Former Thai Pm Abhisit In Court Over 'red Shirt' Protest Deaths

[rixalex]

I'm awake and have quotes to prove my point about the illegitimate Dem govt. Please provide your evidence regarding Somchai's govt. instead of unsuccessfully trying to make witty comments with no backing

"comments by Chartthaipattana leader Chumpol Silpa-archa about the role of an "irresistible power" in the formation of the present government has placed the military once more in the spotlight. Mr Chumpol has said his party actually did not want to join the Democrat Party in forming the present coalition, but it was forced to by this "irresistible power". " (OP)

"During this power vacuum the army chief was reported to have become the key man seeking an agreement from the former PPP’s coalition partners to switch their support to the opposition Democrat party and form the next coalition government. Amid intense lobbying by both Puea Thai and Democrat camps, many key members of the coalition parties and key factions within them were seen visiting Gen Anupong at his official residence in the compound of the First Infantry Regiment off Vibhavadi RangsitRoad, both in small and large groups.

Among these special visitors were reportedly Newin Chidchob and Sora-at Klinprathum, two faction leaders in the now dissolved PPP. The two men were seen at Gen Anupong’sresidence on Dec 4 along with Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, the army’s chief-of-staff.Later, Pradit Phataraprasit, secretary-general of Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana party reportedly called on Gen Prayuth at his residence, also in the regiment compound.

In the meantime, Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thaugsubankept in touch with Gen Anupong by phone. Mr Suthep and Gen Anupong became acquaintances when the Council for National Security was in power.

On Dec 6, shortly before the Democrat’s plan to form a new coalition government was announced, Mr Suthep reportedly led a group of key members of the Democrats’ prospective coalition partners to meet Gen Anupong at the residence of former army chief Gen Prawit Wongsuwan, who is well respected by Gen Anupong. Even though the meetings were supposed to be secret events, they ended up in the open because of the unusual manner of the visits. Suddenly, Gen Anupong was viewed by the media as the “coalition formation manager”.During this power vacuum the army chief was reported to have become the key man seeking an agreement from the former PPP’s coalition partners to switch their support to the opposition Democrat party and form the next coalition government. Amid intense lobbying by both Puea Thai and Democrat camps, many key members of the coalition parties and key factions within them were seen visiting Gen Anupong at his official residence in the compound of the First Infantry Regiment off Vibhavadi RangsitRoad, both in small and large groups.

Among these special visitors were reportedly Newin Chidchob and Sora-at Klinprathum, two faction leaders in the now dissolved PPP. The two men were seen at Gen Anupong’sresidence on Dec 4 along with Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, the army’s chief-of-staff.Later, Pradit Phataraprasit, secretary-general of Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana party reportedly called on Gen Prayuth at his residence, also in the regiment compound.

In the meantime, Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thaugsubankept in touch with Gen Anupong by phone. Mr Suthep and Gen Anupong became acquaintances when the Council for National Security was in power.

On Dec 6, shortly before the Democrat’s plan to form a new coalition government was announced, Mr Suthep reportedly led a group of key members of the Democrats’ prospective coalition partners to meet Gen Anupong at the residence of former army chief Gen Prawit Wongsuwan, who is well respected by Gen Anupong. Even though the meetings were supposed to be secret events, they ended up in the open because of the unusual manner of the visits. Suddenly, Gen Anupong was viewed by the media as the “coalition formation manager”.

“Gen Anupong accepted that meetings between him and politicians from the Democrats and other smaller parties at his residence at the First Infantry Regiment on Vibhavadi Rangsit road paved the way for the Democrats to eventually form a new coalition government." (Newin VS the army)

All you have proven is your skills in cutting and pasting from selected sources and your mistaken beliefs about what constitutes evidence.

[whybother]

I'm awake and have quotes to prove my point about the illegitimate Dem govt. Please provide your evidence regarding Somchai's govt. instead of unsuccessfully trying to make witty comments with no backing

<snipped>

All you have proven is your skills in cutting and pasting from selected sources and your mistaken beliefs about what constitutes evidence.

It seems that when it suits, BPG wants irrefutable evidence, but other times suggestion is sufficient.

[rubl]

I'm awake and have quotes to prove my point about the illegitimate Dem govt. Please provide your evidence regarding Somchai's govt. instead of unsuccessfully trying to make witty comments with no backing

<snipped>

All you have proven is your skills in cutting and pasting from selected sources and your mistaken beliefs about what constitutes evidence.

