Abhisit, Suthep to be indicted Dec 12 as scheduled

[Emptyset]

You're trusting Chalerm all of a sudden? lol. Not sure his word counts even as an 'informed rumour', more likely to be a deliberate red herring. I'm sure he has his reasons for saying that, though I also think there's no way he could've blamed the military without massive fallout. Anyway, I doubt we'll even know for sure, but as there's no solid evidence either way, I think it best to think the simplest explanation most likely. The army knew they'd have much more chance of a succesful operation with Seh Daeng out of the way, and it can't be any coincidence that operations were stepped up during the days that followed. Many also wanted revenge for what they perceived to be his involvement with the Romklao killing although I doubt that was the reason for the killing, just a further incentive, main reason was operational.

Also, why would Thaksin have him killed at that point if he were going to do so? Not only was he going to be a scourge to the military, but I actually think Seh Daeng was proving a useful decoy, distraction attention away from the generals who were really directing the men in black. Still, as I say, we'll never know for sure. He was such a loose cannon that you could see reasons for both sides to want to put him out of action.

"why would Thaksin have him killed"

Because he was saying that he was now in charge of the revolt, on the orders of the Big Boss, and the other Red-leaders should take their instructions from him, also that he was linked to the MiBs. This was embarrassing to Mr T, he didn't want this stuff coming out into the open, unlike the military who were delighted at someone openly saying who was directing the whole mess.

That person has yet to have any related-charges laid against him, but no doubt a general-amnesty would be comforting to have, just in case.

And Chalerm should name names, if only to help his boss's little-helper at the DSI, unless of course that trail too does not lead to the government but to those trying to overthrow them on-the-streets. But I wouldn't take any bets, that he ever will speak up. So much for "fighting for justice" !

Yes, and he'd also had a huge fallout with the red shirt leaders and red shirt guards over the barricades at Chualongkorn Hospital which they were trying to remove and Seh Daeng refused. Apparently he pushed the chief red shirt ground to the floor or something. Actually once spoke to Sean, the ex-UDD international spokesman or whatever he was, about this and he said he remembers Seh Daeng came marching over to main camp where the UDD core leaders were, looking so furious that Sean thought he was going to kill Nattawud or Dr Weng. So there's that too.

But then, especially given the military seemed to control most of the area he was shot from, it seems on balance more likely that the military did it. Occam's razor and all that. And Seh Daeng I think was actually a legitimate target. Maybe not at the point he was shot, especially given the bullet could've easily hit someone else, but clearly he was armed and was very likely responsible for the grenade attack at Silom and numerous other grenade attacks. Whoever shot him probably did both sides a favour.

[boomerangutang]

The initial reason for threatening the two who were in charge in 2010, was for PT to put pressure toward gaining their top priority: garnering hero-status for their puppetmaster in Dubai. The ruse failed earlier, and it will fail now and in the future.

It's amazing, to me, that PT is still pursuing the indictments, when any ding-dong can see it's further shooting themselves in their feet. Oh well, keep going PT, it only hastens your demise. Even the thinking-challenged Issan Reds are starting to see the dunces they put in power - for what they really are.

[boomerangutang]

The demonstration was gulping its last feeble breaths when Sae Daeng was shot. Why would the military have wanted him dead? He was still a military man at the time (though he was a big-mouth rogue), so if he had been grilled (while facing charges of treason and/or dereliction of duty), he would likely have given insight on the MIB which he led. Thaksin and the Reds had a whole lot more reasons to want him snuffed out, than the authorities did. Plus, SD had been clashing with Thaksin, just prior to SD being shot. If any of the Red leaders were capable of telling truth, many interesting facets of this would come out. Unfortunately, they all learned very well from their paymaster - that telling truth is a wimpy and stupid thing to do.

[Emptyset]

The video!

