Abhisit Sues Defence Minister Sukampol For Defamation

[phiphidon]

The argument that Thaksins use of the defamation laws to silence critics is reasonable but I don't think doing the same things as Thaksin is exactly good for Abhisits image.

Whilst i completely agree with you, how absurd it is to see Thaksin's most loyal sycophants nodding their heads in mock agreement at this. If there was the remotest degree of consistency to their garbage, they would be applauding from the rooftops any action from anyone, that could be construed as in any way Thaksin-esque.

Why do you say that? Do you believe there are only two states to supporting Thaksin and / or his beliefs? What is it to be, Anti - Thaksin or

100 % slavish belief in everything he says or does and no shades of grey in between? This is not one of those stupid "a little bit pregnant" arguments that some people are so fond of on here.

How do you know to what extent my support (or anybody elses for that matter) of Thaksin or Yingluck or the UDD Leaders or the UDD rank supporters goes. You can make assumptions, yes, but that is all they are, assumptions.

For the record, I feel that Thaksin used to go overboard suing people he disagreed with. However that was a long time ago and I now find it amusing that people are backing Abhisit on the numerous occasions he or his party members resort to the lawyers to get their way - was it ever so since the Junta constitution tipped the balance of power over to the courts.

When he was in power he resorted to the computer crimes act, LM and the Emergency Decree to enforce his power, now he's reduced to suing people through the judiciary. Not a clever move for his image as was stated.

[rixalex]

Why do you say that? Do you believe there are only two states to supporting Thaksin and / or his beliefs? What is it to be, Anti - Thaksin or

100 % slavish belief in everything he says or does and no shades of grey in between?

To a degree, yes. Thaksin is a man of extremes, in the things that he does, the things that he says, the things he believes, and i think in the main, those who support him, and indeed those who don't, rarely fall into some sort of middle ground. He is Marmite. You love him, or you hate him. I know where i stand, and i believe after all these years of reading however many posts it is you have made, i know where you stand too, and throwing in the token, "i don't agree with everything he did" does not make much of a convincing impact.

[rixalex]

For the record, I feel that Thaksin used to go overboard suing people he disagreed with.

Going on record with that at the time or some short time after, would have meant a lot more and carried with it more credibility, than going on record with it now (how wonderfully convenient), as part of an argument used against someone else altogether.

[Moruya]

Oh right, the old Calgaryll manoeuvre, well done!

Oh joy,I have a stalker. Welcome to my ignore list.

How childish..

Whatever happened to Calgary? Did they stop funding him?

[phiphidon]

For the record, I feel that Thaksin used to go overboard suing people he disagreed with.

Going on record with that at the time or some short time after, would have meant a lot more and carried with it more credibility, than going on record with it now (how wonderfully convenient), as part of an argument used against someone else altogether.

I wasn't on the forum then so would not have been able to convince or even gain credibility points from you but I'll live with it.

Come to think of it you didn't join the forum until June 2007, so I couldn't have convinced you at the time, or even some short time after either, oh well.

[whybother]

If the allegations are untrue then I would expect the accused to welcome a full investigation at the highest level as this would not only prove innocence but also give him ammunition against his opponents for making false allegations as well as the moral high ground for the future.

The defamation route implies something to hide as it is not based around the truth of the allegations but on if someone has been made to look bad. The argument that Thaksins use of the defamation laws to silence critics is reasonable but I don't think doing the same things as Thaksin is exactly good for Abhisits image.

There was a full investigation in 1999.

[phiphidon]

If the allegations are untrue then I would expect the accused to welcome a full investigation at the highest level as this would not only prove innocence but also give him ammunition against his opponents for making false allegations as well as the moral high ground for the future.

The defamation route implies something to hide as it is not based around the truth of the allegations but on if someone has been made to look bad. The argument that Thaksins use of the defamation laws to silence critics is reasonable but I don't think doing the same things as Thaksin is exactly good for Abhisits image.

There was a full investigation in 1999.

There was a full Army investigation in 1999.

[whybother]

There was a full Army investigation in 1999.

Yes. Is there any new evidence now?

[maidu]

There was a full Army investigation in 1999.

Yes. Is there any new evidence now?

only for those digging around on a witchhunt. Maybe they can find a t not crossed, or an i not dotted. The pirannas are in the water and they smell blood, though it might just be a dollop of ketchup spilled by a sloppy picnicker.