It seems that when it suits, BPG wants irrefutable evidence, but other times suggestion is sufficient.

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because some think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

[birdpooguava]

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because some think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

Not some, most. Remind me how many seats they lost in the last election.

Edited September 1, 2012 by birdpooguava

[whybother]

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because some think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

Not some, most. Remind me how many seats they lost in the last election.

So that justifies an armed militia, and the killing of innocent bystanders by protesters?

[birdpooguava]

Start again:

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because <some|many|most> think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

(*underline your preferred quantity)

It is difficult to comment on as an outsider. The Arab Spring has shown us the power of the people and the consequences of suppressing people's rights.

Edited September 1, 2012 by birdpooguava

[rubl]

Start again:

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because <some|many|most> think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

(*underline your preferred quantity)

It is difficult to comment on as an outsider. The Arab Spring has shown us the power of the people and the consequences of suppressing people's rights.

Arab Spring? What's next, ICC, eradicating Democrats? Difficult to comment, but some|many|most still trying.

Still no answer on "Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified ..."

[Pimay1]

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because some think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

Not some, most. Remind me how many seats they lost in the last election.

Ok thanks birdpooguava I got it now. If a group of people think, and I repeat think, the government is illegitimate it justifies burning shopping centers, raiding hospitals, burning city halls, establishing illegal road blocks stopping innocent citizens searching their vehicles, and closing down the business district of Bangkok for months. Thanks for the enlightenment. This just proves we are never too old to learn.

[birdpooguava]

Ok thanks birdpooguava I got it now. If a group of people think, and I repeat think, the government is illegitimate it justifies burning shopping centers, raiding hospitals, burning city halls, establishing illegal road blocks stopping innocent citizens searching their vehicles, and closing down the business district of Bangkok for months. Thanks for the enlightenment. This just proves we are never too old to learn.

And how about if the government are illegitimate, what should be done? Looking at history suppressing the people tends to have a backlash.

[birdpooguava]

The Dem's selfish and deceitful route to power was highly inflammatory and they knew it, but they chose to advance their interests ahead of the country's peace & stability.

[tlansford]

just because you never saw armed groups at ratchaprasong doesn't mean they didn't exist. The men who I saw were all in civilian clothes and looked exactly like your average Thai. The only thing that set them apart was how they moved physically, and how they carried their weapons calmly confidently and with a purpose. These weren't some technical college students with grandads revolver and a Ping pong bomb over excited and full of bravado. They were quiet, confident and deliberate and around 35-45m years old. Please remember the events i recounted took place outside the protest area which is where most of the violence and deaths occurred.

There is a myth of groups of MIB, there were no MIB, those MIB wore the same clothes as you, I or your average person would wear and would be impossible to distinguish. Makes perfect sense if you think about it - Blend in avoid detection

If what you say is true then these men were openly visible to the public. I mean YOU saw it. Therefore why didn't the army/ government who had 30,000+ personnel dedicated to the conflict simply have officers in "the same clothes as you, I or your average person would wear and would be impossible to distinguish. Makes perfect sense if you think about it - Blend in avoid detection" They could then have gathered the evidence needed to convict all of these 'terrorists' after the conflict had run its course. The culprits could then have been interrogated to find out their superiors and consequently the links with the "big boss in Dubai".

The lack of intelligence by the government regarding the MIB before April 10th is amazing to me.

The lack of intelligence by the government regarding the MIB after April 10th is unforgivable.

This lack of information allows people to claim what they want about the MIB - on TVF, but elsewhere as well.

Until more details come out, we'll have to live with people making uniformed claims - on TVF and elsewhere.

[Pimay1]

Ok thanks birdpooguava I got it now. If a group of people think, and I repeat think, the government is illegitimate it justifies burning shopping centers, raiding hospitals, burning city halls, establishing illegal road blocks stopping innocent citizens searching their vehicles, and closing down the business district of Bangkok for months. Thanks for the enlightenment. This just proves we are never too old to learn.

And how about if the government are illegitimate, what should be done? Looking at history suppressing the people tends to have a backlash.

Ok this could be an endless debate but we will agree to disagree. Just remember this. The burn Bangkok campaign by the reds only started immediately after K. Thaksin's illgotten gains were siezed. K. Abhisit agreed to hold an early election on national television as demanded by the reds and then after an SMS was received during the meeting they suddenly rejected it. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the agenda at hand.

[whybother]

Start again:

Does this mean that for all to read and understand, red-shirt violence was totally justified because <some|many|most> think the Abhisit government was illegitimate?

