Focus On Thaksin's Associates

[rixalex]

rabo, they simply pay hundreds of millions of baht into the bank accounts of certain top army generals.

Where's the proof?

[slapout]

473; I tend to agree about your 5 dollar scenario, but when you furnish the man a glass cutter and he cuts the window to gain access to the jewelry he steals, then you may be deemed an accomplice. More so, if you loaned/gave him your car to use or even drove it yourself. But then, I try not to look for a complicated solution when the simple things just seem to reach out and get your attention..

[473geo]

If you give your friend 5 dollars and he goes out and smashes a shop window - in your eyes the giver of the 5 dollars carries a share of the blame!!

If that's what you were paying him to do, then yes.

473, what about if you give an assasin 1 million dollars to shoot someone? Would you be guilty?

He asked me to loan him 5 dollars he is a friend........is giving money to a friend a crime now? is giving money to a beggar a crime because he may later go on to commit a crime?

Will the bank be charged with murder because they approved a loan for a car, and the guy took the money bought a gun and shot somebody?

You emphasise the point I have raised thank you........the money is only part of the equation and a money transfer in itself is not evidence of intent.

Edited June 19, 2010 by 473geo

[rabo]

rabo, they simply pay hundreds of millions of baht into the bank accounts of certain top army generals.

He (or she) who controls the top generals controls the power. The army does what the top dogs say. Foot soldiers follow orders.

Do some research into it, but do it outside of Thailand where there is freedom of the media.

Levelhead, my intended point was that no illegal funding is required for a military coup. A coup can happen for many reasons including a legitimate belief that the country has a real problem. Your suggestion that illicit money could be involved is also possible. As always one must build a logically sound argument and then back it with supporting evidence. However, I would not necessarily believe information because it was banned. If it were simply a matter of money, Thaksin at the height of his power and corruption, would not have faced expulsion. So, in my opinion, it was not a "purchased coup".

[473geo]

473; I tend to agree about your 5 dollar scenario, but when you furnish the man a glass cutter and he cuts the window to gain access to the jewelry he steals, then you may be deemed an accomplice. More so, if you loaned/gave him your car to use or even drove it yourself. But then, I try not to look for a complicated solution when the simple things just seem to reach out and get your attention..

I think if you drove the getaway car, the fact you bought the glass cutter would not be required to prove intent.

[LevelHead]

rabo, they simply pay hundreds of millions of baht into the bank accounts of certain top army generals.

Where's the proof?

I find it quite hilarious that there are demands of "proof" when the same people happily accuse lots of people of funding red shirts when there is no "proof". They accuse people of being "terrorists" when there is no PROOF.

Proof means proof.

It does not mean just saying money was taken out of accounts, you have to "PROVE" where it went with "EVIDENCE".

So show me the evidence that all the accused actually did what they are accused of, not just implication or accusation or opinion.

And for those talking about the coup I suggest you read this, written in 2006, and see how well the plans laid out by the Military for "long term control of politics" has come to fruition.

http://thailand.ahrchk.net/docs/AHRC_Thailand_Coup_2006.pdf

+

[LevelHead]

rabo, they simply pay hundreds of millions of baht into the bank accounts of certain top army generals.

He (or she) who controls the top generals controls the power. The army does what the top dogs say. Foot soldiers follow orders.

Do some research into it, but do it outside of Thailand where there is freedom of the media.

Levelhead, my intended point was that no illegal funding is required for a military coup. A coup can happen for many reasons including a legitimate belief that the country has a real problem. Your suggestion that illicit money could be involved is also possible. As always one must build a logically sound argument and then back it with supporting evidence. However, I would not necessarily believe information because it was banned. If it were simply a matter of money, Thaksin at the height of his power and corruption, would not have faced expulsion. So, in my opinion, it was not a "purchased coup".

You base your argument on the basis of the CNS propaganda that Thaksin was "too corrupt".

He actually was a lot less corrupt than many others in Thailand, and many in the present control group today.

