Abhisit ready to defend murder case in Criminal Court

[tezzainoz]

Well, it is clear that the army under Abhisit's command did shoot 90 unarmed demonstrators in the head. That is merely a statement of fact. The question is, is he culpable (yes, since he ordered it), and was it illegal (not in Thailand).

Hey we have a special person here

He has evidence that Abhisit signed papers for the army to shoot and kill people

Or is some one a Taskin Stooge

Or maybe some one using a new post to talk s,,,t

[northernjohn]

"Meanwhile protest leader Suthep would ask the court to adjourn the hearing of the case to other date"

Got to have a chuckle when you read things like this. Your up for a murder charge, ask for it to be post poned because hes a little bit busy at the moment. This whole thing has turned into a circus more than ever. They need a strong 3rd challenging party or else this is going to go on forever.

I disagree with another strong third party needed. What is needed is voters who are informed and wish to see Thailand move ahead.

The Democrats in my opinion offer that.

One may ask Well what have they done and that is a fair question deserving a fair answer.

The Democrats were in power for three years. If you will look at the corruption perception chart put out by Amnesty International you will note that right after the military turned the government back over to the voters the corruption rose rather high and fast. You will then note that when Abhist came into power he managed to stop the rise. As soon as he left power it once again started soaring upward.

Now that might not impress you but bear in mind the odds he had to work against. His was a coalition party that meant in order to stay in power he had to kowtow to other parties. these other parties were not as interested in the welfare of Thailand as the Democrats were. Plus he also had to work with an opposition party that had and was using an armed for hire group of thugs. Abhist successful negotiated a truce with them only to have them back out of it and say no that was not good enough we also want this so he said OK only to see them back out on the truce once again.

Now you may say well and fine but what has he done as the opposition in the present government. He successfully stopped a man in Dubai with a big check book and an army of armed backers from becoming dictator in Thailand. He did this with a government that many times refused to listen they would say their piece in Parliament allow 10 minutes maybe for the opposition and then cut of talk.

I know that with this verifiable record they deserve a chance to govern the country once again.

Thank you for reading through to the end.

[Roadman]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Quite simply during Thaksins 2010 attack on Bangkok yes they were offered early elections by PM Abhisit which they declined.

[firestar]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Quite simply during Thaksins 2010 attack on Bangkok yes they were offered early elections by PM Abhisit which they declined.

LINK?

PS : Good luck finding it. The only Red Shirt demand was new elections as a loophole in the Thai constitution had allowed individual MPs to switch sides in between elections giving the Dems enough MPs to form the "coalition".

Edited December 11, 2013 by firestar

[northernjohn]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Excuse me I am not sure what you are talking about. Are you saying they should have called for a new election after the four other parties switched sides to align them selves with the PTP? In 2011

[JRSoul]

A fast dismissal could be a disaster. PTP will then claim court bias, the "red leaders" will be sent forth to push the message and inflame the red mob, hoping they remember the red dogma"we have done nothing wrong." This could cause those currently angry at the PTP shenanigans to lose focus and turn on the old enemy.

[northernjohn]

At the same time a red-shirt leader Supprn Attawong, now deputy secretary-general of the Prime Minister, said he was asking the Department of Special Investigation to protest granting bail for Abhisit and Suthep at tomorrow’s hearing as he feared that if both had the chance to return to power, they would again abuse the power to take revenge on the red-shirt people.

Is he saying the reds did some thing wrong? That they do not want to pay for?

[JRSoul]

LINK?

PS : Good luck finding it. The only Red Shirt demand was new elections as a loophole in the Thai constitution had allowed individual MPs to switch sides in between elections giving the Dems enough MPs to form the "coalition".

So in your tiny mind, MPs represent the party rather than their constituency, even after that party has been disbanded? They should have no choice other than to follow the orders of their former party leader/owner, even though he is a convicted criminal fugitive banned from politics?

On which country's constitution do you base this view?

[firestar]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Excuse me I am not sure what you are talking about. Are you saying they should have called for a new election after the four other parties switched sides to align them selves with the PTP? In 2011

I am saying the dissolution of a party that had just received 61% of the votes should have triggered immediate new election instead of exploiting a loophole to grab power.

