Abhisit: I Will Fight Charge, Accept Any Outcome

[webfact]

2010 POLITICAL VIOLENCE

I'll fight charge, accept any outcome: Abhisit

The Nation

File photo : Abhisit

BANGKOK: -- Former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has told the British Broadcasting Corporation he will fight to clear his name of a murder charge levelled against him in connection with the political riots in 2010, adding that he will accept the court's verdict, even if it sentences him to death.

He said that while his side of the country's political divide allowed justice to take its course, former premier Thaksin Shinawatra and the ruling politicians are pushing for a new law to grant themselves amnesty.

"I will accept any verdict, even if it brings the death penalty. I will prove my innocence in court, and if the court for whatever reason renders a guilty verdict, I will accept it," he said.

"I'm asking the former prime minister and members of this government to do the same, because they're always looking to find a way to pass a bill to grant themselves amnesty."

In an exclusive interview shown on the BBC on Monday night, Abhisit tried to explain that the violence occurred when armed protesters fired grenades and did acts of terror in the middle of Bangkok.

"We tried to negotiate with the protesters, and they wouldn't accept any of the deals that we offered them," he said. "Unfortunately we were facing a situation where they occupied the middle of the city... It was our duty to restore order, and that's what we were trying to do."

Thousands of red shirts began street protests in Bangkok in mid-March 2010, a little over a week after a court seized Bt46 billion in assets from Thaksin, found to have been obtained improperly.

The red mob called for Abhisit's government to step down, occupied Ratchaprasong business district and adjacent areas, setting up barricades and paralysing the city centre between mid-April and May 2010. Ninety-one people were killed in bids to crackdown on the protesters and end days of rioting.

Abhisit, the Democrat leader and now opposition leader, will go to the Department of Special Investigation tomorrow to hear the murder charge, along with senior Democrat Suthep Thaugsuban, who served as deputy prime minister in Abhisit's government, according to party spokesman Chavanond Intarakomalyasut.

"[Abhisit] will not run away. He will fight through the justice system," Chavanond said yesterday.

Abhisit and Suthep are the first officials to face charges over the deaths caused by the crackdown. The DSI filed the murder charge after the Criminal Court found that a taxi driver was killed by a "high-velocity bullet", supposedly fired from a military weapon.

The Democrat leader told the BBC that some protesters had stolen weapons from the military.

Abhisit said that although his government authorised the use of live ammunition, the instructions were clear as to how and under what circumstance soldiers could use it.

"First of all, it was self defence. It was about preventing possible loss to other people, and they [the military] must use [such power] with extreme care," he said.

Meanwhile, red-shirt leader Natthawut Saikua, who is now a deputy commerce minister, yesterday urged Thaksin's red-shirt supporters not to gather at the DSI when Abhisit and Suthep show up tomorrow. He said the presence of red shirts could be viewed as an attempt to pressure the authorities to act in a certain way.

-- The Nation 2012-12-12

[righteous]

>This is a typical ploy of Abhisit - trying to change the conversation. Whenever challenged about the 90+ deaths at R'song, he starts talking about "Men in Black". In this case, trying to re-direct the conversation about his legal status to "amnesty". Nothing to do with his predicament.

>It is true, the protesters occupied the middle of the city, and he felt compelled to restore order. But who was restoring order after the 2006 coup, an occupation of the country, which precipitated all of it. The disconnect between these two events is another 'change of conversation' by him, when seeking to link the protests with Thaksin assets seizure. The 2010 event was a coup-election thing. The so-called negotiation that wasn't, wasn't about 'assets', but about election timing.

>I think the term 'crackdown' is overused and does not describe historical reality. It implies legitimate use of State Power, when a political solution was easy, and hence rendered use of force illegitimate. There is never talk about a 'crackdown' on those who perpetrated a coup.

Edited December 11, 2012 by righteous

[taff33]

Abhisit stand up and be counted 'like a man',and if there is any justice in Thailand,get ready to pack your bags for a long holiday.

[Rich teacher]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

[Thait Spot]

>This is a typical ploy of Abhisit - trying to change the conversation. Whenever challenged about the 90+ deaths at R'song, he starts talking about "Men in Black". In this case, trying to re-direct the conversation about his legal status to "amnesty". Nothing to do with his predicament.