[473geo]

Why do you say that? Do you believe there are only two states to supporting Thaksin and / or his beliefs? What is it to be, Anti - Thaksin or

100 % slavish belief in everything he says or does and no shades of grey in between?

To a degree, yes. Thaksin is a man of extremes, in the things that he does, the things that he says, the things he believes, and i think in the main, those who support him, and indeed those who don't, rarely fall into some sort of middle ground. He is Marmite. You love him, or you hate him. I know where i stand, and i believe after all these years of reading however many posts it is you have made, i know where you stand too, and throwing in the token, "i don't agree with everything he did" does not make much of a convincing impact.

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

As for the Abhisit saga just the normal mud slinging, perhaps the truth will never emerge, seems to happen that way in Thailand, all parties need to move on get to the real issue the 'reconciliation'........and all that is to follow

[whybother]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

As for the Abhisit saga just the normal mud slinging, perhaps the truth will never emerge, seems to happen that way in Thailand, all parties need to move on get to the real issue the 'reconciliation'........and all that is to follow

"perhaps the truth will never emerge"

Not a truth that the red shirt supporters will accept anyway.

[rixalex]

For the record, I feel that Thaksin used to go overboard suing people he disagreed with.

Going on record with that at the time or some short time after, would have meant a lot more and carried with it more credibility, than going on record with it now (how wonderfully convenient), as part of an argument used against someone else altogether.

I wasn't on the forum then so would not have been able to convince or even gain credibility points from you but I'll live with it.

Come to think of it you didn't join the forum until June 2007, so I couldn't have convinced you at the time, or even some short time after either, oh well.

To not sound so hollow, wouldn't even of have to have been a short time after the event, could have been a long time, just any other time than when someone else happens to do something remotely similar... for you to then suddenly and conveniently pop up to break your silence on a matter regarding Thaksin that has been discussed over and over here with, as usual for Thaksin related matters, your condemnation no where in sight.

Perhaps what it takes for you to come out on record and condemn any Thaksin action, is for Abhisit to commit it also...

[Moruya]

If the allegations are untrue then I would expect the accused to welcome a full investigation at the highest level as this would not only prove innocence but also give him ammunition against his opponents for making false allegations as well as the moral high ground for the future.

The defamation route implies something to hide as it is not based around the truth of the allegations but on if someone has been made to look bad. The argument that Thaksins use of the defamation laws to silence critics is reasonable but I don't think doing the same things as Thaksin is exactly good for Abhisits image.

There was a full investigation in 1999.

There was a full Army investigation in 1999.

I have heard on the grapevine that another charge has been leveled against Abhisit. Apparently when he was twelve he once spent his lunch money on a large bar of chocolate. The OAG is frantically investigating

[MEL1]

Oh right, the old Calgaryll manoeuvre, well done!

Oh joy,I have a stalker. Welcome to my ignore list.

How childish..

Whatever happened to Calgary? Did they stop funding him?

Apparently he was last seen carrying red balloons on the BTS, singing the number 99.

-mel.

[473geo]

There was a full Army investigation in 1999.

Yes. Is there any new evidence now?

only for those digging around on a witchhunt. Maybe they can find a t not crossed, or an i not dotted. The pirannas are in the water and they smell blood, though it might just be a dollop of ketchup spilled by a sloppy picnicker.

Did you miss the point of who conducted the original investigation. You know I am still trying to work out why the military had to give an amnesty after the coup, also why people holding the rank of general cannot be charged, because some here appear to give the impression they believe the military are beyond reproach, are they?

[rixalex]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

I'm only reluctant to accept his position because the position he claims doesn't match in my eyes with the impression gained from 3000 odd other posts he has made.

[Sharp]

What a sissy getting his legal team and running to court to sue for defamation

ttelise ,post # 1 ^^

I would of course presume that you include all the other Thai politicians who have used this tactic in the past in the quote and labelled them as ''sissies too?.

Thaksin was himself rather fond of using the sue and run tactic and I believe you will find he still has cases before the court too.

Candidly, his actions and MO for dealing with situation make it pretty apparent allegations are correct.

You are of course privy yourself to all the facts concerned in the matter, thus your judgement is based upon pure facts rather than your own opinion ?

If so you should present your evidence to the court so as to assist the defendent in his case.

I am sure that the esteemed legal firm ''Messrs Sue, Grabbit, and Run,'' would indeed be delighted to request your appearance in court so as to enhance their case in defending their client as you so clearly state you are fully aware of the guilt of the plaintiff in the current case before the court ?

