Abhisit, Suthep Face More Murder Charges Over 2010 Strife

[tominbkk]

Just because the army can't be charged, doesn't mean that they weren't responsible. Why does someone else need to be charged? Sent from my Phone.

Well, i completely agree that the army should be charged as well.

If an inquest finds that the army was responsible and given that the army apparently can't be charged, shouldn't it stop there?

Sent from my Phone.

If your relative would have been killed by the army would you also think that it is alright not to charge the ones responsible?

If I knew my relative was in agreement that burning down Bangkok, killing civilians, and raiding hospitals was an OK means of protest, I might not care if he was smacked with some lead by the army.

[nicknostitz]

Equally fascinating how you deliberately misrepresent others' views.

I do not support any 'culture of impunity' as you so simply put it. What I do support is justice & fairness, which is in short supply in the current political environment here today.

You support Abhisit & Suthep being tried for murder or accessories to murder. You do not explain how they might receive a fair trial. You also seem to have a very selective agenda regarding who should be made responsible for the riots & protests in 2010. Nothing about the power behind the red shirts & MIB who are at the equivalent level to Abhisit & Suthep.

Using the politicised DSI to investigate & instigate charges (along with all the other trumped-up charges which you choose to ignore) is not going to satisfy real justice - only the revenge type of 'justice' sought by some sections of the red shirts.

The major problem is the impunity allowed under the law for the military. That is where the blame is & shifting the blame to find someone else to take it is part of Thailands ' culture of scapegoatism'.

Well, they will receive a fair trial because you can be sure that there will be many national and international observers in that trial - journalists, diplomats, and members of relevant organizations. Trials here generally are public trials, and are therefore open to scrutiny.

Several alleged "MIB" are standing for trial right now, which the DSI has investigated during the Abhisit government - where the DSI was equally accused of being politicized, only then leaning towards the Democrat government and the military. Which has resulted in stalling investigations in the cases of dead protesters suspected to have been killed by the military.

As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai polity and society. But to find that out you will have to look a bit deeper into it than the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which still has huge difficulties in understanding the basic structures of the Red Shirts, as can be seen in reporting over the present protests at the constitution court, in which especially the Bangkok Post still reports it as an "UDD protest", while it is clear that this is organized by a network of so called "free Red Shirt groups" who are not under the authority of the UDD, and are neither supported nor funded by the UDD or the Pueah Thai Party.

But i digress...

But yes, i have no problem in the investigation into all the matters you mentioned. The Democrat led government had more than one year time and all the resources that come with being in government available. There were a few convicted Red Shirt protesters for more serious crimes than violations against the emergency decree, and many trials that collapsed because people were arrested on more than flimsy pretense, very little evidence that just could not stand up in court.

And yes, i agree with you that a one of the major problems is the impunity under which the military acts. Yet the Abhisit government went to bed with the military in order to come to power, and to stay in power. History might have been different if back in 2006 the Democrat Party would have made a principled stand against the coup (while still being Thaksin opponents - which is perfectly legitimate). The first leaders that protested against the coup, by the way, were actually Thaksin opponents, such as Dr. Weng, who was briefly part of the PAD before the coup, or Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong, and many others.

But the Democrat Party didn't - it just made a few meaningless statements, while in reality not just applauding the coup, but also key members of the Democrat Party, such as Kraisak Choonhavan, traveling around the world to make the coup appear nice to foreign leaders. The Democrat Party could also not have massively supported the PAD (which was also strongly supported by the military) in 2008, and then just riding the military's coattails to power.

In short - you make your bed, you gotta sleep in it. If now powerful members of the PT try to make their own deal with the military, it may one day come back to haunt them as well. Thai people increasingly are not tolerating the military structure anymore as it is, and even many soldiers are sick and tired of this system.

Edited May 6, 2013 by nicknostitz

[hellodolly]

Does the police chief, the police minister or the PM get charged with authorising "murder" when ever a policeman kills someone? Sent from my Phone.

An excellent point.

Maybe the Dems should start making charges like that.

They could charge all the prison Warden's with murder when some one is killed in a prison.

Edit

They could charge Thaksin for all the murders in the supposed war on drugs. Also in the deaths of some of the people in the southern three provinces. The PTP along with their red shirt rent a mob don't really want that precedent to be set. It would lay the base for Interpol to step in and hunt Thaksin down and brought back to Thailand in chains.

Edited May 6, 2013 by hellodolly

[rubl]

Instead of rewriting history in a form some like to see it, allegedly that is, let's get back to the OP where we have k. Abhisit and k. Suthep yet again to face more 'murder' charges.

That's probably because the DSI could not come up with or think of a more condemning charge, in their eyes that is. Obviously they couldn't charge them with terrorism, now could they?

[khunken]

Equally fascinating how you deliberately misrepresent others' views.

I do not support any 'culture of impunity' as you so simply put it. What I do support is justice & fairness, which is in short supply in the current political environment here today.

You support Abhisit & Suthep being tried for murder or accessories to murder. You do not explain how they might receive a fair trial. You also seem to have a very selective agenda regarding who should be made responsible for the riots & protests in 2010. Nothing about the power behind the red shirts & MIB who are at the equivalent level to Abhisit & Suthep.

Using the politicised DSI to investigate & instigate charges (along with all the other trumped-up charges which you choose to ignore) is not going to satisfy real justice - only the revenge type of 'justice' sought by some sections of the red shirts.

The major problem is the impunity allowed under the law for the military. That is where the blame is & shifting the blame to find someone else to take it is part of Thailands ' culture of scapegoatism'.

Well, they will receive a fair trial because you can be sure that there will be many national and international observers in that trial - journalists, diplomats, and members of relevant organizations. Trials here generally are public trials, and are therefore open to scrutiny.

Several alleged "MIB" are standing for trial right now, which the DSI has investigated during the Abhisit government - where the DSI was equally accused of being politicized, only then leaning towards the Democrat government and the military. Which has resulted in stalling investigations in the cases of dead protesters suspected to have been killed by the military.

As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai polity and society. But to find that out you will have to look a bit deeper into it than the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which still has huge difficulties in understanding the basic structures of the Red Shirts, as can be seen in reporting over the present protests at the constitution court, in which especially the Bangkok Post still reports it as an "UDD protest", while it is clear that this is organized by a network of so called "free Red Shirt groups" who are not under the authority of the UDD, and are neither supported nor funded by the UDD or the Pueah Thai Party.

But i digress...

But yes, i have no problem in the investigation into all the matters you mentioned. The Democrat led government had more than one year time and all the resources that come with being in government available. There were a few convicted Red Shirt protesters for more serious crimes than violations against the emergency decree, and many trials that collapsed because people were arrested on more than flimsy pretense, very little evidence that just could not stand up in court.

And yes, i agree with you that a one of the major problems is the impunity under which the military acts. Yet the Abhisit government went to bed with the military in order to come to power, and to stay in power. History might have been different if back in 2006 the Democrat Party would have made a principled stand against the coup (while still being Thaksin opponents - which is perfectly legitimate). The first leaders that protested against the coup, by the way, were actually Thaksin opponents, such as Dr. Weng, who was briefly part of the PAD before the coup, or Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong, and many others.

But the Democrat Party didn't - it just made a few meaningless statements, while in reality not just applauding the coup, but also key members of the Democrat Party, such as Kraisak Choonhavan, traveling around the world to make the coup appear nice to foreign leaders. The Democrat Party could also not have massively supported the PAD (which was also strongly supported by the military) in 2008, and then just riding the military's coattails to power.

In short - you make your bed, you gotta sleep in it. If now powerful members of the PT try to make their own deal with the military, it may one day come back to haunt them as well. Thai people increasingly are not tolerating the military structure anymore as it is, and even many soldiers are sick and tired of this system.

There's a lot of stuff there, some of which I agree with & some I don't. It's my bedtime so I'll reply to you tomorrow.

[nicknostitz]

Does the police chief, the police minister or the PM get charged with authorising "murder" when ever a policeman kills someone? Sent from my Phone.

An excellent point.

Maybe the Dems should start making charges like that.

They could charge all the prison Warden's with murder when some one is killed in a prison.

Edit

They could charge Thaksin for all the murders in the supposed war on drugs. Also in the deaths of some of the people in the southern three provinces. The PTP along with their red shirt rent a mob don't really want that precedent to be set. It would lay the base for Interpol to step in and hunt Thaksin down and brought back to Thailand in chains.

