Abhisit Vows To Back Probe Into 91 Deaths

[webfact]

Abhisit vows to back probe into 91 deaths

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Every Thai is responsible, in one way or another, for the death of 91 people and thousands others being injured in April-May 2010, Opposition leader and then-premier Abhisit Vejjajiva said.

"We are all responsible in one way or another. Let's be frank about that," the former PM said when asked if he felt even partially responsible for the deadly crackdown. He was speaking at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand (FCCT) on Tuesday night.

Abhisit said that the 91 deaths and the injuring of 2,000 people in 2010 - during his time as premier - did not happen in clashes in key places. He reiterated that there would have been no loss of life if there were no armed men in black. He was referring to the first deadly clash on April 10, 2010 when mysterious armed men showed up and attacked soldiers tasked with dispersing red-shirt protesters on Rajdamnoen Avenue.

The former premier insisted that for six hours that day nobody was killed.

"The trouble began when grenades were launched … Weapons were stolen. And there was chaos. I tried at every stage to find solutions. Every time negotiations broke down," he said, adding that he and his then-deputy Suthep Thaugsubhan, are still willing to go through the justice system and find out what happened.

"I find it difficult to understand why somebody like Thaksin [shinawatra] should say 'forget everything'," Abhisit said.

The former premier touched on several subjects at the FCCT, including calling his Democrat Party "almost a natural minority party", explaining that the Democrats usually formed a coalition government when majority political blocks split. "If it takes two [general] elections rather than one election for us to win, that is okay."

He also described his party as Thailand's "only properly institutionalised party".

As for charter reform, Abhisit warned that the Constitution reform process was being "hijacked by a government that wants to pursue an amnesty agenda [for Thaksin].

"Amnesty disguised as reconciliation will not be smooth and will cloud Thai politics for some time and create more division," Abhisit warned. "There will be a wider division."

The Democrat leader also said that if Thaksin returned to serve even a short period in jail for his conviction and then won a royal pardon, it would be fine. He also insisted that he was not afraid of Thaksin returning. "It's not about fear. It's about what is right … He should come back. He should come back today, tonight."

As for the economy, Abhisit criticised Yingluck Shinawatra administration's rice and tapioca price-pledging schemes, saying they were plagued with corruption at almost every stage. Rice purchased at a very high price affected Thailand's competitiveness at the international level, Abhisit warned.

In addition, the Bt300 minimum wage is starting to affect the investment climate since some companies are thinking of moving elsewhere. "It's not promising," he said, adding that the situation was compounded by high inflation and the rising cost of living.

"We're really testing the patience of investors."

-- The Nation 2012-04-26

[Roadman]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

[JurgenG]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

Abhisit personal assets are around 55 Millions. For a guy who never worked a single day of his life.

And you can imagine how much money is under his wife name ...

Truly a man of the people

Edited April 26, 2012 by JurgenG

[sparebox2]

Isn't it a little too late to take action?

If he would have intervene earlier, these 91 would still be alive, hence no need for investigation.

[longway]

^ And to help you forget, let me give you tax-payers money, after all I am stealing billions anyway, why not give you a few crumbs off my table.

[hyperdimension]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

Abhisit personal assets are around 55 Millions. For a guy who never worked a single day of his life.

And you can imagine how much money is under his wife name ...

Truly a man of the people

It would be more relevant if you compared how much his wealth increased with how much Thaksin's wealth increased whilst prime minister.

[hyperdimension]

The point was - it's all well and good that he says now he will support a probe - but does he still believe what he said in statements he made to the press in 2008?

Let's wait and see. Or will Thaksin just say "just forget about it, everything's OK now" after giving some substantial gifts to the few elites that really matter?

[Skywalker69]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

Abhisit personal assets are around 55 Millions. For a guy who never worked a single day of his life.

And you can imagine how much money is under his wife name ...

Truly a man of the people

That´s pocket-money for the guy in Dubai. I bet many of the Red shirt leaders holds fat bank account as well.

[Skywalker69]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

Abhisit personal assets are around 55 Millions. For a guy who never worked a single day of his life.

And you can imagine how much money is under his wife name ...

Truly a man of the people

And how much money is under Thaksins ex wife and kids, sisters and brothers? Edited April 26, 2012 by Skywalker69

[animatic]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

More like gold and fools-gold.