Quote from The Guardian:

"a top leader within the anti-government People’s Alliance for Democracy [...] predicts a wholly different scenario after the widely expected guilty verdict, one that exploits a perceived loophole in the Thai constitution and would amount to a sort of judicial coup.

The Thai charter allows politicians from disbanded political parties 60 days to regroup under a new party banner. However, the charter fails to indicate explicitly who or what"

A UK still coalition if formed by individual parties not individual MPs going to the highest bidder.

[northernjohn]

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Quite simply during Thaksins 2010 attack on Bangkok yes they were offered early elections by PM Abhisit which they declined.

LINK?

PS : Good luck finding it. The only Red Shirt demand was new elections as a loophole in the Thai constitution had allowed individual MPs to switch sides in between elections giving the Dems enough MPs to form the "coalition".

Hard to stay allied with a disbanded party.

[firestar]

LINK?

PS : Good luck finding it. The only Red Shirt demand was new elections as a loophole in the Thai constitution had allowed individual MPs to switch sides in between elections giving the Dems enough MPs to form the "coalition".

So in your tiny mind, MPs represent the party rather than their constituency, even after that party has been disbanded? They should have no choice other than to follow the orders of their former party leader/owner, even though he is a convicted criminal fugitive banned from politics?

On which country's constitution do you base this view?

When a post starts with insults you know it's going to be good No I am saying if a party that received 61% of the votes is disbanded there should be new elections.

And just about any democratic country of your choice would do so.

[firestar]

Hard to stay allied with a disbanded party.

True. However voters would have every right to feel cheated.

[Roadman]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Quite simply during Thaksins 2010 attack on Bangkok yes they were offered early elections by PM Abhisit which they declined.

LINK?

PS : Good luck finding it. The only Red Shirt demand was new elections as a loophole in the Thai constitution had allowed individual MPs to switch sides in between elections giving the Dems enough MPs to form the "coalition".

It would help if you actually knew what the subject was that seajae was talking about being the offer of elections from the Democrats to the Reds during the 2010 violence and not what you have wandered off onto being the Democrats forming a government earlier.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Roadman

[firestar]

It would help if you actually knew what the subject was that seajae was talking about being the offer of elections from the Democrats to the Reds during the 2010 violence and not what you have wandered off onto being the Democrats forming a government earlier.

I asked for a link, I am still waiting.

Edited December 11, 2013 by firestar

[In Town]

Well, it is clear that the army under Abhisit's command did shoot 90 unarmed demonstrators in the head. That is merely a statement of fact. The question is, is he culpable (yes, since he ordered it), and was it illegal (not in Thailand).

Er

Could you please clue us in what you are talking about. Many of us were here in 2010 when Abhist had to stop an armed rebellion. We do not have a clue as to what you are talking about. I hope this is not another in 19 some thing the democrats did this story. I am getting tired of that. I wasn't here and when I arrived here Thailand was just starting into a period of attempted anarchy funded by a convicted criminal who for some reason or other choose to live in Dubai. probably to stay out of jail and avoid other charges he was guilty of.

Actually, I was here (and still am) and was at the demonstrations almost every day for work, and within sound of the gunfire as the army shot the unarmed demonstrators. There was no armed rebellion, only a massacre. If you don't believe me, look up the video, or ask the foreign and local reporters who were there and shot (those still alive anyway). I saw the signs for the live fire zone, and wandered across the army lines everyday, looking at soldiers armed with m-16s and shotguns loaded with buckshot (clearly buckshot as the cases were transparent plastic). But hey, believe whoever you want to. Even Suthep, who claimed the army didn't shoot anyone, and that the protestors ran into the bullets. Suthep, clearly a mad man, and the posterboy for Thai corruption long before anyone ever heard of Thaksin. Anyway, they are only buffalo...

[newcomer71]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Quite simply during Thaksins 2010 attack on Bangkok yes they were offered early elections by PM Abhisit which they declined.

This topic is full of completely wrong affirmations: first someone who tell 90 people killed shot at head all by army after being ordered that by Abhisit in person.

Then this joke about Abhisit offered elections to Red Shirts.

Both facts are pure inventions... Guys get some info before post.

