Thai Democrats Ordered Use Of Snipers: Korkaew

[sysardman]

it seems many here are forgetting the crackdown weeks before near democracy (ironic isnt it) monument. I was refering to the tanks that were brought in there to clear a pieceful protest. I walked through that protest (on my way to Ko San) and saw absoulutely no weapons or "men in black" or anything else that would suggest anything but a peiceful protest. The next day I am seeing videos on youtube of unarmed people being shot in the head. The day after I went back and saw that burger king's front wall looked like swiss cheese, disabled tanks on the street and 10's of protestor coffins surronding the monument.

I have trouble understanding how people can hate Taksin soo much that they are willing to overlook blatent crimes against humanity such as these. For the record, I am not a fan of Taksin, my ideology falls closer with the yellow shirts but they give all capitalist a bad name when they do such things.

Unfortunately, when a Thaksin apologist claims that they are not a fan of Thaksin and that they are merely telling the truth, they often give themselves away with the deliberate misspelling of Thaksin's name to correspond with the historical figure King Taksin. The royalist pretension (read absolutist). Maybe in this case also claiming to be a yellow shirt supporter (pull the other one) they think that they will get a more sympathetic hearing on the TV website. For those who were around in 2010 there was a veritable boiler room of invented red supporters pushing the red line. The trouble is they all left a rather silly calling card and the 'Taksin' spelling is this one. As for the 'I saw a peaceful protest and I saw tanks', just fits in with the fictional stories put out by these people.

ummm, i honestly did not "deliberately misspell" THaksin's name; and I am also not a yellow supporter, I simply said my ideology is closer to theirs (yellow). I am not for universal health care, high minimum wages, farming subsidies or any of the other reasons people support Thaksin (and no, he never game me money either). I reject these concepts in the USA, and I dont think they are helpful in the advancement of the Thai economy.

As someone who believes in capitalism (true capitalism, not the fictional stuff in most of the west) I believe that incidents like this give capitalism a bad name (and democracy for that matter). There may have been an element on the fringe within the reds that were not as peaceful although it did not start up until after the government started with its threats and intimidation. After all, they were protesting that 3 of their governments had been thrown out of office and the opposition (to them) installed undemocratically.

In ANY case, there is never cause for an army to fire live rounds into protesters. Sorry, that will never change in my mind. I dont care if a few of them did have weapons (which we could argue the who, what, where for many years) governments should never use their military against its own people, period! I certainly dont remember the army marching in on the airport when the yellows did their little sit in (rightfully so I might add).

Bogus from beginning to end. The suggestion that the reds were peaceful until fired upon is a blatant lie.

And not surprising when another fake is injected that an elected government was overthrown (not true) and replaced by the opposition (also not true)

And then we have the 'I don't care if a few of them have weapons'. That would be the few no doubt who were fully supported by the speakers urging the burning down of Bangkok applauded by the supporters waving their kids on the barricades and the supporters trying to set light to a petrol tanker or maybe the supporters setting fire to local town halls.

The whole diatribe a paeon to Thaksin. No relationship whatsoever to actual events. Another Che wannabe though this time in the bizarre camouflage of a pro-capitalist T-shirt.

Yo! Come to Thailand and reinvent yourself as a hero. Not.

Take a chill pill mate - did they burn your soapbox!!!! The Reds won, truth and justice prevailed, why the belly aching. If you're from the west then go shout at real terrorists like George Bush and Tony Blair.

[sysardman]

You can borrow this one:

The problem I'm having the Red knockers arguments is they keep posting videos that back up my claim:

I suggested the Army had the where-with-all to eliminate the Black shirts without indiscriminate shooting at civilians but I was met by 'well they were hiding behind protesters' and yet in this video it shows them clearly apart from the crowd. I also mentioned that if the army had spotters then it was hard to miss the muzzle flashes - well all the so-called weapon experts (subscribers to Gun Monthly) said you know nothing of weapons they were probably supressed - well in that video if that weapon was supressed he needs to cut down the chilli in his Som Tam. Finally I was scoffed at about soldiers on the BTS and yet here they all are lined up in the video.

