philw Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) "........Try to understand that thousands upon thousands of people commit a crime, it is still a crime despite what they believe. And when some of them commit murder, that guilt is shared by all who do not immediately disassociate themselves and disclaim such acts. But how can they when they are urged by their leaders to commit violence? " Absolutely agree. When can we hope to see the army snipers charged with murder and brought before the court ??? And their officers incarcerated. Your comment is perfectly applicable to the RTA, would you not agree ? In court they should be. Snipers and officers. Edited October 23, 2012 by philw 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 "........Try to understand that thousands upon thousands of people commit a crime, it is still a crime despite what they believe. And when some of them commit murder, that guilt is shared by all who do not immediately disassociate themselves and disclaim such acts. But how can they when they are urged by their leaders to commit violence? " Absolutely agree. When can we hope to see the army snipers charged with murder and brought before the court ??? And their officers incarcerated. Your comment is perfectly applicable to the RTA, would you not agree ? In court they should be. Snipers and officers. Ah Phil, you see there is a difference between carrying out the legitimate orders of the government of the day and the illegal orders of the would-be dictator. If you need to have that explained, talk to your local PTP MP and I'm sure he will give good reasons why after 13 months in government, the only people facing criminal charges are "peaceful protesters". Oh, and Thaksin. He may even have a few charges of his own. I believe they are a status symbol for PTP, help you get an audience with master - let's face it, they get you a party list seat. Another Shinawatra exception - Yingluk had her charges dropped when they changed the definition of perjury. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 "a claim supported by an unnamed military source" has as much credibility as jatuporns claim by a military source. 0 I can see why you have a credibility problem... He has been publicly accused of keeping war weapons and ammunition in his house and he has claimed he trained former para-military rangers as a “people’s army” to protect red shirt leaders and their followers – a claim supported by an unnamed military source. "He (Kattiya) has claimed he (Kattiya, again) trained former para-military rangers as a “people’s army” to protect red shirt leaders and their followers" If you are going to come to the defense of bulsh#t providers, try harder. "He has been publicly accused of keeping war weapons and ammunition in his house" - "a claim supported by an unnamed military source" understand? saying that jatuporns claim from unnamed army sources has zero credibility is coming to his defence is it? my point was about unnamed sources, nothing more. ye all slur people about trolling... how is one to respond to sentences like "I can see why you have a credibility problem"? - that's rhetorical btw. too much rage around here, people should relax a bit. What this again proves is that to be a Red Shirt supporter one has to live in a bubble were no information that casts the movement in a bad light gets through. The rage, if you may call it like that, is from people willfully trying to rewrite history for the benefit of murderous terrorists. Something any person with a hint of morality should be inflamed about. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby nz Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 And the one who could positively identify the men in black was shot. So who had the most to gain by shooting him? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gemini81 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) "........Try to understand that thousands upon thousands of people commit a crime, it is still a crime despite what they believe. And when some of them commit murder, that guilt is shared by all who do not immediately disassociate themselves and disclaim such acts. But how can they when they are urged by their leaders to commit violence? " Absolutely agree. When can we hope to see the army snipers charged with murder and brought before the court ??? And their officers incarcerated. Your comment is perfectly applicable to the RTA, would you not agree ? In court they should be. Snipers and officers. They used every other means to dismiss the thugs. You're trying to reinvent the story and paint these bum rioters and money hungry low lives as innocent. The snipers ought to be charged for not picking off the whole lot of thugs and rogues behind those bamboo fences. Anywhere else around the globe, loads more would've taken down and rightfully so. Holding a sign and chanting is one thing, but we had just violence and looting hungry fools behind those silly bamboo fences.. They were told time and again to leave, and they certainly deserved what they got Now their families hit the jackpot with 7 million in attempt to get votes next campaign. Just how could you support a group like that if you have even an ounce of a basic education? Edited October 23, 2012 by gemini81 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 …the art of using troops is this: When ten to the enemy's one, surround him; When five times his strength, attack him; If double his strength, divide him… From Thaksins favourite book the art of war, that he often referred to back in the good old days before he fled. So here we have his boys trying to muddy the waters as to who were the red shirts armed force dressed in black. Of course a simple look at the youtube videos shows them to be absolutely a part of the red mob, and re-looking at Se Deangs speakings confirm that they were of course controlled by Thaksin. It is way out there in wacky conspiracy theory territory to suggest that the black shirts were a democrat party or army plant. Youtube wasnt available back 2200 or so years ago when Sun Tzu wrote his manual for winning a war, so the BS is easily disproved to any that choose to view. There were apparently 4 or 5 groups of MiB under their own commanders. Seh Daeng had his own group but had no control over the other groups, despite his boasts that he was "head of security". There was another group of obviously armed thugs that hung around in front of the 4 Seasons Hotel. Seh Daeng kept well away from them in his daily rounds to check security. They were all clearly on the red shirt side. Whether Thaksin had direct control over them is doubtful