Ex-Thai P M Abhisit To Hear Murder Charge Over Protest Death

[khunken]

Quote:

Tarit told reporters at DSI headquarters that it was "very awkward" for him to file the charges against the pair because of their position in society and since he himself had served on the official body that oversaw the crackdown in 2010.

Lovely expression: 'very awkward'. He is the typical india-rubber man who can be made to do whatever he is told. That's the problem - he was told to do it by PTP heavies just like the defence minister's 'committee' was told what to do about the unproven forged military service documents.

What a facade!

[geriatrickid]

'ginjag' timestamp='1355367101' post='5926922'

Sir,

The premise of your argument is that because you believe that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man and perceive him to be of higher quality than other politicians, he should not be investigated. The allegations here relate to whether or not Mr. Abhisit violated certain laws as they relate to the use of the military against a civilian population. The fact of the matter is that no other PM in recent years has faced such allegations, not even the bogeyman of Mr. Thaksin. Sufficent evidence has been given to justify an investigation. One cannot simply put those facts aside and say, ooops sorry, Mr. Abhisit seems like a nice enough fellow, so he gets a pass.

Much has changed in the past decade and the Thai people are not as willing to accept "abuse" like they once were. I am not saying Mr. Abhisit is guillty. However, there are sufficient numbers of aggrieved citizens demanding action that an investigation is required. One cannot ignore the Thai citizens' allegations, as to do so, would only further the widely held perception of injustice. If the charges are unfounded, the investigation will show that, and those that are of the view that Mr. Abhisit was complicit in the deaths of civilians will be given an explanation as to why he was not.

The issue here is not about the current PM. Yes, she worked for a family firm. So do many people, since family businesses are a major component of the economy. PM Yingluck is not accused of using the military against the civilian population of Thailand, nor is she implicated in the deaths of any protestors. There are not even any allegations as to acts of impropriety when the PM was in the private sector. Therefore, the chap raising the issue, is off on a tangent that has nothing to do with this subject.

The fact remains that Mr. Abhisit was a political opportunist and many of the problems that ensued during his term in office arose because of his failure to achieve a clear mandate. Had he been able to obtain an electoral victory for his government, I doubt these charges would have as much momentum as they do now, for the simple reason, that his government would have been perceived as having had a popular mandate to govern.

Perhaps, Thailand's "laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation". However, that is not relevant in this case. The investigation is in respect to mass human rights abuses. This is a different class of "crime" and is treated differently.There is ample evidence of human rights abuses. The part that needs to be determined is if any one person in particular was responsible, or if it was just an unintended side effect of the response. If the abuses were isolated unintentional events, this will be apparent. People make mistakes. However, if it is demonstrated that specific orders were given and an intent to bypass the laws applied, then the people that gave those orders and that intentionally violated the Thai laws regarding emergency decrees etc. will be held accountable, albeit Thai style.

Edited December 13, 2012 by geriatrickid

[scorecard]

Quote:

Tarit told reporters at DSI headquarters that it was "very awkward" for him to file the charges against the pair because of their position in society and since he himself had served on the official body that oversaw the crackdown in 2010.

Lovely expression: 'very awkward'. He is the typical india-rubber man who can be made to do whatever he is told. That's the problem - he was told to do it by PTP heavies just like the defence minister's 'committee' was told what to do about the unproven forged military service documents.

What a facade!

By saying 'very awkward' he means there is one law for the rich and one for the rest.

His masters would try to claim they are fighting for equality, equal justice for all, no double standards, etc.

it's actually a very good example of double standards.

[geriatrickid]

Quote:

Tarit told reporters at DSI headquarters that it was "very awkward" for him to file the charges against the pair because of their position in society and since he himself had served on the official body that oversaw the crackdown in 2010.

Lovely expression: 'very awkward'. He is the typical india-rubber man who can be made to do whatever he is told. That's the problem - he was told to do it by PTP heavies just like the defence minister's 'committee' was told what to do about the unproven forged military service documents.

What a facade!

The military document episode demonstrated that there was a questionable history and aspects of Mr. Abhisit's "national service". At the very least, it showed that he did not complete his national service in the usual manner. The evidence that was brought forward supported the basis for the investigation.

