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

[philw]

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?

Spot on !!!

[philw]

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.

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

One side offers early elections, the other to burn down the capital city and a long list of targets unless they get, wait for it, early elections.

Plus all those hardly note worthy bombings around the city since the very beginning of the protests, easy to overlook for someone not living here I suppose.

You truly live on the other side of the mirror.

Supposition very wrong, by the way.

23 years, you ???

[tlansford]

July 2010

""Journalists said that in several instances troops fired in a random manner into crowds of apparently unarmed demonstrators, frequently in areas where reporters were present. Their news reports and interviews with CPJ also highlighted the presence of heavily armed, black-clad protesters who fired gunshots and launched grenades at troops deployed in areas where journalists were positioned."

http://cpj.org/repor...-under-fire.php

Mind you, those armed red-shirt militants were really friendly, they didn't even kill NN

"Several of us, including me, met armed Red Shirt militants during the fighting, and non of us were killed by them, even though in cover of darkness it would have been easy for them to do so. I, for example, was only asked by them not to photograph them (quite politely, actually), and i won't argue with this point with heavily armed people."

http://www.thaivisa....00#entry5308387

Why so selective with NN's post - it wasn't that long :

You are grasping for straws.

We journalists, etc, in most situations knew very well where the bullets that were fired at us were coming from - namely from the lines of the soldiers. When we were with the military lines, we knew that we exposed ourselves to fire from the Red Shirt militants firing at the soldiers, such as when Chandler Vandergrift became collateral damage when he stayed with a group of soldiers under fire instead of getting out of the way like most of us there.

Several of us, including me, met armed Red Shirt militants during the fighting, and non of us were killed by them, even though in cover of darkness it would have been easy for them to do so. I, for example, was only asked by them not to photograph them (quite politely, actually), and i won't argue with this point with heavily armed people. I didn't either when heavily armed soldiers asked me the same (not very polite) after their unit killed a protester in front of me. Sorry, but i fear that i may lack hero qualities - in those situations my life is more dear to me than my rights as a journalist.

Other than what we saw with our own eyes, there is more than enough evidence available, such as video footage, bullet holes with clear trajectories, etc.

[rubl]

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.

The renegade general Seh Daeng surely had his personal weapon with him, or did he only put those grenade pins on his floppy jungle hat, for protection and good luck that is?

[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?

Why do you support people who want to burn all Muslim mosques and burn Sirirat hospital?

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

[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.

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?

It was pretty straight forward. Don't go there... and it started weeks before Ratchaprasong became permanently occupied.

It was disregarded... and continually disregarded.

As said, disregarding any sort of warning continually has consequences.

It's not that difficult to sort out that that when one constantly refuses to comply with warnings, they do so at their own peril.

April 4, 2010 - The Associated Press

Anti-government protesters in Thailand's capital announced they would continue their demonstrations at a new location Monday after paralyzing Bangkok's downtown commercial core over the weekend.

Bangkok has been the scene of similar demonstrations the last four weekends, but this was the most disruptive yet.

The Red Shirts' decision to vacate the commercial district appeared to head off a confrontation with government forces, who said they were prepared to use tough measures to clear protesters from the affected downtown areas.

Jatuporn Prompan, a protest leader, said Sunday evening that the demonstrators would move to an undisclosed location in the morning. An army spokesperson warned the Red Shirts not to enter other nearby business or residential areas

[473geo]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

Unarmed? Lie.

Courage? Paid for stupidity.

Say in who runs the country? Vote more intelligently

The unarmed protestors are the ones I think deserve respect.....you didn't get that......sorry, discussion closed, no point in continuing discussion with somebody who has limited comprehension, be it natural or self inflicted.

Edited September 1, 2012 by 473geo

[gemini81]

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

"Journalists said that in several instances troops fired in a random manner into crowds of apparently unarmed demonstrators, frequently in areas where reporters were present. Their news reports and interviews with CPJ also highlighted the presence of heavily armed, black-clad protesters who fired gunshots and launched grenades at troops deployed in areas where journalists were positioned."

http://cpj.org/repor...-under-fire.php

So. what line are we going for here guys; they wore black, they didn't wear black, they wore black on alternate days; depended on their skin tone....

