#  >  > Living And Legal Affairs In Thailand >  >  > Thailand and Asia News >  >  Exclusive: Probe reveals Thai troops' role in civilian deaths

## StrontiumDog

*Exclusive: Probe reveals Thai troops' role in civilian deaths | Reuters
*
*Exclusive: Probe reveals Thai troops' role in civilian deaths*

12:00am GMT+0700

     By Jason Szep and Ambika Ahuja
                  BANGKOK |          Thu Dec 9, 2010 11:07pm EST         

 BANGKOK  (Reuters) - The Thai military played a larger role in the  killing of  civilians during political unrest in Bangkok this year than  officials  have acknowledged, leaked state documents seen by Reuters  show.

  A preliminary state probe into  political violence in April and May  concluded Thai special forces  positioned on an elevated railway track  fired into the grounds of a  Buddhist temple where several thousand  protesters had taken refuge on  May 19.

Three of six people shot  dead at the temple were likely killed by  troops, the investigation  found, directly contradicting statements by  the Thai military, which has  denied soldiers were responsible for the  killings at the temple.

The  report said there was not enough evidence to come to a conclusion  about  who was responsible for the other three deaths in the temple, but  it  said all six victims were hit by high-velocity bullets.

"There  is a reasonable amount of facts, evidence and witness accounts  to  believe that (three) deaths resulted from security officials'  actions on  duty,"" the investigators said, recommending that police  look into the  deaths further.

The report quoted soldiers involved as saying they fired warning shots and cover fire, and had been shot at from the temple.

The findings by Thailand's   Department of Special Investigation (DSI) are likely to embolden the   "red shirt" anti-government protest movement challenging the legitimacy   of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, who in June blamed armed elements   among the protesters for the temple deaths.

Wat  Prathum Wanaram, a Buddhist temple, had been designated a "safe  zone"  for women, children, the elderly and the infirm. Thousands fled  there  when the military used force on May 19 to disperse protesters  occupying a  nearby commercial district.

According  to the DSI's investigation, witnesses reported scenes of  chaos outside  the temple as gunshots rang out and civilians fled a  shopping area.

One  witness said he saw soldiers firing from the elevated train track  into a  medical tent inside the compound, where two nurses treating  wounded  civilians were killed.

Ninety-one  people were killed and at least 1,800 were wounded during  the unrest in  April and May. More than 30 buildings were set on fire.  It was the worst  political violence in modern Thai history.

REUTERS CAMERAMAN LIKELY KILLED BY TROOPS, REPORT SHOWS

The  DSI is investigating a total of 89 deaths linked to the unrest but  the  government has yet to publicly release any findings despite  pressure  from human rights groups.

The  findings seen by Reuters were contained in two DSI reports -- one  on the  temple shootings and another on the April 10 death of Reuters  cameraman  Hiro Muramoto.

Muramoto, a 43-year-old Japanese   national based in Tokyo, was killed by a high-velocity bullet wound to   the chest while covering protests in Bangkok's old quarter.

The report quoted a witness who said Muramoto  collapsed as gunfire  flashed from the direction of soldiers. Thailand's  government has not  yet publicly released the report into his death  despite intense  diplomatic pressure from Japan.

Reuters Editor in Chief David Schlesinger called for the immediate public release of the full report.

"The  Thai authorities owe it to Hiro's family to reveal exactly how  this  tragedy happened and who was responsible," Schlesinger said in a   statement.

The detailed accounts of  soldiers opening fire on civilians could  inflame public anger and  galvanize supporters of twice-elected and  now-fugitive former premier  Thaksin Shinawatra, who has called for an  international probe into the  April-May violence, including the  contentious deaths at the temple.

One  witness hiding under a car at the temple said he was shot at four  or  five times by men in camouflage uniforms positioned on the elevated  mass  transit Skytrain track.

He was hit  once and helped to safety by a monk. Autopsies showed  bullets found in  four of the six bodies inside the temple were the same  type that  soldiers on the elevated tracks said they were equipped  with. An unknown  number of people were wounded at the temple.

"OFFICIAL SECRET"

Soldiers  quoted in the DSI report said they fired warning shots toward  the  temple and came under fire from black-clad gunmen from below and by   another gunman in the temple. They said they were providing cover fire   for troops on the ground, who had requested backup.

Tharit  Pengdith, director general of the Department of Special  Investigation,  said the DSI had concluded its preliminary investigation  and passed the  results to the police but had not publicly disclosed  the contents.

"The  investigation report is a sensitive issue to talk about or to  confirm  its authenticity," he said. "It's an official secret. To  confirm the  authenticity of the report sent to police would affect the  rights of the  people whose names were in it."

He  would neither confirm nor deny the authenticity of the two reports  seen  by Reuters but said police will now investigate the case of the  three  people believed to have been killed by troops at the temple,  along with  three others possibly killed by troops, including Muramoto.

The results of the police investigation will be sent to the DSI and government prosecutors.

If  troops are found responsible for civilian deaths, families could sue   for compensation. But authorities could also claim shootings were   committed in the line of official duty.

(Additional reporting by Andrew Marshall in Singapore; editing by Andrew Marshall and John Chalmers)

----------


## good2bhappy

the cover up over the reuters reporter's death is unlikely to make reuters happy

----------


## Bettyboo

> A preliminary state probe into political violence in April and May concluded Thai special forces positioned on an elevated railway track fired into the grounds of a Buddhist temple where several thousand protesters had taken refuge on May 19.





> One witness said he saw soldiers firing from the elevated train track into a medical tent inside the compound, where two nurses treating wounded civilians were killed.





> He was hit once and helped to safety by a monk. Autopsies showed bullets found in four of the six bodies inside the temple were the same type that soldiers on the elevated tracks said they were equipped with.


Where is TH?

----------


## sabang

Firing into a Temple from an elevated position at unarmed protesters and paramedics. With snipers bullets. Very nice.

----------


## StrontiumDog

Where's the big pile of shite smilie?

This will do..... :shtf:  :shtf:  :shtf:

----------


## Mid

watch this go nowhere , after all TIT  :Sad:

----------


## DroversDog

> Soldiers  quoted in the DSI report said they fired warning shots toward  the  temple and came under fire from black-clad gunmen from below and by   another gunman in the temple. They said they were providing cover fire   for troops on the ground, who had requested backup.


From below? If they saw them then why didn't they fire at the black-clad gunmen rather then the medical tent. I can't believe that they made it through their special forces training without being able to shot at the correct targets.

----------


## Bettyboo

^ don't forget that by this stage they had been targeting (killing) civilians all week, so it was second nature to them by this time...

----------


## mc2

Abhisit should resign.

----------


## mc2

> Firing into a Temple from an elevated position at unarmed protesters and paramedics. With snipers bullets. Very nice.


followed by lies, cover ups and denials by the government just rubs salt into it all.

its an absolute disgrace.

----------


## StrontiumDog

> Abhisit should resign.


He should've resigned after the debacle in May. I doubt there's much hope of it now.

----------


## Mid

*Leak implicates Thai military in civilian deaths*
Zoe Daniel

 Leaked documents show the Thai military was probably  responsible for the deaths of several civilians and one journalist  during political unrest earlier this year.

 The documents leaked to Reuters are said to show the findings of a  Thai department of special investigation report into civilian deaths in  political unrest in April and May.

 Contrary to government statements, the report says soldiers firing  into a temple complex where civilians were sheltering probably killed at  least three people, including two nurses.

 Three others killed are also said to have been hit by high-velocity bullets.
 The report also says a Reuters cameraman, Japanese national Hiro Muramoto, was probably killed by gunfire from the army.

xxx.xxx.xx

----------


## StrontiumDog

*http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...s-military-may
*
*Leaked report reveals Thai military responsible for protesters' deaths*

                                      Separate report concludes Thai army also responsible for death of Reuters cameraman

 Mark Tran guardian.co.uk,                                                                                                                    Friday 10 December 2010 14.29  GMT  Demonstrators take to the streets of Bangkok during a protest rally. Photograph: David Longstreath/AP
Thai soldiers were responsible for the deaths of three people at a   Bangkok Buddhist temple during demonstrations in May, leaked government   documents revealed today.

The preliminary investigation, seen by Reuters,   concluded that Thai special forces on an elevated railway track fired   into the grounds of a temple where several thousand protesters had  taken  refuge on 19 May. A separate leaked report concluded that the  bullet  that killed a Reuters cameraman in protests the following month  was also  probably fired by a Thai soldier.

The findings of the  investigation flatly contradict statements by the  Thai military, which  has denied soldiers were responsible for the  temple deaths.

The report from Thailand's   department of special investigation (DSI) said there was not enough   evidence to determine who was responsible for three further deaths in   the temple, but said all six victims were hit by high velocity bullets.

"There  is a reasonable amount of facts, evidence and witness accounts  to  believe that [three] deaths resulted from security officials'  actions on  duty," Reuters quoted investigators as saying. The report  recommended  that police investigate the deaths further.

At the time of the protests, Amnesty International condemned the use of live ammunition   against demonstrators. Benjamin Zawacki, Amnesty's Thailand  researcher,  spoke of eyewitness accounts and video recordings showing  the military  firing live rounds at unarmed people.

Wat Pathum Wanaram, a Buddhist temple, had been designated a safe zone for women, children, the elderly and the infirm. Thousands fled there when the military used force  to disperse protesters occupying a nearby commercial district.

According  to the DSI's investigation, witnesses reported scenes of  chaos outside  the temple as gunshots rang out and civilians fled a  shopping area. One  witness said he saw soldiers firing from the raised  train track into a  medical tent inside the compound, where two nurses  treating wounded  civilians were killed. In total, 91 people were killed  and at least  1,800 were wounded during the unrest in April and May.  More than 30  buildings were set on fire in the worst political violence  in modern  Thai history. The Thai prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva,  blamed armed  elements among the protesters for the temple deaths.

Another DSI  report, into the death of Reuters cameraman Hiro Muramoto,  quoted a  witness as saying that Muramoto collapsed as gunfire flashed  from the  direction of soldiers. Muramoto, a 43-year-old Japanese  citizen based in  Tokyo, was killed by a high velocity bullet wound to  the chest while  covering protests in Bangkok's old quarter.

"There is a reasonable  amount of facts and evidence to believe that the  death of Hiro was due  to an act of the security forces who said they  were acting according to  official duty," the DSI report said,  recommending police investigate the  case further. Thailand's government  has not yet publicly released the  report into his death despite  intense diplomatic pressure from Japan.

The  leaks came amid reports that the centre for the resolution of  emergency  situations (CRES), an ad hoc civilian-military body, will recommend a lifting of the state of emergency that came into force in April, as it believes that the political situation has returned to normal.

The US group Human Rights Watch said last month that the Thai authorities were using emergency powers to violate fundamental rights   and obstruct efforts to bring abusers to justice after the clashes. It   said under the state of emergency, the authorities had detained  suspects  without charge for extended periods, using unofficial  detention  facilities with inadequate safeguards against possible abuse,  and had  imposed widespread censorship. In addition, officials in  effect have  immunity from prosecution for most acts committed under the  decree.

The  protests began in March when the United Front for Democracy against   Dictatorship, known as the redshirts, took to the streets calling for   the dissolution of parliament and new elections. Many of them back the   former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was deposed in a  2006  coup and is currently in voluntary exile. Shinawatra has called  for an  international investigation into the violence, including the  deaths at  the temple.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*http://asiancorrespondent.com/bangko...the-dsi-report
*
*Reuters obtains DSI report on Bangkok protests UPDATE With comments from Thai PM*


*Dec. 10 2010 - 06:08 pm
* *UPDATE*: _Reuters_ has a comment from Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva:  Asked by Reuters to comment on the leaked documents, Prime Minister   Abhisit Vejjajiva did not deny their authenticity, but said   investigations were still not complete and efforts were being made to   expedite the process.

"The next step will involve the judicial process so we can't react to any incomplete information", he said.*BP*: Also, Andrew Marshall of _Reuters_ confirms   that the documents that Reuters were obtained were more comprehensive   that those passed out by red shirt leader Jatuporn. His exact words are   "Jatuporn handed out partial scraps of information taken from the   reports. We saw the full documents".
 --
 First, some background to the _Reuters_ story. The Department  of  Special Investigation (DSI) is the investigative agency who have been   investigating crimes committed during the red shirt protests from   March-May. Last month, DSI publicly and directly blamed the red shirts   in eight instances whereas in other cases they were less definite saying   "maybe" the security forces killed the red shirts.

 At the time, _The Nation_ had a story entitled "Reds, 'men in black' involved in eight cases of deaths, four unknown: DSI" There are eight cases of deaths during the  anti-government protests from March to May *involving* the red shirts and  the “men in black”, while the cause of deaths in four other cases is  *unknown* but they could have resulted from a crackdown by security  forces, the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) said yesterday.

 The deaths *caused by red shirts* include   the killing of five  soldiers at  Khok Wua Intersection on April 10, an   M79 attack on Silom  Skytrain  station, which killed one woman, two   drive-by shootings in  which two  policemen were killed, an ambush on a   military vehicle that  saw one  soldier killed, and an M79 attack near   Lumpini Park in which  one soldier  died.

 Included in the eight   cases is an arson attack on CentralWorld, in  which  one person was   killed, and a post-protest bomb attack in front  of Big C  Rajdamri that   killed a man, said DSI Director-General Tharit  Phengdit.

 The deaths in four cases *possibly involving security forces* are:    three  deaths in Wat Pathum Wanaram, out of a total of six in the    temple  compound; the death of Private Narongrit Sala, who was shot dead    on  Vibhavadi Rangsit highway; the death of Japanese photographer    Hiroyuki  Muramoto; and the death of a Suan Dusit zoo guard.The _Bangkok Post_ article is entitled "DSI concludes probe into 18 deaths" and the key excerpts are: DSI chief Tharit Pengsit said out of the 18 deaths, 12 *were found to have been caused* by the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) and its supporting armed elements.

It *could not yet be determined* if the six other deaths *were caused* by the UDD or government authorities.
...
Altogether 12 people - soldiers, police and civilians - *were killed in attacks by the UDD and supporting elements,* Mr Tharit said.

The DSI *could not definitely determine* whether the deaths of six people were caused by the UDD, its supporting groups, or government authorities.*BP*: Have checked the wording in Thai from this _Matichon_ report   and it matches. DSI is definitive in that the red shirts caused deaths   in eight cases whereas DSI is vague about the other cases. BP should   note that this is the DSI declaring the result. The basis for the   conclusions drawn were not provided except to state that in regards to   the deaths at the temple as per _The Nation_:  The three deaths in the temple implicating security forces come from a   trajectory study indicating that the bullets that killed them were   fired from “declined angles” which is consistent with Army snipers and   soldiers who were positioned on the elevated BTS track overlooking the   temple.*BP*: Alternatively, it could have been mysterious gunmen standing next to the army snipers which the army didn't notice.....

 In fairness to DSI for the rest of the deaths, we don't know what   evidence they have.* They may have convincing evidence, but there is no   way to know or evaluate based on a simple conclusion as it is not as if   the DSI Chief has the best reputation for neutrality.

 Nevertheless, it is unsurprising with the DSI being some definite   about what the the red shirts did, but then seemingly non-committal   about what the military did that more details of the report would not   leak. _Reuters_   who have obtained an exclusive with details from the DSI report. Some   excerpts are reproduced below although you should read the article for   all the details: *The Thai military played a larger role  in the killing of  civilians during political unrest in Bangkok this  year than officials  have acknowledged,* leaked state documents seen by Reuters show.

A preliminary state probe into political violence in April and May *concluded Thai special forces positioned on an elevated railway track fired into the grounds of a Buddhist temple* where several thousand protesters had taken refuge on May 19.

Three of six people shot dead at the temple *were likely killed by troops,* the   investigation found, directly contradicting statements by the Thai   military, which has denied soldiers were responsible for the killings at   the temple.

The report said there was not enough evidence to  come to a conclusion  about who was responsible for the other three  deaths in the temple, *but it said all six victims were hit by high-velocity bullets.*

"*There  is a reasonable amount of facts, evidence and witness  accounts to  believe that (three) deaths resulted from security  officials' actions on  duty,*"" the investigators said, recommending that police look into the deaths further.

The report quoted soldiers involved as saying they fired warning shots and cover fire, and had been shot at from the temple.*BP*: Have a read of one of BP's earlier blog postings   with photos of the soldiers on the tracks which the military were   denying were theirs (they said they were standing 100 metres away). The _Reuters_ report continues: One witness said he saw *soldiers  firing from the elevated  train track into a medical tent inside the  compound, where two nurses  treating wounded civilians were killed.*
...
One witness hiding under a car at the temple said *he was shot at four or five times by men in camouflage uniforms positioned on the elevated mass transit Skytrain track.*

He  was hit once and helped to safety by a monk. Autopsies showed  bullets  found in four of the six bodies inside the temple were the same  type  that soldiers on the elevated tracks said they were equipped  with. An  unknown number of people were wounded at the temple.

*Soldiers  quoted in the DSI report said they fired warning shots  toward the  temple and came under fire from black-clad gunmen from below  and by  another gunman in the temple*. They said they were providing cover fire for troops on the ground, who had requested backup.

Tharit  Pengdith, director general of the Department of Special  Investigation,  said the DSI had concluded its preliminary investigation  and passed the  results to the police but had not publicly disclosed  the contents.

"The  investigation report is a sensitive issue to talk about or to  confirm  its authenticity," he said. "It's an official secret. To  confirm the  authenticity of the report sent to police would affect the  rights of the  people whose names were in it."*BP:* Sensitive because it implicates people? Why  then  do we have these DSI press conferences which implicate people.  Aren't  their rights also affected? There were plenty of people inside  the  temple, including foreign journalists, so we will have to see if  the  military can find a corroborating witness about the gunman in the   temple...

 There is also a second _Reuters_ article specifically on the part of the report into the death of the _Reuters_ cameraman.

 Coincidentally, this is being leaked not long before Thaksin is scheduled to speak in person/by video conference in the US about the crackdown....

 *Just wanted to say one additional thing. There are some who believe   that the red shirts/men in black never killed anyone or never burnt down   any buildings. There are others who believe that it was unidentified   people (the mysterious third hand) or the red shirts themselves who   killed the red shirts and others and the army was not responsible. BP   would just ask that you broaden your horizons and open your eyes because   there are enough videos and photos and eyewitness testimony around  that  contradicts these polar extremes...

----------


## sabang

> One witness said he saw soldiers firing from the elevated train track into a medical tent inside the compound, where two nurses treating wounded civilians were killed.


This should absolutely be acted on as a crime. The soldiers and unit concerned will certainly be known.

----------


## StrontiumDog

Just a note...The Nation hasn't mentioned this story at all on its website as of this time of writing...

Bizarre!

----------


## LooseBowels

The noose is closing on the criminals murderers of the 90 innocent protestors.
This is all coming out on the back of the tremendous work by Amsterdam in chronicaling the murderous events of the military proxy government and recording first hand the eyewitness testimony of the crimes commited.
In the past the amart have done the crime and run, this time the incriminating evidence is in their faces.
Bring on the world court appearances

----------


## mc2

Most articles in this thread are from international sources, local media is not reporting it i guess.

----------


## Mid

^

also obvious is the silence from the usual suspects ,

you know who you are  :mid:

----------


## Mid

*Hopes for justice fading fast*
11/12/2010

*Holding state to task for cracking down on the red shirts will not be easy*

 Holding security officers to account for their  role in the crackdowns on red shirt protesters this year will be  difficult, even if a critical report by the Department of Special  Investigation suggests they are more culpable than they have let on.

 
_Thousands of red shirts gather at Democracy Monument to mark  Constitution Day yesterday and attack the government for continuing to  keep their compatriots from the April-May protests in detention._ 
CHANAT  KATANYU

 The report, still under wraps, has gone to police for further  investigation, but for people affected by the violence, the task of  taking legal action against the state already looks enormous.

 They face several hurdles, including the possibility that troops will  enjoy legal immunity under the emergency decree from prosecution; the  reluctance of state agencies to cooperate with official inquiries under  way into what happened; and the hesitancy of some victims to come  forward to claim compensation and file complaints.

 They fear they may be persecuted further by the state.

 The poor prospects for seeking justice from the state are starting to  emerge amid indications that the military played a larger role in the  killing of civilians during the recent political unrest than officials  have been willing to admit.

The Reuters news agency revealed yesterday it had seen state  documents into the clashes between red shirts and the state which raised  new questions about the fate of six civilians found dead at a city  temple.

 It said a preliminary probe by the Department of Special  Investigation into the May 19 crackdown concluded that special forces on  an elevated railway track fired into the grounds of Wat Pathum Wanaram,  near Ratchaprasong intersection where several thousand protesters from  the anti-government United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship  (UDD) took refuge.

 Three of six people shot dead at the temple were probably killed by  troops, the investigation found, contradicting statements by the  military, which has denied soldiers were responsible for the killings at  the temple.

 A senior DSI official told the Bangkok Post late last month that an  investigation had found that security forces were involved in the deaths  of 13 of the 90 people killed in Bangkok during the red shirt rallies.

 Among the 13 were Reuters' Japanese cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto; Pvt  Narongrit Sala, who was shot during clashes on Vibhavadi Rangsit Road;  Mana Atran, who was shot at Dusit Zoo; and three people found dead  inside Wat Pathum Wanaram - Rop Suksathit, Mongkol Kemtong and Suwan  Sriraksa.

 The DSI claimed it had evidence to back its assumption, but asked police to investigate further.

 The DSI has sent the 13 cases back to the police for further investigation.