Thanks for finding it, Whybother. Yes, pretty much as I remembered. Impossible to tell if he died or exactly where he was shot, but obviously he didn't look in a good way.

and obviously it wasn't suicide, I remember the reports that day saying he died. Were there men in black there? yes.. were they Seh Daeng's "ronin"? can't say. They didn't, after all, run around in daylight hours sporting AR's AK's etc. If you watch a few more of the videos in that set you will see MiB firing towards the military and from behind redshirts. Yet again making the laying of all civilian deaths at the feet of the military a blatantly wrong assumption.

I think Pi Sek may have been being somewhat sarcastic when he suggested suicide as a possible explanation. I don't know how you can tell there were MiB in the vicinity from this video though. Either way, even if there was, they don't necessarily seem relevant to this incident. Seems far more likely he was shot by someone that grabbed his own weapon, either purposefully or by accident. I watched the other videos, yes, you can see men in black mingling with protesters engaged in battles with the military, but they're not necessarily in the same place, nor were they necessarily filmed on the same day as the truck incident.

Or am I getting confused and you're actually saying that you believe that there were MiB in operation during the red shirt protests as a whole? In which case, no disagreement. Perhaps laying all of the civilian deaths at the feet of the military is a blatantly wrong assumption, especially during intense battles with crossfire like on April 10th. But assuming the MiB deliberately shot civilians would also be even more of an assumption, especially if you're going on these videos, because the fact that they're in amongst protesters makes that less likely. If it did happen, it'd be much more likely via snipers. I think you have to look at each specific incident - there were clearly many occassions witnessed by foreign journalists and observers where the military were firing recklessly and there were no MiB involved. But then there are definitely murkier instances where it might be very difficult or near impossible to tell where the shots were coming from.

[Emptyset]

The demonstration was gulping its last feeble breaths when Sae Daeng was shot. Why would the military have wanted him dead? He was still a military man at the time (though he was a big-mouth rogue), so if he had been grilled (while facing charges of treason and/or dereliction of duty), he would likely have given insight on the MIB which he led. Thaksin and the Reds had a whole lot more reasons to want him snuffed out, than the authorities did. Plus, SD had been clashing with Thaksin, just prior to SD being shot. If any of the Red leaders were capable of telling truth, many interesting facets of this would come out. Unfortunately, they all learned very well from their paymaster - that telling truth is a wimpy and stupid thing to do.

He didn't lead the real 'MiB'. The HRW report even has that right. That's the point, he was useful to Thaksin & those who ran the 'war room' behind the scenes as a decoy, someone that focused attention in on him and away from them. Perhaps they decided he'd taken that too far, I don't know. I just don't get the certainty which some people here seem to have in asserting that SD was killed on Thaksin's orders. All we have on that is a Chalerm statement and no one would ordinarily give him time of day. I am not ruling it out completely*, but I think the military knew it was going to be a dead or alive thing with Seh Daeng, and that he'd be one of the main obstacles to the crackdown. Revenge is also worth considering.

The demonstration clearly wasn't 'gulping its last feeble breaths' anyway, numbers had obviously dropped from the beginning, but in terms of resistance nothing had really changed. The military operation started in earnest only after he'd died, and it was the 7 days after that which were the most intense. The vast majority of people died after Seh Daeng was killed.

*There is even actually a third possibility, noted by Sean Crispin at the time: 'While it is unlikely that the protesters would have assassinated their own man, another possible culprit could be businessmen in the area who are tired of the huge losses they have suffered as a result of the protests.'

[boomerangutang]

Dear Ms Yingluck, Perhaps it's time to extend invitations again to Kofi Annan and Tony Blair, to come back to Thailand - to burnish your intentions to gain reconciliation. You could get them the presidential suites at the best Bangkok hotels, and you could arrange some more 5-star dinners with candlelight. Great new photo-opps, with everybody raising glasses of wine and smiling. We, the little people, would love to hear more speeches from esteemed world statesmen, on how you, Ms Yingluck, are working hard towards attaining reconciliation among the Thai people.