(*underline your preferred quantity)

It is difficult to comment on as an outsider. The Arab Spring has shown us the power of the people and the consequences of suppressing people's rights.

Who's rights were suppressed? What rights were suppressed?

Are you against PMs being elected in parliament?

[birdpooguava]

Not really baiting anyone. It just shows the poster has no idea of the real facts viewed through his red colored glasses.

Right! While I am the only one posting quotes and others resort to taunts, abuse & unsubstantiated opinions I am the one with coloured glasses

[Scott]

A number of off-topic, baiting, inflammatory posts and one with an oversized picture have been deleted.

Please read the OP and discuss accordingly. Further baiting and off-topic comments will earn posters a suspension.

[Moruya]

Not really baiting anyone. It just shows the poster has no idea of the real facts viewed through his red colored glasses.

Right! While I am the only one posting quotes and others resort to taunts, abuse & unsubstantiated opinions I am the one with coloured glasses

The truth should be a sacrilegious, unadulterated, incorruptible state on here but it isn't. There are those who believe as "fact" things that cannot stand up on their own. Videos of "shootings" on YouTube? You can see UFOs, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and Elvis still living on there. The Red Press with all their one eyed vitriol? Find me one credible paper that says that Abhisit gave the orders to shoot. Find me a copy of the orders to the army, some real substantial proof or quit presenting all this nonsense as fact.

[Buchholz]

< moderator-deleted post snipped >

Indiscriminate firing implies a wanton disregard for life. It's easy to judge the soldiers, but they were mostly young, not that well trained people, experiencing the mayhem of what effectively amounted to warfare, for the first time in their lives; the pressures of dealing with a situation in which their lives were in real threat. They were the only people, besides perhaps medics and a few others, who had no choice in being there. Everyone else had complete freedom to walk away any moment they chose. And there were certainly plenty of pleas for them to do so, and warnings about the potential consequences of not. They didn't, and some of them paid dearly for that decision that they, and they alone, made.

But as is the way of the world these days, it's always someone else's fault, isn't it. Not, "if only i had left the protest and gone home when the government pleaded me to for the umpteenth time of asking, i wouldn't have been shot", but rather, "if those soldiers hadn't been so nasty and evil, firing back at our group, just because a couple of us were firing AK-47s at them, i wouldn't have been shot.... now where is my compensation?"

As with any sort of warning, be it electrical safety or vacate the area, constantly disregarding that warning has consequences.

.

[carra]

As with any sort of warning, be it electrical safety or vacate the area, constantly disregarding that warning has consequences.

.

Interesting, was the warning given as ' this is a live fire zone and you will be shot while posing no direct threat'?

So then at least peaceful protestors would know they were likely t be shot at random, as would the press and medical staff that were murdered, then they could make a decision based on this warning, hey maybe some were confused as the army only had rubber bullets and wouldn't shoot anyone would they?

[gamini]

So Bird Poo - Who shot the soldiers who died -other soldiers, perhaps while your at it you'll say the protesters were shooting themselves.

I spent 2 days at the Intersection of Rama 4 and Klong Toei market and during my time there saw groups of armed men (in the region of 4-6 per group, I clearly saw the wooden end of a firearm most likely a rifle of sorts. The gums were hidden under blankets as they moved through the crowd making identification difficult), These men moved forward towards the military lines in the direction of Lumpini and Silom., before disappearing into a small soi and the left hand side of rama 4. Men on the bridges over the intersection where looking down rama 4 road from the walkways with binoculars and coordinating with radios. From the direction of lumpini and silom explosions and gunfire could be heard at frequent intervals. This occurred about two days after the Bangkok bank on Rama 4 was burnt down. There are probably very few photos of these incidents as on 1 single occasion i saw a Thai man take some photos of these events with a small compact digital camera. The camera was swiftly taken away and thrown from the overpass onto Rama 4 and the man told in no uncertain terms to go away.

Those who were there and saw the fight know that groups of protestors, were armed and up for it, and they showed no regard for the safety of those innocents caught up in the chaos. Furthermore remember this as well - Guns are very easy to come by and Thais have no compunction in using them, as the multiple weekly shootings in Thai language press highlight.

I guess then it would have been impossible for the govt to have had a plain clothed soldier there recording what you saw on a concealed camera.

