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

Originally Posted by Calgary

^
Thank you for copying that.

I'd have missed it otherwise.

Hahaha Hehehe Hohoho!

Originally Posted by Calgary

Originally Posted by Bobcock

After all, you have no idea what those soldiers were actually thinking at the time they pulled those triggers do you?

Yeah, I have a pretty good idea.

It is what their coupist masters were thinking the moment they decided to obliterate these "low life's" for having the unmitigated gall to not accept their governance usurpation.

It is what they are thinking now, when unleashing their judiciary to rectify that most egregious affront, beating them in an election.

And having the 'unmitigated gall' to think they can proceed in areas that don't have approval of those unbeholden to such electoral nonsense.

Oh I don't think you do.

I think you credit soldiers with more thought than they are capable.

If most soldiers knew what their coupist masters were really all about you'd have a lot less soldiers.

I think the average soldier is either following orders or acting out of revenge because they can.

To suggest they are willinglay part of the big Amart plan is rather fanciful even for a one track thinker like you.

Originally Posted by Calgary

Thank you for copying that. I'd have missed it otherwise.

Funny been said sveral times in this thread, just shows tyou don't actually read what is being said.

A poor quality even in the most direhardened revolutionary, which of course you are not.

Originally Posted by Calgary

Every time I'm compared to Amsterdam, I show all my Red Shirt friends.

hahaha....do you get an erection as well???..... do they all come round and crowd around your computer....the Chaiyaphum massive...... it really is a funny picture....

Originally Posted by Calgary

Is that a little bit like that coup incident of 2006?

Dunno, your words not mine..... why so dismissive of such a big injustice? careful you don't show your chums that one, you may get lynched. You are only tolerated as long as you play the clown you know.....

bobcock.... why do you bother?

Do you have some sort of saintly patience?

Originally Posted by Gerbil

Predicting Calgary's response:

"Those were not soldiers they were coupists."

Originally Posted by Calgary

Soldiers?

What soldiers?

You mean at R'song?

I'm not aware of any soldiers anywhere.

I am aware of a coupist massacre of anti-coupists, by coupists starting someplace, coursing on down through the CRESS and being actualized on the ground.

Guess I was right

Originally Posted by Bobcock

Calgary / LB

Do you think Abhisit gave the order for the killings?

I mean we all know that as a leader he is ultimately responsible for what happens on his watch, but do you think he was a puppet who had no control over the Army, or was he in full control and gave the oder?

Interested to know what you actually think.

Who do you think gave the order Bobcock? I would be interested to know your view too (as well as theirs).

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by Bobcock

Calgary / LB

Do you think Abhisit gave the order for the killings?

I mean we all know that as a leader he is ultimately responsible for what happens on his watch, but do you think he was a puppet who had no control over the Army, or was he in full control and gave the oder?

Interested to know what you actually think.

Who do you think gave the order Bobcock? I would be interested to know your view too (as well as theirs).

so, you don't have an answer, of course.

^ how's things over in the US of A there Daffy, you Dickhead.

That was a good thread you put up over there on SZS, just before you flounced big style, you remember, the one about your holiday, and that small boy you had along.

Yep it was a good thread that one, but what did happen in the end?

You can't argue with that

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Who do you think gave the order Bobcock? I would be interested to know your view too (as well as theirs).

Tom, we'll never actually get theirs, but I'm always happy to answer.

I dunno to be honest, so many facets of these grey areas that we will never get to know confuse me as I'm sure they do many others.

Abhisit is culpable, that's clear, he was happy enough to declare Live Fire Zones which says it all at the end of the day. What pressure he was under to make that declaration who knows? Not that much I suspect, I think he was happy with the call, but maybe didn't realise he'd just given the Army carte blanche.....

I'd imagine he met with the Army, got told what was what, listened to their expert opion (after all there is no more expert Army at shooting it's own people) and didn't have much say in the matter, after all he'd put himself in the position of being their puppet, something I'm sure he regrets.

Of course the victims of the bullets were killed in many different places and at many different times. Each case maybe be different in terms of who made, and is responsible for the ultimate decision to pull the trigger. I hardly think Abhisit was in his office watching events from 'Sniper 1 Head Cam' shouting "Shoot" as Calgary would have you believe.

The temple for example I see as nothing more than a very spiteful act probably ordered and performed by soldiers on the ground themselves, I'd be very suprised if it was known about at Abhisit's level prior to it happening. After all he was party to the agreement that it was a Safe Haven. But, as declarer of Live Fire Zones he has to carry the can, the same way any leader has to in such a situation.

