'Those accountable for 2010 should face court'

[fab4]

fab4 @post #47

Please accept my apologies for posting this way but when I tried there were too many qoutes already.

Your words

Thank you Jag, as I was saying every reply I get these days is prefixed with insults. Maybe the truth is beginning to hurt.I missed that rant from bild.

Bild766 if you care to look here, my post #37 may have something you were shouting about

http://www.thaivisa....-2#entry6996137

I did look at that thank you and you said that it was Suthep issuing the order but not Abhisit..

My problem with you is that you make a statement such as

quote "Actually it was his intent to use live ammunition from the beginning of the advance on the UDD on April 10th 2010."

Abhisit who alledgedly (according to you) said that and you say the opposite.

You offer no proof at all of what you say other than your word.

I, like you have the choice of who I believe.

You, who have offered NO proof other than your words and were not there or Abhisit, who certainly was there and is currently charged with offences which if proven may result in him going to jail for a long time, possibly the death penalty. You on the other hand are not involved in court cases and probably never will be.

On the balance I would believe Abhisit every time over you because you amke statements without backing them up whereas Abhisit doesn't seem to.

In the scale of things would you say that abhisit appointed suthep as director of CRES? Do you think that Suthep would sign the order for the use of live ammunition without abhisit knowing anything whatsoever about it? Truly?

But

On the balance I expect you to believe abhisit every time because he has done nothing wrong. He's a little tinkerbell, flawless, without malice, believe me. Oh, you don't believe me do you.

[fab4]

Actually I don't bellow at everybody who "dares" have a different view.

Have you read what he wrote?

What I asked for was a simple answer. Does fab4 have any proof of what he is saying or not.

If he has proof then produce it, if he has no proof whay say what he said which leads into the realm of conjecture, guesswork, hope or lies.

If I offer an opinion on the forum without proof and anybody calls me on it and I cannot back up what I said then I will apologise and admit my mistake. If I can then I will stand by my statement.

I cannot remember any post of fab4s which does not have any semblance of the facts or truth in it. However I am not going to look back at every single post he has made to check. Mostly I ignore what he says but sometimes I cannot.

I'll save you the trouble put me on ignore and then I won't have to waste time replying to you. Fact: abhisit appointed suthep to be director of CRES. suthep signed the order for the use of live ammunition. abhisit is sutheps boss - he knew nothing about it? What more do you want proving?

[yoshiwara]

Aphisit was patient during that rally. It was a last resort to use live ammunition.

I would like to see how our current PM would answer a set of similar questions.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Actually it was his intent to use live ammunition from the beginning of the advance on the UDD on April 10th 2010. He just lied to everybody denying live ammunition had been used. Suthep even went as far as to suggest that the UDD shot each other.

It was definitely NOT last resort

Every so often a new red apologist comes on line spouting the junk they peddle to the red troops. It just comes out of thin air. You wonder where our old friends from the boiler room are these days.

Their problem is whether to support Thaksin's deal or be an unhappy red. Trying to reconcile what has been up to now unconditional support for Thaksin with the reds being played as disposable soldiers must be quite galling. Since, however, the reds are ultimately bought and paid for, their future lies four-squarely in being Thaksin's reserve army. For now though, just lump it lads.

I just like to let the facts outshine the hyperbole and lies. Surely you can't argue with that. Do you believe that the truth was that abhisit authorised the use of live ammunition as the last resort? Honestly, do you?

The facts are that suthep as director of CRES authorised the use of live ammunition on the 10th April. Thats it, nothing to argue about. But, for pointing that out, I'm a red apologist? I think the amnesty bill is a stupid idea but that is not the statement that I was correcting, was it?

I have a little test for red apologists who like to talk about the events of 2010, which is to ask them about Arisman's video. The last person I asked ran around in circles trying to avoid the question, so let's see if you can do any better. By the way, his initial defence was that he had denied seeing it. See if you can do a little better. The video is very clear about the level of violence which the reds were planning and which escalated to what eventually happened in April. So what's your opinion on the video fab?

Edited November 4, 2013 by yoshiwara

[rubl]

Didn't you get the memo on this, dear fabby?

With tears in her eyes, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra Monday called on all sides in the political conflicts to forgive and forget and have compassion toward one another.

Members of 24 families, whose relatives were killed during the red-shirt crackdowns in 2010, met her at the Government House and expressed support for the amnesty bill, saying relatives of the slain red-shirt protesters agreed that the amnesty would be he best way-out for the country so that it could move forward.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/679344-tearful-pm-yingluck-calls-for-forgiving/

Actually I don't bellow at everybody who "dares" have a different view.

Have you read what he wrote?

What I asked for was a simple answer. Does fab4 have any proof of what he is saying or not.

If he has proof then produce it, if he has no proof whay say what he said which leads into the realm of conjecture, guesswork, hope or lies.

If I offer an opinion on the forum without proof and anybody calls me on it and I cannot back up what I said then I will apologise and admit my mistake. If I can then I will stand by my statement.

I cannot remember any post of fab4s which does not have any semblance of the facts or truth in it. However I am not going to look back at every single post he has made to check. Mostly I ignore what he says but sometimes I cannot.