 According to Reuters, the report said there was not enough evidence  to come to a conclusion about who was responsible for the other three  deaths in the temple, but it said all six victims were hit by  high-velocity bullets.

 "There is a reasonable amount of facts, evidence and witness accounts  to believe that [three] deaths resulted from security officials'  actions while on duty," investigators said.

 The report quoted soldiers involved as saying they fired warning shots and cover fire, and were shot at from the temple.

 One witness said he saw soldiers firing from the elevated train track  into a medical tent inside the compound, where two nurses treating  wounded civilians were killed.

 Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva declined to comment yesterday.

 Legal experts have raised concerns that security officers involved in  the crackdowns on the red shirt protesters are likely to enjoy legal  immunity under the emergency decree that was imposed at the time.

 Panat Tasneyanond, former dean of Thammasat University law faculty,  said victims may find it hard to file cases against authorities in the  Criminal Court.

 The judiciary may lend weight to the use of authorities' discretion permitted by emergency rule, he said.

 Meanwhile, the government-appointed Truth for Reconciliation  Commission (TRC), which is looking into the crackdown, has faced  bureaucratic obstacles as some state agencies have proved slow to  cooperate.

 Somchai Hom-laor, a TRC member, said the army had given the panel few  insights about its operation. The DSI has provided a summary of its  investigations, not the full reports, he said.

 Ronnachai Khongsakont, who heads a committee in charge of  compensation and rehabilitation for people affected by the violence,  said the panel has received about 400 complaints.

 Many victims and their relatives feared they might be arrested for  taking part in the protests. "Some people are reluctant to come to us,  so we have to visit them. We have visited five communities in Bangkok  and some in Khon Kaen," Mr Ronnachai said.

 Chaiwat Pumpuang, a photographer for The Nation who was injured  during the clashes, said state agencies have shown no sincerity in  providing assistance to people affected by the riots.

 "I may sue for damages if there are no measures to compensate. I can  no longer work as an able-bodied person. I have been offered 5,000 baht a  month for the rest of my life," he said.

 He was shot in the leg during the clashes on May 15. He undergoes daily physical therapy and now uses a cane.

bangkokpost.com

----------


## Mid

Welcome to BURMA  :Sad:

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Bangkok Post : Diplomats demand answers
*
*Diplomats demand answers*
Published: 11/12/2010 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 International governments have expressed their  disappointment with a  lack of progress in investigations into deaths and  injuries during the  military's crackdown on red shirt protesters.

 They warned that Thailand's failure to establish the truth would hurt its long-term credibility and international relations.

 About 30 diplomatic representatives including six ambassadors   expressed their frustrations at a meeting on Thursday with key members   of the government-appointed Truth for Reconciliation Commission (TRC),   sources from the meeting told the Bangkok Post.

 Their key concern was that culprits may be let off the hook.

 In April and May, the military's operation to disperse protests by  the  United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship in Bangkok resulted  in  clashes involving security forces, civilians and those claimed by the   government to be unidentified armed men. There were 90 deaths and more   than 1,400 injuries.

 An Italian photographer and a Japanese reporter were among those killed.

 The strongest message at the meeting was from Italy's ambassador to   Thailand, Michelangelo Pipan, who said the government's failure to   disclose the truth would hurt Thailand's relationships.

 "He said he was not impressed with the investigations of the TRC and   other state agencies such as the Department of Special Investigation,"   said a source.

 The Italian ambassador told the TRC to urge the DSI to make better   progress in its probe. Most diplomats questioned the accountability of   those behind violent and fatal actions. They doubted whether   investigations would lead to anyone being punished for wrongdoing.

 TRC head Kanit na Nakorn said Italy particularly wanted to know about   the circumstances of the Italian photographer's death. Switzerland has   assigned experts to examine protest sites.

 Seeking the truth has been a difficult task for the TRC, which has no authority to subpoena witnesses.

 Somchai Hom-laor, a TRC member, said the army had made it clear it   would not reveal details about its operations - even though it had   previously promised the panel it would provide its detailed plan. "But   the army recently told us they had no such plan. They said they just   handled situations on a daily basis," Mr Somchai said.

 The TRC investigation has found that several pieces of forensic   evidence, such as bullet shells, have disappeared, he said. Some bullet   shells indicate they were from weapons possessed by state agencies, he   said.

 A source quoted Mr Somchai as saying many witnesses had refused to   give information to the TRC because they feared repercussions.

----------


## StrontiumDog

Well, The Bangkok Post has covered it, even made its main story on the front page and added this additional item. Their report seems pretty good. 

Once again The Bangkok Post is shown to be the better paper....

But nothing on The Nation's page. Nothing. Shocking.

----------


## sabang

> Three of six people shot dead at the temple were probably killed by troops, the investigation found,


All of the six people killed at the temple were 'probably' (ie almost definitely) killed by troops- the same specialised, pointed tip bullets were used. Three of those six were _definitely_ killed by troops though. This would appear to include two paramedics, killed while in a tent attending to the injured. The type of bullet used, and the fact they were firing into a tent with knowledge of where they were likely to hit people indicates to me they were snipers, or had snipers training. The fact they were operating from the elevated skytrain tracks also backs this up.

So some questions that will not be asked in the media. Snipers just don't spontaneously pop up- they are a specialised unit, and are deployed under orders.
1- Who was commanding them & what rank?
2- Were they under orders to fire into the Wat, or did they act on their own discretion? Who's orders?
3- Who was the most senior officer present?
4- Why did they fire into a tent?
5- Was there any sign (such as a Red Cross) on the tent, or on the paramedics, indicating that they were so?
6- Did they shoot to kill? if so, on who's orders?

Firing at unarmed protesters seeking sanctuary in a place of worship is bad enough.
Lethally shooting uninvolved paramedics carrying out their duty in a place of sanctuary is about as low as it gets.

----------


## kmart

Thai military. Killing Thais seems to be its only purpose.

----------


## thehighlander959

There are no excuses fo what the Thai Army did to support this unelected government of the day. This  is a class issue its the have,s and have nots in Thailand. The Bangkok elite ensuring that the staus quo in their favour never changes. I think maybe Gaddhafi got the idea he could murder his own people with impunity from the Thais.

----------


## Tom Sawyer

^
I think that had a real popular uprising taken hold here in LOS with the urban lower middle classes joining the Reds, it could well have turned into a Libyan-style bloodbath with the right-wing hardline elements of the military stepping in (but controlled from behind the scenes by the usual suspects).

Hard to say whether any elements of the military would side with the people. My guess is they wouldn't since there hasn't been any indication for generations that it is anything more than an organization that one joins (at officer level) purely for selfish financial gain.

----------


## sabang

> urban lower middle classes


But they are now mostly aware they were shilled.

----------


## Tom Sawyer

> Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
> 
> urban lower middle classes
> 
> 
> But they are now mostly aware they were shilled.


I hope so.

----------


## Rural Surin

> Originally Posted by sabang
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
> ...


Yet, will such enlightenment change anything? I think not.

----------


## StrontiumDog

http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/o...bottomless-pit

COMMENTARY

*Getting to the bottom of a bottomless pit*
Published:  8/03/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 <snip>

_Given the tumultuous circumstances of Muramoto's death - the  darkness,  the armed clashes, bullets ricocheting around and bombs going  off, it  would not be easy to identify the shooter. That much should be  clear.

 But of course, considering the extent of what is at stake, that much   cannot be allowed to prevail. Instead, more and more has been added to   the story with the result that it has gotten murkier and become so   confusing that it would not be surprising if people soon gave up trying   to find the truth altogether._ _

 Instead of letting the public know what it has done - who it has   talked to and what these people had to say - every step of the way, like   an authority in charge of investigating a high-profile murder case   should be doing, the DSI has acted more like a thief, proceeding in   every step of its work suspiciously and guardedly._ _

 Guess from whom the general public learned about an initial report   into the death of Muramoto? Not from the DSI but from Reuters, which   received a leaked report and promptly released it._ _

 My question, of course, is why couldn't the DSI inform the public about its own findings?

 It's true this was a preliminary finding but what's wrong with releasing a preliminary report, making it clear this is so?

 In my opinion, what's much more troubling than the special probe   organisation's less than transparent conduct and apparent flip-flopping   over who or what kind of bullet killed Muramoto, is the quality of the   investigative work itself._ _

 The DSI's initial report - which concluded that the bullet which   killed Muramoto "probably" came from the security forces - was   apparently based on the account of a single witness._ _

 Likewise, when the agency did a double-take and held a press   conference to announce a different conclusion - that Muramoto "probably"   was not killed by security officers - its assessment was also based on   the opinion of a single person, a retired forensics expert from the   police department._ _

 I am not saying if the single opinion is right, wrong or credible   here; I only question whether our top investigative agency should   prepare a report or counter-report - preliminary, mid-way or final -   based on a "single" source._ 

<snip>

 Atiya Achakulwisut is Deputy Editor, Bangkok Post.

(more at the link, opinion piece obviously)

----------


## Butterfly

> Originally Posted by Butterfly
> 
> well we can all agree that we will never know the truth then,
> 
> 
> Untrue- in this instance, the truth is already known. Farcical Thai officialdom does not feature.
> Do not confuse concerted, 'official' attempts at obfuscation with people knowing the truth BF.


sab, you need to stop drinking that lao khao because you dont have access to that truth either

dont confuse your wishful thinking masturbation with facts and the truth  :Smile:

----------


## StrontiumDog

*http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/secu...main-a-mystery
*
*Bloody clashes still remain a mystery*
Published:  9/03/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
_The Truth For Reconciliation Committee made  little headway at a  hearing yesterday in trying to establish the truth  surrounding last  year's clashes between soldiers and anti-government  protesters in the  Bon Kai, Silom and Lumpini areas.

 Instead, a sub-panel conducting the investigation was advised by   military officers who were among witnesses invited to provide   information on the incident that it should find out the truth from the   people who ordered the crackdown instead of trying to establish the   details of each death._ _

 A dozen military officers appeared before the fact-finding subcommittee._ 

 ( a lot more at the link, should be posted whole, but I can't due to....)

----------


## SteveCM

^



> ( a lot more at the link, should be posted whole, but I can't due to....) __________________


Due to what? Other than what you cited as being DD's advice,




> I've been in contact with DD, I think post new news items as whole pages, originals so to speak, then update with relevant chunks if the information is new. This avoids repetition of information. Hope that helps.


I've seen no board advisory that says we can't continue to use our own discretion about quoting - did I miss it? From what I can see, just about all of what you left out here is new (and relevant) information - nor was the article particularly long. Up to you and your discretion how you post, but please don't say that you _"can't"_ post it whole.

----------


## thehighlander959

^
"Supawat Thaksin, a lawyer of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), told the panel that it was not sufficient for military officers to simply say they were doing their duty."

Is this not what the SS said at their trials before the War Crimes commission after  Germany,s surrender in 1945

----------


## Mr Lick

^ As i believe was announced whilst PM Thaksin was in power in 2006 following the investigation into the Tak Bai incident of 2004.

Indeed, the PM quite incredibly initially announced that ''the men died because they were already weak from fasting during the month of Ramadan''

Nobody should be holding their breath on this one, especially if we look at similar incidents, that for instance, have occurred in the UK.

Bloody Sunday (1972) Recent apology after 38 years of inquiries.

Hillborough Disaster (1989) No one has ever been brought to account over the events that day, despite many inquests


In all large operations in the UK involving demonstrations/firearms briefings are videotaped. 
I doubt that such technology is used in similar conflicts here and would suspect that if they were then that evidence would conveniently disappear should it cause some embarrassment to those who hold power.

Incidentally, VCD's made by Muslims of the Tak Bai incident allegedly showing footage of events and some speeches were deemed illegal to possess by the Thaksin Government who said that they would prosecute anyone that had a copy.

----------


## thehighlander959

^
So you are comparing the Hillsboro football disaster to these other incidents where loss of life was murder at best or worst whichever way you look at it.

I am sorry to disagree but I think your comparisons are flawed and fucked at the same time. :smiley laughing:

----------


## Mr Lick

^ I am relating the Thai government probe (OP) to incidents in the UK where loss of life, such as the Hillsborough disaster (96) occurred and a major inquiry ensued.

Loss of life was murder at best? Not sure about that one.  :Smile: 

To have a singular viewpoint on the incidents in Bangkok during April/May of last year may not be particularly healthy position to hold

As i have mentioned, expecting any government around the world to admit liabilty on multiple deaths, well that, even in the developed world, can take decades.  :Smile:

----------


## StrontiumDog

^ Indeed, very valid points raised....

The American government and their treatment of Guantanamo residents...the deaths in Iraq (numbers unknown and totals vary...)...the "torture" and extraordinary rendition carried out under the Bush regime....none of this has been fully explained, a lot of it denied or minimised....very little responsibility taken. Where are the trials...?

It would be nice if the Abhisit government did the right thing, but not only have many previous Thai governments failed to do so, but the supposedly democratic western governments have also failed to be transparent and take responsibility for their failings. 

Fully agree that taking a singular viewpoint on the troubles here is short-sighted. Doesn't and wont stop some from doing so though. 

I'm often bemused by western expats expecting some 'Utopian' ideal from Thailand, when the countries they come from are very far from it as well.

----------


## thehighlander959

I don,t hold any singular viewpoint on the loss of life in any of the incidents mentioned, however Thai governments over the years have been able to kill and wound citizens on a whim just because it suits the government of the day in Thailand.
They are never held accountable for any of their actions the Thai military is not a representative group for the people, it is a tool used to control the people by the judiciary,military and the Privy Council. When it suits the government of the day.

There were not to many yellow shirts shot and killed during the siege at the airport...

----------


## sabang

*October 1976, Thammasat*- Officially, there were 46 dead and 167 wounded. Puey Ungphakorn, rector of Thammasat at the time of the massacre, gives an unofficial estimate of over 100 based on anonymous sources at the Chinese Benevolent Association, which disposed of the bodies
Thammasat University massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Black May 1992*-  Up to 200,000 people demonstrated in central Bangkok at the height of the protests. The military crackdown resulted in 52 officially confirmed deaths, many disappearances, hundreds of injuries, and over 3,500 arrests.
Black May (1992) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*2010 UDD Protests*- 'Cruel April' 2010- 24 deaths, 800+ injured, Phan Fa Bridge.
'Savage May' 2010- The casualty count as of May 22 stood at 85 dead and 1,378 injured.
2010 Thai political protests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


All of these protests were for democracy. All followed a military coup, although 2010 had the additional wrinkle of preceding 'judicial' coups also. In all incidents, the majority of deaths were caused by military or paramilitary forces. 

No one from the military/ State has ever been punished.

There is nothing new or unique about the 2010 UDD protests, or the states reaction to it. Not counted, in all cases, are the 'invisible'- deaths and disappearances outside of the main flashpoints, often outside Bangkok. Of course, the official state and approved Media response is still that Thai people do not really care about democracy. The protesters are either 'communists' or 'anti-monarchists'. Not you and me.

Who's Lying?  ::chitown::

----------


## DrB0b

^That was worth pointing out again, Sabang. There are far too many farangs here who have no knowledge of Thai history and no context in which to place these events. Yes, much of what has happened recently in Thailand is surreal and any outsider would be quite unable to understand how a government could behave like this and get away with it. No, this is not at all unusual in Thailand.

----------


## SteveCM

_"Thailand's so-called Red Shirts will take to the streets this weekend,  almost a year after their failed attempt to bring down the government.

Almost 90 people died in those protests.

As  the government prepares for parliamentary elections, many of the  victims' families are still searching for answers to what happened to  their loved ones in last year's unrest.

Al Jazeera's Wayne Hay reports from Bangkok."_

----------


## Mid

^

ran into bullets ...................................

----------


## Butterfly

indeed they did,

great, you finally got it mid

----------


## The Bold Rodney

> ran into bullets ...................................


Yes and it's only complete idiots who believe the governments dogma and pathetic excuses re terrorists and or self defence or could it be a case of 90 plus suicides in Bangkok as "pupa" would like us to believe?

----------


## Thaihome

That certainly is a report filed with bias and images that do not match the narrative as well as some serious omissions. I truly feel for the father that lost his son and I do indeed hope that the actual situation in which the young man placed himself and got shot come to light. But the scene shown in the movie of the Army moving across Rama IV into Lumpini Park is likely not where his son got shot, a few get shot that day and there is ample proof that there was indeed a firefight with shots exchanged the Army under grenade attack during the movement. Most of the casualties occurred during the period of May 13th to the 18th in the Rama IV area known as known as Bon Kai and in Din Deang. The report goes to great length to leave the impression that live rounds were used to shot unarmed, peaceful protestors that were just standing there, at worst just taunting the Army. The truth of what happened is far from that.

Live rounds were used when the Army perceived they were being threatened or they were used to keep what was perceived as threats away from their positions. Whether that threat was real and justified shooting is wrapped in some serious controversy which always accompanies these tragic incidents. But at no time did the Army stand there and shoot live rounds into a crowd of people facing them. 

Here are the events as I either witnessed them myself or pieced together from news reports and photos.

After the radical UDD leadership asserted itself after a 4 day struggle for control of the UDD they refused the offer of the November elections on May 13th, the moderates, led by Veera walked away from the rally, and the Army began an operation during the evening to close the roads outside the barricaded protest area. They moved troops into the Rama IV/Sathorn/Silom area outside Lumpini Park and in the Din Deang area with the intent to setup blockades around the protest area. 

I was witness to much of what happened in Rama IV/Sathorn area and will discuss what I saw and what I believe was the Armys strategy. I do not have much idea of what happened in the Din Deang area, but from what I know it followed pretty much the same pattern. 

During the period of the 14th to the 18th, there was no clearance operation of the protest site. The Armys intent at that point was setup a blockade on Sathorn and Rama IV that protected their flank and rear for the positions being setup in front of Lumpini Park, at the Silom intersection. If they controlled Sathorn from Convent Road to Rama IV and Rama IV down to Ngam Duplili the protestors could not move behind them or up Rama IV on their right flank. 

There were confrontations on Sathorn and Rama IV on the evening of the 13th and the morning of the 14th as the Army moved numbers of troops into the area. The protestors came over the barricades from Lumpini Park and from the residential areas on Rama IV. 

The battle for Sathorn on the 14th was fairly brief and the Army easily took control. There were no shootings and crowd that tried to stop the Army eventually dispersed. Sathorn itself was only closed for a while on the 14th and thereafter remained open to normal traffic. The main action took place on Rama IV which was closed from Sathorn to Rama III for the entire 7 days only reopening to full traffic on the 21st. 

The Army moved into the area from Silom down Rama IV to Ngam Duplili just past Lumpini Park on the evening of the 13th and continued the operation on the 14th. The Army succeeded in securing Rama IV down to Ngam Duplili by the early afternoon of the 14th. The Army then built sandbag positions on Rama IV at Ngam Duplili from which they rarely moved for the remainder of the time and never tried to move further down Rama IV. 


Here is a photo of Rama IV looking towards Sathorn taken from the Rama III overpass at about 6:30 AM on the morning of the 14th after the clashes the night before and before the confrontations that would take place later that day for control of Rama IV in front of Lumpini Park.


Here is a photo of the face off between the protestors and Army on Rama IV on the 14th before the protestor moved down Rama IV before the barricades and the Army sandbag positions were built. This would be later in the day from the previous photo and looking towards the expressway and Rama III overpass. 


The Army at this point used non-lethal crowd control methods of rubber bullets and the more controversial firing live rounds in the air to move the crowd back down Rama IV past Ngam Duplili and proceeded to dig in at that point. Note that in this and previous photos most are carrying shotguns to fire rubber bullets.


By the afternoon of the 14th, the protestors having been moved down past Lumpini Park toward the expressway, as said earlier, built a forward tire barricade on Rama IV at about Soi Suwan Sawat from which they threw petrol bombs, launched ping ball grenades from slingshots and fired homemade rockets up Rama IV at the Army positions. There are also many reports of grenades being launched and shots being fired at the Army positions. The famous picture of the protestor firing the pistol is from this area as well as any number of other photographs and videos showing the action. 




Another tire barricade was built just under the expressway and tires were kept lit between it and the forward position as well as behind the expressway overpass for just about the entire time to obscure the Armys view down Rama IV. 

For the Army, this became a combat operation in which the primary goal was to not take any casualties and hold the positions. The tactic became keeping the protesters at least 300 meters away and out of range of the homemade rockets, slingshots, petrol bombs and the M-79 grenade that were being used by protestors and to prevent them from moving up Rama IV. They did this by using a selected covering fire that targeted people that came out from the forward barricade. There is no doubt that bystanders that were not actively participating were probably shot in this area, but the majority were people that were attempting to engage the Army. Why you would stay in that area and watch is beyond my comprehension, but that was their choice. Basically the Army sat in their sandbag positions at Ngam Duplili (near the boxing stadium) keeping the protestors down the street in the Expressway overpass area. 


By the 16th, the protestor had built a small stage in the middle of Rama IV between the expressway and the Rama III overpass around which a couple hundred people gathered and listened to various speeches and such 24 hours a day. To my knowledge, none of the people in this area were ever shot at.

Here is a photo taken on the morning of the 17th, again from the Rama III overpass that shows the stage setup in the middle of Rama IV.


I can see parts of the Bon Kai area from the balcony of my condo and Rama IV is but a few hundred meters ways. I could hear the shots and explosions as the Army and protestors exchange fire during the night when most of the action actually took place. During the day, it was generally pretty quiet with sporadic shots and explosions as the protestors did not move out from the barricades much during the daylight mainly just throwing the occasional petrol bomb or sending off their rockets.

