2010 crackdown trial: Abhisit to blame violence on Blackshirts

[hugh2121]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

Where did you read that? It is a rather inaccurate and biased statement.

Actual fact: 92 died during the entire period of the red shirt's 'demonstration', which included reds, army who were attached on April 10, innocent pedestrians, etc., which included bombs and shootings coming from the red camp.... many incidents prior to the day when the troops went in to disperse the reds, who had within their encampment a private militant force, under control of a radical ex-army General, and encampment fortified with bamboo spike & petrol-doused tyres?

That is the scene set, before any shots were fired by the military: certainly, fingers of RTA were Behind the trigger that downed some of the red shirts, but please be realistic.....

Would governments of other countries even had this much patience before making a move? I doubt it.

Governments of other countries would have specified PLASTIC bullets if mobilised water canon failed. Unavailability of water canon is another failing of government at the time.

[halloween]

Canon to right of them,
Canon to left of them,
Canon in front of them...........

Into the mouth of Hell
Rode the six hundred Vatican librarians.

With apologies to ALT

[smedly]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

spoken as a true Expratt - your naivety is astounding

[smedly]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

Where did you read that? It is a rather inaccurate and biased statement.

Actual fact: 92 died during the entire period of the red shirt's 'demonstration', which included reds, army who were attached on April 10, innocent pedestrians, etc., which included bombs and shootings coming from the red camp.... many incidents prior to the day when the troops went in to disperse the reds, who had within their encampment a private militant force, under control of a radical ex-army General, and encampment fortified with bamboo spike & petrol-doused tyres?

That is the scene set, before any shots were fired by the military: certainly, fingers of RTA were Behind the trigger that downed some of the red shirts, but please be realistic.....

Would governments of other countries even had this much patience before making a move? I doubt it.

Governments of other countries would have specified PLASTIC bullets if mobilised water canon failed. Unavailability of water canon is another failing of government at the time.

wrong - you seriously have no clue what you are talking about, you don't go against assault rifles and grenades with rubber bullets and water cannon - what an ill-informed naïve stupid thing to say, you honestly would be better just staying quiet than making such horrendously stupid statements

[smedly]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

Because the Black shirts and other red militants were sheltering in the temple grounds.

As to the army killing 90 people then were they shooting at each other, targeting the press and were the black shirts such rotten shots?

The black shirts started the violence by getting out of vans and pick-ups and randomly shooting in the direction of the army who were trying to use peaceful means to break up this illegal rally. Don't say they didn't exist because I saw the footage!!!

as rare as that footage is because journalists were dropping like flies and their equipment disappeared without a trace - I suppose the army shot them and disposed of any incriminating evidence - oh wait, journalists that were shot were in the red camp - keep the feet for dancing and stay of the yogurt

[rubl]

Chris, this is not an inquiry in a military court

Yes but who is running the courts at the moment?

The same people that ran them prior to May 2014.

Appointees of the former military junta which overthrew Thaksin.

and the ones before appointees of the Thaksin autocracy?

It would seem court are only respected when they make the 'right' decisions, with what is 'right' depending on ones views rather than the truth.

Shall we just organise firing squads at dawn, 06:00AM suits you? In Thai alphabetic order or in English transcribed, drawing a lot or appointing?

Of course when in 2012 a Pheu Thai MP stated he'd go to the Hague to file a charge with the ICC against Abhisit/Suthep it was quickly pointed out to him that since the Pheu Thai led government was pushing for the legal process against the duo, they would implicitly admit to be running a failed state if they wanted the ICC to take over. The planned blanket amnesty bill make involvement of the ICC even less likely.

Justice Pheu Thai way?

[Baerboxer]

Chris, this is not an inquiry in a military court

Yes but who is running the courts at the moment?

The same people that ran them prior to May 2014.

Appointees of the former military junta which overthrew Thaksin.

Would that be the self appointed non legal caretaker PM Thaksin who was refusing to go from a position he had no authority to occupy?

Edited March 25, 2015 by Baerboxer

[Srikcir]

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

It will be good to hear the truth come out at last ...

Indeed it would. I don't expect that we will hear it at this, or any other trial!

A lot of people were shot by the army, 90 odd died. Quite who was responsible (gave the order) will never be made known. That's not to say there might well be a fall guy. It could even be Abhisit.

Who gave the order to the military to fire?