I'll save you the trouble put me on ignore and then I won't have to waste time replying to you. Fact: abhisit appointed suthep to be director of CRES. suthep signed the order for the use of live ammunition. abhisit is sutheps boss - he knew nothing about it? What more do you want proving?

[tonneke breda]

Brave man, which can't be said from many others, living in exile or hiding behind political immunity.

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post has been removed as well as a reply. A tongue in cheeky nonsense post also removed.

[Denim]

I remember when Somchai was Prime Minister and the PAD were occupying government . During the police crackdown , two protesters were killed. Abhisit stood up in parliment and accused Somchai of being responsible and of not being a Thai person. He went further and questioned whether Somchai was even a human being. He later tried to have murder charges laid against Somchai holding him responsible for the two deaths.

Strange how he seems to have forgotten what his views were back then.

[gemini81]

The headline suggests to those of who have even basic knowledge and common sense, that rented mob participants and a man named Thaskin.

[jayboy]

*Deleted posts edited out*

I must blushingly confess that Yoshiwara is referring to me.And though it pains me to admit it when he first raised the question of the video not only had I not seen it but I had never heard of Arisman.I subsequently did track it down and while it was certainly rather wild, it lacked the overarching significance attributed to it.Whether this is "running around in circles" in debatable.Having eventually seen the video I'm not sure it proves Yoshiwara's point nor that his "little test" really proves anything at all other than he holds an irrelevant obsession.A lot of people at that time on all sides said silly things.Why single one out and give it special or sole importance? I'm afraid true comprehension requires a rather more nuanced and analytical approach - of the type that is developed at elite universities such as the one Abhisit and Korn attended for example.Otherwise a one trick pony approach leaves us with "little tests" that don't reveal much except the chaotic thought processes of the originator.Anyway at least on this occasion we are spared some semi digested and poorly understood Marxist homily.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Scott
Deleted post edited out

[rubl]

Duly noted. People say silly things, Arisman (bring some bottle), Nattawut (it's on me), Thaksin (I'll come back to stand behind you), Suthep (running into bullets).

Why single any one out?

I must blushingly confess that Yoshiwara is referring to me.And though it pains me to admit it when he first raised the question of the video not only had I not seen it but I had never heard of Arisman.I subsequently did track it down and while it was certainly rather wild, it lacked the overarching significance attributed to it.Whether this is "running around in circles" in debatable.Having eventually seen the video I'm not sure it proves Yoshiwara's point nor that his "little test" really proves anything at all other than he holds an irrelevant obsession.A lot of people at that time on all sides said silly things.Why single one out and give it special or sole importance? I'm afraid true comprehension requires a rather more nuanced and analytical approach - of the type that is developed at elite universities such as the one Abhisit and Korn attended for example.Otherwise a one trick pony approach leaves us with "little tests" that don't reveal much except the chaotic thought processes of the originator.Anyway at least on this occasion we are spared some semi digested and poorly understood Marxist homily.

[rubl]

Your honour,

to the defense of the duo charged with premeditated murder I would like to submit this from a recent statement by our current Prime Minister Yingluck:

"It is to be regretted that hundreds of people were killed and thousands were injured in the political violence triggered by attempts to overthrow an elected government."

There is a crystal clear reason why our red apologist friend cannot acknowledge the video and point blank look in the opposite direction. Its not difficult to see why.

(link removed - doing you a favour)

You might want to check a couple of the comments on that link you posted. Not too clever on your part, not that I've ever assumed any different. And I can't be more crystal clear than that.

[Scott]

Numerous inflammatory, off-topic and nasty posts and replies have been deleted. Please stay on topic.

[kingalfred]

And the low life scum ,the hypocrites and terrorists who incited violence at the time are not charged and part of an amnesty .You have have to wonder in this crazy country with where anyone can be bought and the majority of the masses dont care.Their convicted idol fugitive criminal should be cleared but a PM who was restrained in2010 is charged by the fake corrupt government attorney ,What a joke fake LOS

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited November 6, 2013 by kingalfred

[jdinasia]

Those responsible should face court,

Thaksin,

Arisaman,

etc etc etc

[JRSoul]

I must blushingly confess that Yoshiwara is referring to me.And though it pains me to admit it when he first raised the question of the video not only had I not seen it but I had never heard of Arisman.I subsequently did track it down and while it was certainly rather wild, it lacked the overarching significance attributed to it.Whether this is "running around in circles" in debatable.Having eventually seen the video I'm not sure it proves Yoshiwara's point nor that his "little test" really proves anything at all other than he holds an irrelevant obsession.A lot of people at that time on all sides said silly things.Why single one out and give it special or sole importance? I'm afraid true comprehension requires a rather more nuanced and analytical approach - of the type that is developed at elite universities such as the one Abhisit and Korn attended for example.Otherwise a one trick pony approach leaves us with "little tests" that don't reveal much except the chaotic thought processes of the originator.Anyway at least on this occasion we are spared some semi digested and poorly understood Marxist homily.

A paid political agitator encourages and incites a crowd to commit arson if they don't achieve his paymaster's goals, and that arson is duly carried out, but you dismiss that as "rather wild" but just "silly". If that is his legal defence, I'm not surprised that his court case is being delayed, because the evidence of the video and the subsequent fires is damning, even if the judge takes "a rather more nuanced and analytical approach."