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

[Hugo6]

almost 3 years

bout time

[Hugo6]

but I think a lot of people understand how much effort I put in to avoid losses.

hes dreamin or lying to himself

[rubl]

but I think a lot of people understand how much effort I put in to avoid losses.

hes dreamin or lying to himself

My dear H6, pure and utter BS opinion. For many weeks people were wondering why k. Abhisit didn't do anything, but just let those 'peaceful protesters' run amok. The patience shown was not really understood by many.

Edited December 27, 2012 by rubl

[Hugo6]

but I think a lot of people understand how much effort I put in to avoid losses.

hes dreamin or lying to himself

My dear H6, pure and utter BS opinion. For many weeks people were wondering why k. Abhisit didn't do anything, but just let those 'peaceful protesters' run amok. The patience shown was not really understood by many.

dude, i'm not your dear anything ruble. dont come with the feigned politness and then cross out BS as if you didnt mean it

abhisit used the army and snipers and if that is your idea of "effort", then forgive me for not posting my opinion of your "idea" 90+ people are DEAD and the man in charge needs to answer for his decisions.

and since the collective memory around this place needs a vitamin boost, lets point out that the protest sites were peaceful until after the state of emergency declared by the darling PM which put the military in charge and peaceful until the first protestor was shot. or have y'all forgotten that a protestors were not only the vast majority of all the dead, but that a protestor was the first to die as well. The way history is written around this place, it was the "peaceful army" attacked by those terrible armed protestors and not the other way around.

[Buchholz]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

[AleG]

dude, i'm not your dear anything ruble. dont come with the feigned politness and then cross out BS as if you didnt mean itabhisit used the army and snipers and if that is your idea of "effort", then forgive me for not posting my opinion of your "idea" 90+ people are DEAD and the man in charge needs to answer for his decisions. and since the collective memory around this place needs a vitamin boost, lets point out that the protest sites were peaceful until after the state of emergency declared by the darling PM which put the military in charge and peaceful until the first protestor was shot. or have y'all forgotten that a protestors were not only the vast majority of all the dead, but that a protestor was the first to die as well. The way history is written around this place, it was the "peaceful army" attacked by those terrible armed protestors and not the other way around.

That would be because that's what in fact happened.

Just as an example, before the army moved to clear the protesters at Victory Monument, Red Shirts had stormed the ThaiCom installation guarded by army troops and even before that they went to the 11th army regiment to confront them there. (at the same time a grenade fired into another army base injured two soldiers.)

Besides that there were nearly daily grenade attacks throughout the city, for which several Red Shirts have been already arrested and confessed to some of them.

As a background to all that the Red Shirts had resorted to violence and terrorism on their previous demonstrations, the murder of a man in Chiang Mai, in Bangkok on 2009 threatening to blow up a gas tanker in a neighbourhood for example, and the storming of the ASSEAN summit in Pattaya.So spare us the they were peaceful until the army intervened.

Note: You see those links? that's called a cite, used to substantiate a statement, you are free to do the same to substantiate yours.

Edited December 29, 2012 by AleG

[whybother]

dude, i'm not your dear anything ruble. dont come with the feigned politness and then cross out BS as if you didnt mean it

abhisit used the army and snipers and if that is your idea of "effort", then forgive me for not posting my opinion of your "idea" 90+ people are DEAD and the man in charge needs to answer for his decisions.

and since the collective memory around this place needs a vitamin boost, lets point out that the protest sites were peaceful until after the state of emergency declared by the darling PM which put the military in charge and peaceful until the first protestor was shot. or have y'all forgotten that a protestors were not only the vast majority of all the dead, but that a protestor was the first to die as well. The way history is written around this place, it was the "peaceful army" attacked by those terrible armed protestors and not the other way around.

The protests were peaceful until the red shirts stormed parliament and stormed Thaicom. That's when they stopped being peaceful.

I'm not sure why the SOE is an excuse for the red shirts to get violent.

