Abhisit Vows To Back Probe Into 91 Deaths

[Ferangled]

"But they demanded early elections, elections that they would have got anyway if instead of protesting, they waited just another 1.5 to 2 years, which is an insignificant amount of time in the bigger scheme of things."

Throughout history people have fought and died trying to gain the "privilege" of democracy. It's quite clear that many attach some considerable value to this idea, although obviously not too many here...

Very good point of you. But what you don't want to understand that the BJT and Democratic Party's coalition come forth through a completely normal democratic process. They formed a majority and in a democracy, and I am sure you agree, it's the majority that should rule!

By the way, you know that Thailand is a constitutional monarchy, in which coalitions are formed and where the citizens do not directly elect a government in contrast to a two-party system such as in the US for example. Several European countries are constitutional monarchies as well.

It was hardly a clear cut democratically elected majority by the people though was it?!

As I understand it, he won a parliamentary vote having lost two such votes previously but "good fortune" saw both of the previous PMs removed, one for being on a cookery show and the other banned for 5 years for being on the executive board of the PPP.

Even the forming of the coalition came across as extremely dodgy, with rumors of alleged coercion by Army Commander General Anupong Paochinda, a move labelled the "Anupong-style coup".

What is blatantly clear in the whole fiasco that is Thai politics, is that until the various politicians and parties stop bickering and start acting in the best interests of the people, it's the people of Thailand that really suffer.

[hyperdimension]

Throughout history people have fought and died trying to gain the "privilege" of democracy. It's quite clear that many attach some considerable value to this idea, although obviously not too many here...

They weren't fighting for democracy, they were fighting for Thaksin. The two are polar opposites.

The suggestion that they should have meekly waited a mere 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to have a democratically elected Government is ridiculous.

Thaksin should have waited, as he probably would have been able to re-take power eventually anyway, instead of arranging violent riots in which people died for him.

I wonder if the citizens of UK, US or Australia would be happy to see the military install their own PM/ President against the wishes of the majority of the population and then idly sit back and wait 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to elect their own?

They may protest, but would they bring military weapons?

[Siam Simon]

Those wishing to get past Simon's obfuscations and apologist rhetoric can find also find that within days of his emotional outburst made while facing hundreds of patients:

Dr. Suthep apologised for having announced a boycott of medical services to the police, and for the emotional remarks he had made at a press conference which, he said, may have had an unintended negative impact on the hospital. He added that his intentions may have been misunderstood by some, and that he had wanted only to stress that he had considered the measures used by the police and permitted by the government were inappropriate. In practice, he said, he could not deny medical treatment to any patient.

http://www.chiangmai.../295/news.shtml

They can also surmise that Dr. Suthep in 2008 is not the same person as Chula Hospital Director Dr Adisorn, who directed the hospital be evacuated in 2010 and that this red herring is grasping at straws to justify the Red Shirt armed thugs who raided the hospital.

.

Yes, of course the hospital backtracked several days after Dr Suthep's announcement. By that time, they'd realised the enormity of their error. But the damage was already done. The doctors had already stated their willingness to break their hippocratic oath in order to make a pro-PAD political statement. Thus, the stage was set for another morally bankrupt political act by the hospital: Evacuation because some people were walking through it's car park and some more were standing around inside and outside it's main lobby.

[hyperdimension]

until the various politicians and parties stop bickering and start acting in the best interests of the people, it's the people of Thailand that really suffer.

Do you think Thaksin is "acting in the best interests of the people"?

Do you think he was when he organised violent riots with military weapons?

Edited April 27, 2012 by hyperdimension

[KireB]

What is blatantly clear in the whole fiasco that is Thai politics, is that until the various politicians and parties stop bickering and start acting in the best interests of the people, it's the people of Thailand that really suffer.

And here dear Ferangled................................ we agree completely!

[Ferangled]

The suggestion that they should have meekly waited a mere 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to have a democratically elected Government is ridiculous.

I wonder if the citizens of UK, US or Australia would be happy to see the military install their own PM/ President against the wishes of the majority of the population and then idly sit back and wait 1.5 - 2 years for the chance to elect their own?