>It is true, the protesters occupied the middle of the city, and he felt compelled to restore order. But who was restoring order after the 2006 coup, an occupation of the country, which precipitated all of it. The disconnect between these two events is another 'change of conversation' by him, when seeking to link the protests with Thaksin assets seizure. The 2010 event was a coup-election thing. The so-called negotiation that wasn't, wasn't about 'assets', but about election timing.

>I think the term 'crackdown' is overused and does not describe historical reality. It implies legitimate use of State Power, when a political solution was easy, and hence rendered use of force illegitimate. There is never talk about a 'crackdown' on those who perpetrated a coup.

Its pretty clear you didn't see the interview. As usual your comments are made without knowledge.

[Thait Spot]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

You mean it would show Thaksin in an even more demeaning light

[Siripon]

>This is a typical ploy of Abhisit - trying to change the conversation. Whenever challenged about the 90+ deaths at R'song, he starts talking about "Men in Black". In this case, trying to re-direct the conversation about his legal status to "amnesty". Nothing to do with his predicament.

>It is true, the protesters occupied the middle of the city, and he felt compelled to restore order. But who was restoring order after the 2006 coup, an occupation of the country, which precipitated all of it. The disconnect between these two events is another 'change of conversation' by him, when seeking to link the protests with Thaksin assets seizure. The 2010 event was a coup-election thing. The so-called negotiation that wasn't, wasn't about 'assets', but about election timing.

>I think the term 'crackdown' is overused and does not describe historical reality. It implies legitimate use of State Power, when a political solution was easy, and hence rendered use of force illegitimate. There is never talk about a 'crackdown' on those who perpetrated a coup.

The occupation at Rachaprasong occured just 2 months after the court seized half of Thaksin's 84 billion baht.I suggest the two are related.

Apisit is a brave and articulate man.Compare his actions to the cowardly Thaksin,always running away, hiding in shopping malls when violence occured by his foot soldiers.

Not directly related but I do wonder when Chalerm,'there is no terrorism in Thailand' Youbamrung will resign.Did he not read about the two Buddhist teachers gunned down 2 days ago whilst their Muslim colleagues were left unharmed?

[fareastguy]

PTP can smell a backfire on the way.. keeping the reds away from court so as not to give the impression that this is another manipulated outcome.

Abhisit & Co will have their day in court (unlike someone else) they will prove their actions as leaders of the government at the time& cannot be held accountable for the death of a bystander by a stray bullet.

After they are acquitted I wonder what PTP's next ploy will be ??

[DP25]

After they are acquitted I wonder what PTP's next ploy will be ??

Give the next judge a bigger box of 'doughnuts', or threaten him and his family with the red mob

[sirchai]

Here's a guy WITH a brain...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/video/7478

[chainarong]

We've got this charge coming up, which is all very well ,unless Abhisit was there personally running the operation, can't see this going very far,another planned diversion by the government, however, what happened to the charges and accusations, some from the UN, against the former strong man Thaksin , on who's watch, murders and the disappearance of people suspected of drugs involvement, that ran into the thousands, any court cases penciled in for him

[jonclark]

>This is a typical ploy of Abhisit - trying to change the conversation. Whenever challenged about the 90+ deaths at R'song, he starts talking about "Men in Black". In this case, trying to re-direct the conversation about his legal status to "amnesty". Nothing to do with his predicament.

>It is true, the protesters occupied the middle of the city, and he felt compelled to restore order. But who was restoring order after the 2006 coup, an occupation of the country, which precipitated all of it. The disconnect between these two events is another 'change of conversation' by him, when seeking to link the protests with Thaksin assets seizure. The 2010 event was a coup-election thing. The so-called negotiation that wasn't, wasn't about 'assets', but about election timing.

>I think the term 'crackdown' is overused and does not describe historical reality. It implies legitimate use of State Power, when a political solution was easy, and hence rendered use of force illegitimate. There is never talk about a 'crackdown' on those who perpetrated a coup.

You know people always try to link 2006, with the events of 2010 as if there is a direct correlation, there were two governments and 1 election between those dates. Why is that always over looked as if it had no bearing on the coup - riot link, perhaps the intervening 4 years were a dream?

What of the failures of the Samak government?

What of the failure of the Somchai government?

Because lets be honest, these two governments were weak puppet governments led by low quality minister and individuals that made countless awful decisions and it was that consistent poor judgement and leadership which ultimately led to their disbandment and the installing of the dems at the helm.