but it is more than likely that he personally approved the policy of using violence to provoke a reaction from the military, after his abject failure to do so the year before. There is nothing in his record that suggests he would ever shrink from using violence, or perhaps even revels in it, to get what he feels entitled to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Maybe we should rewrite American history too - strike 'freedom fighters' and replace 'terrorists' fighting the legal British government. Now you're talking. We Dutch had a similar problem with the legal Spanish Government. Mind you, I'm not sure that all this has any relation with k. Jatuporn testifying to the DSI that he has been told by someone else that the police drove MiB around I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. So, getting a hundred thousand people out to protest makes it acceptable kill a few people because you think a government made up of a majority of elected MPs is illegitimate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EarthAlien Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 It finally hit me today,... now I know who this guy reminds me of,- having very similar appearance and facial expression: Idi Amin Ugandan President and dictator of the 1970's bloody regime! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Maybe we should rewrite American history too - strike 'freedom fighters' and replace 'terrorists' fighting the legal British government. Now you're talking. We Dutch had a similar problem with the legal Spanish Government. Mind you, I'm not sure that all this has any relation with k. Jatuporn testifying to the DSI that he has been told by someone else that the police drove MiB around I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. 'the voice of the people', 'legitimacy in question'. Nice these absolutes, easy to apply to various voices and governments. Like the current government which legitimacy is questioned depending as it does on a fugitive criminal as attested by the voice of the people. Let's try to avoid this type of rhetoric as it doesn't help in discussions. Let's just have fun with the topic of k. Jatuporn testifying truthfully that a while ago he was told something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Maybe we should rewrite American history too - strike 'freedom fighters' and replace 'terrorists' fighting the legal British government. Now you're talking. We Dutch had a similar problem with the legal Spanish Government. Mind you, I'm not sure that all this has any relation with k. Jatuporn testifying to the DSI that he has been told by someone else that the police drove MiB around I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. So, getting a hundred thousand people out to protest makes it acceptable kill a few people because you think a government made up of a majority of elected MPs is illegitimate. I don't think you've quite got the grasp on elections - you're not allowed to vote yourself in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Maybe we should rewrite American history too - strike 'freedom fighters' and replace 'terrorists' fighting the legal British government. Now you're talking. We Dutch had a similar problem with the legal Spanish Government. Mind you, I'm not sure that all this has any relation with k. Jatuporn testifying to the DSI that he has been told by someone else that the police drove MiB around I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. So, getting a hundred thousand people out to protest makes it acceptable kill a few people because you think a government made up of a majority of elected MPs is illegitimate. I don't think you've quite got the grasp on elections - you're not allowed to vote yourself in. I don't think you understand the Westminster system. As I said, the government was made up of a majority of the elected MPs. Every MP in that government was elected by the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! No. Does that give an excuse to the red shirts to kill innocent people? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! No. Does that give an excuse to the red shirts to kill innocent people? I think the records stuck!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I take your point @rubl but I was just making a point that despite obvious wrongdoing and killing on both sides some people seem to think they can label certain people as terrorists. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the legitimacy of that government was certainly in question as attested by the voice of the people. So, getting a hundred thousand people out to protest makes it acceptable kill a few people because you think a government made up of a majority of elected MPs is illegitimate. I don't think you've quite got the grasp on elections - you're not allowed to vote yourself in. I don't think you understand the Westminster system. As I said, the government was made up of a majority of the elected MPs. Every MP in that government was elected by the people. I think you answered it yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! No. Does that give an excuse to the red shirts to kill innocent people? I think the records stuck!!! Yours? You seem to think that because the army wasn't perfect, it excuses everything the red shirts did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I don't think you've quite got the grasp on elections - you're not allowed to vote yourself in. I don't think you understand the Westminster system. As I said, the government was made up of a majority of the elected MPs. Every MP in that government was elected by the people. I think you answered it yourself How was the formation of the Abhisit government any different than any other? It was the PTP that went to parliament to elect a PM. They lost. Abhisit formed government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sysardman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! No. Does that give an excuse to the red shirts to kill innocent people? I think the records stuck!!! Yours? You seem to think that because the army wasn't perfect, it excuses everything the red shirts did. I think the records stuck!