Nickymaster Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 (edited) Yep, totally correct, the army when in full swing and really into it used some excessive force. Mind you those armed militants who shot and lobbed grenades weren't too friendly either. I don't think I downplay civilian deaths, I just try to emphasize that lots of deaths could have been prevented if only the police had done it's job, if red-shirts had refrained from allowing militant elements in their midst, etc., etc. So why do you tend to downplay red-shirt involvement, dear phiphidon? "if only the police had done it's job" ... There we go again. Where did the police not do their job? See, when an SOE is declared, the military is put in charge, not the police. And Abhisit declared that 3 days prior to the first dispersal attempt in April. As for the UDD & militant violence vs the government and army lethal force, I've already commented on that a couple of times. The police vanished when the Reds starting terrorizing down-town Bangkok. All part of the game to make the army come in and look bad. I live in the area and have seen it with my own eyes. A guy like you who seems to have nothing else to do but spend time on TV should know this. You have enough time to find out the truth (but I doubt you would ever admit it). In general, you need to have big balls to give the Thai Police Farce the benefit of the doubt. "In general, you need to have big balls to give the Thai Police Farce the benefit of the doubt." I just don't lampoon them without reason. EVERY report I have read - from all sources, government, government supporting, and more independent have never pointed to the police not performing their duties. To the contrary, the police were an active part of the crowd control force. After the SOE, the military was put in charge - that could explain why police "vanished" as you put it... If you have other reports showing the police did not do their job and that is why the government was "forced" to call in the military, then I would be interested to see that. AFAIK, that was never the case. Unlike some posters, I was only in BKK at the start of the protest, not the start of the hostilities, so I did not have the occasion to witness something with my own eyes and jump to conclusions as to why it happened. I've been forced to find various sources with different perspectives to piece it together. And so far, none of the sources except TVF posters have implicated the police in this way for not performing their duties. Hey Robin to the rescue! Batman must be busy twisting. EVERY report I have read - from all sources, government, government supporting, and more independent have never pointed to the police not performing their duties. To the contrary, the police were an active part of the crowd control force. You can say all this with a straight face...wow.. you are amazing. I think any reasonable person would agree that there was NO law and order during the Red occupation of down-town Bangkok. So which department is responsible for law and order in this country? Edited September 5, 2012 by Nickymaster 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KireB Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Unlike some posters, I was only in BKK at the start of the protest, not the start of the hostilities, so I did not have the occasion to witness something with my own eyes and jump to conclusions as to why it happened. I've been forced to find various sources with different perspectives to piece it together. And so far, none of the sources except TVF posters have implicated the police in this way for not performing their duties. I was clear to me that you only witnessed the more carnavalesk part of the red shirts.The uprising of the poor, all sponsored by the richest and meanest clan in Thailand. I witnessed a side of them that was more grim and violent. And yes the police stood there, smiled and did nothing. How about Arisman's hotel escape, any comment on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Sadly,some of the more deluded posters here, seem to think that it is the responsibility of the Army. They also seem to prefer it that way, which is rather baffling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Unlike some posters, I was only in BKK at the start of the protest, not the start of the hostilities, so I did not have the occasion to witness something with my own eyes and jump to conclusions as to why it happened. I've been forced to find various sources with different perspectives to piece it together. And so far, none of the sources except TVF posters have implicated the police in this way for not performing their duties. I was clear to me that you only witnessed the more carnavalesk part of the red shirts.The uprising of the poor, all sponsored by the richest and meanest clan in Thailand. I witnessed a side of them that was more grim and violent. And yes the police stood there, smiled and did nothing. How about Arisman's hotel escape, any comment on that? Yeah, quite amusing in hindsight. Like, welcome to Thailand, where things ain't what they seem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nickymaster Posted September 6, 2012 Share Posted September 6, 2012 "if only the police had done it's job" ... There we go again. Where did the police not do their job? See, when an SOE is declared, the military is put in charge, not the police. And Abhisit declared that 3 days prior to the first dispersal attempt in April. As for the UDD & militant violence vs the government and army lethal force, I've already commented on that a couple of times. The police vanished when the Reds starting terrorizing down-town Bangkok. All part of the game to make the army come in and look bad. I live in the area and have seen it with my own eyes. A guy like you who seems to have nothing else to do but spend time on TV should know this. You have enough time to find out the truth (but I doubt you would ever admit it). In general, you need to have big balls to give the Thai Police Farce the benefit of the doubt. So would you say you would give the army the benefit of the doubt rather than the police with respect to the events in April / May? I think any reasonable person would agree that there was NO law and order during the Red occupation of down-town Bangkok. So which department is responsible for law and order in this country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 In the meantime there are credible reports of the army threatening witnesses of the massacre at Wat Pathum. Human Right Watch has a more general statement on the army's despicable behaviour.One wonders if there is any army outrage the usual suspects will not justify or ignore. http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/08/23/thailand-army-chief-interfering-investigations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thait Spot Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I wonder how Abhisit knew the armed groups inside the protest wanted to cause a civil war? Did he have a chat with them or was he just projecting these intentions on them - you know like people do with their pets, ... The Red Shirts aren't that hard to figure out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now