Sources confirm Abhisit's life under threat: Democrats

[pmugghc]

While I certainly don't condone the deaths caused by the explosion, or the cheering of the crowd, the fact is that dead children were NOT mentioned by the Red Shirt Leader, so no one was "cheering the death of children". I really do wish some of you would get your facts straight before putting on your keyboard know-it-all warrior hats.

So it was OK to cheer the killings since they didn't know children were among the dead?

[AleG]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

Yes, very on topic post...

[kimamey]

pheu thai and red shirt child killers are at it again the only thing they know is violence and intimidation

So just who gave the orders to the military to open fire on men woman and children 2010??? Hypocrite.

Not all PTP support violence, Not all red's support violence, and I suspect Not all Dem's or Suthep's followers support violence.

So if you like having some kind of credibility, stop spewing your "red shirt child killers" line and try a far more accurate violent extremist groups on all sides are the ones who should be locked away forever.

You're right about not all being violent on both sides and that's something I've said on many occasions.

I was just wondering who you think gave the orders to the military to open fire on men woman and children 2010. The government of the time gave ROE to the army regarding the circumstances under which they could shoot and as far I'm aware none of the death met the criteria so if you're thinking it was Abhisit and Suthep who gave the order that resulted in the deaths I think you'll find you're wrong.

[kimamey]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

How do you work out he was responsible?

[fab4]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

How do you work out he was responsible?

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

Edited April 24, 2014 by fab4

[northernjohn]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So the threat was confirmed by his own party, an offshoot of his own party and some unnamed agencies.

What a load of <deleted>.

If it was too dangerous for him, send a rep.

Democrats don't want elections because they lose them and Abhisit, like all lapdogs, does what his master tell him to do.

Why bother with the lies?

Everyone already knows the truth.

He's just an oxygen thief.

Naive posters on here really believe the yellow peril do not commit violence.

The old head in the sand trick! 99

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

Well there we have it the three blind mice.

One of them still mad that his blood thirsty buddies in the red shirts failed to succeed in a coup attempt in 2010. His love of Thaksin is so powerful that he can not see the facts today in 2014.

[northernjohn]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

How do you work out he was responsible?

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

Was there another choice. Abhist bargained in good faith with them and met there terms twice both times they reneged on the agreements. You may not have been at the head of the class but surely you were not that far behind that you can't see the government was given no other choice. The red shirts were not going to surrender to peaceful means. How do you justify their invasion of a hospital? Yet you are willing to condemn the people who stopped these kind of people before they could carry out there stated aim on many u tube videos to burn Bangkok down.

Yes it is unfortunate that some people died. What makes it so much more unfortunate is that they the red shirts twice agreed to end it in return for certain things and apon getting them said no we are going to keep on fighting.

[anteater]

The sad thing is if you create enough hatred there are enough unbalanced people around to take up the cudgels. Why would they do this? Certainly for a personal feelgood factor and self-aggrandisement in the eyes of Thaksin, Thaksin's henchmen (and women) and off course fellow reds. There have been studies on why people would do this but the best of course is Reich's Mass Psychology of Fascism. We have seen an almost perfect example of how to build this type of movement over the past few years and Khun T seems to have got it off to a T (as they say). Very sad to see ignorant people supporting the anti-Abhisit line and even one farang of my unfortunate acquaintance praising the murderous tactics of extreme reds. Certyainly an undemocratic solution, I would say.

Switch "Suthep" for "Thaksin" in your little missive, and it would still sound exactly right.

Am I just totally naive? Or is a lifetime's involvement in human rights and the fringe of politics just been a waste of time? Are people really serious about Thaksin? Have people not understood the devastation that this man has heaped upon Thailand and the Thai Psyche? Do people not understand how sociopaths manipulate in order to satisfy their own thirst for power? Have people not followed international politics and seen how the Marcos, Amin, Saddam, Pinochet (and many many more) regimes have destroyed the lives of so many? Do people just turn their backs on history so that when another would-be dictator comes along they can humbly follow and not learn the lessons of history? I despair. I despair time and time again at the blind ignorance and the self-centred ideas that I see displayed in these forums as people are fooled into following Thaksin : someone whom Amnesty International has already lambasted as a serial human rights violator. Someone who is demonstrably running, or trying to, a hereditary dictatorship with classic attacks on anyone who opposes them. Is it not bleedin' obvious? How can anyone with even a tiny spark of humanity and understanding make the comment above. We all know who Suthep is. He's a stalking horse put out to try and overturn this idea Thaksin has of taking total, and I mean total, control of this country. I've never come here and said he's a great guy. But I have said that what he is doing is VITAL (shout!) for the future of Thailand. Then he can disappear as far as I am concerned. Shoot the messenger if you like. But don't under any circumstances shoot the main message.