Both are shiny, but only one is good to buy dinner with.

Only one gives you hard reality with common sense,

while the other promises the moon and stars

and gives you mud.'

"Amnesty disguised as reconciliation will not be smooth and will cloud Thai politics for some time and create more division," Abhisit warned. "There will be a wider division."

A sadly ominous observation likely quite correct.

Edited April 26, 2012 by animatic

[waza]

from the topic of..............Abhisit Vows To Back Probe Into 91 Deaths......... so far we have had comments on How much money Abhist is rumoured to have. Discussion on Abhist's comments on

Somchai Wongsawat's crowd control responsabilities. Thaksins corruption and the April 10th 2010 riots.

However, I though and arrangements had been made at the Thaksin Barhain meeting to settle all this.

Edited April 26, 2012 by waza

[phiphidon]

The point was - it's all well and good that he says now he will support a probe - but does he still believe what he said in statements he made to the press in 2008?

Let's wait and see. Or will Thaksin just say "just forget about it, everything's OK now" after giving some substantial gifts to the few elites that really matter?

Can you or anyone else refresh my memory when Thaksin said "just forget about it, everything's OK now". I'm not doubting it, but just that I've seen that quote on this forum being attributed by a democrat party member as being addressed specifically to Kamonkate Akahad's mother. I'd just like to know when Thaksin said it and in what form.

[spidermike007]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

it was never about whether or not Abhisit was an honorable man. We all know Mr. Toxic was not. The issue was that Abhisit was never permitted to do anything to benefit the Thai people. He was bought and paid for, by the Army. He was completely, and utterly beholden to the generals. Also, being junior in age, to all of the rest of the people in the administration was a great limitation for him, and one of the reasons he was so terrible ineffective. He did very, very little to benefit the average Thai. He did a great job of making sure the wealthy got wealthier. But, that is the job or PM, or President in most countries, so he was not the exception to the rule.

[airconsult]

The point was - it's all well and good that he says now he will support a probe - but does he still believe what he said in statements he made to the press in 2008?

Let's wait and see. Or will Thaksin just say "just forget about it, everything's OK now" after giving some substantial gifts to the few elites that really matter?

I've noticed a few people make the same comment. I do not agree with "just forget everything" but I feel that many people are ignoring the fact that this tactic has been used before in politics in Thailand, and on this occasion Thaksin is not the first to suggest it - Gen Sonthi said the same thing a few months ago to the press, and of course, he was one of the coup leaders. Gen Prem used it to forgive the communists and integrate them back into Thai society.

I's often used as an admission that a conflict can't be resolved without massive damage to the country - so we need to reset and try again.

Don't see everything as "black and white", this is Thailand.

[OzMick]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

Abhisit personal assets are around 55 Millions. For a guy who never worked a single day of his life.

And you can imagine how much money is under his wife name ...

Truly a man of the people

No I can't imagine. Do you know, or are using innuendo to slur? I CAN imagine that she is from a wealthy family and may have substantial assets of her own. Is this reprehensible, criminal or even noteworthy?

[Siripon]

I haven't seen Amsterdam making any noise recently about a probe into the Ratchprasong deaths. Has his paymaster told him to shut up?

[airconsult]

Ah... the legendary flexibility of all politicians....

Please consider this article http://www.prachatai...glish/node/1760

Including the statement..... (only 10% - mostly quotes made to the press, so fair-use)

On 7 Oct 2008, then Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat ordered a crackdown on the PAD protests in front of Parliament House, resulting in two deaths and over 400 injuries. Abhisit held a press conference after a meeting of his party.

‘For all that has happened, the PM cannot deny his responsibility, either by negligence or intention.

‘What is even worse than laying the blame on the authorities is vilifying the people.

‘I have never thought that we would have a state which has the people killed and seriously injured, and then accuses the people of the crimes. This is unacceptable.

........... (parts left out - read the full article)

‘There is nowhere else on earth, in democratic systems, where the people are abused by the state, but the government which comes from the people does not take responsibility.

‘For what we have said today, the government must not make the accusation that it is because we agree with all points of the PAD. Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people.’

When reporters asked why Somchai still stayed on despite such a crisis, Abhisit said, ‘I have no idea. I have never seen a person like this. If he were a normal human of the kind that I know, it would not have been like this.’