At night, the action tended to heat up. In the first few days of the weekend, there were skirmishes on Sathorn Soi 1 and the subsois that connect to Rama IV as the protestors attempted to move behind the troops on Rama IV. These were unsuccessful and by Monday, they had stopped completely and Soi 1 and the area towards Sathorn was quiet and traffic flowed normally.

During those 5 days May 14th to May 18th, I took a taxi from Ploenchit down Wireless in front of Lumpini Park and over to Sathorn very evening about 9:00PM. There was never a problem. The Army had a few sandbagged positions along Wireless opposite Lumpini Park, but there was never any incidents and traffic moved normally. As we were behind the Army lines on Rama IV and they held the area in front of the protest site from Sathorn to Silom, there was no action at all. The protest area in Lumpini Park was completely dark and quiet. That side of the street was deserted and you could see nothing into the Park itself. It was bit surreal though knowing what was going on just a few hundred meters down Rama IV. I also drove over the Rama III overpass every morning from the 17th (Monday) to the 19th. 

When, on the morning of the 19th, the clearance of Lumpini Park began at Silom moving down Ratchadamri the Army made no move on the protestors in Bon Kai area, instead they held their positions to prevent the protestors from moving up Rama IV and flanking the Lumpini Park operations. 

The actual clearance operation was mostly confined to Lumpini Park and consisted of a couple of brief firefights and grenades launched at the Army. They proceeded very slowly across the park and as the expected armed resistance did take place, they used standard combat tactics to move across the park. The entire focus was to minimize their causalities (certainly understandable) and they were very careful not expose themselves. They did pretty much shoot at anything that moved as you are trained to do in these situations. At no time were the protestors still sitting at the main stage fired on. In fact, by the time the Army finished clearing the park and moved down Ratchadamri to the main stage everyone but one person was gone. 


After the Lumpini Park operation was complete and the UDD leadership quit the protest and surrendered to the Police (at the Police HQ which is across the street from where the main stage was located) in order to avoid arrest by the Army (but that is another story), the Army still made no move to clear the Bon Kai area. I assume because though there were peaceful protestors in area of the stage, the people on the perimeter had to considered armed and Army was apparently unwilling to take or inflict the casualties that would have inevitably resulted if they had moved down Rama IV. 

Consequently, the area became the scene for some of the worst arson attacks. The SET, the EGAT and Channel 3 buildings were all burned. Pretty much all the shop houses on both sides of Rama IV in the area from the expressway to the Rama III overpass were heavily damaged.

The protestors blocked the intersection at Asok and Sukhumvit to prevent to Army from approaching Rama IV from that direction. Besides the buses that were used, at two different times pickups with tires were unloaded and the fire at the intersection and the one set on Sukhumvit under the Asok BTS were replenished. Here is photo of the blockade. 


It wasnt much of a barricade and it was ultimately unnecessary as the Army did not take control of Sukhumvit until well into the afternoon of the 19th. It does show there was an organizational and communication structure in place and what can only be an existing plan being followed. I dont think the Army even moved into Bon Kai until the morning of the 20th, letting the fires burn themselves out or be fought by the local residents.
Bon Kai the morning of the 20th


The entire 5 days was well documented and witnessed by many living close by those areas. The government was on TV every day, pleading with people to stay away from the Rama IV and Din Deang area. They also announced clear rules of engagement. I will say there is little doubt that were instances of troops not strictly following the rules of engagement and were erring on the side shooting at the time anytime the felt they were being lethally threatened. 

Anyone that has some combat training and maybe even some actual combat experience where you are being shot at or under grenade attacks knows how truly scary that is. It is easy to come in after it all over and criticize decisions that were made in the heat of moment when you thought your life was being threatened. But, dont get me wrong, I do believe investigations need to be conducted. But based on what I witnessed, I just dont think a lot of people are going to like what it would say about many of the deaths and other casualties.


The Army has proven many times they are well capable of non-lethal crowd control and breaking up groups of protestors without serious injuries or fatalities if they are not heavily outnumbered. They proved that in Songkran 2009, they proved that on Vibhavadi Rangsit Road in April 2011, though heavily outnumbered, they even proved it on afternoon of April 10th when they battled the protestors all day in what ended as a stalemate without serious injuries. What they dont do well and I dont how any security force would do it well, is react in a non-lethal manner when they perceive people are trying to kill them. They are trained combat troops and first priority for them is not to get killed. The people within the protestors that were trained and armed seemed to have had the same priorities, but unfortunately the protestors that either participated in shooting the ping pong bombs, Molotov cocktails and homemade rockets did not seem to share the same concern for their own safety, nor did the people that did not even participate in that but did choose to stand by while others attempted to attack the Army positions. 

I am sure that as the Army moved into positions beginning on May 13th and continuing on through the Lumpini Park clearing operation, the events on the night of April 10th played heavily on the minds of the troops in the field. The evidence is there for anyone who knows anything about combat to see that the main priority of the troops on the ground was self preservation. They were not going to be taken down in a surprise lethal attack as was done on April 10th nor once they had achieved and secured the assigned tactical positions on Rama IV were they going to let anyone they even slightly suspected of being threatening get close to them. Their actions fully show that.


I would still like to see a full investigation take place that would detail the time and place and what was going on where each person was killed or wounded. I seriously doubt that will ever happen thought and that is truly a shame. Even if the government issues a report because so many of the facts do not fit with what people who did not witness any of it think happened, it will torn to shreds and called a coverup.
TH

Edit. Here is map of the area for those not familiar with it.

----------


## Mid

and with that lengthy Epistle you have proved that you have more than a casual interest

----------


## StrontiumDog

Thanks for your efforts TH.

For me it is all about the snipers, who picked off people seemingly at random, such as the Thai guy who got shot having a cigarette on his balcony (near to where I lived, in Complete condo), which was certainly the same people who shot at me (same direction of fire) and you have to wonder who the hell would do this? Both the guy who died and my good self were simply on our balcony, both having a quiet smoke. We were high up, obviously not engaging in threatening or subversive behaviour. We were both obviously not red shirts. 

I've wondered about the motivation of those who would engage in such a thing. 

If it was the army, why would they target random strangers? There is no upside or gain in engaging in such actions. Just doesn't make sense. However, there was the live fire zone debacle. 

If it was the red shirt armed brigade (those spooky black shirts), then some motives can be discerned....

----------


## Rural Surin

> *October 1976, Thammasat*- Officially, there were 46 dead and 167 wounded. Puey Ungphakorn, rector of Thammasat at the time of the massacre, gives an unofficial estimate of over 100 based on anonymous sources at the Chinese Benevolent Association, which disposed of the bodies
> Thammasat University massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *Black May 1992*-  Up to 200,000 people demonstrated in central Bangkok at the height of the protests. The military crackdown resulted in 52 officially confirmed deaths, many disappearances, hundreds of injuries, and over 3,500 arrests.
> Black May (1992) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *2010 UDD Protests*- 'Cruel April' 2010- 24 deaths, 800+ injured, Phan Fa Bridge.
> 'Savage May' 2010- The casualty count as of May 22 stood at 85 dead and 1,378 injured.
> 2010 Thai political protests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


Yet, no one seems to be picking up on history cycles itself. Nothing has change. Nothing will change. Rather useless, even moot, to bring attention needlessly. Seemingly, the lifeless aren't getting it.

----------


## The Bold Rodney

> Mentioned many times already (but plainly needs repeating) is that the RTA does have 7.62mm weapons "in commission" - e.g. the SR-25 and SIG-Sauer SSG 3000 [ Royal Thai Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ]


Yes they do have those weapons but these "elected and democratic"  politicians work on the premise that if you keep saying the same bullshit over and over and over again some people will begin to believe the bullshit, take "pupa" as just one simple example.

Who was it that said...even if your caught in the act deny, deny, deny because there will always be some element of doubt?

----------


## robuzo

> Originally Posted by SteveCM
> 
> Mentioned many times already (but plainly needs repeating) is that the RTA does have 7.62mm weapons "in commission" - e.g. the SR-25 and SIG-Sauer SSG 3000 [ Royal Thai Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ]
> 
> 
> Yes they do have those weapons but these "elected and democratic"  politicians work on the premise that if you keep saying the same bullshit over and over and over again some people will begin to believe the bullshit. . .


At the risk of an infraction of Godwin's Law, that tactic is right out of, um, a famous playbook: 
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

----------


## hazz

> Originally Posted by Mr Lick
> 
> Whether he means a mass killing (the deaths to rounds fired would appear not to support such a view)
> 
> 
> By that bizarre definition neither World Wars One nor Two were mass killings.



humans have demonstrated a remarkable ability to do truly terrible things to each other, to the point that we now have a rich vocabulary of words to use to describe these events. And these are big words describing big events and carry serious emotional overtones.

Sometimes these words  are used  because they accurately describe events which which have been given the name in the past. But often these words are used to evoke an emotional response in the reader, irrespective of wether the situation  deserves the title or not. By doing this you are trivialising these truly awful historical events and insulting the victims of these events.

When I think of massacre I think of events like Andijan massacre, Srebrenica massacre, Tiananmen Square Massacre, Hama massacre, The warsaw massacres etc. Truly evil events, but I am also aware of other massacres such as the Peterloo Massacre, Boston Massacre and Hungerford massacre.
The latter events, whilst terrible, are trivial compared to the former; and to describe them as massacre is to trivialise the truly evil events which constitute the former list of events.

To describe may's events as a massacre, the wholesale brutal killing of thai civilians, is plain wrong when you consider the number of available victims and the number of soldiers involved. After all a single brit in rural village can kill 16 people and an Israeli in a mosque 29; you would expect an army of thousands with orders to carry out wholesale killings would manage many more than 84 people.

What is clear is that some of these soldiers did interpret their orders as 'kill anything that moves'. The temple killings is a good example, as is the attempted killing of SD, whilst smoking on his balcony. But given the number of people killed and what a sniper should be capable of it will be a relatively small number of soldiers. The victims of these soldiers were not victims of a massacre, they were victims of cold blooded murder. 

Irrespective of the vocabulary used, there are within the thai army a small number of individuals who have carried out the cold blooded murder of innocent unarmed thai civilians in may and april. And whilst its quite possible that these individuals ignored their orders when carrying out these murders. By their failure to condemn and publicly punish these individuals, the army is as an institution is giving tacit approval to the acts of these soldiers and its reasonable to accuse the army as an institution of being responsible for these murders. In the same that the udd leaderships failure to deal with the armed protesters within their ranks; transformed their peaceful protest into an armed insurrection providing the army an excuse for their later acts.

----------


## The Bold Rodney

> What is clear is that some of these soldiers did interpret their orders as 'kill anything that moves'.


Agree with the majority of your post and if these individuals were rooted out and prosecuted that should go some way to reconciling the views of the people who are so incensed and tired by the continuing lies and deceit demonstrated daily by this government.

----------


## hazz

But as someone said earlier, its taken the UK 30 years to do this over black sunday and with no prosecutions and as for the french they don't even bother to remember the killing of hundreds of unarmed protesters in paris in the 1960's and 70's.

If this is the behaviour of EU governments what hope would we have of the thai government and army of going even further; even if as you say it would help enormously in reconciling the country and perhaps taming the army

----------


## SteveCM

> you would expect an army of thousands with orders to carry out wholesale killings would manage many more than 84 people.


Hazz, you make some interesting and valid points sometimes - but, with all due respect, trotting out this line yet again does you no credit.

----------


## Butterfly

> the french they don't even bother to remember the killing of hundreds of unarmed protesters in paris in the 1960's and 70's.


in which parallel world did that happen ? link ?

----------


## hazz

^in my parrell world you can google 1961 Paris massacre. A demonstration was attacked by the French police with between 70 and 200 people; some being killed by drowning after being thrown in to the river and others ex judicially killed at the police headquarters. The whole event was largely missed by the French press, and I don't think anyone's been punished for it. 
See the parallels between Paris and Bangkok go much further than just the bad driving.

To be honest the only reason I know about this, is because I just happened to be in Paris when a memorial was erected to remember the dead.  In a city full of memorials to French citizens send to their deaths by their fellow citizens, this one stands out by being the only one on a bridge.

----------


## Rural Surin

> Originally Posted by DrB0b
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Originally Posted by Mr Lick
> ...


Generally speaking, a military infrastructure exist, trained and operates for what purpose?

----------


## Rural Surin

> Originally Posted by hazz
> 
> you would expect an army of thousands with orders to carry out wholesale killings would manage many more than 84 people.
> 
> 
> Hazz, you make some interesting and valid points sometimes - but, with all due respect, trotting out this line yet again does you no credit.


Rather long winded for what seemed to be a stance of an apologist, naturally with the historical intermingling of irrelevant comparatives.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*PM: Muramoto probe 'won't fade away'
*
*PM: Muramoto probe 'won't fade away'*

                            By The Nation
                                             Published on March 25, 2011                


*In a special interview with Japanese media  yesterday, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the investigation into  the killing of Japanese cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto "would not fade  away", but could not give a timeframe for completion of the Department  of Investigation (DSI) probe.*

                                                            Responding to a question on whether the investigation  would "fade away like those into murders and deaths of redshirt  protesters", Abhisit, speaking separately to the Thai media, quoted  himself as saying: "It would probably not, because it is in the focus  [of the media]. We need to help extract the facts and produce evidence  to make the case as complete as possible."

"I told them that  premature discussions about the case in public were fine, but that they  would only result in greater confusion over the case. We need to fully  give a chance to the people solving it," he said.

"The case is  being processed in the Thai justice system, and it will take quite a  lengthy additional period, because a lot of evidence is involved and it  requires complicated verification," he said.

Pheu Thai MP and red  leader Jatuporn Prompan earlier threatened to avenge what he described  as delay tactics and twisting of probe results by DSI directorgeneral  Tharit Pengdit and certain senior police officers "when power changed  hands".

Meanwhile, in Chiang Mai, Phra Jittaphinyo, formerly Pheu  Thai MP Wiphoj Aphornrat, mediated the surrender of a redshirt leader  for his role in blockading a police headquarters in Muang district  during a rally last January. 

Phoomjai Chaiya, a DJ at a prored  radio station, has been released on bail of Bt100,000 for various crimes  including organising unrest and intimidation of policemen on duty, all  charges he denies.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Bangkok Post : Army under fire over bullets
*
*Army under fire over bullets*

Published: 25/03/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 The army has ordered all units to return unused  bullets from last year's protests after it was revealed in parliament  that 100,000 were fired, including about 2,500 sniper rounds.

 
Parliament no-go zone
 Bangkok police have set up a sign detailing the ban on any activity  that obstructs a parliamentary session and warning that the area around  the parliament building is under the Internal Security Act. Officials  fear the People’s Alliance for Democracy will rally there today to  oppose approval of Joint Boundary Commission minutes despite having said  they would not. CHANAT KATANYU

 Pol Lt Col Somchai Phetprasoet, a Puea Thai MP for Nakhon Ratchasima  and chairman of the House committee on military affairs, told the House  that army units withdrew about 600,000 bullets from arsenals for the  crackdown, including 3,000 7.62-mm bullets for SG-3000 sniper rifles.

 They used more than 100,000 of them in their operations against red-shirt protesters.

 The remarks set off alarm in the army, sources say. The army chief  has asked all army units that took part in the crackdown to return the  unused ammunition to the arsenals.

 Ninety-two died after clashes between soldiers and red-shirt protesters in April and May last year.

 Pol Lt Col Somchai made the claims during the no-confidence debate against the government last week.

 Army chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha recently told all army units that  were involved in red-shirt crackdown from March 12 to May 19, 2010 that  the residual ammunition needed to be accounted for.

 An army source said Gen Prayuth and the army chief of staff, Gen  Dapong Rattanasuwan, were alarmed that so many bullets were fired.

 Pol Lt Col Somchai said that of the 3,000 sniper bullets taken out of armouries, only 480 were returned.

 About 50,000 bullets for M1 rifles, which are used in ambush operations, were withdrawn from arsenals for the operations.

 After the operations, 45,158 of them were returned.

 According to Pol Lt Col Somchai, altogether 597,500 bullets were taken out of army arsenals and 479,577 returned.

 That meant that altogether, 117,923 bullets were fired, he told the House.

 After hearing the claims in parliament, Prime Minister Abhisit  Vejjajiva asked the army to supply him with the details, the source  said.

 The army told the prime minister that the figures presented to the  House applied at the time when units had yet to return any bullets.

 The army chief has ordered all units to quickly return all ammunition  to arsenals, so the army could work out the exact number of bullets  fired during the crackdown on the red shirts.

 The source added that the army earlier ordered all units to delay  returning the ammunition because it did not want the figures to come to  light.

 The source said Pol Lt Col Somchai's information on the ammunition was accurate.

 However, some figures might have changed because some units have since returned the residual bullets to army arsenals.

 The number of bullets returned as given in the figures presented to the House may represent an incomplete picture.

----------


## robuzo

"including 3,000 7.62-mm bullets for SG-3000 sniper rifles"

B-b-but, "the DSI insisted that all 13 victims killed during the clash between soldiers and red shirts at Khok Wua intersection on April 10 last year were killed by 7.62mm bullets. Such bullets came from weapons not in commission with the Army."

Could it be that the "7.62-mm bullets for SG-3000 sniper rifles" and the 7.62mm bullets that killed "all 13 victims" are. . ._same same but different_?

Pardon the above, but it seems appropriate to use a worn-out cliche when, as all Thailand stories seem to do, this tale has taken the usual trajectory from the sublime (or something like it) to the ridiculous. _TIT_

----------


## SteveCM

^



> According to Pol Lt Col Somchai, altogether 597,500 bullets were taken out of army arsenals and 479,577 returned.


*but*




> The army told the prime minister that the figures presented to the House applied at the time when units had yet to return any bullets.






> The army chief has ordered all units to quickly return all ammunition to arsenals, so the army could work out the exact number of bullets fired during the crackdown on the red shirts.


Given the army's way with figures, it won't be surprising if they turn out to show units returning _more_ ammunition than they were actually issued. That wouldn't be a problem, of course. Clearly the protesters must have been _throwing_ bullets at the soldiers who, understandably, did the right thing and collected them for safe keeping.....

----------


## thehighlander959

Specialist ammunition will be used for all sniper rifles, normail 7.62 ball ammo can be used however it will reduce accuracy over longer distance shots. 

The normal NATO 7.62 ball Ammunition Is used for all normal rifles, how it is classified as normal is that on the striker cap at the base of the round it will be a specific colour showing in which country it was manufactured ie, Green striker Cap made in Sweden, Red Striker Cap made in India and so on. The best ammo is that made in Sweden by their Royal Ordnance Factory it of a very high quality. 

The same as all factories they will make specialist 7.62 ball ammunition for sniper rifles, this will be marked separately and will have a date of manufacture, the grain used in the round, and the weapon muzzle velocity for which the round is to be used. When the SG3000 is used in the sniper mode it would require specialist ammo over longer distances. I dont think this was the case as most shots would have been taken at under 300 metres so a scope would have been used for accuracy, however the specialist ammo would not have been necessary at that range.
The thai Army and Navy have many weapons that use 7.62 ammo although the 7.62 ammo for a Kalashnikov will not fire from an SG3000 or similar western weapon.

----------


## SteveCM

^



> About 50,000 bullets for M1 rifles, which are used in ambush operations, were withdrawn from arsenals for the operations.  After the operations, 45,158 of them were returned.


Assuming it's not a misprint, add the M1 to the list of higher (than M16, Tavor etc) calibre weapons deployed.

_
Cartridge__.30-06 Springfield (7.62x63mm)__7.62x51mm NATO (.308 Winchester) (Used by the U.S. Navy and some commercial companies to modernize the M1 and increase performance)__
Users

Thailand_ _: Received about 40,000 M1 rifles from the U.S. government prior to 1965.
_ 

M1 Garand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

----------


## superman

> "including 3,000 7.62-mm bullets for SG-3000 sniper rifles"


No such gun as an SG-3000, but there is one called an SSG-3000.

----------


## robuzo

> Originally Posted by robuzo
> 
> "including 3,000 7.62-mm bullets for SG-3000 sniper rifles"
> 
> 
> No such gun as an SG-3000, but there is one called an SSG-3000.


Must always bear in mind that the source is a Thai English-language birdcage liner (dog trainer?).

----------


## thehighlander959

SSG 2000 5.56mm Sniping Rifle
SSG 3000 7.62mm Sniping Rifle

Made by Sig-Sauer in Austria and Germany. In use by Police Forces and Military all over the world.

----------


## robuzo

^Right, so the BKK Post got one wrong. In other news, a dog bit a man.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Erratic investigation yields 
*
*Erratic investigation yields “utterly unsatisfactory” findings*

 Published on Friday 25 March 2011.                              

Reporters Without Borders regards the findings  from the official investigation into Japanese cameraman Hiro Muramoto’s  death during clashes between government forces and anti-government “Red  Shirts” in Bangkok on 10 April 2010 as “utterly unsatisfactory.”

  The provisional conclusion one year after the event that  the security forces did not fire the shot that killed Muramoto, who  worked for Reuters, betrays a reluctance to shed light on the  circumstances of his death and identify those responsible, Reporters  Without Borders said.

  There have been several U-turns in the investigation.  After initially suggesting that a soldier may have fired the shot, the  Department of Special Investigation (DSI) said at the end of February  that it had ruled out that possibility.

