Sources confirm Abhisit's life under threat: Democrats

[fab4]

"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?

Before I was timed out I wanted to post these two accounts of the event in question

The army had blamed the red shirts for Thursday's grenade attacks,even before all five explosions had taken place and Suthep Thaugsuban, the deputy prime minister, went on television to say that the grenades had been fired from an M79 grenade launcher from within the red shirts' protest area.

He had also said three people were killed in the violence but the Bangkok Emergency Medical Service confirmed on Friday that only one person was killed and 86 injured.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2010/04/2010423112447279768.html

One killed, 75 injured as five grenades are fired targeting pro-govt group; reds insist they're not responsible; 5 of 6 suspects apprehended are released

Five grenades were fired from M-79 launchers at BTS Saladaeng station and nearby areas last night from unknown launch sites, killing a Thai woman and injuring 75 others including three foreigners, officials said. Ten are in serious condition.

However, Deputy Premier Suthep Thaugsuban reported three deaths from yesterday's attacks.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/04/23/politics/Bangkok-Dangerous-30127770.html

So, on the day of the incident we have the army claiming it was the red shirts before a grenade had even landed and suthep (deputy PM at the time ) definitively stating on TV that the grenades were fired from the UDD camp and that 3 people had been killed..................

..................Yet the very next day Officials say that the launch site/s are unknown and one death is reported.

Something rotten in the state of Bangkok, or just the usual official line?

[semester]

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?

. This guy Yim had accurately predicted previous attacks.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

.

It was in regards to the fatal highway shootings last month, Red Shirt Yim Tasawang posted on Facebook at 11:00am that nefarious Red Shirt Leader Ko Tee had "sweets from the border" waiting for Suthep followers on their way back on the expressway. The protesters were attacked on the expressway at 2:30pm.

In light of all the shootings, bombings, grenading, and overall mayhem, particularly in the last six months, to cavalierly dismiss a death threat amongst all this chaos is absurd.

[AleG]

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.........................

Riiiight, the background of this threat has only been referred multiple times, in the news and in the TV threads on the topic. But hey, you didn't know, so why have you been dismissing this threat if you don't know what you are talking about? Knee-jerk reaction?

[fab4]

Riiiight, the background of this threat has only been referred multiple times, in the news and in the TV threads on the topic. But hey, you didn't know, so why have you been dismissing this threat if you don't know what you are talking about? Knee-jerk reaction?

Just working with what I had, you have a problem with that? I've explained why but you're still going on?

Anyway as I said the threat either wasn't credible or it's been suppressed because abhisit is going off walkabout this week. Let's just say it gave him an excuse to miss the EC meeting. Any coincidence that he is seeing all these people this week? It's not a social call - he's guaging opinion, seeing which way the winds blowing before he will commit to an election or not. As I said, grubby little opportunist.

[billd766]

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.

OK smartypants. Just who DID give the orders to the military to open fire on men, women and children in 2010.

If you know then name the names with proof of course.

If you don't know and have no proof then stop making allegations that you cannot backup.

[northernjohn]

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.

Interesting

Now that the end is near for Thaksin a number of people come out of hiding with the nonsense statements. Of course they have nothing to do with 2014 completely overlook It and search history for some thing they can take out of context.

[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?

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.

Sorry for the delay in replying only I’ve been busy and had internet problems.

I normally take notice of your posts as they are usually based on facts. philw's reply (Er he was PM at the time) on the other hand has very little going for it. On that basis a prime minister or caretaker prime minister who is removed from office by a military coup is responsible for his or her own overthrow as they were PM at the time.

Whilst I take notice of what you say it doesn't mean I accept it without question however many times you say it.

When the emergency decree and the ROE for the military were put in place it gave them permission to shoot under certain circumstances mainly involving danger to life or property. That was changed to enable the use of snipers in cases where someone who fitted the criteria for the use of live ammo was in a position that didn’t allow a safe shot. I know many inquests have taken place but I don't know if all of them have but based on the ones I've seen the military seem to have shot people who weren't endangering either life or property. I know the army have claimed that it might have been others who had stolen guns that fired the shots but even if that were the case, and it seems unlikely, it's not credible that all the deaths could be explained this way.

The fact that deaths occurred wouldn’t have been that surprising as that was the reason for live ammunition. Although most protesters were peaceful there were, as there are now in the current protests those who want to be violent. It wasn't helped by the fact that they seemed to be encouraged by the leadership and those on stage.

I'm not an expert on this sort of thing but I would guess that the PM would have been given information by the army commanders regarding the circumstances surrounding the deaths. I doubt they told him they had shot unarmed people posing no threat as they don’t seem to be admitting that now either. Even if Abhisit did find out the truth or suspected it what would be his options?

He could have told the military commanders that they weren't authorised to shoot people who weren't a danger. We don't know if he did that but since the ROE were still in place then that would constitute an order to that effect anyway. His other option would be to call the army back to barracks but that would have problems as well. The redshirts, or at least the more extreme ones might have seen that as weakness and either stayed where they were or moved to attack the government and anyone who supported them. If that happened they would either have been allowed to do what they wanted or the army would have had to start all over again with the same problems. The other scenario is that the army might have refused to back off. They were already refusing to obey orders so it's just as likely they would have disobeyed that order as well. There were statements made by Suthep and I believe Abhisit that turned out to be untrue and that I would criticise them for although they may have been relaying what they were told. It's usual for a PM to get their information about the situation on the ground from those close to it as they can’t see themselves. Media reports may give some information but in any other country the accuracy of the reports would be checked with those on the ground.

A government can’t operate on its own but needs support from police, military and all the other bodies that go with it. If as in this case the army didn’t follow the rules given to them then I would have said that yes they went off and did their own thing and once that happens the government has no way to stop them.

Under those circumstances it would be hard to hold Abhisit or Suthep responsible directly for the deaths. Their only responsibility would be to make sure that an investigation took place to obtain the facts and to act on those facts. There might be some problems for them in that regard but even there it may not be down to them.

What is needed now is a court case that gets to the facts but that's not going to happen without the army being investigated as well since they fired the shots. I may not wish Abhisit to be responsible but if he is and that can be shown fairly then so be it but at the moment it doesn’t seem that it will happen. The same goes for Suthep although I’m not a great fan of him.

The problem seems to be the strength of the army against the civilian government. Thaksin couldn't stop them taking over in 2006 and Yingluck (or Thaksin) can't get them to court over the deaths in 2010, some of whom were their supporters so it's possible that Abhisit was equally powerless to control them and that all of them were or are suffering the same problems.

I would always be suspicious of an army that has it’s own TV stations.