Thai Army chief says soldiers did not kill 6 Wat Pathum victims

[Thai at Heart]

The likelihood, is that army personnel did do it.

But Thailand is completely incapable of convicting soldiers for wrong doing in this situation.

Like it or lump it. No soldier in Thailand will go to jail for even following orders that break the law. Why anyone ever sees them as saviours of the country I cannot understand.

Are they any better than the stasi, or ss ? They are given the privilege of acting without any punishment to solve political problems.

The Thai system applauds their actions for saving the country. Simple.

[rubl]

Wasn't there a Mercedes found stuffed with explosives, belonging to the wife of one of the UDD leaders? The poor lady must surely have suffered from nightmares about what could have happened to her.

Anyway I doubt NN has been present and witnessed all, but just seeing vanderGrift and a few soldiers get a grenade lobbed on them and knowing about Col Romkhlau 5 weeks before, It's interesting that none here seems to be willing to understand that soldiers will fire when threatened by the odd militant hiding amongst other, more peaceful protesters.

Nothing new really, three years and still the same discussions.

Nothing has changed in terms of you and some here trying to defend the indefensible, desperately hanging on to a narrative that was nothing more than propaganda fed to you by a at the time highly censored local media. And, as usual, your ill attempt of humor over the plight of one of the victims is quite simply despicable.

What though has changed during the past 3 years is that we have now the results of the court inquests into approximately 13 (if i remember correctly) of the 90 something dead during the May 2010 violence. 2 of these inquests were ruled inconclusive, the remaining were ruled against the military.

In two of these inquests i have testified (in one more of those i haven't, but was present at the scene) - and in those there were no armed protesters or militants, odd or otherwise, anywhere in the vicinity - as the courts have rightly and justly ruled, based on numerous witness accounts, forensic evidence, videos and photos of the incidents.

Yes - soldiers may fire when "threatened by the odd militant". I have never disputed that there were armed militants during the 2010 violence, and that they were legitimate targets of the military.

But then - one would expect that soldiers would also hit that "odd militant", and not just unarmed protesters, journalists or bystanders.

Faced with the results of the inquests, it would actually be time that something changes in this discussion of 3 years: that you finally might admit of having been proven wrong. Unfortunately though i am convinced that you will continue to ridicule and obfuscate, and insult the memory of all that died in 2010.

With the 'odd militant' in hiding and just possibly only the direction of a shot fired at one known, it's no surprise there is 'collateral damage'. Do you think vanderGrift also falls under this term maybe with 'caused by terrorists' added?

As for 'ridicule', 'obfuscation' and 'insult', that's in the eye of some beholders. Mostly of the red-tinted glasses kind who have a problem understanding anything which doesn't fit their ideas.

Anyway how can I be proven wrong if I didn't state something wrong? I'm the wondering kind who doesn't accept a story just because the government or some whatever side supporter says so. I only admit that my name could easily have been Thomas