Interested a man with a doctorate in the red "protest" such as yourself never viewed the videos of black shirts firing and carrying weapons inside the buffalo camp, just search it on youtube.

Edited September 1, 2012 by gemini81

[rics21]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

Unarmed? Lie.

Courage? Paid for stupidity.

Say in who runs the country? Vote more intelligently

Voting for the winner is an intelligent move.

Courage. Fighting for the winner is another intelligent move.

What has the elected government did to u? Dont feel so pissed?

Sent from my XT910 using Thaivisa Connect App

Edited September 1, 2012 by rics21

[rics21]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

Unarmed? Lie.

Courage? Paid for stupidity.

Say in who runs the country? Vote more intelligently

Voting for the winner is an intelligent move.

Courage. Fighting for the winner is another intelligent move.

What has the elected government did to u? Dont feel so pissed?

Sent from my XT910 using Thaivisa Connect App

You raise an interesting point.

What has the elected government done for me?

That's largely irrelevant as I can support myself. What has the elected government done for the Thai people? That's the real question.

I just got back from the family's home in Loei. Used to be a rice growing stronghold. Now the focus is on tapioca and sugar cane. Why? More money? What about the rice prices? Nobody gets that. Tablet PCs? Not one in the 700 strong village. Minimum wage? Zero. Graduate salary? No positions.

So who on here has a family that lives here? You? Tom? PPD? Bird poo? Carra? Neurofiend? I doubt it.

I'd be delighted to hear from anyone who lives here up country with a family as to how their benefits from PTP have worked out. Armchair plastics need not apply

Most of the policies by Thai governments (democrats or pt) benefit the politicians more than the people.

I guess they r used to it.

But, if there is another election, they will still chose the pt.

Many of the staffs in the company I m working, benefited from the minimum wage thing. The messagers/ security guards/ maids.

Sent from my XT910 using Thaivisa Connect App

[Scott]

A large number of off-topic posts have been deleted, mostly those which contain nasty, personal attacks on other posters.

A few posters will have suspensions.

[philw]

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

"Journalists said that in several instances troops fired in a random manner into crowds of apparently unarmed demonstrators, frequently in areas where reporters were present. Their news reports and interviews with CPJ also highlighted the presence of heavily armed, black-clad protesters who fired gunshots and launched grenades at troops deployed in areas where journalists were positioned."

http://cpj.org/repor...-under-fire.php

So. what line are we going for here guys; they wore black, they didn't wear black, they wore black on alternate days; depended on their skin tone....

Interested a man with a doctorate in the red "protest" such as yourself never viewed the videos of black shirts firing and carrying weapons inside the buffalo camp, just search it on youtube.

It would seem "buffalo" rather gives your hand away.............

I don't need to profane to make that point, to a midway orifice.

[Moruya]

Most of the policies by Thai governments (democrats or pt) benefit the politicians more than the people.

I guess they r used to it.

But, if there is another election, they will still chose the pt.

Many of the staffs in the company I m working, benefited from the minimum wage thing. The messagers/ security guards/ maids.

Sent from my XT910 using Thaivisa Connect App

I'm glad to hear your company played the rules like gentlemen.

I hope they reward the company with the type of loyalty that the Thais are respected for

[OzMick]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

The reason that people don't answer your questions is that they are so self-serving and removed from reality as to be worthless. On this page alone there are witness reports that the protests were neither non-violent or unarmed. There were women and children amongst the protesters who fit your description but i have seen no reports of injury within this group.

You also ask why did the government not step down "for a matter of a few months". Actually it was 15 months before they called early elections - half the term they served. The bigger question is why did protesters have to resort to violence when elections were due in your so called "matter of a few months." that they DID is historical fact that your denial can not change.

Don't bother replying, the inanity of your posts attempting to revise history have moved me to the ignore button. Enjoy your ill-gotten rice subsidy.

[OzMick]

Most of the policies by Thai governments (democrats or pt) benefit the politicians more than the people.

I guess they r used to it.

But, if there is another election, they will still chose the pt.