In respect to Tarit, of course it is awkward. However, he has a legal obligation to bring the investigation if there are grounds for one. o not do so would have been a dereliction of duty. If the man needed a nudge to carry out his duties, so be it.

[khunken]

Quote:

Tarit told reporters at DSI headquarters that it was "very awkward" for him to file the charges against the pair because of their position in society and since he himself had served on the official body that oversaw the crackdown in 2010.

Lovely expression: 'very awkward'. He is the typical india-rubber man who can be made to do whatever he is told. That's the problem - he was told to do it by PTP heavies just like the defence minister's 'committee' was told what to do about the unproven forged military service documents.

What a facade!

The military document episode demonstrated that there was a questionable history and aspects of Mr. Abhisit's "national service". At the very least, it showed that he did not complete his national service in the usual manner. The evidence that was brought forward supported the basis for the investigation.

In respect to Tarit, of course it is awkward. However, he has a legal obligation to bring the investigation if there are grounds for one. o not do so would have been a dereliction of duty. If the man needed a nudge to carry out his duties, so be it.

The military service document episode only demonstrated how easy it is for a politician in power to corrupt that power. What evidence? The so-called committee was nothing more than a 'find him guilty' facade.

Tarit doesn't need 'grounds' for an investigation. The link from an accidently shot individual in a shoot-out between the military & armed protestors, & prosecuting the PM is extremely tenuous. Getting told what to do is somewhat more than a 'nudge'.

By the way, Tarit's role in the prosecution of the red-shirt leaders was similar. If he had any balls he would have had them accused of anything other than terrorism.

[ginjag]

'ginjag' timestamp='1355367101' post='5926922'

Sir,

The premise of your argument is that because you believe that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man and perceive him to be of higher quality than other politicians, he should not be investigated. The allegations here relate to whether or not Mr. Abhisit violated certain laws as they relate to the use of the military against a civilian population. The fact of the matter is that no other PM in recent years has faced such allegations, not even the bogeyman of Mr. Thaksin. Sufficent evidence has been given to justify an investigation. One cannot simply put those facts aside and say, ooops sorry, Mr. Abhisit seems like a nice enough fellow, so he gets a pass.

Much has changed in the past decade and the Thai people are not as willing to accept "abuse" like they once were. I am not saying Mr. Abhisit is guillty. However, there are sufficient numbers of aggrieved citizens demanding action that an investigation is required. One cannot ignore the Thai citizens' allegations, as to do so, would only further the widely held perception of injustice. If the charges are unfounded, the investigation will show that, and those that are of the view that Mr. Abhisit was complicit in the deaths of civilians will be given an explanation as to why he was not.

The issue here is not about the current PM. Yes, she worked for a family firm. So do many people, since family businesses are a major component of the economy. PM Yingluck is not accused of using the military against the civilian population of Thailand, nor is she implicated in the deaths of any protestors. There are not even any allegations as to acts of impropriety when the PM was in the private sector. Therefore, the chap raising the issue, is off on a tangent that has nothing to do with this subject.

The fact remains that Mr. Abhisit was a political opportunist and many of the problems that ensued during his term in office arose because of his failure to achieve a clear mandate. Had he been able to obtain an electoral victory for his government, I doubt these charges would have as much momentum as they do now, for the simple reason, that his government would have been perceived as having had a popular mandate to govern.

Perhaps, Thailand's "laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation". However, that is not relevant in this case. The investigation is in respect to mass human rights abuses. This is a different class of "crime" and is treated differently.There is ample evidence of human rights abuses. The part that needs to be determined is if any one person in particular was responsible, or if it was just an unintended side effect of the response. If the abuses were isolated unintentional events, this will be apparent. People make mistakes. However, if it is demonstrated that specific orders were given and an intent to bypass the laws applied, then the people that gave those orders and that intentionally violated the Thai laws regarding emergency decrees etc. will be held accountable, albeit Thai style.

Your reply to me is not saying much different than the last saga you wrote about a guy you cannot abide, who is no good at anything while p.m. if your so clever to attack him pray tell us of the good things he did do in the term he served, if you do not come up with many you havent wanted to look, if you did search and be honest you will find he did far more than your beloved P.M is achieving now, but you have an ingrained thing about the demo's that will never change.