[fab4]

So you are saying from your bar stool that public citizens should be shot for protesting against a party that has not won an election in how many years? Which part or North Korea sorry I mean Southern America are you from exactly?

They weren't shot for protesting. They were shot for hanging around an armed militia.

We have a new suthep in our midst "They were shot for hanging around an armed militia"

The 16 year old kid? The 6 casualties at the Wat? The Zookeeper? Various reporters, the unarmed protesters who were shot in the middle of the road cowering below a temporary barricade of tyres. I could go on, and that is just some of those shot dead by the army. There are still plenty of inquests to come. Not to mention the thousands of UDD supporters shot and injured.

[fab4]

This is marvellous, these two aren't in the slightest bit worried because they well know the charge simply cannot stick otherwise Yingluck's position will be equally imperilled. But every step of the way, rather than be humiliated, they will man up to it and every single time they appear in court everyone will ask 'And where is Thaksin the fugitive'.

OK I'll fall for it - what is your logical linking between the indictment of abhit and suthep and Yinglucks "position" being "equally imperilled".

Looking forward to this one.

This time you are absolutely right.

She hasn't done anything wrong, but only because she hasn't done anything at all.

No, you're right she's done nothing at all..........................................................

[Ricardo]

You're trusting Chalerm all of a sudden? lol. Not sure his word counts even as an 'informed rumour', more likely to be a deliberate red herring. I'm sure he has his reasons for saying that, though I also think there's no way he could've blamed the military without massive fallout. Anyway, I doubt we'll even know for sure, but as there's no solid evidence either way, I think it best to think the simplest explanation most likely. The army knew they'd have much more chance of a succesful operation with Seh Daeng out of the way, and it can't be any coincidence that operations were stepped up during the days that followed. Many also wanted revenge for what they perceived to be his involvement with the Romklao killing although I doubt that was the reason for the killing, just a further incentive, main reason was operational.

Also, why would Thaksin have him killed at that point if he were going to do so? Not only was he going to be a scourge to the military, but I actually think Seh Daeng was proving a useful decoy, distraction attention away from the generals who were really directing the men in black. Still, as I say, we'll never know for sure. He was such a loose cannon that you could see reasons for both sides to want to put him out of action.

"why would Thaksin have him killed"

Because he was saying that he was now in charge of the revolt, on the orders of the Big Boss, and the other Red-leaders should take their instructions from him, also that he was linked to the MiBs. This was embarrassing to Mr T, he didn't want this stuff coming out into the open, unlike the military who were delighted at someone openly saying who was directing the whole mess.

That person has yet to have any related-charges laid against him, but no doubt a general-amnesty would be comforting to have, just in case.

And Chalerm should name names, if only to help his boss's little-helper at the DSI, unless of course that trail too does not lead to the government but to those trying to overthrow them on-the-streets. But I wouldn't take any bets, that he ever will speak up. So much for "fighting for justice" !

Yes, and he'd also had a huge fallout with the red shirt leaders and red shirt guards over the barricades at Chualongkorn Hospital which they were trying to remove and Seh Daeng refused. Apparently he pushed the chief red shirt ground to the floor or something. Actually once spoke to Sean, the ex-UDD international spokesman or whatever he was, about this and he said he remembers Seh Daeng came marching over to main camp where the UDD core leaders were, looking so furious that Sean thought he was going to kill Nattawud or Dr Weng. So there's that too.

But then, especially given the military seemed to control most of the area he was shot from, it seems on balance more likely that the military did it. Occam's razor and all that. And Seh Daeng I think was actually a legitimate target. Maybe not at the point he was shot, especially given the bullet could've easily hit someone else, but clearly he was armed and was very likely responsible for the grenade attack at Silom and numerous other grenade attacks. Whoever shot him probably did both sides a favour.

One can well imagine, that the Red-Shirt leaders weren't happy with him, going round claiming he'd been put in charge locally by Thaksin, that would have been a slap-in-the-face to them if true, and embarrassing lack-of-unity if not.

