Thai Ex-PM Abhisit Grilled Over Deadly Rally Crackdown

[anterian]

If people recall the situation correctly, Abhisit refrained from using force as long as he could. He refrained for so long that the military was on the verge of taking matters into their own hands.

The soldiers were very passive and were the one's being attacked by the red shirts, they just stood there taking a beating, getting homemade bombs thrown at them and getting injured.

The reds threw the first punch and kept throwing and kept throwing, while the soldiers just stood still... until eventually there was no way the military was going to allow their men to get harmed any longer.

The men in black are indeed a real group, not made up and not a figment of imagination. Where i use to work by Pratunam there is a restaurant i use to go to for lunch every other day. A couple of times there were indeed a few people sitting there with black shirts and combat fatigues wearing berets, before the rallies they were never there before.

The reds are the scum of thailand all things bad in Thailand are a result of these type of people....sorry to say though that the majority are poverty stricken with no education, easily manipulated and willing to do almost anything to get ahead - except put down the whiskey and pride...because when you are poor that's all you have left, your pride...and that's what all this is about, pride no matter if its red or yellow.

I'd like to take issue with your first sentence. The above is your recollection of events I take it, your opinion. You're entitled to it by all means but please do not project your opinion on what other people should think.

I would like to take issue with this statement, "The reds are the scum of thailand all things bad in Thailand are a result of these type of people." This may be your biased opinion but it is not fact. I know many good and decent reds, just as for balance I know many evil, antisocial yellows.

[tlansford]

'Internationally acclaimed' made me giggle. Liberal with the truth again I see. No-matter, I am sure he doesn't care much about what we post about him. But we care what he posts. And will act on it. And he knows it. But to continue with the topic: So what you are saying is that he cannot corroborate your assertion posted above?

Where in my one sentence post did I mention Nick Nostitz corroborating or not corroborating anything? Or are you just fond of non sequiturs?

I know from a few short discussions with Nick Nostitz that he finds the discussions on this forum quite edifying in a similar way to myself. But not in the way that posters such as yourself would hope .

So then, Nostitz hasn't corroborated anything and we're back to having only PaulBax "seeing" what no else managed to see.

"internationally acclaimed" gave me a chuckle too, TAWP.

.

"internationally acclaimed" gave me a chuckle too, TAWP.

the implication being that he is not?

Der Spiegel, just a silly little old local rag, I guess... But perhaps even you have heard of it, no??? It is more respected than any journal coming from your home-country that I can think of off-hand...

[Buchholz]

'Internationally acclaimed' made me giggle. Liberal with the truth again I see. No-matter, I am sure he doesn't care much about what we post about him. But we care what he posts. And will act on it. And he knows it. But to continue with the topic: So what you are saying is that he cannot corroborate your assertion posted above?

Where in my one sentence post did I mention Nick Nostitz corroborating or not corroborating anything? Or are you just fond of non sequiturs?

I know from a few short discussions with Nick Nostitz that he finds the discussions on this forum quite edifying in a similar way to myself. But not in the way that posters such as yourself would hope .

So then, Nostitz hasn't corroborated anything and we're back to having only PaulBax "seeing" what no else managed to see.

"internationally acclaimed" gave me a chuckle too, TAWP.

the implication being that he is not?

Der Spiegel, just a silly little old local rag, I guess... But perhaps even you have heard of it, no??? It is more respected than any journal coming from your home-country that I can think of off-hand...

my, my... such staunch defense.

Let us know when he's hired full time.... anywhere.

Still, I can accept that your definition of internationally acclaimed might be quite a bit more liberal than my own.

.

[KRS1]

It just struck me what the heck are the police doing interrogating them. When there was a need for action they ran.

Sorry I forgot Thaksins relative is the Police Chief. Silly me.:jap:

Did you have a similar thought when these very same police were interrogating the Red Shirts?

Yes of course

Now back to the OP "Thai ex-PM Abhisit grilled over deadly rally crackdown"

Probably one of the questions not asked because the answer might be embarrassing "why didn't you stick to using the police, you already used them for a month or so?"

Indeed he could. But then people may ask why the Army did not get involved with the PAD disturbances when ordered to do so but that may be embarrassing too which is probably why it hasn't been pursued. Seems like the Army likes to pick its opponents.............though under the control of the Prime Minister in an Emergency Decree of course.

Why would they have to?They didn't burn down any department stores or force the closing of shops and traffic, and they did not iterate and encourage the making of bombs or make barricades - like the reds did , nor was there leader a fugitive from the law, even after he lied and said he would no longer get involved in politics.