Sociopath? says who?

Dictator? wasn't Thaksin elected (by quite large majorities) several times?

A hereditary dictatorship? really? Wasn't Thaksin elected (to repeat) and wasn't Yingluck elected? Next you'll be telling us that the Kennedys in the US or the Benns in the UK are 'hereditary dictators'.

Suthep is VITAL for the future of Thailand? I'd have to differ there.

You really need to get your, "I hate the Shinewatras", obsession under control. I know that several people on ThaiVisa and many middle-class Thai people have this obsession, but it's not healthy. What you need to do is to understand modern democracy. Under democracy the majority gets to vote and then the government gets to run the country for the stipulated time (and, by the way, they are allowed to appoint or dismiss civil servants during their time - note to Constitution Court!) Then, if they haven't done so well and there is another party on offer which seems better, the electorate gets to vote the 'better' party in.

Hey, that's what we call democracy. This is the system that Thailand supposedly adopted in 1932, and that has more recently been recommended by all the international press and all the members of ASEAN.

The only people who oppose it seem to be those who have obscure arguments against it ('there must be 18 principles of democracy', 'but you haven't got the blessing of Mr Abhisit', 'but you've been disrespectful to the monarch'... etc etc etc) okay, I'm not sure about some of these, but my point is that some people are complicating what should be simple!

Honestly, it really is simple! you just let the people vote, and then vote next time, and if the governing party needs ousting, that will happen. Just 'trust the people', as has been said many times.

Let the parties campaign and offer the voters alternatives, and then see what the result is.

BTW, it would be great, obviously, if one could return to the 1997 Constitution -- the best one that Thailand ever had, some people say.

[ianf]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

How do you work out he was responsible?

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

I think 'Fab' is a short form of Fabrication. The description above of the events in 2010 is a total fabrication.

[Ricardo]

Does anyone know, have the caretaker-PM or the boss of CAPO yet condemned the threats of violence/death, against their main political-rival ?

And shouldn't the caretaker-PM have been attending this vital meeting, to try and progress the holding of the election, come to think of it just what has she been doing lately ?

[kurnell]

Didn't know the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) and the Democrat Party has any intelligent at all.

Quite an ironic post

[fab4]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

How do you work out he was responsible?

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

I think 'Fab' is a short form of Fabrication. The description above of the events in 2010 is a total fabrication.

Another person calling me a liar. OK, ianf, point out the lies in the above post or apologise.

[fab4]

Does anyone know, have the caretaker-PM or the boss of CAPO yet condemned the threats of violence/death, against their main political-rival ?

And shouldn't the caretaker-PM have been attending this vital meeting, to try and progress the holding of the election, come to think of it just what has she been doing lately ?

Does anyone know that the death threats have been shown to be a "real" threat, not just a couple of sentences on facebook, a credible threat, by any sources other than the democrat party? Which particular State Intelligence Agency was it that confirmed these threats?

Do we expect abhisit to fade from the public eye until this "threat"has been neutralised?

[philw]

To get back on topic, one would expect a Prime Minister who was party to, and responsible for, the use of snipers against unarmed civilians to feel a certain unease..........

Could also explain why he is currently unelectable.

How do you work out he was responsible?

Er.

PM at the time and all that........

[Piichai]

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

I think 'Fab' is a short form of Fabrication. The description above of the events in 2010 is a total fabrication.

Another person calling me a liar. OK, ianf, point out the lies in the above post or apologise.

You've obviously forgotten about the Red Shirts' attack on the innocents of Bangkok from behind the Red Shirt barricades.

Or did you lie by omission?

[Ricardo]

Does anyone know, have the caretaker-PM or the boss of CAPO yet condemned the threats of violence/death, against their main political-rival ?

And shouldn't the caretaker-PM have been attending this vital meeting, to try and progress the holding of the election, come to think of it just what has she been doing lately ?