What where those poor decisions?

Samak - broke the conflict of interest law - replaced by Somcahi Wongsawat (PPP)

Yongyuth Tiyapairt - House speaker and member of PPP executive who was caught on VDO paying Chaing Rai officals 20'000 baht to campaign on behalf of PPP (vote buying) as a member of the executive as he knew his actions if caught would result in the disbandment of PPP.

Maybe if PPP hadn't tried to buy votes and played by the rules they wouldn't have been caught and disbanded and history might have been different???

But then when has any Thai government played by the rules??

[Nickymaster]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

PT made a huge error (assuming they can control DSI ). Now AV is playing the role of the victim in front of the international press and at the same time is blaming Thaksin for all this injustice. The moment the Dems have been waiting for. And trust me that they will rub it in. Expect non-stop interviews, just as Thaksin was doing.

Going after AV and Suthep is a desperate and stupid move.

(And......if AV would also have billions (stolen from the hard-working Thai taxpayers) hidden in offshore bank accounts, the lower classes would also relate to him).

Edited December 12, 2012 by Nickymaster

[saltandpepper]

I'll fight charge, accept any outcome: Abhisit

Now, that is a change compared to what the red hero has been doing so far:

Jumping bail and living abroad to avoid to face the music ... Coward

Promising the red crowd to come back to Thailand as soon as the first gun shot is fired, but going for shopping in Paris instead....Coward bis

Yeah, I definitely do prefer the Abhisit attitude...

[Ferangled]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

PT made a huge error (assuming they can control DSI ). Now AV is playing the role of the victim in front of the international press and at the same time is blaming Thaksin for all this injustice. The moment the Dems have been waiting for. And trust me that they will rub it in. Expect non-stop interviews, just as Thaksin was doing.

Going after AV and Suthep is a desperate and stupid move.

(And......if AV would also have billions (stolen from the hard-working Thai taxpayers) hidden in offshore bank accounts, the lower classes would also relate to him).

Unfortunately the people want someone to be found accountable for the deaths in 2010. PT have to show their supporters that they aren't abandoning them now they are in power. I very much doubt this move is A. expected to result in a guilty verdict or B. meant to remove AV and Suthep from the political arena. It smacks of appeasing the reds, those that took to the streets and campaigned to have their voice heard, those that lost family members.

During the interview Abhisit kept harking back to the findings of the "independent" commission but with no acceptance of the fact that so many people struggle to see a commission set up by the Democrat Government to investigate the deaths of protesters under their watch as independent. I found the comment at the end of the interview about accepting any verdict, even the death penalty to be in very bad taste. When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice.

I think Abhisit knows full well he won't be sentenced to the death penalty even if found guilty, which let's face it is a very remote possibility and to make such comments shows a distinct lack of empathy with his own people. It was a very cheap and obvious shot across the bows of Thaksin when the situations are not really comparable. He would have gained far more credibility in my eyes if he had used the interview as a platform to express his deepest regret over the events of 2010 and acknowledge that the Thai people need some closure, some justice even if he feels that pointing the finger at him is misplaced.

The talk of amnesties to white wash crimes with no mention of the rewrites to the constitution that achieved remarkably similar aims for the Dems also came across as an incredibly cheap and hypocritical shot...

"Article 37 - The granting of amnesty to the junta for executing the coup"

[FarangTalk]

This can't backfire.

The Democrats are so deeply unpopular in the poorest regions of the country that this is a win-win for the government.

Guilty verdict satisfies Thaksin, the red shirts and their sympathisers, not-guilty (carefully spun) exposes the corruption in the court system and re-enforces that the elite, the coup-makers and their associates never go to jail.

It's brilliant politics from the master (underhanded admittedly). It also paves way to have all these niggling little 'politically motivated' guilty verdicts annulled.

Watch, and learn.

[Nickymaster]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

PT made a huge error (assuming they can control DSI ). Now AV is playing the role of the victim in front of the international press and at the same time is blaming Thaksin for all this injustice. The moment the Dems have been waiting for. And trust me that they will rub it in. Expect non-stop interviews, just as Thaksin was doing.

Going after AV and Suthep is a desperate and stupid move.

(And......if AV would also have billions (stolen from the hard-working Thai taxpayers) hidden in offshore bank accounts, the lower classes would also relate to him).