[yoshiwara]

Bogus from beginning to end. The suggestion that the reds were peaceful until fired upon is a blatant lie.

And not surprising when another fake is injected that an elected government was overthrown (not true) and replaced by the opposition (also not true)

And then we have the 'I don't care if a few of them have weapons'. That would be the few no doubt who were fully supported by the speakers urging the burning down of Bangkok applauded by the supporters waving their kids on the barricades and the supporters trying to set light to a petrol tanker or maybe the supporters setting fire to local town halls.

The whole diatribe a paeon to Thaksin. No relationship whatsoever to actual events. Another Che wannabe though this time in the bizarre camouflage of a pro-capitalist T-shirt.

Yo! Come to Thailand and reinvent yourself as a hero. Not.

Take a chill pill mate - did they burn your soapbox!!!! The Reds won, truth and justice prevailed, why the belly aching. If you're from the west then go shout at real terrorists like George Bush and Tony Blair.

Top political analysis from the People's Popular Front for the Liberation of the Khao San Road.

The reds won? They don't think so. Did the reds run in the last election? I don't think so.

Not until Thaksin is back in the saddle and captures state power will these crazies think they have won.

[yoshiwara]

You can borrow this one:

The problem I'm having the Red knockers arguments is they keep posting videos that back up my claim:

I suggested the Army had the where-with-all to eliminate the Black shirts without indiscriminate shooting at civilians but I was met by 'well they were hiding behind protesters' and yet in this video it shows them clearly apart from the crowd. I also mentioned that if the army had spotters then it was hard to miss the muzzle flashes - well all the so-called weapon experts (subscribers to Gun Monthly) said you know nothing of weapons they were probably supressed - well in that video if that weapon was supressed he needs to cut down the chilli in his Som Tam. Finally I was scoffed at about soldiers on the BTS and yet here they all are lined up in the video.

You have many problems and make strange suggestions that might be resolved foremost by a visit to the opticians, but I suspect a more mendacious outlook is behind the deliberate distortions.

Delusions of leading Thaksin's ideological rebuttal unit room might be at hand.

[philw]

Some interesting but flawed viewpoints being put forward by the anti-democracy supporters.

However these people should take note of the thai peoples verdict on all this, the very same thai people who saw their democratically elected government couped, and military law imposed upon them, then through the military assaults on peaceful protestors, at the asean conference, and bangkok rallies. .

Their verdict was a resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide election victory for the democratic elements of society

What abisit, the dems, the PAD , etc stand for was completely rejected at the ballot box..

Always interesting that those who call themselves Truth continue to peddle the same untruths when they know them to be so.

There was of course no elected government in power at the time of the coup.

Thaksin had overrun his term of office. he was no longer the elected PM.

As for the violent red thugs at both the ASEAN conference in 2009 and the assault on Bangkok in 2010, the re-iteration of the peaceful red agenda is really not on.

As is the claim of landslide victory. As is the claim that electoral success trumps the real truth, which is that the reds have blood on their hands.

The peaceful reds is the sham story. Can't bury that one, however hard they try.

The elected "peaceful reds" are now successfully running the country, are they not ??

Peacefully.

Edited October 23, 2012 by philw

[philw]

Delusions of leading Thaksin's ideological rebuttal unit room might be at hand.

Love it...............

The RTA under the aegis of AV's government shot Thai citizens in the head.

Got it ??

Or all the red Marxist hordes from Issan coming to turn to golf courses into farang grave yards ??

[metisdead]

A nonsense post has been removed.

[yoshiwara]

Some interesting but flawed viewpoints being put forward by the anti-democracy supporters.

However these people should take note of the thai peoples verdict on all this, the very same thai people who saw their democratically elected government couped, and military law imposed upon them, then through the military assaults on peaceful protestors, at the asean conference, and bangkok rallies. .

Their verdict was a resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide election victory for the democratic elements of society

What abisit, the dems, the PAD , etc stand for was completely rejected at the ballot box..

Always interesting that those who call themselves Truth continue to peddle the same untruths when they know them to be so.

