So you have the facts. Please enlighten us. What happened while she was in detention? Is she guilty of charges being brought?

 

How would I know that? The fact is I don't. I wasn't there, and no evidence has been given by anyone, on any side, only allegations. People have opinions, which is fine —  IF AND ONLY IF the opinions are backed by the (relatively few) available facts. 

 

That was my point about your post. She did not fail to report. When ordered to report, she was in fact already in army custody. People are going to believe she was (not) tortured and people are going to believe she was (not) supplying weapons, but it is nothing more than belief. Trying to insert unfactual information can only make your beliefs seem even weirder than they are.

 

For me: I think that given Thai army history, a torture allegation is credible and deserves to be properly investigated. I think that allegations that Kritsuda gave/sold guns to people is credible and deserves proper investigation. Neither allegation has apparently received any investigation at all.

 

I think that the army's actions in the Kritsuda case are, or border on, criminal. It has failed to act on evidence of a crime, and the very best you can say is that officers of several units, at levels up to the head office of the coup administration, did not perform their duty as expected in serial incidents.

 

.

 

So you have the facts. Please enlighten us. What happened while she was in detention? Is she guilty of charges being brought?

 

How would I know that? The fact is I don't. I wasn't there, and no evidence has been given by anyone, on any side, only allegations. People have opinions, which is fine —  IF AND ONLY IF the opinions are backed by the (relatively few) available facts. 

 

That was my point about your post. She did not fail to report. When ordered to report, she was in fact already in army custody. People are going to believe she was (not) tortured and people are going to believe she was (not) supplying weapons, but it is nothing more than belief. Trying to insert unfactual information can only make your beliefs seem even weirder than they are.

 

For me: I think that given Thai army history, a torture allegation is credible and deserves to be properly investigated. I think that allegations that Kritsuda gave/sold guns to people is credible and deserves proper investigation. Neither allegation has apparently received any investigation at all.

 

I think that the army's actions in the Kritsuda case are, or border on, criminal. It has failed to act on evidence of a crime, and the very best you can say is that officers of several units, at levels up to the head office of the coup administration, did not perform their duty as expected in serial incidents.

 

 

Didn't fail to report because already apprehended? If already apprehended there is no need to summon someone to report.

 

It would seem the 'real' facts might be interpreted as having been summoned and failing to do so voluntarily she was apprehended so the army could help her to report? Like the army did with Suthep and a few PDRC members ?

 

I guess the army should have handed k. Kritsuda over to the police to let them handle the case. Of course the lady would still be in the country then.

 

Edited August 10, 201411 yr by rubl

Didn't fail to report because already apprehended? If already apprehended there is no need to summon someone to report.

 

Gee, you'd think so, anyway. And yet she was in custody, and she was summoned. Or, to be exquisitely and exactly correct, that is what the army (credibly) states, specifically the celebrity spokesman Col Winthai.

 

 

It would seem the 'real' facts might be interpreted as having been summoned and failing to do so voluntarily she was apprehended so the army could help her to report? Like the army did with Suthep and a few PDRC members ?

 

And yet the "real fact" is that she was in custody by one office, and the main office summoned her. The army did not, as a matter of record, "help her to report". That is entirely your responsibility for claiming that. Do you have any evidence? I bet you don't.

 

 

I guess the army should have handed k. Kritsuda over to the police to let them handle the case. Of course the lady would still be in the country then.

 

I guess they should have. Or just handled it themselves, since it's martial law and they have that right, also.

 

Yet they did neither.

 

Me, I think they acted incompetently and there was malfeasance in one or more military offices. But I only say that based on available facts and evidence made public by the RTA. Unfortunately, there is either a lot more facts and evidence the army will not currently release - or the army is lying, there is no third possibility. So it's tough coming to an informed opinion really, and mine is certainly open to change in case more facts emerge.

 

.

Edited August 10, 201411 yr by wandasloan

A post in which the quoted content had been snipped and altered to change the context of the post has been removed as well as a reply: 

 

16) You will not make changes to quoted material from other members posts, except for purposes of shortening the quoted post. This cannot be done in such a manner that it alters the context of the original post.

So you have the facts. Please enlighten us. What happened while she was in detention? Is she guilty of charges being brought?