Unfortunately the people want someone to be found accountable for the deaths in 2010. PT have to show their supporters that they aren't abandoning them now they are in power. I very much doubt this move is A. expected to result in a guilty verdict or B. meant to remove AV and Suthep from the political arena. It smacks of appeasing the reds, those that took to the streets and campaigned to have their voice heard, those that lost family members.

During the interview Abhisit kept harking back to the findings of the "independent" commission but with no acceptance of the fact that so many people struggle to see a commission set up by the Democrat Government to investigate the deaths of protesters under their watch as independent. I found the comment at the end of the interview about accepting any verdict, even the death penalty to be in very bad taste. When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice.

I think Abhisit knows full well he won't be sentenced to the death penalty even if found guilty, which let's face it is a very remote possibility and to make such comments shows a distinct lack of empathy with his own people. It was a very cheap and obvious shot across the bows of Thaksin when the situations are not really comparable. He would have gained far more credibility in my eyes if he had used the interview as a platform to express his deepest regret over the events of 2010 and acknowledge that the Thai people need some closure, some justice even if he feels that pointing the finger at him is misplaced.

The talk of amnesties to white wash crimes with no mention of the rewrites to the constitution that achieved remarkably similar aims for the Dems also came across as an incredibly cheap and hypocritical shot...

"Article 37 - The granting of amnesty to the junta for executing the coup"

"When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice."

You keep on mentioning this part. All I want to say is that they had a choice NOT to be there. Most were not just bystanders; they choose to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Election was ALREADY promised (before the whole thing really went out of control), and would happen within 6 months. I believe that most of us (and the international world) thought that was a fair solution out of the crisis. Unfortunately, A FEW didn’t accept that proposal and choose to keep on fighting. The famous clips where Nathawut and Arisman tell their followers to burn the city happened AFTER AV promised an election.

[righteous]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

PT made a huge error (assuming they can control DSI ). Now AV is playing the role of the victim in front of the international press and at the same time is blaming Thaksin for all this injustice. The moment the Dems have been waiting for. And trust me that they will rub it in. Expect non-stop interviews, just as Thaksin was doing.

Going after AV and Suthep is a desperate and stupid move.

(And......if AV would also have billions (stolen from the hard-working Thai taxpayers) hidden in offshore bank accounts, the lower classes would also relate to him).

Unfortunately the people want someone to be found accountable for the deaths in 2010. PT have to show their supporters that they aren't abandoning them now they are in power. I very much doubt this move is A. expected to result in a guilty verdict or B. meant to remove AV and Suthep from the political arena. It smacks of appeasing the reds, those that took to the streets and campaigned to have their voice heard, those that lost family members.

During the interview Abhisit kept harking back to the findings of the "independent" commission but with no acceptance of the fact that so many people struggle to see a commission set up by the Democrat Government to investigate the deaths of protesters under their watch as independent. I found the comment at the end of the interview about accepting any verdict, even the death penalty to be in very bad taste. When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice.

I think Abhisit knows full well he won't be sentenced to the death penalty even if found guilty, which let's face it is a very remote possibility and to make such comments shows a distinct lack of empathy with his own people. It was a very cheap and obvious shot across the bows of Thaksin when the situations are not really comparable. He would have gained far more credibility in my eyes if he had used the interview as a platform to express his deepest regret over the events of 2010 and acknowledge that the Thai people need some closure, some justice even if he feels that pointing the finger at him is misplaced.

The talk of amnesties to white wash crimes with no mention of the rewrites to the constitution that achieved remarkably similar aims for the Dems also came across as an incredibly cheap and hypocritical shot...

"Article 37 - The granting of amnesty to the junta for executing the coup"

Amen to that!

[Pimay1]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

PT made a huge error (assuming they can control DSI ). Now AV is playing the role of the victim in front of the international press and at the same time is blaming Thaksin for all this injustice. The moment the Dems have been waiting for. And trust me that they will rub it in. Expect non-stop interviews, just as Thaksin was doing.

Going after AV and Suthep is a desperate and stupid move.

(And......if AV would also have billions (stolen from the hard-working Thai taxpayers) hidden in offshore bank accounts, the lower classes would also relate to him).