[kimamey]

Well, it is clear that the army under Abhisit's command did shoot 90 unarmed demonstrators in the head. That is merely a statement of fact. The question is, is he culpable (yes, since he ordered it), and was it illegal (not in Thailand).

There were rules of engagement. The cases dealt with so far were killed outside those rules. The army then is responsible but will the government take them to court?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[In Town]

Google "dead red shirts 2010" and click on "images". Then google "thai sniper 2010" and click on images. Notice all the images of soldiers with guns and red shirts with slingshots. They also had firecrackers...

[In Town]

Well, it is clear that the army under Abhisit's command did shoot 90 unarmed demonstrators in the head. That is merely a statement of fact. The question is, is he culpable (yes, since he ordered it), and was it illegal (not in Thailand).

There were rules of engagement. The cases dealt with so far were killed outside those rules. The army then is responsible but will the government take them to court?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes, but who made the rules of engagement (CRES), and in what other country does rules of engagement include "live fire zones" at domestic demonstrations?

[firestar]

There were rules of engagement. The cases dealt with so far were killed outside those rules. The army then is responsible but will the government take them to court?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

and, as per my previous post, either the government lied to the public or (less likely) the army lied to the government.

"The army were firing live rounds on civilians. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself"

Paul, British teacher

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8612783.stm

While later that night a government spokesman on national Television:

A government spokesman denied reports that live rounds had also been fired.

"There were no live bullets fired at protesters," Panitan Wattanayagorn said on national TV, AFP agency reported.

Edited December 11, 2013 by firestar

[JRSoul]

This topic is full of completely wrong affirmations: first someone who tell 90 people killed shot at head all by army after being ordered that by Abhisit in person.

Then this joke about Abhisit offered elections to Red Shirts.

Both facts are pure inventions... Guys get some info before post.

Joke? It was televised, the reds accepting the offer, mobile phone rings, no deal.

[rubl]

I don't care much for Abhisit or what he represents, but he deserves credit for walking into the courtroom and standing up against whatever comes. Unlike his "indicted co-conspirator", the would-be dictator Suthep.

The case will go nowhere, and will ultimately be dismissed. It's a loser for PTP to pursue this.

It may be that Pheu Thai is in need to press on with 'justice and punish the guilty' as their opponents will not hesitate to tell all that it was Pheu Thai which tried to push through a 'blanket amnesty bill'.

[newcomer71]

This topic is full of completely wrong affirmations: first someone who tell 90 people killed shot at head all by army after being ordered that by Abhisit in person.

Then this joke about Abhisit offered elections to Red Shirts.

Both facts are pure inventions... Guys get some info before post.

Joke? It was televised, the reds accepting the offer, mobile phone rings, no deal.

Wait: we all remember the roadmap right? And when elections were offered?

If we want to speak the truth, we should tell the whole story...

Tell "Red shirts refused Abhisit election proposal" is a pure lie.

[JRSoul]

LINK?

PS : Good luck finding it. The only Red Shirt demand was new elections as a loophole in the Thai constitution had allowed individual MPs to switch sides in between elections giving the Dems enough MPs to form the "coalition".

So in your tiny mind, MPs represent the party rather than their constituency, even after that party has been disbanded? They should have no choice other than to follow the orders of their former party leader/owner, even though he is a convicted criminal fugitive banned from politics?

On which country's constitution do you base this view?

When a post starts with insults you know it's going to be good No I am saying if a party that received 61% of the votes is disbanded there should be new elections.

And just about any democratic country of your choice would do so.

Your next question should be, "who would call the new election?" followed by "why didn't they do it?"

BTW I still refute that any MP owes loyalty to a party disbanded for breaking electoral law, more so when it appears to be habitual.

[Siripon]

There were rules of engagement. The cases dealt with so far were killed outside those rules. The army then is responsible but will the government take them to court?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

and, as per my previous post, either the government lied to the public or (less likely) the army lied to the government.

"The army were firing live rounds on civilians. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself"

Paul, British teacher

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8612783.stm

While later that night a government spokesman on national Television:

A government spokesman denied reports that live rounds had also been fired.

"There were no live bullets fired at protesters," Panitan Wattanayagorn said on national TV, AFP agency reported.

The violence of the red shirts is all on video- the rockets, the bombings,the shootings, the calls to violence by the leaders.