  DSI director-general Tharit Pengdith’s announcement  yesterday that “we have to conclude for now that the government forces  did not kill Mr. Muramoto until there is new evidence to say otherwise”  is far from conclusive, just as his promise to accept any new evidence  and continue searching for Muramoto’s killer is far from reassuring.

  In Reporters Without Borders’ view, the authorities have  gradually and subtly suppressed the investigation although the foreign  ministry had originally insisted that the commission created to  investigate the violence would be independent.

  “Regardless of the investigation’s findings, the  government will assume its responsibility,” foreign ministry spokesman  Thani Thongphakdi told Reporters Without Borders in June 2010 (see the  “Thailand: Licence to kill” report: http://en.rsf.org/thailand-report-o...).

  The violence between the army and government opponents  began in March 2010, when thousands of “Red Shirt” supporters of Thaksin  Shinawatra – the prime minister ousted in a coup in September 2006 –  invaded Bangkok and demanded Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s  resignation and new elections.

  Reporters Without Borders concluded in its report that  the behaviour of both the army and the Red Shirt militias constituted a  flagrant violation of the UNESCO Medellin Declaration on the obligation  to protect journalists in war zones.

  Another journalist, Italian freelance photographer Fabio  Polenghi, was killed during clashes on 19 May 2010. The circumstance of  his death have never been clarified either. In all, around 90 people  were killed in the course of the clashes of April and May 2010.

----------


## Mid

> It has been finalised that Japanese cameraman Hiroyuki Muramoto was not killed by security officials





> In one leaked email, an executive at the budget airline  wrote to a colleague: One thing we must be concerned is the Insurer can  ask for copies of the Aircraft Log Book. Is there someone we can trust  that could help re-make the logbook?


 :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## sabang

> Reporters Without Borders regards the findings from the official investigation into Japanese cameraman Hiro Muramoto’s death during clashes between government forces and anti-government “Red Shirts” in Bangkok on 10 April 2010 as “utterly unsatisfactory.”


You don't say.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

As with all historical _Events_ in Thailand, there will be the 'official' narrative and the real narrative. Only one person (or was it none) was officially massacred at Thammasat, remember. There is nothing new happening here.

As westerners, we tend to look at things quite literally. Thus, because the '_State_' &/or it's organs says so, this must ipso facto have a certain weight of evidence, a certain credibility. We consciously look for it. We ignore the process and importance of the Narrative, and the fact that in Asian political culture the short term aspect of believability or credibility matters little- what is being worked out in a dynamic process is the official Narrative, which will go on state record. 

Just look back at official state 'narrative' on Thammasat, original democracy revolution circa 1932, democracy protests '92, or even further back to intercourse with Burma, France, Japan, Laos, UK & Khmer (_etc_), to see the point. The current process is no different, merely current.

The 'Thaksin' effect (popular vote leading to popular outcomes), widespread availability of distributive information technology (which they are actively trying to suppress), plus the requirement for incrementally improving education standards to service Thailands industrialisation and modernisation, have manifestly put paid to the official 'Narrative' with regards to Thailands recent political history, by which I mean that Thai people see right through it and obviously do not believe it. Who believes the official Narrative on Thamasat, and the '92 democracy protests? Who will believe the current "Narrative"? 

I hope that the decreasing power of these feudal narratives is not lost on those that style themselves the intelligentsia.

----------


## Tom Sawyer

^
Thailand was never colonized because it was cleverly guided..blah, blah..
 :Smile:

----------


## DrB0b

> Just look back at official state 'narrative' on Thammasat, original democracy revolution circa 1932,


The "Official" narrative on democracy here is that there was no 'revolution" as such. Democracy was granted to the Siamese people by a wise and benevolent ruler, the fact that it was at gunpoint is generally omitted for some reason. Democracy was then betrayed by corrupt politicians conveniently "proving" the point (harped on to this day) that there is really only one form of government suited to the Thai people.

----------


## StrontiumDog

> What on God's green earth was that all about? Blind support? I'm not blindly supporting anyone. THEY WON THE FUCKING ELECTION YOU IDIOT - HANDS FUCKING DOWN! NO CONTEST.


And nowhere am I disputing this or taking issue with it. In fact I've made several posts about this, saying I hope the will of the people is respected....or did you forget that?




> They're not even the government yet! What the fuck is wrong with you and your bile-spewing Thaksin hating cohorts? They need to play politics - internal and external - of course they do - that's why it's called p-o-l-i-t-i-c-s. They need to remember who owns them - and it ain't just Thaksin - it's the Reds. My view is the people of Thailand told the amart, the Sakdina, the military and the old-family-money types that they hate them for killing the red shirts - and this was their only way to do so. They'd take Thaksin any day over this old corrupt pro-guanxi closed system. And if Sombat the farmer and Noi the waitress can't shut it down - then at least they want a cut.


I've also made several posts saying that they aren't the government yet. I've also made several posts saying that they should be allowed to get on with governing. 

Or did you forget that?




> I still recall when Abhisit came to power through the corrupt courts and army fiddling - though not winning anything - not a constituency - and only a 'vote' in the "RUMP" Parliament after most of the opponents were forced out by a kangaroo hopping through the courthouse and then the legislature. You and Butters and a few of the other nutters on here were all ready to give him a rim job. Where was your seething contempt for what happened then?


Abhisit Vejjajiva - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Abhisit was formally endorsed by King Bhumibol Adulyadej as Prime Minister on *17 December 2008*. Abhisit ascended to power amid a global economic crisis.

StrontiumDog 
 

*Join Date: Jul 2009*

Or did you forget that....?

It appears you just make shit up as you go along....I wasn't even a member here until 7 months later. 

You've ignored your initial error, your total denial. You are a Thaksin fan through and through. Blind to the reality. You will be coming out with the same shit over and over, no matter what. 

What you fail to understand is that the names change, but that is it. Yingluck won. Thaksin is the real power. Everything else will remain the same. Your hopes of change are futile and misplaced, history informs us of this..and we all know what happens to those who fail to learn from it....

----------


## Tom Sawyer

What was my initial error? What am I blind too? Of course Thaksin is the big Pooyai behind the party. No one denies that, least of all me. But Thaksin's support and that of Yingluck and PT rests ENTIRELY on the working class and marginalised poor of Thailand (the majority). It is YOU who is a through-and-through Abhisit supporter and Red hater - whilst pretending to be neutral. I don't love Thaksin at all - I don't like him actually because of his obvious manipulations. So what? Wasn't my vote. Was it yours? The fact STANDS. The people of Thailand have chosen PT as their leaders. Sakdina and Amart - if they choose to live by the sword they will surely die by it. That seems clear. Cry on..

----------


## StrontiumDog

> What was my initial error? What am I blind too? Of course Thaksin is the big Pooyai behind the party. No one denies that, least of all me. But Thaksin's support and that of Yingluck and PT rests ENTIRELY on the working class and marginalised poor of Thailand (the majority). It is YOU who is a through-and-through Abhisit supporter and Red hater - whilst pretending to be neutral. I don't love Thaksin at all - I don't like him actually because of his obvious manipulations. So what? Wasn't my vote. Was it yours? The fact STANDS. The people of Thailand have chosen PT as their leaders. Sakdina and Amart - if they choose to live by the sword they will surely die by it. That seems clear. Cry on..


Why should I cry on? I've continually criticised Abhisit and his government over many issues. It isn't my fault that you don't recall the past accurately (as proven by your previous post).

I'm very happy that democracy has been restored (by the very people you said wouldn't let it happen..) and that the people have spoken. I hope this is respected and that a period of stability will follow. 

Your never-ending defense of Thaksin and Pheu Thai proves where your loyalty lies. It is blatantly obvious. You continually fail to criticise Pheu Thai and Thaksin. But the merest hint of anyone criticising PT/Thaksin and you are all over it. It is like a conditioned response. 

Now, please try to remember what I've written. Thanks.

----------


## LooseBowels

Hopefully, Amsterdam is putting together the evidence and the cases off criminal abisit suthep and the like to the ICC   :Smile:

----------


## Tom Sawyer

Good grief.

----------


## lom

> I'm very happy that democracy has been restored


Democracy is not restored, a free election is only the cornerstone in building  a democracy.
A young democracy needs, like a baby, lots of attendance and care-taking in order for it to grow mature but that is too much to ask from a people that can't even take care of their own kids or dogs.
There is a huge lack of responsibility in them and too much of  "not my family - not my problem" thinking.
They've now got one corner-stone of democracy but no house plan,no architect, and they are satisfied with that. 
They'll soon declare Thailand as the hub of democracy..

----------


## StrontiumDog

> Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
> 
> I'm very happy that democracy has been restored
> 
> 
> Democracy is not restored, a free election is only the cornerstone in building  a democracy.
> A young democracy needs, like a baby, lots of attendance and care-taking in order for it to grow mature but that is too much to ask from a people that can't even take care of their own kids or dogs.
> There is a huge lack of responsibility in them and too much of  "not my family - not my problem" thinking.
> They've now got one corner-stone of democracy but no house plan,no architect, and they are satisfied with that. 
> They'll soon declare Thailand as the hub of democracy..


Fair enough.

----------


## StrontiumDog

> Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
> 
> Do as i say, but  not as I do, right Tom? Got to be your mantra. Zero integrity. No wonder  you worship Thaksin so much....
> 
> 
> In fairness to "TS" this bullshit about him, everyone, not forgetting  Stevey, me, etc. etc. etc.supporting, following, worshiping Thaksin is  an old chestnut that's well past it's sell by date!


The evidence for such a claim is simple. There is a group here that never, I repeat, never criticises Pheu Thai or Thaksin. 

Why is that?

It isn't exactly rocket science. Silence is in effect condoning what Thaksin is doing. Lets face it, there's a lot of evidence of the Thaksin peanut gallery being extremely vocal when it comes to the Dem's/Abhisit, so why is it that the same people are to seemingly reluctant to criticise Thaksin?

The second piece of glaring evidence is that when Thaksin is criticised by myself or other non-aligned posters here, the Thaksin peanut gallery all attack that poster. It is like a circle jerk...one after the other. It has happened to thegent and Buksida recently, but also TH. I get it every week, so does Butterfly. It has been going on for a year now. 

Now, lets see if you can work this out. I'll make it real easy for you.

1. No criticism of Thaksin.

2. Attacking posters who criticise Thaksin. 

What does that mean? 

You'll have to excuse me, as I am unable to give a definite answer, as...




> You are an idiot..... I consider you pompous, foolish, bigoted, and ignorant.


So you're on your own on this one.

----------


## Tom Sawyer

> I don't love Thaksin at all - I don't like him actually because of his obvious manipulations.


You were saying?

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Bangkok Post : Men in black were fakes, ranger leaders say
*
*Men in black were fakes, ranger leaders say*
Published: 15/07/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 NAKHON RATCHASIMA : Leaders of former military  rangers have denied members of the ranger force supported activities of  the red shirt movement  _ and said the armed black-clad men seen at last  year's riot scene were "fake rangers".

 
_Hundreds of former military rangers from around the country, plus  some stationed near Preah Vihear temple, gather at Pak Thong Chai  military camp in Nakhon Ratchasima to mark the 33rd anniversary of the  establishment of the ranger force. WASSANA NANUAM_

 Hundreds of former military rangers nationwide, including those  stationed near Preah Vihear temple, yesterday gathered at Pak Thong Chai  military ranger camp in Nakhon Ratchasima province to mark the 33rd  anniversary of the establishment of the ranger force.

 The leaders used the occasion to deny media reports and public  assumptions that a number of unidentified militants seen holding  firearms during clashes between red shirt protesters and security forces  in April and May last year wearing black outfits were former military  rangers from the Pak Thong Chai camp.

 Phairot Chaengsawat, chairman of Ubon Ratchathani Military Ranger  Club, said those militants had tried to mislead the public into  believing they were former military rangers by wearing black camouflage  outfits and black-red scarves.

 "They were fake rangers," Mr Phairot said. "They looked so young. The  real former rangers must be older than 40. It [this speculation] will  damage the reputation of the real black warriors."

 Sgt Maj (3rd class) Chao Koetmongkhon, the chairman of Bangkok  Military Ranger Club, said he had gone to rally sites of red shirt  protesters to observe the activities of black-clad militants.

 "They were not members of our ranger force," SM3 Chao said. "They  have undergone training that is different from our training in the Pak  Thong Chai camp. Those militants seemed to have been trained for a few  days in the jungle."

 They did not uphold the same ideology as military rangers as military rangers would not hurt civilians, he said.

 The military ranger force was set up by Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh on  July 18, 1978. They were civilian volunteers who had undergone combat  training.

 The Pak Thong Chai camp was closed in 2000. The army has set up ranger regiments within the army to replace them.

 About 500 former military rangers from the defunct Pak Thong Chai  camp have grouped together to set up three former military ranger clubs,  however. They are the Bangkok Military Ranger Club, Ubon Ratchathani  Military Ranger Club and Nakhon Ratchasima Military Ranger Club.

----------


## LooseBowels

Oh Dear

When will the PAD yellow terrorist bullshit end

When they're all in jail I hope   :Smile:

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Bangkok Post : Khao Sod columnist Lek Nai (the sting)
*
*Khao Sod columnist Lek Nai (the sting)*
Published: 20/07/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 As part of its campaign for national  reconciliation, Pheu Thai Party will have to seek justice for members of  the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship who are in jail on  various criminal charges.

 These imprisoned UDD members, better known as the red shirts, joined  the protests against the Abhisit government in Bangkok and other cities  during April and May last year. The Criminal Court has refused to  release them on bail, despite repeated requests by their lawyers.

 Because of these court rulings, more and more people feel that there  is a double standard in the application of the law. Why, they ask, did  the courts grant bail to all members of the People's Alliance for  Democracy who were arrested on similar charges?

 Better known as the yellow shirts, these PAD members seized  Government House and Suvarnabhumi Airport to force two pro-Thaksin prime  ministers to step down in 2008.

 The red shirts have the right to demand justice, and Prime  Minister-elect Yingluck Shinawatra has responded by letting the Kanit  commission continue its investigation into last year's bloodshed.

 The Department of Special Investigation under Tharit Pengdit must  also speed up its investigation into the tragedy. More than a year has  passed but the DSI has yet to come up with a full report. Pressure is  now on Mr Tharit to find those responsible for the deaths of unarmed  protesters.

----------


## Calgary

^
This will all be cleaned up when DSI Tharit leaves the scene and there is some realigning of the judicial landscape. 

Best to leave all this business about political prisoners and Ratchaprasong investigations alone, until those who are responsible leave the scene.

I expect this to happen soon.

And let us not forget about all those other political prisoners incarcerated for speaking unfavorably..............................

I expect these things to be quietly looked after with minimal fanfare when the time is right....very soon now.

----------


## Tom Sawyer

^
Nope. This will never be cleared up until the people take full control of their country. PT is just the beginning - the Reds cannot place all their eggs in the PT basket for reasons that have been explained _ad nauseum_ here. The people will need to take on the military next - then the Amart will flee. Perhaps no one will ever face justice.

----------


## LooseBowels

> Pressure is now on Mr Tharit to find those responsible for the deaths of unarmed protesters


He already knows who it is, but daren't spill the beans yet for a while   :Smile:

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Internal row behind leaked NHRC report, says chief
*
*Internal row behind leaked NHRC report, says chief*

                            By The Nation
                                             Published on July 23, 2011                


*In the wake of a report on the 91 deaths during last  year's riots being leaked to the press, National Human Rights  Commission (NHRC) chairwoman Amara Pongsapich said yesterday that an  conflict within the organisation might be behind it.*

                                                            "Such conflicts can take place anywhere and we have  been trying to ensure that this feud does not have an impact on our  work," Amara told a news conference yesterday. 

The NHRC has set  up a factfinding panel to determine how the document was leaked. The  report, published by some news media, appeared to portray the red shirts  in an unfavourable light. 

However, Amara said the report was  based only on a preliminary factfinding process and had not been  reviewed by an NHRC subcommittee tasked with the job of looking into the  AprilMay 2010 crackdown. 

"I am sorry for the confusion and the  resulting doubt in the NHRC," she said. "But I would like to assure you  that the commission has carefully selected each specialist to work with  us." 

She said it took the NHRC a long time to prepare the report  because of contradictory information provided by witnesses and the large  amount of evidence involved. 

"If the public thinks the NHRC  should be held responsible for the delay, then we are ready to take  responsibility. We are also ready either to resign or face impeachment,"  Amara said.

----------


## StrontiumDog

^ Haven't seen any English language copies of this report. I guess we will eventually. Or maybe not. If it does indeed portray the red shirts in an unfavourable light it would certainly be interesting to read. Also, you'd expect the "elite-biased" media to have picked it up and published it. Lets see what happens.

----------


## SteveCM

^^
See https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...ml#post1809049 (Exclusive: Probe reveals Thai troops' role in civilian deaths)

Interesting to read a further report - _whatever_ its content and conclusions.

----------


## StrontiumDog

The Bangkok Post report on this today doesn't shed much light on the content...still looking for a copy of the leaked report (which at 80 pages, sounds as though it was in fact complete). I'm curious about the cancellation after a date had been set for its release...and how they are going to change the conclusions when seemingly they had already produced some. All a bit odd. 

Bangkok Post : NHRC 'sorry' for handling of report

RED-SHIRT PROTESTS 

*NHRC 'sorry' for handling of report*

Published: 23/07/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 The National Human Rights Commission yesterday  apologised for its handling of the report into the government crackdown  on red-shirt protesters last year which resulted in 92 deaths.

 The NHRC earlier this month had said it would release the report on  the April-May 2010 incidents on July 8.However, publication was  cancelled amid speculation of infighting among the commissioners.  Shortly after the cancellation, an 80-page leaked report revealed that  the NHRC had apportioned "equal blame" to the protesters and government.

 
_Amara: No deadline set for report._

 The conclusion drew criticism from human rights advocates, led by the  NHRC Watch group, which demanded the seven-member commission explain  how it came to such a conclusion.

 NHRC chair Amara Pongsapich and commissioner Niran Pitakwatchara yesterday said they regretted the commission's performance.

 "We will improve. From now on the seven commissioners will meet every  week with outside scholars and will try to update the public on a  monthly basis," they said.

 The five other commissioners did not show up at the press conference yesterday.

 Ms Amara said she would not set a deadline for completion of the fact-finding report as the case was difficult and complicated.

 "Therefore, I will try not to provide any specific timeframe," said  Ms Amara, former dean of Chulalongkorn University's faculty of political  science.

 She also said the leaked report was an incomplete draft prepared by a  task force. Under the NHRC's working procedures, the task force draft  will be submitted to two sub-committees that will scrutinise  fact-finding and legal issues. The sub-committees will then make  recommendations to the seven-member NHRC, which will finalise the report  and submit it to the government and parliament, she said.

 Commissioner Niran said the NHRC report on the red-shirt incident would be "different from other reports".

 
_Niran: Promising improvements._

 The NHRC will not file lawsuits against any perpetrators, but will leave that task to prosecutors.

 Pokpong Lawansiri and Kwanravee Wangudom, members of NHRC Watch, said  the commission had to take responsibility for its delayed judgement on  the alleged human rights violations that took place.

 The NHRC should be more accountable to taxpayers, be more transparent to the public and communicate better with the media.

 Thewarit Maneechai, another member of NHRC Watch, noted that previous  NHRC members had been able to finish their report into the Oct 7, 2008,  crackdown on the yellow-shirt People's Alliance for Democracy a mere 10  days after the incident.

 "So, why can't the present NHRC say when it can conclude its report on the April-May 2010 incident?" Mr Thewarit said.

----------


## Mr Lick

So a seven member NHRC has come up with an 80 page report on incidents over a 2 month period in the capital and have drawn and included their 'conclusions' in that report?

80 pages appears awfully limited given the extent of incidents leading up to the death of 90 people. 
If the conclusion itself was 80 pages then that may appear more logical. An 800 page report may be nearer the mark.

We have experienced so called 'firearms wound experts' in Thailand talking absolute bollocks over the very same deaths of civilians in Bangkok and i suspect that these NHRC members are very closely related.

----------


## StrontiumDog

Bangkok Post : Seh Daeng's daughter promises to follow up on killings

ON THE RECORD

*Seh Daeng's daughter promises to follow up on killings*
Published: 24/07/2011 at 12:00 AMNewspaper section: News
 Khattiya Sawatdiphol, the daughter of the  assassinated Maj Gen Khattiya Sawatdiphol, the army specialist and core  red shirt supporter known as Seh Daeng, is now a Pheu Thai Party list  MP. Speaking to Wassana Nanuam, the 30-year-old political novice  outlines the priorities for her work in parliament.

*Q: What did the party assign you to do?*

*A:* The senior members want me to learn on the job because I'm a first-timer MP.

*Q: Is there any particular parliamentary task you want to do?*

*A:* I want to join the standing committee on military affairs to keep track of the armed forces. But it's not to exact revenge.

*Q: What's the first thing you plan to do after the government takes office?*

*A:* To follow up on my father's case and other cases  involving the people killed during last year's political unrest. The  matter should be easier to pursue now that Pheu Thai is heading the new  government. The cases have been slow to proceed and it's been very  quiet. I won't let the issue slide. I don't know how much I can do but  as an MP there must be something I can do.

*Q: What else do you intend to do as a female MP?*

*A:* I don't want to sound like a soap opera queen. We  campaigned during the election and we must honour our words with  actions, especially on issues concerning women. We [likely will] have  our first female prime minister and that should motivate women to work  harder to increase their roles in many aspects. I've talked to fellow  women MPs in the party and we agreed to get together and help promote  women's status and improve opportunities for women.