Another question to ask is - why did the people give flowers to the soldiers when Thaksin was ousted, take pictures with tanks and give the soldiers food? Because the soldiers fight for the people while the reds fight for what Thaksin will give them.

[KRS1]

If you recall live fire was used early on by the Army, they lied about it, saying only blanks were used, then it was pointed out that M16's cannot cycle blank ammunition without muzzle suppressors and their story fell apart.

M16 can cycle rubber bullets.

[KRS1]

Maybe they didn't use lethal force to evict the yellow shirts out of the airport because they were peacefully protesting without machine guns and grenade launchers.

And they were not invading hospitals and using there children as shields.

They initially took the airport by force.

The protesters turned up later, once the area was secured by the paramilitary element of the yellow shirts who were armed.

I know, because I was at the airport when the takeover began.

Really? I was there too, i use to live 10 minutes away. The paramilitary element you saw were Thai SWAT making sure there was no violence that was going to come from the yellows or to get attacked by anyone else, they were neutral.

[Buchholz]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

[animatic]

a ) Who had the most to gain by sending them?

If you ask me, I would say the Army, as it give them the license to shoot with life bullets, and use heavy weapons.

So why were the black shirts able to move freely amongst the red shirt protestors?

The army never wished to get involved with the red shirt protest last year. If the police had done their job there would have been no need to involve the army.

Anupong was extremely reluctant to send the army in to disperse the red shirts- but how the red shirts needed martyrs, without them they would have no cause to protest the last year.

Not to mention that the Army and government had

NOTHING TO GAIN, by live fire, if there was an alternative.

It was obvious from the extended forbearance of the army under extreme provocations, that they did NOT want to resort to live fire if at all possible. That possibility was systematically denied them by the red leadership over and over again.

The army made it clear for months this was the Polices job to do, but the police dropped the ball completely... Remember the corrpulent Arisaman doing his ragged Spiderman imitation down the Shinawatra owned hotel wall, in front of several big wig police.... who did NOTHING about arresting him?

The search for alternatives was stretched out WAY to far an most people's estimations, causing greater problems when it was used as final resort.

And yes Siripon makes and excellent point ;

Why would the reds have allowed army ringers in their own, rather paranoid about strangers, ranks, if they were NOT told by their leaders to ignore the armed men in black in their midst.

Mr sBox, your argument is more than a little Spare of LOGIC.

[animatic]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

Not one of which was caught by ANY of the hundreds of cameras in the area...

not a single one.

But plenty of shots of PAD members being mauled and blown up.

And one guy panicing in a pickup truck running over someone.

The sum total of guns witnessed on film at the airport in PAD hands was not even AT the airport yet, but one guy on a PAD truck shooting near, but not at, a mob of taxi drivers trying to attack their truck... none of whom were actually shot.

Edited December 13, 2011 by animatic

[philw]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

Not one of which was caught by ANY of the hundreds of cameras in the area...

not a single one.

But plenty of shots of PAD members being mauled and blown up.

And one guy panicing in a pickup truck running over someone.

The sum total of guns witnessed on film at the airport in PAD hands was not even AT the airport yet, but one guy on a PAD truck shooting near, but not at, a mob of taxi drivers trying to attack their truck... none of whom were actually shot.

So what is it then, in your view , that never happened ???

Either or both .

[TAWP]

Der Spiegel, just a silly little old local rag, I guess... But perhaps even you have heard of it, no??? It is more respected than any journal coming from your home-country that I can think of off-hand...

Are you saying that anyone that has sold pictures to Der Spiegel is 'internationally acclaimed'?

[TAWP]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

Not one of which was caught by ANY of the hundreds of cameras in the area...

not a single one.

But plenty of shots of PAD members being mauled and blown up.

And one guy panicing in a pickup truck running over someone.

The sum total of guns witnessed on film at the airport in PAD hands was not even AT the airport yet, but one guy on a PAD truck shooting near, but not at, a mob of taxi drivers trying to attack their truck... none of whom were actually shot.

So what is it then, in your view , that never happened ???

Either or both .

The incident with a guard firing towards attacking taxi-drivers happened next to the radio central on Vibhavade. That can be said to be in 'west' of Bangkok. The airport is clearly outside Bangkok to the East. So...those pictures are clearly not from...inside...the airport. But on a major road, leading North...some 30 kilometers to the west of the Airport. All clear?

[473geo]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

Here is the script I recalled ........make of it what you will........ Nick...... .from the thread Simon provided.