Unfortunately the people want someone to be found accountable for the deaths in 2010. PT have to show their supporters that they aren't abandoning them now they are in power. I very much doubt this move is A. expected to result in a guilty verdict or B. meant to remove AV and Suthep from the political arena. It smacks of appeasing the reds, those that took to the streets and campaigned to have their voice heard, those that lost family members.

During the interview Abhisit kept harking back to the findings of the "independent" commission but with no acceptance of the fact that so many people struggle to see a commission set up by the Democrat Government to investigate the deaths of protesters under their watch as independent. I found the comment at the end of the interview about accepting any verdict, even the death penalty to be in very bad taste. When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice.

I think Abhisit knows full well he won't be sentenced to the death penalty even if found guilty, which let's face it is a very remote possibility and to make such comments shows a distinct lack of empathy with his own people. It was a very cheap and obvious shot across the bows of Thaksin when the situations are not really comparable. He would have gained far more credibility in my eyes if he had used the interview as a platform to express his deepest regret over the events of 2010 and acknowledge that the Thai people need some closure, some justice even if he feels that pointing the finger at him is misplaced.

The talk of amnesties to white wash crimes with no mention of the rewrites to the constitution that achieved remarkably similar aims for the Dems also came across as an incredibly cheap and hypocritical shot...

"Article 37 - The granting of amnesty to the junta for executing the coup"

Amen to that!

Praise the Lord and pass the biscuits.

[Nickymaster]

This can't backfire.

The Democrats are so deeply unpopular in the poorest regions of the country that this is a win-win for the government.

Guilty verdict satisfies Thaksin, the red shirts and their sympathisers, not-guilty (carefully spun) exposes the corruption in the court system and re-enforces that the elite, the coup-makers and their associates never go to jail.

It's brilliant politics from the master (underhanded admittedly). It also paves way to have all these niggling little 'politically motivated' guilty verdicts annulled.

Watch, and learn.

Yes let's watch and learn. At the moment AV is getting support from many corners because he is fighting his charges and not fleeing the country. People tend to sympathize with the underdog...

[gl555]

This can't backfire.

The Democrats are so deeply unpopular in the poorest regions of the country that this is a win-win for the government.

Guilty verdict satisfies Thaksin, the red shirts and their sympathisers, not-guilty (carefully spun) exposes the corruption in the court system and re-enforces that the elite, the coup-makers and their associates never go to jail.

It's brilliant politics from the master (underhanded admittedly). It also paves way to have all these niggling little 'politically motivated' guilty verdicts annulled.

Watch, and learn.

Yeah you wish.

There's not going to be a guilty verdict. Everyone knows it. This is just typical Red Shirt lakorn for the poor masses. Brilliant politics? Yeah only the uneducated 'poor' would see it as such.

[fstarbkk]

"Ninety-one people were killed in bids to crackdown on the protesters and end days of rioting."

Days??? Try weeks and months!

[righteous]

This can't backfire.

The Democrats are so deeply unpopular in the poorest regions of the country that this is a win-win for the government.

Guilty verdict satisfies Thaksin, the red shirts and their sympathisers, not-guilty (carefully spun) exposes the corruption in the court system and re-enforces that the elite, the coup-makers and their associates never go to jail.

It's brilliant politics from the master (underhanded admittedly). It also paves way to have all these niggling little 'politically motivated' guilty verdicts annulled.

Watch, and learn.

Yeah you wish.

There's not going to be a guilty verdict. Everyone knows it. This is just typical Red Shirt lakorn for the poor masses. Brilliant politics? Yeah only the uneducated 'poor' would see it as such.

The arrogance of denigrating the electoral majority is astounding at times. The disrespect for the Thai electorate is pervasive throughout everything the Opposition musters. They have the firm belief, that if they are not in power, things are out-of-control.

Until they rectify such underlying perceptions, and acquire leaders who don't look down their noses at everyone but their "electoral minority own", they will remain in the political wilderness for the foreseeable future.

And that is as it should be!

Not that I have any naiive expectations that Abhisit will be held judicially accountable. No more so than the Airport seizure and coup leaders - the "Mother of all" double standards.

Edited December 12, 2012 by righteous

[Ferangled]

The worst thing that could happen to PT is if AV goes to jail. His awkward, unlikeable demeanour and complete lack of ability to relate to the lower classes is one of the main reasons the Dems are perennial losers. PT should be fighting tooth & nail to keep him out of jail.