[Hugo6]

dude, i'm not your dear anything ruble. dont come with the feigned politness and then cross out BS as if you didnt mean it

abhisit used the army and snipers and if that is your idea of "effort", then forgive me for not posting my opinion of your "idea" 90+ people are DEAD and the man in charge needs to answer for his decisions.

and since the collective memory around this place needs a vitamin boost, lets point out that the protest sites were peaceful until after the state of emergency declared by the darling PM which put the military in charge and peaceful until the first protestor was shot. or have y'all forgotten that a protestors were not only the vast majority of all the dead, but that a protestor was the first to die as well. The way history is written around this place, it was the "peaceful army" attacked by those terrible armed protestors and not the other way around.

The protests were peaceful until the red shirts stormed parliament and stormed Thaicom. That's when they stopped being peaceful.

I'm not sure why the SOE is an excuse for the red shirts to get violent.

youre a piece of work

the military got violent - shoot a protestor and see how the rest of the people react.

stormed the parliament - how long did they stay? weeks? months?

i know the story about thai telecom and youre just full of hot air. they "stormed" it when the government censored the protestors - who is the real aggressor? then they left and after they left the government shut it down again. yours is just crap from the propaganda committee - you get an A+

[whybother]

dude, i'm not your dear anything ruble. dont come with the feigned politness and then cross out BS as if you didnt mean it

abhisit used the army and snipers and if that is your idea of "effort", then forgive me for not posting my opinion of your "idea" 90+ people are DEAD and the man in charge needs to answer for his decisions.

and since the collective memory around this place needs a vitamin boost, lets point out that the protest sites were peaceful until after the state of emergency declared by the darling PM which put the military in charge and peaceful until the first protestor was shot. or have y'all forgotten that a protestors were not only the vast majority of all the dead, but that a protestor was the first to die as well. The way history is written around this place, it was the "peaceful army" attacked by those terrible armed protestors and not the other way around.

The protests were peaceful until the red shirts stormed parliament and stormed Thaicom. That's when they stopped being peaceful.

I'm not sure why the SOE is an excuse for the red shirts to get violent.

youre a piece of work

the military got violent - shoot a protestor and see how the rest of the people react.

stormed the parliament - how long did they stay? weeks? months?

i know the story about thai telecom and youre just full of hot air. they "stormed" it when the government censored the protestors - who is the real aggressor? then they left and after they left the government shut it down again. yours is just crap from the propaganda committee - you get an A+

The protesters got violent before anyone was shot.

It doesn't matter that they didn't stay. They broke through riot police and at Thaicom they also used molotov cocktails.

When a TV station is inciting people to commit crimes, it should get censored.

The aggressors were the protesters who escalated their protest at every step, starting with threats to burn down the city, then spreading blood, then mobile rallies, then confronting soldiers nowhere near protest areas, then shutting down a business/shopping district ... all while there were grenade blasts going on around the city.

[Hugo6]

The protests were peaceful until the red shirts stormed parliament and stormed Thaicom. That's when they stopped being peaceful.

I'm not sure why the SOE is an excuse for the red shirts to get violent.

youre a piece of work

the military got violent - shoot a protestor and see how the rest of the people react.

stormed the parliament - how long did they stay? weeks? months?

i know the story about thai telecom and youre just full of hot air. they "stormed" it when the government censored the protestors - who is the real aggressor? then they left and after they left the government shut it down again. yours is just crap from the propaganda committee - you get an A+

The protesters got violent before anyone was shot.

It doesn't matter that they didn't stay. They broke through riot police and at Thaicom they also used molotov cocktails.

When a TV station is inciting people to commit crimes, it should get censored.

The aggressors were the protesters who escalated their protest at every step, starting with threats to burn down the city, then spreading blood, then mobile rallies, then confronting soldiers nowhere near protest areas, then shutting down a business/shopping district ... all while there were grenade blasts going on around the city.

