with thier dogs can trample all over it and destroy evidence. They may also be starting to understand that gruesome photos of victims plastered all over the media can be distressing to families. They may just be tired of being laughed at on social media around the world and have started to adopt an attitude that resembles some sort of professionalism.

One can only hope.

{Hey Tim, if you're reading here, bet you had to look up "troglodyte"didn't ya?} So did I.

Fits him perfectly, eh?

I only heard of that loser by reading here; he seems to fancy himself as someone important on those youtube videos but he's really just a knuckle-dragging cretin, the worst kind of people Pattaya is world-famous for.

Personally I agree. I think that this guy is one of those people who lowers Thais' estimation of foreigners. It doesn't make him wrong in this instance though, especially as the other kind of people Pattaya is famous for is the institutionalized mafia.

You think they had all this evidence and they decided not to charge him (especially as it seems he didn't exactly cooperate after the cops found said evidence)? Something smells wrong, other than "Sharky".

The Thai hate the RTP police as much as anyone; my Thai colleagues are also disgusted by this whitewash.

Likewise.

I have the old versions, I wonder what the new ones say:

Democracy (aka 'Winner Takes All') : The process of using money from the educated taxpaying minority to bribe the non taxpaying majority to vote you into power. Once in power, everything the country owns belongs to you to do with as you want. The election mandate approves anything and everything you decide, whether in the manifesto or not. The elected government are there to serve their supporters, not those who didn't vote for them. Democracy means that the taxpaying minority have the theoretical option to vote you out at the next election.

Coup: What happens when democracy fails and the elected government plunders so much of the Nations treasure that social collapse is imminent.

That's not bad actually

jdinasia

How do you work that one out, zero bearing on anything, I signed so did a few of my friends, my daughter signed and my Mum signed, it matters to us as it matters to the victims family and the suspects family. Of course it can make a difference, exposure, press, and eventually change in thinking from the Thai government. Stop being so negative, if it wasn't for petitions and similar actions then majority of the people around the world would have no voice

Agree wholeheartedly.

It doesn't make a difference if what we do has an effect or otherwise... what is important is that speak out when we think something is wrong.

Slightly off-topic, but this David Cameron music video is a corker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBumQHPAeU

Welcome Amnesty!

Shine a bright light on the corrupt thugs!

Amnesty International are one big joke - why don't they get a real job rather than mess about when its none of their business. Go back to London as you are not wanted!!!

Why so angry?

bought them no SIM cards or souvenir of you when they visited the island

May be he is jealous because AI only helps people whor are NOT guilty

Unfortunately for Human Rights in general, I have noted Amnesty International (and other Human Rights organizations, like Human Rights Watch) has a tendency to kick up a fuss over all sorts, including cases where the accused are guilty.

I am convinced their intentions are good, but view them as one of the "bleeding hearts and artists", although the world is probably a better place with them to cross-question issues when needed. It's certainly a good thing that they've got involved on this one.

I just feel the impact of their cross-questioning is compromised by their over-willingness to represent anyone who "has had their rights infringed", perceived or otherwise.

And the "key witness" didn't come forward until now because..................

a) because he's a "fake" key witness and his statement is a load of &lt;deleted&gt;

because he was "afraid of the tourist mafia"

c) because he was "too busy" to report to the police

Answers on a postcard, send to Tharit @ DSI

There's as much chance that "Koh Tao murder probe 85% complete" means just that as there is that they have inserted some kind of confession-extraction torture device 85% of the way in.

Quote

I met a very influential long time good Thai friend yesterday. She said senior police she knows told her that it was definitely foreigners who were responsible, and again made reference to the low morals and bad behavior generally expected of and associated with foreigners. An interesting mind set, and far from open.

UN Quote

This sums up what is becoming an obvious cover up attempt

Maybe so.

However, I also have heard from a fairly high level official, this time in the Forestry Department in Suratthani, that this was a case of farang-on-farang murder. This seems to be doing the rounds in official channels and, when I question it saying there's no proof, there's no competence in the investigation, and this is something that Thailand would prefer to brush under the carpet, all I got was a shrug of the shoulders in typical Thai style.

Personally I think that it could have been anyone - jealous farang guy who had shacked up with a young English girl and wasn't happy that she'd changed bungalows for another guy, or horny Burmese fisherman high on yaba, or a Thai pissed on lao cao who decided he wanted some action and took his opportunity through violent means.

Unfortunately I think the truth will never come out.