Your post markedly fails to mention that the situations were not comparable. AFAIK all the deaths and injuries were suffered by the protesters, none of whom were armed with military weapons and using them to kill and maim police/RTA. Yes, they were causing inconvenience and disruption, but they were NOT invading hospitals, firing M-79 grenades at bystanders, or RPGs at oil tanks and temples. If you can't see that difference then you deliberately closing your eyes.

The tear gas canisters used were completely inappropriate and their use by police not trained for this caused the casualties. The responsibility for that rests with those ordering the attack. Had the same canisters been used against the red-shirts with similar results, Abhisit would have indeed been culpable. Whether he is or not for the 91 deaths HE is willing to have examined.

I think you missed the point a little. Both sides committed crimes. I think you could talk about UDD crimes all day, so I won't recap, but remember that that particular protest by PAD blocked access to Parliament - which again is breaking the law. Honestly.... I don't think the RTP really understood the difference between military tear gas canisters and ones used in the west for crowd control. But that's OT.

The point you missed was the hypocrisy (common among politicians worldwide) of preaching while in opposition, then doing the opposite while in power.

[how241]

Isn't it a little too late to take action?

If he would have intervene earlier, these 91 would still be alive, hence no need for investigation.

+1.....All politics.

[OzMick]

Ah... the legendary flexibility of all politicians....

Please consider this article http://www.prachatai...glish/node/1760

Including the statement..... (only 10% - mostly quotes made to the press, so fair-use)

On 7 Oct 2008, then Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat ordered a crackdown on the PAD protests in front of Parliament House, resulting in two deaths and over 400 injuries. Abhisit held a press conference after a meeting of his party.

‘For all that has happened, the PM cannot deny his responsibility, either by negligence or intention.

‘What is even worse than laying the blame on the authorities is vilifying the people.

‘I have never thought that we would have a state which has the people killed and seriously injured, and then accuses the people of the crimes. This is unacceptable.

........... (parts left out - read the full article)

‘There is nowhere else on earth, in democratic systems, where the people are abused by the state, but the government which comes from the people does not take responsibility.

‘For what we have said today, the government must not make the accusation that it is because we agree with all points of the PAD. Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people.’

When reporters asked why Somchai still stayed on despite such a crisis, Abhisit said, ‘I have no idea. I have never seen a person like this. If he were a normal human of the kind that I know, it would not have been like this.’

Your post markedly fails to mention that the situations were not comparable. AFAIK all the deaths and injuries were suffered by the protesters, none of whom were armed with military weapons and using them to kill and maim police/RTA. Yes, they were causing inconvenience and disruption, but they were NOT invading hospitals, firing M-79 grenades at bystanders, or RPGs at oil tanks and temples. If you can't see that difference then you deliberately closing your eyes.

The tear gas canisters used were completely inappropriate and their use by police not trained for this caused the casualties. The responsibility for that rests with those ordering the attack. Had the same canisters been used against the red-shirts with similar results, Abhisit would have indeed been culpable. Whether he is or not for the 91 deaths HE is willing to have examined.

I think you missed the point a little. Both sides committed crimes. I think you could talk about UDD crimes all day, so I won't recap, but remember that that particular protest by PAD blocked access to Parliament - which again is breaking the law. Honestly.... I don't think the RTP really understood the difference between military tear gas canisters and ones used in the west for crowd control. But that's OT.

The point you missed was the hypocrisy (common among politicians worldwide) of preaching while in opposition, then doing the opposite while in power.

I didn't miss the point, I thought that was not valid. The speech quoted was referring to deaths of peaceful protesters by incompetent use of the wrong equipment. Saying that the RTP didn't know what they were doing only emphasises that point.

To compare that to the actions taken to disperse protesters knowingly shielding armed insurgents after weeks of tolerance, concessions, negotiation and finally warnings borders on the farcical.

[Ferangled]

Ah... the legendary flexibility of all politicians....

Please consider this article http://www.prachatai...glish/node/1760

Including the statement..... (only 10% - mostly quotes made to the press, so fair-use)

On 7 Oct 2008, then Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat ordered a crackdown on the PAD protests in front of Parliament House, resulting in two deaths and over 400 injuries. Abhisit held a press conference after a meeting of his party.

‘For all that has happened, the PM cannot deny his responsibility, either by negligence or intention.

