Appeals Court drops alleged unlawful 2010 military crackdown case against Abhisit and Suthep

[tbthailand]

So, negligence (if it occurred) is a greater crime than killing people. Understood.

Actually it's much more that such illogical remarks like your could be seen as greater crime.

Mind you, one might accuse the then PM Abhisit of a certain level of negligence for allowing all those deaths. One might accuse the PM of having been too mild, too tolerant. His attitude might have given the 'peaceful protesting terrorists' the wrong impression. Surely had he been more forceful from the start all deaths could have been prevented ?

Haha, too mild, you got to be kidding rubl. When protests turn sour, most countries do not dispatch the army.

And for good reason, as the army isn't suited to handle crowd control. Especially not the Thai Army, which has a well documented history of killing fellow Thai citiziens.

Personally I am convinced it wasn't Abhisit who wanted this, but his corrupt buddy from Surat. Too bad he could't held that idiot back.

Don't you get tired choosing the very same side every tinme, and seeing no errors on that side whatsoever ? Even though there is compelling evidence to the contrary ?

Terrorism is shooting people with snipers.

it really is useful to compare 2010 and 2013/14.

He claims that Abhisit was too mild, too tolerant, when the reality is that he and Suthep called the red shirts "terrorists" before the planned protests even began.

The 2010 protests lasted an entire 2 months, and the 2013/14 protests lasted 6 months, ... begs the question regarding Mark being "tolerant".

It should also be noted for the poor feeble minds like that above, that Abhisit and Suthep invoked an emergency declaration that specifically put security in the hands of the military not the police.

I am not convinced like you are that Abhisit was not fully supportive of this. I think he is just easier for the ladies to look at than Suthep ... beyond that, he has proven himself as a dedicated anti-democrat many times over.

We should also all be hopeful that the Thai military is never ever called on for their alleged purpose of protecting Thailand. They did not manage to capture much less kill a single MiB. Given that the MiB were themselves Thai military, it would seem that General Prayuth was sending out his second string back in 2010... If the same general's army ever gets into a real fight, the Thai people are going to be having flashbacks all the way to Ayuthaya...

Edited February 20, 2016 by Support
insulting reference to a member removed

[Compo]

Rubl is Rubl..

Snipers for mob control is indefensible.

Only a nutter would try to deny.

Welcome to the reality of Thailand where a nurse killed, by government forces in a Temple does not deserve even an inquiry....

[mrrizzla]

"Why didn't Yingluck just ask the army to help during the PDRC protests like Abhisit did"

Guffaw! Christ you are deluded rubl. The army publicly stated (and lied) several times that they wouldn't get involved. Prayuth wouldn't of ever helped the government. He was too busy colluding with Suthep who publicly admitted as such.

Blah blah blah Thaksin, blah blah blah amnesty. Same old mantra from you. We know that he's a corrupt and manipulative a hole. But unlike your myopic self we also know that his enemies are just as bad or worse!

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Excuses accepted

Well for sure he wasn't shot by Thaksin and most of the sniper rifles are holded by military.

Now we all know the military has sided with the establishment. What would have been the advantage to kill Sae Daeng for the red? I not say this guy was not a moron and didn't put the pressure on the red to turn violent but the facts are still strongly in favor of the military abuse, as well as the temple shooting.

Why do you think it was pointing to the wrong people?

Who was in charge?

Who ordered the crackdown?

Who allowed the use of live munitions, instead of rubber bullets, gaz and riot control.

Any government in western country would have fall and been accountable for this kind of murders....

As for the journalists, the independant investigations concluded that the italian guy was shot in the back while he was facing the Red.

Well, it would seem some of the life ammunition was held by 'unknowns' fighting the Army, dropping grenades on innocents.

No wonder we get 'collateral' damage cleaning up. Fabio one of them, vanderGrift 'lucky' surviving a grenade attack.

BTW

"It is believed that the bullet which killed the deceased came from the direction of [army] officers who were moving to take control [of Ratchaprasong Intersection] from Sala Daeng area [of Silom] … but it's unclear as to who did it," part of the inquest finding stated."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Bullet-that-killed-Fabio-came-from-near-govt-troop-30207194.html

So, anyone here who still wants to argue that the government should have continued talking with terrorists? Give in to demands by 'peaceful protesters' backed by heavily armed madmen?

Yes as we know the investigations are very careful and not take side in this country.

Speak of the "collateral damages" to the relatives of the ones killed inside the temple, they will love it.

The first ones to shoot were the army and i can point you at videos and pictures which clearly show the army shooting at unarmed people. Do you want them?

The first ones were those friendly unknowns who started dropping grenades in March.

I agree 'collateral damage' is an ugly term. Being 'collateral damage' isn't nice either. Being made into collateral damage by having terrorists attack the military you walk with isn't nice either. Fabio would agree with that, Chambers did agree recovering from the grenade attack.

If the red were armed to the teeth, I think we would have more dead in the army side.

Fabio was most probably killed by the army, not the reds, like it or not