Page 36 of 81 FirstFirst ... 26282930313233343536373839404142434446 ... LastLast
Results 876 to 900 of 2020
  1. #876
    Twitter #BKKTS
    Tom Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    27-08-2023 @ 10:33 AM
    Posts
    9,222
    ^
    I think you cut and pasted pretty much the whole thing haven't you? In any event, HRW and AI are about as neutral as you SD.

  2. #877
    Thailand Expat
    SteveCM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    A "non-existent" Thai PsyOps unit
    Posts
    4,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
    I think you cut and pasted pretty much the whole thing haven't you?
    Very far from it. Do yourself a favour and read the whole thing, TS.

  3. #878
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer View Post
    ^
    I think you cut and pasted pretty much the whole thing haven't you? In any event, HRW and AI are about as neutral as you SD.
    I posted those 2 sections as they address two highly controversial issues. Issues that Mr Amsterdam has been hyping up for some time...(I wonder if he'll apologise or acknowledge his gross error?)

    (oh btw, your criticism of this report, about it having selective interviews may or may not be relevant, but I don't recall you leveling such a criticism at the reports produced by Robert Amsterdam, as he did the very same thing..except he gave them a number...)

    The report is extremely long and although I'd love to post the entire thing, I don't think there's any reason to do so. Click the link....

    I think you will find that the report is extremely clear on who killed many of the civilians. The army and thus the government are pretty much named and blamed for the deaths. It is very clear. You assume too much TS. You may have to eat your words.
    "Slavery is the daughter of darkness; an ignorant people is the blind instrument of its own destruction; ambition and intrigue take advantage of the credulity and inexperience of men who have no political, economic or civil knowledge. They mistake pure illusion for reality, license for freedom, treason for patriotism, vengeance for justice."-Simón Bolívar

  4. #879
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Each of the 91 deaths should be investigated: HRW

    Each of the 91 deaths should be investigated: HRW

    By Pongphon Sarnsamak
    The Nation
    Published on May 4, 2011

    Human Rights Watch is calling on the government to conduct an investigation on each of the 91 deaths caused by the crackdown last year.

    Meanwhile, the media and activists are demanding that the authorities inform the public about what really happened during the political riots and the subsequent crackdown.

    The Department of Special Investigation, which is investigating the deaths, is controlled by the government and cannot be expected to produce an unbiased report, said Brad Adams, Asia director for the watchdog.

    The New York-based agency has also asked Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's administration to immediately reveal details of people being detained under charges of violating the emergency decree since April 7, 2010. Information should include the names and current status of the detainees, their place of detention and whether they have access to lawyers, their families, and medical aid.

    The government should also ensure access to all detention facilities and detainees by independent humanitarian agencies, it said. The rights body is also insisting that UN officials and other groups be allowed to investigate and report on the situation in Thailand, and the government should take necessary measures to implement their recommendations in a timely matter.

    Adams said the government should review the military's role in politics, adding that people should not be using the lese majeste charge against people who are on different political sides.

    The authorities have always insisted that all detainees are being held at recognised places of detention and are not subjected to torture or any cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment.

  5. #880
    Thailand Expat
    SteveCM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    A "non-existent" Thai PsyOps unit
    Posts
    4,550
    From the blog world.....


    Tongue-Thai’ed! Part II: Suthep, Human Rights Watch and who killed JFK? | Asian Correspondent

    By Siam Voices
    May 04, 2011 6:10PM UTC


    By Saksith Saiyasombut


    Tongue-Thai’ed!” is the new segment on Siam Voices, where we encapsulate the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous, appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures – in short: everything we hear that makes us go “Huh?!”. Check our premiere entry here. Some backstory before we dive into the quote: I initially had the idea for this segment earlier this year and started to collect a few verbosities here and there. But after two months or so I noticed that one person has trumped everyone else in quantity and ‘quality’ – deputy prime minister Suthep Thaungsuban. He has said so many stupid things (like “Protesters died because they ran into bullets”) during a short amount of time that creating such a segment would ultimately turn this into a segment almost exclusive about him. But since we got this train rolling now, it’d be unfair (and half as much fun) to leave him out! Now, onto the fresh new quote:

    Human Rights Watch has released their report about the bloody crackdown of the red shirt protests last year on Tuesday, depicting a very detailed account of what happened and finds fault at both government forces and anti-government protesters. Having said that, it didn’t took long for anybody to pan the report as a partisan, unbalanced piece of propaganda (without having actually read that).

    Enter: Suthep….
    Suthep scorns Human Rights Watch, slams “Thai soldiers killed red shirts”, tells to take care of America first
    In an interview at Government House, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaungsuban has voiced disappointment after the international human rights organizations Human Rights Watch has reported that Thai soldiers have caused the death of civilians during the red shirt protests, where 91 people have died. He said that after he saw the news he felt sad because he thinks such an organization should be neutral and not be inclined to take sides [...] before they say anything and damage the public image of Thailand, [thus they] should have checked their facts properly first. [Suthep laments] where that organization was during the government of Thaksin Shinawatra, when they killed 3,000 people ["War on Drugs"] but hasn’t heard a thing from them.

    “That organization should better look into their own country first before, [...] [like] John F. Kennedy’s assassination, nothing is still clear about that.
    Thus all sides are still working and searching for facts, such as the independent [Truth and Reconciliation] Commission of Mr. Kanit na Nakorn [...] we should listen more to them rather than some foreigners. The commission, that the government has set up, has just worked for 10 months and continues to do so [...]”

    “สุเทพ” ฉุนฮิวแมนไรท์ วอทช์ ซัด “ทหารไทย” ฆ่าเสื้อแดง ย้อนให้กลับไปดูแลอเมริกาให้ดีเสียก่อน“, Matichon, May the Fourth, 2011 (translation and emphasis by me)

    I didn’t expect him to have actually read the report, but this quote is still astonishingly ignorant. First off, the report criticizes both. Secondly, Human Rights Watch has actually covered the War on Drugs. Thirdly, the organization has been founded in 1978, 15 years after the Kennedy assassination. And lastly, Suthep still doesn’t respect foreigners!


    If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us a email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us [at]siamvoices.

    Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist still based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter [at]Saksith.

  6. #881
    Thailand Expat
    robuzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last Online
    19-12-2015 @ 05:51 PM
    Location
    Paese dei Balocchi
    Posts
    7,847
    "when they killed 3,000 people ["War on Drugs"] but hasn’t heard a thing from them.

    “That organization should better look into their own country first before, [...] [like] John F. Kennedy’s assassination, nothing is still clear about that."