‘What is even worse than laying the blame on the authorities is vilifying the people.

‘I have never thought that we would have a state which has the people killed and seriously injured, and then accuses the people of the crimes. This is unacceptable.

........... (parts left out - read the full article)

‘There is nowhere else on earth, in democratic systems, where the people are abused by the state, but the government which comes from the people does not take responsibility.

‘For what we have said today, the government must not make the accusation that it is because we agree with all points of the PAD. Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people.’

When reporters asked why Somchai still stayed on despite such a crisis, Abhisit said, ‘I have no idea. I have never seen a person like this. If he were a normal human of the kind that I know, it would not have been like this.’

Your post markedly fails to mention that the situations were not comparable. AFAIK all the deaths and injuries were suffered by the protesters, none of whom were armed with military weapons and using them to kill and maim police/RTA. Yes, they were causing inconvenience and disruption, but they were NOT invading hospitals, firing M-79 grenades at bystanders, or RPGs at oil tanks and temples. If you can't see that difference then you deliberately closing your eyes.

The tear gas canisters used were completely inappropriate and their use by police not trained for this caused the casualties. The responsibility for that rests with those ordering the attack. Had the same canisters been used against the red-shirts with similar results, Abhisit would have indeed been culpable. Whether he is or not for the 91 deaths HE is willing to have examined.

I think you missed the point a little. Both sides committed crimes. I think you could talk about UDD crimes all day, so I won't recap, but remember that that particular protest by PAD blocked access to Parliament - which again is breaking the law. Honestly.... I don't think the RTP really understood the difference between military tear gas canisters and ones used in the west for crowd control. But that's OT.

The point you missed was the hypocrisy (common among politicians worldwide) of preaching while in opposition, then doing the opposite while in power.

I didn't miss the point, I thought that was not valid. The speech quoted was referring to deaths of peaceful protesters by incompetent use of the wrong equipment. Saying that the RTP didn't know what they were doing only emphasises that point.

To compare that to the actions taken to disperse protesters knowingly shielding armed insurgents after weeks of tolerance, concessions, negotiation and finally warnings borders on the farcical.

Claiming that this isn't hypocrisy just demonstrates blatant bias. It's convenient for your stance to label one protest as peaceful and another as armed insurgency.

The facts however would dispute your carefully chosen words:

More than 90 people, mostly civilians, were killed and nearly 1,900 wounded during the 2010 rallies

Digest that fact then consider these words...

"Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people."

If you really can't see the hypocrisy in that statement, given the events of 2010, you are being entirely selective with your reasoning.

[waza]

Ah... the legendary flexibility of all politicians....

Please consider this article http://www.prachatai...glish/node/1760

Including the statement..... (only 10% - mostly quotes made to the press, so fair-use)

On 7 Oct 2008, then Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat ordered a crackdown on the PAD protests in front of Parliament House, resulting in two deaths and over 400 injuries. Abhisit held a press conference after a meeting of his party.

‘For all that has happened, the PM cannot deny his responsibility, either by negligence or intention.

‘What is even worse than laying the blame on the authorities is vilifying the people.

‘I have never thought that we would have a state which has the people killed and seriously injured, and then accuses the people of the crimes. This is unacceptable.

........... (parts left out - read the full article)

‘There is nowhere else on earth, in democratic systems, where the people are abused by the state, but the government which comes from the people does not take responsibility.

‘For what we have said today, the government must not make the accusation that it is because we agree with all points of the PAD. Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people.’

When reporters asked why Somchai still stayed on despite such a crisis, Abhisit said, ‘I have no idea. I have never seen a person like this. If he were a normal human of the kind that I know, it would not have been like this.’

Your post markedly fails to mention that the situations were not comparable. AFAIK all the deaths and injuries were suffered by the protesters, none of whom were armed with military weapons and using them to kill and maim police/RTA. Yes, they were causing inconvenience and disruption, but they were NOT invading hospitals, firing M-79 grenades at bystanders, or RPGs at oil tanks and temples. If you can't see that difference then you deliberately closing your eyes.

The tear gas canisters used were completely inappropriate and their use by police not trained for this caused the casualties. The responsibility for that rests with those ordering the attack. Had the same canisters been used against the red-shirts with similar results, Abhisit would have indeed been culpable. Whether he is or not for the 91 deaths HE is willing to have examined.