Eh, yes, but you may want to mull over why neither the coup government (nearly one and a half years) nor the Democrat government (three and a half years) did charge Thaksin over these deaths. I don't think though they avoided this because they wanted to be nice to Thaksin...

[nicknostitz]

Instead of rewriting history in a form some like to see it, allegedly that is, let's get back to the OP where we have k. Abhisit and k. Suthep yet again to face more 'murder' charges.

That's probably because the DSI could not come up with or think of a more condemning charge, in their eyes that is. Obviously they couldn't charge them with terrorism, now could they?

Of course it could not possibly have been the fact that several persons were ruled by the courts to have been killed by soldiers in 2010, and as Abhist and Suthep having been the two most senior members of the council that has overseen the Emergency Situation and issued orders to the military, they could be seen as somewhat involved in whatever orders may have been given leading to the death of those people.

Definitely this could not have played a role in that decision.

Why use simple logic when a sexy conspiracy theory may lurk just around the corner?

[Theoutsider]

Stand by folks, the apologists and Red Shirt fans will arrive soon.

Apologists is so last year.

Red huggers:)

[hellodolly]

Does the police chief, the police minister or the PM get charged with authorising "murder" when ever a policeman kills someone? Sent from my Phone.

An excellent point.

Maybe the Dems should start making charges like that.

They could charge all the prison Warden's with murder when some one is killed in a prison.

Edit

They could charge Thaksin for all the murders in the supposed war on drugs. Also in the deaths of some of the people in the southern three provinces. The PTP along with their red shirt rent a mob don't really want that precedent to be set. It would lay the base for Interpol to step in and hunt Thaksin down and brought back to Thailand in chains.

Eh, yes, but you may want to mull over why neither the coup government (nearly one and a half years) nor the Democrat government (three and a half years) did charge Thaksin over these deaths. I don't think though they avoided this because they wanted to be nice to Thaksin...

So you are proposing double standards here. The Dems and the army did not charge Thaksin because he was the PM not the man on the ground.

But the PTP and red shirts are charging the PM and the man in charge of handling the situation the PTP controlled police Department hid from. Why are they not charging the man on the ground?

Any one with a western education can easily see that it is all a cover up for the PTP and their red shirted army. Take the spotlight off the terrorists and the man who paid for it by making trumped up charges against any one who disagrees with them.

Given the education system here I am not surprised it is fooling the Thais.

Do you not find it kind of puzzling that if they give one man a white wash all the charges go away. I don't that is all that the whole dog and pony show is about.

Easy answer there they may be dumb as a barrel full of hammers but they are not that dumb.

[AleG]

Thank you nicknostitz for the valuable information about the court cases, I'm glad to hear that they are handled in a not too biased way (it's very difficult to get any information about these ongoing cases).

I also always appreciate your personal eywitness accounts of the events.

No reasonable person would deny that the military killed many protesters, as decided in these cases.

But I just cannot agree on your insisting that that Abhisit/Suthep (as much as I loath the 2nd) must be held responsible for that. It is insane to put a PM on the stand for a lowly soldier killing a protestor in a country where the military has so much power (or in any country !).

My comments are very simple, I know, but at the same time I wouldn't be surprised if many TV members would agree (maybe preposterous).

Again, I very much appreciate your engagement and reports of these events (and your books). I'm sure you'll have your place in history.

Thanks for the comment.

I believe that Abhisit and Suthep should be charged.

If they should be and/or can be held responsible is then up to the court to decide, and it will depend on the evidence presented. I do not know enough about the inner workings of the CRES to state that Abhisit and/or Suthep are to be held responsible, legally. I just hope that part of the trial will be that more of the inner workings on CRES are made public, such as orders, decision making processes, etc

They could be charged with all sorts of things potentially, but murder is a huge stretch. Much like charging the reds with terrorists had all sorts of legal ramifications for other issues, charging these guys for murder is very unlikely to succeed.

On the contrary, it has been hugely successful... in graving headlines around the world."Former Thai PM faces murder charges..." PR gold for team Thaksin.

It's like crack for the Red faction here in Thailand too. A hallmark of Thaksin, grandstanding headline grabbing stunts that more often than not lead nowhere but help build his legend.

[Ianatlarge]

Great. Government officials should be held responsible for their actions, the worst of which is killing citizens. The military is all too often used to suppress citizens attempting to redress grievances. The soldiers who pulled the trigger, the officers who ordered their men, everyone along the chain of command should be held responsible.

[tominbkk]

Without KNOWING who fired the bullets then the individual responsible remains as persons unknown.

The subject here is Abhisit and Suthep being charged with murder. And that's a political and trumped up charge.

Anyone who advocates only to charge the UDD leadership, but not the leadership of CRES over 2010 should really think about logic and why we have courts. People died, and society has the right to find out as much of the truth as possible - and that is generally done in the courts.

Sorry, can't agree. The CRES was operating as a branch of the government and was attempting to control a dangerous mob of people from hurting civilians. This mob was burning and looting, and had many weapons and threatened to use them against normal Bangkokians on a daily basis. It was the responsibility of the CRES to quell this dangerous mob and restore order.

Along the way a few innocents who decided to wander around the battlefield were killed. Truthfully, they should have know better than to be wandering around those dangerous areas. I feel he same way about reporters who embed so they can get a hot story, and who then get injured or killed. It's a pity, but the risks are known and taken, so there should be no crying afterwards if something happens.

[tominbkk]

Just because the army can't be charged, doesn't mean that they weren't responsible. Why does someone else need to be charged? Sent from my Phone.

Well, i completely agree that the army should be charged as well.

If an inquest finds that the army was responsible and given that the army apparently can't be charged, shouldn't it stop there?

Sent from my Phone.

If your relative would have been killed by the army would you also think that it is alright not to charge the ones responsible?

Therefore, no, i don't think that it should stop there.

And i am not even going here at this place into the problems concerning the emergency decree, when it was issued, it's legal definitions, the curtailing of civil rights, and if issuing this emergency decree was actually justified by law, or a far too liberal interpretation of the law, and/or abuses of the law that seem to have been conveniently covered by the laws ruling the emergency decree (such as blocking Prachatai, quite direct threats against the media by the government on subjects that we are not to cover, and how to cover other subjects, etc).

This would be rather off topic, but i would suggest to privately look into these matters.

If my relative chose to wander around a dangerous area, or take part in a violent anti-society protest, I would probably warn them not to do it, and if I cared about them I would be upset if they got injured or killed. But I would also understand that they took a big risk and it did not pay off. If the ones who killed him were in charge of returning the area to safety for all, I would understand.

It's like that Japanese reporter who was killed in burma during the monk protest. He laid down on the ground to get pictures of soldiers running after the monks. He must have known the risks, and took them anyway, and was shot. Too bad, but war is hell and that is that.

[Thaddeus]

Why use simple logic when a sexy conspiracy theory may lurk just around the corner?

Ok, in that case, let's stop the guff, there is only one man who is primarily responsible for the riots in 2010 and ALL the associated deaths.

And all the others deaths in previous years, he will also be the only man responsible for any politically motivated deaths in the next years to come, while he continues to breathe, ordinary people will die for no good reason.

[rubl]

Government conspiracy? If one were to read my post one would possibly see that I wonder not about the charging, but about the type of charge. Murder that is.

If one were to believe in conspiracies it would seem that provoking a government to the point the government has no choice but to react would be a better candidate. Mind you, a conspiracy to get fatalities in order to gather sympathy for an alleged democratic cause seems weird to say the least. Maybe I should play some UDD leader speeches again, on full blast sound level, that may improve my ability to see red before my eyes.

[nicknostitz]

What makes it almost impossible for me here is that many seem to have internalized the notion that the Red Shirts are simply a paid mob of terrorists paid and commanded by Thaksin. This, i am sorry to say, is completely wrong.

Unless you start understanding that the Red Shirts are a very complex social mass movement with many groups, it members ranging from all sectors of Thai society - from farmers to intellectuals, these groups strategies ranging from reformist to revolutionary, with very active discussions on all levels, discussion is just not possible.

On some level i can't blame you. Reporting on the Red Shirts in the English language media is more than insufficient. I can't remember any article in the English language media that looks at structure, dynamics and political ideology of the Red Shirts (and i have in my archives thousands of articles - several gigs of space on my computer).

I believe that i have studied the Red Shirts closer than anybody else since the birth of the that movement even before the military coup. And before i get accused of being embedded or biased - i have done the same with the Yellow Shirts, and also since last year i have went to many of the Democrat Party's Blue Sky rallies, since the Dems decided to form their own street movement (which has so far completely failed to take off).

