Red-shirt crackdown: Supreme Court agrees no grounds for suing Abhisit, Suthep

[halloween]

26 minutes ago, jayboy said:

It's this kind of language that makes you irrelevant.

It's what we use in our tawdry hovels. Or did I misquote your patronising BS?

[sjaak327]

30 minutes ago, halloween said:

Let me put this simply. This man, Tarit is one of the prime subjects of this thread. His veracity in lodging the case against Abhisit is the basis of the red case of court bias, Yet you think he is a liar promoting government propaganda, so obviously the case against Abhisit is unsubstantiated, as decided by the court.

The Supreme Court upheld decisions of the Criminal Court and Appeals Court that the Department of Special Investigation had no authority to initiate an investigation against the two officials or to file suit against them.

 

The court said that, since Abhist and Suthep ordered the crackdown in their capacities as top-ranking ministers, the investigation would have had to be initiated by the National Anti-Corruption Commission.

 

 

[candide]

The comparison between 2013/14 events and 2009/10 events is illuminating. Both government's have been challenged for not being representative of the will of the Thai people (which was confirmed by an election in one case).

The YL government rapidly dissolved the assembly and organised elections, which is the usual democratic behaviour in such cases. The protesters were given a free pass by the army and the judiciary to block elections and try to put into power an unelected government.

The Abhisit government sent the troops and the army happily complied.....

[halloween]

1 hour ago, candide said:

The comparison between 2013/14 events and 2009/10 events is illuminating. Both government's have been challenged for not being representative of the will of the Thai people (which was confirmed by an election in one case).

The YL government rapidly dissolved the assembly and organised elections, which is the usual democratic behaviour in such cases. The protesters were given a free pass by the army and the judiciary to block elections and try to put into power an unelected government.

The Abhisit government sent the troops and the army happily complied.....

5555 a little selective memory perhaps? Abhisit offered elections but was refused after a phone call by the red negotiators to whoever was pulling their strings. Who could it be now? And why, not enough bodies yet?

You also forgot to mention the only thing stopping a re-elected Yingluk government from giving Thaksin his pardon was her promise not to do so. What is the promise of a perjurer worth? I suppose that won't bother you, popularity over-riding the law, but consider that amnesty would also include Yingluk's negligence and Boonsong's theft of B20 billion. Do the minority voters not have some rights to justice?

Edited August 31, 2017 by halloween

[jayboy]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

It's what we use in our tawdry hovels. Or did I misquote your patronising BS?

No doubt it is.But if you can't contribute in other than a mindless manner, a period of silence on your part would be welcome.

[Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere]

Oh.. They got off because they weren't private citizens when they ordered the crackdown? And this is coming from the Supreme court? And the Lower court ain't much for brain's too.. 

[jayboy]

3 hours ago, halloween said:

The great benefactor! Is that hard to do when someone hands you billions of dollars worth of monopoly for free? Could it be that those stakeholders were the same people who gave him, and themselves, that billion dollar monopoly?

In fact, could that mobile phone monopoly have been given to a government company, and then the people of Thailand would have been the stakeholders? Should they feel robbed, or take your lead and accept corruption as business as usual?

Have you done any research at all? Have you read any of the widely available books about Thaksin by Chris Baker and Acharn Pasuk Phongpaichit? I ask because you express strong opinions but apparently devoid of any knowledge or background beyond the superficial.

 

But your idea of giving a phone monopoly to the Thai government is so deranged that comment would be superfluous.Worked so well with CAT.

[tbthailand]

9 hours ago, Chris Lawrence said:

So they overstepped their authority. Isn't that the same charge the ministers and Mrs T were charged with.

 

At the end of the day someone gave the order to shoot. 

 

This is not a red or yellow bashing tweet, but questions as to who gave the order need to be answered. There are 80 families out there that will never have a loved one come home. If the General is to be fair, both sides of politics need to be accountable.

The General was the one in charge of the killing.

 

Nothing is going to happen. 

[candide]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

5555 a little selective memory perhaps? Abhisit offered elections but was refused after a phone call by the red negotiators to whoever was pulling their strings. Who could it be now? And why, not enough bodies yet?

You also forgot to mention the only thing stopping a re-elected Yingluk government from giving Thaksin his pardon was her promise not to do so. What is the promise of a perjurer worth? I suppose that won't bother you, popularity over-riding the law, but consider that amnesty would also include Yingluk's negligence and Boonsong's theft of B20 billion. Do the minority voters not have some rights to justice?

Abhisit did not dissolve the assembly, nor proposed a date for it. The reason was he did not want to discuss the dissolution date because he wanted to make sure that dissolution would happen only after the appointment of Prayuth as army chief. Don't you think that red shirts were smart to consider this appointment as a very critical factor, in a country in which coup occur regularly?