"Some parts of the PAD were as heavily armed back then in 2008 as some parts of the Red Shirts were. For example, only one Uzi of the about 12 Uzi's and 3 M16's the PAD stole from a Special Branch Police Station in Government was retrieved by security forces in a string operation, the remaining weapons are still at large.

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

Edited December 13, 2011 by 473geo

[Buchholz]

I'll make of it literally. So then, PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

.

[473geo]

I'll make of it literally. So then, PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

.

Ok I accept PaulBax did witness many armed with guns too, you have convinced me

[Insight]

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

Given this comparison, we're not talking about a raw eye witness account made at the time...?

Based on the above sentence it sounds like it was made a few years after the airport occupation, after the red shirt riots even, and yet another finger-pointing "they were just as evil!" exercise.

Yawn.

[billd766]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

Here is the script I recalled ........make of it what you will........ Nick...... .from the thread Simon provided.

"Some parts of the PAD were as heavily armed back then in 2008 as some parts of the Red Shirts were. For example, only one Uzi of the about 12 Uzi's and 3 M16's the PAD stole from a Special Branch Police Station in Government was retrieved by security forces in a string operation, the remaining weapons are still at large.

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

So the PAD barricades were mined with explosives.

Land mines, anti personnel mines, hand grenades, firecrackers or what?

Do you have any proof such as photos or videos or is it just a case of I know a man who knows a man who knows....

Because without proof what you have said is merely an unsubstantiated rumour and as such it totally worthless.

By the way is there any proof that the PAD stole the weapons from a Special Branch Police Station or were they really Red Shirts disguised as fake PAD Yellow Shirts?

[473geo]

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

Given this comparison, we're not talking about a raw eye witness account made at the time...?

Based on the above sentence it sounds like it was made a few years after the airport occupation, after the red shirt riots even, and yet another finger-pointing "they were just as evil!" exercise.

Yawn.

Yes boring, simply because too many forum contributors cannot accept the simple fact that there are violent factions who attend many political demonstrations, the level of violence may fluctuate, but once there it can escalate at any time.

[473geo]

Now then, how about that quote from your provided link thread of Nostitz corroborating what PaulBax said, many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

I noticed you completely avoided that part in my post... again.

So, after 30 or so of teeth-pulling posts, we can finally surmise that PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Thank you, gentleman, for the clarification.

.

Here is the script I recalled ........make of it what you will........ Nick...... .from the thread Simon provided.

"Some parts of the PAD were as heavily armed back then in 2008 as some parts of the Red Shirts were. For example, only one Uzi of the about 12 Uzi's and 3 M16's the PAD stole from a Special Branch Police Station in Government was retrieved by security forces in a string operation, the remaining weapons are still at large.

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

So the PAD barricades were mined with explosives.

Land mines, anti personnel mines, hand grenades, firecrackers or what?

Do you have any proof such as photos or videos or is it just a case of I know a man who knows a man who knows....

Because without proof what you have said is merely an unsubstantiated rumour and as such it totally worthless.

By the way is there any proof that the PAD stole the weapons from a Special Branch Police Station or were they really Red Shirts disguised as fake PAD Yellow Shirts?

Believe it or not, up to you.............................I just recalled mention of armed protestors from an alternative source.............

It appears my memory works.......well

Edited December 14, 2011 by 473geo

[whybother]

Here is the script I recalled ........make of it what you will........ Nick...... .from the thread Simon provided.

"Some parts of the PAD were as heavily armed back then in 2008 as some parts of the Red Shirts were. For example, only one Uzi of the about 12 Uzi's and 3 M16's the PAD stole from a Special Branch Police Station in Government was retrieved by security forces in a string operation, the remaining weapons are still at large.

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

So, they stole some guns. Has there been any evidence of them using or even brandishing them?

The red shirts stole some guns. There was also a lot of evidence of, if not the stolen guns, the use of similar guns.

[Buchholz]

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

Given this comparison, we're not talking about a raw eye witness account made at the time...?

Based on the above sentence it sounds like it was made a few years after the airport occupation, after the red shirt riots even, and yet another finger-pointing "they were just as evil!" exercise.

Yawn.

Yes boring, simply because too many forum contributors cannot accept the simple fact that there are violent factions who attend many political demonstrations, the level of violence may fluctuate, but once there it can escalate at any time.

The boredom comes with the endless, and erroneous, feeble attempts to ascribe the same level of weaponry and severity of violent actions between the two groups.

.

[Buchholz]

I'll make of it literally. So then, PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Ok I accept PaulBax did witness many armed with guns too, you have convinced me

There's a medical term for a condition wherein the sufferer is the only person to see something that no one else can. But with proper medication, that condition usually can be eliminated.