PT made a huge error (assuming they can control DSI ). Now AV is playing the role of the victim in front of the international press and at the same time is blaming Thaksin for all this injustice. The moment the Dems have been waiting for. And trust me that they will rub it in. Expect non-stop interviews, just as Thaksin was doing.

Going after AV and Suthep is a desperate and stupid move.

(And......if AV would also have billions (stolen from the hard-working Thai taxpayers) hidden in offshore bank accounts, the lower classes would also relate to him).

Unfortunately the people want someone to be found accountable for the deaths in 2010. PT have to show their supporters that they aren't abandoning them now they are in power. I very much doubt this move is A. expected to result in a guilty verdict or B. meant to remove AV and Suthep from the political arena. It smacks of appeasing the reds, those that took to the streets and campaigned to have their voice heard, those that lost family members.

During the interview Abhisit kept harking back to the findings of the "independent" commission but with no acceptance of the fact that so many people struggle to see a commission set up by the Democrat Government to investigate the deaths of protesters under their watch as independent. I found the comment at the end of the interview about accepting any verdict, even the death penalty to be in very bad taste. When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice.

I think Abhisit knows full well he won't be sentenced to the death penalty even if found guilty, which let's face it is a very remote possibility and to make such comments shows a distinct lack of empathy with his own people. It was a very cheap and obvious shot across the bows of Thaksin when the situations are not really comparable. He would have gained far more credibility in my eyes if he had used the interview as a platform to express his deepest regret over the events of 2010 and acknowledge that the Thai people need some closure, some justice even if he feels that pointing the finger at him is misplaced.

The talk of amnesties to white wash crimes with no mention of the rewrites to the constitution that achieved remarkably similar aims for the Dems also came across as an incredibly cheap and hypocritical shot...

"Article 37 - The granting of amnesty to the junta for executing the coup"

"When talking about an incident that claimed the lives of so many this show of mock bravado was misplaced; the protesters, bystanders and journalists that were shot in the streets had no choice but to accept their "sentence", they had no trial, no chance of appeal and no voice."

You keep on mentioning this part. All I want to say is that they had a choice NOT to be there. Most were not just bystanders; they choose to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Election was ALREADY promised (before the whole thing really went out of control), and would happen within 6 months. I believe that most of us (and the international world) thought that was a fair solution out of the crisis. Unfortunately, A FEW didn’t accept that proposal and choose to keep on fighting. The famous clips where Nathawut and Arisman tell their followers to burn the city happened AFTER AV promised an election.

We're straying off topic here but I'd like to point out that not only did the protesters, bystanders and journalists have a choice to be there, they had a RIGHT to be there. Similarly they had a RIGHT to protection from the authorities and not aggression. They had a right to be protected from any violent elements not simply branded as terrorists because a minority were acting like them.

Elections hadn't been promised prior to the protests and a late change of heart by Abhisit, only when faced with a mass occupation of the city, to grant the citizens their democratic right to vote (but only at a time of his choosing) didn't appease the situation.... perhaps too little, too late?

I'd also like to point out that I made a single post that actually addressed the topic at hand and gave my thoughts on Abhisit's interview with the BBC. Please don't disingenuously suggest that I'm repeating myself. This is the first time that I have written about Abhisit's show of mock bravado during the BBC interview being in bad taste given the deaths of so many in 2010 who didn't have the luxury of a trial or a platform to explain their motivation or actions.

[rubl]

>This is a typical ploy of Abhisit - trying to change the conversation. Whenever challenged about the 90+ deaths at R'song, he starts talking about "Men in Black". In this case, trying to re-direct the conversation about his legal status to "amnesty". Nothing to do with his predicament.

>It is true, the protesters occupied the middle of the city, and he felt compelled to restore order. But who was restoring order after the 2006 coup, an occupation of the country, which precipitated all of it. The disconnect between these two events is another 'change of conversation' by him, when seeking to link the protests with Thaksin assets seizure. The 2010 event was a coup-election thing. The so-called negotiation that wasn't, wasn't about 'assets', but about election timing.

>I think the term 'crackdown' is overused and does not describe historical reality. It implies legitimate use of State Power, when a political solution was easy, and hence rendered use of force illegitimate. There is never talk about a 'crackdown' on those who perpetrated a coup.

Typical ploy of certain posters to immediately obfuscate.

Amnesty if proposed by the Pheu Thai led government and would cover ALL involved in 'activities' from the coup upto and including the 2010 mayhem.