That does not make him good, but also he was not that bad. He has been subjected to a mass psychology warfare by the CNS and the coup backers. They have deliberately controlled news and pumped out propaganda to drag his name through the mud to disgrace him.

Lets not forget the issue that caused the coup was a bunch of old men who got worried that Thaksin might end up being more powerful as a politician than they are being "elite" within privileged circles.

They used their privileged position to gain support for a coup to oust Thaksin, based on the lies and tales they spun to worry others into agreeing to their plan.

They have since that day systematically abused their privileged positions within the elite groups to attempt to control who was in government.

This is the more interesting thing now, their lies and deceit are becoming more and more obvious to ordinary people and their positions are weakened, they now have to rely more and more on the military to openly back them and keep their lies and deceit alive and keep their puppet government in power.

The use of the military in more overt operations gives the game away more and more, and probably was part of the plan of the red shirt leaders, to force these corrupt old men to start losing their marbles and to start having to resort to overt military operations against the people on the streets of Bangkok.

Ask yourself this, if you believe the government propaganda and so many Thais love the Democrats and hate the Reds, then why is there no election ?

Surely Abhisit would want to have a quick election to win easily ? But there is not.

Whilst most people may only read government propaganda anyone out and about in Thailand will tell you clearly that the Democrats and those "corrupt old men" and treated with more and more universal hatred. People hated them but did not speak of them, now they openly speak of their hate of them.

This is a major change and will likely lead to more and more changes ahead, which is why the puppet government is stalling and trying to buy time while they figure out how to ensure they can win the next election, if they fail to win then another coup or another judicial coup to evict PTP might be one too far and force the country into real trouble with the eyes of the world clearly now watching.

Presently they are trying the "divide and conquer" method. Hit out at all opposition backers, supporters, throw them in prison, seize their assets, try to put pressure on them to join BJT or the Democrats. They are now trying to systematically take down the opposition party piece by piece in order to leave it "neutered" ahead of an election.

Again, these kind of things are far worse than anything Thaksin did, its is Junta type behavior trying to ensure democracy is not democratic. The present "corruptos" will try to ensure that the next election is like an election in China, everyone has a vote but all votes will be only for the one party (through various names). At the next election it might be worth simply changing he name of the smaller parties to "Democrat via other name 1" and "Democrat via other name 2" etc....

[animatic]

I would like to see an investigation into the people who sponsored the 2006 coup.

The 2006 coup was a treason offense under the 1997 constitution, and they threw that "Peoples Constitution" into the bin. Who sponsered the coup ? Who paid the money to make it happen ?

Why has this never been investigated ?

The coup was funded, obviously, from military and probably some other government budgets, except for the purchase of large amounts of flowers and ribbons.

There is the possibility that the purchase of so many flowers and ribbons may have come from some secret funds, that perhaps deserves investigation.

"Sonthi Secretly Funds Flowers For Coup"

I think a national committee needs to be established to investigate this flower purchase!

The coup was part funded by the leaders of the Yellow shirts, the ones who paid for the coup in 2006, the ones who paid for the protests in 2006 and in 2008, the ones who allowed the terrorists to shut down the international airport.

The real leaders of the Yellow shirts are never seen, they remain hidden from the media as the media is not allowed to comment on who they are.

There is plenty of detail in the media of who paid for the 2006 coup, its all banned in Thailand of course, but outside Thailand its very easy to know who paid for what.

So hard to see why others might find Thaksin's rum crew

a danger to Thailand's stability if he was left in sole control,

and created a faked State of Emergency and Martial Law

with HIS faction of the army ruling under his orders.

No, do nothing, and let the expired caretaker who

unilaterally took back the PM job without getting signed off on constitutionally,

thus insulting thumbing his nose at the monarchy's primary constitutional right,

then gets to become absolutely leader of the country under military control,

till he can fix elections his way, without interferance..

Naw just let it happen.

[rixalex]

I find it quite hilarious that there are demands of "proof" when the same people happily accuse lots of people of funding red shirts when there is no "proof".