How would I know that? The fact is I don't. I wasn't there, and no evidence has been given by anyone, on any side, only allegations. People have opinions, which is fine — IF AND ONLY IF the opinions are backed by the (relatively few) available facts.

That was my point about your post. She did not fail to report. When ordered to report, she was in fact already in army custody. People are going to believe she was (not) tortured and people are going to believe she was (not) supplying weapons, but it is nothing more than belief. Trying to insert unfactual information can only make your beliefs seem even weirder than they are.

For me: I think that given Thai army history, a torture allegation is credible and deserves to be properly investigated. I think that allegations that Kritsuda gave/sold guns to people is credible and deserves proper investigation. Neither allegation has apparently received any investigation at all.

I think that the army's actions in the Kritsuda case are, or border on, criminal. It has failed to act on evidence of a crime, and the very best you can say is that officers of several units, at levels up to the head office of the coup administration, did not perform their duty as expected in serial incidents.

.

I quoted my source. You disagree with the source. You didn't include sources, but your comments are plausible.

Why the condescending remarks? Remember, people are entitled to their opinions and are not necessarily weird because you don't agree.

For me: I don't know if her claims are true, but I doubt they will be proven. I am not saying it is right, just the way it will probably go.

I am pro-coup. I did support the PDRC and have friends who were in the PAD. Maybe weird to you, but so it goes.




Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

 

It would seem the 'real' facts might be interpreted as having been summoned and failing to do so voluntarily she was apprehended so the army could help her to report? Like the army did with Suthep and a few PDRC members ?

 

And yet the "real fact" is that she was in custody by one office, and the main office summoned her. The army did not, as a matter of record, "help her to report". That is entirely your responsibility for claiming that. Do you have any evidence? I bet you don't.

 

 

I guess the army should have handed k. Kritsuda over to the police to let them handle the case. Of course the lady would still be in the country then.

 

I guess they should have. Or just handled it themselves, since it's martial law and they have that right, also.

 

Yet they did neither.

 

Me, I think they acted incompetently and there was malfeasance in one or more military offices. But I only say that based on available facts and evidence made public by the RTA. Unfortunately, there is either a lot more facts and evidence the army will not currently release - or the army is lying, there is no third possibility. So it's tough coming to an informed opinion really, and mine is certainly open to change in case more facts emerge.

 

.

 

 

1. "The army did not, as a matter of record, "help her to report". That is entirely your responsibility for claiming that."

I wrote "the army could help her to report"

 

2. letting suspects go.

As it would seem no one likes the army to detain people without proper 'proof' as to why, it seems a bit hilarious to complain the army let someone go as there wasn't sufficient evidence yet.

 

BTW ''malfeasance" ? As in "the willful and intentional action that injures a party." ? Do you want to claim here that k. Krisuda was injured if only in a legal sense? Should she complain that she wasn't handed over to the police to get nicely charged ? I'm afraid I have problems understanding your use of "malfeasance".

 

Anyway, k. Kritsuda has arrest warrants open against her, is in 'self-exile' and the case against her will be waiting till she comes back to acknowledge the charges or till the case can be dropped

 

Actually, according to one of the English language newspapers, she was arrested on May 28th in Chonburi for not reporting. She had been summoned on suspicion of involvement of computer crime and weapons related charges.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not "some newspaper" you won't even quote. Here are the facts of the case. Feel free to point out where they are wrong, in any detail. If you succeed, you will be the first to find any error in them, so please document the errors you find as extensively as possible and "some newspaper I read" isn't documentation.

 

 

On 28 May 2014, Ms. Kritsuda Khunasen was taken from Chonburi province by police and soldiers and was under detention after that. No one was able to contact her while she was in detention and it was not known where she was detained.  On 17 June 2014, there was a summons for Ms. Kritsuda to report herself to the junta following National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order No. 68/2557 [2014]. This was the case although there was neither evidence that she had been released nor had any charges been brought against her.

 

Subsequently, on 20 June 2014, Colonel Winthai Suwaree, deputy spokesperson for the Army, admitted that it was true that Ms. Kritsuda had been detained.

 

On June 23, a video was released by army TV showing Ms Kritsuda praising the excellent treatment she received in army hands. At the time, she was still in army hands.

 

On June 24, Col Winthai announced she had been released.

 

.