They broke through riot police

i thought the police werent doing their job

learned that here

abhisit and suthep called em all terrorists before the first one arrived in bangkok and you wanna tell me the protestors are the aggressors

ok, then i ll claim that your brain is jelly ... would htat be a true statement? of course not.

i ll stick to my statements that

its about time and

the man didnt try to limit losses he was trying to save his political butt

[whybother]

They broke through riot police

i thought the police werent doing their job

learned that here

abhisit and suthep called em all terrorists before the first one arrived in bangkok and you wanna tell me the protestors are the aggressors

ok, then i ll claim that your brain is jelly ... would htat be a true statement? of course not.

i ll stick to my statements that

its about time and

the man didnt try to limit losses he was trying to save his political butt

Rephrase: Soldiers in riot gear.

Can you show me one instance of them being called terrorists before they arrived in Bangkok? You can stick to your made up statements if you like.

Do you really think that stepping down when ever a few thousand protesters come out, and particularly when some of them are armed, is the smart thing to do? Yay for mob rule.

[AleG]

That would be because that's what in fact happened.

Just as an example, before the army moved to clear the protesters at Victory Monument, Red Shirts had stormed the ThaiCom installation guarded by army troops and even before that they went to the 11th army regiment to confront them there. (at the same time a grenade fired into another army base injured two soldiers.)

Besides that there were nearly daily grenade attacks throughout the city, for which several Red Shirts have been already arrested and confessed to some of them.

As a background to all that the Red Shirts had resorted to violence and terrorism on their previous demonstrations, the murder of a man in Chiang Mai, in Bangkok on 2009 threatening to blow up a gas tanker in a neighbourhood for example, and the storming of the ASSEAN summit in Pattaya.So spare us the they were peaceful until the army intervened.

Note: You see those links? that's called a cite, used to substantiate a statement, you are free to do the same to substantiate yours.

see those links - thats worthless junk when your post is full of nonsense. For anyone interested in learning more about the conflict heres one that works www.google.com

so mr aleg, back to your nonsense - none of that happened at the protest site so blame it on the peaceful protestors. already addressed your thaicom stuff above. you make it out as though the red shirts just "stormed" it cause they were bored... crap. btw, the first killing of a protestor WAS at the site. so go blame that on the thaicom incident.

i know the red shirts are evil and the army and abhisit are saints.

Nobody is stopping you from citing facts to support your assertion that the Red Shirts were a peaceful, non violent movement until they were confronted by the army. That you instead try childish bluster speak by itself on the value of your "facts".

[rubl]

Here a NewMandela article on the issue at hand, with lots of comments from posters. Although from 2010-06-07 not really much different from the discussion now.

http://asiapacific.a...hts-yes-indeed/

[Hugo6]

They broke through riot police

i thought the police werent doing their job

learned that here

abhisit and suthep called em all terrorists before the first one arrived in bangkok and you wanna tell me the protestors are the aggressors

ok, then i ll claim that your brain is jelly ... would htat be a true statement? of course not.

i ll stick to my statements that

its about time and

the man didnt try to limit losses he was trying to save his political butt

Rephrase: Soldiers in riot gear.

Can you show me one instance of them being called terrorists before they arrived in Bangkok? You can stick to your made up statements if you like.

Do you really think that stepping down when ever a few thousand protesters come out, and particularly when some of them are armed, is the smart thing to do? Yay for mob rule.

can you show me one instance of them not callin them terrorist before they arrive in bangkok

show me that i m wrong since you insist that the truth is not the truth

youre just a major apologist for how abhisit came to power and ignore the fact that he was not democratically in power but only thanks to his own efforts, the pad, and that of the opposition to the ppp to topple the government and install him as pm.

when you start with the correct point of departure it all becomes clear

but for you there is no hope.

[Hugo6]

That would be because that's what in fact happened.

Just as an example, before the army moved to clear the protesters at Victory Monument, Red Shirts had stormed the ThaiCom installation guarded by army troops and even before that they went to the 11th army regiment to confront them there. (at the same time a grenade fired into another army base injured two soldiers.)

Besides that there were nearly daily grenade attacks throughout the city, for which several Red Shirts have been already arrested and confessed to some of them.

As a background to all that the Red Shirts had resorted to violence and terrorism on their previous demonstrations, the murder of a man in Chiang Mai, in Bangkok on 2009 threatening to blow up a gas tanker in a neighbourhood for example, and the storming of the ASSEAN summit in Pattaya.So spare us the they were peaceful until the army intervened.