.

[473geo]

The PAD barricades around Government House were mined with explosives as were the Red Shirt barricades"

Given this comparison, we're not talking about a raw eye witness account made at the time...?

Based on the above sentence it sounds like it was made a few years after the airport occupation, after the red shirt riots even, and yet another finger-pointing "they were just as evil!" exercise.

Yawn.

Yes boring, simply because too many forum contributors cannot accept the simple fact that there are violent factions who attend many political demonstrations, the level of violence may fluctuate, but once there it can escalate at any time.

The boredom comes with the endless, and erroneous, feeble attempts to ascribe the same level of weaponry and severity of violent actions between the two groups.

.

No...... it comes from people who will not condemn all violent action with regard to political demonstrations because it suits their particular political leanings

[473geo]

I'll make of it literally. So then, PaulBax is the only witness to the many armed with guns and automatic weapons by PAD at Parliament.

Ok I accept PaulBax did witness many armed with guns too, you have convinced me

There's a medical term for a condition wherein the sufferer is the only person to see something that no one else can. But with proper medication, that condition usually can be eliminated.

.

Pleased you have sought a cure

[Buchholz]

Given this comparison, we're not talking about a raw eye witness account made at the time...?

Based on the above sentence it sounds like it was made a few years after the airport occupation, after the red shirt riots even, and yet another finger-pointing "they were just as evil!" exercise.

Yawn.

Yes boring, simply because too many forum contributors cannot accept the simple fact that there are violent factions who attend many political demonstrations, the level of violence may fluctuate, but once there it can escalate at any time.

The boredom comes with the endless, and erroneous, feeble attempts to ascribe the same level of weaponry and severity of violent actions between the two groups.

No...... it comes from people who will not condemn all violent action with regard to political demonstrations because it suits their particular political leanings

Not really, because there are far more that readily acknowledge the violent actions from both sides. The boredom emanates from those transient posters that pop in continually to say the level of violent action was equal from both sides.

When the reality of the differences is pointed out, that's when the inevitable boring derailment to rehash the same scenarios thread after thread to highlight these factual differences.

Like this thread, for example.

.

[473geo]

No level of violence is acceptable, so discussion and debate on the level of violence must always become a pointless stone throwing exercise, in order to try and accentuate the magnitude of the 'crime' in order to allocate the blame to a selected political faction....it's political motivated debate.....all violence should be condemned

[rixalex]

No level of violence is acceptable, so discussion and debate on the level of violence must always become a pointless stone throwing exercise, in order to try and accentuate the magnitude of the 'crime' in order to allocate the blame to a selected political faction....it's political motivated debate.....all violence should be condemned

You seem confused. Acknowledging that different groups have committed violence to different levels, is not condoning any sort of violence from anyone or any group. Pretending that all groups have committed violence to the exact same level - which it seems you are encouraging us to do - doesn't make your condemnation any louder than anyone else's, it just makes you poorly informed.

[animatic]

No level of violence is acceptable, so discussion and debate on the level of violence must always become a pointless stone throwing exercise, in order to try and accentuate the magnitude of the 'crime' in order to allocate the blame to a selected political faction....it's political motivated debate.....all violence should be condemned

Real politik does not exist in the land of imaginary utopia.

Either deal with reality as it is or except you are preferring fantasy land to reality.

All courts, in all lands, gauge the magnitude of crimes relative to other crimes.

Being hit with a cream pie can be considered assault.

As can being stomped on with a boot heal.

But the severity and the magnitude of EACH of these ASSAULTS,

are unequal in comparison, as is their punishment.

[Buchholz]

No level of violence is acceptable, so discussion and debate on the level of violence must always become a pointless stone throwing exercise, in order to try and accentuate the magnitude of the 'crime' in order to allocate the blame to a selected political faction....it's political motivated debate.....all violence should be condemned

You seem confused. Acknowledging that different groups have committed violence to different levels, is not condoning any sort of violence from anyone or any group. Pretending that all groups have committed violence to the exact same level - which it seems you are encouraging us to do - doesn't make your condemnation any louder than anyone else's, it just makes you poorly informed.

and at the end of the day, that's the bottom line

.

[TAWP]

No...... it comes from people who will not condemn all violent action with regard to political demonstrations because it suits their particular political leanings

You just described the typical Red Shirt apologist here. How many have denounced any violence from their side? And when they did, how many didn't follow it up with the word 'but' and an explanation that Yellow Shirts 'did bad things too'?

Edited December 14, 2011 by TAWP