I appreciate why the reds didn't much like the way that Abhisit came to power, and why they considered some of the "wranglings" that made it possible, undemocratic, but the fact was, Abhisit was the legitimate and legal leader of the country, and if they opposed the alleged interference of outside parties in the voting of him by MPs, why did they not oppose the alleged interference of outside parties in the voting of Somchai? Why? Well because in the case of Somchai, it was their beloved on the run criminal who was doing the interfering, and in their book, this sort of interference is fine and dandy. So what you have is people not fighting for democracy, but simply fighting for their side to be in power. Please stop suggesting otherwise. You might fool some people outside of the country who have but a fleeting interest in Thai affairs, but most of the people on this forum who live in Thailand know your argument to be a complete nonsense.

More blatant hypocrisy on display. I guess only one side is allowed to question what is legitimate or not? That sounds entirely democratic to me...

Just because you surmise that "what you have is people not fighting for democracy, but simply fighting for their side to be in power" doesn't make it factual and totally ignores the most recent election in Thailand, where the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

[phiphidon]

as a paramedic showing extreme concern at abuse of the sanctity of a hospital, you must've also been at least as equally concerned by the reports that army personnel might be abusing that sanctity by using the upper floors of that hospital to shoot protesters, right? I'm assuming that you obtained a pistol and checked the upper floors for what was potentially such an obscene abuse of that hospital's sanctity, ready to shoot in the temple any bananasoldiers that you might find, right? Did you shoot any of the PAD-leaning admin or doctors who endangered patients' lives with their completely unnecessary showboating evacuation?

unnecessary evacuation?

What ridiculousness. Armed marauders invading the hospital made evacuation absolutely necessary and was a decision that would have been made anywhere under similar circumstances.

Please reveal the source of information for this latest revision and provide a list of hospital administrators and medical doctors that were "PAD-leaning" and why you think they would reverse all their years of providing patient care to thousands in order to simply "showboat" for a political movement.

Ridiculous.

.

Yes who would think the non PAD leaning doctors of the King Chulalongkorn Hospital "would reverse all their years of providing patient care to thousands in order to simply "showboat" for a political movement"

Perish the thought, it must have been something else that made them forget their hippocratic oath and refuse to treat the policemen injured during the PAD riots............

Doctors of the Chulalongkorn Hospital Wednesday refused to treat police injured during Tuesday’s clashes with protesters.

Doctor Suthep Kolcharnwit of the hospital’s medical school said the boycott of police was a measure to denounce police’s use of excessive violence against the protesters.

Suthep said Chulalongkorn doctors would seek cooperation from doctors of other hospitals to boycott police as well.

http://asiancorrespo...o-treat-police/

Doctors at Chulalongkorn University's faculty of medicine on Wednesday said they would not treat officers wounded during the clash at parliament on Tuesday between police and People's Alliance for Democracy supporters.

Suthep Kolchanwit, the group's leader, yesterday confirmed the doctors' stance.

Fifty physicians, mostly surgeons at the faculty of medicine of Chulalongkorn and Chiang Mai universities, would refuse to treat police. Their stance is a reaction to the government's use of violence to disperse demonstrators, they said..............

.....................Seventy doctors at Chiang Mai University's faculty of medicine also decided against treating police, cabinet members and government MPs, except in emergency cases.

Hundreds of students and academics from Chulalongkorn and PAD supporters yesterday gathered at the statues of King Rama V and King Rama VI and started a week-long protest by wearing black.

Human rights advocates condemned the doctors' move.............

http://www.movethail...l--en-1710.html

Edited April 27, 2012 by phiphidon

[hyperdimension]

the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

...and they would have got probably the same result without Thaksin's violent riots, just a little later, and the much-discussed dead people, whom probably nobody will be held accountable for, would likely all still be alive today.

Thaksin's violent riots were absolutely unnecessary. He is the main instigator and he should be the one to be held accountable. But with some deal-making ("cash and contracts") everything will be settled and "reconciled". Most of the dead victims' families have been subdued accordingly with large cash payouts from the treasury (when it really should come from Thaksin himself).

So even though Abhisit supports investigations into the deaths, it's more likely that they'll be called off, for the sake of "reconciliation" and to "move forward".

Edited April 27, 2012 by hyperdimension

[rixalex]

More blatant hypocrisy on display. I guess only one side is allowed to question what is legitimate or not? That sounds entirely democratic to me...