There was of course no elected government in power at the time of the coup.

Thaksin had overrun his term of office. he was no longer the elected PM.

As for the violent red thugs at both the ASEAN conference in 2009 and the assault on Bangkok in 2010, the re-iteration of the peaceful red agenda is really not on.

As is the claim of landslide victory. As is the claim that electoral success trumps the real truth, which is that the reds have blood on their hands.

The peaceful reds is the sham story. Can't bury that one, however hard they try.

The elected "peaceful reds" are now successfully running the country, are they not ??

Peacefully.

No they are not. It is an alliance of PT with other parties. There are some reds in the government.

However some may dream of a red government led by that old Stalinist hack Thida Thavornseth.

And Thaksin attempts to control his different onion layers. But no it is not an elected red shirt government.

But like most Thaksin apologists you like to muddy the waters.

[yoshiwara]

Delusions of leading Thaksin's ideological rebuttal unit room might be at hand.

Love it...............

The RTA under the aegis of AV's government shot Thai citizens in the head.

Got it ??

Or all the red Marxist hordes from Issan coming to turn to golf courses into farang grave yards ??

There are two things I have got. One is that the reds were a violent movement under the behest of Thaksin in 2010. And armed.

And second, is that the hordes from Issan have no relationship whatsoever with Marxism. Marx and Lenin very clear on the distinction between the proletariat and the peasantry.

If you want to see the 2010 events in class terms, then look on it as an attack on the livelihoods of the Bangkok working class organised by a split in the ruling class (Thaksin) using petty-bourgeois and declasse elements (Jatuporn et al) and with the strategic alliance of the northern landowners. As for the agricultural workers, no land reforms for them, just 500 baht a day for a week's outing...

Irrespective of the class war verbiage from the reds and the rotten remnants of the Thai Stalinist Communist Party. the reds are ideologically junk from top to bottom. Marxist? Not for one minute.

[jayboy]

Delusions of leading Thaksin's ideological rebuttal unit room might be at hand.

Love it...............

The RTA under the aegis of AV's government shot Thai citizens in the head.

Got it ??

Or all the red Marxist hordes from Issan coming to turn to golf courses into farang grave yards ??

There are two things I have got. One is that the reds were a violent movement under the behest of Thaksin in 2010. And armed.

And second, is that the hordes from Issan have no relationship whatsoever with Marxism. Marx and Lenin very clear on the distinction between the proletariat and the peasantry.

If you want to see the 2010 events in class terms, then look on it as an attack on the livelihoods of the Bangkok working class organised by a split in the ruling class (Thaksin) using petty-bourgeois and declasse elements (Jatuporn et al) and with the strategic alliance of the northern landowners. As for the agricultural workers, no land reforms for them, just 500 baht a day for a week's outing...

Irrespective of the class war verbiage from the reds and the rotten remnants of the Thai Stalinist Communist Party. the reds are ideologically junk from top to bottom. Marxist? Not for one minute.

You seem to have difficulty in distinguishing between Marxist theory and Marxist tools of analysis, so sadly confused in your last post.I doubt whether you are familiar with Alexander Pope but I would commend to you the following:

A little learning is a dangerous thing

Drink deep, or taste not the Pieran spring;

There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,

And drinking largely sobers us again.

Edited October 23, 2012 by jayboy

[sysardman]

Fimally exposed - the terrorist guns for hire team: The real MiB

Edited October 23, 2012 by sysardman

[rubl]

There are two things I have got. One is that the reds were a violent movement under the behest of Thaksin in 2010. And armed.

And second, is that the hordes from Issan have no relationship whatsoever with Marxism. Marx and Lenin very clear on the distinction between the proletariat and the peasantry.

If you want to see the 2010 events in class terms, then look on it as an attack on the livelihoods of the Bangkok working class organised by a split in the ruling class (Thaksin) using petty-bourgeois and declasse elements (Jatuporn et al) and with the strategic alliance of the northern landowners. As for the agricultural workers, no land reforms for them, just 500 baht a day for a week's outing...