You don't need proof that the red shirt protests were funded - they had to have been, by someone. You need proof as to who it was. That is what the authorities are in the process of establishing. Nobody has been convicted - yet. Somebody should be.

[473geo]

I find it quite hilarious that there are demands of "proof" when the same people happily accuse lots of people of funding red shirts when there is no "proof".

You don't need proof that the red shirt protests were funded - they had to have been, by someone. You need proof as to who it was. That is what the authorities are in the process of establishing. Nobody has been convicted - yet. Somebody should be.

Then I guess we will be seeing all the BP shareholders in court shortly, plus any who invest in companies who design, assemble and sell weaponry?

[rixalex]

I find it quite hilarious that there are demands of "proof" when the same people happily accuse lots of people of funding red shirts when there is no "proof".

You don't need proof that the red shirt protests were funded - they had to have been, by someone. You need proof as to who it was. That is what the authorities are in the process of establishing. Nobody has been convicted - yet. Somebody should be.

Then I guess we will be seeing all the BP shareholders in court shortly, plus any who invest in companies who design, assemble and sell weaponry?

The comparisons you are making are simply daft and i suspect you know that.

[473geo]

You don't need proof that the red shirt protests were funded - they had to have been, by someone. You need proof as to who it was. That is what the authorities are in the process of establishing. Nobody has been convicted - yet. Somebody should be.

Then I guess we will be seeing all the BP shareholders in court shortly, plus any who invest in companies who design, assemble and sell weaponry?

The comparisons you are making are simply daft and i suspect you know that.

Just reiterating a very valid point that a money link does not prove any guilt concerning subsequent actions and consequences, indeed there are those that may have put money into BP because of their exploration into alternative fuel, now look at the environmental damage which has occured!....................are they to carry the label of environmental terrorist for the rest of their days and perhaps thrown in Jail??

[craigt3365]

rabo, they simply pay hundreds of millions of baht into the bank accounts of certain top army generals.

He (or she) who controls the top generals controls the power. The army does what the top dogs say. Foot soldiers follow orders.

Do some research into it, but do it outside of Thailand where there is freedom of the media.

Levelhead, my intended point was that no illegal funding is required for a military coup. A coup can happen for many reasons including a legitimate belief that the country has a real problem. Your suggestion that illicit money could be involved is also possible. As always one must build a logically sound argument and then back it with supporting evidence. However, I would not necessarily believe information because it was banned. If it were simply a matter of money, Thaksin at the height of his power and corruption, would not have faced expulsion. So, in my opinion, it was not a "purchased coup".

You base your argument on the basis of the CNS propaganda that Thaksin was "too corrupt".

He actually was a lot less corrupt than many others in Thailand, and many in the present control group today.

That does not make him good, but also he was not that bad. He has been subjected to a mass psychology warfare by the CNS and the coup backers. They have deliberately controlled news and pumped out propaganda to drag his name through the mud to disgrace him.

Lets not forget the issue that caused the coup was a bunch of old men who got worried that Thaksin might end up being more powerful as a politician than they are being "elite" within privileged circles.

They used their privileged position to gain support for a coup to oust Thaksin, based on the lies and tales they spun to worry others into agreeing to their plan.

They have since that day systematically abused their privileged positions within the elite groups to attempt to control who was in government.

This is the more interesting thing now, their lies and deceit are becoming more and more obvious to ordinary people and their positions are weakened, they now have to rely more and more on the military to openly back them and keep their lies and deceit alive and keep their puppet government in power.

The use of the military in more overt operations gives the game away more and more, and probably was part of the plan of the red shirt leaders, to force these corrupt old men to start losing their marbles and to start having to resort to overt military operations against the people on the streets of Bangkok.

Ask yourself this, if you believe the government propaganda and so many Thais love the Democrats and hate the Reds, then why is there no election ?

Surely Abhisit would want to have a quick election to win easily ? But there is not.

Whilst most people may only read government propaganda anyone out and about in Thailand will tell you clearly that the Democrats and those "corrupt old men" and treated with more and more universal hatred. People hated them but did not speak of them, now they openly speak of their hate of them.