Nice ....

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[473geo]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

I'm only reluctant to accept his position because the position he claims doesn't match in my eyes with the impression gained from 3000 odd other posts he has made.

So you claim he must 'love' Thaksin.........I think you have a very shallow understanding of love......only the impression I get from your last 3 posts you understand

Edited July 28, 2012 by 473geo

[phiphidon]

For the record, I feel that Thaksin used to go overboard suing people he disagreed with.

Going on record with that at the time or some short time after, would have meant a lot more and carried with it more credibility, than going on record with it now (how wonderfully convenient), as part of an argument used against someone else altogether.

I wasn't on the forum then so would not have been able to convince or even gain credibility points from you but I'll live with it.

Come to think of it you didn't join the forum until June 2007, so I couldn't have convinced you at the time, or even some short time after either, oh well.

To not sound so hollow, wouldn't even of have to have been a short time after the event, could have been a long time, just any other time than when someone else happens to do something remotely similar... for you to then suddenly and conveniently pop up to break your silence on a matter regarding Thaksin that has been discussed over and over here with, as usual for Thaksin related matters, your condemnation no where in sight.

Perhaps what it takes for you to come out on record and condemn any Thaksin action, is for Abhisit to commit it also...

Hey you set the time limits not me.

I was just pointing out it would not have been possible for me to confess my viewpoint on thaksins forays into litigation because I wasn't on the forum then and you didn't join until 2007 so a fair while later than when he was at the height of his 'powers'.

[phiphidon]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

I'm only reluctant to accept his position because the position he claims doesn't match in my eyes with the impression gained from 3000 odd other posts he has made.

I'm still in the room. If you have something to say you can address it to me but it doesn't appear you have much of interest to say. Now if you'd only accepted you'd made a bit of blanket assumption back in post 29 we could all have gone on our merry way. Now, I have better things to do.

[tlansford]

- deleted -

How about you tell us your opinion for a change instead of just commenting on others?

Still waiting on your opinion of the complete charter rewrite. You must have had some urgent business yesterday, did you?

No, just not interested enough to put across opinions to people who will not read and / or listen to alternative viewpoints and discuss in a reasonable way.

Oh right, the old Calgaryll manoeuvre, well done!

getting OT, but I fail to see how you can attribute THAT tactic to CalgaryII... he was willing to debate with anyone anytime.... especially with those unwilling to read and / or listen... got him in a lot of trouble here as well.

[rixalex]

Hey you set the time limits not me.

I was just pointing out it would not have been possible for me to confess my viewpoint on thaksins forays into litigation because I wasn't on the forum then and you didn't join until 2007 so a fair while later than when he was at the height of his 'powers'.

No time limit was set in stone. I said at the time or a short time after. One man's short time is another man's long time though. Perhaps there are more interesting things for us to discuss...

Thaksin has been suing people, or attempting to, for a long time now and i don't see any sign of him stopping this practice, and the matter as i say has been discussed on various threads quite possibly hundreds of times since we welcomed you to the forum in what was it, 2010? Plenty of opportunity to express the disapproval for this practice you have woken up with today.

[Thaddeus]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

I'm only reluctant to accept his position because the position he claims doesn't match in my eyes with the impression gained from 3000 odd other posts he has made.

I'm still in the room.

And the topic has turned into an elephant.

[rubl]

"What would you do"

The honorable thing of course! Duel at sunrise!

[473geo]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

I'm only reluctant to accept his position because the position he claims doesn't match in my eyes with the impression gained from 3000 odd other posts he has made.

I'm still in the room.

And the topic has turned into an elephant.

Amazingly the topic has moved around to be about PPD and Thaksin, it would appear even for the anti Thaksin crew Abhisit has to stand in line.....behind Thaksin, and now also PPD in discussion value....

[rixalex]

According to your statement PPD could well and may not be "in the main" you make the assumption that he is........in other words you are reluctant to accept his position.....your choice, but a little narrow minded, given you openly admit such a position exists

I'm only reluctant to accept his position because the position he claims doesn't match in my eyes with the impression gained from 3000 odd other posts he has made.

I'm still in the room. If you have something to say you can address it to me but it doesn't appear you have much of interest to say. Now if you'd only accepted you'd made a bit of blanket assumption back in post 29 we could all have gone on our merry way. Now, I have better things to do.

The comment wasn't made by you so it would hardly be fair to address it to you. If you don't appreciate being discussed in the third person, address the person who started that discussion.