That is why i can only state here that in order to understand this social conflict here you will have to go to the rallies of the different sides in person, and discuss the issues with people of all levels there.

If this whole thing would be as simplistic as many on Thaivisa believe, i would not have spent the last 7+ years of my life studying this conflict - i would have been bored a long time ago. And no, doing this was not exactly financially rewarding - i don't do it for the money either. I do it because it is a highly fascinating subject.

Somebody here mentioned the term "western education". Part of "western education" is to question everything, and to develop a thirst for learning. Therefore i would suggest to you people to go and learn where this conflict takes place: at rallies (small and large), community radio stations, grassroots organizations, etc.

Don;t just stay in internet discussion forums.

[nicknostitz]

Government conspiracy? If one were to read my post one would possibly see that I wonder not about the charging, but about the type of charge. Murder that is.

If one were to believe in conspiracies it would seem that provoking a government to the point the government has no choice but to react would be a better candidate. Mind you, a conspiracy to get fatalities in order to gather sympathy for an alleged democratic cause seems weird to say the least. Maybe I should play some UDD leader speeches again, on full blast sound level, that may improve my ability to see red before my eyes.

Well, but would you even understand the speeches if you listened to them?

[rubl]

Government conspiracy? If one were to read my post one would possibly see that I wonder not about the charging, but about the type of charge. Murder that is.

If one were to believe in conspiracies it would seem that provoking a government to the point the government has no choice but to react would be a better candidate. Mind you, a conspiracy to get fatalities in order to gather sympathy for an alleged democratic cause seems weird to say the least. Maybe I should play some UDD leader speeches again, on full blast sound level, that may improve my ability to see red before my eyes.

Well, but would you even understand the speeches if you listened to them?

Some speeches have a lot of slang, some Lao, and interesting terms I didn't learn in school and if I had and did use them my mother would give me a piece of soap, but apart from that I have build up a reasonable understanding of the Thai language. Also the speeches mostly are relatively simple and repeatative. Dr. weng can be a bit more philosofical at times but with my copy of the Mao's red book I can still follow the trail of his thoughts

BTW being able the understand what's being said and being able to understand the meaning of what's said are two different things. At full blast sound level none of the two seem to be really important somehow

[khunken]

Equally fascinating how you deliberately misrepresent others' views.

I do not support any 'culture of impunity' as you so simply put it. What I do support is justice & fairness, which is in short supply in the current political environment here today.

You support Abhisit & Suthep being tried for murder or accessories to murder. You do not explain how they might receive a fair trial. You also seem to have a very selective agenda regarding who should be made responsible for the riots & protests in 2010. Nothing about the power behind the red shirts & MIB who are at the equivalent level to Abhisit & Suthep.

Using the politicised DSI to investigate & instigate charges (along with all the other trumped-up charges which you choose to ignore) is not going to satisfy real justice - only the revenge type of 'justice' sought by some sections of the red shirts.

The major problem is the impunity allowed under the law for the military. That is where the blame is & shifting the blame to find someone else to take it is part of Thailands ' culture of scapegoatism'.

Well, they will receive a fair trial because you can be sure that there will be many national and international observers in that trial - journalists, diplomats, and members of relevant organizations. Trials here generally are public trials, and are therefore open to scrutiny.

Several alleged "MIB" are standing for trial right now, which the DSI has investigated during the Abhisit government - where the DSI was equally accused of being politicized, only then leaning towards the Democrat government and the military. Which has resulted in stalling investigations in the cases of dead protesters suspected to have been killed by the military.

As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai polity and society. But to find that out you will have to look a bit deeper into it than the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which still has huge difficulties in understanding the basic structures of the Red Shirts, as can be seen in reporting over the present protests at the constitution court, in which especially the Bangkok Post still reports it as an "UDD protest", while it is clear that this is organized by a network of so called "free Red Shirt groups" who are not under the authority of the UDD, and are neither supported nor funded by the UDD or the Pueah Thai Party.

But i digress...

But yes, i have no problem in the investigation into all the matters you mentioned. The Democrat led government had more than one year time and all the resources that come with being in government available. There were a few convicted Red Shirt protesters for more serious crimes than violations against the emergency decree, and many trials that collapsed because people were arrested on more than flimsy pretense, very little evidence that just could not stand up in court.

And yes, i agree with you that a one of the major problems is the impunity under which the military acts. Yet the Abhisit government went to bed with the military in order to come to power, and to stay in power. History might have been different if back in 2006 the Democrat Party would have made a principled stand against the coup (while still being Thaksin opponents - which is perfectly legitimate). The first leaders that protested against the coup, by the way, were actually Thaksin opponents, such as Dr. Weng, who was briefly part of the PAD before the coup, or Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong, and many others.

But the Democrat Party didn't - it just made a few meaningless statements, while in reality not just applauding the coup, but also key members of the Democrat Party, such as Kraisak Choonhavan, traveling around the world to make the coup appear nice to foreign leaders. The Democrat Party could also not have massively supported the PAD (which was also strongly supported by the military) in 2008, and then just riding the military's coattails to power.

In short - you make your bed, you gotta sleep in it. If now powerful members of the PT try to make their own deal with the military, it may one day come back to haunt them as well. Thai people increasingly are not tolerating the military structure anymore as it is, and even many soldiers are sick and tired of this system.

As far as a fair trial goes - maybe. The international media

may take as much notice as they did with Thaksin's conflict of interest trial -

not a lot. It was only the lunchbox 'incident' that made any real impact. The

red shirt court intimidation mob may play a part too.

Your take on the red shirts being factionalised is current

& I broadly agree with it. However, it was different 3 years ago when,

despite some differences of opinion, there were no real factions & they

certainly were supporters of Thaksin. The 2010 riots & protests were timed

just after part of Thaksin's ill-gotten wealth was sequestered.

You are openly showing your bias in panning the Bangkok Post

& The Nation. Both have reporters of varying quality & both do give

voice to PTP & red shirt supporters. Are you suggesting that they are worse

than, say, the BBC? Now there's an organisation that has lost its way & its

independence.

Yes, the Democrats had the opportunity to investigate the

power behind the red shirts as well as red shirt violence. They missed that

opportunity as their focus was too much on tracking Thaksin & using the DSI

(& others) to file OTT terrorist charges against protestors & rioters.

As I said, they also missed the opportunity to set up a proper independent

investigative body to look at the events in a balanced way.

However, I don't think they believed that PTP would target

Abhisit so blatantly with so many trumped-up charges. More on that

later.

Your comments on the coup & the Democrats 'support' for it

yet again displays your bias. IMO they didn't display overt support, nor overt

condemnation. They would have been politically naive to condemn it. Similarly

they didn't provide 'massive support' for the PAD (surely confirmation of your

bias). They had a FM who was a PAD member & an idiot, the latter similar to

the current FM. On the other hand, the PTP did overtly support the 2010 riots & protests.

Pot, Kettle & black.

'Riding the military's coattails to power' - sorry, we're now

into the propaganda arena. There were two regimes between the coup & the

Democrats in power (Somchai & Samak). So, if you believe in this you are

into conspiracy theories, which you have criticised others for.

Which 'people' are growing intolerant of the

military? I think we know the answer to that. A far more

broadly-based view is that the problems with the military (and there are major

ones, especially in the south) are secondary to the problems with the police who

are widely viewed as systematically corrupt and both disrespected & feared.

Most citizens have far more dealings with the police than they do with the

military.

The police & their supposed large scale investigatory body

(the DSI) are totally controlled by the PTP which is far more anti-democratic

than any perceived problems with the CC. It is painfully obvious that the PTP,

by abusing their control, are trying to tie Abhisit up with as many trumped-up

charges as possible so that he & the Democrats cannot provide their focus on

opposing bringing back Thaksin with all the outstanding conviction &

suspended court cases dropped. The DoD committee (kangaroo court) stripping

Abhisit of his military service record was part of it.

Again, Abhisit & Suthep should not be charged over the

2010 riots as it is only politically motivated.

[hellodolly]

Great. Government officials should be held responsible for their actions, the worst of which is killing citizens. The military is all too often used to suppress citizens attempting to redress grievances. The soldiers who pulled the trigger, the officers who ordered their men, everyone along the chain of command should be held responsible.

Agreed

In this case there was no citizens attempting to redress grievances.