    From the sound of it Kh. Suthep is lucky not have been killed in the "war on drugs" himself- wtf is he smoking?
    “You can lead a horticulture but you can’t make her think.” Dorothy Parker

  7. #882
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Human Rights Watch on Thailand’s 2010 Crackdowns | Robert Amsterdam Thailand

    Human Rights Watch on Thailand’s 2010 Crackdowns



    This week Human Rights Watch released the widely anticipated report “Descent into Chaos: Thailand’s 2010 Red Shirt Protests and the Government Crackdown.” For anyone working to end Thailand’s cycle of impunity, and for the re-establishment of democracy, this release represents a valuable contribution to the cause of justice and truth. Human Rights Watch should be commended for the thorough investigative work it has performed, as well as for not mincing words when it comes to exposing the systemic abuses committed in April and May 2010.

    While Human Rights Watch is also quite critical of the UDD, the report provides evidence supporting many of the arguments our firm has made on behalf of the Red Shirts over the past year. Human Rights Watch reports the following:

    - The government’s crackdown involved “excessive and unnecessary lethal force on the part of security forces, including firing of live ammunition at protesters, sometimes by snipers.” Given that vast majority of those killed (including unarmed protesters, medic volunteers, and journalists) did not pose any danger to the security forces, the security forces are responsible for “cold blooded acts of murder;”

    - During and after the protests, the government adopted measures that “seriously infringed on fundamental human rights.” Such measures include “holding suspects without charge for up to 30 days in unofficial places of detention,” “arbitrary arrests and detentions of UDD supporters,” “mistreatment of detainees,” as well as “torture and forcible interrogations;”

    - The government has engaged in “broad censorship of critical media and websites.” Moreover, it has sought to undermine media freedom and freedom of expression and persecute Red Shirt dissidents through repressive laws such as the Computer Crimes Act and Article 112 of the Code of Criminal Procedure;

    - Since the rallies’ dispersal, “government forces implicated in abuses continue to enjoy impunity.” Indeed, the military has not cooperated with investigations, and no one in the army or police has been charged;

    - The government’s aggressive prosecution of UDD leaders and supporters stands in stark contrast to the treatment reserved for the People’s Alliance for Democracy and the security forces, “sending Thais the message that the scales of justice are imbalanced, if not entirely broken;”

    Some Red Shirt supporters may be puzzled by aspects of HRW’s report. This includes: 1) The disproportionate space dedicated to acts of violence attributed to UDD supporters and presumed affiliates, which flies in the face of the lopsided casualty count; 2) The extent to which Human Rights Watch speaks of the “Men in Black” as an “apparently” pro-UDD element, even after noting these groups were not connected to the Red Shirt leadership and were not led by Major-General Khattiya Sawasdipol (Seh Daeng), as the government alleges; 3) The firmness of HRW’s conclusion that the arson attacks committed in the wake of the dispersals were part of a coordinated effort by the Red Shirts, a claim not supported by evidence beyond the ill-conceived public statements made by some UDD leaders; and 4) The continued reference to the already debunked notion that the “War on Drugs” resulted in 2800 deaths (the government report that HRW cites does identify 2,800 as the total number of murder victims between February-April 2003, but also points to the fact that Thailand’s “normal” murder rate for a comparable three-month period is about 1,500).

    Amsterdam & Peroff’s position has always been that the 2010 massacres should be the subject of an independent, complete, and fair investigation conducted in accordance with standards set by international law. On the basis of whistleblower evidence, corroborated by independent experts, Amsterdam & Peroff submitted an application to the prosecutor at the International Criminal Court on January 31, 2011, requesting that an inquiry be initiated to examine these events. Further, on the basis of new evidence collected and corroborated by other sources, we are preparing a further filing to the ICC concerning the illegal cover-up that has taken place since the murders in April and May of last year. These new revelations, as well as the sheer number of dead and wounded among the victims, are testament to the government’s excessive use of force and premeditated attack to eliminate the political opposition through the violation of their fundamental rights.

  8. #883
    Twitter #BKKTS
    Tom Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    27-08-2023 @ 10:33 AM
    Posts
    9,222
    Quote Originally Posted by StrontiumDog View Post

    Some Red Shirt supporters may be puzzled by aspects of HRW’s report.

    This includes:

    1) The disproportionate space dedicated to acts of violence attributed to UDD supporters and presumed affiliates, which flies in the face of the lopsided casualty count;

    2) The extent to which Human Rights Watch speaks of the “Men in Black” as an “apparently” pro-UDD element, even after noting these groups were not connected to the Red Shirt leadership and were not led by Major-General Khattiya Sawasdipol (Seh Daeng), as the government alleges;

    3) The firmness of HRW’s conclusion that the arson attacks committed in the wake of the dispersals were part of a coordinated effort by the Red Shirts, a claim not supported by evidence beyond the ill-conceived public statements made by some UDD leaders;
    Count me as one of the 'puzzled'.

  9. #884
    Thailand Expat
    SteveCM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    A "non-existent" Thai PsyOps unit
    Posts
    4,550
    Truth and reconciliation for Thailand: Looking back on the battle | The Economist


    May 5th 2011, 11:31
    by S.M. | BANGKOK



    TRUTH and reconciliation panels are all the rage these days. Most are created in the aftermath of cataclysmic political events. Sadly, few scale the lofty heights attained by the post-apartheid hearings in South Africa, which lent their name to the genre. It is all the harder to hold the perpetrators to account when they are still in positions of power. Witness Sri Lanka’s feeble stab at investigating its wartime conduct, while at the same time its government furiously denounces a UN report into alleged war crimes committed in the final months of the conflict.

    Last May parts of Bangkok resembled a war zone, as combat troops faced off against “red-shirt” protesters, some of them armed. In the bloody aftermath, the prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, promised a proper inquiry into the nation’s worst outbreak of political violence since 1992. A truth-and-reconciliation commission was appointed and legal investigators began to work through their caseloads of the dead and injured. A year on however not a single case has been prosecuted. The truth commission is similarly stalled. With elections coming soon, there seems little hope of a breakthrough in apportioning blame for the killing of the 92 people who died.

    Human Rights Watch (HRW) has stepped into the breach with a detailed, 154-page report on what happened last year. “Descent into Chaos” pieces together how the red shirts set up protest camps in Bangkok’s city centre and the subsequent actions of the government and its security forces. The report does an impressive job of marshalling the known facts, talking to those directly involved and describing the violence, including the use of military snipers in “live-fire” zones around the protest camp.

    It is, by necessity, a partial account: HRW does not have access to official data, such as forensic tests on shooting victims. But it is not a partisan effort. While there is plenty of blame for trigger-happy soldiers, the red shirts are not spared. Armed “black shirts” allied to the reds appear to have instigated the first deadly clashes on April 10th and to have joined ensuing battles against the army. Grenades were fired into army bases and police posts. Armed men stormed a hospital where soldiers were reportedly billeted.

    While red-shirt leaders claimed the mantle of peaceful, non-violent protest, they urged their own supporters to prepare for war. “Bangkok will be a sea of fire,” vowed one leader. This was not far off the mark: arson attacks spread across the city as the army closed in on the protest camp. Other leaders made similar blood-curdling speeches on stage.