"As the CRES chief, Mr. Suthep was in charge of the army officers and he outlined how the officers should use their weapons....Troops were told to shoot below a person’s knee without intent to kill and not to fire a weapon when protesters were mingling with innocent people, Mr. Abhisit said." - Abhisit vows to clear name of malfeasance charge, Nattaya Chetchotiros.

No doubt Prayut, et al will claim the classic "just following orders" from the duly elected government. Notice there is no distinguishment of armed protesters from unarmed protesters.

Edited March 25, 2015 by Srikcir

[Robby nz]

Of course they didn't have to wear black to carry weapons and shoot in the general direction of the army, like this gent :

Could it possibly be that some of the so called peaceful protesters who were carefully picked off by snipers were "Packing iron".

Easy to remove the evidence from the body.

They didn't have to have firearms to inflict violence, like on this unfortunate gent who happened to be passing :

Or on this soldier that they dragged from a truck, if I remember rightly he died of his injuries :

[Chris Lawrence]

Chris, this is not an inquiry in a military court

Yes but who is running the courts at the moment?

The same people that ran them prior to May 2014.

JD yes but they are becoming more of a juristocracy, with contemporary courts exerting great power and are generally the tool of senior arch-royalists. This is overseen by the military at present.

But at the end of the day it is about Abhisit and Suthep having their day in court.

[jdinasia]

Chris, this is not an inquiry in a military court

Yes but who is running the courts at the moment?

The same people that ran them prior to May 2014.

JD yes but they are becoming more of a juristocracy, with contemporary courts exerting great power and are generally the tool of senior arch-royalists. This is overseen by the military at present.

But at the end of the day it is about Abhisit and Suthep having their day in court.

Well, your opinion certainly matches the opinion of the redshirts.

[Chris Lawrence]

You must be a salivating or you like two bites of the cherry? As you seem to be saying the same. Not heard as a child? I hope my reference to alternatives in this conflict has not developed stimuli as described by Ivan Pavlov in his studies on behaviour?

The water cannons would have been effective at the beginning. Read the press reports at the time.

Again read the press reports about the arms the protestors had. I have linked only a few reports.

I agree there weapons ended up on both sides but what escalated the violence. What escalated the call to arms? This is what has to be investigated.

The problem is that the Government/military people being investigated are denying any involvement. They are also trying to stymie the investigators. Look at some of the General’ comments.

Read some of the reports about Abhisit and Suthep just prior to the demonstrations and what their fears were with the demonstration’s coming into town.

Again this is what needs to be investigated and responsibility taken for.

Whybother, if you were at the head of the Red shirt protests, I believe that it would be your right to protest. Now if they started shooting at you in your peaceful red shirt, what would you be thinking?

Look at Nostitz report. The attitude of the troops towards protestors. Nostitz didn't show the protestors with the same in-built hatred that was displayed by the army young men at the protest site. Don't you find that type of attitude disturbing?

I think to say 'you shot I shot' trivialises what actually happened. I don't think that offers the families or the survivors of this protest/riot an answer. Everyone has the right to peaceful protest. The families also have a right to know what transpired to give the order to shoot.

We are not Thais and don't have the right to say to a Thai how to run their country. But, when acts of violence against citizens of a country I do believe we have to speak up and say 'No that can't be done'.

Someone gave the order to fire? Who?

It’s the investigation that is now important. Not what you or I think?

But if you have links to back up your claims, show them. I would be happy to read them.

"The water cannons would have been effective at the beginning."

Water cannons were used when the red shirts stormed Thaicom. They weren't effective.

"Read some of the reports about Abhisit and Suthep just prior to the demonstrations and what their fears were with the demonstration’s coming into town.

Again this is what needs to be investigated and responsibility taken for."

They were worried about armed protesters and there WERE armed protesters. Their fears were certainly realised, weren't they? The red shirts need to take responsibility for that.

"I believe that it would be your right to protest."

The red shirts were allowed to protest. They were allowed to spread blood. They were allowed to march all over Bangkok. They were allowed to march to the army barracks. It was after they stormed government house and Thaicom (while throwing Molotov cocktails) that the government decided that the protests needed to be stopped.

"what escalated the violence."

The red shirts storming parliament and Thaicom escalated the violence.

The red shirts marching to the army barracks and threatening to storm them escalated the violence.

The red shirts throwing a grenade that killed the colonel certainly escalated the violence.

The red shirt militia shooting at the army on the night of April 10 definitely escalated the violence.

"Someone gave the order to fire?"

They army were given rules of engagement. They were attacked by the red shirts with grenades and guns. They engaged the red shirts. I don't believe that Abhisit was there and told them to open fire.