There is far more worry for Thailand if this government stays in office, and carries on as they have done for well over a year.

[antpet]

Being the political head of a state means that on your watch fokk will die. Die in all many of circumstances. Individual responsibilty can not pass so far up the chain in a democracy where that 'head' is accountable.

Fact.

What we have here is a clear abuse of any form of faair and natural justice where Abhisit has clearly been targetted by the amoral Thaksin clan. The purpose being to eradicate their most serious, able and talented opponent.

I find it an absolute charade what is taking place and I hope the political response from abroad is not only condemning of the Thaksin government but also shunning it.

It takes Thailand down a darker road than before where there is no justice; only the abuse of justice.

I remain totally appalled.

[whybother]

'ginjag' timestamp='1355367101' post='5926922'

Sir,

The premise of your argument is that because you believe that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man and perceive him to be of higher quality than other politicians, he should not be investigated. The allegations here relate to whether or not Mr. Abhisit violated certain laws as they relate to the use of the military against a civilian population. The fact of the matter is that no other PM in recent years has faced such allegations, not even the bogeyman of Mr. Thaksin. Sufficent evidence has been given to justify an investigation. One cannot simply put those facts aside and say, ooops sorry, Mr. Abhisit seems like a nice enough fellow, so he gets a pass.

Much has changed in the past decade and the Thai people are not as willing to accept "abuse" like they once were. I am not saying Mr. Abhisit is guillty. However, there are sufficient numbers of aggrieved citizens demanding action that an investigation is required. One cannot ignore the Thai citizens' allegations, as to do so, would only further the widely held perception of injustice. If the charges are unfounded, the investigation will show that, and those that are of the view that Mr. Abhisit was complicit in the deaths of civilians will be given an explanation as to why he was not.

The issue here is not about the current PM. Yes, she worked for a family firm. So do many people, since family businesses are a major component of the economy. PM Yingluck is not accused of using the military against the civilian population of Thailand, nor is she implicated in the deaths of any protestors. There are not even any allegations as to acts of impropriety when the PM was in the private sector. Therefore, the chap raising the issue, is off on a tangent that has nothing to do with this subject.

The fact remains that Mr. Abhisit was a political opportunist and many of the problems that ensued during his term in office arose because of his failure to achieve a clear mandate. Had he been able to obtain an electoral victory for his government, I doubt these charges would have as much momentum as they do now, for the simple reason, that his government would have been perceived as having had a popular mandate to govern.

Perhaps, Thailand's "laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation". However, that is not relevant in this case. The investigation is in respect to mass human rights abuses. This is a different class of "crime" and is treated differently.There is ample evidence of human rights abuses. The part that needs to be determined is if any one person in particular was responsible, or if it was just an unintended side effect of the response. If the abuses were isolated unintentional events, this will be apparent. People make mistakes. However, if it is demonstrated that specific orders were given and an intent to bypass the laws applied, then the people that gave those orders and that intentionally violated the Thai laws regarding emergency decrees etc. will be held accountable, albeit Thai style.

" There are not even any allegations as to acts of impropriety when the PM was in the private sector."

Except for perjury.

[antpet]

'ginjag' timestamp='1355367101' post='5926922'

Sir,

The premise of your argument is that because you believe that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man and perceive him to be of higher quality than other politicians, he should not be investigated. The allegations here relate to whether or not Mr. Abhisit violated certain laws as they relate to the use of the military against a civilian population. The fact of the matter is that no other PM in recent years has faced such allegations, not even the bogeyman of Mr. Thaksin. Sufficent evidence has been given to justify an investigation. One cannot simply put those facts aside and say, ooops sorry, Mr. Abhisit seems like a nice enough fellow, so he gets a pass.

Much has changed in the past decade and the Thai people are not as willing to accept "abuse" like they once were. I am not saying Mr. Abhisit is guillty. However, there are sufficient numbers of aggrieved citizens demanding action that an investigation is required. One cannot ignore the Thai citizens' allegations, as to do so, would only further the widely held perception of injustice. If the charges are unfounded, the investigation will show that, and those that are of the view that Mr. Abhisit was complicit in the deaths of civilians will be given an explanation as to why he was not.