I was at Ratchaprasong on numerous occasions and never saw 1 armed black or red shirt mingling with the protesters as was claimed by AV, ST & the army spokesman

As I have said before, it was obvious that a very limited number of the reds had some rudimentary weapons, but as for '500 heavily armed terrorists' that was just one of the many lies used by the government to incriminate the reds, justify their existence and their heavy handed tactics.

It is pretty obvious you are a Taksin ?Red shirt supporter.

[473geo]

< moderator-deleted post snipped >

Indiscriminate firing implies a wanton disregard for life. It's easy to judge the soldiers, but they were mostly young, not that well trained people, experiencing the mayhem of what effectively amounted to warfare, for the first time in their lives; the pressures of dealing with a situation in which their lives were in real threat. They were the only people, besides perhaps medics and a few others, who had no choice in being there. Everyone else had complete freedom to walk away any moment they chose. And there were certainly plenty of pleas for them to do so, and warnings about the potential consequences of not. They didn't, and some of them paid dearly for that decision that they, and they alone, made.

But as is the way of the world these days, it's always someone else's fault, isn't it. Not, "if only i had left the protest and gone home when the government pleaded me to for the umpteenth time of asking, i wouldn't have been shot", but rather, "if those soldiers hadn't been so nasty and evil, firing back at our group, just because a couple of us were firing AK-47s at them, i wouldn't have been shot.... now where is my compensation?"

As with any sort of warning, be it electrical safety or vacate the area, constantly disregarding that warning has consequences.

.

Indeed interesting to have such strong belief in your protest that you do not leave when surrounded by an army knowing it could cost you your life

Anybody worked out why the government chose confrontation instead of the less damaging stepping down and calling elections?

[OzMick]

Anybody worked out why the government chose confrontation instead of the less damaging stepping down and calling elections?

Refusing to negotiate with terrorists is the default position of most governments. The Democrat however did offer early elections, which were accepted in front of TV cameras - until the phone call ended any real attempt at negotiation.

Did you forget that detail?

[phiphidon]

Anybody worked out why the government chose confrontation instead of the less damaging stepping down and calling elections?

Refusing to negotiate with terrorists is the default position of most governments. The Democrat however did offer early elections, which were accepted in front of TV cameras - until the phone call ended any real attempt at negotiation.

Did you forget that detail?

Without a date that the government would declare and with with the addition of caveats with non specific target definitions the "offer of early elections" as a bargaining tool was worth SFA.

[philw]

Ok thanks birdpooguava I got it now. If a group of people think, and I repeat think, the government is illegitimate it justifies burning shopping centers, raiding hospitals, burning city halls, establishing illegal road blocks stopping innocent citizens searching their vehicles, and closing down the business district of Bangkok for months. Thanks for the enlightenment. This just proves we are never too old to learn.

And how about if the government are illegitimate, what should be done? Looking at history suppressing the people tends to have a backlash.

Ok this could be an endless debate but we will agree to disagree. Just remember this. The burn Bangkok campaign by the reds only started immediately after K. Thaksin's illgotten gains were siezed. K. Abhisit agreed to hold an early election on national television as demanded by the reds and then after an SMS was received during the meeting they suddenly rejected it. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the agenda at hand.

Assuming the reds burnt Central, which is in no way established,( the astonishing lack of arrests, for example ) perhaps it was a reaction to the heavy handed lethality of the Army............

Just a thought , like, from a rocket scientist.

Edited September 1, 2012 by philw

[rubl]

Assuming the reds burnt Central, which is in no way established,( the astonishing lack of arrests, for example ) perhaps it was a reaction to the heavy handed lethality of the Army............

Just a thought , like, from a rocket scientist.

Just a thought, like from a grenade lobbing expert

PS NO, I'm not implying you are one of those, grenade lobbing experts that is)

[Moruya]

Ok thanks birdpooguava I got it now. If a group of people think, and I repeat think, the government is illegitimate it justifies burning shopping centers, raiding hospitals, burning city halls, establishing illegal road blocks stopping innocent citizens searching their vehicles, and closing down the business district of Bangkok for months. Thanks for the enlightenment. This just proves we are never too old to learn.

And how about if the government are illegitimate, what should be done? Looking at history suppressing the people tends to have a backlash.

Ok this could be an endless debate but we will agree to disagree. Just remember this. The burn Bangkok campaign by the reds only started immediately after K. Thaksin's illgotten gains were siezed. K. Abhisit agreed to hold an early election on national television as demanded by the reds and then after an SMS was received during the meeting they suddenly rejected it. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the agenda at hand.