If you missed the reports that the red shirts were armed and were shooting at the army, I think you need to read a bit more.

Maybe your enquiry will be sufficient for the Thai people as the judiciary is still controlled by the military. Unfortunately TV and its salivating brethren against red shirt protests don't count in the Thai judicial system?

Its the death of the 90+ people that needs to be investigated? Their lives deserve their day in court. The Thai people deserve to see how this regime looks at justice.

Does your country of origin shoot people in the streets? If yes what does your countrypeople think of such action?

Some of your claims may be correct, but they need to be aired in a court of law.

One of the rules in a military junta court is that it does not have to be open or be recorded?

So, you are supportive of the charge of 'abuse of power' the NACC lodged at the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders ?

Go for it Rubi. Unlike you to deviate from the OP? You’re usually a daffodil coloured type of guy?

But anyone that causes the death of another needs to face the charge.

What about the truck load down south? The protestors were laid on each other and died. What happened with that one?

[Chris Lawrence]

Yes but who is running the courts at the moment?

The same people that ran them prior to May 2014.

JD yes but they are becoming more of a juristocracy, with contemporary courts exerting great power and are generally the tool of senior arch-royalists. This is overseen by the military at present.

But at the end of the day it is about Abhisit and Suthep having their day in court.

Well, your opinion certainly matches the opinion of the redshirts.

I'd rather see justice done, rather than colour my view.

You can read the same view in press publications, other than 'the Nation'.

Don't shoot the Messanger.

[Chris Lawrence]

Chris, this is not an inquiry in a military court

Yes but who is running the courts at the moment?

Judges ?

'On 22 May, the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) took over all branches of the Royal Thai Government, suspended the Constitution and nullified the independence of the judiciary.' http://www.lrwc.org/thailand-judicial-harassment-of-human-rights-defender-mr-andy-hall-statement/

[whybother]

It will be good to hear the truth come out at last ...

Which truth? This is the Abhisit political spin. He wasn't really in control of the situation. It's becoming rather clear that the nefarious Suthep was pulling strings and in cahoots with elements of the military in this matter. As much as I don't like Abhisit, it is becoming clearer that he was shoved aside, not given accurate information and his instructions were not followed. He can't very well come out and point the finger at the Suthep faction as it would rip the Democrat party apart and destroy Abhisit. However, the reality is that Suthep was the most powerful man in the Democrat party, the man who delivered the core southern vote and who raised the money to fund the party. In political parlance, he was the kingmaker, the dark lord of the back room. Abhisit was used and abused and hung out to dry.

If Abhisit's instructions weren't followed, that would suggest that he's got no case to answer, wouldn't it?

[tbthailand]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

How about go and get a source for that statistic please. Pretty certain the figures of around 90 include multiple soldiers who were killed either by grenade attacks, gunshots, or blunt force trauma (beatings).

Also pretty sure that the person killed on the bts platform by a random grenade wasn't killed by army bullets. So how about be a bit more specific before flouting such open ended / false statements. Otherwise just makes you look clueless

A total of 7 soldiers were killed during the entire episode. 2 police officers, as well.

Do you know of any other "peaceful protest" that resulted in the death of 9 security personnel?

Do you know of any less than peaceful protest that saw a similar number of security personnel deaths without orders being given to fire on the protesters?

you're just plain weird...

First of all, I don't know of other protests at all where orders were given to fire on the protesters... well, not in normal, open, free societies... but your point does expose the brutal nature of the Abhisit government and his military handlers' response to the protests.

moving on, ... do you not understand that it takes 2 to fight? Do you not see that over 90% of all the casualties were not soldiers? Do you have no historical context in which the 2010 protests occurred?

Apparently not.

But - without projecting this on you, I am beginning to wonder if you think violence is OK if the army did it but not ok if it came from protesters.

LBNL, the "peaceful" protesters in 2013/14 were also not peaceful, yet on this forum, they were angels, so while I don't recall exactly where you stand on the PDRC protests, I would point out that these 'peaceful' protesters also killed security personnel and other protesters. But for me, the violence from the protesters and especially from the military is to be condemned.

[tbthailand]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

Whilst Abhisit's defence will likely acquit him personally of any wrongdoing, it might incriminate some members of the army as I don't think all protesters who were shot were armed.

But to say that "the army killed 90 people" is a lie. Stop it.

why not just post the correct number of people killed by the army?