The issue here is not about the current PM. Yes, she worked for a family firm. So do many people, since family businesses are a major component of the economy. PM Yingluck is not accused of using the military against the civilian population of Thailand, nor is she implicated in the deaths of any protestors. There are not even any allegations as to acts of impropriety when the PM was in the private sector. Therefore, the chap raising the issue, is off on a tangent that has nothing to do with this subject.

The fact remains that Mr. Abhisit was a political opportunist and many of the problems that ensued during his term in office arose because of his failure to achieve a clear mandate. Had he been able to obtain an electoral victory for his government, I doubt these charges would have as much momentum as they do now, for the simple reason, that his government would have been perceived as having had a popular mandate to govern.

Perhaps, Thailand's "laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation". However, that is not relevant in this case. The investigation is in respect to mass human rights abuses. This is a different class of "crime" and is treated differently.There is ample evidence of human rights abuses. The part that needs to be determined is if any one person in particular was responsible, or if it was just an unintended side effect of the response. If the abuses were isolated unintentional events, this will be apparent. People make mistakes. However, if it is demonstrated that specific orders were given and an intent to bypass the laws applied, then the people that gave those orders and that intentionally violated the Thai laws regarding emergency decrees etc. will be held accountable, albeit Thai style.

Your reply to me is not saying much different than the last saga you wrote about a guy you cannot abide, who is no good at anything while p.m. if your so clever to attack him pray tell us of the good things he did do in the term he served, if you do not come up with many you havent wanted to look, if you did search and be honest you will find he did far more than your beloved P.M is achieving now, but you have an ingrained thing about the demo's that will never change.

There is far more worry for Thailand if this government stays in office, and carries on as they have done for well over a year.

Any of us can put up a reasoned argument for investigating Abhisit but in truth it would be bogus and not one we could believe in.

The turth is that this farce is a witchhunt. A perverse twisting of judicial enquiry in order to damage a political opponent. It is an abuse of power by the Thaksin clan who have produced a new and dirtier tactic to damage, smear and remove their opponents.

That is transparent.

If anyone were to be tested for murder it would be he with the blood stained hands from innocent drug murders; or the 80 suffocated in a metal container in the South. Thaksin, may I remind you, took out 2000 individuals. That was a direct order to kill from him. He also abused his power when dealing with a Samui rape and murder when he said that the alledged perpetrator would die for his crime.

Yet here we are with this trumped up nonsense from the abusers and denyers of democracy. Thaksin is an odious meglamaniac devoid of ethics or morality. In contrast Abhisit remains a decent, honest man.

History shows us it is the latter who are victimised, persecuted and abused. This is an example of such. It is a total abuse of all that is decent. To defend it, to claim it is somehow part of the natural process of investigation, of the application of law and justice, is to manipulate those systems to your own ends. As better educated, knowledgeable and experienced watchers it is disgraceful for any of us to defend this lie or be associated with it through our interpretation.

Quite honestly you must be from another planet to see any valedation in this process.

It wasn't by chance that Hitler had his brown shirts and Thaksin perpetuates this 'red' shirted thuggery.

[Baloo22]

Well, at least Mr. Abhisit is staying put, and fighting the charges. Unlike the fleeing Coward Boy in Dubai.

Also, I seem to have missed the announcement by DSI of their charges against former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra over the deaths of eighty-plus innocent people in the Tak Bai incident. Has anyone heard of the DSI announcing those charges??

[jrincon17]

What a darn shame , going to ruin this mans life and prosecute him unlawfully

[yoshiwara]

Arisman issued clear instructions to the reds to go to Bangkok to burn it down.

Without those instructions which translated into a progressive escalation of violence once they arrived in Bangkok, they wouldn't have reaped what they sowed. The fake pass put out by the red cheerleaders on the forum was that the reds were essentially a peaceful demonstration, rather than an armed mob using participants as collateral damage.

[Thait Spot]

Quote:

Tarit told reporters at DSI headquarters that it was "very awkward" for him to file the charges against the pair because of their position in society and since he himself had served on the official body that oversaw the crackdown in 2010.

Lovely expression: 'very awkward'. He is the typical india-rubber man who can be made to do whatever he is told. That's the problem - he was told to do it by PTP heavies just like the defence minister's 'committee' was told what to do about the unproven forged military service documents.