 

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

As for posts (not necessarily yours) speculating that she is being framed after her accusation of torture  - it is her brothers in arms who are accusing her of supplying them with arms. The 'singing' red birds.

 

Also the statement that she asked to remain in custody (true or false, I don't know) could well be explained by that she was fearful of being silenced by those who employed her.

 

BTW you suggest that the torture claim could be credible based on 'previous' by the army. There I was thinking that your previous claim of being unbiased towards the army was factual The claim of torture could equally be false, based on the fact that none of the other hundreds of detainees made a similar claim.

 

Anyway it is certainly good that these implicated runaways are being pursued as they need to be prevented from being responsible for killing any more innocent civilians. It didn't happen before the army got involved in supervising the police and they've now got quite a few of the probable offenders.

 

I know how it upsets the red shirt defenders of their violence & that's just toooooooo bad.

 

Edited August 10, 201411 yr by khunken

seriously they try to make us believe, this 40 kg woman does the same job than Viktor Bout? really?

Which yellow came with this stupid allegation? the mad monk???

 

 

and except the yellow looney on this forum, who they want to fool? Because any people with more than 2 brains cells....

 

What does her weight have to do with buying and distributing "war weapons", come now Mr Bender, time to wear boxing gloves to bed!!! 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

All these so-called Red trouble-makers are just misunderstood innocents on trumped up charges.  What about  Suthep, Abhisit & "the yellow monk?"   Seriously, these bleeding heart PTP/UDD apologists make me sick.  Don't like the time???  Shouldn'ta done the crime.  Oh I forgot, your lot was the democratically elected governent then & bosses in UDD promised nothing could go wrong, click, could go wrong, click, could go wrong, clickj, could go wrong!

Edited August 10, 201411 yr by The Deerhunter

 

 

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

 

"Large bore caliber...."

 

This was to make you appear knowledgeable? Heh.

 

For what it's worth, I have photos in my home of me and (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns, plural. For what it's worth, I've not trafficked the guns in the photos. Or any others. I suspect you have absolutely no more knowledge of Kritsuda's attention to those (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns than mine, where "absolutely" is an absolute word. Or am I wrong?

 

 

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

 

 

I asked you to correct this and you haven't. Did you miss my request? I take it quite seriously.

 

.

 

 

 

How does Human Rights Watch feel about her brandishing large-bore caliber handguns?

 

"Large bore caliber...."

 

This was to make you appear knowledgeable? Heh.

 

For what it's worth, I have photos in my home of me and (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns, plural. For what it's worth, I've not trafficked the guns in the photos. Or any others. I suspect you have absolutely no more knowledge of Kritsuda's attention to those (cough)large-bore(cough) handguns than mine, where "absolutely" is an absolute word. Or am I wrong?

 

 

Absolutely, my dear Wanda. I too would be surprised if dear Bland had more or even any knowledge of your attention to your guns you obviously legitimately keep in your house.

 

 

I asked you to correct this and you haven't. Did you miss my request? I take it quite seriously.

 

 

My dear Wanda, anything to make you feel better.

 

The description was my interpretation. You didn't write the guns in the photo were your guns, you didn't write the photo was made in your home, neither did you write the guns were currently at your home.

 

Just like I have photo's with me sitting on a heap of 120mm grenades, next to a 120mm mortar piece. The stuff wasn't mine, the photo wasn't made at my home, neither is the stuff at my home.

 

Mind you, neither you nor I are accused. The accused is k. Kritsuda.

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

 

 

I didn't claim that she 'smiled for the camera' - your words (in my mouth). I'm responding to your claims that she may have done it under duress and, equally, your unfounded claim that she may not have asked to stay in custody. My claims are as much a possibility as yours and patronising comments don't add to yours.

 

I am certainly not 'gobsmacked' that you cannot accept contrary opinions that are very much as strong as yours - your history of pretence of being unbiased towards the military is being repeated.

 

I agree that the army should allow an investigation into the claims of torture. How?

 

The army has nothing to investigate as far as the weapons allegations are concerned - these have been made by arrested suspects (by the police) and the court has approved arrest warrants for the woman and others. Nowhere in the Op does it say they are relying on photo(s). This is purely a smokescreen to attempt to make the weak torture allegations look slightly less weak. The military have a damn site more credibility than posters using innuendo.

 

I'm certainly not shooting you personally or virtually, but I will shoot down any of your messages that I think are untrue or wild conjecture.