There was armed rocket launching citizens illegally seizing a portion of down town Bangkok behind barbed wire fences and invading hospitals because the PM had been elected legally just the same method used to elect Thaksin the man who was paying them wages to terrorize and attempt to burn Bangkok down.

The Government and the army were protecting honest law abiding citizens from these terrorists. That included you and me.

You and I both know that.

As we all know the charges are just red herrings being used to white wash one man and take the focus off of the real criminals. Given the education level of Thailand it is working.

[nicknostitz]

Government conspiracy? If one were to read my post one would possibly see that I wonder not about the charging, but about the type of charge. Murder that is.

If one were to believe in conspiracies it would seem that provoking a government to the point the government has no choice but to react would be a better candidate. Mind you, a conspiracy to get fatalities in order to gather sympathy for an alleged democratic cause seems weird to say the least. Maybe I should play some UDD leader speeches again, on full blast sound level, that may improve my ability to see red before my eyes.

Well, but would you even understand the speeches if you listened to them?

Some speeches have a lot of slang, some Lao, and interesting terms I didn't learn in school and if I had and did use them my mother would give me a piece of soap, but apart from that I have build up a reasonable understanding of the Thai language. Also the speeches mostly are relatively simple and repeatative. Dr. weng can be a bit more philosofical at times but with my copy of the Mao's red book I can still follow the trail of his thoughts

BTW being able the understand what's being said and being able to understand the meaning of what's said are two different things. At full blast sound level none of the two seem to be really important somehow

Dr. Weng can also quote you from most of the ancient philosophers as well. You should also have a look at Nattawut's speeches, they can be quite enormous. He is arguably Thailand's best orator, now even beating Sondhi Limthongkul's abilities (which have quite decreased since the assassination attempt).

It gets really interesting when you listen to speeches of some of the free Red Groups, especially the ones geared to the educated Red Shirts. You get an idea of wide that movement is when you listen to speeches of people like Ajarn Somsak Jeamteerasakul, Ajarn. Wan, or Ajarn Dum. At those events you also have regular poetry readings. Listen to social revolutionary music of "Fai yen", or the lyrics of the music by Jin Gamachon, especially the very powerful song of 'Nac Suu Turidin' - which commemorates the dead of the Red Shirts and has a multitude of subtle layers as well. Nitirat's suggestions to legal changes are very interesting. Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong held in December 2010 his "politcal talk show" (which earned him death threats) - one of the most intelligent and hilarious acts of political satire i have ever seen. Sombat, by the way, has often criticized Thaksin in public, and was the inventor of the use of the color Red as an identification color for the "Red Shirts"

Fascinating is also the present protest at the constitution court, geared mostly to common Red Shirts - the average listeners of the community radio stations. Speeches on stages are at times quite rough, but nevertheless, many speakers attempt, with the use of language that is quite easy to understand, to raise the level of political awareness and the understanding of social and political concepts.

And these are just a few little points that jump to my mind. There is a whole lot out there that many here don't seem to be aware of.

[nicknostitz]

Equally fascinating how you deliberately misrepresent others' views.

I do not support any 'culture of impunity' as you so simply put it. What I do support is justice & fairness, which is in short supply in the current political environment here today.

You support Abhisit & Suthep being tried for murder or accessories to murder. You do not explain how they might receive a fair trial. You also seem to have a very selective agenda regarding who should be made responsible for the riots & protests in 2010. Nothing about the power behind the red shirts & MIB who are at the equivalent level to Abhisit & Suthep.

Using the politicised DSI to investigate & instigate charges (along with all the other trumped-up charges which you choose to ignore) is not going to satisfy real justice - only the revenge type of 'justice' sought by some sections of the red shirts.

The major problem is the impunity allowed under the law for the military. That is where the blame is & shifting the blame to find someone else to take it is part of Thailands ' culture of scapegoatism'.

Well, they will receive a fair trial because you can be sure that there will be many national and international observers in that trial - journalists, diplomats, and members of relevant organizations. Trials here generally are public trials, and are therefore open to scrutiny.

Several alleged "MIB" are standing for trial right now, which the DSI has investigated during the Abhisit government - where the DSI was equally accused of being politicized, only then leaning towards the Democrat government and the military. Which has resulted in stalling investigations in the cases of dead protesters suspected to have been killed by the military.

As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai polity and society. But to find that out you will have to look a bit deeper into it than the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which still has huge difficulties in understanding the basic structures of the Red Shirts, as can be seen in reporting over the present protests at the constitution court, in which especially the Bangkok Post still reports it as an "UDD protest", while it is clear that this is organized by a network of so called "free Red Shirt groups" who are not under the authority of the UDD, and are neither supported nor funded by the UDD or the Pueah Thai Party.

But i digress...

But yes, i have no problem in the investigation into all the matters you mentioned. The Democrat led government had more than one year time and all the resources that come with being in government available. There were a few convicted Red Shirt protesters for more serious crimes than violations against the emergency decree, and many trials that collapsed because people were arrested on more than flimsy pretense, very little evidence that just could not stand up in court.

And yes, i agree with you that a one of the major problems is the impunity under which the military acts. Yet the Abhisit government went to bed with the military in order to come to power, and to stay in power. History might have been different if back in 2006 the Democrat Party would have made a principled stand against the coup (while still being Thaksin opponents - which is perfectly legitimate). The first leaders that protested against the coup, by the way, were actually Thaksin opponents, such as Dr. Weng, who was briefly part of the PAD before the coup, or Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong, and many others.

But the Democrat Party didn't - it just made a few meaningless statements, while in reality not just applauding the coup, but also key members of the Democrat Party, such as Kraisak Choonhavan, traveling around the world to make the coup appear nice to foreign leaders. The Democrat Party could also not have massively supported the PAD (which was also strongly supported by the military) in 2008, and then just riding the military's coattails to power.

In short - you make your bed, you gotta sleep in it. If now powerful members of the PT try to make their own deal with the military, it may one day come back to haunt them as well. Thai people increasingly are not tolerating the military structure anymore as it is, and even many soldiers are sick and tired of this system.

As far as a fair trial goes - maybe. The international media

may take as much notice as they did with Thaksin's conflict of interest trial -

not a lot. It was only the lunchbox 'incident' that made any real impact. The

red shirt court intimidation mob may play a part too.

Your take on the red shirts being factionalised is current

& I broadly agree with it. However, it was different 3 years ago when,

despite some differences of opinion, there were no real factions & they

certainly were supporters of Thaksin. The 2010 riots & protests were timed

just after part of Thaksin's ill-gotten wealth was sequestered.

You are openly showing your bias in panning the Bangkok Post

& The Nation. Both have reporters of varying quality & both do give

voice to PTP & red shirt supporters. Are you suggesting that they are worse

than, say, the BBC? Now there's an organisation that has lost its way & its

independence.

Yes, the Democrats had the opportunity to investigate the

power behind the red shirts as well as red shirt violence. They missed that

opportunity as their focus was too much on tracking Thaksin & using the DSI

(& others) to file OTT terrorist charges against protestors & rioters.

As I said, they also missed the opportunity to set up a proper independent

investigative body to look at the events in a balanced way.

However, I don't think they believed that PTP would target

Abhisit so blatantly with so many trumped-up charges. More on that

later.

Your comments on the coup & the Democrats 'support' for it

yet again displays your bias. IMO they didn't display overt support, nor overt

condemnation. They would have been politically naive to condemn it. Similarly

they didn't provide 'massive support' for the PAD (surely confirmation of your

bias). They had a FM who was a PAD member & an idiot, the latter similar to

the current FM. On the other hand, the PTP did overtly support the 2010 riots & protests.

Pot, Kettle & black.

'Riding the military's coattails to power' - sorry, we're now

into the propaganda arena. There were two regimes between the coup & the

Democrats in power (Somchai & Samak). So, if you believe in this you are

into conspiracy theories, which you have criticised others for.

Which 'people' are growing intolerant of the

military? I think we know the answer to that. A far more

broadly-based view is that the problems with the military (and there are major

ones, especially in the south) are secondary to the problems with the police who

are widely viewed as systematically corrupt and both disrespected & feared.

Most citizens have far more dealings with the police than they do with the

military.

The police & their supposed large scale investigatory body

(the DSI) are totally controlled by the PTP which is far more anti-democratic

than any perceived problems with the CC. It is painfully obvious that the PTP,

by abusing their control, are trying to tie Abhisit up with as many trumped-up

charges as possible so that he & the Democrats cannot provide their focus on

opposing bringing back Thaksin with all the outstanding conviction &

suspended court cases dropped. The DoD committee (kangaroo court) stripping

Abhisit of his military service record was part of it.