    The report cites evidence that troops fired repeatedly on unarmed protesters and on volunteer medics trying to assist the injured. At least four medics died, including a nurse at a temple on May 19th, the day that troops dispersed the protests. Red shirts were killed with single shots to the head, an indication that snipers were employed. Video footage obtained by HRW shows a military sniper in action, with a colleague acting as a spotter.

    Bangkok may have resembled a war zone, but this was not an armed conflict, according to Brad Adams, HRW’s executive director for Asia. He told a press conference on May 3rd that Thailand was obliged to use only non-lethal force against civil disturbances. But it seems “the laws of war didn’t apply in Thailand last year,” he said.

    Such legal niceties may be lost on Thais who argue that the troops were justified in using deadly force, given the presence of black-shirt gunmen in the crowd. Why did the red shirts encourage these rogue elements? On the other hand, most of the firepower was on one side, hence the high death toll among protesters, most of who carried nothing more dangerous than a stick or a rock, if that. Could they have been stopped by non-lethal methods? Did the army exert proper control over its rank-and-file?

    The answers have spent the past year lost in the fog. This is precisely why truth-telling tends to be seen as a necessary start to healing the wounds. It might be too much to expect a single report to capture all the complexities of the chaos. HRW should be commended for trying. It is up to those in power in Thailand to push the process forward.

  10. #885
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Rights Group Says Thailand Murdered Civilians, Urges Investigation

    Posted by Emily Rauhala Wednesday, May 4, 2011 at 3:27 am

    A year after a violent crackdown on anti-government protesters in Bangkok that killed at least 90 people, not a single official has been charged. Now, Human Rights Watch, an influential American NGO, says they've collected evidence that government snipers targeted civilians, including unarmed medical personnel. Their claims are laid out in a 194-page report, 'Descent Into Chaos,' that was released yesterday. Here are some of their findings, courtesy of the Times:
    At a news conference [in Bangkok], the New York-based group's Asia director, Brad Adams, displayed video clips that he said showed at least one sniper in military uniform, as well as figures on an elevated train track, whose presence he said contradicted the government assertions that no soldiers had been deployed there.

    The use of snipers has been one of the contentious elements of debate over the events that convulsed Bangkok with violence. The government has insisted that it did not deploy snipers.

    But the report said Human Rights Watch had gathered evidence that “several unarmed protesters, medical volunteers and bystanders were killed with single shots to the head, suggesting the use of snipers and high-powered scopes.”
    The report also criticizes some of the opposition, or 'Red Shirt,' leaders for calling for the use of violence and supporting shadowy militants dressed in black. Adams and HRW urged the government to investigate "both sides" of the incident and prosecute those responsible.

    That may be easier said that done given the Thai prime minster's tenuous grip on power, Adams admits. “For a long time, the question has been not whether he is willing but whether he is able to assert government control over the military,” he told the paper. “The evidence has been increasingly pointing to the fact that the civilian government does not control the military.”

    Thani Thongphakdi, a spokesman for Thailand's Foreign Ministry defends the government, reports the Nation, an English-language newspaper. "The events that occurred were very chaotic," he said. "And, there were a number of cases where it is unclear, both from witnesses account as well as from forensic evidence, as to the people behind the various deaths and injuries." The government's investigation is "ongoing" he said.

    The report comes at a delicate time. In April, Thailand and Cambodia fought, again, over their disputed border. And the divisions at the heart of last year's protests remain. A year to the day after the stand-off in Bangkok, Prime Minister Abhisit announced he will dissolve parliament this spring, paving the way for an election. But, as TIME Contributor Robert Horn observed in March, an election, alone, won't heal Thailand's wounds. A government investigation won't either — but it just might help.


    Read more: Rights Group Says Thailand Murdered Civilians, Urges Investigation - Global Spin - TIME.com

  11. #886
    Thailand Expat
    SteveCM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    A "non-existent" Thai PsyOps unit
    Posts
    4,550
    No one will accept responsibility for their actions

    EDITORIAL



    By The Nation
    Published on May 6, 2011

    A new report on the political violence of last year blames both the government and red shirts, but neither will admit to wrongdoing

    The truth hurts. But while the Human Rights Watch report on last year's political violence in Thailand cannot be thoroughly classified as the ultimate truth, it hurts all the same. Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban reacted angrily to it, whereas the red shirts have been largely muted. Nobody seems to want to talk about it. We would like to ask why, but in truth we know.

    The report points a damning, accusing finger at both sides in the conflict. That's why. That's the problem for Human Rights Watch - which is Thailand's problem to be exact. Neither side in the prolonged political conflict wants to take any responsibility. Each wants to pin the total blame on the other. Everybody wants to come out of this squeaky clean, from start to finish.

    That's why we have ended up here. "Double standard" is a term for "the other side". When we do something bad, it's because we don't have a choice. When our rivals do it, it's because they are evil. The HRW report might be questioned for its accuracy, but it can boast one thing that most Thai people cannot boast about: HRW tries to take an unbiased look at the Thai problem.

    The 139-page report describes "excessive and unnecessary use of force" on the government side. Troops were said to be shooting randomly. "At everything that moves" according to at least one witness. Snipers, the report says, were employed to enforce the declaration of restricted zones. Many unarmed protesters, bystanders and even medics fell victim to the drastic security measures, the report concludes.

    The red shirts, meanwhile, are blamed for their association with the "men in black", who killed and injured soldiers on April 10. The men in black and other militants were armed with assault rifles, grenade launchers and hand grenades, the report says. It also mentions the invasion of the Chulalongkorn Hospital by some protest leaders that prompted the chaotic and traumatic evacuation of patients and medical staff.

    At the press conference at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand to announce the report, HRW Asia director Brad Adams insisted that everyone responsible for the violence, be it on the government's or red shirts' side, should be brought to justice.

    He called for a transparent and impartial investigation. HRW noted an "imbalance of justice", as no government official has been held accountable, whereas serious terrorism charges have been levied against many red shirts. "DAAD leaders have been charged with crimes, but despite promises by the government to also hold security forces accountable, no one in the Army or police has been charged," Adams said. "This has fed the understandable belief among many Thais that the scales of justice are imbalanced."

    The anti-government movement, however, was urged to renounce violence and take some of the blame. "Regardless of their stated grievances and the conduct of the government, DAAD members responsible for crimes should also be brought to justice," Adams said. "The DAAD leadership should understand that when they use violence they cannot claim to be a peaceful movement."

    So, how do we begin to clean up this mess? HRW's calls are almost certain to fall on deaf ears no matter who is in power in Thailand. Suthep's angry reaction has said enough for the government. If the Pheu Thai Party comes to power, will it investigate red-shirt leaders who for months urged followers to turn Bangkok into "a sea of fire" if they were dispersed from the Ratchaprasong intersection?

    The "imbalance" is here now, and it will likely remain with a possible shift of power. Thailand has faced this kind of challenge before and it has never passed the test, so the future looks questionable at best. It is quite embarrassing that it has to take an international organisation to tell us that maybe both sides should be blamed for the tragic events of last year. And it will be more embarrassing still if the views honestly expressed by HRW are ignored with the same old attitude that has brought us here in the first place.