Where did i say one side was not allowed to question what is legitimate or not? All sides are welcome to question legitimacy. No sides are welcome to use violence in doing so however. Both the yellows and the reds have been guilty of this, and when this occurs, i condemn it. You on the other hand, are willing to justify and excuse it, providing it's the "right" colour.

Don't even start to talk to me about hypocrisy, when you are up to your neck in it.

Just because you surmise that "what you have is people not fighting for democracy, but simply fighting for their side to be in power" doesn't make it factual and totally ignores the most recent election in Thailand, where the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

If the shoe were on the other foot, the reds would be on the streets now, armed with goodness knows what, and demanding the Dems step down immediately or face more death and destruction, for having ran with a banned politician and a criminal to boot, as their leader, and for having blatantly lied in promises they made to win votes. However, as it is their own side that committed all this, they happily accept it. Everyone else, might not happily accept it, but accept it they do, undemocratic though it may be, and patiently they wait for the next election in which to express their dissatisfaction. Precisely what the reds should have done... and had they, 91 people killed would still be alive today.

[whybother]

...

You'll find I am actually sympathetic to Thailand and neither political party. All that separates them for me, is that one is supported by the majority of the population, the other isn't. Ignoring that indisputable fact leads us down a very slippery slope...

...

I'll dispute that "fact". They aren't even supported by a majority of the voters.

[Ferangled]

the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

...and they would have got probably the same result without Thaksin's violent riots, just a little later, and the much-discussed dead people, whom probably nobody will be held accountable for, would likely all still be alive today.

Thaksin's violent riots were absolutely unnecessary. He is the main instigator and he should be the one to be held accountable. But with some deal-making ("cash and contracts") everything will be settled and "reconciled". Most of the dead victims' families have been subdued accordingly with large cash payouts from the treasury (when it really should come from Thaksin himself).

So even though Abhisit supports investigations into the deaths, it's more likely that they'll be called off, for the sake of "reconciliation" and to "move forward".

Sadly we'll never know, but the fact is the party he is sympathetic towards is now in power while his seized assets, which many would have us believe were the only reason for the protests/ riots/ insurgency (pick one that sits best with your take on the events), have not been returned.

If this is correct, it would seem he has been unsuccessful in his aims and the fact that the Thai people have finally been permitted to elect their preferred party into power is purely an accidental bi product... incredible stuff!

[Ferangled]

...

You'll find I am actually sympathetic to Thailand and neither political party. All that separates them for me, is that one is supported by the majority of the population, the other isn't. Ignoring that indisputable fact leads us down a very slippery slope...

...

I'll dispute that "fact". They aren't even supported by a majority of the voters.

Sorry, did I miss another election or are you simply nitpicking? They weren't elected by the people of Thailand?

[Buchholz]

Those wishing to get past Simon's obfuscations and apologist rhetoric can find also find that within days of his emotional outburst made while facing hundreds of patients:

Dr. Suthep apologised for having announced a boycott of medical services to the police, and for the emotional remarks he had made at a press conference which, he said, may have had an unintended negative impact on the hospital. He added that his intentions may have been misunderstood by some, and that he had wanted only to stress that he had considered the measures used by the police and permitted by the government were inappropriate. In practice, he said, he could not deny medical treatment to any patient.

http://www.chiangmai.../295/news.shtml

They can also surmise that Dr. Suthep in 2008 is not the same person as Chula Hospital Director Dr Adisorn, who directed the hospital be evacuated in 2010 and that this red herring is grasping at straws to justify the Red Shirt armed thugs who raided the hospital.

.

Yes, of course the hospital backtracked several days after Dr Suthep's announcement. By that time, they'd realised the enormity of their error. But the damage was already done. The doctors had already stated their willingness to break their hippocratic oath in order to make a pro-PAD political statement. Thus, the stage was set for another morally bankrupt political act by the hospital: Evacuation because some people were walking through it's car park and some more were standing around inside and outside it's main lobby.

The hospital didn't backtrack, a solitary physician did, after realizing his mistake. Something that professionals do.

As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken.

Your adamant defense of armed thugs raiding a hospital really puts into a category all alone.