What a facade!

Allow me to sum the treacherous reptile up.

Lackey

[OzMick]

'ginjag' timestamp='1355367101' post='5926922'

Sir,

The premise of your argument is that because you believe that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man and perceive him to be of higher quality than other politicians, he should not be investigated. The allegations here relate to whether or not Mr. Abhisit violated certain laws as they relate to the use of the military against a civilian population. The fact of the matter is that no other PM in recent years has faced such allegations, not even the bogeyman of Mr. Thaksin. Sufficent evidence has been given to justify an investigation. One cannot simply put those facts aside and say, ooops sorry, Mr. Abhisit seems like a nice enough fellow, so he gets a pass.

Much has changed in the past decade and the Thai people are not as willing to accept "abuse" like they once were. I am not saying Mr. Abhisit is guillty. However, there are sufficient numbers of aggrieved citizens demanding action that an investigation is required. One cannot ignore the Thai citizens' allegations, as to do so, would only further the widely held perception of injustice. If the charges are unfounded, the investigation will show that, and those that are of the view that Mr. Abhisit was complicit in the deaths of civilians will be given an explanation as to why he was not.

The issue here is not about the current PM. Yes, she worked for a family firm. So do many people, since family businesses are a major component of the economy. PM Yingluck is not accused of using the military against the civilian population of Thailand, nor is she implicated in the deaths of any protestors. There are not even any allegations as to acts of impropriety when the PM was in the private sector. Therefore, the chap raising the issue, is off on a tangent that has nothing to do with this subject.

The fact remains that Mr. Abhisit was a political opportunist and many of the problems that ensued during his term in office arose because of his failure to achieve a clear mandate. Had he been able to obtain an electoral victory for his government, I doubt these charges would have as much momentum as they do now, for the simple reason, that his government would have been perceived as having had a popular mandate to govern.

Perhaps, Thailand's "laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation". However, that is not relevant in this case. The investigation is in respect to mass human rights abuses. This is a different class of "crime" and is treated differently.There is ample evidence of human rights abuses. The part that needs to be determined is if any one person in particular was responsible, or if it was just an unintended side effect of the response. If the abuses were isolated unintentional events, this will be apparent. People make mistakes. However, if it is demonstrated that specific orders were given and an intent to bypass the laws applied, then the people that gave those orders and that intentionally violated the Thai laws regarding emergency decrees etc. will be held accountable, albeit Thai style.

Being the un-named " the chap raising the issue" may I point out that the current PM lied through her teeth (as decided by the court) when declaring her brother's assets were in fact hers, and has since used her position to prevent perjury charges being pressed. Just in case you have forgotten to take that into account.

[Markaew]

When a nation puts a pretty decent man on a murder enquiry/charge/investigation, something is sick with the running of it. The thousands who have avoided murder by buying out, and others who are running free. This country thrives on corruption and scandle, it's laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation.

Just take a look who the people are in office in the running of the country, my god, and this country has the gall to bring these 2 democrats to court, get real Thailand before you sink further into the corrupt sh#T PIT.....i FEEL SORRY AND SHY FOR THE SUPER FRIENDS/THAIS i know.

You make the assumption that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man. I believe him to be more of an opportunist and a poor manager lacking leadership skills. This is a man with a questionable national service record, and with no private sector work experience. He went from a short term lectureship, to a safe seat in the House. Think about it. The man never really worked prior to his ascension.He didn't even work as a civil servant prior to being selected for the political life. I could understand if he had been a gifted academic or was a unifying fgure, but he was not.

I went to school with guys like this. A guy that has never had a real job, whether it is a part time job at the 7-11 or doing manual labour like so many university students have done, can not understand those that do have to work. He has no understanding of the typical Thai.

Perhaps, he is not guilty of the charges, or perhaps he is. The investigation will help determine if there are sufficient grounds to proceed with a court appearance. Moe likely than not, he will not be convicted.

That's quite common in politics these days and not just in Thailand. Obama has the same background that you just stated.

[Markaew]

When a nation puts a pretty decent man on a murder enquiry/charge/investigation, something is sick with the running of it. The thousands who have avoided murder by buying out, and others who are running free. This country thrives on corruption and scandle, it's laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation.