 

Edited August 10, 201411 yr by khunken

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

 

 

 

Like Pheu Thai spokesperson Prompong used to say "I accuse you. It's up to you to prove me wrong".

 

In the mean time some like to pressure the army, junta, NCPO into being more likable. Strange, really. Next we'll see people talking about government when discussing the NCPO. 

 

Actually, according to one of the English language newspapers, she was arrested on May 28th in Chonburi for not reporting. She had been summoned on suspicion of involvement of computer crime and weapons related charges.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not "some newspaper" you won't even quote. Here are the facts of the case. Feel free to point out where they are wrong, in any detail. If you succeed, you will be the first to find any error in them, so please document the errors you find as extensively as possible and "some newspaper I read" isn't documentation.

 

 

On 28 May 2014, Ms. Kritsuda Khunasen was taken from Chonburi province by police and soldiers and was under detention after that. No one was able to contact her while she was in detention and it was not known where she was detained.  On 17 June 2014, there was a summons for Ms. Kritsuda to report herself to the junta following National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order No. 68/2557 [2014]. This was the case although there was neither evidence that she had been released nor had any charges been brought against her.

 

Subsequently, on 20 June 2014, Colonel Winthai Suwaree, deputy spokesperson for the Army, admitted that it was true that Ms. Kritsuda had been detained.

 

On June 23, a video was released by army TV showing Ms Kritsuda praising the excellent treatment she received in army hands. At the time, she was still in army hands.

 

On June 24, Col Winthai announced she had been released.

 

.

 

 

Funny, you forgot to add to the facts list that she has been named as the weapons supplier by one of her accomplices that was arrested after her release. "After" being underlined so that the claptrap about the army releasing her and then wanting her back can be put to rest.

 

Besides that the police claim to have documents and other witnesses to support the accusation.

 

Meanwhile Kritsuda has sweet F all to support her claims of being tortured and a very large incentive to make them to convince some government to give her asylum; being a weapons provider for a terrorist group is not a good selling point.

 

 

 

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

As for posts (not necessarily yours) speculating that she is being framed after her accusation of torture  - it is her brothers in arms who are accusing her of supplying them with arms. The 'singing' red birds.

 

Also the statement that she asked to remain in custody (true or false, I don't know) could well be explained by that she was fearful of being silenced by those who employed her.

 

BTW you suggest that the torture claim could be credible based on 'previous' by the army. There I was thinking that your previous claim of being unbiased towards the army was factual The claim of torture could equally be false, based on the fact that none of the other hundreds of detainees made a similar claim.

 

Anyway it is certainly good that these implicated runaways are being pursued as they need to be prevented from being responsible for killing any more innocent civilians. It didn't happen before the army got involved in supervising the police and they've now got quite a few of the probable offenders.

 

I know how it upsets the red shirt defenders of their violence & that's just toooooooo bad.

 

 

 

The other man implicated on the weapons distribution. Kamong Duangpasuk, was murdered in April.

 

 

Actually, according to one of the English language newspapers, she was arrested on May 28th in Chonburi for not reporting. She had been summoned on suspicion of involvement of computer crime and weapons related charges.

 

 

Actually, if you wish to argue with the facts of the case, you should get the facts of the case and not "some newspaper" you won't even quote. Here are the facts of the case. Feel free to point out where they are wrong, in any detail. If you succeed, you will be the first to find any error in them, so please document the errors you find as extensively as possible and "some newspaper I read" isn't documentation.

 

 

On 28 May 2014, Ms. Kritsuda Khunasen was taken from Chonburi province by police and soldiers and was under detention after that. No one was able to contact her while she was in detention and it was not known where she was detained.  On 17 June 2014, there was a summons for Ms. Kritsuda to report herself to the junta following National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order No. 68/2557 [2014]. This was the case although there was neither evidence that she had been released nor had any charges been brought against her.

 

Subsequently, on 20 June 2014, Colonel Winthai Suwaree, deputy spokesperson for the Army, admitted that it was true that Ms. Kritsuda had been detained.

 

On June 23, a video was released by army TV showing Ms Kritsuda praising the excellent treatment she received in army hands. At the time, she was still in army hands.

 

On June 24, Col Winthai announced she had been released.

 

.