I do agree with you that the military would have regarded him as a rogue-element, given that he was still a serving-soldier, but wouldn't this bad-publicity & open claiming that his orders came straight from Dubai, have given him propaganda-value enough, for the military to want to keep him alive in the short-term ? Maybe I'm too cynical.

I just wish he was still alive, and able to be questioned, as part of the various investigations.

And hope also those dark days aren't repeated again in the near future.

[Pi Sek]

You're trusting Chalerm all of a sudden? lol. Not sure his word counts even as an 'informed rumour', more likely to be a deliberate red herring. I'm sure he has his reasons for saying that, though I also think there's no way he could've blamed the military without massive fallout. Anyway, I doubt we'll even know for sure, but as there's no solid evidence either way, I think it best to think the simplest explanation most likely. The army knew they'd have much more chance of a succesful operation with Seh Daeng out of the way, and it can't be any coincidence that operations were stepped up during the days that followed. Many also wanted revenge for what they perceived to be his involvement with the Romklao killing although I doubt that was the reason for the killing, just a further incentive, main reason was operational.

Also, why would Thaksin have him killed at that point if he were going to do so? Not only was he going to be a scourge to the military, but I actually think Seh Daeng was proving a useful decoy, distraction attention away from the generals who were really directing the men in black. Still, as I say, we'll never know for sure. He was such a loose cannon that you could see reasons for both sides to want to put him out of action.

"why would Thaksin have him killed"

Because he was saying that he was now in charge of the revolt, on the orders of the Big Boss, and the other Red-leaders should take their instructions from him, also that he was linked to the MiBs. This was embarrassing to Mr T, he didn't want this stuff coming out into the open, unlike the military who were delighted at someone openly saying who was directing the whole mess.

That person has yet to have any related-charges laid against him, but no doubt a general-amnesty would be comforting to have, just in case.

And Chalerm should name names, if only to help his boss's little-helper at the DSI, unless of course that trail too does not lead to the government but to those trying to overthrow them on-the-streets. But I wouldn't take any bets, that he ever will speak up. So much for "fighting for justice" !

Yes, and he'd also had a huge fallout with the red shirt leaders and red shirt guards over the barricades at Chualongkorn Hospital which they were trying to remove and Seh Daeng refused. Apparently he pushed the chief red shirt ground to the floor or something. Actually once spoke to Sean, the ex-UDD international spokesman or whatever he was, about this and he said he remembers Seh Daeng came marching over to main camp where the UDD core leaders were, looking so furious that Sean thought he was going to kill Nattawud or Dr Weng. So there's that too.

But then, especially given the military seemed to control most of the area he was shot from, it seems on balance more likely that the military did it. Occam's razor and all that. And Seh Daeng I think was actually a legitimate target. Maybe not at the point he was shot, especially given the bullet could've easily hit someone else, but clearly he was armed and was very likely responsible for the grenade attack at Silom and numerous other grenade attacks. Whoever shot him probably did both sides a favour.

Our conclusions here are exactly the same.

[boomerangutang]

It will be interesting if Seh Daeng's name is brought up in a trial of Abhisit and Suthep. I'd bet the judge wouldn't allow his name to be mentioned, because he's such a polarizing hot potato. Indeed, the more that's mentioned of Seh Daeng, the worse things look for Thaksin - who had the most to lose if SD shot off his mouth - after the Red demonstrations ended.

[rubl]

Why would the renegade general Seh Daeng be unmentional? It will be the duty of the defense to bring forward any information they think they can use to help their clients.

Surely Seh Daeng's remark on the April 10th fireworks 'no one saw me' could be used as circumstantial evidence?

It will be interesting if Seh Daeng's name is brought up in a trial of Abhisit and Suthep. I'd bet the judge wouldn't allow his name to be mentioned, because he's such a polarizing hot potato. Indeed, the more that's mentioned of Seh Daeng, the worse things look for Thaksin - who had the most to lose if SD shot off his mouth - after the Red demonstrations ended.