Many of the staffs in the company I m working, benefited from the minimum wage thing. The messagers/ security guards/ maids.

Sent from my XT910 using Thaivisa Connect App

The question is will they still appreciate the pay rise as the inflation it is causing eats away at the benefits? Perhaps the cause and effect relationship might not be obvious to them.

[gemini81]

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?

Spot on !!!

The democrats attempted negotiations and civilized meetings and were yielding, and if you were here, you'll recall the red shirts leaders would not negotiate. Were you here? Do you recall they wanted nothing less than completely their way and threatening to continue vioence if their full requests weren't met? Abhisit was willing to move up election dates and do this, that and the other, but nothing satisfied the red shirt leaders. They WANTED violence to continue to erupt and then play the martyr. If you weren't here, you can certainly watch the vids on youtube of Abhisit trying endlessly to make a bargain and keep things peacful.

Edited September 1, 2012 by gemini81

[philw]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

The reason that people don't answer your questions is that they are so self-serving and removed from reality as to be worthless. On this page alone there are witness reports that the protests were neither non-violent or unarmed. There were women and children amongst the protesters who fit your description but i have seen no reports of injury within this group.

You also ask why did the government not step down "for a matter of a few months". Actually it was 15 months before they called early elections - half the term they served. The bigger question is why did protesters have to resort to violence when elections were due in your so called "matter of a few months." that they DID is historical fact that your denial can not change.

Don't bother replying, the inanity of your posts attempting to revise history have moved me to the ignore button. Enjoy your ill-gotten rice subsidy.

No unarmed women and children shot by the RTA ???

Really ??

What about some of the ( approx) 2500 wounded over the period ??

[473geo]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

You can't answer my question - accepted

The reason that people don't answer your questions is that they are so self-serving and removed from reality as to be worthless. On this page alone there are witness reports that the protests were neither non-violent or unarmed. There were women and children amongst the protesters who fit your description but i have seen no reports of injury within this group.

You also ask why did the government not step down "for a matter of a few months". Actually it was 15 months before they called early elections - half the term they served. The bigger question is why did protesters have to resort to violence when elections were due in your so called "matter of a few months." that they DID is historical fact that your denial can not change.

Don't bother replying, the inanity of your posts attempting to revise history have moved me to the ignore button. Enjoy your ill-gotten rice subsidy.

I thank you for putting me on ignore Mick

You see any person who cannot accept that I can abhor violent armed protest but admire the bravery and conviction of those who opted to stay in peaceful protest, despite being surrounded by live fire zones and the military, well Mick you and others paint with too broader brush to see the detail I offer

Happy posting

[OzMick]

No unarmed women and children shot by the RTA ???

Really ??

What about some of the ( approx) 2500 wounded over the period ??

" I have seen no reports of injury within this group." Really. But if you have some I'm sure you will share.

[philw]

[phiphidon]

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

"Journalists said that in several instances troops fired in a random manner into crowds of apparently unarmed demonstrators, frequently in areas where reporters were present. Their news reports and interviews with CPJ also highlighted the presence of heavily armed, black-clad protesters who fired gunshots and launched grenades at troops deployed in areas where journalists were positioned."

http://cpj.org/repor...-under-fire.php

So. what line are we going for here guys; they wore black, they didn't wear black, they wore black on alternate days; depended on their skin tone....

Interested a man with a doctorate in the red "protest" such as yourself never viewed the videos of black shirts firing and carrying weapons inside the buffalo camp, just search it on youtube.

"inside the buffalo camp"

Oh dear, Where's the "shaking ones head in quiet disbelief" smiley when you need one..........................................

[Thaddeus]

Oh dear, Where's the "shaking ones head in quiet disbelief" smiley when you need one..........................................

You know where it is, it's right next to the "disingenuous arse kissing" smiley.

[whybother]

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?

Do you think a government should step down when ever people come out to protest?

Sent from my HTC phone.

[whybother]

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.

There is plenty of evidence that the red shirts burnt central and a number of other buildings. They haven't been able to arrest people because they don't have enough specific evidence to identify them to get a conviction.

Sent from my HTC phone.