 

 

Funny, you forgot to add to the facts list that she has been named as the weapons supplier by one of her accomplices that was arrested after her release. "After" being underlined so that the claptrap about the army releasing her and then wanting her back can be put to rest.

 

Besides that the police claim to have documents and other witnesses to support the accusation.

 

Meanwhile Kritsuda has sweet F all to support her claims of being tortured and a very large incentive to make them to convince some government to give her asylum; being a weapons provider for a terrorist group is not a good selling point.

 

 

 

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

As for posts (not necessarily yours) speculating that she is being framed after her accusation of torture  - it is her brothers in arms who are accusing her of supplying them with arms. The 'singing' red birds.

 

Also the statement that she asked to remain in custody (true or false, I don't know) could well be explained by that she was fearful of being silenced by those who employed her.

 

BTW you suggest that the torture claim could be credible based on 'previous' by the army. There I was thinking that your previous claim of being unbiased towards the army was factual The claim of torture could equally be false, based on the fact that none of the other hundreds of detainees made a similar claim.

 

Anyway it is certainly good that these implicated runaways are being pursued as they need to be prevented from being responsible for killing any more innocent civilians. It didn't happen before the army got involved in supervising the police and they've now got quite a few of the probable offenders.

 

I know how it upsets the red shirt defenders of their violence & that's just toooooooo bad.

 

 

 

The other man implicated on the weapons distribution. Kamong Duangpasuk, was murdered in April.

 

 

Very interesting - thanks for connecting the dots. He was the red shirt poet allegedly killed by the opposition (whoever that is).

 

So that means one cannot exclude the possibility that he was silenced and Kritsuda was afraid of the same happening to her. The plot thickens.

 

 

Assuming what you say is correct (a very big assumption based on past history), why would she praise the treatment she received and then renege on it?

 

This, and all your post. I'm amazed you ask that. You really, actually, can't think why someone in military custody would smile for the camera and say that she was happy in military custody? Really?:

 

People under duress say untrue things. That MIGHT and I stress that word MIGHT be why she and the red shirts said what they said. It's a possibility. I have no idea if it's true but everyone from thieves to kidnap victims and prisoners of war say what is in their interest to say, or what their captors tell them so say. It's hardly science.

 

That doesn't mean she did that. It means I'm absolutely gobsmacked and you and others are asking the question, "Well why would she do that?" and can't figure out a reason why it MIGHT happen.

 

Now. That's conjecture. This isn't: The unfortunate fact here is that the whole country knows the RTA's very spotty and questionable past about people in its custody. So it's in the interest of the army, if not beholden upon them, to answer the current allegations of torture and claims that arms trafficking charges were invented. In fact, if the army does NOT provide more facts/proof, then more and more people will turn in disbelief from them.

 

The army can help a proper investigation of torture claims. The army MUST have evidence of arms trafficking beyond a snapshot of a woman sitting with guns, which match thousands and thousands of similar photos in any simple Google search — or it wouldn't have made the charges. If the army refuses to expand on either of these subjects, then the army will suffer public and media pressure like the editorials already printed saying, essentially, what I've just written. There will be more of these, and more public pressure, and the army will continue to get zero public support over these two issues, just as it is currently getting.

 

Gen Sarit is on a honeymoon. People like him. People like his regime. People even kind of like his goals. He can't afford to lose any of them. Not over something like this. If the army won't address these issues, people will assume the army has quite a lot to hide.

 

And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese.

 

.

 

 

.........................."And don't shoot me. I'm carrying a message that some people don't like. Hard cheese."..............................

 

Perhaps, wanda4, it is not the message you are carrying that annoys people to no end, but the way you are carrying it. Every post you have posted since joining TV has reeked of condescension. Us "mere males" have feelings too, you know. Lighten up !    

 

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".
 
Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?
 
Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.
 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

There's no proof of course but then there's no proof she was tortured or that her weight would stop her giving someone weapons either.

I guess you don't have a background in science then. Is quite difficult to probe something didn't happen. Try proving other redshirts didn't torture her for propaganda.

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. 

 

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. 

 

 

A bit childish guys. Obviously two typos. Try:

 

"He added that the red-shirt activist asked to stay on in army’s custody, claiming that she felt unsafe getting out."

 

 

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. 