This is a major change and will likely lead to more and more changes ahead, which is why the puppet government is stalling and trying to buy time while they figure out how to ensure they can win the next election, if they fail to win then another coup or another judicial coup to evict PTP might be one too far and force the country into real trouble with the eyes of the world clearly now watching.

Presently they are trying the "divide and conquer" method. Hit out at all opposition backers, supporters, throw them in prison, seize their assets, try to put pressure on them to join BJT or the Democrats. They are now trying to systematically take down the opposition party piece by piece in order to leave it "neutered" ahead of an election.

Again, these kind of things are far worse than anything Thaksin did, its is Junta type behavior trying to ensure democracy is not democratic. The present "corruptos" will try to ensure that the next election is like an election in China, everyone has a vote but all votes will be only for the one party (through various names). At the next election it might be worth simply changing he name of the smaller parties to "Democrat via other name 1" and "Democrat via other name 2" etc....

You are absolutely correct that Thaksin is not as bad as some...Thailand is an extremely corrupt country. And as you stated, many in the current control group are corrupt as heck.

But, to say they are controlling media is not 100% true. What about all the red shirt stations up in Issan broadcasting message to over throw the government? Doesn't seem controlled to me. I also have read reports critical of the government in all of the mainstream media. If you are talking about them controlling the red shirt stations/media outlets...well, good for them. In most countries they would have been thrown in jail a long time ago.

Thaksin dug his own grave. He got too greedy...that's why he was ousted. Sure, the other side wanted to be in power, but that's the case in every country worldwide...they will do whatever they can get away with to get into power...no different here...except you get away with a lot more!

The army has basically ruled this country for ever. Nothing new there....

And yes, they did have an election and the PT party got whipped! Big time....did you read about that?

I could go on, but you seem to have drunk from the red well a bit much. I am not red and not yellow...but don't like this one sided pitch. Just not fair.

Thailand is messed up. Corrupt. The rest is just wallpapering....

[rixalex]

You are absolutely correct that Thaksin is not as bad as some...Thailand is an extremely corrupt country. And as you stated, many in the current control group are corrupt as heck.

But, to say they are controlling media is not 100% true. What about all the red shirt stations up in Issan broadcasting message to over throw the government? Doesn't seem controlled to me. I also have read reports critical of the government in all of the mainstream media. If you are talking about them controlling the red shirt stations/media outlets...well, good for them. In most countries they would have been thrown in jail a long time ago.

Thaksin dug his own grave. He got too greedy...that's why he was ousted. Sure, the other side wanted to be in power, but that's the case in every country worldwide...they will do whatever they can get away with to get into power...no different here...except you get away with a lot more!

The army has basically ruled this country for ever. Nothing new there....

And yes, they did have an election and the PT party got whipped! Big time....did you read about that?

I could go on, but you seem to have drunk from the red well a bit much. I am not red and not yellow...but don't like this one sided pitch. Just not fair.

Thailand is messed up. Corrupt. The rest is just wallpapering....

^ Well said that man.

[Robby nz]

Just reiterating a very valid point that a money link does not prove any guilt concerning subsequent actions and consequences, indeed there are those that may have put money into BP because of their exploration into alternative fuel, now look at the environmental damage which has occured!....................are they to carry the label of environmental terrorist for the rest of their days and perhaps thrown in Jail??

Ome basic problem with that:

What is happening in the Gulf with oil is an accident

The reds were deliberatly funded to cause as much trouble, death and destruction as possible.

[473geo]

Just reiterating a very valid point that a money link does not prove any guilt concerning subsequent actions and consequences, indeed there are those that may have put money into BP because of their exploration into alternative fuel, now look at the environmental damage which has occured!....................are they to carry the label of environmental terrorist for the rest of their days and perhaps thrown in Jail??

Ome basic problem with that:

What is happening in the Gulf with oil is an accident

The reds were deliberatly funded to cause as much trouble, death and destruction as possible.