Irrespective of the class war verbiage from the reds and the rotten remnants of the Thai Stalinist Communist Party. the reds are ideologically junk from top to bottom. Marxist? Not for one minute.

You seem to have difficulty in distinguishing between Marxist theory and Marxist tools of analysis, so sadly confused in your last post.I doubt whether you are familiar with Alexander Pope but I would commend to you the following:

A little learning is a dangerous thing

Drink deep, or taste not the Pieran spring;

There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,

And drinking largely sobers us again.

The problem with people educated in one of England's great universities (no, not Hull) is the use of rhetoric to confuse lesser beings. The 'better to attack than to defend' seems part of the education as well.

As for Alexander Pope, well ever popular to quote him. Wiki says he is the third-most frequently quoted writer in The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, after Shakespeare and Tennyson ( http://en.wikipedia..../Alexander_Pope )

Maybe he got (even) more popular after being mentioned in the (somewhat nationalistic) television series Sharpe, specifically the episode "Sharpe's Enemy"

Now warm in love, now withering in my bloom,

Lost in a convent's solitary gloom!

[TruthEyes]

Some interesting but flawed viewpoints being put forward by the anti-democracy supporters.

However these people should take note of the thai peoples verdict on all this, the very same thai people who saw their democratically elected government couped, and military law imposed upon them, then through the military assaults on peaceful protestors, at the asean conference, and bangkok rallies. .

Their verdict was a resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide election victory for the democratic elements of society

What abisit, the dems, the PAD , etc stand for was completely rejected at the ballot box..

"resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide"

When was that ? I recall PTP in July-2011 as being 48.4% of the 75%-ish who voted, and most of them were looking for the immediate nation-wide B300/day minimum-wage, which they're still waiting for, or their free laptop, which they're still waiting for, etcetera ?

I believe you are trying to soft-land the total and utter rejection of the undemocratic elements at work in thai politics.

Let me summarise for you " 265 to 159".

[yoshiwara]

Some interesting but flawed viewpoints being put forward by the anti-democracy supporters.

However these people should take note of the thai peoples verdict on all this, the very same thai people who saw their democratically elected government couped, and military law imposed upon them, then through the military assaults on peaceful protestors, at the asean conference, and bangkok rallies. .

Their verdict was a resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide election victory for the democratic elements of society

What abisit, the dems, the PAD , etc stand for was completely rejected at the ballot box..

"resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide"

When was that ? I recall PTP in July-2011 as being 48.4% of the 75%-ish who voted, and most of them were looking for the immediate nation-wide B300/day minimum-wage, which they're still waiting for, or their free laptop, which they're still waiting for, etcetera ?

I believe you are trying to soft-land the total and utter rejection of the undemocratic elements at work in thai politics.

Let me summarise for you " 265 to 159".

The undemocratic element of this government is the sight of government ministers going overseas to kiss hands with Thaksin.

They have to lie and deny they are discussing political decision-making with a wanted criminal.

The election vote, believe it or not, is not a vote for an elected dictatorship. That is why elected MPS have to declare a loyalty oath.

Nor is a government absolved from criticism or even being removed from office in the event of wrong-doing.

Election is not a 'get-out-of-jail' card, though it appears to be the last refuge of Thaksin apologists when they have run out arguments.

Which is about now in your case.

[jayboy]

Some interesting but flawed viewpoints being put forward by the anti-democracy supporters.

However these people should take note of the thai peoples verdict on all this, the very same thai people who saw their democratically elected government couped, and military law imposed upon them, then through the military assaults on peaceful protestors, at the asean conference, and bangkok rallies. .

Their verdict was a resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide election victory for the democratic elements of society

What abisit, the dems, the PAD , etc stand for was completely rejected at the ballot box..

"resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide"

When was that ? I recall PTP in July-2011 as being 48.4% of the 75%-ish who voted, and most of them were looking for the immediate nation-wide B300/day minimum-wage, which they're still waiting for, or their free laptop, which they're still waiting for, etcetera ?

I believe you are trying to soft-land the total and utter rejection of the undemocratic elements at work in thai politics.

Let me summarise for you " 265 to 159".