I think you missed the point a little. Both sides committed crimes. I think you could talk about UDD crimes all day, so I won't recap, but remember that that particular protest by PAD blocked access to Parliament - which again is breaking the law. Honestly.... I don't think the RTP really understood the difference between military tear gas canisters and ones used in the west for crowd control. But that's OT.

The point you missed was the hypocrisy (common among politicians worldwide) of preaching while in opposition, then doing the opposite while in power.

Good point but remember they blocked parliment to stop a caretaker government from changing the laws to legitimise their corruption. Also dont forget that the Thaksin government were calling for the ruthless border police to come to BKK to deal with the yellows after the failure of the BIB to break them up. Now that would have been a bloodbath.

[Siam Simon]

Ah... the legendary flexibility of all politicians....

Please consider this article http://www.prachatai...glish/node/1760

Including the statement..... (only 10% - mostly quotes made to the press, so fair-use)

On 7 Oct 2008, then Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat ordered a crackdown on the PAD protests in front of Parliament House, resulting in two deaths and over 400 injuries. Abhisit held a press conference after a meeting of his party.

‘For all that has happened, the PM cannot deny his responsibility, either by negligence or intention.

‘What is even worse than laying the blame on the authorities is vilifying the people.

‘I have never thought that we would have a state which has the people killed and seriously injured, and then accuses the people of the crimes. This is unacceptable.

........... (parts left out - read the full article)

‘There is nowhere else on earth, in democratic systems, where the people are abused by the state, but the government which comes from the people does not take responsibility.

‘For what we have said today, the government must not make the accusation that it is because we agree with all points of the PAD. Even if the PAD has done wrong, the government has no right to hurt the people.’

When reporters asked why Somchai still stayed on despite such a crisis, Abhisit said, ‘I have no idea. I have never seen a person like this. If he were a normal human of the kind that I know, it would not have been like this.’

Your post markedly fails to mention that the situations were not comparable. AFAIK all the deaths and injuries were suffered by the protesters, none of whom were armed with military weapons and using them to kill and maim police/RTA. Yes, they were causing inconvenience and disruption, but they were NOT invading hospitals, firing M-79 grenades at bystanders, or RPGs at oil tanks and temples. If you can't see that difference then you deliberately closing your eyes.

The tear gas canisters used were completely inappropriate and their use by police not trained for this caused the casualties. The responsibility for that rests with those ordering the attack. Had the same canisters been used against the red-shirts with similar results, Abhisit would have indeed been culpable. Whether he is or not for the 91 deaths HE is willing to have examined.

I think you missed the point a little. Both sides committed crimes. I think you could talk about UDD crimes all day, so I won't recap, but remember that that particular protest by PAD blocked access to Parliament - which again is breaking the law. Honestly.... I don't think the RTP really understood the difference between military tear gas canisters and ones used in the west for crowd control. But that's OT.

The point you missed was the hypocrisy (common among politicians worldwide) of preaching while in opposition, then doing the opposite while in power.

Good point but remember they blocked parliment to stop a caretaker government from changing the laws to legitimise their corruption. Also dont forget that the Thaksin government were calling for the ruthless border police to come to BKK to deal with the yellows after the failure of the BIB to break them up. Now that would have been a bloodbath.

And the Abhisit government brought in the Burapha Regiment, with specialist sniper units to disperse, and it was a bloodbath.

[Jawnie]

Abhisit, in his much ballyhooed speech at Centralworld in 2011 immediately before the elected, publicly admitted he signed the order to use deadly force on the street protests. He said he cried. There is a good place to start.

Problem: Having Abhisit involved in the investigation is a complete sham, as is Sonthi's involvement in reconcilliation.

If there were any sort of accountability built into Thai political and civil society, things might change. Until then, all of Thailand will remain under the boot of these men who have rapacious cesspools for hearts.

[Siam Simon]

Do you recall anybody being shot at the airport? Let me rephrase that - do you recall anybody being shot by PAD at the airport?

Wasn't the body of someone shot to death found at Don Mueang after PAD moved out? And wasn't someone beaten, shot and dumped in a ditch by PAD guards at Swampy?

The dead woman was hit in the chest by a tear gas canister containing an explosive charge - but you think she MAY have been carrying a ping pong bomb. Do you have any proof to support this claim? Do you have any explanation for those protesters whose limbs spontaneously separated from their body?