 
Khattiya Sawatdiphol

*Q: What do you see in [presumptive prime minister] Yingluck Shinawatra in terms of her work?*

*A:* I don't mean to flatter her but I felt motivated  every time I saw her smile to people at election rallies. Her smile is  refreshing and sincere, unlike [outgoing Prime Minister] Abhisit  Vejjajiva's smile, which is insincere. Ms Yingluck is endearing to  watch. We don't know each other personally but she's every approachable.  She asks how I'm doing. I guess we're in the same boat. My father died  and she feels like she has lost her brother. He's living overseas but  hasn't been able to return home.

*Q: Are you afraid of setting foot in politics?*

*A:* Quite. Rather anxious. I don't have anyone who honestly cares for me. I only have my mother now that my father's gone.

 There's no one to give me advice. I'm afraid of making mistakes.

*Q: Is there anything Thaksin [Shinawatra] wants you to do?*

*A:* He has asked about me through other people. He  also asked senior party figures to help take care of me. I need to be  strong. I need lots of advice and guiding hands. I'm like a toddler  learning to walk and tottering in need of a supporter. I don't have any  [political] experience.

*Q: Do you have other worries?*

*A:* I carry with me many people's expectations. I feel the pressure that as my father's daughter I can do anything as an MP.

 I have to be clear with where I stand. Some people still think I'm a  yellow shirt because I used to take part in the People's Alliance for  Democracy rallies. But after my father died, I took over leadership of  the Khatiyatham Party. It's clear that I'm a red shirt now and I won't  forget what I promised to do.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*NHRC gets sidetracked in riot probe

BURNING ISSUE* 

*NHRC gets sidetracked in riot probe*

                            By Avudh Panananda
The Nation
                                             Published on July 26, 2011                

*The National Human Rights Commission has stepped  into the limelight for the wrong reason - its report on last year's  riots is drawing flak for defending the anti-riot operations instead of  focusing on rights violations.*

                                                            Although the NHRC claims its report was leaked because  of office politics, the leakage should serve as a lesson that partial  truth would drive a deeper wedge into a society already plagued by  divisiveness.

 With testimony from 28 state officials, 54 red shirts and 26  witnesses, the NHRC-appointed panel might have overreached itself trying  to draw a conclusion on what happened at the red-shirt rallies between  March 12 and May 19, 2010.

 A full inquiry is being conducted by the Truth for Reconciliation  Commission led by jurist Kanit na Nakorn. A major part of the leaked  NHRC report seemed to duplicate Kanit's work.

 In the face of the limited evidence and testimony at its disposal,  the NHRC-sponsored panel report might have erred by trying to apportion  blame between the red shirts and the security forces.

 Of the nine major incidents in connection with the rallies, the  report held the red shirts accountable for the eruption of violence but  failed to shed light on human-rights offences and how to resolve the  issue or prevent a repeat.

 During the April 10, 2010, bloodshed on Rajdamnoen Avenue, the report  noted the involvement of "men in black" to assist the red shirts in  repelling the crowd-control operations.

 It drew the conclusion that the protests were not peaceful - but fell  short of addressing such crucial questions as who the "men in black"  were and how they were linked to the red shirts.

 In regard to the mysterious deaths at Wat Pathum on May 19, it cited a  lack of evidence and witnesses to re-enact how the six victims were  shot dead. And forensic evidence indicated that not all six were killed  inside the temple.

 It is understandable why the red shirts were furious at the report,  which put them in a bad light while absolving the government for  cracking down on protesters.

 Any attempt to apportion the blame related to politically motivated  violence would be counterproductive. The NHRC should be devoting its  attention to remedies and restoration for victims of rights abuses. The  task of uncovering the truth on the bloodshed should be left to the  Kanit commission.

 If national reconciliation is to materialise, then it is imperative  that the probes into the bloodshed piece together differing slices of  truth to form a whole picture.

 Various investigations conducted by the Kanit commission, police, the  Department of Special Investigation and other law-enforcement agencies  should leave no stone unturned, otherwise the country will find no  closure to the bloodletting.

 The investigations have made significant progress on re-enacting  activities involving the red shirts and the retaliatory measures of the  security forces. But that is not enough.

 One of the unanswered questions is the involvement of the men in  black. If the red shirts strongly deny any links, then who are the men  in black? And why did these armed men show up to defend the reds on  several occasions?

 The next question is why the red leaders turned a blind eye to armed guards, who happened to dress in black, at Lumpini.

 The red leaders owe an explanation as to why their armed guards could  raid Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital without their consent. 

 After the hospital raid, the armed guards refused to relocate from  Lumpini to Sarasin. Why did the red leaders fail to rein in the guards?

----------


## DroversDog

> Khattiya Sawatdiphol, the daughter of the  assassinated Maj Gen Khattiya Sawatdiphol, the army specialist and core  red shirt supporter known as Seh Daeng, is now a Pheu Thai Party list  MP. Speaking to Wassana Nanuam, the 30-year-old political novice  outlines the priorities for her work in parliament.
> 
>  
> Khattiya Sawatdiphol


It is absolutely awesome that she got into parliament.

----------


## DroversDog

> One of the unanswered questions is the involvement of the men in  black. If the red shirts strongly deny any links, then who are the men  in black? And why did these armed men show up to defend the reds on  several occasions?


Good question, though you probably should not dig too deep.

----------


## LooseBowels

^^ Next PM after 12 years of Yingluk.  :Smile: 

Now then Now then,
To find out why the NHRC came to such a preposterous conclusion in its report to the 91 innocent protestors murdered..............follow the money  :Smile:

----------


## tomta

> Thailand's judicial system would lose credibility


What credibility?





> and violence against "vulnerable" persons


Bullets make you quite vulnerable

----------


## LooseBowels

quite simple.

Vote on it in parliament :Smile:

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Bangkok Post : Abhisit, Suthep invited for questioning
*
*Abhisit, Suthep invited for questioning*
Published:  1/12/2011 at 03:26 PMOnline news:
 Police investigators of the Metropolitan Police  Bureau have sent a letter to invite former prime minister Abhisit  Vejjajiva and former deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban to see them  tomorrow over the government's crackdown on red-shirt protesters last  year, Pol Maj-Gen Anuchai Lekbamrung said.

 Pol Maj-Gen Anuchai, a deputy metropolitan police chief, said Mr  Abhisit was to meet the investigators at 10am and Mr Suthep at 2pm.

 However, the two had not yet replied, he said.

 The officer said the two were required to give more information on  the crackdown since the Metropolitan Police Bureau had been assigned to  re-investigate the deaths of 16 people.

 The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) believed the authorities might be responsible for the deaths.

 Pol Maj-Gen Anuchai said more information from Mr Abhisit, the then  prime minister, and Mr Suthep, then director of the Centre for the  Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), was needed because the  South Bangkok Criminal Court said information on the death of Japanese  photographer Hiroyuki Muramoto was still incomplete.

 Mr Abhisit, when asked by reporters over this matter, said he had not seen the letter from the police.

 He said Mr Suthep had not received it either.

----------


## Mid

> Abhisit, Suthep invited for questioning


people are _invited_ for tea 'n scones .................

----------


## Tom Sawyer

The slow dance simply continues. There's no one in this country who would actually think that Abhisit or greesy head Suthep would ever be prosecuted, much less go t prison. Where is Moo Ham these days? He's living proof that even a prison sentence means fuck all - you just ignore it.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Sunai to discuss red-shirt crackdown with judge - The Nation
*
*Sunai to discuss red-shirt crackdown with judge*

         THE NATION December 2, 2011  1:00 am 

*Says it's too early to say whether the case would be taken to the ICC*

Pheu Thai Party MP Sunai Jullapongsathorn said yesterday he would  consult the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the possibility of  Thailand bringing before it the government's deadly crackdown on  red-shirt protesters last year, despite the fact that the Kingdom has  yet to ratify the Rome statute.

Thailand signed the statute - the treaty that founded the court - in  October 2000 during Chuan Leekpai's administration, but has not yet  ratified it, Sunai said.

Sunai, who heads the House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs  Committee, yesterday consulted with Foreign Minister Surapong  Towichukchaikul and senior officials at the Foreign Ministry to explore  the possibility of bringing the case before the ICC.

Sunai said he would make a courtesy call on the ICC's chief judge in the Netherlands next week to discuss the case.

Senior officials and legal experts at the ministry would accompany him at his personal expense, he |said.

A military crackdown on red shirts protesting against Abhisit  Vejjajiva's government in April and May last year killed 91 people,  including some military officers and journalists.

Pheu Thai MP Khattiya Sawasdipol, a daughter of the late Maj-General  Khattiya Sawasdipol, who was shot dead during the protest, and  overseas-based |supporters of the red shirts are |also interested in the  case, Sunai said.

Asked whether the case could be taken to the international court in The  Hague, Sunai said, "It's too early to answer the question, since I  don't know the law, but I have to do something since the case has made  no progress in the Thai justice system.

"Members of the opposition Democrat Party should not have anything to fear if they did nothing wrong," Sunai told reporters.

Opposition Democrat leader Abhisit said yesterday he has not yet  received an official summons from the Metropolitan Police Bureau to give  his account of the bloody incident.

Former deputy prime minister Suthep Thuagsuban, who was then in charge  of security matters, has not received any official letter from the  police regarding the case, either, Abhisit said.

"I'm ready to cooperate, but it's very strange that some government  politicians and media knew about the [possibility of a] police letter  before I did," he said.

Abhisit said the government is trying to link the 91 fatalities with  its move to seek amnesty for all parties involved in the political  struggle of recent years. Abhisit has said he is opposed to an amnesty  designed to benefit individuals.

"I personally disagree with the amnesty since it would not benefit the  public or rule of law, but is intended to benefit somebody in  particular," he said.

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Promphong Nopparit challenged Abhisit to face  justice and take responsibility for the bloody incident.

"As many as 91 people died during Abhisit's government, and the then-prime minister won't take any responsibility?" he said.

----------


## LooseBowels

Khun Robert Amsterdams documented eyewithess and verbal statement evidence is now crucial in the prosecution of abisit and the dems amart junta. :Smile:

----------


## longway

> Originally Posted by longway
> 
> 5 years of prancing around calling themselves a democracy movement saying they are 'dtaa sawang' and getting themselves killed while their patron goes shopping in theChamps-Elysees. The result? They manage to elect a government who backs out of every promise except for the the one with the massive pay off and get Chalerm as deputy PM, in charge of the police no less.  Please don't tell me this them doing their best. Either they are stupid beyond belief and incompetent, or the ones that matter have been bought off. Probably some combination of both.  The only good thing is that Thaksin seems to be kept under control, give it a few more years and even the most die-hard red will wake up to how they have been scammed.
> 
> 
> The option has proven itself far worse over the last 80 years or so...


Not really, the country was progressing along democratic lines without Thaksin or the red shirts. The last coup before Thaksin's ouster was in 1991, all the coups since then and possibly will take place in the near future centre on him alone, and he is as anti democratic as they come, an authoritarian bully who does not hesitate to use violence against his enemies, and use puntitive legal actions to quash opposition all the while considering himself above accountability, in short he is Ammart.

The reds have tackled none of the issues that would help make this country more democratic and if anything have made the country worse. Its no coincidence as the movement appears to be dominated by Thaksin's money and his lackeys.

I am still waiting for the red shirt rank and file to realise they are treated as nothing more than peasant cannon fodder in an elite power struggle between two authoritarian forces.



> *Says it's too early to say whether the case would be taken to the ICC*


He has already spoken with the judge and made sure there is not the slightest chance that the ICC will take on the case. You cant argue with that.

----------


## StrontiumDog

MCOT_Eng   MCOT English News                                                   

_Ex-PM Abhisit postpones  testimony to police on crackdown against alleged Red Shirts last year;  says more time needed to prepare documents_

----------


## StrontiumDog

More on the above...

Former PM Abhisit postpones testimony to police on crackdown against Red Shirts

*Former PM Abhisit postpones testimony to police on crackdown against Red Shirts*

  วันศุกร์ ที่ 02 ธ.ค. 2554

 

BANGKOK, Dec 2 - Opposition Democrat party leader and former  prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Friday postponed his testimony to  police on his government’s crackdown against Red Shirt protesters during  April-May last year, saying he needed more time to prepare documents.

 Speaking to reporters before leaving for Sukhothai province, 400 km  north of the capital, Mr Abhisit said he had only just received a letter  from the Metropolitan Police Bureau asking him to testify, but said he  had not read it yet, and that he was not aware whether he had to testify  with former deputy premier Suthep Thaugsuban.

 Chavanond Intarakomalyasut, Democrat party spokesman, said the party was  assigned to issue a letter to the police bureau, stating that Mr  Abhisit would appear in mid-December.

 According to the spokesman, the party leader was given the letter on  short notice last night and that  he had no time to prepare his  arguments. Furthermore, Mr Abhisit had a scheduled engagement in  Sukhothai early today to participate in rehabilitation activities for  flood-affected temples and schools.

 In April and May last year, over 90 people, mostly civilians, were  killed in street clashes between the red-clad demonstrators and  soldiers.

 Troops dispersed thousands of Red Shirt protesters who had been camped  at Khok Wua intersection on Ratchadamnoen Avenue and in the capital's  premier shopping and hotel district of Ratchaprasong for weeks. The  anti-government protest leaders surrendered, enraging followers who used  grenades and set fire to landmark buildings including Thailand’s  largest luxury shopping mall and the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET).  (MCOT Online News)

----------


## StrontiumDog

^ Hmmm

Abhisit gets a 'fail' for this.

There are such things as priorities, and the investigation into the deaths last year should come at the top of the list. Using the flood to dodge the issue just doesn't cut it....

Very very lame.

----------


## SteveCM

> Opposition Democrat party leader and former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Friday postponed his testimony to police on his governments crackdown against Red Shirt protesters during April-May last year, saying he needed more time to prepare documents.  Speaking to reporters before leaving for Sukhothai province, 400 km north of the capital, Mr Abhisit said he had only just received a letter from the Metropolitan Police Bureau asking him to testify, but said he had not read it yet, and that he was not aware whether he had to testify with former deputy premier Suthep Thaugsuban.  Chavanond Intarakomalyasut, Democrat party spokesman, said the party was assigned to issue a letter to the police bureau, stating that Mr Abhisit would appear in mid-December.  According to the spokesman, the party leader was given the letter on short notice last night and that he had no time to prepare his arguments. Furthermore, Mr Abhisit had a scheduled engagement in Sukhothai early today to participate in rehabilitation activities for flood-affected temples and schools.


Assuming there's any truth to the account of when the letter was delivered, Abhisit has a credible point in citing insufficient notice. He'll presumably be speaking on the record at the interview and it's entirely reasonable that he be able to prepare both his statement and the relevant documents to support it. I suspect mention of the scheduled Sukhothai trip is just political cover designed to reduce the impression that there's any substantial case for him to answer.

----------


## StrontiumDog

^ I disagree, he's had 18 months to prepare (did he think this day would never come?). 

These are extremely serious charges being leveled at him. 

I wonder if a normal person could cite a prior engagement to avoid questioning over allegations of ordering the deaths of others? Actually, here you probably could....

----------


## SteveCM

[some inevitable repetition - but this refers also to Suthep delaying attendance]

*Abhisit, Suthep postpone their grilling session - The Nation*

 December 2, 2011  5:19 pm 

                 Opposition Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and  party member Suthep Thaugsuban have asked to postpone their meeting with  police investigators, who were to question them about the deaths of  redshirt protesters last year, sources said.

      Democrat spokesman Chavanont Intarakomalsut said Abhisit had only the  night before received a letter summoning him for an interrogation  session Friday. 

      Abhisit asked the police to give him two weeks before the questioning, the party spokesman said. 

      Chavanont said that both Abhisit and Suthep were busy people and needed  time to prepare for the questioning. He also said the police should  deal with the cases independently, free of any political pressure from  the government. 

      Before leaving for Sukhothai Friday, Abhisit said he had yet to read  the letter he received from the Metropolitan Police Bureau.

----------


## SteveCM

^ Not in this or elsewhere have I seen mention of actual (i.e. formal/legal) charges to answer - only 


> The officer said the two were required to give more information on the crackdown since the Metropolitan Police Bureau had been assigned to re-investigate the deaths of 16 people.


 Anyone seen different?




> Chavanont said that both Abhisit and Suthep were busy people...


Certainly not the greatest PR comment to make.

----------


## Tom Sawyer

> ^ Hmmm
> 
> Abhisit gets a 'fail' for this.
> 
> There are such things as priorities, and the investigation into the deaths last year should come at the top of the list. Using the flood to dodge the issue just doesn't cut it....
> 
> Very very lame.


More to the point, why is some deputy Democrat Party something with a long jek name "assigned" to respond to the police letter? If the police send me a letter summoning me to explain something, can I hand it to a colleague and have him give some third hand reply? Is this a newspaper interview request where Mr Big Nuts passes a reply off to some underling? Or is this a criminal investigation with a letter addressed to Abhisit? "I'm sorry Mark is too busy to take your call. May I take a message?"

----------


## longway

> ^ Hmmm
> 
> Abhisit gets a 'fail' for this.
> 
> There are such things as priorities, and the investigation into the deaths last year should come at the top of the list. Using the flood to dodge the issue just doesn't cut it....
> 
> Very very lame.


I know what you mean but not too sure if its that lame.

His summons was leaked to the press before it reached him and he was given a very short time in which to appear, this appears to be a deliberate and calculated snub, to which he he has responded to in kind. 

May not be the smartest move PR wise, but thats not exactly new either.

----------


## Mid

*Suthep, Abhisit to see police Dec 8-9*
3/12/2011   

 Former deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban  and former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva will meet police  investigators on Dec 8 and 9 respectively to give information on the  government's crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May last year.

 The Metropolitian Police initially wanted both Mr Abhisit and Mr  Suthep to meet them on Dec 2, but the two requested that the  appointments be postponed to the middle of this month.

 Mr Abhisit said today that the police, in replying to his request, asked him to see them on Dec 9 and he agreed.

 Mr Suthep, meanwhile, said he would go to see the police investigators at the Metropolitan Police headquarters on Dec 8 at 1pm.

 The Metropolitan Police Bureau wants to get more information from Mr  Abhisit, who was prime minister during the crackdown, and Mr Suthep, who  was director of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency  Situation (CRES) which was responsible for handling the red-shirt  protest.

 It has been asked to re-investigate after the Department of Special  Investigation (DSI) concluded government authorities might be  responsible for the deaths of 13 people during the crackdown.

bangkokpost.com

----------


## SteveCM

*Abhisit, Suthep to meet police this week - The Nation*

The Nation on Sunday December 4, 2011  1:00 am 

 

Former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and former  deputy PM Suthep Thaugsuban yesterday said they were ready to meet  police investigators for questioning about the deaths of red-shirt  protesters last year.

      Opposition leader Abhisit said he would give his statement to the  police on December 9 in connection with the cases of 13 bodies found  during the unrest in April-May 2010.

      Senior Democrat MP Suthep Thaugsuban said yesterday that he would  testify before police investigators in the same cases on December 8 to  show he was ready to cooperate.

      Abhisit, who is also the Democrat Party leader, said he had asked  police to postpone the meeting to the middle of this month but the  police insisted that he meet them by December 9. He said he wanted to  delay the statement because he needed time to prepare documents as there  is a three-day holiday period early this month.

      The former PM said he would ask or hold unofficial talks with people or state agencies involved in the case.

      He said if police question him about the orders involved during the  event, he would have no problem because all state agencies keep a record  of all orders.

      He said if he had new information, he would be willing to provide the  information to the police so that they can use it to handle the case in a  fair manner.

      During the red-shirt anti-government protests last year, which later  turned into riots, Abhisit and Suthep created the Centre for Resolution  of the Emergency Situation. After the riots were quelled, both the red  shirts and the leaders' political enemies blamed them for the deaths of  protesters.

      Suthep said yesterday that he actually wanted to give the statement on  December 15. But as the police want to wrap up the case very soon, he  would gather as much information as possible in the limited time he has.

      He said he would give the statement about what happened on April 10 and any other issues police want to know about.

      Suthep said politicians in the government camp had been telling the  press that he and Abhisit have been summoned to give the statement as  suspects not witnesses, which has brought him and Abhisit public  sympathy. He said he was not worried as everything he did during his  leadership of the CRES was based on the law.

      He said his lawyer would be present during the meeting with the police because he wants to be careful. 

      "I can anticipate what is going to happen but I am not frightened. I  did the right thing for the country with good intention and within the  framework of law,'' he said.

----------


## LooseBowels

> Suthep said politicians in the government camp had been telling the press that he and Abhisit have been summoned to give the statement as suspects not witnesses, which has brought him and Abhisit public sympathy. He said he was not worried as everything he did during his leadership of the CRES was based on the law. He said his lawyer would be present during the meeting with the police because he wants to be careful. "I can anticipate what is going to happen but I am not frightened. I did the right thing for the country with good intention and within the framework of law,'' he said.


Of course, all this crap is referenced against the rule of "coup-issued law", and nothing to do with any semblance of rule of law supported by any sort of democratic  underpinning :Smile: 

You can't argue with that

----------


## Rural Surin

> Welcome to BURMA


....with a twist here and there.
Like one could tell the difference. :mid:

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman - The Nation
*
*Private investigative report on Japanese cameraman*

          December 6, 2011  10:41 am 

*Police have received a private investigative report  on a Japanese cameraman killed last April in connection with the  political mayhem, Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said on  Tuesday.*

Reuters has commissioned the report on the death of cameraman Hiroyuki  Muramoto who covered the April 10 anti-riot operations for the news  agency, Chalerm said.