The undemocratic element of this government is the sight of government ministers going overseas to kiss hands with Thaksin.

They have to lie and deny they are discussing political decision-making with a wanted criminal.

The election vote, believe it or not, is not a vote for an elected dictatorship. That is why elected MPS have to declare a loyalty oath.

Nor is a government absolved from criticism or even being removed from office in the event of wrong-doing.

Election is not a 'get-out-of-jail' card, though it appears to be the last refuge of Thaksin apologists when they have run out arguments.

Which is about now in your case.

Nobody would disagree that the current situation is unsatisfactory with Thaksin in exile and facing charges.We know that the unelected elite establishment is split with some particularly in the military wishing to do a deal.My hunch is that this would involve Thaksin serving some brief time in prison.His planet sized ego probably rules that course out however though in my opinion it could be quite a savvy move, even savvier if he had returned to face the music much earlier.From a human point of view one can understand his objection to being punished while arguably more serious alleged offences by Abhisit, Suthep et al go unpunished.It is interesting why some are so opposed to a compromise when it would be so obviously in the interests of the country.

The post quoted illustrates the real agenda.Thakin, Taksin, Tak Sin (<deleted>) is the subject of this group's obsessive interest.The rhetoric is insanely directed at undermining the legitimacy of elections - elected dictatorship etc - much like the objections to democracy in a 1950's Latin American banana republic.Actually one has some sympathy with the proposition that general elections are only part of the democratic process.However the main message one takes is the visceral hatred of the Thai majority achieving power and influence, and the determination to roll back democratic advances, ugly sentiments but sanitised by keeping the demon Thaksin in the foreground.The irony is that due to an almost complete lack of enlightened self interest the reactionaries will not only lose their case but be the cause of the institiutions they most value being weakened - which will certainly be to Thailand's disadvantage..The ignorance and folly of it is staggering.

Edited October 24, 2012 by jayboy

[whybother]

Nobody would disagree that the current situation is unsatisfactory with Thaksin in exile and facing charges.We know that the unelected elite establishment is split with some particularly in the military wishing to do a deal.My hunch is that this would involve Thaksin serving some brief time in prison.His planet sized ego probably rules that course out however though in my opinion it could be quite a savvy move, even savvier if he had returned to face the music much earlier.From a human point of view one can understand his objection to being punished while arguably more serious alleged offences by Abhisit, Suthep et al go unpunished.It is interesting why some are so opposed to a compromise when it would be so obviously in the interests of the country.

<snip>

The only "compromise" that seems to be coming from the Thaksin/PTP/red side is a complete white wash of Thaksin's crimes.

That's NOT a compromise.

[jayboy]

The only "compromise" that seems to be coming from the Thaksin/PTP/red side is a complete white wash of Thaksin's crimes.

That's NOT a compromise.

I don't suppose either of us is on the inside track here but surely it doesn't make sense to think of monolithic blocks.However, with this caveat, my understanding there is obstinacy on both sides.It's further complicated since as in any negotiation, nobody wishes to make concessions prematurely.I do understand that powerful elements in the military and feudal circles want to do a deal, but have been stymied by more hardline elements.

Thaksin's position is inscrutable.He has already received back a large part of his confiscated dosh, but I'm guessing this is not the driving factor.His sister is in power and his party looks unassailable.So a more philosophical guy might think he had all but won.Personally I don't much care.

[Ricardo]

Some interesting but flawed viewpoints being put forward by the anti-democracy supporters.

However these people should take note of the thai peoples verdict on all this, the very same thai people who saw their democratically elected government couped, and military law imposed upon them, then through the military assaults on peaceful protestors, at the asean conference, and bangkok rallies. .

Their verdict was a resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide election victory for the democratic elements of society

What abisit, the dems, the PAD , etc stand for was completely rejected at the ballot box..

"resounding, overwhelming, historic, landslide"

When was that ? I recall PTP in July-2011 as being 48.4% of the 75%-ish who voted, and most of them were looking for the immediate nation-wide B300/day minimum-wage, which they're still waiting for, or their free laptop, which they're still waiting for, etcetera ?