Again, Abhisit & Suthep should not be charged over the

2010 riots as it is only politically motivated.

A few point, because i have to work soon.

Already from 2006 onwards the groups that became the Red Shirts had many factions and independent groups that never joined the Nor Bor Kor, or the later Nor Por Chor. Groups such as the 24th of June group and many other small groups. In 2010 the UDD distanced themselves from Surachai Sae Dan's Red Siam (founded in 2009), who had a separate stage. Sae Daeng was never part of the UDD. Within the UDD you had the so called hardcore faction which and the peaceful faction. There was further regional factionalism between the Southern faction and the Isaarn and Northern factions. After 2010 the factionalism was only more pronounced, partly through initial lack of UDD leadership, and through rising differences in both political strategies and ideologies.

Democrat support for the PAD: unfortunately here i have to cite the lack of media reporting. Other than the well known leaders that were prominent Democrat members, you had on the common protesters levels massive involvement. Whole guard units of the PAD were on loan from Democrat Party street fighters of local MP from both Bangkok and Southern provinces. Many southern PAD chapters were from southern Democrat vote canvassers. It was quite obvious to see, when the PAD protested against Abhisit in 2011, and exactly those Democrat Party guards and vote canvassers were absent from the protest areas.

But all this you cannot gather from reading the newsmedia, you will have to investigate this on the ground, you will have to know the political networks and build relationships with the people involved.

And yes - before i am accused of white washing - i am aware that the involvement of TRT/PPP/PT in the Red Shirts is equally complex. Most people though here are not aware of the (former) extend of Democrat Party/PAD collaboration.

While i cannot argue that now the DSI is leaning towards the government, it was during the Abhisit government leaning strongly towards the Democrats and the military. And if there is a change of government - you can be sure that the DSI will lean towards whatever government that will be in power.

Yes, there are naturally many problems within the police, and it desperately needs to be reformed. But just because the military is less in public view does not mean that the problems of the military are any less. The military is far more powerful than the police, and have in some way created a state within the state, which the police has only achieved in the 50's under General Pao, before its power was lastingly curtailed.

Anyhow, gotta go now.

Edited May 7, 2013 by nicknostitz

[hellodolly]

What makes it almost impossible for me here is that many seem to have internalized the notion that the Red Shirts are simply a paid mob of terrorists paid and commanded by Thaksin. This, i am sorry to say, is completely wrong.

Unless you start understanding that the Red Shirts are a very complex social mass movement with many groups, it members ranging from all sectors of Thai society - from farmers to intellectuals, these groups strategies ranging from reformist to revolutionary, with very active discussions on all levels, discussion is just not possible.

On some level i can't blame you. Reporting on the Red Shirts in the English language media is more than insufficient. I can't remember any article in the English language media that looks at structure, dynamics and political ideology of the Red Shirts (and i have in my archives thousands of articles - several gigs of space on my computer).

I believe that i have studied the Red Shirts closer than anybody else since the birth of the that movement even before the military coup. And before i get accused of being embedded or biased - i have done the same with the Yellow Shirts, and also since last year i have went to many of the Democrat Party's Blue Sky rallies, since the Dems decided to form their own street movement (which has so far completely failed to take off).

That is why i can only state here that in order to understand this social conflict here you will have to go to the rallies of the different sides in person, and discuss the issues with people of all levels there.

If this whole thing would be as simplistic as many on Thaivisa believe, i would not have spent the last 7+ years of my life studying this conflict - i would have been bored a long time ago. And no, doing this was not exactly financially rewarding - i don't do it for the money either. I do it because it is a highly fascinating subject.

Somebody here mentioned the term "western education". Part of "western education" is to question everything, and to develop a thirst for learning. Therefore i would suggest to you people to go and learn where this conflict takes place: at rallies (small and large), community radio stations, grassroots organizations, etc.

Don;t just stay in internet discussion forums.

Now you are probably right in all that you say.

But none of it has any thing to do with the fact that the red shirts recieving pay from Thaksin illigaly siezed a portion of down town Bangkok behind barbed wire fences when the police refused to do sany thing about them the army was called in to get them out.

Du8ring there illegal tenure for which no charges have been laid. They fired live ammunition at soldiers and rockets at civilians as well as invaded a hospital.

You babble on about your doubt of the legality of the governments actions and say nothing about the illegal actions of the red shirts.

Would you have walked in there and peaceful escorted them out when they were carrying a gun and talking about burning Bangkok down.

Yes it was a social conflict that turned into an illegal action on the part of people who were paid to break the law and refuse to negotiate in good faith. Remember that they came to an agreement and when the government agreed to it they backed out of it and continued with there illegal carrings on including urging red shirts to burn Bangkok down and then proceed to try to do it.

You meander all over the place with your wanderings yet you never face the reality of what the red shirts did.

I can't remember you ever saying any thing about the rights of the honest citizens to earn a living but were deprived of it by the illegal actions of the red shirts.

I bet you would have a different story and point of view if one of those rockets launched at civilian targets had killed a member of your family.

I supported the red shirts but when they started with the pouring of blood that could have well been HIV positive I realized this had nothing to do with justice it was a mob that had made their demands clear and were now doing any thing they could think of to unseat an legally elected government. At that point I changed my attitude towards them and they proceeded to prove me right in changing my attitude towards them.

Do you think Abhist should be charged with misappropriation of funds by paying there way home for them?

[nicknostitz]

What makes it almost impossible for me here is that many seem to have internalized the notion that the Red Shirts are simply a paid mob of terrorists paid and commanded by Thaksin. This, i am sorry to say, is completely wrong.

Unless you start understanding that the Red Shirts are a very complex social mass movement with many groups, it members ranging from all sectors of Thai society - from farmers to intellectuals, these groups strategies ranging from reformist to revolutionary, with very active discussions on all levels, discussion is just not possible.

On some level i can't blame you. Reporting on the Red Shirts in the English language media is more than insufficient. I can't remember any article in the English language media that looks at structure, dynamics and political ideology of the Red Shirts (and i have in my archives thousands of articles - several gigs of space on my computer).

I believe that i have studied the Red Shirts closer than anybody else since the birth of the that movement even before the military coup. And before i get accused of being embedded or biased - i have done the same with the Yellow Shirts, and also since last year i have went to many of the Democrat Party's Blue Sky rallies, since the Dems decided to form their own street movement (which has so far completely failed to take off).

That is why i can only state here that in order to understand this social conflict here you will have to go to the rallies of the different sides in person, and discuss the issues with people of all levels there.

If this whole thing would be as simplistic as many on Thaivisa believe, i would not have spent the last 7+ years of my life studying this conflict - i would have been bored a long time ago. And no, doing this was not exactly financially rewarding - i don't do it for the money either. I do it because it is a highly fascinating subject.

Somebody here mentioned the term "western education". Part of "western education" is to question everything, and to develop a thirst for learning. Therefore i would suggest to you people to go and learn where this conflict takes place: at rallies (small and large), community radio stations, grassroots organizations, etc.

Don;t just stay in internet discussion forums.

Now you are probably right in all that you say.

But none of it has any thing to do with the fact that the red shirts recieving pay from Thaksin illigaly siezed a portion of down town Bangkok behind barbed wire fences when the police refused to do sany thing about them the army was called in to get them out.

Du8ring there illegal tenure for which no charges have been laid. They fired live ammunition at soldiers and rockets at civilians as well as invaded a hospital.

You babble on about your doubt of the legality of the governments actions and say nothing about the illegal actions of the red shirts.

Would you have walked in there and peaceful escorted them out when they were carrying a gun and talking about burning Bangkok down.

Yes it was a social conflict that turned into an illegal action on the part of people who were paid to break the law and refuse to negotiate in good faith. Remember that they came to an agreement and when the government agreed to it they backed out of it and continued with there illegal carrings on including urging red shirts to burn Bangkok down and then proceed to try to do it.

You meander all over the place with your wanderings yet you never face the reality of what the red shirts did.

I can't remember you ever saying any thing about the rights of the honest citizens to earn a living but were deprived of it by the illegal actions of the red shirts.

I bet you would have a different story and point of view if one of those rockets launched at civilian targets had killed a member of your family.