Even Red Shirt Leaders eventually realized their grave error and distanced themselves from the Red Shirt maniac General Payap.... amazing he has found a defender here.

[phiphidon]

Why is having some people walking through a hospital (doctors, official visitors and even patients do this in hospitals all the time, you know) more dangerous to a patient's health than moving that patient to another hospital?

Walking through?

Footage i recall showed hospital staff barrackading up doors and reds storming through them forcefully wielding a variety of weapons. People then shrieking and fleeing in varying directions. In short, pandemonium. If you can't appreciate how distressing this might be, especially on someone in a fragile state of ill-health, and liken it all to doctors, official visitors and patients passing through, i don't think you understand the situation.

The evacuation was political showboating by a hospital that has an established history of morally dubious political showboating imo.

Suggesting the medical workers would ever put politics above the health of patients is a very grave accusation and one for which i think you have zero evidence.

Your attempt to shift the blame for the moving of patients away from the people who stormed the hospital, and on to the doctors and nurses, has parallels for me with the blame shifting we saw attempted by some for the closing of the airport, away from the people who took it over, and onto the AOT. Same twisted nonsense.

I believe these are the videos you were referring to. May I suggest that your recollection is slightly at odds with the videos.

red shirts checking the car parking area and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYdASCkNa_4&feature=related

"hospital staff barrackading up doors and reds storming through them forcefully wielding a variety of weapons" ?

"Suggesting the medical workers would ever put politics above the health of patients is a very grave accusation and one for which i think you have zero evidence" - Plenty of evidence in the Bangkok Post, The Nation, Asian Correspondent. I have provided links to these (where allowed) in another post.

[rixalex]

Ok but you ignore the violence committed during the PAD era and refuse to see the hypocrisy in Abhisits actions... hmm.

Where have i done that?

Why is it relevant to assume what would have happened if the PT weren't elected, they were?

It is relevant because it exposes hypocrisy.

Please demonstrate my hypocrisy rather than simply alleging it, I do you the courtesy of clarifying my comments in reference to yours and refrain from name calling.

I have demonstrated your hypocrisy on many occasions in my last few posts... and i'm not "name calling", i'm calling a spade a spade.

[phiphidon]

Yes, of course the hospital backtracked several days after Dr Suthep's announcement. By that time, they'd realised the enormity of their error. But the damage was already done. The doctors had already stated their willingness to break their hippocratic oath in order to make a pro-PAD political statement. Thus, the stage was set for another morally bankrupt political act by the hospital: Evacuation because some people were walking through it's car park and some more were standing around inside and outside it's main lobby.

The hospital didn't backtrack, a solitary physician did, after realizing his mistake. Something that professionals do.

As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken.

Your adamant defense of armed thugs raiding a hospital really puts into a category all alone.

Even Red Shirt Leaders eventually realized their grave error and distanced themselves from the Red Shirt maniac General Payap.... amazing he has found a defender here.

Actually it was 120 doctors who refused to treat poicemen, 50 from Chulalongkorn, 70 from the Chiang Mai Uni Faculty of Medicine. In addition hundreds of students and academics demonstrated with PAD. Hardly just one man. It's all been documented - I just cannot see how you refuse to believe the facts.

[metisdead]

Some more off topic posts and replies have been removed. I think people need to go back and read the OP and start over.

This topic has nothing to do with Samak, and this topic has nothing to do PAD.

Abhisit Vows To Back Probe Into 91 Deaths

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.

Link to OP

[rixalex]

I believe these are the videos you were referring to. May I suggest that your recollection is slightly at odds with the videos.

How so? Seemed to be the commotion i described, albeit without any visible weapons. Do you also liken these events to that of an official visitor passing through a ward?

[hyperdimension]

the actual people of Thailand got a chance to vote, and the results speak for themselves...

...and they would have got probably the same result without Thaksin's violent riots, just a little later, and the much-discussed dead people, whom probably nobody will be held accountable for, would likely all still be alive today.

Thaksin's violent riots were absolutely unnecessary. He is the main instigator and he should be the one to be held accountable. But with some deal-making ("cash and contracts") everything will be settled and "reconciled". Most of the dead victims' families have been subdued accordingly with large cash payouts from the treasury (when it really should come from Thaksin himself).