I believe you are trying to soft-land the total and utter rejection of the undemocratic elements at work in thai politics.

Let me summarise for you " 265 to 159".

"total and utter rejection"

Would surely mean zero seats, for the Dems, or at least no more than a handful, not the 159 they did get ? In fact 235 seats were for non-PTP/Red-Shirt parties, some of which later did the usual, and joined the governing-coalition.

I do agree that PTP, by making some pretty-attractive (and mostly unkept) pre-election promises, and by running an attractive Poster-Girl candidate for PM, got a slight-majority in the election and were thus correctly able to form the current government.

I'd also agree that they're currently the largest single party in parliament, and clearly represent a significant proportion or the electorate, albeit only in certain parts of the country. The Dems similarly represent a significant portion of the electorate, in other parts of the country.

Which is why I reject your assertions of "resounding, historic, overwhelming, landslide" or now "total and utter", which are just plain wrong, and go way beyond what was actually achieved. No need to exaggerate your case in such a silly way. It is self-defeating.

I'd also suggest that if a maximum street-presence of a hundred-thousand 'peaceful-protesters' feel that they can demand and get an existing elected-government to resign, then there are clearly some fairly 'undemocratic elements at work', on the Red-Shirt side too.

Let alone when someone brings armed-men into the conflict, to stir up trouble, something which certainly didn't harm their cause at the next election. That's just too too cynical for me to swallow.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Ricardo

[rixalex]

Have you seen the Youtube video with the Redshirt flag waver getting the top of his head removed by a sniper - don't tell me a flag is now an offensive weapon.

If he was shot by someone from the red side, it wouldn't matter what he was waving, as he was simply being used as a sacrificial lamb to increase tension and pressure on the government. I don't know that he was shot by the red side, but i don't know that he wasn't. And nor do you. So what is your point?

are you listening to yourself? your implying they were killing themselves to make a point

No doubt. Retarded theory. I am amazed that people could buy into such a theory. Passion and politics blind one to common sense and reality.

Don't just claim something is a retarded theory without explaining why. I come here for debate and enjoy doing so with people who have a different opinion to me. But it's not debating when you ridicule something but give no reason why. If the idea is so retarded, come on then, let's hear why... i'm all ears.

[rixalex]

From a human point of view one can understand his objection to being punished while arguably more serious alleged offences by Abhisit, Suthep et al go unpunished.

Arguably more serious alleged offences by Abhisit?

The most serious alleged offence i can think of regarding Abhisit would be relating to his involvement in the 2010 crackdown. No doubting or questioning the seriousness of that alleged offence, just wondering how you think it can be argued as being more serious than some of Thaksin's alleged crimes?

[jayboy]

From a human point of view one can understand his objection to being punished while arguably more serious alleged offences by Abhisit, Suthep et al go unpunished.

Arguably more serious alleged offences by Abhisit?

The most serious alleged offence i can think of regarding Abhisit would be relating to his involvement in the 2010 crackdown. No doubting or questioning the seriousness of that alleged offence, just wondering how you think it can be argued as being more serious than some of Thaksin's alleged crimes?

The most serious alleged offence you can think of relations to Abhisit's direct involvement as Prime Minister in the murder of unarmed Thais and foreigners on the streets of Bangkok.(You forgot to mention the last part)

Thaksin could have avoided many of the charges of against him if he had put in place a blind trust (of the type Romney will institute if he wins).We know also froom Wikileaks and elsewhere that even though the charges against Thaksin are relatively trivial, the establishment was out to nail him on any pretext.Some of the charges like the lottery action are just plain ridiculous.This is why no country took the terrorist Kasit's calls for extradition seriously - obviously politically motivated.None of this suggests that Thaksin isn't corrupt and unfit for purpose, but his crimes are not in the same league as those alleged of Abhisit.The latter would in some jurisdictions if proved warrant the death penalty, Thaksin's in contrast if proved a short stretch inside.