I hope that answers your question, I'm sure Calgary will come along to translate it into coupists and non coupists and will declare for any undecided's that I am a PADite so they are clear.

Your hat is now in the ring Tom, what do you think?

[QUOTE="Bobcock"]I dunno to be honest, so many facets of these grey areas that we will never get to know confuse me as I'm sure they do many others. [/QUOTE]

You know, to be honest.........You just don't want to be honest.

Even though you cannot answer this for self-evident reasons, dont say you don't know, because you do.

This self-censorship does a lot of damage.

When one needs to censor oneself, have the guts to say you are doing it, and quite shielding Perps.

Or better yet, instead of self-censorship, just say nothing. That is better than misleadingly mealy-mouthing about.

Originally Posted by Bobcock

Your hat is now in the ring Tom, what do you think?

Tom, Cat cut your tongue by any chance?

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by Bobcock

Calgary / LB

Do you think Abhisit gave the order for the killings?

I mean we all know that as a leader he is ultimately responsible for what happens on his watch, but do you think he was a puppet who had no control over the Army, or was he in full control and gave the oder?

Interested to know what you actually think.

Who do you think gave the order Bobcock? I would be interested to know your view too (as well as theirs).

so, you don't have an answer, of course.

Your name Bobcock?

Now in answer to Bobcock yes that's pretty close to my guess too. But I think abhisit was being pushed along by others. The question remains who ?

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Now in answer to Bobcock yes that's pretty close to my guess too. But I think abhisit was being pushed along by others. The question remains who ?

Not a question in my mind.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Now in answer to Bobcock yes that's pretty close to my guess too. But I think abhisit was being pushed along by others. The question remains who ?

As i remember it was not secret that there wasn't exactly a consensus within the army command as to how to proceed with things. There were significant differences of opinion between the then commander of the armed forces and the man who now holds that position.

Obviously we know who won that argument, but knowing who mediated between these two chaps and ultimately decided which one of them should be in charge of may 23rd, would to a large degree tell you who really running the show on the day. In principle that person should have been abisit, but its also quite possible it was someone we are not allowed to talk about

^ Dont forget Suthep. IMO Abbhisit had a back seat in most of these discussions, but he was the PM, so thats that.

There is no reason to postulate going any higher than the army and PM, cant see any reason anyone higher than that would get involved in on the ground tactics.

Give sniper rfiles to a bunch of poorly disiplined and stessed teenagers and give them the power to call the shots and start shooting at them and you can pretty much expect it to unfold as it did.

The temple incident seems a bit apart from the rest as it sounds more deliberate and vicous.

Originally Posted by longway

"..........cant see any reason anyone higher than that would get involved in on the ground tactics"

Ground tactics are just one end of a chain of perps to whom culpabilities need to be assigned.

Ground tactics were at one end of the authorization and command chain.

Who was at the other end of the authorization chain?

I don't expect an answer to that question, but I also don't expect a whitewashing.

^ well don't fucking ask a question if you don't expect an answer, dickhead!

Originally Posted by longway

The temple incident seems a bit apart from the rest as it sounds more deliberate and vicous.

Perhaps neither deliberate and vicious.

But just channeling of Amart arrogance, contempt, disdain and condescension of those daring to oppose coupists.

Originally Posted by Calgary

Originally Posted by longway

"..........cant see any reason anyone higher than that would get involved in on the ground tactics"

Ground tactics are just one end of a chain of perps to whom culpabilities need to be assigned.

Ground tactics were at one end of the authorization and command chain.

Who was at the other end of the authorization chain?

I don't expect an answer to that question, but I also don't expect a whitewashing.

I just dont see any reason to need it to go any further. A perfectly good compromise was offered, it could not have been fake as there were early elections anyway, and even it was it makes no difference, it still could have been accepted, there was no reason to refuse it given the alternative. The UDD, and Thaksin, who paid for you and your mates to be there, knew the army were coming in and they had been deliberately provoking them for weeks if not months. The army's tactics were brutal and ruthless, but thats what you get if you seed armed militia within a barricared protest site and refuse any compromise.

The UDD and Thaksin made the the caluclated and cynical decision not to allow the protestors to go home unharmed, as they wanted blood on the streets. If they had accepted the offer it would have been unpopular, but so what?