  12. #887
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    "A new report on the political violence of last year blames both the government and red shirts, but neither will admit to wrongdoing"

    Says it all.

  13. #888
    Thailand Expat
    Pol the Pot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    22-02-2012 @ 03:37 PM
    Location
    Phnom Penh
    Posts
    1,643
    Quote Originally Posted by StrontiumDog View Post
    "A new report on the political violence of last year blames both the government and red shirts, but neither will admit to wrongdoing"

    Says it all.
    This, IMO, says it all:

    He called for a transparent and impartial investigation. HRW noted an "imbalance of justice", as no government official has been held accountable, whereas serious terrorism charges have been levied against many red shirts.

  14. #889
    Thailand Expat
    Mid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,411
    ^

    wot he said

  15. #890
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    The Nation Nutures the Government’s Crimes | Robert Amsterdam Thailand

    The Nation Nutures the Government’s Crimes

    May 6, 2011

    Bangkok’s daily newspaper The Nation is in full damage control over a pair of devastating reports issued this week by Freedom House and Human Rights Watch. Human Rights Watch, for its part, accused security forces of “cold blooded murder” and chastisied the government for covering up the massive human rights violations it committed in 2010. Meanwhile, weeks following the release of a detailed report on internet freedom, Freedom House downgraded Thailand’s overall status as “Not Free” in its annual “Freedom of the Press” index. This had never happened since Freedom House started assessing press freedom in 1980. Never. Even in the 1980s, when Freedom House used to give separate scores for “print” and “broadcast,” Thailand’s “Not Free” rating on broadcast had always been accompanied by a rating of “Partly Free” on print media. Since 1989, when Freedom House began releasing combined scores, Thailand had never done worse than “Partly Free,” even in the wake of coups in 1991 and 2006. Thanks to the administration of Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva, press freedom in Thailand has been rolled back over thirty years.

    It is well known that The Nation, minus one or two real (and lonely) reporters still employed at the paper, operates as the Thai Establishment’s press agency. The way it typically reacts to evidence about the destruction of democracy in Thailand is either by covering its ears and repeating “Thaksin” over and over again, or by attacking the source as misguided, ill-intentioned, or in Thaksin’s pay. This time, given that the evidence is so overwhelming it would simply look ridiculous to try to refute or ignore, The Nation’s intrepid editorialists have taken a novel line in their continuing, craven defense of the only regime under which it is possible for them to work at a national newspaper— acknowledge problems, spread the blame around, and under no circumstances demand that the government be held accountable for Thailand’s long slide into dictatorship.

    Commenting on the Freedom House report, The Nation published an editorial entitled “Thailand Can No Longer Celebrate Freedom of Speech,” as if that were anything new. After acknowledging that freedom of expression is currently under siege in Thailand, The Nation engages in three bits of disingenuous sleights of hand to deflect the blame away from where it really lies. First, The Nation argues that the wave of censorship is “indicative of the Thai authorities’ rudimentary understanding regarding the role of the media in society”— apparently, poor grasp of reality is to blame, not the determination to silence the opposition. Second, The Nation implicitly justifies the censorship by arguing that some of its victims are themselves to blame. Some of them are described as “provocateurs” or “political agents disguised as commentators or media personalities”—never mind that The Nation operates undisturbed in spite of being almost entirely staffed with “political agents disguised as commentators or media personalities.” Third, The Nation absolves Abhisit Vejjajiva of any responsibility. While the Prime Minister is described as a supporter of a “free media,” The Nation laments that “there are people out there who do not heed these words, and indeed try to undermine this goal at every turn.”

    The Nation’s attempt to shift the blame from Abhisit to unnamed “people out there” is understandable. After all, the Establishment has an election to win and Abhisit remains its candidate, if only for want of plausible alternatives. But its excuses are hardly believable. Given that Abhisit has presided over restrictions to freedom of expression not seen since the late 1970s, his role can only be explained in two ways. Either Abhisit has never been sincere about “media freedom,” and has used his soothing platitudes to cover for his government attempt to silence oppositions, or Abhisit is a mere figurehead with no real power over those “people out there” who always seem to get their way. If the latter is the case, what does it say of the man’s character that he agrees to let others use him as their sock-puppet while they pursue policies inconsistent with his beliefs?

    The Nation’s response to Human Rights Watch’s report on the 2010 massacres, in an editorial entitled “No One Will Accept Responsibility for their Actions,” is an equally appalling exercise is obfuscation and misdirection. Again, The Nation does not attempt to deny the accusations HRW makes against the government, but manufactures three false equivalences aiming to spread the blame around and place the failings of the government and the Red Shirts on the same level. First, The Nation notes that HRW blames “both sides,” but fails to remind readers that while HRW faults “men in black” with no known ties to the UDD leadership for the death of four or five security officers, the government is responsible for the murder of a number of unarmed civilians twenty times as large. Second, The Nation claims that “both sides” do not want to talk about the HRW report. This is a complete fabrication. For our part, though we have expressed skepticism about parts of the report, we have welcomed and even applauded it as an attempt to provide an unbiased view of last year’s events. Meanwhile, the government has refused to engage the evidence HRW presented and reacted with its usual, racist references to ill-intentioned farangs. Third, The Nation claims that “neither side” wants to take “any responsibility” and that “everybody wants to come out of this squeaky clean, from start to finish.” The Nation neglects to say that the Red Shirts have spent most of the past year calling for an independent, fair and complete investigation (which of course, by function of its existence, would have to look into the allegations of violations committed by protesters), while the government has spent the same time obstructing such an investigation, suppressing evidence, and denying that anyone was killed by the security forces.

    The Nation’s concludes: “It is quite embarrassing that it has to take an international organisation to tell us that maybe both sides should be blamed for the tragic events of last year. And it will be more embarrassing still if the views honestly expressed by HRW are ignored with the same old attitude that has brought us here in the first place.” As usual, The Nation is wrong. Saying that “both sides should be blamed” does nothing to prevent last year’s events from happening again. Future repeats of the 2010 massacres can only be prevented by finding out the truth and bringing those responsible for human rights violations to justice. Unfortunately, The Nation stands for neither.

  16. #891
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Human Rights Watch and

    Human Rights Watch and “constructed balance”.

    By Andrew Spooner May 07, 2011 1:31AM UTC

    Over the last few days commentators from all sides of the Thai political divide have been pouring over Human Rights’ Watch report into the events of Bangkok 2010. Entitled “A Descent into Chaos” this report is certainly the best that has yet been produced by any human rights NGO that has any connection to Thailand.

    Already it has drawn bizarre comments from Thailand’s Deputy Prime Minister Suthep, who suggested that the US-based HRW go and work out who killed JFK before conducting any inquiry into Thai human rights‘ abuses.