"I believe Reuters did not share the report with the previous  government because of differing opinions on the cause of death," he  said.

He said the report had 60 pages drawn a similar conclusion to the  police inquiry that state officials were suspected to have involved in  the killing of Muramoto.

The Nation

----------


## StrontiumDog

Thai-ASEAN News Network



Deputy PM: Reuters Hires Investigators to Probe Cameraman's Death 

UPDATE : 6 December 2011 

*Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung  said foreign news agency Reuters has hired private investigators to look  into the death of its Japanese cameraman and those investigators'  60-page report, which puts blame on government officials, is now in the  hands of the police.

Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said he was notified by the  Japanese police that United Kingdom-based news agency Reuters has hired  international investigators to look into the cause of death of its  Japanese cameraman during a military crackdown on red-shirt protesters  near Khok Wua Intersection on April 10 last year.* 

He added the Royal Thai Police have received a 60-page investigation  report from the private investigators which indicated that government  officials are responsible for the cameraman's death. 

The deputy PM believes the investigators did not submit the report to  the previous administration because they have a different approach to  probing the case. 

Meanwhile, Chalerm denied influencing the police to call forward former  prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and former deputy PM Suthep Thaugsuban,  who was in charge of the Center for the Resolution of Emergency  Situation, to give further testimonies, saying that the request was made  by the public prosecutor. 

He refused to comment on the possibility of a Cabinet reshuffle in the  near future, but said he did not think he will be replaced.

----------


## StrontiumDog

_People get away with murder in this country all the time, and I should know!_

----------


## StrontiumDog

There's a delicious irony in Chalerm being the driving force in pushing for the murders of April/May 2010 to be solved....

Chalerm Ubumrung - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Murder scandal*

_Chalerm's three sons acquired a public reputation for violence and  troublemaking for their repeated involvement in altercations in  Bangkok's massage parlors and pubs. The phrase "Do you know whose son I  am?" became associated with the three as a mark of derision for their  abuse of their father's political influence. They were involved in  multiple lawsuits, which were usually settled out of court._

_The most infamous of these cases was the 2001 murder of Pol. Sen.  Sgt. Maj. Suwichai Rodwimuti in a pub on Ratchadaphisek Road. Chalerm's  youngest son, Duangchalerm, fled the scene and eventually surrendered  himself to authorities more than six months after the killing. Chalerm,  fiercely protective of his son, threatened the press reporting on the  case, resulting in a temporary press boycott of Chalerm. Following this  incident Chalerm and his sons published a short-lived magazine  criticizing the press for alleged unfair treatment._

_The murder case was eventually dismissed by the Criminal Court when  witnesses were unable to clearly identify Duangchalerm as the killer.  During the investigation Chalerm had given a statement to the police  claiming the true killer was Chalermchon Burisamai, or "Ai-Pued", a  close friend of his son's. The police have not pursued a case against  this man._

----------


## Calgary

> Originally Posted by lom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Originally Posted by Calgary
> ...


I understand there is little appetite to stir this pot at this time. The Government has its' 'plate full' already.

All I know this Mirror Foundation has registered all information available, regarding names of those who were murdered, those who were injured and those who are missing.

This missing list totalled 900 at one point. 

I suppose one could 'Google' the Mirror Foundation, but beyond that, this is all I was able to ascertain.

----------


## Thaihome

> He was no-where near this stuff, as I wasn't in spite of my best efforts. Couldn't get close no matter how hard I tried. I had reason to try to get to Wat Pratum to try and rescue some people close to me.
> 
> The Amart agenda this writer is slavishly devoted to, is to always divert the conversation away from the heavily armed, coupist State attack on its' citizens, and change the focus to the feeble fightback from those citizens.
> 
> It is their preferred choice of 'spin'.
> 
> Some of you may choose to buy into this facade.....I don't.


You are refering to one incident that took place on the evening of the 19th. There was serious street fighting going at Ding Daeng and Rama IV for a week before that. Some of us live and work right in the middle of those areas and witnessed first hand what was occuring. 

Apparently you did not.
TH

----------


## Calgary

> There was serious street fighting going at Ding Daeng and Rama IV for a week before that.


"_Serious street fighting_"?....ya gotta be kidding. 

Street fighting between run-of-the-mill protesting citizens and trained, heavily armed pro-coupist forces, do not "_serious street fighting_" make.

Your 'spin' of seeking to equate the antagonists during the pro-coupist assault is just that...........trying to spin away from the pro-coupist murderers, and trying desperately to focus attention away from them.

I see through that every time you and your friends do it. I hope others do as well.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Elderly man shot after troops reached Bonkai - The Nation
*
*Elderly man shot after troops reached Bonkai*

         Kesinee Tangkhieo
The Nation June 12, 2012  1:00 am 
*
A witness told the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court  yesterday that after patrolling soldiers got to the Bonkai area on May  14, 2010 - during the red-shirt unrest - shots were heard and an elderly  man fell down bleeding.*

          Boonmee Rermsuk sustained a gunshot to his abdomen and, 76 days later, succumbed to his injuries.

"He was around there because he was waiting for his granddaughter. She  reported herself to school that day and he was worried about her safety  with armed soldiers all around," Boonmee's wife Nantaporn Rermsuk said. 

The soldiers were mobilised in Bangkok at that time because of intensifying red-shirt protests. 

Nantaporn, 71, showed up at the courtroom with her three grown-up daughters. 

"He was there not because he was participating in red-shirt rallies," she said.

Thanaporn Wongnarat, 50, said he tried to warn Boonmee about approaching soldiers but it was not in time.

"I shouted out the warning because, as the patrolling soldiers approached, I heard gunshots time and again," Thanaporn said.

He said he rushed to the elderly man after seeing him fall down with a wound that was bleeding.

"Then, many people rushed to him and identified him as Uncle Boonmee," Thanaporn said.

The witness said he then sent Boonmee to a hospital on a motorcycle. 

"After I sent him to the hospital, I came back to the Bonkai area because I was a red-shirt demonstrator," Thanaporn said.

He said he later learnt Boonmee finally succumbed to his injuries.

----------


## LooseBowels

> It is the way you are trying to put your message across that is the problem.


Oh, you mean he should follow the Notion and BKK Post model, you imbercile :Smile: 

You can't argue with that

----------


## Butterfly

> Why he is still allowed to pollute the News forum with his drivel is beyond me.


he is a refreshing alternative to DrBob  :Smile:

----------


## Butterfly

> indoctrinated coccoon, facts and reality can be disturbing


indeed, indeed  :Smile:

----------


## Calgary

> *Elderly man shot after troops reached Bonkai* - The Nation






> *The soldiers were mobilised in Bangkok at that time because of intensifying red-shirt protests*.


Talk about propagandistic drivel

They weren't mobilized to defend their coupist masters???????? 

I see!


He wasn't the only "old man":

>One 76-year-old from here, shot through the foot while in Wat Pratom (sp?), with a bullet that expanded on the way through.

>The old man whose funeral I attended last week, who was so old, he fell as the police were herding Red Shirts from Wat Pratom to the police station.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingn...driver-inquest
*
*Army wants inquest in military court*
Published: 12/06/2012 at 11:59 AMOnline news:
 The Royal Thai Army has applied to the Criminal  Court to move the inquest into the death of a 44-year-old taxi driver,  Phan Kamkong, during the crackdown on anti-government protesters on May  15, 2010 to a military court.

The request was made on Tuesday to the  Criminal Court on Ratchadapisek Road.

 A court source said it was unlikely to be granted because the  Criminal Procedures Code stipulated that the court of instance in the  area where the death occurred was the authority to deal with the  inquest.

 "The court has yet to rule whether Phan died because of action by the  officers in charge of the crackdown, so the army request is a  pre-emptive and inapproriate move," the source said.

 The counsel for the plaintiff, Chokchai Angkeo, said a military court  was not an appropriate venue to the case  because Phan's death was  linked to those who issued the orders to the military. It also involved  other people, not just the army.

  Two witnesses scheduled to give testimony to the inquest on Tuesday  morning, Lt Col Worakan Hoontrakoon and Capt Kriengsak Kamlamul, were  unable to appear and asked that the court set another date next month.

This afternoon, the court was due to hear from Air Vice Marshal  Vicharn Piewnim, a doctor who does autopsies at Ramathibodi hospital.

 The Phan Kamkong inquest has been proceeding earlier than other cases  so far, but the lengthy list of  witnesses on both sides suggests it  will take very long time before decisions on some 20 inquests  pending will beknown.

 Next week, the inquest of Channarong Polsila is to begin on Monday, with two foreign journalists listed as witnesses.

----------


## LooseBowels

^
Yet another flagrant attack on democracy by a member of the thai axis of evil :Smile: 

You can't argue with that

----------


## Calgary

[QUOTE]*Army wants inquest in military court[/*QUOTE]




> "........._during the crackdown on anti-government protesters on May  15, 2010_




Some more propagandistic lying by the propaganda media.

R'song was not an anti-government protest.........it was not against the price of eggs, or tax increases or whatever.

It was an anti-coup protest. 

The Govt. of the day, led by ICC investigated Abhi., were small potatoes in the whole scheme of things.

The demonstrations were against coupists. We can all speculate about who they were.

Just another indication of media avoidance......Coup?........What coup?

PLUS, denying the anti-coup taxpayers the proper political context.




> Phan's death was  linked to those who issued the orders to the military.


Yup!

We can all speculate about who issued orders to the military........and it wasn't Abhi, although he let himself be used and now is under ICC investigation.....................Not smart!

He would help himself a lot, if he simply 'fessed up to who gave him the go-ahead for the R'song assault and murders.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Military bullets killed civilians | Bangkok Post: news
*
*Military bullets killed civilians*

*Police say temple dead shot from elevated spot * 
Published: 19/06/2012 at 01:38 AMNewspaper section: News
 Police have confirmed five of the six people  killed at Wat Pathum Wanaram during the crackdown on red shirts on May  19, 2010 were shot with bullets normally used by military forces.

 Testifying before the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court, Pol Col  Suebsak Phansura, deputy chief of the Metropolitan Police Bureau's  division 6, yesterday said the bullets were .223 calibre, which are used  with M16 and Tavor rifles, which are for military use. All of the  victims were shot from an elevated spot, he said.

 The six people killed were Suwan Sriraksa, 30, a farmer; Atthachai  Chumchan, 28, a law school graduate; Mongkol Khemthong, 36, a rescue  worker; Rop Suksathit, 66, a hired driver; Kamonkade Akkahad, 25, a  volunteer nurse; and Akkharadej Khankaew, 22, a hired hand.

 Pol Col Suebsak, who heads the investigating team looking into the  deaths, said the six victims and other red-shirt demonstrators had  gathered at the temple to wait for transport home, while soldiers from  two units were guarding the Siam Paragon department store and the Siam  skytrain station.

 While queueing up to use a temple toilet, Suwan was shot and died at  the scene, while Atthachai was gunned down while crossing the road to  the temple. Shortly afterwards, Rop and Mongkol, both standing in front  of the temple entrance, were shot.

 Kamonkade and Akkharadej were shot while trying to flee, said the  officer. The bodies of the six civilians were later sent for autopsies.

 Pol Col Suebsak said his investigators had summoned experts to help  examine the direction of the bullets and they found that five of the  killed, except Atthachai, had been shot by .223 calibre bullets that  were fired from elevated positions to ground level.

 His team had interrogated soldiers based at the skytrain station who  claimed men in black had fired at them from the ground up toward the  skytrain track. But ballistic tests showed no bullets had been fired  from ground level, he said.

 In a separate hearing yesterday, the wife of a taxi driver slain on  May 15, 2010, told the court that former prime minister Abhisit  Vejjajiva, former deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban, and former  army commander Gen Anupong Paojinda must be held responsible for his  death. Charnarong Polsila, 45, was shot dead on Ratchaprarop Road.

 Suriyan Polsila, 47, Charnarong's wife, told the court that her husband was merely a protester.

 Mr Abhisit declared the Emergency Decree on April 7, 2010 and then  appointed Mr Suthep director of the Centre for Restoration of Emergency  Situations and Gen Anupong as deputy director. Mrs Suriyan said this  made them responsible for her husband's death.

 Mr Suthep took charge of the area to reclaim operations against the  red-shirt protest and Gen Anupong directly issued the crackdown order to  the military, which resulted in 91 deaths.

 "They have never expressed any regret to my family or showed any responsibility since his death," Mrs Suriyan said.

 Siriporn Ruangsinoon, 52, a legal representative for Mrs Suriyan and  her two daughters, said the Abhisit government's operations were not in  line with international standards which should start with a soft  approach, including warnings, and gradually increase to hard measures.

 Nick Nostitz, a German freelance journalist and a witness for the  plaintiffs, told the court that on May 15, 2010, he met Charnarong and  took his photo just a minute before he was shot.

 Mr Nostitz said the injured Charnarong tried to crawl from the scene  to hide at a petrol station with help from two other individuals. When  the soldiers moved to the petrol station, Mr Nostitz said he told them  to help Charnarong. He heard them call an ambulance.

 Thilo Thielke, a Der Spiegel journalist, 44, told the court that he saw Charnarong get shot but he didn't see who shot him.

 Minutes after he took the photos of the protesters, he managed to take photos of Charnarong being shot.

 The next hearing is on Monday. There will be 32 more hearings, with 17 prosecution witnesses and 15 from the damaged parties.

----------


## Calgary

> _Military bullets killed civilians_ | Bangkok Post: news


Duh!!!!....of course.....was somebody disputing that?

Surely no-one was fooled by the ICC investigated Abhi-Suthep spin, frantically trying to change the conversation to the feeble Red Shirt fightback.

And what the hell is this about "civilians'?

They were Red Shirts fighting against a coup. This damn media trying to obfuscate that matter by denying the demonstrators a political context.

"Anti-coupists" have a political context. "Civilians" do not.




> ".............._during the crackdown on red shirts on May  19, 2010.."_


There was not a 'crackdown" on Red Shirts!

There was a murderous attack by coupists on those who did not accept their coup!

Damn this media, trying to revise history.




> "_The six people killed were_............"


Killing six people in a temple is eggregious enough, but what about the ones maimed, and suffering to this day.

I personally gave financial support to an old man shot through the foot...........there were many more.




> _His team had interrogated soldiers based at the skytrain station who  claimed men in black had fired at them from the ground up toward the  skytrain track. But ballistic tests showed no bullets had been fired  from ground level, he said._




Of course.

This is just more of those diversionary tricks, trying to move the conversation to the feeble fightback, away from the murderers.

One needs to look no further than to see the many threads here on TD, where PADites were succesful in deflecting the conversation in that direction.

Can you imagine the blizzard of that stuff dished up to the "*group-think mushrooms*"! who would have swallowed it holus-bolus, when there was no alternative information allowed.

After pivotting the conversation here on TD, PADites than spent voluminous time and space discussing this supposed fightback, all the while steering clear of the murders of over 90 taxpayers by pro-coupists.

When I mentioned these diversionary tricks to some people here, the comment I heard was, "_That is the Democrat Party"_ 

The implication being that the DP populates these discussion boards with expressly that purpose in mind.......to focus discussions on their agenda's.




> _Mr Suthep took charge of the area to reclaim operations against the  red-shirt protest and Gen Anupong directly issued the crackdown order to  the military, which resulted in 91 deaths._




The above quote is correct, but also 'smoke'.

One must always keep in mind, the self-censorship being exercised by all media. Suggesting such a primary role for Suthep and Anupong, even for the military is "the fog of self-censorship'.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Army rebuttals on six deaths at Wat Pathum - The Nation
*
*Army rebuttals on six deaths at Wat Pathum*

         The Nation June 20, 2012  11:27 am 

*The Army has issued a three-point statement aimed at  rebutting a witness statement at the judicial inquest on the six deaths  at Wat Pathum.*

The six were shot dead  in connection with the crowd control operations  on May 19, 2010 in the wake of the Ratchaprasong rallies involving the  red shirts.

The Army statement said although forensic checks found the six were  shot with .223 bullets used in M-16 and Trevor assault rifles which were  a standard issue in the military service, riot forces had reported  three incidents, on April 10, 13 and 15, about 62 stolen assault rifles  and almost 2,000 rounds of ammunitions

In regard to the witness testimony about the absent of a crossfire  between the forces and the men in black around the elevated rail track,  the on-the-scene report clearly stated about gun attacks from the ground  to where the forces were deployed on the elevated track.

The traces of bullet shot from the ground level hitting the first  pillar of the track, counting from the Chalerm Phao Junction to Wat  Pathum, still remain in evidence.

The Army had forces deployed on the elevated track but did not fully  occupy the track as alleged because of gun attacks aimed at disrupting  such deployment.

The judicial inquest on the six deaths continues after hearing  the first prosecution witness on Monday.

----------


## Calgary

[QUOTE]*Army rebuttals on six deaths at Wat Pathum - The Nation[/QUOTE*]




> _The six were shot dead  in connection with the crowd control operations  on May 19, 2010 in the wake of the Ratchaprasong rallies involving the  red shirts._




"Crowd control operations"..........??????????

Not attacks by coupists on anti-coupists, using the military?

How did I get that wrong????

Glad they clarified it.

----------


## LooseBowels

^ A direct result of abisits boss's live fire zone:headshoot to kill policy

You can't argue with that

----------


## sabang

Nurse Kamolkade Akkahad, who was killed in a clearly marked Green Cross medical tent in Wat Pathum Wanaram, was shot more than once. In fact, the tent was riddled with bullets and at least one other person was shot there. Six unarmed people, in all, were shot dead inside this Wat, I do not know offhand how many more were injured. The government had previously said to Red Shirts that they should seek refuge there, which makes sense because a Temple is an accepted place of refuge. Or so I thought.

But of course-
Prayuth will not Say Sorry | Chiang Rai Times English Language Newspaper

Those brave military snipers on the Skytrain tracks were just 'doing their job' after all.  ::chitown:: 
It's a mans life in the Thai Army, gunning down unarmed, uninvolved people in a place of refuge and worship. Who can blame these Hero's for targeting a medical tent. After all they must have been in mortal peril, up there on the train tracks with their specialist sniper rifles.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## Calgary

^



> *Those brave military snipers on the Skytrain tracks were just 'doing their job' after all*




I agree with the basic premise of your Post completely, and don't mean to take anything out of context, lest it affect the gist of it, in its' entirety.

Permit me however to lift one sentence, and use it to make an entirely different point.

The above quote talks about those "skytrain track shooters' as _'just doing their job'_.

On another level, that is absolutely true.

The Amart owned and operated media however would like to make those shooters, their buddies and officers the beginning and the end of the R'song thing.

When in fact what they are doing, is protecting and shielding others.

It is a little like blaming the gun for the killing, not who was handling it.

So whenever I see reference to a military operation against Red Shirts, it is misleading to the extreme.

It was pro-coupists attacking those who stood up to their power-grab.

The foreign media self-censorship in this regard is also very disturbing.

In my view, if you cannot tell the whole story, don't say anything.

It is better to say nothing, than to mislead.

----------


## Thaihome

> . The government had previously said to Red Shirts that they should seek refuge there, which makes sense because a Temple is an accepted place of refuge. Or so I thought.
> 
> But of course-
> Prayuth will not Say Sorry | Chiang Rai Times English Language Newspaper
> 
> Those brave military snipers on the Skytrain tracks were just 'doing their job' after all. 
> 
> It's a mans life in the Thai Army, gunning down unarmed, uninvolved people in a place of refuge and worship. Who can blame these Hero's for targeting a medical tent. After all they must have been in mortal peril, up there on the train tracks with their specialist sniper rifles.


 
Descent into Chaos
Deaths at Wat Phatum Wanaram

On May 15, a series of negotiations between Red Shirt leaders, government and security representatives, and humanitarian activists led to an agreement to declare the Wat Phatum Wanaram grounds, located just a hundred meters from the main stage of the Ratchaprasong UDD camp, a demilitarized safe zone sanctuary. Following the declaration, hundreds of women and children demonstrators moved to the temple compound. 

On May 19, following the declaration by the Red Shirt leaders that they were surrendering and asking protesters to disperse, almost 2,000 of remaining protesters headed into the temple, as other departure routes were either blocked, inaccessible due to heavy fighting, or considered too dangerous. Government security forces had created an exit route near the Siam BTS station, where departing protesters were carefully checked and placed on buses to their home villages. But very few protesters took this exit route, as it required them to walk towards armed soldiers with their hands raised into an uncertain future. A foreign journalist showed Human Rights Watch footage he took of a dense crowd of unarmed civilians heading into the temple, which he said continued for a long time. 

The safe zone at the temple was not in a very safe location. Wat Phatum Wanaram is very close to the Central World shopping complex, which Red Shirt arsonists were torching at the same time as crowds were fleeing into the temple. Throughout the afternoon and evening of May 19, sporadic gunfire and clashes took place in the immediate vicinity of the temple. Several foreign journalists said they saw UDD militants, some of them armed, on the street outside the temple between 2 and 4 p.m. that day. One photojournalist described running into a group of armed militants:
_Just before 4 oclock, I went to Henri Dunant Road near the Paragon Shopping Center. There were three or four Black Shirts there next to some tires and they threw something, plus there was shooting taking place. It was too dangerous to stay there so I left. They had weapons, I didnt see what kind. They were also being shot at, so they were taking cover. They were being shot at from the direction of the road._ Another foreign videographer told Human Rights Watch: Hardcore elements were outside the temple, including some big guy whose body was later among those [found] inside the templeI saw him outside the temple. Another journalist told Human Rights Watch that between the temple and Central World there were some tough guys, the type of people I didnt want to be around.