Just take a look who the people are in office in the running of the country, my god, and this country has the gall to bring these 2 democrats to court, get real Thailand before you sink further into the corrupt sh#T PIT.....i FEEL SORRY AND SHY FOR THE SUPER FRIENDS/THAIS i know.

You make the assumption that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man. I believe him to be more of an opportunist and a poor manager lacking leadership skills. This is a man with a questionable national service record, and with no private sector work experience. He went from a short term lectureship, to a safe seat in the House. Think about it. The man never really worked prior to his ascension.He didn't even work as a civil servant prior to being selected for the political life. I could understand if he had been a gifted academic or was a unifying fgure, but he was not.

I went to school with guys like this. A guy that has never had a real job, whether it is a part time job at the 7-11 or doing manual labour like so many university students have done, can not understand those that do have to work. He has no understanding of the typical Thai.

Perhaps, he is not guilty of the charges, or perhaps he is. The investigation will help determine if there are sufficient grounds to proceed with a court appearance. Moe likely than not, he will not be convicted.

// Previously deleted post edited out //

// Previously deleted post edited out //

Dear G'kd,

You start your message with words about people assuming abhisit is a decent man, then you try (with the words below) to build a perception that he's not decent because he never worked whilst he was at university, etc etc etc.

You wrote:

..... and with no private sector work experience. He went from a short term lectureship, to a safe seat in the House. Think about it. The man never really worked prior to his ascension.He didn't even work as a civil servant prior to being selected for the political life. I could understand if he had been a gifted academic or was a unifying fgure, but he was not.

I went to school with guys like this. A guy that has never had a real job, whether it is a part time job at the 7-11 or doing manual labour like so many university students have done .....

So does that mean that everybody who never worked whilst at university / everybody who never worked in the civil service before they entered parliament is 'not decent'?

What actual evidence / facts do you have which proves that abhisit is not a decent man?

G'kd made a statement of opinion over "decent" which in my opinion is a subjective topic. Now you are asking for evidence and/or facts. Again, in my opinion, I believe G'kd is correct and I don't intend to create a research paper for you to read to support my opinion.

[jcw]

This is to stop some people form running at the next election so some people can spend less money on bribing the voters.

[scorecard]

Quote:

Tarit told reporters at DSI headquarters that it was "very awkward" for him to file the charges against the pair because of their position in society and since he himself had served on the official body that oversaw the crackdown in 2010.

Lovely expression: 'very awkward'. He is the typical india-rubber man who can be made to do whatever he is told. That's the problem - he was told to do it by PTP heavies just like the defence minister's 'committee' was told what to do about the unproven forged military service documents.

What a facade!

The military document episode demonstrated that there was a questionable history and aspects of Mr. Abhisit's "national service". At the very least, it showed that he did not complete his national service in the usual manner. The evidence that was brought forward supported the basis for the investigation.

In respect to Tarit, of course it is awkward. However, he has a legal obligation to bring the investigation if there are grounds for one. o not do so would have been a dereliction of duty. If the man needed a nudge to carry out his duties, so be it.

Again g'kid you quote unproven things. The truth is that there has never been a solid decision whether abhisits national service documents are fake, and there is some reliance (trying to make it look like they are fake) on the fact that certain documents were lost and the army came up with some form of document to replace the lost ones.

One could even suggest that maybe the army couldn't find the original records and manufactured some documentation to try to produce a replacement document. Do I have any evidence of this? No, but just maybe it's another possible theory of what happened.

The most recent activity on this by the defence minister to remove abhisits rank has become lost in the clouds including some action to request that the defence minister explain his action and prove he made a correct decision to remove the rank. As usual conveniently all forgotten.

I ask you again g'kid, whats your comment / summation, in regard to 'decency' of the curent pt politicians, the red shirt leaders, many of whom told outright lies to the bussed in masses and incited the crowd to bring gasoline to the rallies to burn down Bangkok at numerous red rallies and several of them now in ministerial positions?

Would you give 100% of all these folks a tick for decency?

Would you give 90% of these folks a tick for decency?

Would you give...

Would you give 10% of these folks a tick for decency?

Please answer the question.

Edited December 14, 2012 by scorecard

[electau]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhisit_Vejjajiva

Read this article on subject.