Does anyone know that the death threats have been shown to be a "real" threat, not just a couple of sentences on facebook, a credible threat, by any sources other than the democrat party? Which particular State Intelligence Agency was it that confirmed these threats?

Do we expect abhisit to fade from the public eye until this "threat"has been neutralised?

Fair point, the OP says the Democrat Party, PDRC plus "state security agencies all warned that Abhisit would not be safe if he attended the meeting", it doesn't say which agencies.

Given the attempt by Red-Shirts in 2009, to drag him from his car & attack him, when he was PM, one might understand Abhisit taking these sorts of threats seriously.

Perhaps the police or CAPO will release further details, we'd both be interested to see them, but perhaps they won't.

Meanwhile surely responsible politicians should be speaking-out against these threats, if only to distance themselves from any blame, for anything which does happen ?

[fab4]

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

I think 'Fab' is a short form of Fabrication. The description above of the events in 2010 is a total fabrication.

Another person calling me a liar. OK, ianf, point out the lies in the above post or apologise.

You've obviously forgotten about the Red Shirts' attack on the innocents of Bangkok from behind the Red Shirt barricades.

Or did you lie by omission?

I'm not aware of attacks from behind the red shirt "barricades" on the innocents of Bangkok. Perhaps you could define those for me.

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people, obviously I misunderstood the post as Piichai has so helpfully pointed out .

I didn't realise that question was code for "write a detailed precis of the events of March/April/May 2010 with particular regard to every "attack on the innocents of Bangkok" whether they perpetrated by the UDD or not.

If you truly want to know about attacks on the "innocents of Bangkok", abhisits snipers would be a good place to start.

[fab4]

Does anyone know, have the caretaker-PM or the boss of CAPO yet condemned the threats of violence/death, against their main political-rival ?

And shouldn't the caretaker-PM have been attending this vital meeting, to try and progress the holding of the election, come to think of it just what has she been doing lately ?

Does anyone know that the death threats have been shown to be a "real" threat, not just a couple of sentences on facebook, a credible threat, by any sources other than the democrat party? Which particular State Intelligence Agency was it that confirmed these threats?

Do we expect abhisit to fade from the public eye until this "threat"has been neutralised?

Fair point, the OP says the Democrat Party, PDRC plus "state security agencies all warned that Abhisit would not be safe if he attended the meeting", it doesn't say which agencies.

Given the attempt by Red-Shirts in 2009, to drag him from his car & attack him, when he was PM, one might understand Abhisit taking these sorts of threats seriously.

Perhaps the police or CAPO will release further details, we'd both be interested to see them, but perhaps they won't.

Meanwhile surely responsible politicians should be speaking-out against these threats, if only to distance themselves from any blame, for anything which does happen ?

I'm sorry, I don't buy this "if you don't deny it you condone it" mindset so prevalent on here. It's a lazy argument with no substance. Just how many times can you condemn political violence until it rings hollow?

Why would the PTP condemn a barely credible "threat" that exists only on facebook and "confirmed" by dem party and pdrc "intelligence" sources. Especially when it coincided with an important meeting about setting an election date.

Don't you find just a tad interesting that before this "bomb" threat, the dems were going into this meeting knowing the meetings goal, yet they still haven't decided whether to contest the election or not?

Abhisits desperate bluff had been called and he was left with no choice but to go to the meeting, unless........................

[fab4]

Today, abhisit is meeting with Permanent Secretary for Justice and the Reform Now Group. Tomorrow, he meets the Supreme Commander, Thanasak Patimaprakorn for talks. He also plans to meet the Election Commission, the government, other political parties, as well as leaders of protest groups in a series of meetings over the next seven days.

Well that's a relief, obviously the seriously credible threat to his life has been averted................................overnight...............................after the meeting with the EC has finished..............................curious, that............................

[kingalfred]

Didn't know the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) and the Democrat Party has any intelligent at all.

rather more than someone with a yellow or green fruit in their head

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Eric Loh]

Today, abhisit is meeting with Permanent Secretary for Justice and the Reform Now Group. Tomorrow, he meets the Supreme Commander, Thanasak Patimaprakorn for talks. He also plans to meet the Election Commission, the government, other political parties, as well as leaders of protest groups in a series of meetings over the next seven days.

Well that's a relief, obviously the seriously credible threat to his life has been averted................................overnight...............................after the meeting with the EC has finished..............................curious, that............................