"Both sides of Thailand's political divide want to be in power in September, for two critical events: the annual round of promotions in the military – a highly political body in Thailand – and the passing of the country's budget"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/04/thai-redshirts-accept-reconciliation-election

 

As for YL, is the fact that the next elected government may not respect a promise a sufficient reason for preventing citizen to chose their government, and impose an unelected government? On top of it an unelected government that there were no more reasons to trust (i.e. Suthep or the army) than an elected government? With the big difference that citizens cannot get rid of unelected politicians.

[kaorop]

9 minutes ago, candide said:

Abhisit did not dissolve the assembly, nor proposed a date for it. The reason was he did not want to discuss the dissolution date because he wanted to make sure that dissolution would happen only after the appointment of Prayuth as army chief. Don't you think that red shirts were smart to consider this appointment as a very critical factor, in a country in which coup occur regularly?

"Both sides of Thailand's political divide want to be in power in September, for two critical events: the annual round of promotions in the military – a highly political body in Thailand – and the passing of the country's budget"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/04/thai-redshirts-accept-reconciliation-election

 

As for YL, is the fact that the next elected government may not respect a promise a sufficient reason for preventing citizen to chose their government, and impose an unelected government? On top of it an unelected government that there were no more reasons to trust (i.e. Suthep or the army) than an elected government? With the big difference that citizens cannot get rid of unelected politicians.

There's no point debating with these guys, they are blind to anything but their hatred of taksin.

Its why they cant come to terms with both side are as bad as each other, just one now has gun pointed at every ones head and CANT be removed and CANT be held accountable, which sorta just kinda makes them worse in any reasoned argument.

 

[Dave67]

5 hours ago, robblok said:

There is no excuse for having armed fighters open fire on the army from within the protesters. Did you expect the army not to fire back. Don't bring guns and armed fighters to your protests and you won't get shot at.. not hard at all.. but it is for violent red shirts.. you know the guys that were told to drive over people and burn BKK. These guys were incited by their leaders to violence.. the army came and took control (and make errors during this) but this is certainly up two two sides that it went tits up. But again red supporters will never admit to such  truths. 

Black shirts were fighting the army not civilians

[sjaak327]

8 hours ago, halloween said:

5555 a little selective memory perhaps? Abhisit offered elections but was refused after a phone call by the red negotiators to whoever was pulling their strings. Who could it be now? And why, not enough bodies yet?

You also forgot to mention the only thing stopping a re-elected Yingluk government from giving Thaksin his pardon was her promise not to do so. What is the promise of a perjurer worth? I suppose that won't bother you, popularity over-riding the law, but consider that amnesty would also include Yingluk's negligence and Boonsong's theft of B20 billion. Do the minority voters not have some rights to justice?

The pardon did not only benefit Thaksin. If Yingluck's government would be re-elected, it would have meant implicit approval by the electorate of the amnesty bill. Now look up the definition of a democracy, this IS what it is all about. 

 

All the whinging of amnesty is getting to the stage of a broken record. And since the likes of you refuses to criticize the mother of all amnesties, that actually became a reality, all the whinging only disqualifies you as an utter hypocrite....

[ramrod711]

15 hours ago, jayboy said:

.But Thaksin did not order the massacre.He was not even aware of it until later.

Oh please. I suppose he was unaware of the nearly 3,000 alleged drug dealers he killed as well. Unbelievable.

Edited September 1, 2017 by ramrod711

[jayboy]

25 minutes ago, ramrod711 said:

Oh please. I suppose he was unaware of the nearly 3,000 alleged drug dealers he killed as well. Unbelievable.

Don't be a dope.Of course he was aware of the drugs war killings since he authorised the campaign.Quite different from Tak Bai where he did not know about it until after it had occurred.Do pay attention.

[Bundooman]

21 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

So Thaksin's tweet was spot on.

No, Abhisit was spot on. the DSI exceeded their authority. 

[Bundooman]

20 hours ago, AGareth2 said:

100 lives taken

nothing

a red shirts' life is cheap

So was a 'Yellow shirt' life - as far as the 'Red shirts' were concerned....!

[jayboy]

14 hours ago, halloween said:

Why do you continually post false figures re 2010? The investigation by Tarit, with all associated bias, concluded 12 people were killed by the red/black shirts and 53 deaths were were deemed inconclusive.

Ignore this fellow.He deceives himself as much as the forum and lacks the analytical ability to sift evidence and make tis case

 

The HRW provides a fair account of this shameful lapse of accountability.

 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/01/thailand-supreme-court-enshrines-impunity-2010-violence

[Chris Lawrence]

19 hours ago, wirat69 said:

No.... you are stirring the sh*t or ignorant of the facts.....

What you need to do is read some of my posts at the time this problem was playing out. 