As for the blanket assumption, as i say, it's not as if you have just arrived on the forum with a handful of posts to your name. You have over 3,000, most of which seem to have been made on the News forum and on matters relating in some way to Thaksin, the reds, the PTP, the yellows, the Dems etc. I therefore i am not simply plucking out of thin air your opinion as i see it, but viewing your opinion based on reams and reams of your comments over the last couple of years.

[drdoom6996]

What a sissy getting his legal team and running to court to sue for defamation. Handle like a man instead more of the primate intellect pervading Thai political arena. One needs to have thicker skin when entering politics and realize that scrutiny is just the nature of the beast. Didn't see OBama filing lawsuits against Donald Trump or others when they accused him of not be elgible to be president. Now that was a BIG deal.

This is grade school bs that evokes even more immature responses. Grow some cajones and either admit (for once) and say so what or say false, apologogize for dude spending time and resources focusing on something so old and stupid and move on.

Candidly, his actions and MO for dealing with situation make it pretty apparent allegations are correct.

That means that Thaksin must be the biggest sissy.

+1

[Greer]

As mentioned in the article, they dont even know if the legal statutory limit has expired - I would imagine that it expired quite a few years ago, given that the limit as stated above for homicide is 20 years - and this all supposedly happened 25 years ago.

If someone defamed you by making VERY public statements about something that is untrue (or even that you believe is untrue), I am sure most people, if they had the wherewithall to do so, would sue the defamer...

Whats the problem?

[thaicbr]

Mr Abhisit is going to have a problem with the timeline. Abhisit went on to say that he had repeatedly pointed out that he did not report for his military duty because at the time he was applying for and subsequently got a teaching job at the Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy. The teaching position came 2 years after his conscription date. I don't recall Mr. Abhisit peviously volunteered for national services, so the 6 month lecturer psoition may not necessarily have satisfied the national service requirement. Fortunately, for Mr. Abhisit, the burden of proof under Thai defamation law works in his favour. Even if the Defence Minister can show that he was truthful, he could still be guilty of defamation.

I don't know if this is brightest political move on Mr. Abhisit's part. Air Chief Marshal Sukampol Suwannathat was a career military officer that volunteered for service.

Career military officer that volunteered. Hahahahaha

GK. Just cannot understand that its NOT VOLUNTEERING its a Career.

jeeze how many times.

Also GK are you privy to all the documents? Maybe not. Otherwise you would know that he applied for and received a waiver to finish his education then volunteer to do the lecture job at the RMC thus serving his conscription.

sent from my Wellcom A90+

Edited July 28, 2012 by thaicbr

[Roadman]

What a sissy getting his legal team and running to court to sue for defamation. Handle like a man instead more of the primate intellect pervading Thai political arena. One needs to have thicker skin when entering politics and realize that scrutiny is just the nature of the beast. Didn't see OBama filing lawsuits against Donald Trump or others when they accused him of not be elgible to be president. Now that was a BIG deal.

This is grade school bs that evokes even more immature responses. Grow some cajones and either admit (for once) and say so what or say false, apologogize for dude spending time and resources focusing on something so old and stupid and move on.

Candidly, his actions and MO for dealing with situation make it pretty apparent allegations are correct.

On the contrary, it is normal for Thais to sue for defamation, Thaksin is and has done this. What would you have Abhisit do, call him out in the street for a gun fight?

If the allegations are untrue then I would expect the accused to welcome a full investigation at the highest level as this would not only prove innocence but also give him ammunition against his opponents for making false allegations as well as the moral high ground for the future.

The defamation route implies something to hide as it is not based around the truth of the allegations but on if someone has been made to look bad. The argument that Thaksins use of the defamation laws to silence critics is reasonable but I don't think doing the same things as Thaksin is exactly good for Abhisits image.

He has everything to gain and it is the correct choice. This is the total dirt that anybody can dig against Abhisit. Look all around him and even within his own Democratic party you can point the finger at most for corruption. Look across the house at the current Pheua Thai government and its not only corruption but its criminals (convicted and also hiding from justice), thugs and murderers galore, let along the Dubai criminal liable for the more serious charges against Thailand and the Thai Army. I hope he burries this Pheua Thai idiot in court, because if this is the total dirt that they can dig on him then it shows that he is about the only moral voice in Thai politics and justifies his decision to deal with Thaksins attack on Thailand, its Army and its people in Bangkok in 2010. Kia Kaha Khun Abhisit.