At least two separate gunfights took place around Wat Pathum Wanaram, one starting around 4 p.m. and a second, more intense exchange of gunfire that began around 5:30 or 6 p.m. Andy Buncome, a journalist for the Independent newspaper, witnessed two major shooting incidents at the temple:
_Around lunch time, the Red Shirt leaders said that it was all over, and asked people to go home. I went out again and probably got to the temple around 3:30 to 4 p.m. Things were calm then, but tense. Some of the malls had been set on fire.Then we heard very clear shooting. Other reporters said that the troops and Red Shirts were shooting at each other. We remained at the rear of the temple. We knew there was a curfew. So we started heading out, but we paused and went back to try and get a phone number of a monk so we could call him later. As we were leaving around 5:30, the shooting got going again. My colleagues ran to the back, but I was caught in the front, taking cover with other people. I remember thinking that I should get out of there. I was watching the number of injured pouring into the temple from outside._ 
_I dont know how I was hit or where the bullet came from. I was lying down. I could not really see the gun battle, I could only hear it. There was vast gunfire outside. The Red Shirts with guns, I think, were out in the streets. Maybe when the army was firing back at them, some of it was coming back into the temple. I could see some bullets ricocheting off the walls. It is hard to know. I could see where some of the shots were hitting and would therefore have to guess some of them were coming from the west._

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Army says it didn't kill anyone at temple | Bangkok Post: news
*
*Army says it didn't kill anyone at temple*
Published: 21/06/2012 at 08:23 AMNewspaper section: News
 The army yesterday insisted soldiers did not  kill people at Wat Pathum Wanaram during the crackdown on red shirts on  May 19, 2010 after police testifying in court had implicated the army.

 Deputy army spokesman Winthai Suwari made the statement in defence of  the army's security operations after the court heard testimony on  Monday from witnesses and investigators probing the temple deaths.

 During the hearing, police confirmed that five of the six people  killed at Wat Pathum Wanaram during the crackdown were shot with bullets  normally used by military forces.

 Testifying before the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court, Pol Col  Suebsak Phansura, deputy chief of the Metropolitan Police Bureau's  Division 6, said the bullets were .223 calibre, which are used with M16  and Tavor rifles, common in military use.

 The victims were shot from an elevated position, he added. The six  people killed that day were Suwan Sriraksa, 30, a farmer; Atthachai  Chumchan, 28, a law school graduate; Mongkol Khemthong, 36, a rescue  worker; Rop Suksathit, 66, a hired driver; Kamonkade Akkahad, 25, a  volunteer nurse; and Akkharadej Khankaew, 22, a hired hand.

 Pol Col Suebsak's team had interrogated soldiers based at the  skytrain station who said men in black had fired at them from the ground  up toward the skytrain track.

 But ballistics tests showed no bullets had been fired from ground level at the victims in the temple, he said.

 Col Winthai said yesterday the bullets and firearms used to kill the people in the temple had been stolen during the riots.

 On April 10, 2010 12 Tavor rifles, 700 .223 calibre bullets, 35  shotguns and 1,152 rubber bullets were stolen from soldiers at Phra  Pinklao Bridge.

 Later that same day, 13 Tavor rifles were stolen from soldiers at Democracy Monument.

 On April 15, 2010, two M16 rifles and 100 M16 bullets were stolen from soldiers at Sam Liam Din Daeng.

 The army has filed complaints with police asking them to investigate the robberies, Col Winthai said.

 He said the army had proof that the stolen firearms and bullets were used during the unrest.

 He said soldiers could not move past Chaloem Phao junction because  they had been held back by men in black firing at them. Security forces  were not positioned along the entire length of the skytrain track  because they were obstructed by men in black.

 He insisted that soldiers were positioned only at the Siam BTS station and did not move any further towards the temple.

 Col Winthai said the army did not want to sway the court's decision,  but it expected all sides to stick to the evidence when drawing  conclusions.

 First Army chief Udomdej Seetabutr said yesterday he was not  concerned about the testimony against the soldiers over the temple  deaths.

 He said he was confident soldiers had performed their duties carefully and correctly during the security operations.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*No order to open fire on the crowds in 2010: Abhisit - The Nation
*
*No order to open fire on the crowds in 2010: Abhisit*

          June 21, 2012  10:07 am 
*
Former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has denied  his government had ordered troops to open fire on the crowds in  connection with the bloodshed at Rajdamnoen Avenue on April 10, 2010.*

              Some 25 civilians and soldiers were killed and hundreds sustained  injuries in the clash between anti-riot forces and red-shirt protesters.

Abhisit testified on the political mayhem at the Wednesday's hearing by the Truth for Reconciliation Commission.

The TRCT is expected on July 16 to issue its final report on the 2010 political strife.

"Abhisit has given a very useful statement to shed light on the violence," TRCT chairman Kanit na Nakorn said.

The Nation

----------


## sabang

Unless the snipers on the BTS tracks (and forget the bullshit, they were there) were acting under direct orders from high command, I frankly fail to see why the Army is running interference for them. This was an atrocity, plain and simple. There was no need to fatally shoot protesters in their designated place of refuge, never mind to target a clearly marked medical tent. These people were no longer demonstrating, and certainly not rioting- they had followed the governments advice, and were sheltering inside a Temple to escape the live fire zones. The Wat was absolutely not a live fire zone.

The Thai army would show a much more credible face to the process of truth, reconciliation etc if it were to accept what everybody (including themselves) already knows- these were deliberate, unprovoked slayings, and carried out on people that were posing no threat. Even I find it hard to believe that they would have been acting under direct orders from their superiors to do this- but the military's deliberate stonewalling and obfuscation of this particular atrocity will lead many to exactly that conclusion.

----------


## Calgary

> *Army says it didn't kill anyone at temple | Bangkok Post: news*


There are essentially two avenue's of misleading spin used by these people.

#1 - characterizing their attack on behalf of coupist masters on anti-coupists, as being some sort of benevolent control of civil disobedience with no political context.

#2 - Diverting attention away from their massacre, trying to spin the conversation toward the feeble fightback by anti-coupists taxpayers. 





> during the crackdown on red shirts on  May 19, 2010





> in defence of  the army's security operations


Talk of '_crackdown_' and _'security operations'_ taking the place of a murderous attack, to advance the political objectives of certain people.






> ".......because  they had been held back by men in black firing at them...."





> ".......they were obstructed by men in black..."


The same kind of diversion of conversation focus, as the PADites try to do on this discussion board

----------


## Calgary

> *No order to open fire on the crowds in 2010: Abhisit* - The Nation


Protecting somebody.





> political mayhem


Coup?....What coup?

The propaganda media trying again to obfuscate and hide the overarching cause-and-effect of R'song and other post-coup flashpoints.

Perhaps it was *political mayhem* about the price of eggs, or something.

Could be!

----------


## Calgary

> Unless the snipers on the BTS tracks (and forget the bullshit, they were there) were acting under direct orders from high command, I frankly fail to see why the Army is running interference for them. This was an atrocity, plain and simple. There was no need to fatally shoot protesters in their designated place of refuge, never mind to target a clearly marked medical tent. These people were no longer demonstrating, and certainly not rioting- they had followed the governments advice, and were sheltering inside a Temple to escape the live fire zones. The Wat was absolutely not a live fire zone.
> 
> The Thai army would show a much more credible face to the process of truth, reconciliation etc if it were to accept what everybody (including themselves) already knows- these were deliberate, unprovoked slayings, and carried out on people that were posing no threat. Even I find it hard to believe that they would have been acting under direct orders from their superiors to do this- but the military's deliberate stonewalling and obfuscation of this particular atrocity will lead many to exactly that conclusion.


I am reminded every day about the truthfullness of your Post Sabang, by family members who were in this Wat at this time, trying to shield themselves from the bullets.

Shame on these pro-coupists.

----------


## Notnow

:bananaman: 


> *TRC explains 'men in black' connection | Bangkok Post: news
> *
> *TRC explains 'men in black' connection*
> Published: 17/09/2012 at 06:59 PMOnline news: Local News
>  The Truth for Reconciliation Commission has shed  light on the mystery of the "men in black", saying they were linked  with red-shirt security guards and Maj Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol.
> 
>  Its completed report on the 2010 political unrest unveiled on Monday  also blamed the security forces for poor handling of the protesters and  criticised the military coup in 2006 which stirred political problems in  the country.
> 
>  Somchai Homla-or, who heads the TRC's fact-finding sub-committee,  said the commission probing the bloody events between March and May 2010  found connections between the "men in black" and security guards of the  United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship in at least two clashes  with authorities at Kok Wua intersection near the Democracy Monument  and the Pratunam area on April 10, 2010.
> ...


 :deadhorsebig: 


The M67 grenade is thrown not launched.  It could only be launched if you had a giant slingshot, since it weighs 4002 grams. The crucial factor here is the distance between these 2 forces. The grenade is thrown,  about 30 meters by a fit should soldier. I The American special forces officer who analyze this conflict concluded that the grenade had to be e thrown or rolled from behind a nearby military vehicle. It would not be the first time that an officer in the military unit somewhere got 'fragged to settle a grudge.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Govt will act on any "useful" TRCT ideas, PM says - The Nation
*
*Govt will act on any "useful" TRCT ideas, PM says*

            September 18, 2012  5:03 pm 
*
The government will study the final report from  the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand before making the  next move, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said Tuesday.*

            As with the handling of the TRCT's past reports, the final report would  be forwarded for scrutiny by a followup panel headed by Deputy Prime  Minister Yongyuth Wichaidit.

     "The report will be examined in detail and the government is ready to  implement any recommendations deemed useful and conducive to peace,"  Yingluck said.

              The Nation

----------


## StrontiumDog

*http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.as...=#.UFiO8RhvDx4
*
*UN human rights chief calls on Thailand to take steps towards reconciliation*


High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay. UN Photo/Jean-Marc Ferré

 18 September 2012 – The United Nations human rights chief today  welcomed the report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of  Thailand (TRCT) and called on the South-east Asian country to implement  its recommendations to advance accountability and understanding among  different segments of its society.  

  “In spite of its limited mandate and initial difficulties, the TRCT has  conducted an important investigation into political violence and human  rights violations in Thailand,” said High Commissioner for Human Rights  Navi Pillay. “The Royal Thai Government now has the responsibility to  act on the TRCT’s recommendations, both in holding State officials to  account and addressing the institutional weaknesses identified in the  report.”  

  During April and May 2010, demonstrations took place in Thailand,  leading to violence in which 92 people died and thousands were injured.   On 6 July 2010, the Government established the TRCT with the mandate to  seek truth and reconciliation.  

  While the final report fails to specify who was responsible for the  deaths during the demonstrations, it contains substantive findings  backed by forensic evidence and recommends urgent action to bring  perpetrators to justice, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human  Rights (OHCHR) said in a news release.   

  In particular, the report stresses the importance of the army remaining  neutral in political affairs, the need to strengthen the independence of  the judiciary and a proposal to review article 112 of the criminal code  in order to protect freedom of expression in Thailand.   

  “Making the legal and institutional reforms recommended in the report  will strengthen Thai democracy,” Ms. Pillay said. “Bringing perpetrators  to justice will not only set an important precedent for Thailand but  for South-east Asia as a whole.”   

  OHCHR noted that concerns have been raised about preserving the evidence  gathered by the TRCT, and Ms. Pillay urged the Government to take the  necessary steps to protect the information collected as this is  essential for the pursuit of accountability.  

  Another report on the 2010 political violence by the National Human  Rights Commission of Thailand is also expected to be released soon and  will provide a further detailed account of human rights violations,  OHCHR stated.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*PM: Thaksin worked for the country | Bangkok Post: breakingnews
*
*PM: Thaksin worked for the country*
Published: 18/09/2012 at 05:29 PMOnline news:
 Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said on  Tuesday that she believed her brother, former premier Thaksin, had  worked hard and in the best interests of the country when he was in   office.

 She was responding to  the report of the Truth for Reconciliation  Committee (TRC) yesterday, which concluded that the fugitive former  prime minister should quit politics - to help bring about national  reconciliation and in the best interests of the country.

 The prime minister said after the TRC has submitted its report to her  on the April-May 2010 violence and  crackdown she will forward it to  the Committee to Coordinate and Follow Up on Actions Taken to Implement  the Recommendations of the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of  Thailand for consideration and further action.

 Asked about the suggestion by the TRC that Thaksin should sacrifice  his own interests for the benefit of  the country, Ms Yingluck said she  had confidence the suggestion was in the interests of the country and  that her elder brother would follow it.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Murder charges against Abhisit, Suthep unrelated to politics
*
*Murder charges against Abhisit, Suthep unrelated to politics*

  วันอังคาร ที่ 18 ก.ย. 2555

 

  BANGKOK, Sept 18 – Department of Special Investigation (DSI)  Director-General Tharit Pengdit today brushed aside an allegation of  political interference in a planned filing of murder charges against  former Thai premier Abhisit Vejjajiva and deputy premier Suthep  Thuangsuban for their involvements in the 2010 Bangkok riots.

 The director of the now-dissolved Centre for the Resolution of the  Emergency Situation (CRES) was implicated by Mr Tharit in the murder  charge. CRES was specially set up to deal with the political protests in  Bangkok in 2010, and as the protests progressed nearly 100 people were  killed.

 Mr Tharit’s statement came on the heels of the Criminal Court’s ruling  on Monday that Pan Kamkong, a taxi driver from Yasothorn province, who  died on Rajprarob Road on May 15, 2010 was shot by CRES-supervised army  personnel.

 Former premier Abhisit, citing political implications in the case,  argued that the Criminal Court’s statement on Pan’s death could not be a  precedent for 35 similar cases as claimed by Mr Tharit.

 The DSI chief ruled out political interference and said the  investigation was carried out by three parties: DSI, the police and the  Attorney General.  

 The final decision rests with the court and defendants have the right to  fight the case, Mr Tharit said, adding that the court ruling on the  taxi driver’s death can be a precedent.

 Other pending cases are similar in the sense that they involved actions  by military orders though the times and places are different, he pointed  out. (MCOT online news)

-----
Government and Red Shirt activists blamed for 2010 political violence

*Government and Red Shirt activists blamed for 2010 political violence*

  วันอังคาร ที่ 18 ก.ย. 2555

 

  BANGKOK, Sept 18 – A commission probing the 2010 political  upheaval that had Thailand stalled, suspended, has released its complete  report blaming both the then government and Red Shirt activists for the  months-long violence that killed 91 people and injured nearly 2,000  others. 

 The 276-page report, concluded by the Truth for Reconciliation  Commission of Thailand (TRCT) after two years of investigation on the  political unrest in March-May 2010, presented a chronology of events  leading to the violence. 

 Some events included the burning of government offices in Bangkok and  the provinces and violence instigated by armed men in black outfits.

 The independent commission, appointed by then premier Abhisit Vejjajiva,  investigated the case for two years before releasing its report.

 The report comprises five parts: 1) primary information from the  commission, 2) conclusion regarding violence and breaches of human  rights, 3) causes and origin of conflicts, 4) victims of violence, and  rehabilitation and 5) recommendations. 

 TRCT chairman Kanit Na-Nakorn called on the government to create an  unbiased mechanism to contribute to stages of reconciliation and for  government to refrain from interfering in the work of the mechanism.

 He cited the formation of a national reconciliation network that  includes neutral personages and representatives from every sector in  society as one of the mechanisms.

 The TRCT chairman said then premier Abhisit Vejjajiva and the present  government should make public apologies for the violence given the then  government’s lack of mechanism to deal with the conflict in a peaceful  manner. 

 Mr Kanit said those who were responsible for committing or ordering  violence in the deadly protests must face legal action without any  exemption but that the reconciliation principle should be taken into  consideration during the legal process since the offences originated  from different political ideologies, and were not crime related.

 Regarding an amnesty move, he said an attempt to speed up parliamentary  deliberations toward a [prematurely obtained] National Reconciliation  Act will have a negative impact on nature of reconciliation which takes  place, as it needs cooperation from every party concerned, particularly  victims and those affected by consequences of amnesty.


 “In granting amnesty, charges and conditions for amnesty must be clear  and precise. An amnesty is not meant to whitewash a culprit’s offences  and easily set him free,” Mr Kanit said.   

 He also called on the army to take a neutral stand and refrain from  staging a coup or being involved in politics.  (MCOT online news)

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Govt will act on any 'useful' TRCT ideas, PM says - The Nation
*
*Govt will act on any 'useful' TRCT ideas, PM says*

           The Nation September 19, 2012  1:00 am 
*
The government will study the final report from  the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand before making the  next move, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said yesterday.*

            As with previous TRCT reports, the final one will be forwarded for  scrutiny by a follow-up panel headed by Deputy Prime Minister Yongyuth  Wichaidit.

     "The report will be examined in detail and the government is ready to  implement any recommendations deemed useful and conducive to peace,"  Yingluck said.

     She side-stepped a direct question whether her brother Thaksin would  exit politics - as suggested by TRCT chairman Kanit na Nakorn, saying  she believed he would agree to any ideas to bring about political  normalcy.

     She said relevant agencies would be responsible for implementing moves  designed for reconciliation after the Yongyuth panel vets them.

     Reacting to the report, Deputy Agriculture Minister Natthawut Saikua  said he was disappointed the TRCT had failed to come up with "in-depth"  findings on the 2010 political strife.

     For example, the TRCT did not identify the "men-in-black" - rogue  gunmen who fired on Army troops from April 10 on. But it made a general  observation on the issue that fitted information previously supplied by a  certain political party.

     He claimed the men-in-black had no links to the red shirts and said the TRCT should have unmasked them.

     He said the TRCT failed to get to the bottom of crowd control  operations and that it omitted to shed light on how and why people were  killed.

     "I don't think the TRCT's final report provides the key to overcome the political conflict," he said.

     In regard to TRCT chairman's call for Thaksin to quit politics, he said  Kanit should reconsider, as Thaksin just wanted to see justice restored  to himself. 

     He believed Thaksin did not to strive to be like Pridi Banomyong, the Thai statesman who died in exile in Paris.

     Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung said the report was not a  legally binding document, unlike a judicial verdict about the political  strife.

     Thaksin's lawyer Noppadon Pattama said he had anticipated the findings  in the report. The military, as well as the Abhisit Vejjajiva  government, seemed to have confidence in Kanit to work on varying tasks.

     Noppadon said Kanit made a number of conclusions based on perceptions  rather than facts. Kanit wrongly blamed Thaksin for the killing of  thousands of people during the 'War on drugs', when the Office of  Narcotics Control Board uncovered only 57 deaths.

     He said Kanit was also wrong to single out Thaksin as the catalyst for  the political divide, because the true cause was the 2006 coup.

     Green Politics coordinator Suriyasai Katasila said he saw no  possibility of Thaksin sacrificing himself and living in exile for the  rest of his life. "Thaksin has never shown remorse, nor accepted any  judicial decisions on his cases. [He] remains addicted to power and  wealth, hence he can never attain the status of statesman," he said.

     In regard to the judicial inquest on those killed in connection with  the political strife, he said the DSI had fallen prey to attempts by the  red shirts to pass the blame to the Abhisit government. 

     DSI director-general Tarit Pengdith had gone overboard by using one  inquest verdict to pin the blame on then prime minister Abhisit and his  deputy Suthep Thaugsuban for all 36 cases . Tarit appeared to be playing  the political game by skewing the facts to fault Abhisit and Suthep, he  said.

     Each case had different circumstances and the DSI had yet to shed light  on the men-in-black, who were responsible for killing 12 soldiers and  policemen, including Col Romklao Thuwatham, he said.

-----
Reconciliation report faces political apathy - The Nation

editorial

*Reconciliation report faces political apathy*

           The Nation September 19, 2012  1:00 am 

*The TRCT's account of the 2010 red-shirt  violence should be welcomed by the public as something to build upon,  but politicians and hardcore elements will attempt to bury it*

            Highly anticipated by the public, the Truth for Reconciliation  Commission of Thailand's (TRCT's) report has been released in the hope  that it might pave the way to reconciliation after the 2010 crackdown on  red-shirt protesters, which claimed 92 lives and injured more than  2,000. Thailand's political reality, however, may make the "truth"  presented by the TRCT hard to accept.

     The original idea was that, after the official version of the truth  came out, the nation would be able to move on and put the events of  April and May 2010 behind it. But the TRCT report is unlikely to please  anybody, and it is now in serious danger of being put on the backburner.

     Neutral observers may naturally regard the report as the most reliable  account to date of those tragic events. Its narrative tries to capture  the causes and the results of the various incidents, including what went  wrong when the Army moved in on the protesters, the government's  decision-making, the role of the mysterious "men in black" and the death  of the late Major-General Khattiya "Seh Daeng" Sawasdipol.

     Of course, some political leaders will react negatively to the report.  Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung, obviously disturbed by the  confirmed existence of the "men in black", has taunted the commission  for "not being an investigator", while red-shirt leader and Cabinet  member Nuttawut Saikua said the panel "sounds like the Democrats".

     The "truth" will satisfy no one, but the nation should at least try to  make sense of the report. In spite of its flaws and its limitations, the  report has more or less brought some clarity to the dark events of  2010, which deeply affected Thais on both sides of the political divide.  

     The report of more than 300 pages is designed to lead to solutions and  enable Thais to move ahead despite that divide. With the government  unenthusiastic about the findings, and the opposition as well as the  Army fingered in the report, the document's future looks bleak.