    On the other extreme are those who believe that the HRW report is now the definitive account of what happened during the Bangkok Massacre of April/May 2010 and anyone who dares to offer any critique of it is either a Thaksin stooge or a supporter of terrorism. A more sober analysis other than unhinged comments or just a slavish acceptance is clearly more preferable.


    Pic: AP.

    What can be categorically stated at the moment is that nobody, least of all HRW, has access to the full facts of what happened last year in Bangkok. The shadowy players, whose best interests were always going to be served by dead bodies on Bangkok’s streets, are all still immersed in the thick fog of Thailand’s ongoing political and social conflict.

    From the outset the document doesn’t pull any punches stating that “forensic analyses of the wounds sustained by those killed between May 14 and May 19 … indicated that several unarmed protesters, medical volunteers, and bystanders were killed with single shots to the head, suggesting the use of snipers and high-powered scopes.” It goes on to say that to “disperse the main protest at Ratchaprasong, the army deployed snipers to shoot those who breached “no-go” zones between the UDD protesters and army barricades or who threw rocks and other objects toward soldiers.” It also looks at misguided Red Shirt actions, such as the searching of Chulalongkorn Hospital, but strangely omits other evidence that suggested the Thai Army had been using the hospital as a base (some of Chulalongkorn Hospital’s management and senior staff are long noted for their support of Thailand’s neo-fascist PAD).

    What is striking when reading the background section is that it focuses almost entirely on the premiership of Thaksin Shinawatra – the rest of Thailand’s decades-long bloody and persistently repressive political culture is reduced to a single paragraph. Thaksin clearly was, and is, a product of this corrupted and dysfunctional political culture. The infamous War on Drugs policy of the Thaksin regime (long given as the implied rationale by the NGO community as to why Thaksin needed to be expunged by the military coup in 2006) was not just supported by the former PM Thaksin himself but also by many senior members of the Thai establishment, all of whom seem to have escaped HRW’s ire. And, despite the ousted Thai PM’s numerous faults, he is certainly not responsible for all the sins of this distorted culture of impunity and routine murder. The ever-present meddler in Thai politics is, of course, the Thai Army (armed and trained by its closet ally, the USA) – to place them below Thaksin as the historically creators of Thailand’s descent into chaos is certainly a stark failure of this report. Even now the Thai Army make no bones about riding rough-shod over PM Abhisit’s civilian administration, whether it be in the arena of domestic or foreign policy.

    While HRW’s report is at its strongest when it’s evidence is corroborated from multiple other sources – such as in the case of use of Thai Army snipers against unarmed Thai civilians – what is thinly substantiated is its account of the notorious Men in Black being under the command of the Red Shirts. In places HRW openly contradict themselves on this issue and can’t seem to make their minds up whether the MiB were under UDD command or not. Even the witnesses HRW produce clearly state that the MiB had “no interaction with the Red Shirt leaders” and that “They didn’t have any relationship with the Red Guards, and weren’t interested in dealing with the Red Shirt leaders.”

    Yes, the MiB were attacking the Thai Army but that doesn’t then mean they were doing so as part of the Red Shirt protests. Not one single MiB was arrested or killed by the Thai Army during the Bangkok Massacre yet the presence of this mysterious armed militia has been the relentless justification for killing over 80 unarmed civilians and crushing the Red Shirt protests. In fact, the Thai Army shot and killed more nurses and kids than they did “armed Black Shirt militants”. A later attempt by HRW to pass off some of this wanton murder as just “incompetence” on the Thai Army’s part is actually quite shameful – targeting unarmed civilians with snipers is absolutely a criminal act.

    Ultimately, what one is struck by when reading the HRW report is the more pressing need to effect a “balance” rather than get closer to the truth. And just saying that the Red Shirts and Thaksin did some bad stuff doesn’t bring anyone any closer to that truth. The HRW report might be “balanced” but if this balance is so weakly constructed, even while it draws applause from those who now consider it the definitive holy grail of accounts into the 2010 Bangkok Massacre, it will, unfortunately, only become another part of the miasma of half-truths and rumours. Such an effort, however noble, just ends up being a messy and sticky fudge.

  17. #892
    Twitter #BKKTS
    Tom Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    27-08-2023 @ 10:33 AM
    Posts
    9,222
    Quote Originally Posted by StrontiumDog View Post

    Ultimately, what one is struck by when reading the HRW report is the more pressing need to effect a “balance” rather than get closer to the truth. And just saying that the Red Shirts and Thaksin did some bad stuff doesn’t bring anyone any closer to that truth. The HRW report might be “balanced” but if this balance is so weakly constructed, even while it draws applause from those who now consider it the definitive holy grail of accounts into the 2010 Bangkok Massacre, it will, unfortunately, only become another part of the miasma of half-truths and rumours. Such an effort, however noble, just ends up being a messy and sticky fudge.
    An excellent piece by Spooner.

  18. #893
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    What had been billed as an event to review the progress of reports into the 'truth', soon became itself a search for answers | Prachatai English

    What had been billed as an event to review the progress of reports into the 'truth', soon became itself a search for answers

    Tue, 10/05/2011 - 16:01 | by prachatai Lisa Gardner

    Khon Kaen - At an event marking one year since the dispersal of public demonstrations in which 92 people were killed and over 2,000 injured, speakers from four major non-government groups gathered yesterday to assess the progress of recent reports into the outbreak of violence during April and May 2010.

    Speaking to recent public releases from Human Rights Watch (HRW), the People's Information Centre (PIC), the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) lawyer and activist Robert Amsterdam, speakers who'd gathered at Khon Kaen University's newly reformed Centre for Rule of Law and Human Rights had intended to assess the challenges and opportunities facing their respective investigations.

    Instead, members of the audience sought this opportunity to express publicly many of their own experiences, fears and concerns to emerge following the aftermath of last year's violence. Question time was then extended to allow individuals to express their personal stories. "I was there, when it happened," began one man. "I was convicted during that time, and I just wanted to say this," began another. One woman had "seen it on TV, and it had me thinking," while most stated simply: "I saw these things for myself."

    Nittaya Pachuai, mother, housewife and fruit juice vendor, rose from the audience to speak of her ongoing grief. "I want to talk about my husband," she said. "He was just a normal guy… But he loved to see the righteousness in the society, and this caused him to lose his life. On May 14 last year he was driving his taxi when he saw people crossing the street - because, of his goodwill - he stopped to ask the people what they were running from: they didn't stop to answer. My husband fell down. He hadn't died yet. He was helped by some people. He asked them: 'Can you drive me to the hospital?' He was thankful for their help."
    "But by the time I could contact them," she said, "the official was trying to contact me so I could receive his body."

    In the audience, among them a diverse mix of local and foreign university students, academics, village leaders and other interested parties, an aggrieved 73-year old local retiree spoke of his growing anger. "Who also ordered this massacre? Since we cannot say or pinpoint any perpetrators, you can't tell anything to the people whose families were murdered! You can't reconcile! Unless the people responsible apologize for what they did!"