One basic problem with that......I keep hearing if the reds were not there nothing would have happened..........so I guess if BP were not there nothing would have happened either!!! ................there is always risk......if you do not assess and control correctly you take responsibilty,.....in any situation!!! The Protestors are being charged for being there.....so bring out the BP shareholders......the environmental terrorists.....whose money is causing wanton death and destruction

[animatic]

The government is not necessarily going after the minor investors of Red Inc,

but more against the board of directors, those in charge and their senior partners

with control of the actions of the entity. But those that DID know that their financing

was intended to create chaos and insurrection, must be charged as financing terror or insurrection..

A industrial accident, made possible and worse, by policy corruption by a previous government,

is not the same thing as a previous government funding a violent insurrection to bring down

the following government through street harassment of the public and large scale economic sabatoge,

until push comes to shove and force is needed to end the insurrection.

Edited June 19, 2010 by animatic

[473geo]

The government is not necessarily going after the minor investors of Red Inc,

but more against the board of directors, those in charge and their senior partners

with control of the actions of the entity. But those that DID know that their financing

was intended to create chaos and insurrection, must be charged as financing terror or insurrection..

A industrial accident, made possible and worse, by policy corruption by a previous government,

is not the same thing as a previous government funding a violent insurrection to bring down

the following government through street harassment of the public and large scale economic sabatoge,

until push comes to shove and force is needed to end the insurrection.

You are right, it is not the same. There are many more mercenaries sent out on behalf of large global companies for corporate and personal gain, adopting a profit before people attitude. performing calculated risk regarding elements which may be beyond their control.......... I know....... declare drilling in the oceans illegal...then go out and arrest a few of these mercenaries (not a good idea to shoot them, bad publicity you know).....freeze the bank accounts of all the investors......bring things back to normal, no more oil spillage.........no not the same thing at all.

79% of BP shares are owned by 'institutions' and 'BP have been accused of reckless actions' (Radio 1) let us see who ends up in the doc, or assets frozen shall we!!!!

[Robby nz]

Just reiterating a very valid point that a money link does not prove any guilt concerning subsequent actions and consequences, indeed there are those that may have put money into BP because of their exploration into alternative fuel, now look at the environmental damage which has occured!....................are they to carry the label of environmental terrorist for the rest of their days and perhaps thrown in Jail??

Ome basic problem with that:

What is happening in the Gulf with oil is an accident

The reds were deliberatly funded to cause as much trouble, death and destruction as possible.

One basic problem with that......I keep hearing if the reds were not there nothing would have happened..........so I guess if BP were not there nothing would have happened either!!! ................there is always risk......if you do not assess and control correctly you take responsibilty,.....in any situation!!! The Protestors are being charged for being there.....so bring out the BP shareholders......the environmental terrorists.....whose money is causing wanton death and destruction

So you cant see the difference between an accident and a deliberate attempt to sabotage a country?....must be difficult to see with one red eye.

However: If you had been keeping up with the news you would know that BP has admitted responsability and has agreed to pay for the clean up. In order to finance this they have said there will be no dividend paid this year, if you look you also will see that BP shares are well down so that means the 'investors' will be in fact paying twice for the "accident".

Now could you tell me (Us all) how many and which of the red shirts leaders and backers(investors) have agreed to pay for the mess, destruction, deaths , injuries, loss of income etc and clean up that their deliberate action caused?

Oh yes there is one, isnt he on video saying he will take responsability "rap pit chaub" came streight after "POW" if I remember rightly.

But he said after that it was all a joke didnt he.

[animatic]

The government is not necessarily going after the minor investors of Red Inc,

but more against the board of directors, those in charge and their senior partners

with control of the actions of the entity. But those that DID know that their financing

was intended to create chaos and insurrection, must be charged as financing terror or insurrection..

A industrial accident, made possible and worse, by policy corruption by a previous government,

is not the same thing as a previous government funding a violent insurrection to bring down

the following government through street harassment of the public and large scale economic sabatoge,

until push comes to shove and force is needed to end the insurrection.

You are right, it is not the same. There are many more mercenaries sent out on behalf of large global companies for corporate and personal gain, adopting a profit before people attitude. performing calculated risk regarding elements which may be beyond their control.......... I know....... declare drilling in the oceans illegal...then go out and arrest a few of these mercenaries (not a good idea to shoot them, bad publicity you know).....freeze the bank accounts of all the investors......bring things back to normal, no more oil spillage.........no not the same thing at all.

79% of BP shares are owned by 'institutions' and 'BP have been accused of reckless actions' (Radio 1) let us see who ends up in the doc, or assets frozen shall we!!!!

"..There are many more mercenaries sent out on behalf of large global companies

for corporate and personal gain, adopting a profit before people attitude...."

Actually I see the whole redshirt street actions as JUST THAT,

mercenaries sent out on behalf of large global companies, in this case Thaksin Inc.,

and trying to gain control of a market by force... it so neo-colonial...

manipulating a segment of the peasant classes with demagogues, as a weapon,

but not caring a hoot for them when the goals are met.

Edited June 19, 2010 by animatic

[selftaopath]

Truth? In Thailand?

Get real. Better chance of finding a live unicorn.

I totally agree. I have absolutely NO confidence in the political or commercial aspects of Land of Scams/Lack of Sanctions (LOS). Corruption and greed are the only driving force here - or so I believe.

[LevelHead]

BP ? Why is anyone talking about BP.

American owned rig was only contracted by BP.

So we have an American owned rig, operated by American crew, drilling hole in American waters, no BP staff on site, all American 100% and when it screws up suddenly its BP's problems..........

Behind the scenes agreement, BP agreed to be the "dog" to be kicked, in return they will get in future lots of nice new licenses to drill to "payback" their help in making this US disaster caused by US companies and US workers appear to be a non-US problem.

[rabo]

BP ? Why is anyone talking about BP.

American owned rig was only contracted by BP.

So we have an American owned rig, operated by American crew, drilling hole in American waters, no BP staff on site, all American 100% and when it screws up suddenly its BP's problems..........

Behind the scenes agreement, BP agreed to be the "dog" to be kicked, in return they will get in future lots of nice new licenses to drill to "payback" their help in making this US disaster caused by US companies and US workers appear to be a non-US problem.

When you need a break from weaving conspiracy theories, you can read some truth here.

Anadarko blasts BP for 'reckless decisions' - Jun. 18, 2010

Seems pretty clear that BP's decision to rush a difficult well by substituting light salt water for the usual heavy mud used in these kinds of wells probably caused the disaster. They were also advised not to do this by the American workers.

BTW, by legal agreement BP had full responsibility and control of all safety issues. It was their show.

Edited June 20, 2010 by rabo

[LevelHead]

BP ? Why is anyone talking about BP.

American owned rig was only contracted by BP.

So we have an American owned rig, operated by American crew, drilling hole in American waters, no BP staff on site, all American 100% and when it screws up suddenly its BP's problems..........

Behind the scenes agreement, BP agreed to be the "dog" to be kicked, in return they will get in future lots of nice new licenses to drill to "payback" their help in making this US disaster caused by US companies and US workers appear to be a non-US problem.

When you need a break from weaving conspiracy theories, you can read some truth here. Seems pretty clear that BP's decision to rush a difficult well by substituting light salt water for the usual heavy mud used in these kinds of wells probably caused the disaster. They were also advised not to do this by the American workers.

BTW, by legal agreement BP had full responsibility and control of all safety issues. It was their show.

Anadarko blasts BP for 'reckless decisions' - Jun. 18, 2010

American companies were responsible for casing cement, and lots of American involvement in the well.

My oh my, isn't Andarko a small percentage owner of the well ??? Not surprising therefore to try to see them run away from potential damages.

All the US companies are in hiding and denial.

When this goes to the courts you wait and see what comes out. It would be suicide for BP to try to point out the truth with the well still leaking.