So even though Abhisit supports investigations into the deaths, it's more likely that they'll be called off, for the sake of "reconciliation" and to "move forward".

Sadly we'll never know, but the fact is the party he is sympathetic towards is now in power while his seized assets, which many would have us believe were the only reason for the protests/ riots/ insurgency (pick one that sits best with your take on the events), have not been returned.

If this is correct, it would seem he has been unsuccessful in his aims and the fact that the Thai people have finally been permitted to elect their preferred party into power is purely an accidental bi product... incredible stuff!

"the party he is sympathetic towards is now in power"? He owns the party and is its dictator.

I don't believe the assets seizure was the sole reason for calling riots, and he may not even be seeking them back. I think re-taking power was the prime goal, so he got the Red Shirt leaders and the little people to cry for early house dissolution and subsequent elections, so that one of his proxies could get elected, in effect giving himself the power. Once in power, and if that power is increasingly consolidated such that he remains in power for long enough, the assets that he lost could eventually be made back anyway. The fact that he schemed with rogue generals during the end of 2009 in the planning of the riots (as described in Rogue generals on Thaksin's payroll cry for final showdown) suggests that he knew deaths were possible and he may have even expected or hoped for them.

Edited April 27, 2012 by hyperdimension

[Skywalker69]

Some more off topic posts and replies have been removed. I think people need to go back and read the OP and start over.

This topic has nothing to do with Samak, and this topic has nothing to do PAD.

Abhisit Vows To Back Probe Into 91 Deaths

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.

Link to OP

In one way it does. AW said he could agree on the amnesty If he Samak and Thaksin was excluded. Bot not a word from PTP or the Red Shirt leaders. Wonder why?????

I wont mention Samak in this tread again.

[rixalex]

In one way it does. AW said he could agree on the amnesty If he Samak and Thaksin was excluded. Bot not a word from PTP or the Red Shirt leaders. Wonder why?????

I wont mention Samak in this tread again.

AW didn't say he could agree on the amnesty If he Samak and Thaksin was excluded, he said he could agree on it if he, Suthep and Thaksin were excluded.

[Skywalker69]

In one way it does. AW said he could agree on the amnesty If he Samak and Thaksin was excluded. Bot not a word from PTP or the Red Shirt leaders. Wonder why?????

I wont mention Samak in this tread again.

AW didn't say he could agree on the amnesty If he Samak and Thaksin was excluded, he said he could agree on it if he, Suthep and Thaksin were excluded.

Thanks for the correction.

[Buchholz]

Yes, of course the hospital backtracked several days after Dr Suthep's announcement. By that time, they'd realised the enormity of their error. But the damage was already done. The doctors had already stated their willingness to break their hippocratic oath in order to make a pro-PAD political statement. Thus, the stage was set for another morally bankrupt political act by the hospital: Evacuation because some people were walking through it's car park and some more were standing around inside and outside it's main lobby.

The hospital didn't backtrack, a solitary physician did, after realizing his mistake. Something that professionals do.

As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken.

Your adamant defense of armed thugs raiding a hospital really puts into a category all alone.

Even Red Shirt Leaders eventually realized their grave error and distanced themselves from the Red Shirt maniac General Payap.... amazing he has found a defender here.

Actually it was 120 doctors who refused to treat poicemen, 50 from Chulalongkorn, 70 from the Chiang Mai Uni Faculty of Medicine. In addition hundreds of students and academics demonstrated with PAD. Hardly just one man. It's all been documented - I just cannot see how you refuse to believe the facts.

I was speaking of the apology that I quoted.

Look at my post that contained the apology.

It was one person.

Dr. Suthep apologised for having announced a boycott of medical services to the police, and for the emotional remarks he had made at a press conference which, he said, may have had an unintended negative impact on the hospital. He added that his intentions may have been misunderstood by some, and that he had wanted only to stress that he had considered the measures used by the police and permitted by the government were inappropriate. In practice, he said, he could not deny medical treatment to any patient.

http://www.chiangmai.../295/news.shtml

amazing these TV Red Shirts are more strident in their defense of Red Shirt General Payap than even the other Red Shirt Leaders were.

It's ridiculous to rehash all of this... to death... again

so I'll defer to the mega-threads of the time ...