That number would seem to be somewhere north of 80 ...

ps: to add, "as far as we know" since over the decades, the official death tolls and the most probable death tolls don't always match up after military crack downs... It is possible that the 92 casualties is not precise, but we can agree that it is a minimum.

Edited March 25, 2015 by tbthailand

[jdinasia]

You must be a salivating or you like two bites of the cherry? As you seem to be saying the same. Not heard as a child? I hope my reference to alternatives in this conflict has not developed stimuli as described by Ivan Pavlov in his studies on behaviour?

The water cannons would have been effective at the beginning. Read the press reports at the time.

Again read the press reports about the arms the protestors had. I have linked only a few reports.

I agree there weapons ended up on both sides but what escalated the violence. What escalated the call to arms? This is what has to be investigated.

The problem is that the Government/military people being investigated are denying any involvement. They are also trying to stymie the investigators. Look at some of the General’ comments.

Read some of the reports about Abhisit and Suthep just prior to the demonstrations and what their fears were with the demonstration’s coming into town.

Again this is what needs to be investigated and responsibility taken for.

Whybother, if you were at the head of the Red shirt protests, I believe that it would be your right to protest. Now if they started shooting at you in your peaceful red shirt, what would you be thinking?

Look at Nostitz report. The attitude of the troops towards protestors. Nostitz didn't show the protestors with the same in-built hatred that was displayed by the army young men at the protest site. Don't you find that type of attitude disturbing?

I think to say 'you shot I shot' trivialises what actually happened. I don't think that offers the families or the survivors of this protest/riot an answer. Everyone has the right to peaceful protest. The families also have a right to know what transpired to give the order to shoot.

We are not Thais and don't have the right to say to a Thai how to run their country. But, when acts of violence against citizens of a country I do believe we have to speak up and say 'No that can't be done'.

Someone gave the order to fire? Who?

It’s the investigation that is now important. Not what you or I think?

But if you have links to back up your claims, show them. I would be happy to read them.

"The water cannons would have been effective at the beginning."

Water cannons were used when the red shirts stormed Thaicom. They weren't effective.

"Read some of the reports about Abhisit and Suthep just prior to the demonstrations and what their fears were with the demonstration’s coming into town.

Again this is what needs to be investigated and responsibility taken for."

They were worried about armed protesters and there WERE armed protesters. Their fears were certainly realised, weren't they? The red shirts need to take responsibility for that.

"I believe that it would be your right to protest."

The red shirts were allowed to protest. They were allowed to spread blood. They were allowed to march all over Bangkok. They were allowed to march to the army barracks. It was after they stormed government house and Thaicom (while throwing Molotov cocktails) that the government decided that the protests needed to be stopped.

"what escalated the violence."

The red shirts storming parliament and Thaicom escalated the violence.

The red shirts marching to the army barracks and threatening to storm them escalated the violence.

The red shirts throwing a grenade that killed the colonel certainly escalated the violence.

The red shirt militia shooting at the army on the night of April 10 definitely escalated the violence.

"Someone gave the order to fire?"

They army were given rules of engagement. They were attacked by the red shirts with grenades and guns. They engaged the red shirts. I don't believe that Abhisit was there and told them to open fire.

If you missed the reports that the red shirts were armed and were shooting at the army, I think you need to read a bit more.

Maybe your enquiry will be sufficient for the Thai people as the judiciary is still controlled by the military. Unfortunately TV and its salivating brethren against red shirt protests don't count in the Thai judicial system?

Its the death of the 90+ people that needs to be investigated? Their lives deserve their day in court. The Thai people deserve to see how this regime looks at justice.

Does your country of origin shoot people in the streets? If yes what does your countrypeople think of such action?

Some of your claims may be correct, but they need to be aired in a court of law.

One of the rules in a military junta court is that it does not have to be open or be recorded?

So, you are supportive of the charge of 'abuse of power' the NACC lodged at the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders ?

Go for it Rubi. Unlike you to deviate from the OP? You’re usually a daffodil coloured type of guy?

But anyone that causes the death of another needs to face the charge.

What about the truck load down south? The protestors were laid on each other and died. What happened with that one?

Point a gun at a policeman or soldier (or me) and you can expect to die (and for no charges to be laid.

I fully expect the evidence gathered by the DSI to be presented which will put at least 16 deaths inside the redshirt controlled area to be laid at the barrels of redshirt guns.

The government at the time of the TakBai tragedy was that of Thaksin. He set the policy for ISOC and was never charged.

[rubl]

Maybe your enquiry will be sufficient for the Thai people as the judiciary is still controlled by the military. Unfortunately TV and its salivating brethren against red shirt protests don't count in the Thai judicial system?

Its the death of the 90+ people that needs to be investigated? Their lives deserve their day in court. The Thai people deserve to see how this regime looks at justice.

Does your country of origin shoot people in the streets? If yes what does your countrypeople think of such action?

Some of your claims may be correct, but they need to be aired in a court of law.

One of the rules in a military junta court is that it does not have to be open or be recorded?

So, you are supportive of the charge of 'abuse of power' the NACC lodged at the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders ?

Go for it Rubi. Unlike you to deviate from the OP? You’re usually a daffodil coloured type of guy?

But anyone that causes the death of another needs to face the charge.

What about the truck load down south? The protestors were laid on each other and died. What happened with that one?

The Thai people also saw how the previous government looked at justice, the blanket amnesty version of it. When Ms. Yingluck had her PR team write for her "to expect justice" that's probably the version she and her PR team had in mind.

What about that truckload? Didn't then PM Thaksin explained that they were already very weak from fasting as if it was their own fault to have died and cause the PM unnecessary problems.

Anyway, luckily the PDRC and other anti-government protesters managed to protests so much that even the Senate understood that to accept the blanket amnesty bill was not in the interest of Thailand and its people. Imagine what would have happened if the anti-government protesters would have listened to Ms. Yingluck's "please go home and wait, there's more to follow". TheSenate might have rightly concluded "why not, no one seems against".

How would you have felt about the justice you go on about if the blanket amnesty bill have become law, or do you feel that the blanket amnesty bill of course didn't really cover Abhisit and Suthep as some Pheu Thai MP's were suggesting. Even a good dozen of UDD co-leaders and normal red-shirts turned Pheu Thai MP voted in favour of the blanket amnesty bill. Pheu Thai party list MP Seh Daeng's daughter merely abstained, in honour of her father's memory I guess.

PS Orange is not a typical Daffodil colour and unlike John Boehner I only wear orange shirts, like I do today.

Cheers,

uncle rubl

Edited March 25, 2015 by rubl

[rubl]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

Whilst Abhisit's defence will likely acquit him personally of any wrongdoing, it might incriminate some members of the army as I don't think all protesters who were shot were armed.

But to say that "the army killed 90 people" is a lie. Stop it.

why not just post the correct number of people killed by the army?

That number would seem to be somewhere north of 80 ...

ps: to add, "as far as we know" since over the decades, the official death tolls and the most probable death tolls don't always match up after military crack downs... It is possible that the 92 casualties is not precise, but we can agree that it is a minimum.

Absolutely. The number is 93 (92 + 1 died later of wounds received) and if I remember correctly as of somewhere 2012 54 unaccounted for. No details, no names, just missing. Makes you wonder why people over reacted a bit as Robert A. announced hundreds of bodies of possibly red-shirts to have been found in Rayong. Even Robert A. withdrew his remark as a possible error, after a day that is. The police still had problems getting their story together. The boss read it in the morning newspaper, but his deputy already had received orders from him the night before.

So, 2010 crackdown. No news, only the normal BS.

Edited March 25, 2015 by rubl

[rubl]

Interesting how people want justice for the 2010 events and complain about 2013, or 2014, or 2004, 2005. At times I almost believe that a group of TVF posters is responsible for sabotaging the blanket amnesty bill. Traffic on TVF would certainly drop dramatically with an amnesty. Can't have that of course

[jayboy]

So on every occasion a protester was killed it was due to the "Men in Black" firing at the army.? Even if that was the case and it isn't why were innocent protesters shot and killed?

I'm sure there is huge conspiracies and many people were used and mislead , but at the end of the day the Army killed 90 people

No... At the end of the day. 90 people died. Including soldiers.

Yes but the vast majority of these were killed by the army.

Actually there's little real doubt about the essentials of this episode.The Human Rights Watch report while not perfect is the most credible.It is beyond dispute there was violence from the redshirt camp though there are many issues to resolve on the blackshirt aspects.The army had a difficult task but it's pointless to deny there was a lack of professionalism on occasions and some murderous indiscriminate firing.

Abhisit and Suthep do need to face some forensic questioning ( as would be provided by a top notch British QC ) - but this will never happen of course.Before we get too disdainful of the admittedly feeble Thai process let's remember that Tony Blair was able to dodge and weave his way through the Chilcott Inquiry without a finger being laid on him.