    Nittaya too said she felt that "from then to now, justice has not been received. Who shot my husband? I don't know. But the bullet - two bullets - were coming from very high up. They hit him in the chest."

    "We were together for seven years," she said. "I just wanted to say that such events should not happen to anyone; that the happiness should be gone from any family. I hold the government accountable for this." Having felt a need to speak publicly, she travelled overnight from her home in Ubon Ratchathani with her two small children in order to attend. "I lost the leader of my family and the person who would take care of me. I didn't get a chance to say goodbye."

    Later, as the subject of the day's events shifted towards questions of historical and judicial precedence, most said they felt it important that investigations into the violence should continue. "If the investigation of the incident seems to be stuck, and doesn't have much progress," one man warned the panel, "then you are now degrading, not upholding, the standards of democracy."

    As Dr. Sriprapha Petcharamesree of the Centre of Human Rights Studies and Social Development at Mahidol University sees it, the impact of such violence on individuals could be mitigated by means more persuant to justice; most notably, an "accountability that means the end of impunity". She argues that, in Thailand, a longstanding historical precedence of amnesty exists and has been extensively used to prevent the prosecution of responsible groups and individuals.

    "In the 1970s, there were student uprisings," said Dr. Sriprapha. "And from that moment onwards there hasn't been 'truth finding' - the perpetrators from that point on have been granted amnesty. This cycle of impunity and amnesty means that this is a failure on part of the state, and therefore means further human rights violations for the victims."

    In his remarks, Director Vasan Panich expressed his concern that without accountability, these events would only serve to reinforce past mistakes. He'd hoped "that the last year's incident wouldn't reflect the past three political crackdowns... That there would be some facts that would be open to the public." Instead, the investigations into the violence demonstrated that "there are still many issues that the people are questioning."

  19. #894
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Reconciliation impossible if truth obscured, panel says

    Reconciliation impossible if truth obscured, panel says

    By PRAVIT ROJANAPHRUK
    The Nation
    KHON KAEN
    Published on May 11, 2011

    There can be no national reconciliation if Thai society fails to hold the culprits accountable and fails to discover the truth about what happened in last year's April and May crackdown on red-shirt protesters.

    Panellists discussing the progress of investigations by various groups said this at Khon Kaen University's faculty of law on Monday. "I don't believe reconciliation is possible if no common truth emerges," said Somchai Hom-laor, head of the investigation subcommittee of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), whose chairman was appointed by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

    Somchai, whose subcommittee will take another year to release a full report on the 91 deaths and more than a thousand injuries urged all sides to be open-minded about the findings.

    He admitted that some soldiers, police officers and some red shirts were not giving their full cooperation, but insisted the situation was getting better.

    "The past six months have seen some progress," Somchai said, such as this symposium organised by Khon Kaen University's Centre for Human Rights and Rule of Law in cooperation with Mahidol University's Centre for Human Rights Studies and Social Development.

    Somchai said he was perplexed as to why police had failed to follow up on the initial probes by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), which were leaked and later released. They suggested that at least 13 deaths had likely been caused by security officials.

    The National Police, said Somchai, refused to follow through with the investigation but instead set up a committee to review the DSI's work.

    He admitted that the TRC did not have the power to summon people to testify but insisted that the commission's work was transparent and open to scrutiny.

    Kwanrawee Wang-udom, representing the People's Information Centre (PIC) - a non-governmental organisation of activists attempting to carry out a parallel investigation - said whatever PIC revealed later this year would likely result in a larger puzzle. Kwanrawee said that while some red shirts might have resorted to violence, the force used by the Army and security officers was definitely disproportionate.

    She warned that the continuation of the Internal Security Act and the issuing of more arrest warrants were making a mockery of the government's claim that it wanted reconciliation.

    Her PIC colleague, Sarayuth Tangprasert, said the public should note that live ammunition was first used by security officers in the afternoon of April 10 last year and not in the evening, as claimed by the Army and the government.

    Khon Kaen's red-shirt lawyer Wan Suwanpong said many knew who were responsible for the deaths, however.

    "Nobody wants to admit [to being responsible]. And even if we know we can't speak. What does this mean?" Wan asked.

    Nittaya Pachuai, a villager who lost her taxi-driver husband Inplaeng Pachuai during the protest, said tearfully that she wanted to see justice for her late husband. "But from that day to today, I have not seen it yet."

    Truth and reconciliation could not occur without accountability, said Sriprapha Petchmeesri, adding that people should make a distinction between fact and truth.

    Sriprapha said truth was dependent on a set of beliefs. She urged Thai society to not confuse compromise with reconciliation.

  20. #895
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    22-10-2011 @ 02:56 PM
    Location
    Republic of the Union of Myanmar
    Posts
    3,081
    Quote Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
    There can be no national reconciliation if Thai society fails to hold the culprits accountable and fails to discover the truth about what happened in last year's April and May crackdown on red-shirt protesters.
    Sums it up in a nutshell but unfortunately what a waste of good lives!

  21. #896
    Thailand Expat
    SteveCM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    A "non-existent" Thai PsyOps unit
    Posts
    4,550
    Note: This lengthy piece is nominally about the promised election but such a major part of relates to events last year (and before) that I think it more appropriate to post it here. I'll put a link to it on the election thread.



    Asia Times Online :: Southeast Asia news and business from Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam

    May 12, 2011

    Thaksin gambles on radical wildcards
    By William Barnes

    BANGKOK - Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand's fugitive former prime minister, has given the nod to radical United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) protest movement leaders to run on his Puea Thai party ticket at upcoming national elections. Whether their participation and association with last year's protest-related violence will help Thaksin's electoral cause is in doubt.

    Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva dissolved parliament on Monday, paving the way for early polls on July 3. Opinion polls show a neck-and-neck race between Abhisit's Democrat Party and Puea Thai, which is expected this week to nominate Thaksin's sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, as its prime ministerial candidate.

    The UDD and its top leaders, who last year campaigned for early elections and the ouster of Abhisit, have arguably been tainted by the mayhem unleashed in the wake of last year's protest-related clashes and crackdown. At least 91 people were killed in confrontations between protestors and security forces, with neither side accepting responsibility for any of the casualties.

    Many hold the UDD's associated militant wing as responsible for the assassination of a prominent army colonel, launching grenades into rival protestors in Bangkok's main business district and forcing the nation's ailing chief monk to flee from a royal hospital its members had raided. A string of arson attacks, including against Southeast Asia's largest shopping mall, CentralWorld, and several provincial town halls, are believed to have been ignited by UDD supporters in retaliation for the government's bloody crackdown last May 19.

    Several UDD leaders, currently out on bail after being detained for several months or returned from Cambodia, to where they fled last year, face terrorism charges for those and other attacks. News reports have noted that several UDD leaders hope to win elected office for the parliamentary immunity that comes with the job. A Puea Thai led government is expected to push for a general amnesty that would absolve UDD leaders of responsibility for last year's violence.