[ginjag]

G-kid, reading your replies, and listening to other posters points, you just seem to be a wind up merchant, many posters ask you to answer valid points, with most you just avoid. comparing views are one thing but being just one sided is another story. We all get the message on what and who is good and who is not, your view on the x p.m. is not fair, this is highlighted by your reluctance to fire the gun at this family run outfit in power.

[scorecard]

This is to stop some people form running at the next election so some people can spend less money on bribing the voters.

Also very likely it's an attempt to get the people most likely to lead some structured, and negative, response to the next drive for charter change sidelined.

[chooka]

So are these guys in custody or on bail? Will be interesting to see if they get the death sentence and how much they pay to make all this go away.

Personally I don't think they should have been charged but hey TIT

[chooka]

When a nation puts a pretty decent man on a murder enquiry/charge/investigation, something is sick with the running of it. The thousands who have avoided murder by buying out, and others who are running free. This country thrives on corruption and scandle, it's laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation.

Just take a look who the people are in office in the running of the country, my god, and this country has the gall to bring these 2 democrats to court, get real Thailand before you sink further into the corrupt sh#T PIT.....i FEEL SORRY AND SHY FOR THE SUPER FRIENDS/THAIS i know.

You make the assumption that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man. I believe him to be more of an opportunist and a poor manager lacking leadership skills. This is a man with a questionable national service record, and with no private sector work experience. He went from a short term lectureship, to a safe seat in the House. Think about it. The man never really worked prior to his ascension.He didn't even work as a civil servant prior to being selected for the political life. I could understand if he had been a gifted academic or was a unifying fgure, but he was not.

I went to school with guys like this. A guy that has never had a real job, whether it is a part time job at the 7-11 or doing manual labour like so many university students have done, can not understand those that do have to work. He has no understanding of the typical Thai.

Perhaps, he is not guilty of the charges, or perhaps he is. The investigation will help determine if there are sufficient grounds to proceed with a court appearance. Moe likely than not, he will not be convicted.

Would you also say that the current Prime Minister has ever held a "real" job other than the one in the brothers company which was abolished 10 minutes after she left the building? Does she understand the typical Thai?

Thaksins daughter on the other hand does have real work experience after being a counter worker at McDonalds, a job her Dad got for her, though bein so rich she has never worked since. She MUST understand the typical Thai having worked among them or perhaps not. I have read today rhat his daughter is the 47th richest person on the Thai stock exchange so maybe that is why she quit at McDs.

or macca's pay very well.

[whybother]

So are these guys in custody or on bail? Will be interesting to see if they get the death sentence and how much they pay to make all this go away.

Personally I don't think they should have been charged but hey TIT

Neither. Bail wasn't requested.

[chooka]

So are these guys in custody or on bail? Will be interesting to see if they get the death sentence and how much they pay to make all this go away.

Personally I don't think they should have been charged but hey TIT

Neither. Bail wasn't requested.

I just saw Ashibit on the Aussie news where he made a statement that he will fight the charges in court, and will accept whatever verdict or punishment the courts hand down, even the death sentence. His words not mine.

[whybother]

So are these guys in custody or on bail? Will be interesting to see if they get the death sentence and how much they pay to make all this go away.

Personally I don't think they should have been charged but hey TIT

Neither. Bail wasn't requested.

I just saw Ashibit on the Aussie news where he made a statement that he will fight the charges in court, and will accept whatever verdict or punishment the courts hand down, even the death sentence. His words not mine.

Also reported here: http://www.thaivisa....-murder-charge/

Edited December 14, 2012 by whybother

[Imkah]

When a nation puts a pretty decent man on a murder enquiry/charge/investigation, something is sick with the running of it. The thousands who have avoided murder by buying out, and others who are running free. This country thrives on corruption and scandle, it's laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation.

Just take a look who the people are in office in the running of the country, my god, and this country has the gall to bring these 2 democrats to court, get real Thailand before you sink further into the corrupt sh#T PIT.....i FEEL SORRY AND SHY FOR THE SUPER FRIENDS/THAIS i know.