The time is right for the boot to go on to the other foot when the leak is stopped, so please, just wait for the oil to stop and then watch what happens, that will be the fun time as all the US responsibilities and companies will be launched into the spotlight.

[Robby nz]

BP ? Why is anyone talking about BP.

American owned rig was only contracted by BP.

So we have an American owned rig, operated by American crew, drilling hole in American waters, no BP staff on site, all American 100% and when it screws up suddenly its BP's problems..........

Behind the scenes agreement, BP agreed to be the "dog" to be kicked, in return they will get in future lots of nice new licenses to drill to "payback" their help in making this US disaster caused by US companies and US workers appear to be a non-US problem.

People are talking about BP because you brought it up as some sort of diversion.

You still havent answered my question

Now could you tell me (Us all) how many and which of the red shirts leaders and backers(investors) have agreed to pay for the mess, destruction, deaths , injuries, loss of income etc and clean up that their deliberate action caused?

[rixalex]

People are talking about BP because you brought it up as some sort of diversion.

Actually I think it might be member 473 who takes the credit as having raised the ridiculous comparison.

[philw]

Now could you tell me (Us all) how many and which of the red shirts leaders and backers(investors) have agreed to pay for the mess, destruction, deaths , injuries, loss of income etc and clean up that their deliberate action caused?

And equally relevant, do you think the Government and Army will properly compensate the families and relatives of those they murdered ??

[Robby nz]

Now could you tell me (Us all) how many and which of the red shirts leaders and backers(investors) have agreed to pay for the mess, destruction, deaths , injuries, loss of income etc and clean up that their deliberate action caused?

And equally relevant, do you think the Government and Army will properly compensate the families and relatives of those they murdered ??

The Govt had the BKK administration has already compensated those killed and those who lost livlihoods, whether you consider it adaquate is not an issue.

And to say the Govt murdered anyone is plain B... S... they were forced into an armed response by the actions of the reds.

would like to answer the above question? seems L H cant or wont.

Sorry missed out the fact that His majasty has also generously contributed to those killed and injured.

Edited June 20, 2010 by Robby nz

[jayboy]

And to say the Govt murdered anyone is plain B... S... they were forced into an armed response by the actions of the reds.

would like to answer the above question? seems L H cant or wont.

Sorry missed out the fact that His majasty has also generously contributed to those killed and injured.

So you would give free license for the Government to mow down unarmed civilians? Few would deny the Government didn't have the right to clear the area.The issue is whether the force applied was reasonable.My personal view is that the army did its duty in as efficient way as possible in difficult circumstances, but this needs to be scrutinised carefully.There are some hard questions to be addressed in terms of the numbers and circumstances of those killed, and to deny that is sheer irresponsibility.Abhisit's credibility rests on a full and fair investigation.Again my personal view is that this won't happen.

[Robby nz]

And to say the Govt murdered anyone is plain B... S... they were forced into an armed response by the actions of the reds.

would like to answer the above question? seems L H cant or wont.

Sorry missed out the fact that His majasty has also generously contributed to those killed and injured.

So you would give free license for the Government to mow down unarmed civilians? Few would deny the Government didn't have the right to clear the area.The issue is whether the force applied was reasonable.My personal view is that the army did its duty in as efficient way as possible in difficult circumstances, but this needs to be scrutinised carefully.There are some hard questions to be addressed in terms of the numbers and circumstances of those killed, and to deny that is sheer irresponsibility.Abhisit's credibility rests on a full and fair investigation.Again my personal view is that this won't happen.

You are right there does need to be a full and fair investigation then we would see just who was killed and injured by who but I doubt that will happen because the reds have to much to lose if the truth comes out. like for instance just how many were injured by grenade attacks, how many died on the 10th by red gunfire etc.

However regardless of who did kill or injure who the onus still rests with the reds for provoking the whole mess and making it nessessary for them to be forcably removed.

So you would give free license for the Government to mow down unarmed civilians?

Dont you think a statement like that is pre-empting any investigation?

If that is used as a starting point what hope is there of ever getting truth?