I supported the red shirts but when they started with the pouring of blood that could have well been HIV positive I realized this had nothing to do with justice it was a mob that had made their demands clear and were now doing any thing they could think of to unseat an legally elected government. At that point I changed my attitude towards them and they proceeded to prove me right in changing my attitude towards them.

Do you think Abhist should be charged with misappropriation of funds by paying there way home for them?

Just very briefly.

I do not want to lead this discussion away from the main subject any further. But discussing Red Shirt violence can only be done in context with violence by the state (and the PAD as well), and as part of an escalation process over many years.

As to what i would feel if one of my family members would have been killed by a grenade of Red Shirt armed militants. Well, i had several very close calls when i was nearly blown up by some of those grenades myself, the closest on May 19, where the first of the rain of grenades that killed a soldier and wounded Chandler Vanergrift exploded only two meters from me, but was fortunately most likely a training round as there was no shrapnel. I was also during the Silom grenade attacks on the side of the Yellow Shirts while the grenades came down.

So, yes, i am more than aware of the reality of Red Shirt violence than you will ever know, if you are lucky.

The blood issue is very complex, and already at least two fascinating anthropological studies have been done on this incident, one of the culturally most interesting and relevant during the 2010 protests.

[hellodolly]

Equally fascinating how you deliberately misrepresent others' views.

I do not support any 'culture of impunity' as you so simply put it. What I do support is justice & fairness, which is in short supply in the current political environment here today.

You support Abhisit & Suthep being tried for murder or accessories to murder. You do not explain how they might receive a fair trial. You also seem to have a very selective agenda regarding who should be made responsible for the riots & protests in 2010. Nothing about the power behind the red shirts & MIB who are at the equivalent level to Abhisit & Suthep.

Using the politicised DSI to investigate & instigate charges (along with all the other trumped-up charges which you choose to ignore) is not going to satisfy real justice - only the revenge type of 'justice' sought by some sections of the red shirts.

The major problem is the impunity allowed under the law for the military. That is where the blame is & shifting the blame to find someone else to take it is part of Thailands ' culture of scapegoatism'.

Well, they will receive a fair trial because you can be sure that there will be many national and international observers in that trial - journalists, diplomats, and members of relevant organizations. Trials here generally are public trials, and are therefore open to scrutiny.

Several alleged "MIB" are standing for trial right now, which the DSI has investigated during the Abhisit government - where the DSI was equally accused of being politicized, only then leaning towards the Democrat government and the military. Which has resulted in stalling investigations in the cases of dead protesters suspected to have been killed by the military.

As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai polity and society. But to find that out you will have to look a bit deeper into it than the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which still has huge difficulties in understanding the basic structures of the Red Shirts, as can be seen in reporting over the present protests at the constitution court, in which especially the Bangkok Post still reports it as an "UDD protest", while it is clear that this is organized by a network of so called "free Red Shirt groups" who are not under the authority of the UDD, and are neither supported nor funded by the UDD or the Pueah Thai Party.

But i digress...

But yes, i have no problem in the investigation into all the matters you mentioned. The Democrat led government had more than one year time and all the resources that come with being in government available. There were a few convicted Red Shirt protesters for more serious crimes than violations against the emergency decree, and many trials that collapsed because people were arrested on more than flimsy pretense, very little evidence that just could not stand up in court.

And yes, i agree with you that a one of the major problems is the impunity under which the military acts. Yet the Abhisit government went to bed with the military in order to come to power, and to stay in power. History might have been different if back in 2006 the Democrat Party would have made a principled stand against the coup (while still being Thaksin opponents - which is perfectly legitimate). The first leaders that protested against the coup, by the way, were actually Thaksin opponents, such as Dr. Weng, who was briefly part of the PAD before the coup, or Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong, and many others.

But the Democrat Party didn't - it just made a few meaningless statements, while in reality not just applauding the coup, but also key members of the Democrat Party, such as Kraisak Choonhavan, traveling around the world to make the coup appear nice to foreign leaders. The Democrat Party could also not have massively supported the PAD (which was also strongly supported by the military) in 2008, and then just riding the military's coattails to power.

In short - you make your bed, you gotta sleep in it. If now powerful members of the PT try to make their own deal with the military, it may one day come back to haunt them as well. Thai people increasingly are not tolerating the military structure anymore as it is, and even many soldiers are sick and tired of this system.

As far as a fair trial goes - maybe. The international media

may take as much notice as they did with Thaksin's conflict of interest trial -

not a lot. It was only the lunchbox 'incident' that made any real impact. The

red shirt court intimidation mob may play a part too.

Your take on the red shirts being factionalised is current

& I broadly agree with it. However, it was different 3 years ago when,

despite some differences of opinion, there were no real factions & they

certainly were supporters of Thaksin. The 2010 riots & protests were timed

just after part of Thaksin's ill-gotten wealth was sequestered.

You are openly showing your bias in panning the Bangkok Post

& The Nation. Both have reporters of varying quality & both do give

voice to PTP & red shirt supporters. Are you suggesting that they are worse

than, say, the BBC? Now there's an organisation that has lost its way & its

independence.

Yes, the Democrats had the opportunity to investigate the

power behind the red shirts as well as red shirt violence. They missed that

opportunity as their focus was too much on tracking Thaksin & using the DSI

(& others) to file OTT terrorist charges against protestors & rioters.

As I said, they also missed the opportunity to set up a proper independent

investigative body to look at the events in a balanced way.

However, I don't think they believed that PTP would target

Abhisit so blatantly with so many trumped-up charges. More on that

later.

Your comments on the coup & the Democrats 'support' for it

yet again displays your bias. IMO they didn't display overt support, nor overt

condemnation. They would have been politically naive to condemn it. Similarly

they didn't provide 'massive support' for the PAD (surely confirmation of your

bias). They had a FM who was a PAD member & an idiot, the latter similar to

the current FM. On the other hand, the PTP did overtly support the 2010 riots & protests.

Pot, Kettle & black.

'Riding the military's coattails to power' - sorry, we're now

into the propaganda arena. There were two regimes between the coup & the

Democrats in power (Somchai & Samak). So, if you believe in this you are

into conspiracy theories, which you have criticised others for.

Which 'people' are growing intolerant of the

military? I think we know the answer to that. A far more

broadly-based view is that the problems with the military (and there are major

ones, especially in the south) are secondary to the problems with the police who

are widely viewed as systematically corrupt and both disrespected & feared.

Most citizens have far more dealings with the police than they do with the

military.

The police & their supposed large scale investigatory body

(the DSI) are totally controlled by the PTP which is far more anti-democratic

than any perceived problems with the CC. It is painfully obvious that the PTP,

by abusing their control, are trying to tie Abhisit up with as many trumped-up

charges as possible so that he & the Democrats cannot provide their focus on

opposing bringing back Thaksin with all the outstanding conviction &

suspended court cases dropped. The DoD committee (kangaroo court) stripping

Abhisit of his military service record was part of it.

Again, Abhisit & Suthep should not be charged over the

2010 riots as it is only politically motivated.

A few point, because i have to work soon.

Already from 2006 onwards the groups that became the Red Shirts had many factions and independent groups that never joined the Nor Bor Kor, or the later Nor Por Chor. Groups such as the 24th of June group and many other small groups. In 2010 the UDD distanced themselves from Surachai Sae Dan's Red Siam (founded in 2009), who had a separate stage. Sae Daeng was never part of the UDD. Within the UDD you had the so called hardcore faction which and the peaceful faction. There was further regional factionalism between the Southern faction and the Isaarn and Northern factions. After 2010 the factionalism was only more pronounced, partly through initial lack of UDD leadership, and through rising differences in both political strategies and ideologies.

Democrat support for the PAD: unfortunately here i have to cite the lack of media reporting. Other than the well known leaders that were prominent Democrat members, you had on the common protesters levels massive involvement. Whole guard units of the PAD were on loan from Democrat Party street fighters of local MP from both Bangkok and Southern provinces. Many southern PAD chapters were from southern Democrat vote canvassers. It was quite obvious to see, when the PAD protested against Abhisit in 2011, and exactly those Democrat Party guards and vote canvassers were absent from the protest areas.

But all this you cannot gather from reading the newsmedia, you will have to investigate this on the ground, you will have to know the political networks and build relationships with the people involved.

And yes - before i am accused of white washing - i am aware that the involvement of TRT/PPP/PT in the Red Shirts is equally complex. Most people though here are not aware of the (former) extend of Democrat Party/PAD collaboration.