You make the assumption that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man. I believe him to be more of an opportunist and a poor manager lacking leadership skills. This is a man with a questionable national service record, and with no private sector work experience. He went from a short term lectureship, to a safe seat in the House. Think about it. The man never really worked prior to his ascension.He didn't even work as a civil servant prior to being selected for the political life. I could understand if he had been a gifted academic or was a unifying fgure, but he was not.

I went to school with guys like this. A guy that has never had a real job, whether it is a part time job at the 7-11 or doing manual labour like so many university students have done, can not understand those that do have to work. He has no understanding of the typical Thai.

Perhaps, he is not guilty of the charges, or perhaps he is. The investigation will help determine if there are sufficient grounds to proceed with a court appearance. Moe likely than not, he will not be convicted.

You might be perfectly right, but what kind of argument is it that he never worked part time at 7-11 or manual labour? Goes for every one in Thailand who believes he/she is lower middle class and up. It's a cultural thing and does absolutely not define decency or not.

[alanferdi]

Here is a man charged??????... atleast he is not like his Predecessor, who simply left the country. This is a man with a degree and brain that will help him stand and face accusations and deal with it as a Man. Thaksin... Look and Learn !!!!

[alanferdi]

When a nation puts a pretty decent man on a murder enquiry/charge/investigation, something is sick with the running of it. The thousands who have avoided murder by buying out, and others who are running free. This country thrives on corruption and scandle, it's laws on prostitution and gambling are a joke and abused by all and sundry without any problem--apart from the ones that avoid paying a (my lips are sealed)donation.

Just take a look who the people are in office in the running of the country, my god, and this country has the gall to bring these 2 democrats to court, get real Thailand before you sink further into the corrupt sh#T PIT.....i FEEL SORRY AND SHY FOR THE SUPER FRIENDS/THAIS i know.

You make the assumption that Mr. Abhisit is a "decent" man. I believe him to be more of an opportunist and a poor manager lacking leadership skills. This is a man with a questionable national service record, and with no private sector work experience. He went from a short term lectureship, to a safe seat in the House. Think about it. The man never really worked prior to his ascension.He didn't even work as a civil servant prior to being selected for the political life. I could understand if he had been a gifted academic or was a unifying fgure, but he was not.

I went to school with guys like this. A guy that has never had a real job, whether it is a part time job at the 7-11 or doing manual labour like so many university students have done, can not understand those that do have to work. He has no understanding of the typical Thai.

Perhaps, he is not guilty of the charges, or perhaps he is. The investigation will help determine if there are sufficient grounds to proceed with a court appearance. Moe likely than not, he will not be convicted.

You might be perfectly right, but what kind of argument is it that he never worked part time at 7-11 or manual labour? Goes for every one in Thailand who believes he/she is lower middle class and up. It's a cultural thing and does absolutely not define decency or not.

I would be interested to know what jobs you did when you went to school???? or was it thuggery and handouts!

atleast a decent man and working to make ends meet. A mentor.... not a scumbag.- Finds solutions instead of arguements, has a hope for the poor people, rather than using politics to get richer and make the innocent people fall into debt, so much more that they would have to give up their land. Who am I talking about - Thaksin the "chinese" filtrated business man who majored in Criminology, rose to ranks in the police force and led farmers with taking loans that they were debted till the grave! Look at how the man you are disgrading helped his nation get out of that deadlock situation, where their land would have been taken from them and they would have ended up on the "never never" of paying any of their debts.

[alanferdi]

So are these guys in custody or on bail? Will be interesting to see if they get the death sentence and how much they pay to make all this go away.

Personally I don't think they should have been charged but hey TIT

Neither. Bail wasn't requested.

I just saw Ashibit on the Aussie news where he made a statement that he will fight the charges in court, and will accept whatever verdict or punishment the courts hand down, even the death sentence. His words not mine.

Yes... just as I said previously, this is a man with dignity, who does not run away from his shadow, the ones, certain Thais call ghosts. He will face it as a man...not run away and travel on another passport. He is willing to let justice roll... to prove or disprove stupidity an frivilous assumptions. Mr Thaksin.... LOOK and LEARN... dignity is earned not bought! and justice does not need to be fought for...it reveals in time to the learned mind ... the shallowness of those who think they have a case! What does the Master of Criminology or the student if he claims to be .... say to this or is this instigated by him to side track... we will see and not only us...the whole world will realise more of this masquerade!