Let's re-check the current situation. Ahbisit is trying to re-gain lost credibilities by trying to put forward a proposal, the chiefs of the armed forces agreed that election is the only solution and Suterp is saying April 30th is the final day. The rich corporates that support Suterp is reeling from months of loss profits and the amarts must be feeling that it is a lost cause. Days of Suterp are numbered and he will leave Lumpini with hs tail behind his legs. Bye and please don't come back Facist. You have ruin Thailand enough.

[kingalfred]

How many more times do you need to be told? Abhisit was involved in the CRES meetings that discussed the tactics to be used by the RTA. He set up the CRES. He appointed suthep as head of CRES. suthep signed the orders authorising the use of snipers. At no point did either of them retract this order or the SOE's despite the deaths mounting up after abhisit approved the "crackdown"on the 13th May.

I know you don't want to believe that abhisit and suthep are responsible and that you think that the RTA just went off and did their thing, and before the "brothers in arms" could do anything about it, 90 plus people were dead.

Oops, or as abhisit so eloquently put it, "Unfortunately, some people died".

But it didn't happen like that.

I think 'Fab' is a short form of Fabrication. The description above of the events in 2010 is a total fabrication.

Another person calling me a liar. OK, ianf, point out the lies in the above post or apologise.

You've obviously forgotten about the Red Shirts' attack on the innocents of Bangkok from behind the Red Shirt barricades.

Or did you lie by omission?

I'm not aware of attacks from behind the red shirt "barricades" on the innocents of Bangkok. Perhaps you could define those for me.

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people, obviously I misunderstood the post as Piichai has so helpfully pointed out .

I didn't realise that question was code for "write a detailed precis of the events of March/April/May 2010 with particular regard to every "attack on the innocents of Bangkok" whether they perpetrated by the UDD or not.

If you truly want to know about attacks on the "innocents of Bangkok", abhisits snipers would be a good place to start.

what "innocents " were those?Ah the ones with guns and hand grenades, shooting ,burning and looting?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[AleG]

I think 'Fab' is a short form of Fabrication. The description above of the events in 2010 is a total fabrication.

Another person calling me a liar. OK, ianf, point out the lies in the above post or apologise.

You've obviously forgotten about the Red Shirts' attack on the innocents of Bangkok from behind the Red Shirt barricades.

Or did you lie by omission?

I'm not aware of attacks from behind the red shirt "barricades" on the innocents of Bangkok. Perhaps you could define those for me.

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people, obviously I misunderstood the post as Piichai has so helpfully pointed out .

I didn't realise that question was code for "write a detailed precis of the events of March/April/May 2010 with particular regard to every "attack on the innocents of Bangkok" whether they perpetrated by the UDD or not.

If you truly want to know about attacks on the "innocents of Bangkok", abhisits snipers would be a good place to start.

The attack on Sala Daeng BTS station leaving more than 80 innocent people and one death for example. An example you obviously know yet pretend to not, thus you are lying when you say you don't.

Now please provide a citation on Abhisit ordering snipers to shoot at innocent people.

[fab4]

You've obviously forgotten about the Red Shirts' attack on the innocents of Bangkok from behind the Red Shirt barricades.

Or did you lie by omission?

I'm not aware of attacks from behind the red shirt "barricades" on the innocents of Bangkok. Perhaps you could define those for me.

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people, obviously I misunderstood the post as Piichai has so helpfully pointed out .

I didn't realise that question was code for "write a detailed precis of the events of March/April/May 2010 with particular regard to every "attack on the innocents of Bangkok" whether they perpetrated by the UDD or not.

If you truly want to know about attacks on the "innocents of Bangkok", abhisits snipers would be a good place to start.

The attack on Sala Daeng BTS station leaving more than 80 innocent people and one death for example. An example you obviously know yet pretend to not, thus you are lying when you say you don't.

Now please provide a citation on Abhisit ordering snipers to shoot at innocent people.

Are you completely bereft of brain? Read the bloody post

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people

[AleG]

Does anyone know that the death threats have been shown to be a "real" threat, not just a couple of sentences on facebook, a credible threat, by any sources other than the democrat party? Which particular State Intelligence Agency was it that confirmed these threats?

Do we expect abhisit to fade from the public eye until this "threat"has been neutralised?