[rixalex]

The most serious alleged offence you can think of relations to Abhisit's direct involvement as Prime Minister in the murder of unarmed Thais and foreigners on the streets of Bangkok.(You forgot to mention the last part)

Seems to me there was a much more glaringly obvious piece of missing information that you somehow forgot to mention in your little precis of Thaksin's alleged crimes.

[jayboy]

The most serious alleged offence you can think of relations to Abhisit's direct involvement as Prime Minister in the murder of unarmed Thais and foreigners on the streets of Bangkok.(You forgot to mention the last part)

Seems to me there was a much more glaringly obvious piece of missing information that you somehow forgot to mention in your little precis of Thaksin's alleged crimes.

Huh? I didn't give a précis of his crimes,just an example of a particularly silly charge.

I have no idea of what you think I forgot.If you tell me I will respond.

[rixalex]

The most serious alleged offence you can think of relations to Abhisit's direct involvement as Prime Minister in the murder of unarmed Thais and foreigners on the streets of Bangkok.(You forgot to mention the last part)

Seems to me there was a much more glaringly obvious piece of missing information that you somehow forgot to mention in your little precis of Thaksin's alleged crimes.

Huh? I didn't give a précis of his crimes,just an example of a particularly silly charge.

If you can't think for yourself of an alleged crime that has been made against Thaksin more serious than the examples you offered, i think there is little point continuing this discussion.

[jayboy]

The most serious alleged offence you can think of relations to Abhisit's direct involvement as Prime Minister in the murder of unarmed Thais and foreigners on the streets of Bangkok.(You forgot to mention the last part)

Seems to me there was a much more glaringly obvious piece of missing information that you somehow forgot to mention in your little precis of Thaksin's alleged crimes.

Huh? I didn't give a précis of his crimes,just an example of a particularly silly charge.

If you can't think for yourself of an alleged crime that has been made against Thaksin more serious than the examples you offered, i think there is little point continuing this discussion.

I'm not trying to provoke but I'm genuinely puzzled.Do you mean the drugs war during his premiership, although he has never been charged with that?

[AleG]

The most serious alleged offence you can think of relations to Abhisit's direct involvement as Prime Minister in the murder of unarmed Thais and foreigners on the streets of Bangkok.(You forgot to mention the last part)

Thaksin could have avoided many of the charges of against him if he had put in place a blind trust (of the type Romney will institute if he wins).We know also froom Wikileaks and elsewhere that even though the charges against Thaksin are relatively trivial, the establishment was out to nail him on any pretext.Some of the charges like the lottery action are just plain ridiculous.This is why no country took the terrorist Kasit's calls for extradition seriously - obviously politically motivated.None of this suggests that Thaksin isn't corrupt and unfit for purpose, but his crimes are not in the same league as those alleged of Abhisit.The latter would in some jurisdictions if proved warrant the death penalty, Thaksin's in contrast if proved a short stretch inside.

Conversely, no one that calls Kasit a terrorist should be taken seriously.

[jayboy]

Normally those who illegally participate in the seizure of installations such as airports are known as terrorists.I'm not tied to this term however and would equally be happy with "absurd plonker"

Edited October 24, 2012 by jayboy

[rixalex]

I'm not trying to provoke but I'm genuinely puzzled.Do you mean the drugs war during his premiership, although he has never been charged with that?

What has being charged got to with what crimes he (or Abhisit) is alleged to have committed?

To recap, you stated that Abhisit's alleged crimes were arguably more serious than Thaksin's alleged crimes.

So what is it? You think that Thaksin isn't alleged to have been involved in the deaths of thousands of innocent people, or you think he is, but those deaths, though in far far greater number, were somehow less serious?

[AleG]

Normally those who illegally participate in the seizure of installations such as airports are known as terrorists.

...

No, they are not.

Terrorism is the widespread use of terror to achieve a goal. For example threatening to burn down the capital of a country unless the demands of a group are met. But you don't call those people terrorists, do you?

[rubl]

Normally those who illegally participate in the seizure of installations such as airports are known as terrorists.I'm not tied to this term however and would equally be happy with "absurd plonker"

For someone who likes to belittle others on their use of the English language you write interesting constructions. I mean, can one 'legally' participate in the seizure of installations such as airports ?