 

What happened to Abhisit at the time the people were milling around? Again you need to read some of the articles of the time .

 

Your post is a flame.

[Chris Lawrence]

11 hours ago, tbthailand said:

The General was the one in charge of the killing.

 

Nothing is going to happen. 

That's right. You win the prize. Brilliant TB

[Chris Lawrence]

15 hours ago, halloween said:

Why do you continually post false figures re 2010? The investigation by Tarit, with all associated bias, concluded 12 people were killed by the red/black shirts and 53 deaths were were deemed inconclusive.

Which General was in charge of the troops at this time, Hal?

[Dave67]

“Impunity for state-sponsored violence remains the name of the game in Thailand,” Adams said. “It’s beyond outrageous that until today not a single government official, military commander, or soldier has been punished for the many deaths and injuries they inflicted in 2010.”

[scorecard]

 

 

 

"The Supreme Court upheld decisions of the Criminal Court and Appeals Court that the Department of Special Investigation had no authority to initiate an investigation against the two officials or to file suit against them."

22 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

So...

 

Anyone still wondering why Yingluck did a runner?

 

Or are there still people who argue that the Thai justice system is a paragon of fairness?

 

Even for Thailand...

 

What an opportune comment. Read the full story, it's about the case proceeding in the wrong court / through the wrong judicial process.

 

But don't let the facts get in the way.  

[retarius]

Yet more double standards. Yingluck sued for incompetence.....what about the incompetence of these tow buffoons that left over 100 shot dead by the army?

[pornprong]

17 hours ago, halloween said:

" The DSI also found that at least 12 people died as a result of the actions of members of the red shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD). However, Mr Tarit said that investigators could not yet determine who was responsible for the other 52 deaths."

 

Stop drinking the red KoolAid, it rots your brain.

Since 10 April , more than 50 Thai protesters, many bare-handed or armed with bamboo sticks, have been killed. A number of prominent international journalists in Bangkok have themselves witnessed unarmed protesters shot by Thai security forces, both on 10 April or over the past few days, especially in the “live-ammunition zones” established by the government.

 

http://www.newmandala.org/bangkok-this-is-a-massacre/

[pornprong]

17 hours ago, halloween said:

Yes, you have to wonder how they felt being shot from behind by those allegedly there to 'defend' them. it was a very strange form of defence, shooting at armed soldiers to elicit return fire, and then when the assault against their camp came, nowhere to be found.

 

I have to wonder if they would appreciate being the subject of your humour?

It is true that there was a mysterious black-clad force shooting back at the Thai military on 10 April 2010, leading to the death of five soldiers. And there may be other forces at play in the killings of the past few days. But these factors do not change the basic contours of this struggle: the main body of protesters adhere to non-violence, are unarmed or dramatically under-armed against military and police forces that have been using live ammunition against them. If the red shirts are armed and dangerous, you wouldn’t know it from the number of casualties: in the last two days, 29 protesters have been killed, and zero army and police personnel. This suggests disproportionate, excessive, and deadly force used by security forces in dispersing the protesters. But this skewing of numbers can’t last long: the situation created by the government has created has opened the doors wide to extremists on both sides.

[Ricardo]

1 hour ago, Dave67 said:

“Impunity for state-sponsored violence remains the name of the game in Thailand,” Adams said. “It’s beyond outrageous that until today not a single government official, military commander, or soldier has been punished for the many deaths and injuries they inflicted in 2010.”

 

With the possible exception of Seh Dang ?  Depending upon which conspiracy-theory one prefers.

[candide]

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

 

 

 

"The Supreme Court upheld decisions of the Criminal Court and Appeals Court that the Department of Special Investigation had no authority to initiate an investigation against the two officials or to file suit against them."

 

What an opportune comment. Read the full story, it's about the case proceeding in the wrong court / through the wrong judicial process.

 

But don't let the facts get in the way.  

You are right. The agency who launched an investigation has been denied the right to do so, and the committee which is entitled to do it (NAAC) refused to launch an investigation.

At the end the outcome is the same: double standard.

Edited September 1, 2017 by candide

[EnlightenedAtheist]

21 hours ago, robblok said:

There is no excuse for having armed fighters open fire on the army from within the protesters. Did you expect the army not to fire back. Don't bring guns and armed fighters to your protests and you won't get shot at.. not hard at all.. 

There is no excuse for having ARMED SOLDIERS come to protests. Why can THEY have the guns? Others can have catapults? Maybe if they did not come armed to the teeth, others would not come with guns too.

[khounteen]

The story is getting clearer, its yellow vs red again.

[Dave67]

6 hours ago, Ricardo said:

 

With the possible exception of Seh Dang ?  Depending upon which conspiracy-theory one prefers.

Red Soldier taken out by a sniper, they were afraid of him