While i cannot argue that now the DSI is leaning towards the government, it was during the Abhisit government leaning strongly towards the Democrats and the military. And if there is a change of government - you can be sure that the DSI will lean towards whatever government that will be in power.

Yes, there are naturally many problems within the police, and it desperately needs to be reformed. But just because the military is less in public view does not mean that the problems of the military are any less. The military is far more powerful than the police, and have in some way created a state within the state, which the police has only achieved in the 50's under General Pao, before its power was lastingly curtailed.

Anyhow, gotta go now.

More talk none of it aimed at the actions of the illegal actions of the red shirts.

You say

"As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just

that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely

complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of

Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai

polity and society."

Is it not consisting of a large part of uneducated people and another part led by a communist and another part who has no problem with committing illegal crimes. Yes it is a complex lot. Throw in some academics who I really don't think much of as most of them live in there head and are incapable to put it into the reality that is happening and can't agree with each other any how. In fact some of them would disagree on the time of day using the same watch,

I had not heard of any black shirts being charged. Who are they and what is the charge? Wearing a black shirt?

[Locationthailand]

"Murders' by persons unknown, no shooters found or charged, death resulting from civil unrest (read terrorism) and the executive being charged? What sort of Kangaroo Courts system/lawlessness is this? So bring it on and whilst at it, charge Thaksin, for paying the mercenaries and giving the order to shoot, and burn Bangkok over the deaths of the soldiers and other collateral damage. That is no different to any terrorist organisation. DSI should be emptied out of these peasant-politically-motivated management and real people put there. What a complete mockery of actual justice.

Before leveling such accusations against the court system, i would suggest to go into the details of the individual cases for which the military was ruled having fired the bullets.

1) in the case of Pan Kumkong (and the of the 14 year old boy and the cabdriver - same incident) the prosecution has, in addition to witness and forensic evidence, presented to the court a video which has shown how the soldiers have shot at the van. There just was no other ruling possible

2) In the case of Channarong Ponsrila there were many eye witnesses, including foreign journalists and Thai journalists, forensic evidence, photos and videos of the incident from several angles, one which has shown bullets fired from the military side hitting a wall behind which protesters, and several journalists including me were taking cover. The argumentation of the military - that a shooter from Samliem Dindaeng has shot Channarong - would have made it necessary, from the position of Channarong and the angle of the entry wound, that the bullet made a sharp curve in midair, just before entering his stomach. Which is quite impossible.

3) Chatchai Chalao was shot a in front of at least a dozen journalists (including me) who accompanied a group of maybe 60 Red Shirts protesters walking towards a military line at Rama IV road. None of the protesters was armed and/or shot a firearm at the soldiers.It was more than clear that the only bullets fired were fired from the military lines 100 or so meters away.

4) in the case of Narongrit Sala, who was shot and died in front of me, the prosecutors have also presented a video which has shown a soldier firing bursts of automatic fire from his rifle at protesters (who were throwing stones and bottles at security forces on the street below) on the tollway an hour or so before the death of Narongrit (which injured one man who was shot in the head but survived. This video has quite clearly proven how careless and undisciplined the soldiers acted that day.

5) in the case of Thanuthat Assawasiri-mankong the court ruled that he died from an illness, but he was paralyzed after having been shot by soldiers. I have visited him in late 2010 or early 2011 in his apartment in Bon Gai. I have interviewed him and several witnesses of the incident.

In the two cases the courts ruled the cause of death as inconclusive, but did not explicitly absolve the military. It could simply not proven beyond reasonable doubt that the military fired the bullets that killed the people.

The court rulings may go against your and others believe system and political convictions, but this is about proof and evidence. Just because the cases were not highlighted much, and investigations were slowed down until after the change of government a new investigation commission was set up does not make the judgements political. What was 'political' was the pressure to finally bring the cases to court, after such a long time.

But they were judged according to the evidence, or in the inconclusive cases by lack of evidence. Which should also make it quite clear that the judgements were not political, as if that were to be true, all cases would have been ruled against the military. Which they weren't.

The only thing that is political here in this discussion is to attack how the courts have ruled in these cases.

Really? Thanks for your inside comments. As far as the 'topic' is concerned - the mockery of the system is the courts being asked to prosecute the executive for giving orders to military to clear the streets. That is the issue and considering the first shots fired were from Reds, ongoing before the military arrived, one would think the results as you have stated, would not have occurred had the Reds not seized the city. Collateral damage is never acceptable but before the court lay's waste to the democrat leadership and sets a precedent, they perhaps should be charging all including the red leaders. Thanks for your input.

[smutcakes]

"Murders' by persons unknown, no shooters found or charged, death resulting from civil unrest (read terrorism) and the executive being charged? What sort of Kangaroo Courts system/lawlessness is this? So bring it on and whilst at it, charge Thaksin, for paying the mercenaries and giving the order to shoot, and burn Bangkok over the deaths of the soldiers and other collateral damage. That is no different to any terrorist organisation. DSI should be emptied out of these peasant-politically-motivated management and real people put there. What a complete mockery of actual justice.

Before leveling such accusations against the court system, i would suggest to go into the details of the individual cases for which the military was ruled having fired the bullets.

1) in the case of Pan Kumkong (and the of the 14 year old boy and the cabdriver - same incident) the prosecution has, in addition to witness and forensic evidence, presented to the court a video which has shown how the soldiers have shot at the van. There just was no other ruling possible

2) In the case of Channarong Ponsrila there were many eye witnesses, including foreign journalists and Thai journalists, forensic evidence, photos and videos of the incident from several angles, one which has shown bullets fired from the military side hitting a wall behind which protesters, and several journalists including me were taking cover. The argumentation of the military - that a shooter from Samliem Dindaeng has shot Channarong - would have made it necessary, from the position of Channarong and the angle of the entry wound, that the bullet made a sharp curve in midair, just before entering his stomach. Which is quite impossible.

3) Chatchai Chalao was shot a in front of at least a dozen journalists (including me) who accompanied a group of maybe 60 Red Shirts protesters walking towards a military line at Rama IV road. None of the protesters was armed and/or shot a firearm at the soldiers.It was more than clear that the only bullets fired were fired from the military lines 100 or so meters away.

4) in the case of Narongrit Sala, who was shot and died in front of me, the prosecutors have also presented a video which has shown a soldier firing bursts of automatic fire from his rifle at protesters (who were throwing stones and bottles at security forces on the street below) on the tollway an hour or so before the death of Narongrit (which injured one man who was shot in the head but survived. This video has quite clearly proven how careless and undisciplined the soldiers acted that day.

5) in the case of Thanuthat Assawasiri-mankong the court ruled that he died from an illness, but he was paralyzed after having been shot by soldiers. I have visited him in late 2010 or early 2011 in his apartment in Bon Gai. I have interviewed him and several witnesses of the incident.

In the two cases the courts ruled the cause of death as inconclusive, but did not explicitly absolve the military. It could simply not proven beyond reasonable doubt that the military fired the bullets that killed the people.

The court rulings may go against your and others believe system and political convictions, but this is about proof and evidence. Just because the cases were not highlighted much, and investigations were slowed down until after the change of government a new investigation commission was set up does not make the judgements political. What was 'political' was the pressure to finally bring the cases to court, after such a long time.

But they were judged according to the evidence, or in the inconclusive cases by lack of evidence. Which should also make it quite clear that the judgements were not political, as if that were to be true, all cases would have been ruled against the military. Which they weren't.

The only thing that is political here in this discussion is to attack how the courts have ruled in these cases.

Really? Thanks for your inside comments. As far as the 'topic' is concerned - the mockery of the system is the courts being asked to prosecute the executive for giving orders to military to clear the streets. That is the issue and considering the first shots fired were from Reds, ongoing before the military arrived, one would think the results as you have stated, would not have occurred had the Reds not seized the city. Collateral damage is never acceptable but before the court lay's waste to the democrat leadership and sets a precedent, they perhaps should be charging all including the red leaders. Thanks for your input.

They have already, and they are going through the system.

[Thait Spot]

Equally fascinating how you deliberately misrepresent others' views.

I do not support any 'culture of impunity' as you so simply put it. What I do support is justice & fairness, which is in short supply in the current political environment here today.

You support Abhisit & Suthep being tried for murder or accessories to murder. You do not explain how they might receive a fair trial. You also seem to have a very selective agenda regarding who should be made responsible for the riots & protests in 2010. Nothing about the power behind the red shirts & MIB who are at the equivalent level to Abhisit & Suthep.