I seriously doubt anything substantial can be added here that wasn't already said in

the 298 posts of

Bangkok: Red-Shirts Storm Chulalongkorn Hospital

or the 408 posts of

Bangkok: Red-Shirts Slam Chulalongkorn Hospital For Evacu...

or the staggering 1,341 posts of

Chulalongkorn Hospital Evacuated After Stormed By Red-Shirts

I'll leave with the video from CNN Video news that captures some of the outrage at the time

http://edition.cnn.c...?iref=allsearch

later fellas. Enjoy.

.

Edited April 27, 2012 by Buchholz

[phiphidon]

I believe these are the videos you were referring to. May I suggest that your recollection is slightly at odds with the videos.

How so? Seemed to be the commotion i described, albeit without any visible weapons. Do you also liken these events to that of an official visitor passing through a ward?

"Footage i recall showed hospital staff barrackading up doors and reds storming through them forcefully wielding a variety of weapons. People then shrieking and fleeing in varying directions. In short, pandemonium".

Your very words in all their technicolour imagery except now you change it to visible "weaponry" - The video images reflect your description you say. I beg to differ.

As far as asking me whether "I liken these events to that of an official visitor passing through a ward", why would I when I have expressed no other opinion than comment on your hyperbole.

[hyperdimension]

"the party he is sympathetic towards is now in power"? He owns the party and is its dictator.

I don't believe the assets seizure was the sole reason for calling riots, and he may not even be seeking them back. I think re-taking power was the prime goal, so he got the Red Shirt leaders and the little people to cry for early house dissolution and subsequent elections, so that one of his proxies could get elected, in effect giving himself the power. Once in power, and if that power is increasingly consolidated such that he remains in power for long enough, the assets that he lost could eventually be made back anyway. The fact that he schemed with rogue generals during the end of 2009 in the planning of the riots (as described in Rogue generals on Thaksin's payroll cry for final showdown) suggests that he knew deaths were possible and he may have even expected or hoped for them.

So you believe this is all part of Thaksin's grand master plan? I thought I was paranoid but I guess only time will tell; the real proof I guess being if he returns to Thailand, is absolved of all charges and returns to power.

If you've been following the news closely like a lot of us here do every single day, you would have noticed from the various actions and statements of members of his party that steps are being taken to bring him back with all convictions and charges dropped, and it's getting closer.

Though, I'm not sure if he'd actually return to be prime minister or any other official government position, as doing so would mean putting himself under the microscope of the opposition and the entire public, and there would be restrictions on what he'd be allowed to do. But surely he'd be controlling everything behind the scenes to ensure that everything is skewed towards the interests of himself and his clan. He'd have much more control physically being here than via Skype from Dubai.

it's just sad that the people that actually voted the PTP in get constantly marginalized as irrelevant because of the perceived criminal minds behind them. It doesn't change the fact that they exist, have a right to cast their vote and have a say in the running of their country.

Yes, there have been power games at the elite levels. But there is truth in the criminality.

Yes, people have a right to vote and have it really count. The problem is that Thaksin took advantage of the fact that the masses are easily indoctrinated and bought. Throwing money around, regardless of whether it's his own or the treasury's, can buy a lot of loyalty as well as subdue opponents or those who have suffered (such as families of those who died for his selfish goals). Here's what I wrote today in another thread about Thaksin and the people of Thailand:

I do find Thaksin intriguing, much like a villain in a fictional movie. It's not often nor everywhere that we are able to witness the actions and statements of an uncouth and corrupt megalomaniac and his henchmen in real life. But I am also aware of the bigger picture and of the power games with the old elites. I do give Thaksin some credit for awakening the masses of Thailand even though it was more for selfish purposes than for truly altruistic reasons. It was a turning point in history, so in the big and long-term picture, the awakening was a good thing. But in the short term, this awakening has allowed him to deceive the people enough for him to grab hold of power over Thailand, which is not good when considering his character and past behavior. My hope is that the majority ordinary people of Thailand realize that they have been deceived, and that in future, through their newly-found political awareness, they are not so easily deceived or bought, seek abolishment of patronage systems and draconian Lese Majeste laws, speak out against meddling by unelected elites, and seek much higher standards in the people whom they elevate into power.