 

 

A bit childish guys. Obviously two typos. Try:

 

"He added that the red-shirt activist asked to stay on in army’s custody, claiming that she felt unsafe getting out."

 

Thank you, uncle 

 

 

 

 

He added that the red-shirt activists asked to say on in army’s custody claiming that she felt unsafe getting out.

Could someone translate this translation? My brain hurts...

 

Mine too. 

 

 

A bit childish guys. Obviously two typos. Try:

 

"He added that the red-shirt activist asked to stay on in army’s custody, claiming that she felt unsafe getting out."

 

 

Yes - particularly as AleG has posted in this thread that her accused partner in crime - the red shirt poet - was murdered in April.

 

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

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

 

To escape justice?

Thai Airways should be making a profit this year with all the Thai people leaving the country.

...free seats in First Class as usual, plus the 20 large suitcases direct to the tarmac...

 

by the way, has YS returned as promised??

Edited August 10, 201411 yr by bangon04

My dear Wanda, anything to make you feel better.

 

The description was my interpretation. You didn't write the guns in the photo were your guns, you didn't write the photo was made in your home, neither did you write the guns were currently at your home.

 

Just like I have photo's with me sitting on a heap of 120mm grenades, next to a 120mm mortar piece. The stuff wasn't mine, the photo wasn't made at my home, neither is the stuff at my home.

 

Mind you, neither you nor I are accused. The accused is k. Kritsuda.

 

 

I appreciate that. 

 

In these days, in this atmosphere, anyone might/could be accused. Anyone who tempts that or tests that is a fool. At least.

 

.

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

 

 

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

Thai girls will say anything for attention, and make up any story. Even as much as, "I loving you you are very handsome rich man happy ending".

 

Incidentally, if she had done nothing wrong, why has she fled the country? Bank account with large deposits from TS perhaps?

 

Get over it, it's obvious nobody has been so-called tortured by army personnel.

 

Lots of words with no facts.  Where is the money?   You seen it?   You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen.   Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.   Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

 

Lots of words with no facts. 
 - seems to be talking about himself. Lots of hot air with nothing solid as usual.

 

You know she lying, so prove it, no one has showed it didn't happen

- You can't prove god doesn't exist so surely he must. Same pile of crap as what you just said. The onus is on her to prove the wrong doing she alleged DID happen, same as the authorities must prove she did what they said she did. I know which one my bet is on.

 

Why was she held longer than allowed and no one knew where she was.

- As commented by djjamie, it is very well known and documented. Again you are all hot air.

 

Why did she leave the country?  It's pretty obvious why she left.

- Because she is guilty as hell and like Pistorious she doesn't have a leg to stand on.....

 

My dear Wanda, anything to make you feel better.

 

The description was my interpretation. You didn't write the guns in the photo were your guns, you didn't write the photo was made in your home, neither did you write the guns were currently at your home.

 

Just like I have photo's with me sitting on a heap of 120mm grenades, next to a 120mm mortar piece. The stuff wasn't mine, the photo wasn't made at my home, neither is the stuff at my home.

 

Mind you, neither you nor I are accused. The accused is k. Kritsuda.

 

 

I appreciate that. 

 

In these days, in this atmosphere, anyone might/could be accused. Anyone who tempts that or tests that is a fool. At least.

 

 

Sorry, but 'tempts that', or 'tests that'? What you mean with 'that' ? Do you mean 'tempting or testing to be accused'? Please some explanation.

 

BTW even in previous times any one could be accused, even when the police had clear evidence.

seriously they try to make us believe, this 40 kg woman does the same job than Viktor Bout? really?

Which yellow came with this stupid allegation? the mad monk???

 

 

and except the yellow looney on this forum, who they want to fool? Because any people with more than 2 brains cells....

Because any people with more than 2 brains cells..

 

Clearly you do not belong to that group....

What a coincident that she is charged with possession of weapons just after complaining about being tortured by army personnel.

indeed... she might have been wise to have kept quiet about any torture (if there was any). Now I feel, as they say Snatch "she's proper fooked"!

Reds shirt always play with law limits, they made alliance with anti-monarchist movement, this alliance gave free hand to these criminals to launch attack to reach their goal : change country system by terrorist attack. But they failed again.

 

Now they try to draw attention of international community by launch false accusation. 

 

These criminals made crime in Thailand, they killed children and innocent people, they must pay for this.....