Note: You see those links? that's called a cite, used to substantiate a statement, you are free to do the same to substantiate yours.

see those links - thats worthless junk when your post is full of nonsense. For anyone interested in learning more about the conflict heres one that works www.google.com

so mr aleg, back to your nonsense - none of that happened at the protest site so blame it on the peaceful protestors. already addressed your thaicom stuff above. you make it out as though the red shirts just "stormed" it cause they were bored... crap. btw, the first killing of a protestor WAS at the site. so go blame that on the thaicom incident.

i know the red shirts are evil and the army and abhisit are saints.

Nobody is stopping you from citing facts to support your assertion that the Red Shirts were a peaceful, non violent movement until they were confronted by the army. That you instead try childish bluster speak by itself on the value of your "facts".

its better than spewing yellow/dem propaganda about the poor army victimzed by those evil protestors

really

the only people i know who buy that line of crap are here on this forum

carry on boys

ps show me where the army was killed first. you can't

[whybother]

can you show me one instance of them not callin them terrorist before they arrive in bangkok

show me that i m wrong since you insist that the truth is not the truth

youre just a major apologist for how abhisit came to power and ignore the fact that he was not democratically in power but only thanks to his own efforts, the pad, and that of the opposition to the ppp to topple the government and install him as pm.

when you start with the correct point of departure it all becomes clear

but for you there is no hope.

"can you show me one instance of them not callin them terrorist before they arrive in bangkok"

What a pathetic argument ... but here you go. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/03/09/politics/Fears-of-grenade-attacks-at-key-sites-30124253.html

[Hugo6]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

[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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

One assumes here that they arrived and protested peacefully after listening to Arisman telling them to burn down Bangkok? Since Thaksin apologists have great difficulty even acknowledging the existence of the Arisman video, airy commands to look things up on Google are not to be taken seriously.

Edited December 29, 2012 by yoshiwara

[whybother]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

And conveniently leaving out the violent protesters including protesters with guns and grenades.

[Hugo6]

the terrorists arrived in bangkok

just one of a dozen or so videos of these evil demons

[Hugo6]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

And conveniently leaving out the violent protesters including protesters with guns and grenades.

after being attacked by the army

do you honestly think that after 2009 there might not be people who felt like they had to protect the red shirts from the government

it was obvious.

i thought i said tehre is no hope for you

if i didnt then I shoulda

[whybother]

after being attacked by the army

do you honestly think that after 2009 there might not be people who felt like they had to protect the red shirts from the government

it was obvious.

i thought i said tehre is no hope for you

if i didnt then I shoulda

Are using the 2009 protests as an excuse for the 2010 protesters to get violent?

Did the army attack the red shirts in 2009, or was it the other way around?

[whybother]

the terrorists arrived in bangkok

just one of a dozen or so videos of these evil demons

What exactly does that prove?

[rubl]

the terrorists arrived in bangkok

just one of a dozen or so videos of these evil demons

-- clip removed --

A month later still there, but less friendly

"This is a clip taken from Red Shirt TV Station "Mirror Thailand". Please watch the video carefully towards the end.Someone was firing from red shirt side using war weapons. Red shirts think it's Sey Daeng--Military expert, Thaksin's right hand. Recently Sey Daeng (Gen. Kattiya) said that the strategy the 3 core leaders were using was dog's brain, buffalo brain. He said on TV that he had told Thaksin that the only way to gain victory was to do it aggressive way using soldiers to fight with soldiers. He said if he's the leader of red shirt mob, he can promise Thaksin EASY VICTORY. He said since he's military expert he knows how to get at the soldiers.A few days earlier, he said the government underestimated the red shirt mob. The government had no idea someone is using war weapons to help red shirts.

-----

The Government said a laser beam was pointed to the group of commanders before an MP79 was fire at them, killing the General Romklao and injuring other senior officers...."

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcx64z_red-shirts-terrorists-on-10-april-2_news

BTW the renegade general Seh Daeng when asked said "Who, me? No one saw me."