    If the disruptive closure for several weeks of Bangkok's central shopping and luxury hotel district had brought down Abhisit's government, these violent events would have likely been forgiven as part of a successful popular uprising. But the UDD's protests were simply not big enough, numbering tens of thousands at their peak, to bring down a popularly elected government - albeit one that came to power through behind-the-scenes military machinations.

    Thaksin, overthrown in a bloodless September 2006 coup for his alleged corruption, disloyalty to the Thai crown and elite-jarring ambition, has wrapped his desire for legal and political rehabilitation into Puea Thai's campaign. Given that polls show that the majority of Thai voters are not firmly in either political camp, the inclusion of unrepentant and taboo-breaking protest leaders in the Puea Thai's election line-up could be seen as yet another in Thaksin's long parade of often unsuccessful political gambles.

    Therdpoum Chaidee, a former communist and royalist People's Alliance for Democracy protest group supporter, notes that the pro-Thaksin camp's three-pronged attack, including political, militant and mass movement arms, bears a strong resemblance to Maoist guerrilla strategies taught in Hanoi in the 1970s to would-be revolutionaries like himself and certain UDD leaders, including current chairwoman Thida Thawornseth.

    Therdpoum noted that in revolutionary theory a united front (the UDD in this case) gathers up anti-government forces in a display of popular resistance while shadowy fighters (the so-called "Men in Black" who launched grenades and opened fire on security forces) provoke, discombobulate and fracture their opponents. A political party (the Thaksin-controlled Puea Thai) then moves into the ensuing political vacuum to seize power as the discredited government collapses.

    Historically, united front organizations are discarded or betrayed once the revolutionary party is strong enough to take political power. The point is not to tar the protesters as communists (which, with minor exceptions, UDD leaders certainly are not) but merely to underline that a feisty "people's movement" was created to perform the combative street work inappropriate for a political party aiming to form a legitimate government in a free election.

    Revolutionary theory or mere political calculation dictates that the arms of the campaign must at least appear to run independently of each other for the strategy to succeed. Yet several Puea Thai politicians blurred those lines by sponsoring and supporting last year's UDD protests, with many of their photographs proudly displayed at the protest camp. Some spoke on the protest stage, where threats and vitriol were aimed at the government and military, but the party mostly kept its distance from the UDD's "Red Shirt" movement.

    The UDD, on the other hand, not only failed to distance itself from the vicious "Men in Black" but last year saw several of its leaders boast of violence inflicted against officials or warn of destructive deeds to come. Outspoken UDD leader Jatuporn Prompan, who's also a Puea Thai party member of parliament, has continued the fiery rhetoric that has effectively redrawn the boundaries of political invective in Thailand. Last month, he made a speech that allegedly tilted against the monarchy, causing a former prime minister and army commander, Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, to resign from the party.

    Same old line
    Thaksin, notoriously distrustful of potential rivals, may think the risk of running a few of his radical proteges worth it to jazz up an election platform that essentially recycles his decade old populist promises under the now tired "think new, act new" campaign slogan. Because two of his aligned political parties have been dissolved by court rulings, many analysts view the quality of Puea Thai candidates as lacking when stacked against the Democrats.

    Some of Thaksin's fiercest opponents remain critical over how the government and military were caught flat-footed by last year's assaults by the "Men in Black". They argue that after Thaksin failed to bring down the government through protests in 2009, even after bringing much of the capital to a standstill and forcing the shameful cancellation of a regional political summit attended by world leaders, the next round of protests had to result in bloodshed to have their desired strategic impact.

    On April 13, 2009, a month after Thaksin from exile had called upon his followers to launch a "people's revolution" to overthrow Abhisit's government, this writer exchanged a few words with the army colonel who was in charge of soldiers gathering to confront protestors at Bangkok's Din Daeng intersection. "I am going to do my duty," he said briskly. Was this, I asked, likely to be a problem? Colonel Romklao Thuwatham replied: "No one at all has to get hurt."

    At the time, his troops were lining up in front of protestors arrayed around an eight-wheel truck with giant speakers screaming a spicy combination of abuse and flattery at the slowly advancing soldiers. Some protestors tossed small Molotov cocktails in the troops' direction before they retreated. Under Romklao's command, the army dispersed rioting UDD protestors, killing no-one in the efficient crowd control operation. (Thaksin told international broadcasters at the time that the army had killed several protestors, a claim that was later disproved.)

    One year later, on April 10, 2010, Romklao's troops were again poised to clear Bangkok's streets of UDD protestors. However, an unidentified assailant lit up his helmet with an identifying green laser and moments later a hail of 40 mm anti-personnel grenades, the sort fired from hand-held M-79 launchers, exploded where he stood. The military precision attack was caught clearly by press cameras in the area, showing several soldiers severely injured or killed.

    The unidentified assassins knew what they were doing. The previous year in Din Daeng it was clear the young, noticeably raw, conscripts would be lost without confident command and control. The following year, when Romklao walked into a deadly ambush of assault rifles and grenades rather than unarmed peaceful protestors, bloody chaos ensued. Twenty-five people were killed that evening, including five soldiers. The estimated 860 wounded included another colonel and a general, both of whom were permanently maimed.

    In a recently released investigative report on last year's violence, Human Rights Watch was highly critical of the government's use of lethal force against mostly unarmed protestors. At the same time, the report discounted UDD claims that they were not associated with the "Men in Black". Any fair reading of the independent report based on eyewitness accounts concludes that the provocations of the so-called "Men in Black" were designed to trigger multiple casualties, which the UDD leveraged to predictable political effect.

    This reporter was at one point squatting behind some army sandbags on Bangkok's Rama IV road last May watching the acrid black smoke rising from tires burning on the roadway occupied by protestors a couple of hundred meters or so away. There was barely a flicker of life in the smoke and nothing much seemed to be happening.

    A grizzled old warrant officer was monitoring the haze through a battered pair of binoculars and occasionally spoke to a young soldier beside him who was peering down the sights of an M-16. Perhaps every 15 minutes or so this soldier would fire a shot at presumably some movement in the distant smoke. I asked the sergeant what they were firing at, to which he replied: "They have M-79s."

    Contested histories
    Competing versions of last year's violence are expected to animate Thailand's upcoming election campaign, which some analysts fear could tilt towards more violence. At least in part, the polls will represent a trial of popular tastes for radical and sharp-edged realignments of political power with the many UDD leaders running under Puea Thai's banner.

    Those voters - not to be confused with actual protesters - still impressed by Thaksin's past aura of dynamism and pro-poor promises will likely still punt for his party. But there are subtle indications that the UDD's drawing power may have peaked in 2009, when the movement was widely seen as something fresh, hopeful and exciting. Then, many ordinary Thais were keen to echo the UDD's arguments against social and economic inequality, often with a vigor that often seemed to surprise UDD speakers themselves.