Assuming the reds burnt Central, which is in no way established,( the astonishing lack of arrests, for example ) perhaps it was a reaction to the heavy handed lethality of the Army............

Just a thought , like, from a rocket scientist.

Only a fake rocket scientist could suggest such an abominable act.

[OzMick]

Ok thanks birdpooguava I got it now. If a group of people think, and I repeat think, the government is illegitimate it justifies burning shopping centers, raiding hospitals, burning city halls, establishing illegal road blocks stopping innocent citizens searching their vehicles, and closing down the business district of Bangkok for months. Thanks for the enlightenment. This just proves we are never too old to learn.

And how about if the government are illegitimate, what should be done? Looking at history suppressing the people tends to have a backlash.

Ok this could be an endless debate but we will agree to disagree. Just remember this. The burn Bangkok campaign by the reds only started immediately after K. Thaksin's illgotten gains were siezed. K. Abhisit agreed to hold an early election on national television as demanded by the reds and then after an SMS was received during the meeting they suddenly rejected it. So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the agenda at hand.

Assuming the reds burnt Central, which is in no way established,( the astonishing lack of arrests, for example ) perhaps it was a reaction to the heavy handed lethality of the Army............

Just a thought , like, from a rocket scientist.

perhaps it was a reaction to the heavy handed lethality of the Army............planned weeks in advance. all they had to do was kill enough people to provoke a heavy handed response from the Army.

Rocket scientist - red shirt version (Bang Fai).

[philw]

< moderator-deleted post snipped >

Indiscriminate firing implies a wanton disregard for life. It's easy to judge the soldiers, but they were mostly young, not that well trained people, experiencing the mayhem of what effectively amounted to warfare, for the first time in their lives; the pressures of dealing with a situation in which their lives were in real threat. They were the only people, besides perhaps medics and a few others, who had no choice in being there. Everyone else had complete freedom to walk away any moment they chose. And there were certainly plenty of pleas for them to do so, and warnings about the potential consequences of not. They didn't, and some of them paid dearly for that decision that they, and they alone, made.

But as is the way of the world these days, it's always someone else's fault, isn't it. Not, "if only i had left the protest and gone home when the government pleaded me to for the umpteenth time of asking, i wouldn't have been shot", but rather, "if those soldiers hadn't been so nasty and evil, firing back at our group, just because a couple of us were firing AK-47s at them, i wouldn't have been shot.... now where is my compensation?"

As with any sort of warning, be it electrical safety or vacate the area, constantly disregarding that warning has consequences.

.

Indeed interesting to have such strong belief in your protest that you do not leave when surrounded by an army knowing it could cost you your life

Anybody worked out why the government chose confrontation instead of the less damaging stepping down and calling elections?

They chose confrontation because they wanted to teach the naughty little people a lesson and push them back into line........

It has worked before but this time they miscalculated, hence the current fragility of Thailand, a place I am sure we all love.

2010 really is a watershed and we should accept and recognise that, for something like half the population, the mood has changed and they, quite rightly, want their rights.

If we are lucky, it will happen over the next 20 years without a repeat of 2010, if we are not lucky and the politicians are not adept, there will be a repeat of 2010 with probably worse consequences quite soon.

Their power will grow, as will their voice, and either way, "interesting" times are ahead.

The hiso ( sic) girl with the suspended sentence for the expressway crash, had 300,000 dislikes on her facebook page within a day of the verdict.

That says a lot.

Dylan had a song about this.........and make no mistake, it is happening and the "mood" in this country is changing.

"............and don't criticise what you don't understand..............."

Applies to me also by the way.

[Screws]

There is not a single piece of evidence showing that an armed protester was killed.

Seh Daeng committed suicide, did he?

[473geo]

Indeed interesting to have such strong belief in your protest that you do not leave when surrounded by an army knowing it could cost you your life

Anybody worked out why the government chose confrontation instead of the less damaging stepping down and calling elections?

No self respecting administration would ever back down to terrorism and fascism.

The Nazis may have been very powerful in WWII but the UK, Russians etc. Flew the flag of the righteous and so did Abhisit

Why do you hate the Muslims so much?

This was not a war.....it was a protest with outbreaks of limited and sporadic violence, until the government sent in the military, the outcome desired was not to overun the country, it was to have the government step down and call an election. The government did step down a matter of months later.

So why did the government sacrifice lives to cling to power for a few more measley months?

[philw]

There is not a single piece of evidence showing that an armed protester was killed.

Seh Daeng committed suicide, did he?

Nearly right.

Respectfully suggest you think again.