Here's another clear example of dishonesty, calling it a false threat (is obvious what you meant by using quotations in "real") The same person has previously issued threats in the same manner and at least in one instance it has been followed by death and injury of those threatened. You can look up "Gunment ambush protesters, one killed four injured" in the BP website to see for yourself. Of course then you are going to pretend it never happened like you did in another thread and then slinked away when presented with the facts (presumably so you can pretend again that those facts don't exists):

For all you stupid red sheeple. If Abhisit said there was a threat and there was no proof given, I would be with you in thinking it was just a convenient excuse. However this was a public threat on FB - this is proovable. Is this the same guy who told them not to take the bus on the expressway aa few weeks back, then the red detritus shot at them and murdered someone ? Not sure. But when Chalerm says there could be violence, there is. When red detritus threaten violence, there is. If there was a direct threat made against someone by red terrorists, you would have to be an idiot not to take it seriously.

There are probably pages on facebook saying that the Pope is an alien, it doesn't mean it's proof that he is.

"Is this the same guy who told them not to take the bus on the expressway aa few weeks back, then the red detritus shot at them and murdered someone ? Not sure."

But you thought you'd mention it anyway, even though it didn't happen?

Wow, you've convinced me, perhaps it's your way with words and open minded nature that does it.....................

So now this didn't happen neither:

BANGKOK: -- A security guard for the Students and People Network for Thailand's Reform was shot dead and three STR-led protesters were injured in an ambush on Tuesday afternoon.

But go on, stick to stupid arguments like comparing a threat to attack a group, followed by an actual attack that leaves one dead and three injured with calling the Pope an alien; it serves to exemplify the mentality of those that support the UDD and PTP government.

[AleG]

The attack on Sala Daeng BTS station leaving more than 80 innocent people and one death for example. An example you obviously know yet pretend to not, thus you are lying when you say you don't.

Now please provide a citation on Abhisit ordering snipers to shoot at innocent people.

Are you completely bereft of brain? Read the bloody post

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people

"I'm not aware of attacks from behind the red shirt "barricades" on the innocents of Bangkok. Perhaps you could define those for me."

[fab4]

The attack on Sala Daeng BTS station leaving more than 80 innocent people and one death for example. An example you obviously know yet pretend to not, thus you are lying when you say you don't.

Now please provide a citation on Abhisit ordering snipers to shoot at innocent people.

Are you completely bereft of brain? Read the bloody post

Whilst I'm waiting may I apologise to Piichai and the rest of the forum by not detailing every incident that occurred of that two month period in my 7 line post. I was answering Kimameys question as to why abhisit was responsible for the use of snipers against unarmed people

"I'm not aware of attacks from behind the red shirt "barricades" on the innocents of Bangkok. Perhaps you could define those for me."

And?

[fab4]

Here's another clear example of dishonesty, calling it a false threat (is obvious what you meant by using quotations in "real") The same person has previously issued threats in the same manner and at least in one instance it has been followed by death and injury of those threatened. You can look up "Gunment ambush protesters, one killed four injured" in the BP website to see for yourself. Of course then you are going to pretend it never happened like you did in another thread and then slinked away when presented with the facts (presumably so you can pretend again that those facts don't exists):

No I wasn't aware of that killing until today when I got round to reading your post where you have pointed it out, hence my post. I do not deny it as it obviously happened. I was not aware of it when I wrote that post.

So back to this threat, it obviously has been neutralised seeing that abhisit is making a whole round of public visits in the week ahead.........................

[Jim walker]

Many people throughout the ages have given their lives to fight for their believes and democracy and or freedom with an opportunity to cast a vote, a chance at last for Abbhist to get his views heard and to join the martyrs for his cause, such a brave and fearless man for the cause, our hero..

[pmugghc]

Does anyone know, have the caretaker-PM or the boss of CAPO yet condemned the threats of violence/death, against their main political-rival ?

And shouldn't the caretaker-PM have been attending this vital meeting, to try and progress the holding of the election, come to think of it just what has she been doing lately ?

Does anyone know that the death threats have been shown to be a "real" threat, not just a couple of sentences on facebook, a credible threat, by any sources other than the democrat party? Which particular State Intelligence Agency was it that confirmed these threats?

Do we expect abhisit to fade from the public eye until this "threat"has been neutralised?

Can't link but read today's Bkk Post page p12. This guy Yim had accurately predicted previous attacks.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app