Thread: Abhisit Vejjajiva has been invited to deliver a speech on good governance

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Nor can you answer the question of who really benefited from provoking the Army in to doing so.

True. He can't. That's because answering that question could very possibly result in a hefty prison sentence.

Actually, bob, I tend to agree with yoou about previous incidents, but I think 2010 was a cynical plan to take advantage of the legacy of those incidents. The difference between the 2009 protests and what happened in 2010 are very telling.

If it benefited who you claim, why did they not do so in 2009 under exact same circumstances? Is not the only difference between 2009 and 2010 the presence of the armed element within the UDD?

Why did Veera, the person who called off the 2009 protest in which nobody was killed, leave the 2010 protest before the outbreak of the major violence from May 14th to the 19th?
TH

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by Thaihome

Nor can you answer the question of who really benefited from provoking the Army in to doing so.

True. He can't. That's because answering that question could very possibly result in a hefty prison sentence.

Actually, bob, I tend to agree with yoou about previous incidents, but I think 2010 was a cynical plan to take advantage of the legacy of those incidents. The difference between the 2009 protests and what happened in 2010 are very telling.

If it benefited who you claim, why did they not do so in 2009 under exact same circumstances? Is not the only difference between 2009 and 2010 the presence of the armed element within the UDD?

Why did Veera, the person who called off the 2009 protest in which nobody was killed, leave the 2010 protest before the outbreak of the major violence from May 14th to the 19th?
TH

there are times when talking about a certain family can get you a hefty sentence, but given that the dems, the army command and the the special people had very very closely aligned interests in apr/may 2010; invoking the fear of lm as a reason not to comment how the dems and army gained from the killings in 2010 is not a reason... simply avoiding the question with a pitiful excuse.

Originally Posted by hazz

...not to comment how the dems and army gained from the killings in 2010 is not a reason... simply avoiding the question with a pitiful excuse.

The government had every thing to lose (as has happend) with people getting killed. The people behind the 2010 protest had everything to gain (as has happened).
TH

From the HRW report:

Security arrangements surrounding the UDD movement were complex and organized, aimed at preventing a repeat of 2009, when the military force dispersed the UDD Songkran protests with relatively little force and minimal casualties.

Originally Posted by Thaihome

The government had every thing to lose (as has happend) with people getting killed. The people behind the 2010 protest had everything to gain (as has happened).

Well said - exactly.

The 90 victims were an easy price to pay for leaders that never came under fire, and Seh Daeng (aerobic expert) was a convenient elimination, as he was getting uncomfortably insane, and for the most part, had served his purpose - and thus was called upon for a grand final performance.

Right, as the government had all to lose, and has demonstrated in 2009 to be able to solve demonstrations with no bloodshed, it became obvious that bigger provocations were necessary. I would not be surprised if a good number of the 90 victims were actually shot by the Red gunmen...