[Skywalker69]

the terrorists arrived in bangkok

just one of a dozen or so videos of these evil demons

[muttley]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

And conveniently leaving out the violent protesters including protesters with guns and grenades.

Which have yet to be seen.

Before you twist my words to say that I am denying red shirts fired grenades or fired at security personnel that is not the case.

However is there any clear obvious footage of red shirts doing so out there? I've seen grainy footage of somebody doing so but I've also seen pictures and videos of army personnel in plain clothes mixing with army in full camo so excuse my scepticism, you know my, as Rivalex calls it Ridiculous Bias by now to question most of the bs I've seen on here.

I've seen and heard the effect of grenades but have no idea who fired/threw them especially the period before the red shirts were in Bangkok.

I am aware of a "self confessed" red shirt guard who admitted to firing/throwing 60 odd grenades .

I am aware of Sae Daengs right hand man who admitted to firing a grenade/grenades at the Dusit Hotel in response to where he thought the shots that killed Sae Daeng had come from.

I am aware of a former policeman of no political affiliation who admitted to firing a grenade/s at the Defence Ministry (not the Emerald Buddha which was widely pushed by the government as the target for obvious propaganda reasons and still is touted as such on this forum, suprise,suprise) and I believe an empty fuel tank on the outskirts of a RTAF base which he said he was paid to do.

I am aware of the red shirt ( I think it was later proved not to be the case ) who blew himself up and a house making a bomb.

I am also aware of the b/s so called Chiang Mai 11 who were supposed to have been trained by the Cambodians were arrested and the disappeared into "police protection" on behalf of the government never to be heard from again.

So, so far, 1 guy who says he is a red shirt guard who appears to be responsible for every grenade attack both in Bangkok and Chiang Mai, one of Sae Daengs right hand men (according to the papers he had a couple both with different names) an ex copper and another maybe red shirt who failed bombmaking 101.

Not exactly Bomber Command is it.

Or 500 Ronin as the Military Intelligence had it and Abhisit was fond of touting around. Not one dead protester found armed (and don't give me that spirited away crap)

Now if I didn't have such a "ridiculous bias" some people may believe me when I said that the vast majority of the Red Shirts were peaceful and have a legitimate right to the truth - some of which is now coming out from the inquests.

And the more that comes, the more the abject abhisit apologists cries grow shriller.

I mean what does he have to fear, he did nothing wrong.........

[whybother]

Which have yet to be seen.

Before you twist my words to say that I am denying red shirts fired grenades or fired at security personnel that is not the case.

However is there any clear obvious footage of red shirts doing so out there? I've seen grainy footage of somebody doing so but I've also seen pictures and videos of army personnel in plain clothes mixing with army in full camo so excuse my scepticism, you know my, as Rivalex calls it Ridiculous Bias by now to question most of the bs I've seen on here.

I've seen and heard the effect of grenades but have no idea who fired/threw them especially the period before the red shirts were in Bangkok.

I am aware of a "self confessed" red shirt guard who admitted to firing/throwing 60 odd grenades .

I am aware of Sae Daengs right hand man who admitted to firing a grenade/grenades at the Dusit Hotel in response to where he thought the shots that killed Sae Daeng had come from.

I am aware of a former policeman of no political affiliation who admitted to firing a grenade/s at the Defence Ministry (not the Emerald Buddha which was widely pushed by the government as the target for obvious propaganda reasons and still is touted as such on this forum, suprise,suprise) and I believe an empty fuel tank on the outskirts of a RTAF base which he said he was paid to do.

I am aware of the red shirt ( I think it was later proved not to be the case ) who blew himself up and a house making a bomb.

I am also aware of the b/s so called Chiang Mai 11 who were supposed to have been trained by the Cambodians were arrested and the disappeared into "police protection" on behalf of the government never to be heard from again.

So, so far, 1 guy who says he is a red shirt guard who appears to be responsible for every grenade attack both in Bangkok and Chiang Mai, one of Sae Daengs right hand men (according to the papers he had a couple both with different names) an ex copper and another maybe red shirt who failed bombmaking 101.