[phiphidon]

The hospital didn't backtrack, a solitary physician did, after realizing his mistake. Something that professionals do.

As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken.

Your adamant defense of armed thugs raiding a hospital really puts into a category all alone.

Even Red Shirt Leaders eventually realized their grave error and distanced themselves from the Red Shirt maniac General Payap.... amazing he has found a defender here.

Actually it was 120 doctors who refused to treat poicemen, 50 from Chulalongkorn, 70 from the Chiang Mai Uni Faculty of Medicine. In addition hundreds of students and academics demonstrated with PAD. Hardly just one man. It's all been documented - I just cannot see how you refuse to believe the facts.

I was speaking of the apology that I quoted.

Look at my post that contained the apology.

It was one person.

Dr. Suthep apologised for having announced a boycott of medical services to the police, and for the emotional remarks he had made at a press conference which, he said, may have had an unintended negative impact on the hospital. He added that his intentions may have been misunderstood by some, and that he had wanted only to stress that he had considered the measures used by the police and permitted by the government were inappropriate. In practice, he said, he could not deny medical treatment to any patient.

http://www.chiangmai.../295/news.shtml

snip

.

I was referring to this post actually

"The hospital didn't backtrack, a solitary physician did, after realizing his mistake. Something that professionals do.

As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken.

Your adamant defense of armed thugs raiding a hospital really puts into a category all alone.

Even Red Shirt Leaders eventually realized their grave error and distanced themselves from the Red Shirt maniac General Payap.... amazing he has found a defender here. "

and this line

"As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken."

implying as you do that there was only one doctor involved in not treating the policemen. I pointed out backed up with evidence that there were 120 doctors who refused to treat injured policemen having been organized by Dr.Suthep and hundreds more who demonstrated with/for the PAD.

I know you hate having to apologise, in fact I can't remember you ever doing so, but you're wrong Buchholz, no matter how hard you try to skew the situation.

[philw]

PPD, I respect your ability to resist the endless hyperbole from those on this sad forum who have a blunt axe in need of perpetual grinding..........

Sadly, it's not possible to win against endless nit picking pedantry............

[phiphidon]

PPD, I respect your ability to resist the endless hyperbole from those on this sad forum who have a blunt axe in need of perpetual grinding..........

Sadly, it's not possible to win against endless nit picking pedantry............

Nili illegitimi carborundum as the faux latin goes, Phil.

Though sometimes it's like being the one of the eponymous Fat Slags (Viz) outside a nightclub pulling her boyfriend away from a saturday night fight..............

"Leave it, Phil, they ain't worth it"

[Siam Simon]

The hospital didn't backtrack, a solitary physician did, after realizing his mistake. Something that professionals do.

As pointed out earlier, there was problem with a physician not extending non-emergency care, ergo no oath being broken.

Your adamant defense of armed thugs raiding a hospital really puts into a category all alone.

Even Red Shirt Leaders eventually realized their grave error and distanced themselves from the Red Shirt maniac General Payap.... amazing he has found a defender here.

What part of Dr Suthep's statement on behalf of 120 doctors that they were boycotting treatment of police officers injured in the PAD protests don't you understand? And what part of my condemnation of the Red Shirt intrusion into Chula as "appalling" don't you understand?

And Dr Suthep's mealy-mouthed apology, attempting to pass off his own appalling behaviour as some kind of spur-of-the-moment knee-jerk reaction to events is thoroughly belied by the fact that he and his grouping managed to get doctors from several hospitals all over the country to support their immoral boycott. In any sane country Suthep would have been struck off the medical register. But we're dealing with 'Alice through the looking glass' with all the major players here.

[Siam Simon]

I believe these are the videos you were referring to. May I suggest that your recollection is slightly at odds with the videos.

How so? Seemed to be the commotion i described, albeit without any visible weapons. Do you also liken these events to that of an official visitor passing through a ward?

Yes, there is a difference: Visitors would generally use the car park and walk across it to the wards; The Red Shirt protesters seem to have only walked the car parks. Maybe someone was putting a live feed from the car park straight onto the patients' TV sets in order to upset them, and thus require their evacuation? There must be some genuine reason why all the patients needed to be evacuated.