    If Thai culture accommodates a certain level of "justified" violence, witnessed in the popularity of Thaksin's 2003 war on drugs campaign that resulted in over 2,200 extrajudicial killings, there is also a visceral dislike of anarchy and distrust of overweening arrogance. The UDD leaders running with Puea Thai will likely struggle against perceptions of the latter.

    Somsak Jeamteerasakul, a Thai academic who has been notably pro-UDD and strongly opposed to military meddling in politics, wrote last year on an academic website that "The use of arms in [urban] struggle, during political protest that claims 'non-violence' as its motto is political suicide."

    "[The violence] didn't really 'protect' the rally, in fact it only provoked heavier deployment of lethal force by the government, which the protesters, however armed, would not be able to counter, and which would [result] - and this is my strongest objection - in loss of lives of innocent demonstrators themselves," he added. Somsak now faces lese majeste charges filed by the Thai military for other outspoken views.

    Meanwhile, three top UDD leaders told the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand in late April that their group was an entirely "peaceful" movement. Jatuporn claimed that the arson attacks against CentralWorld and other tower blocks were perpetrated by "the state" to distract attention from the military's killing of unarmed protestors. The government "started the violence because they know our strength is in peaceful protest," he said.

    With the credibility of such claims stretching credulity, including well-documented counter-narratives raised in the HRW report, there are indications of significant splits among UDD stalwarts on moderate and hard lines.

    Former UDD chairman Veerakarn Musikapong, who was jailed after last year's crackdown, warned in a recent press interview that the UDD will destroy itself if it continues to move in lockstep with the Puea Thai party because it should represent the people, rather than a single man, ie Thaksin. Veerakarn also raised concerns that the movement's agenda risked being hijacked by radical fringe elements that did not represent the movement's wider sentiments.

    "We must not make people hate or fear us. We have to erase this image," he said in the interview.

    Whether internal conflicts or negative popular perceptions will undermine the radical UDD leaders' bid to enter the political mainstream at the upcoming polls is yet to be seen. But it will by now have become clear to undecided voters that the UDD and its top leaders are no more peaceful or less guilty than the establishment forces they will be running against in July's elections.

    William Barnes is a veteran Bangkok-based journalist.
    Last edited by SteveCM; 11-05-2011 at 08:44 PM.

  22. #897
    I'm in Jail
    Butterfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-06-2021 @ 11:13 PM
    Posts
    39,832
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveCM
    Therdpoum Chaidee, a former communist and royalist People's Alliance for Democracy protest group supporter, notes that the pro-Thaksin camp's three-pronged attack, including political, militant and mass movement arms, bears a strong resemblance to Maoist guerrilla strategies taught in Hanoi in the 1970s to would-be revolutionaries like himself and certain UDD leaders, including current chairwoman Thida Thawornseth.

    Therdpoum noted that in revolutionary theory a united front (the UDD in this case) gathers up anti-government forces in a display of popular resistance while shadowy fighters (the so-called "Men in Black" who launched grenades and opened fire on security forces) provoke, discombobulate and fracture their opponents. A political party (the Thaksin-controlled Puea Thai) then moves into the ensuing political vacuum to seize power as the discredited government collapses.

    Historically, united front organizations are discarded or betrayed once the revolutionary party is strong enough to take political power. The point is not to tar the protesters as communists (which, with minor exceptions, UDD leaders certainly are not) but merely to underline that a feisty "people's movement" was created to perform the combative street work inappropriate for a political party aiming to form a legitimate government in a free election.
    Interesting, and very well summarized

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveCM
    Revolutionary theory or mere political calculation dictates that the arms of the campaign must at least appear to run independently of each other for the strategy to succeed. Yet several Puea Thai politicians blurred those lines by sponsoring and supporting last year's UDD protests, with many of their photographs proudly displayed at the protest camp. Some spoke on the protest stage, where threats and vitriol were aimed at the government and military, but the party mostly kept its distance from the UDD's "Red Shirt" movement.

    The UDD, on the other hand, not only failed to distance itself from the vicious "Men in Black" but last year saw several of its leaders boast of violence inflicted against officials or warn of destructive deeds to come. Outspoken UDD leader Jatuporn Prompan, who's also a Puea Thai party member of parliament, has continued the fiery rhetoric that has effectively redrawn the boundaries of political invective in Thailand. Last month, he made a speech that allegedly tilted against the monarchy, causing a former prime minister and army commander, Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, to resign from the party.
    You can always count on the Thai to fuck up a perfectly working game plan

  23. #898
    I'm in Jail
    Butterfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-06-2021 @ 11:13 PM
    Posts
    39,832
    Quote Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
    There can be no national reconciliation if Thai society fails to hold the culprits accountable and fails to discover the truth about what happened in last year's April and May crackdown on red-shirt protesters.
    it's really a shame we couldn't go to the bottom of it, but I think if we found out the truth, a few direct LM laws would be violated

  24. #899
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveCM
    Therdpoum Chaidee, a former communist and royalist People's Alliance for Democracy protest group supporter, notes that the pro-Thaksin camp's three-pronged attack, including political, militant and mass movement arms, bears a strong resemblance to Maoist guerrilla strategies taught in Hanoi in the 1970s to would-be revolutionaries like himself and certain UDD leaders, including current chairwoman Thida Thawornseth.

    Therdpoum noted that in revolutionary theory a united front (the UDD in this case) gathers up anti-government forces in a display of popular resistance while shadowy fighters (the so-called "Men in Black" who launched grenades and opened fire on security forces) provoke, discombobulate and fracture their opponents. A political party (the Thaksin-controlled Puea Thai) then moves into the ensuing political vacuum to seize power as the discredited government collapses.

    Historically, united front organizations are discarded or betrayed once the revolutionary party is strong enough to take political power. The point is not to tar the protesters as communists (which, with minor exceptions, UDD leaders certainly are not) but merely to underline that a feisty "people's movement" was created to perform the combative street work inappropriate for a political party aiming to form a legitimate government in a free election.
    Interesting, and very well summarized
    Indeed, for me the interesting point will be after the Pheu Thai Party wins the election, as seems highly likely, what will Thaksin, errrr, I mean Yingluck do, with the investigations in to the red shirts deaths?

    Will he/she investigate the armed forces he/she will supposedly be in charge of?

    I don't think so....

    Could you imagine?

    And....

    Once the red shirt leaders of Rajaprasong are fully integrated into the government, with all that entails, what will become of the grassroots movement? What will become of Sombat?

    And....

    Is Thaksin really going to agree to all their demands? It would weaken his position as well...and we all know he doesn't like his position weakened. Just look at who he is choosing for the Pheu Thai leader....! Just look at the election slogan "Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts". This is not a man interested in consensus....

    Interesting times ahead.

  25. #900
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Online
    02-07-2018 @ 04:00 PM
    Posts
    1,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly
    it's really a shame we couldn't go to the bottom of it, but I think if we found out the truth, a few direct LM laws would be violated
    So you prefer lies to truth, Butterly?

Page 36 of 81 FirstFirst ... 26282930313233343536373839404142434446 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •