webfact Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 'Step forward' in 2010 crackdown cases: NACCThe NationBANGKOK: -- The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has received documents from the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) on the anti-government protest crackdown in 2010 that resulted in 91 deaths, NACC member Vicha Mahakun said yesterday.The submission of the documents represents a step forward in the investigative process, said Vicha, who chairs the special panel working on the protest crackdown cases.He promised more clarification on the matter by next week, when the subcommittee is scheduled to hold a meeting. The NACC, however, may require some time to scrutinise on cases since the new documents comprise over 30 cases with increasing complexity, Vicha said.But these are the final set of documents, he said, and the NACC may not require any more from the DSI.In April and May, 2010, the protest crackdown resulted in confrontations between the military and the United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship protestors, who had been calling on the government to step down. Apart from the 91 deaths, the series of clashes resulted in more than 2,100 injuries.Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Step-forward-in-2010-crackdown-cases-NACC-30273519.html-- The Nation 2015-11-23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 I have the feeling I won't be surprised next week..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
englishoak Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Yea yea, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 One step forward and then how many back ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelonius Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelonius Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 30 cases eh? Any news on the remaining 61 cases? I know it's only been 5 years and certain people have been interfering but......................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangrak Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishJohn Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... The charges were brought as a bargaining chip for Thaksin to get amnesty. It had nothing to do with justice for the people who got killed - but if I've learned one thing in this country, it's that red-shirts will 'believe' anything that suits them. It's called hypocrisy. He approached Abhisit with that very proposition and got told where to go. Abhisit elected to face the court to prove his innocence. The coward elected to stay in his 5 start hotel and force the amnesty through anyway. The very idea of murder charges in those circumstances is absolutely ridiculous. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a99ac12c-4085-11e3-ae19-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3sI6hx0WF is a good summary of how that last bunch of dirty cronies got told to handle it. You can find the information on the internet if you bothered to look, but you people don't care about truth. Only what suits you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangrak Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 30 cases eh? Any news on the remaining 61 cases? I know it's only been 5 years and certain people have been interfering but......................... Would it be it's not only on TV that you have just landed? Or do you question the validity of all the rulings already made when PTP was in power, most of were, indeed, very questionable because of, indeed, certain people having been, heavily, interfering, ...to put the blame on soldiers, because army grade high speed ammunition was used, while clear evidence exists of 'red guards' (not speaking of 'the men in black') were possessing, and using, stolen, army assault rifles too...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharecropper Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 The coward elected to stay in his 5 start hotel and force the amnesty through anyway. At least that one was voted down. Amnesties now seem to be all the rage - the "new government" gave themselves one and now they want one for the use of force, all without a popular vote. Maybe Thaksin was just ahead of his time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toybits Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Don't you just love those "Quotation" marks? "Step Forward"? Yeah! Right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) As Suthep's said it's because the protesters ran into bullets.. Edited November 23, 2015 by candide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saltandpepper Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. Why should they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders.Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... The unbiased report you refer to was the Human Rights Watch report which contrary to your claim did assign culpability.There is certainly clear evidence there was an armed element in the redshirts camp although to this day its make up and origin remains unknown.The military was heavily criticised for the deaths of innocent civilians, its brutality and incompetence.One area the HRW report didn't cover was the potential criminal responsibility of Abhisit and Suthep. I am sure it was just absent mindedness that explains the lack of reference to the above in your post. Frankly there is much still unknown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelonius Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... No culpability? Really? How many other governments have you come across that respond to situations that involved protester and security force deaths with Live Fire Zones and the deployment of snipers? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". Perhaps you got carried away in the heat of the moment and ignored your own bias? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. Amazing - you already know the content of all those files! Do you do lottery numbers too? Or perhaps the NACC might recommend that the person of funded the 2010 insurrection in the hope of recovering his seized assets; and appeared by video link inciting things might face charges. A previous AG claimed although there was clear video evidence he couldn't be charges as he wasn't in the country when he appeared in the video link. How novel. A successor AG promised to re-look at it, but seemingly it's under a very very big pile of more pressing files. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed as well as the replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders.Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... The unbiased report you refer to was the Human Rights Watch report which contrary to your claim did assign culpability.There is certainly clear evidence there was an armed element in the redshirts camp although to this day its make up and origin remains unknown.The military was heavily criticised for the deaths of innocent civilians, its brutality and incompetence.One area the HRW report didn't cover was the potential criminal responsibility of Abhisit and Suthep. I am sure it was just absent mindedness that explains the lack of reference to the above in your post. Frankly there is much still unknown Interesting. As a comparison. The military fired shots and people were killed. The armed elements within the red shirt group also fired shots and grenades. Military personnel and innocent bystanders were also killed. Who exactly really fired the shots that killed each victim, and they are all victims, would be very difficult to determine. And then who is responsible. The government for authorizing live rounds, the military for undisciplined action, the armed red / black shirt terrorists, or those who provoked, organized, lead or financed the whole insurrection / protests? In comparison a former British soldier has been arrested for his part in Bloody Sunday. Whilst the army, via individual soldiers, seem under investigation, the politicians, the terrorists, the armed people within the protesters, all seem to be ignored. A report blamed the army and the police are investigating events of over 40 years ago; but only from one direction. I'm not suggesting the answer, just noting that there is a lack of any consistent criteria anywhere for dealing with complex situations like this; and that holding one party responsible while the other party claima all sorts of things from some imagined moral high ground seems to be an unusual phenomena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders.Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... The unbiased report you refer to was the Human Rights Watch report which contrary to your claim did assign culpability.There is certainly clear evidence there was an armed element in the redshirts camp although to this day its make up and origin remains unknown.The military was heavily criticised for the deaths of innocent civilians, its brutality and incompetence.One area the HRW report didn't cover was the potential criminal responsibility of Abhisit and Suthep.I am sure it was just absent mindedness that explains the lack of reference to the above in your post. Frankly there is much still unknown Interesting. As a comparison. The military fired shots and people were killed. The armed elements within the red shirt group also fired shots and grenades. Military personnel and innocent bystanders were also killed. Who exactly really fired the shots that killed each victim, and they are all victims, would be very difficult to determine. And then who is responsible. The government for authorizing live rounds, the military for undisciplined action, the armed red / black shirt terrorists, or those who provoked, organized, lead or financed the whole insurrection / protests? In comparison a former British soldier has been arrested for his part in Bloody Sunday. Whilst the army, via individual soldiers, seem under investigation, the politicians, the terrorists, the armed people within the protesters, all seem to be ignored. A report blamed the army and the police are investigating events of over 40 years ago; but only from one direction. I'm not suggesting the answer, just noting that there is a lack of any consistent criteria anywhere for dealing with complex situations like this; and that holding one party responsible while the other party claima all sorts of things from some imagined moral high ground seems to be an unusual phenomena. Good post.It's a tough and complex process but I think the effort needs to be made.As with the Thai political impasse in general all sides need to realise that an honest approach will have uncomfortable results for all.Painstaking scrutiny in courts or tribunal free of partisanship is needed.Whether this is possible in Thailand is problematic. No crowing or western superiority at work here as your N.Ireland example underscores.The Thais haven't acquitted themselves well but we have hardly done better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangrak Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... No culpability? Really? How many other governments have you come across that respond to situations that involved protester and security force deaths with Live Fire Zones and the deployment of snipers? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". Perhaps you got carried away in the heat of the moment and ignored your own bias? Aren't you 'a bit' hypocritical there? And I am supposed to be biased because I reacted negatively about your biased post(s), is it? But I can't say that, in depth, you're totally wrong: I am in fact extremely biased: against ALL people and organisations linked with terrorism, criminality, illegality, subversion, propaganda, no matter who they are! You? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Thing of Darkness Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Some of you get real Hard on when talking about the Murder of 91 protesters by the Army and Powers That be. The Army did no wrong obviously just opened up with automatic weapons on a crowd of protesters asking for an election after the Army had overthrown yet another popular Government. If you are British , hang your head in shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangrak Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders.Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... The unbiased report you refer to was the Human Rights Watch report which contrary to your claim did assign culpability.There is certainly clear evidence there was an armed element in the redshirts camp although to this day its make up and origin remains unknown.The military was heavily criticised for the deaths of innocent civilians, its brutality and incompetence.One area the HRW report didn't cover was the potential criminal responsibility of Abhisit and Suthep. I am sure it was just absent mindedness that explains the lack of reference to the above in your post. Frankly there is much still unknown Before using it as a reference, could I invite you to do some research about the origins and financers of HRW, why the top from the start-up 'left', what the financial structure has become, who they accept as sponsors, what their, always, damning reports are based on, etc. This is not Amnesty International, it's a self-serving organisation, not truly a NGO, and bias and sensationalism are how they are making(!) the news, and piles of money to spend on, themselves! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangrak Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Some of you get real Hard on when talking about the Murder of 91 protesters by the Army and Powers That be. The Army did no wrong obviously just opened up with automatic weapons on a crowd of protesters asking for an election after the Army had overthrown yet another popular Government. If you are British , hang your head in shame Who said the army did NO wrong? But you seem to imply it was the army doing ALL the wrong... while clear, documented, evidence(!), a lot of it actually, shows a quite different reality(!), showing elements, clad in red, and in black, among/around/with that '...crowd of protesters asking(?!) for an election...' having, carrying and using weapons, explosive devices, etc., but maybe this is 'too disturbing' for you to accept... And, your false(!) 'legitimation' of the Bkk 'red' insurgency(!) by: '...after the Army had overthrown yet another popular Government' is damning: as if you don't know 'your' 'popular Government' was made to leave DEMOCRATICALLY, as the AV Government came in power through A CHANGE OF PARLEMENTARY MAJORITY! Now, YOU hang your head in shame, as you have been caught lying in public! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbthailand Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 But these are the final set of documents, he said, and the NACC may not require any more from the DSI. ... now that they finally told us what we want to hear... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelonius Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... No culpability? Really? How many other governments have you come across that respond to situations that involved protester and security force deaths with Live Fire Zones and the deployment of snipers? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". Perhaps you got carried away in the heat of the moment and ignored your own bias? Aren't you 'a bit' hypocritical there? And I am supposed to be biased because I reacted negatively about your biased post(s), is it? But I can't say that, in depth, you're totally wrong: I am in fact extremely biased: against ALL people and organisations linked with terrorism, criminality, illegality, subversion, propaganda, no matter who they are! You? You called me hyper biased when I had the temerity to regard that the PM and the DPM's (at the time) actions of signing off on live fire zones, the use of snipers in 2010 and the military "tactics" ending up with protesters, reporters and aid workers being killed by the military, means that they are culpable. What is biased about that? I'm not going to dignify your last sentence with a reply. Edited November 23, 2015 by thelonius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbthailand Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... No culpability? Really? How many other governments have you come across that respond to situations that involved protester and security force deaths with Live Fire Zones and the deployment of snipers? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". Perhaps you got carried away in the heat of the moment and ignored your own bias? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". it seems that people do that often here. Write drivel and then attribute it to you... a common, but infantile, means of debating... Not only was it obvious that there were military folks among the protesters, you could hardly over-look the fact given that Thaksin's lackey, Seh Daing, was on the scene. His was one of the more infamous assassinations during the protests which occurred just prior to the 6 day siege in May where the military killed nearly 60 protesters without a single soldier being lost. Hmmm, can't imagine that the NACC will bring that up. Now what is really interesting is that not one of the posters here who lambast the red shirts for having armed people in their midst investigate the question: "why were there armed military personnel among the protesters, who were targeting the military itself?" One relatively likely conclusion is that the army vs MiB was basically an intramural military skirmish. Following the basics of Thai politics this century points to that pretty directly: Thaksin was clearly aware that having the military loyal to him was key to him remaining in power and during his "reign", he took many steps to promote loyal military people in positions of power and influence Recall that there were tanks on the streets in the 2006 coup. And recall that the forces considered loyal to Thaksin had been moved out of BKK prior to the coup. Clearly in 2006, there were rivalries in the military... this has always been true throughout the last century, but in 2006, the Eastern Tiger faction overthrowing the government took specific, direct actions to address and neutralize their rival military factions. In 2010, the Eastern Tigers had not yet cemented their dominance over the entire military. The aggressive violence against the military and the over-the-top aggressive response of the military is one indicator of this. By 2014, the Eastern Tigers had cemented their control, notably, there were no tanks on the streets in BKK in 2014. In fact the inverse, on the day of the coup, large numbers of soldiers were rounding up politicians, activists, and academics across Isaan and the northern provinces. So, yes, in addition to the normal security guards at Thai protests of both colors, there were military men among the protesters and they were fighting against the military. So many people here like to ignore the military on military violence and just blame the protesters for everything. Arguably, the protesters themselves in 2010 were much less violent that the PDRC in 2014 who actively attacked people who were just trying to vote. On the other, the military on military violence in 2010, and the related over-reaction from Prayuth's troops against the protesters, made 2010 much bloodier than 2014's protests. Edited November 23, 2015 by tbthailand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayboy Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders.Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... The unbiased report you refer to was the Human Rights Watch report which contrary to your claim did assign culpability.There is certainly clear evidence there was an armed element in the redshirts camp although to this day its make up and origin remains unknown.The military was heavily criticised for the deaths of innocent civilians, its brutality and incompetence.One area the HRW report didn't cover was the potential criminal responsibility of Abhisit and Suthep.I am sure it was just absent mindedness that explains the lack of reference to the above in your post. Frankly there is much still unknown Before using it as a reference, could I invite you to do some research about the origins and financers of HRW, why the top from the start-up 'left', what the financial structure has become, who they accept as sponsors, what their, always, damning reports are based on, etc. This is not Amnesty International, it's a self-serving organisation, not truly a NGO, and bias and sensationalism are how they are making(!) the news, and piles of money to spend on, themselves! May I invite you to comment on the HRW Report on Thailand rather than rant irrelevantly about that organisation's background.The report though not perfect was widely praised and in fact earned the ire of some redshirt supporters who resented the clear indictment of violent elements within their camp.As noted the report was defective in some areas but it is still far and way the most reliable analysis of the events of 2010. You mention Amnesty International.You may or not be aware that organisation had to shake down its Thailand Branch - comprised of "good people" - became involved in a stream of dishonesty and ugly partisanship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Thing of Darkness Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 So we can look forward to the NACC recommending next week that Abhisit and Suthep face the Administrative court for "abuse of power" for their culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010? No, I didn't think so. You're right not to think so, as to those who are not hyper-biased it is quite clear there is no such thing as 'culpability in the deaths of 90 plus people in 2010' for AV or ST, it was only a propaganda stunt from PTP/UDD and other TS creations during the YS 'government' using and abusing power and influence to demonise AV and ST, in an attempt to put the responsibily for the consequences of their(!) acts on both's shoulders. Many would like to know more about the truth concerning the 2010 red insurrection(!), also about the financing and organising of it, to better understand the course of events. But I guess that you are not interested at all in any such thing... because, of course, the red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong, is the red book's only truth, hmm... Well, no surprise there, remembering how an un-biased(!) report was shot down a few years ago by your ilks... No culpability? Really? How many other governments have you come across that respond to situations that involved protester and security force deaths with Live Fire Zones and the deployment of snipers? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". Perhaps you got carried away in the heat of the moment and ignored your own bias? By the way I don't believe i mentioned anything about "red peacefull demonstrators and their democratic leaders have never done anything wrong". it seems that people do that often here. Write drivel and then attribute it to you... a common, but infantile, means of debating... Not only was it obvious that there were military folks among the protesters, you could hardly over-look the fact given that Thaksin's lackey, Seh Daing, was on the scene. His was one of the more infamous assassinations during the protests which occurred just prior to the 6 day siege in May where the military killed nearly 60 protesters without a single soldier being lost. Hmmm, can't imagine that the NACC will bring that up. Now what is really interesting is that not one of the posters here who lambast the red shirts for having armed people in their midst investigate the question: "why were there armed military personnel among the protesters, who were targeting the military itself?" One relatively likely conclusion is that the army vs MiB was basically an intramural military skirmish. Following the basics of Thai politics this century points to that pretty directly: Thaksin was clearly aware that having the military loyal to him was key to him remaining in power and during his "reign", he took many steps to promote loyal military people in positions of power and influence Recall that there were tanks on the streets in the 2006 coup. And recall that the forces considered loyal to Thaksin had been moved out of BKK prior to the coup. Clearly in 2006, there were rivalries in the military... this has always been true throughout the last century, but in 2006, the Eastern Tiger faction overthrowing the government took specific, direct actions to address and neutralize their rival military factions. In 2010, the Eastern Tigers had not yet cemented their dominance over the entire military. The aggressive violence against the military and the over-the-top aggressive response of the military is one indicator of this. By 2014, the Eastern Tigers had cemented their control, notably, there were no tanks on the streets in BKK in 2014. In fact the inverse, on the day of the coup, large numbers of soldiers were rounding up politicians, activists, and academics across Isaan and the northern provinces. So, yes, in addition to the normal security guards at Thai protests of both colors, there were military men among the protesters and they were fighting against the military. So many people here like to ignore the military on military violence and just blame the protesters for everything. Arguably, the protesters themselves in 2010 were much less violent that the PDRC in 2014 who actively attacked people who were just trying to vote. On the other, the military on military violence in 2010, and the related over-reaction from Prayuth's troops against the protesters, made 2010 much bloodier than 2014's protests. Perhaps those Military men were loyal to the Government elected by the people for the people. It used to be called Honour , which meant not deposing a fairly elected Government because they happen to differ from your own view of who should be in charge , They had a name for these people in the 30s and 40s , they excused slaughter of opposition by their regime also Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now