In view of the autopsy being invalidated by it's use of the GT200, we really don't know how the PAD protester died. Explosive gas canisters were being fire by and injuring protesters, and protesters were carrying ping pong bombs.

You may also recall that the red shirts were treated with kid gloves until they started killing people. As for calling them buffaloes - you probably know more of them than me.

This interpretation of events (presented as fact, as usual) is pure speculation. Again, you claim to know something that the Thai authorities don't.

[rixalex]

There was the small matter of a heavily armed takeover of an international airport however (my wife, a foreign national with zero interest in Thai politics saw the machine guns for herself).

I belief the people your wife most likely encountered with machine guns was security personnel at road checks in the area around the airport. These people were not protesters.

How did she know they were?

[waza]

There was the small matter of a heavily armed takeover of an international airport however (my wife, a foreign national with zero interest in Thai politics saw the machine guns for herself).

I belief the people your wife most likely encountered with machine guns was security personnel at road checks in the area around the airport. These people were not protesters.

How did she know they were?

I didnt see any armed protestors at the airport at the time, just pleasant, helpfull and apologetic yellow shirted protestors. But because of them I had to stay in Thailand an exta 2 weeks, I cant thank them enough.

[hyperdimension]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

it was never about whether or not Abhisit was an honorable man. We all know Mr. Toxic was not. The issue was that Abhisit was never permitted to do anything to benefit the Thai people. He was bought and paid for, by the Army. He was completely, and utterly beholden to the generals. Also, being junior in age, to all of the rest of the people in the administration was a great limitation for him, and one of the reasons he was so terrible ineffective. He did very, very little to benefit the average Thai. He did a great job of making sure the wealthy got wealthier. But, that is the job or PM, or President in most countries, so he was not the exception to the rule.

Who would have been a better alternative at the time to lead the country?

[longway]

One of the few honourable and most honest Thai's that is involved with the governance of what could be an awesome country.

Comparing the morals and values of Abhisit against Thaksin or any many of the Shinwatra's is like chalk and cheese.

it was never about whether or not Abhisit was an honorable man. We all know Mr. Toxic was not. The issue was that Abhisit was never permitted to do anything to benefit the Thai people. He was bought and paid for, by the Army. He was completely, and utterly beholden to the generals. Also, being junior in age, to all of the rest of the people in the administration was a great limitation for him, and one of the reasons he was so terrible ineffective. He did very, very little to benefit the average Thai. He did a great job of making sure the wealthy got wealthier. But, that is the job or PM, or President in most countries, so he was not the exception to the rule.

Who would have been a better alternative at the time to lead the country?

I would disagree to a certain extent, it was Abhisit's coalition partners that were bought and paid for by the tax payer, not the army. I don't believe a word about them being threatened, they had a ball stuffing their coffers with corrupt schemes, they quoted their price and seem to have got it.

[hyperdimension]

The point was - it's all well and good that he says now he will support a probe - but does he still believe what he said in statements he made to the press in 2008?

Let's wait and see. Or will Thaksin just say "just forget about it, everything's OK now" after giving some substantial gifts to the few elites that really matter?

Can you or anyone else refresh my memory when Thaksin said "just forget about it, everything's OK now". I'm not doubting it, but just that I've seen that quote on this forum being attributed by a democrat party member as being addressed specifically to Kamonkate Akahad's mother. I'd just like to know when Thaksin said it and in what form.

If you've been reading around, the general push for "reconciliation" from Pheu Thai is far more prominent than anything to do with seeking justice. The article "Lonely voices still seeking justice" in the Bangkok Post is just one example of many that shows that victims from both sides who want answers and accountability are being sidelined or ignored in the push to "move forward". Also, I hope you have read the article "Daring double game in Thailand" on the Asia times web site - it all boils down to "cash and contracts".

Edited April 26, 2012 by hyperdimension

[squiz]

There was the small matter of a heavily armed takeover of an international airport however (my wife, a foreign national with zero interest in Thai politics saw the machine guns for herself).

I belief the people your wife most likely encountered with machine guns was security personnel at road checks in the area around the airport. These people were not protesters.

How did she know they were?

She was in one of the local vans and the driver told her who they were. Plus how they were dressed and how the checkpoints were set up. She might not care for politics, but she's not stupid (most of the time ;-) !)