[rixalex]

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

Validity of belief is not measured by strength of belief, and strength of belief is not measured by how much danger you are prepared to place yourself and others under, otherwise people like suicide bombers would be deemed as having the most valid beliefs of us all. They don't. They are brainwashed fanaticals.

[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

Validity of belief is not measured by strength of belief, and strength of belief is not measured by how much danger you are prepared to place yourself and others under, otherwise people like suicide bombers would be deemed as having the most valid beliefs of us all. They don't. They are brainwashed fanaticals.

Well thanks for your comment on suicide bombers.......now back on topic.....people who carried a strong belief that the government should step down fair elections should be held

[OzMick]

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

Validity of belief is not measured by strength of belief, and strength of belief is not measured by how much danger you are prepared to place yourself and others under, otherwise people like suicide bombers would be deemed as having the most valid beliefs of us all. They don't. They are brainwashed fanaticals.

In fact, quite a lot like suicidal redshirts firmly believing a screed written by Thaksin and preached by his mercenary propagandist disciples.

[rixalex]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

The only way any one of the red shirts involved in the 2010 riots could claim to have been protesting in a non violent way, is were they to have removed themselves from the red movement, and to have started their own movement, or to have just gone home, the moment they realised that they were standing amongst people who were protesting violently, upon realising that some of their leaders were advocating violence openly and publicly on the stage.

The moment you see members of your group using violence, the moment you hear your leaders advocating violence openly and publicly on the stage, and you don't remove yourself from support of that group, is the moment you become a part of those acts.

Plenty of people, including a lot on here i might add, ceased support of the PAD, the moment that they started taking things too far in the way they were protesting. Ceasing support need not mean you cease believing in the same things, but it does mean you take a stand against the way the group is trying to achieve their aims.

If there were any red shirts who took the same sort of decision, to remove themselves once they saw the ugly element within their ranks, well then these would be the red shirts for whom should be deserving of a little of your respect. Not the ones who stayed on to clap. Staying on to clap played a part in the deaths of 90 odd people.

[rixalex]

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

Validity of belief is not measured by strength of belief, and strength of belief is not measured by how much danger you are prepared to place yourself and others under, otherwise people like suicide bombers would be deemed as having the most valid beliefs of us all. They don't. They are brainwashed fanaticals.

Well thanks for your comment on suicide bombers.......now back on topic.....people who carried a strong belief that the government should step down fair elections should be held

My comment wasn't solely on suicide bombers (as you very well know), it was on the matter of people who put their beliefs before their own lives, and your flawed conclusions about what that means about them.

[473geo]

Oh I don't......but those that had the courage of their convictions, rightly or wrongly, to sit infront of the military and risk their lives in unarmed and non violent protest to try and have a say in who runs the country.......well they deserve a little respect.......in my opinion

The only way any one of the red shirts involved in the 2010 riots could claim to have been protesting in a non violent way, is were they to have removed themselves from the red movement, and to have started their own movement, or to have just gone home, the moment they realised that they were standing amongst people who were protesting violently, upon realising that some of their leaders were advocating violence openly and publicly on the stage.

The moment you see members of your group using violence, the moment you hear your leaders advocating violence openly and publicly on the stage, and you don't remove yourself from support of that group, is the moment you become a part of those acts.

Plenty of people, including a lot on here i might add, ceased support of the PAD, the moment that they started taking things too far in the way they were protesting. Ceasing support need not mean you cease believing in the same things, but it does mean you take a stand against the way the group is trying to achieve their aims.

If there were any red shirts who took the same sort of decision, to remove themselves once they saw the ugly element within their ranks, well then these would be the red shirts for whom should be deserving of a little of your respect. Not the ones who stayed on to clap. Staying on to clap played a part in the deaths of 90 odd people.

Unfortunately history has shown that when a government decides to start shooting at their own people, creating live fire zones, violence escalates, and resolve appears to increase, perhaps deaths and injury to fellow protestors serve to remove a little of the perfect world ideology you offer above.You see up until the RTA surrounded the encampment there was isolated, sporadic violence, mostly outside the encampment where the peaceful protestors were located.

Edited September 2, 2012 by 473geo