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 First we had k. Korkaew saying "a police officer had once told him" and then we have k. Jatuporn with "he learned from army sources". Now the questions, who's next and what will he have been told :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! No. Does that give an excuse to the red shirts to kill innocent people? Of course not, but out of curiosdity, how many innocent folks killed by the redshirts ?? And, does that give the army an excuse to kill and wound about 2600 innocent, unarmed people ?? Nurses ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickyknee Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I think the records stuck!!!Your comment made me think of a TISM song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Someone that calls the bombing of a busy skytrain station as "fair game" has no right to lecture people on what is or isn't terrorism. And the army was completely innocent I suppose!!!!! No. Does that give an excuse to the red shirts to kill innocent people? Of course not, but out of curiosdity, how many innocent folks killed by the redshirts ?? And, does that give the army an excuse to kill and wound about 2600 innocent, unarmed people ?? Nurses ??? All but one army/police casualties may be put on the red-shirts. How many army/police personel were wounded and whether or not these are included in the 2600 tally I do not know. To ask 'does that give the army an excuse' is trying to shift focus. The army had legal orders to clear a protest which wasn't really peaceful anymore, they could defend themselves legally, they could target armed suspects, they might be tempted to shoot before asking questions. Now the 'peaceful protesters' didn't have any legal right to be armed or even lob grenades. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 We were talking about war weapons found in the homes and cars of his and his associates. eh... no we weren't. that's just blatantly incorrect. read back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 What this again proves is that to be a Red Shirt supporter one has to live in a bubble were no information that casts the movement in a bad light gets through. The rage, if you may call it like that, is from people willfully trying to rewrite history for the benefit of murderous terrorists. Something any person with a hint of morality should be inflamed about. What this again proves is that to be a Red Shirt supporter one has to live in a bubble were no information that casts the movement in a bad light gets through. what's a word for projecting onto someone else exactly what you are yourself? (swapping red with yellow shirt supporter of course) it's just yet another baiting comment from yourself that you know isn't true and if you think it is truly how i look at things then you sir are the one living in the bubble of no information and probably very low oxygen. oh btw, the 'rage' is what we see on this forum with the constant spewing of hateful comments, it's obsessive, it's childish... no matter what the thread - thaksin will come in somewhere. any thread about yingluck, someone will mention shoe shopping or some other hilarious joke we've heard a thousand times before. it's not the attacks that annoy me, i enjoy them if they're funny even if i disagree or agree, it's the bloody repetitiveness... it's just boring. what's that saying about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? only thing is, it gets the same results every time, a lot of guffawing and high-fiving. take a long hard look at yourselves.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 First we had k. Korkaew saying "a police officer had once told him" and then we have k. Jatuporn with "he learned from army sources". Now the questions, who's next and what will he have been told :-) It'll be Barney The Dinosaur, he's purple and therefore neutral, he will start with the old tried and tested "we know a song about this don't we" and all the children will sing along, the production staff who are paid with money from the coffers of BtD, which originated from the children anyway, will of course support this applauding merrily along and point a 9mm at anyone who isn't enjoying the show. Yes it's me. Yes it's me. Yes it's me. Oh yes it's me. Suck it up like children. Yes it's me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickyknee Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 First we had k. Korkaew saying "a police officer had once told him" and then we have k. Jatuporn with "he learned from army sources". Now the questions, who's next and what will he have been told :-) It'll be Barney The Dinosaur, he's purple and therefore neutral, he will start with the old tried and tested "we know a song about this don't we" and all the children will sing along, the production staff who are paid with money from the coffers of BtD, which originated from the children anyway, will of course support this applauding merrily along and point a 9mm at anyone who isn't enjoying the show. Yes it's me. Yes it's me. Yes it's me. Oh yes it's me. Suck it up like children. Yes it's me. Barney the dinosaur? Not "meet the feebles"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 any thread about yingluck, someone will mention shoe shopping or some other hilarious joke we've heard a thousand times before. it's not the attacks that annoy me, i enjoy them if they're funny even if i disagree or agree, it's the bloody repetitiveness... it's just boring. Those comments exist for a reason, yes it is boring, but the only person that can change that is Yingluck. Prevent them by doing something worthwhile, maybe attending a meeting in parliament, maybe have an opinion that she though of on her own. If she starts to take some steps to actually fixing the inherent problems in Thai politics, I will be one of the first to applaud her, until that point in time, she is a Burrberry boot wearing Barbie doll who likes shopping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 any thread about yingluck, someone will mention shoe shopping or some other hilarious joke we've heard a thousand times before. it's not the attacks that annoy me, i enjoy them if they're funny even if i disagree or agree, it's the bloody repetitiveness... it's just boring. Those comments exist for a reason, yes it is boring, but the only person that can change that is Yingluck. Prevent them by doing something worthwhile, maybe attending a meeting in parliament, maybe have an opinion that she though of on her own. If she starts to take some steps to actually fixing the inherent problems in Thai politics, I will be one of the first to applaud her, until that point in time, she is a Burrberry boot wearing Barbie doll who likes shopping. i know you know she hasn't attended parliament enough, fair enough, no argument here. but do you even know what she has or hasn't done besides that? and i'm talking details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.jpg.a649cacedeeccbc218adc073bf668ef2.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now