Anyone who wants to know what really happened over those months and wasn't living here has to google the information, but those such as myself who live here know exactly how violent the reds were.

[JRSoul]

This topic is full of completely wrong affirmations: first someone who tell 90 people killed shot at head all by army after being ordered that by Abhisit in person.

Then this joke about Abhisit offered elections to Red Shirts.

Both facts are pure inventions... Guys get some info before post.

Joke? It was televised, the reds accepting the offer, mobile phone rings, no deal.

Wait: we all remember the roadmap right? And when elections were offered?

If we want to speak the truth, we should tell the whole story...

Tell "Red shirts refused Abhisit election proposal" is a pure lie.

And we remember it being accepted as a fair deal, until...........it didn't suit somebody's plan for violent confrontation.

[In Town]

Its true that in the second reading of the bill senior officials in PT inserted language that provided a blanket amnesty for political leaders. In the pattern of old, they thought they could do a back room deal with the Democrats, trading the return of Thaksin for amnesty for Suthep and Abhisit, who were facing murder charges. What they didn't realise was that both reds and yellows had become ideological, and were no longer willing to follow their patrons blindly. its also important to realise that it was red opposition, not yellow, that was most influential in convincing PT to withdraw the bill (although you will never read that here.

[Roadman]

I think his government's only fault in the sad events of 2010 was in not taking firm control of the situation early. They let people camp out in the streets of the capital for weeks, until things came to a boil.

They will never get a "murder" charge to stick. It's bogus, politically motivated, and just adds to the general chaos and misery we're seeing every day here. It should be thrown out of court.

mate, it is a bit hard when the police simply ignored the reds as instructed to by thaksin. With the police backing the reds and thaksins agenda it is the reason all the shit happened. No one can deny this, they were offered an election but then went on to start the violence that in turn created the shootings. People want to lay blame, look at thaksin, the police and the red leaders, pity the reds/police are too indoctrined to thaksins ideology for the truth to come out.

Quite simply No. they weren't.

Even though the shenanigans that allowed individual MPs elected under the TRT banner to switch sides after getting red votes should have triggered immediate re-elections they weren't.

Quite simply during Thaksins 2010 attack on Bangkok yes they were offered early elections by PM Abhisit which they declined.

This topic is full of completely wrong affirmations: first someone who tell 90 people killed shot at head all by army after being ordered that by Abhisit in person.

Then this joke about Abhisit offered elections to Red Shirts.

Both facts are pure inventions... Guys get some info before post.

How about both you and the other waiting above both go to to page 578 on this site and actually do some reading to educate your selfs on the events of Thaksins attack on Bangkok including Abhisits offer of early elections to the Reds in May that year. Then you both can be man enough to front up with an apology.

[Siripon]

Its true that in the second reading of the bill senior officials in PT inserted language that provided a blanket amnesty for political leaders. In the pattern of old, they thought they could do a back room deal with the Democrats, trading the return of Thaksin for amnesty for Suthep and Abhisit, who were facing murder charges. What they didn't realise was that both reds and yellows had become ideological, and were no longer willing to follow their patrons blindly. its also important to realise that it was red opposition, not yellow, that was most influential in convincing PT to withdraw the bill (although you will never read that here.

Forget your yellow and red nonsense- hundreds of thousands of Thai people showed on Monday what they thought of that self serving corrupt bill.

[newcomer71]

Joke? It was televised, the reds accepting the offer, mobile phone rings, no deal.

Wait: we all remember the roadmap right? And when elections were offered?

If we want to speak the truth, we should tell the whole story...

Tell "Red shirts refused Abhisit election proposal" is a pure lie.

And we remember it being accepted as a fair deal, until...........it didn't suit somebody's plan for violent confrontation.

I think you remember not well.

They accepted but reserved their final decision until Abhisit will clear the roadmap.

It's the same idiot game that is being played now.

Abhisit in any case NEVER offere unconditional elections. He put them in a package, different to tell he offered elections to Red Shirts.

Anyway, to close the discussion. The point is: Thailand is under game of power since 2006... Whatever will be the outcome, if either Shin clan, or Suthep clan will get the power again, the tragic game will go on. No way out.