Not exactly Bomber Command is it.

Or 500 Ronin as the Military Intelligence had it and Abhisit was fond of touting around. Not one dead protester found armed (and don't give me that spirited away crap)

Now if I didn't have such a "ridiculous bias" some people may believe me when I said that the vast majority of the Red Shirts were peaceful and have a legitimate right to the truth - some of which is now coming out from the inquests.

And the more that comes, the more the abject abhisit apologists cries grow shriller.

I mean what does he have to fear, he did nothing wrong.........

Yes ... and for every incident the army is being blamed for you can also find something that could put into doubt them doing it.

[muttley]

Which have yet to be seen.

Before you twist my words to say that I am denying red shirts fired grenades or fired at security personnel that is not the case.

However is there any clear obvious footage of red shirts doing so out there? I've seen grainy footage of somebody doing so but I've also seen pictures and videos of army personnel in plain clothes mixing with army in full camo so excuse my scepticism, you know my, as Rivalex calls it Ridiculous Bias by now to question most of the bs I've seen on here.

I've seen and heard the effect of grenades but have no idea who fired/threw them especially the period before the red shirts were in Bangkok.

I am aware of a "self confessed" red shirt guard who admitted to firing/throwing 60 odd grenades .

I am aware of Sae Daengs right hand man who admitted to firing a grenade/grenades at the Dusit Hotel in response to where he thought the shots that killed Sae Daeng had come from.

I am aware of a former policeman of no political affiliation who admitted to firing a grenade/s at the Defence Ministry (not the Emerald Buddha which was widely pushed by the government as the target for obvious propaganda reasons and still is touted as such on this forum, suprise,suprise) and I believe an empty fuel tank on the outskirts of a RTAF base which he said he was paid to do.

I am aware of the red shirt ( I think it was later proved not to be the case ) who blew himself up and a house making a bomb.

I am also aware of the b/s so called Chiang Mai 11 who were supposed to have been trained by the Cambodians were arrested and the disappeared into "police protection" on behalf of the government never to be heard from again.

So, so far, 1 guy who says he is a red shirt guard who appears to be responsible for every grenade attack both in Bangkok and Chiang Mai, one of Sae Daengs right hand men (according to the papers he had a couple both with different names) an ex copper and another maybe red shirt who failed bombmaking 101.

Not exactly Bomber Command is it.

Or 500 Ronin as the Military Intelligence had it and Abhisit was fond of touting around. Not one dead protester found armed (and don't give me that spirited away crap)

Now if I didn't have such a "ridiculous bias" some people may believe me when I said that the vast majority of the Red Shirts were peaceful and have a legitimate right to the truth - some of which is now coming out from the inquests.

And the more that comes, the more the abject abhisit apologists cries grow shriller.

I mean what does he have to fear, he did nothing wrong.........

Yes ... and for every incident the army is being blamed for you can also find something that could put into doubt them doing it.

Would you like to try the first three inquests as incidents you can raise doubt over? I'm sure the courts (not to mention abhisit and suhep) would mop up any such crucial info you have that they don't.

Abhisit said that the troops weren't shooting anybody.He lied. Not for the first time.

[Skywalker69]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

Sigh! Another one whom think he knows everyting. Did you know that Thaksin wasn´t even a legal Caretaker Premier in time the coup happend?

[Pimay1]

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.

The peaceful nonsense being distributed once again with the post above.

looks like nonsense is on the pitchers mound doesnt it

no one is going to convince the blind 'n blinded posters on this forum that there was ever a good reason to protest in 2010 or that abhisit and the army werent victims of those evil red shirts

there are lots of videos out there of the protestors arriving and protesting peacefully and others with the military killing people but you wont see those here

get yourself a browser with google and you ll be better informed

Sigh! Another one whom think he knows everyting. Did you know that Thaksin wasn´t even a legal Caretaker Premier in time the coup happend?

I really don't understand my friend why you guys respond to this troll's posts. If we ignore him maybe he will go away, take his toys to another forum and play.