Using the politicised DSI to investigate & instigate charges (along with all the other trumped-up charges which you choose to ignore) is not going to satisfy real justice - only the revenge type of 'justice' sought by some sections of the red shirts.

The major problem is the impunity allowed under the law for the military. That is where the blame is & shifting the blame to find someone else to take it is part of Thailands ' culture of scapegoatism'.

Well, they will receive a fair trial because you can be sure that there will be many national and international observers in that trial - journalists, diplomats, and members of relevant organizations. Trials here generally are public trials, and are therefore open to scrutiny.

Several alleged "MIB" are standing for trial right now, which the DSI has investigated during the Abhisit government - where the DSI was equally accused of being politicized, only then leaning towards the Democrat government and the military. Which has resulted in stalling investigations in the cases of dead protesters suspected to have been killed by the military.

As to the hypothesis of the so-called "power behind..." - it is just that, and does not take into account that the Red Shirts are a extremely complex social mass movement whose aims are not just the return of Thaksin, but are far beyond, and advocate structural changes in the Thai polity and society. But to find that out you will have to look a bit deeper into it than the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which still has huge difficulties in understanding the basic structures of the Red Shirts, as can be seen in reporting over the present protests at the constitution court, in which especially the Bangkok Post still reports it as an "UDD protest", while it is clear that this is organized by a network of so called "free Red Shirt groups" who are not under the authority of the UDD, and are neither supported nor funded by the UDD or the Pueah Thai Party.

But i digress...

But yes, i have no problem in the investigation into all the matters you mentioned. The Democrat led government had more than one year time and all the resources that come with being in government available. There were a few convicted Red Shirt protesters for more serious crimes than violations against the emergency decree, and many trials that collapsed because people were arrested on more than flimsy pretense, very little evidence that just could not stand up in court.

And yes, i agree with you that a one of the major problems is the impunity under which the military acts. Yet the Abhisit government went to bed with the military in order to come to power, and to stay in power. History might have been different if back in 2006 the Democrat Party would have made a principled stand against the coup (while still being Thaksin opponents - which is perfectly legitimate). The first leaders that protested against the coup, by the way, were actually Thaksin opponents, such as Dr. Weng, who was briefly part of the PAD before the coup, or Sombat "Nuling" Boonngamanong, and many others.

But the Democrat Party didn't - it just made a few meaningless statements, while in reality not just applauding the coup, but also key members of the Democrat Party, such as Kraisak Choonhavan, traveling around the world to make the coup appear nice to foreign leaders. The Democrat Party could also not have massively supported the PAD (which was also strongly supported by the military) in 2008, and then just riding the military's coattails to power.

In short - you make your bed, you gotta sleep in it. If now powerful members of the PT try to make their own deal with the military, it may one day come back to haunt them as well. Thai people increasingly are not tolerating the military structure anymore as it is, and even many soldiers are sick and tired of this system.

As far as a fair trial goes - maybe. The international media

may take as much notice as they did with Thaksin's conflict of interest trial -

not a lot. It was only the lunchbox 'incident' that made any real impact. The

red shirt court intimidation mob may play a part too.

Your take on the red shirts being factionalised is current

& I broadly agree with it. However, it was different 3 years ago when,

despite some differences of opinion, there were no real factions & they

certainly were supporters of Thaksin. The 2010 riots & protests were timed

just after part of Thaksin's ill-gotten wealth was sequestered.

You are openly showing your bias in panning the Bangkok Post

& The Nation. Both have reporters of varying quality & both do give

voice to PTP & red shirt supporters. Are you suggesting that they are worse

than, say, the BBC? Now there's an organisation that has lost its way & its

independence.

Yes, the Democrats had the opportunity to investigate the

power behind the red shirts as well as red shirt violence. They missed that

opportunity as their focus was too much on tracking Thaksin & using the DSI

(& others) to file OTT terrorist charges against protestors & rioters.

As I said, they also missed the opportunity to set up a proper independent

investigative body to look at the events in a balanced way.

However, I don't think they believed that PTP would target

Abhisit so blatantly with so many trumped-up charges. More on that

later.

Your comments on the coup & the Democrats 'support' for it

yet again displays your bias. IMO they didn't display overt support, nor overt

condemnation. They would have been politically naive to condemn it. Similarly

they didn't provide 'massive support' for the PAD (surely confirmation of your

bias). They had a FM who was a PAD member & an idiot, the latter similar to

the current FM. On the other hand, the PTP did overtly support the 2010 riots & protests.

Pot, Kettle & black.

'Riding the military's coattails to power' - sorry, we're now

into the propaganda arena. There were two regimes between the coup & the

Democrats in power (Somchai & Samak). So, if you believe in this you are

into conspiracy theories, which you have criticised others for.

Which 'people' are growing intolerant of the

military? I think we know the answer to that. A far more

broadly-based view is that the problems with the military (and there are major

ones, especially in the south) are secondary to the problems with the police who

are widely viewed as systematically corrupt and both disrespected & feared.

Most citizens have far more dealings with the police than they do with the

military.

The police & their supposed large scale investigatory body

(the DSI) are totally controlled by the PTP which is far more anti-democratic

than any perceived problems with the CC. It is painfully obvious that the PTP,

by abusing their control, are trying to tie Abhisit up with as many trumped-up

charges as possible so that he & the Democrats cannot provide their focus on

opposing bringing back Thaksin with all the outstanding conviction &

suspended court cases dropped. The DoD committee (kangaroo court) stripping

Abhisit of his military service record was part of it.

Again, Abhisit & Suthep should not be charged over the

2010 riots as it is only politically motivated.

A few point, because i have to work soon.

Already from 2006 onwards the groups that became the Red Shirts had many factions and independent groups that never joined the Nor Bor Kor, or the later Nor Por Chor. Groups such as the 24th of June group and many other small groups. In 2010 the UDD distanced themselves from Surachai Sae Dan's Red Siam (founded in 2009), who had a separate stage. Sae Daeng was never part of the UDD. Within the UDD you had the so called hardcore faction which and the peaceful faction. There was further regional factionalism between the Southern faction and the Isaarn and Northern factions. After 2010 the factionalism was only more pronounced, partly through initial lack of UDD leadership, and through rising differences in both political strategies and ideologies.

Democrat support for the PAD: unfortunately here i have to cite the lack of media reporting. Other than the well known leaders that were prominent Democrat members, you had on the common protesters levels massive involvement. Whole guard units of the PAD were on loan from Democrat Party street fighters of local MP from both Bangkok and Southern provinces. Many southern PAD chapters were from southern Democrat vote canvassers. It was quite obvious to see, when the PAD protested against Abhisit in 2011, and exactly those Democrat Party guards and vote canvassers were absent from the protest areas.

But all this you cannot gather from reading the newsmedia, you will have to investigate this on the ground, you will have to know the political networks and build relationships with the people involved.

And yes - before i am accused of white washing - i am aware that the involvement of TRT/PPP/PT in the Red Shirts is equally complex. Most people though here are not aware of the (former) extend of Democrat Party/PAD collaboration.

While i cannot argue that now the DSI is leaning towards the government, it was during the Abhisit government leaning strongly towards the Democrats and the military. And if there is a change of government - you can be sure that the DSI will lean towards whatever government that will be in power.

Yes, there are naturally many problems within the police, and it desperately needs to be reformed. But just because the military is less in public view does not mean that the problems of the military are any less. The military is far more powerful than the police, and have in some way created a state within the state, which the police has only achieved in the 50's under General Pao, before its power was lastingly curtailed.

Anyhow, gotta go now.

I'm afraid your palette has but one colour.

[wealth]

when there is a curfew and emergency rules, warnings of getting hurt or shot, what do so called journalists do? Hanging out with the mob? So they went here because the mob was there and the mob went there because the journalists were there? Nobody went home to have it cooling down.

Not sure if some of the journos can get a lawsuit for violating the laws and almost acting for marksman than Mark's man who in that case had to hide himself in the army barracks.

Could it be that none of the witnesses can rely on being heard because they themselves were breaking the law?

What a sad stunt.

[wealth]

What makes it almost impossible for me here is that many seem to have internalized the notion that the Red Shirts are simply a paid mob of terrorists paid and commanded by Thaksin. This, i am sorry to say, is completely wrong.

Who's clan is in charge and power now? Answers everything.

If those so called independent groups and intellectuals don't change ship they will wake up the hard way.

Even a tasteless cartoon can bring you to court.

What intellect is this?