The 2010 mayhem was threatened before the assets seizure decision and really started to get going after. The 2010 mayhem was a coup-thing, but a failed one. Luckily we also have PTV to thank for their recordings of all UDD shoutcasts.

k. Abhisit could not restore order after the 2006 coup, because there was no disorder at that time apart from the fact he was not involved or in a position to do something other then saying 'I'm not for it'. We even had general elections December 2007.

A crackdown because another solution was rejected by the impatient UDDThaksin. A political solution was offered and rejected, that doesn't reflect on the legality of using force. Still using force against not so peaceful grenade lobbing protesters would be concidered completely justified in most countries, even with a chance of innocent casulties. No relation to whatever happened with the coup in 2006, just obfuscating referring to it.

[gl555]

This can't backfire.

The Democrats are so deeply unpopular in the poorest regions of the country that this is a win-win for the government.

Guilty verdict satisfies Thaksin, the red shirts and their sympathisers, not-guilty (carefully spun) exposes the corruption in the court system and re-enforces that the elite, the coup-makers and their associates never go to jail.

It's brilliant politics from the master (underhanded admittedly). It also paves way to have all these niggling little 'politically motivated' guilty verdicts annulled.

Watch, and learn.

Yeah you wish.

There's not going to be a guilty verdict. Everyone knows it. This is just typical Red Shirt lakorn for the poor masses. Brilliant politics? Yeah only the uneducated 'poor' would see it as such.

The arrogance of denigrating the electoral majority is astounding at times. The disrespect for the Thai electorate is pervasive throughout everything the Opposition musters. They have the firm belief, that if they are not in power, things are out-of-control.

Until they rectify such underlying perceptions, and acquire leaders who don't look down their noses at everyone but their "electoral minority own", they will remain in the political wilderness for the foreseeable future.

And that is as it should be!

Not that I have any naiive expectations that Abhisit will be held judicially accountable. No more so than the Airport seizure and coup leaders - the "Mother of all" double standards.

This is Thailand. No one who's rich and/or powerful is ever held judicially accountable for anything. Double standards? Yeah they're going after Abhisit for the death of a single taxi driver while ignoring the 2000+ deaths ordered by their paymaster in the 'drug war'. It's the hypocrisy of the Reds and their apologists that's astounding.

[rubl]

This can't backfire.

The Democrats are so deeply unpopular in the poorest regions of the country that this is a win-win for the government.

Guilty verdict satisfies Thaksin, the red shirts and their sympathisers, not-guilty (carefully spun) exposes the corruption in the court system and re-enforces that the elite, the coup-makers and their associates never go to jail.

It's brilliant politics from the master (underhanded admittedly). It also paves way to have all these niggling little 'politically motivated' guilty verdicts annulled.

Watch, and learn.

Brilliant, in true democratic fashion as well, the underhanded part that is.

BTW which political motivated guilty verdicts ?

[Ferangled]

This is Thailand. No one who's rich and/or powerful is ever held judicially accountable for anything.

You seem to be forgetting Thaksin...

Double standards?

Yes it appears so...

hypocrisy

Yes, I'd say so!

[rubl]

The arrogance of denigrating the electoral majority is astounding at times. The disrespect for the Thai electorate is pervasive throughout everything the Opposition musters. They have the firm belief, that if they are not in power, things are out-of-control.

Until they rectify such underlying perceptions, and acquire leaders who don't look down their noses at everyone but their "electoral minority own", they will remain in the political wilderness for the foreseeable future.

And that is as it should be!

Not that I have any naiive expectations that Abhisit will be held judicially accountable. No more so than the Airport seizure and coup leaders - the "Mother of all" double standards.

For a moment I thought you were referring to how the current Pheu Thai led government was busy with 'bread and games' policies.

BTW the airport seizure and the conviction of the PAD leaders is not part of this OP, neither the coupmakers whose leader is now in parliament and helping Pheu Thai to promote an amnesty (probably under the motto 'a second amnesty keeps the doctor away')

[Searat7]

Abhisit is probably the most honest PM this country has ever had and I think he exercised great restraint dealing with the Red Shirts 2 years ago. Had the police done their job the military would not have to get involved. When people are illegally blocking streets they should be arrested and taken away. In the unlikely event that Abhisit is convicted and jailed I will be leaving this country for good.