     Against the background of highly polarised society, people with  different political affiliations will naturally react differently to the  report, which suggests that both sides were responsible for the actions  that led to one of Thailand's greatest political tragedies. 

     There has been an attempt to question the integrity of the  commissioners in the observation that the commission was set up under  former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. This is despite the fact that  the commission's chairman, Kanit na Nakhon, a well-regarded lawyer, was  one of the founders of the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai Party. Somchai  Homla-or, another member, is also widely known for his work on human  rights.

     Thai society might need time to make sense of the commission's  conclusions, even if they were apparently reached in the most neutral  manner possible. TRCT members held hearings and conducted research and  interviews to pinpoint the perpetrators of rights violations. There  seems to be little if any political bias in the report.

     The report might contain some flaws, but it could be the best the  nation can hope for right now. Lingering questions and issues can be  further addressed by the TRCT, the public and other agencies, who are  encouraged to pursue the truth to its end.

     Modelled after South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the  TRCT marks a step forward for the nation. The report has drawn so much  attention because of the trust that the public has placed in the TRCT.  Politically speaking, though, the report may be something that no one  wants to touch.

     There are, of course, some issues and questions that have to be further  addressed and answered. The TRCT, however, is fading into oblivion for  the obvious reason that it was set up under the previous government and  the current government doesn't seem too pleased with its findings. The  TRCT may have made its first and last report, but Thailand's political  situation cries out for a mechanism like this to carry on its work. In  the end, the public may have to carry the TRCT torch. After all, the  effort to reconcile a divided nation cannot rely on the work of one  commission alone. We are all in this together.

----------


## Notnow

> Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
> 
> 
> *TRC explains 'men in black' connection | Bangkok Post: news
> *
> *TRC explains 'men in black' connection*
> Published: 17/09/2012 at 06:59 PMOnline news: Local News
>  The Truth for Reconciliation Commission has shed  light on the mystery of the "men in black", saying they were linked  with red-shirt security guards and Maj Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol.
> 
> ...


Corrected typos in the above paragraph.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Abhisit rebukes DSI chief | Bangkok Post: news
*
*Abhisit rebukes DSI chief*
Published: 19/09/2012 at 08:05 AMNewspaper section: News
 Opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva says the  Department of Special Investigation has gone too far by implying a taxi  driver caught up in the 2010 political violence was murdered.

 
Abhisit: Talk of murder goes too far

 The Criminal Court found on Monday that Yasothon native Phan  Khamkong, 44, was killed by security forces near the Ratchaprarop  Airport Link station during the red-shirt riots.

 They fired at a suspicious van which had entered a military controlled zone on the night of May 14, 2010.

 Responding to the decision, DSI chief Tarit Pengdith said former  prime minister Abhisit and Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency  Situation (CRES) director Suthep Thaugsuban could face charges of  premeditated murder as a result of the killing.

 Mr Abhisit said Mr Tarit had probably forgotten the fact that the DSI  chief was also a member of the CRES at the time. If the CRES is  prosecuted in relation to the taxi driver's death, the DSI chief could  be regarded as a suspect as well.

 Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung said the DSI would be asked  to further investigate Phan's death in the aftermath of the court's  ruling.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*PM will act on 'useful' TRC advice | Bangkok Post: news
*
*PM will act on 'useful' TRC advice*

*Report findings trigger fury among red shirts* 
Published: 19/09/2012 at 08:05 AMNewspaper section: News

 The prime minister Tuesday pledged to study the  Truth for Reconciliation Commission's (TRC) report on the 2010 protests,  saying the government would adopt its recommendations if they could  lead to national reconciliation.

 Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said she had ordered Interior  Minister Yongyuth Wichaidit to study the findings of the TRC's  investigation and its recommendations thoroughly.

 If the TRC's recommendations are useful and could bring about peace,  the government would be pleased to adopt and implement them, she said.

 As for the TRC's recommendation for her elder brother and former  prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra to end his political roles, Ms  Yingluck said she believed Thaksin would agree to the proposal if that  was deemed "useful" and would lead to national peace.

The TRC on Monday officially announced the results of its two-year  investigation into the 2010 demonstrations, blaming both red shirts and  the military for the violence that resulted in at least 92 deaths.

 Mr Abhisit said he hoped the Yongyuth-led committee, set up late last  year, would respect the TRC's report and its non-partisan intentions.

 The Yongyuth-led panel had not strictly followed the TRC's past  recommendations but only picked the ones that suited the government's  agenda, said the opposition leader.

 The publication of the TRC report, meanwhile, has sparked furious  reactions from key figures in the red shirt and pro-Thaksin camp.

 Pheu Thai list MP Khattiya Sawatdiphol, daughter of Maj Gen Khattiya  Sawatdiphol who was gunned down near the Lumpini MRT station on May 13,  2010, accused the TRC of basing its probe results on opinions, not  facts.

 Instead of vaguely linking the "men in black" with her late father,  the TRC should have found out who those black-clad attackers actually  were, she said.

 The TRC said on Monday it had found evidence that the men in black,  who used M79 grenades and rifles to attack security forces, had received  support from red-shirt security guards linked to Maj Gen Khattiya.

 Ms Khattiya said the TRC must prove its claim that Maj Gen Khattiya  was seen at the rally on April 10, 2010, the same day the men in black  were sighted, because she could confirm that her father was not at the  protest that day.

 She said she felt very uncomfortable with the TRC's findings, which  shifted the blame to her deceased father who could no longer defend  himself.

 Jarupan Kuldilok, another Pheu Thai list MP, described the TRC's investigation results as "the same old lie".

 She said the TRC has not only failed to prove who the men in black  were, but also told tales which were based on nothing but its own  hypotheses.

 The TRC failed miserably in its task and its members must apologise to the public, said Ms Jarupan.

 Pheu Thai list MP Weng Tojirakarn, also a red-shirt protest leader,  said the TRC's report was unreliable and had a hidden agenda of  justifying the use of force against protesters by the Centre for the  Resolution of the Emergency Situation and the Abhisit government.

 Nicha Thuwatham, wife of Gen Romklao Thuwatham who was killed on  April 10, 2010, during the unrest, told the Bangkok Post that it was a  good step for Thailand to issue a report that gathered information about  the events.

 "I appreciate the effort and caution of the TRC in presenting and  explaining those events. I hope the report, which is based on facts,  will be followed with proper judicial procedures," she said.

 "In fact, I expect the TRC could dig deeper and find out who was or were behind the men in black," she added.

 The TRC report said Gen Romklao was among eight security officers who were killed by men in black.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2012: Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence | PRNewswire | Rock Hill Herald Online
*
*Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence*

                                      Published: September 18, 2012                  

                                                          By Amsterdam & Partners LLP          

                                                                                        WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2012 —  WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Counsel acting on behalf of  Thailand's Red Shirt pro-democracy movement has denounced the  conclusions of a new report into the 2010 killings of protesters, saying  that it is counterproductive and provocative because the victims will  refuse to accept anything less than accountability.

"All of us who  were there know what happened, and this report, which mostly absolves  the key players of any responsibility, defiles the dead and wounded,"  said Robert Amsterdam, international counsel to the United National  Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), also known as the Red  Shirts.  "The victims will not accept this report, and will not accept  the false equivalence the report attempts to draw between an army firing  upon unarmed protesters and their civic right to protest for democracy  against a coup-appointed government."

On September 17, 2012, the  Truth for Reconciliation Commission (TRC) published its final report on  the events of that took place in Bangkok in April and May 2010, when  more than 90 people were killed in military crackdowns against Red Shirt  protesters.

According to Mr. Amsterdam, when the government of  former Prime Minister Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva appointed the TRC, there  were reasons to question the commission's independence, its mandate, and  its membership. The TRC's Chairman, Khanit na Nakhon, had been selected  by a non-elected military junta three years earlier to investigate the  "War on Drugs," and has gone on the record to say that he was not  concerned with accountability but rather only wanted to focus on  forgiveness.

According to Mr. Amsterdam, the TRC report cannot be  taken seriously given that it fails to address the unlawful nature of  the military coup that unseated the democratically elected government of  Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in 2006, which is a core grievance of  Thailand's pro-democracy protest movement.  Instead, says Mr.  Amsterdam, the TRC blames Thaksin for the coup, much like the Deputy  Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban has blamed protesters for "running into  the bullets."

"The presentation of findings in the TRC report  concerning the 2010 killings of Red Shirt protesters fails to address  the clear and universally condemned breaches of human rights law  resulting in parts of Bangkok being turned into a live fire zone," said  Mr. Amsterdam.  "The Red Shirts reject the conclusions of this biased  report as another attempt to whitewash the crimes against humanity  committed by a small group of Thai elites.  We will continue fighting  for accountability so that the people of Thailand are not subjected  again and again to violence by the Army with no consequences."

Thailand  has experienced regular cycles of violence with citizens killed by the  military in 1973, 1976, 1992, 2009, and 2010.  According to Mr.  Amsterdam, the conclusions of this report only ensure that it happens  again.

In late June, Robert Amsterdam participated in a delegation  of victims, witnesses, and government officials led by the Thai  historian Dr. Thongchai Winichakul to meetings at the International  Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague to discuss their application  requesting an investigation. 

"While there are sections of the  report that contain commendable recommendations, the section addressing  the April-May 2010 violence fails miserably," said Dr. Winichakul of the  University of Wisconsin.  "The commission is guided by their own bias  and ideology since several leading TRC members are supporters of the  2006 coup.  Any serious human rights organization should be careful  before endorsing this report."

More information can be found on Robert Amsterdam Thailand.

SOURCE  Amsterdam & Partners LLP            



Read more here: WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2012: Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence | PRNewswire | Rock Hill Herald Online

----------


## lom

> Noppadon said Kanit made a number of conclusions based on perceptions rather than facts. Kanit wrongly blamed Thaksin for the killing of thousands of people during the 'War on drugs', when the Office of Narcotics Control Board uncovered *only 57 deaths*.


Only 57? Ah, but that's like a piss in Mississippi, isn't it? :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## StrontiumDog

Setting brave new standards | Bangkok Post: opinion

EDITORIAL   

*Setting brave new standards*
Published: 19/09/2012 at 06:25 AMNewspaper section: News
 The country owes a big "thank you" and chai yo   to Kanit na Nakorn and his staff of the Truth for Reconciliation  Commission (TRC). The 351-page report compiled and presented to the  public on Monday marked a major and progressive departure from the past.

 In the past, authorities have stonewalled investigations into  virtually every serious incident. Mr Kanit and others persevered and  managed to cut through some of the fog concealing facts around the 2010  street violence in Bangkok.

 The report is incomplete in many areas. Don't blame Mr Kanit or any  member of the TRC. It is obvious from the report and previous interviews  with commission members that they received almost no cooperation.

 As in previous events - from the killings of the 1973 revolution  through to the Tak Bai and Krue Se mass deaths - authorities put up  strong delays, defences and denials to prevent the truth from reaching  the public.

 Mr Kanit has persevered to produce a report that is superior in every  way to those of the past. First, he has actually printed a report. No  objective investigation of the past has ever reached this stage. The TRC  has also made available volumes of documents with testimony and  reports. The public now can delve into more facts of the 2010 violence  than have ever been made available in this or any such case in the past.

 What is remarkable about the TRC report presented on Monday is its  objectivity. Mr Kanit and staff should be proud of the criticisms they  have received from many of those who had a direct hand in the deadly  events of 2010. The red shirts, former government ministers,  bureaucrats, the military and security forces - all have rushed to try  to defend themselves by attacking Mr Kanit's report.

 It cannot and should not work. The TRC report is comprehensive and  footnoted. The denials are self-interested, incomplete and narrowly  focused on a goal of "not our fault". The red shirts did not incite  violence. The army did not use live ammunition. The government ministers  did not recommend using deadly force. The "men in black" were some sort  of mysterious group of unprovable provenance.

 All these denials and diversions are shown to be shams by the Kanit  report. This is why it is such a valuable, national resource. It is a  sincere, honest and credible attempt to relate the dark days of  mid-2010. Those who claim to be maligned by the TRC's final report are  probably simply showing shame at having their actions revealed in the  public light.

 This report, lamentably, is not as good as it could be. It leaves  many questions unanswered. In particular, it has failed to pierce the  military and government networks of silence and obfuscation. The  circumstances of most of the 92 deaths investigated now are known.  Unfortunately, the exact identities of those responsible are still  unclear. But the TRC appointed more than two years ago has produced a  type of document never seen before. Mr Kanit and his TRC have  established a new standard for accountability.

 From now on, the public will no longer have to accept silence and stonewalling, and can push even harder for the truth.

----------


## lom

> Mr Abhisit said Mr Tarit had probably forgotten the fact that the DSI chief was also a member of the CRES at the time. If the CRES is prosecuted in relation to the taxi driver's death, the DSI chief could be regarded as a suspect as well.


Mr Tarit also seems to have forgotten that he was not only an observer in CRES, he was the suggester of forming CRES and declaring a state of emergency on 7th of April 2010.

----------


## StrontiumDog

> Originally Posted by StrontiumDog
> 
> Noppadon said Kanit made a number of conclusions based on perceptions rather than facts. Kanit wrongly blamed Thaksin for the killing of thousands of people during the 'War on drugs', when the Office of Narcotics Control Board uncovered *only 57 deaths*.
> 
> 
> Only 57? Ah, but that's like a piss in Mississippi, isn't it?


Yeah, strange right.....

Well, he is a lawyer....

----------


## StrontiumDog

Oblivion may be where the truth belongs - The Nation

stoppage time

*Oblivion may be where the truth belongs*

           Tulsathit Taptim 
tulsathit@nationgroup.com September 19, 2012  1:00 am 
 

*The most comprehensive report on the political violence of 2010 can do anything but speak volumes.*

                It will most likely turn out to be the Truth for Reconciliation  Commission of Thailand's (TRCT) swan song. Nobody can actually benefit  from the detailed chronology of events, the added and well-researched  witness accounts, the intriguing information picked up by the social  media, as well as how the conventional media saw the unfolding violence.  The country's political divide has been romanticised and idealised, so  much so that as the TRCT tries to tell the story as it happened, the  panel will not be making any friends.

     The "men in black" existed, the panel has concluded, and there is  strong evidence that they were linked to at least some red-shirt  leaders. The men in black played a crucial role in the Kok Wua  Intersection bloodbath on April 10, 2010, as heavy fire rained down on  troops deployed to push back red-shirt protesters from prohibited zones.  After the Kok Wua incident, the men in black re-emerged several times  and were involved in incidents leading up to the infamous May 19  crackdown, according to the TRCT report.

     As for the Abhisit government and the command centre set up to deal  with the protesters, the TRCT also pulls no punches. Soldiers shouldn't  have been tasked with restoring order in that kind of political  situation, the panel says. There were cases of misjudgement or  stereotyping, leading to blanket negativity toward the red-shirt  protesters and their eventual suppression. The commission calls for  "restorative justice", or total leniency toward protesters who may have  broken national security laws during the political confrontation. It  also denounces the 2006 coup in no uncertain terms, and gives the Thai  judiciary a strong caution that its role can either be a solution to the  problem or help prolong the political suffering.

     The Yingluck administration is not spared either. In what arguably is  the most significant message in its report, the TRCT expresses its  absolute disapproval of the move to rush through what it suggests are  conspicuous amnesty programmes. Reconciliation can't be forced upon a  nation by the party that controls the majority in Parliament, the  commission says. Meaningful steps toward peace need time and consensus,  and unilateral moves carry the danger of generating the opposite results  - in other words, deeper divide and greater hostility, it says.

     The TRCT lectures the media on how not to add fuel to volatile  political situations, and reminds all protesters of the need to  differentiate between exercising democratic liberty and provoking the  authorities through armed activities and the violation of other people's  rights. The military must stay away from politics no matter what, and  Article 112, or the "lese majeste law", must be neither taunted nor  abused. Thailand needs to address the evolution of the monarchy with the  utmost sincerity, and with only one united agenda, which is to protect  the institution to the country's best interests.

     The commission will fade away after this, as the Yingluck government  isn't much interested in a fact-finding mechanism created by the  previous government. The panel, however, has been true to a "balance of  perspectives" format up to the last minute. In a previous report, the  panel gave both the armed forces and Thaksin Shinawatra a strong rebuke.  As the commissioners see it, if the 2006 coup sent Thailand down a  slippery slope, there is no doubt about who brought it to the precipice.

     The truth, they say, often upsets people. The commission, chaired by  Kanit na Nakorn, has presented possibilities on how historians should  tackle the past decade of Thailand politically. The red shirts have  their own version, so do the yellow shirts, the Pheu Thai Party, the  Democrat Party, the Army and so on. Different from their versions is the  commission's obvious attempt to see the Thai political world as grey,  not black or white.

     And that's probably how the truth is supposed to be told. Most  tragedies result from a juxtaposition of factors, and sometimes they  lead to greater tragedies because all those involved do is deflect blame  to others. The commission's ultimate message is that everybody played a  part, big or small, in bringing Thailand to this sad impasse, and that  reconciliation can never happen unless this is realised by all.

     The TRCT's swan song blends realism and idealism. The panel tried to be  realistic in presenting accounts of events without political bias, in  analysing everyone's motives and actions. It is idealistic in assuming  that everyone will accept, or at least understand, the report and its  calls for reason.

----------


## StrontiumDog

> *WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2012: Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence | PRNewswire | Rock Hill Herald Online
> *
> *Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence*
> 
>                                       Published: September 18, 2012                  
> 
>                                                           By Amsterdam & Partners LLP          
> 
> "All of us who  were there know what happened, and this report, which mostly absolves  the key players of any responsibility, defiles the dead and wounded,"  said Robert Amsterdam, international counsel to the United National  Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), also known as the Red  Shirts.  "The victims will not accept this report, and will not accept  the false equivalence the report attempts to draw between an army firing  upon unarmed protesters and their civic right to protest for democracy  against a coup-appointed government."


Interesting reality distortion field underway here, but the gullible will buy in to it. 

I particularly liked the "_all of us who were there know what happened_" bit, I don't recall see Robert along Ratchaprarop road. 

I was there, and yes I know what happened. The army did shoot unarmed civilians but also the men in black operated from behind red shirt lines. No one is going to tell me otherwise. I know what I saw/heard/felt for 6 days.

----------


## GT200 Oerator

> I was there, and yes I know what happened. The army did shoot unarmed civilians but also the men in black operated from behind red shirt lines. No one is going to tell me otherwise. I know what I saw/heard/felt for 6 days.



Why didn't you report this to the DSI?  

But it's not too late I am sure they would be glad if you could tell them more of what you saw especially about these "men in black"

----------


## Butterfly

> The truth, they say, often upsets people. The commission, chaired by Kanit na Nakorn, has presented possibilities on how historians should tackle the past decade of Thailand politically. The red shirts have their own version, so do the yellow shirts, the Pheu Thai Party, the Democrat Party, the Army and so on. Different from their versions is the commission's obvious attempt to see the Thai political world as grey, not black or white.
> 
> And that's probably how the truth is supposed to be told. Most tragedies result from a juxtaposition of factors, and sometimes they lead to greater tragedies because all those involved do is deflect blame to others. The commission's ultimate message is that everybody played a part, big or small, in bringing Thailand to this sad impasse, and that reconciliation can never happen unless this is realised by all.


wise words and quite a well balanced report, nice to see that coming from a Thai organization

----------


## StrontiumDog

> *WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2012: Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence | PRNewswire | Rock Hill Herald Online
> *
> *Lawyer for Thailand's Red Shirts Denounces Report on 2010 Violence*
> 
>                                       Published: September 18, 2012                  
> 
>                                                           By Amsterdam & Partners LLP          
> 
> Thailand  has experienced regular cycles of violence with citizens killed by the  military in 1973, 1976, 1992, 2009, and 2010.  According to Mr.  Amsterdam, the conclusions of this report only ensure that it happens  again.
> ...


I'm curious about his inclusion of 2009....

The only 2 deaths known about were at Din Daeng, who were local residents who dared to stand-up against the red shirts occupying the streets there. 

The inclusion of something so obviously false and misleading suggests many things....

----------


## StrontiumDog

*UDD: TRC biased against Thaksin | Bangkok Post: news
*
*UDD: TRC biased against Thaksin*
Published: 19/09/2012 at 04:34 PMOnline news: Local News
 The Truth for Reconciliation Commission (TRC)  has not been impartial and its report on its findings on the 2010 riots  is intended to help former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his  former deputy Suthep Thaugsuban, according to red-shirt leader Tida  Thawornseth.

 Ms Tida, chair of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship  (UDD), said she questioned the TRC's impartiality since it was  established by the Abhisit government in 2010.

 It was not believable that a government would set up a commission that would find it find fault with its own actions, she said.

 Therefore, the TRC's report came out in a way that presented the  peaceful struggle by the people as illegal and where the "men in black"  gave the then-government the legitimacy to use force against them, she  said.

 She said Kanit Na Nakorn, the TRC chairman, was once a member of the  dissolved Thai Rak Thai party, but left in circumstances that certainly  were not with love.

 Mr Kanit was also appointed by former prime minister Surayud  Chulanont to chair an independent committee to investigate the killing  of people in the war on drugs during the government of former prime  minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

 "How can this kind of person be impartial or independent?  The TRC  report also said Thaksin's court win in the shares concealment case was  the root cause of the whole problem," she said.

 Therefore, the report of the Kanit commission would not lead to reconciliation, but only to more hatred.

 "How can the TRC be impartial when its chairman harboured so much hatred for Thaksin?" Ms Tida said.

 She said Thaksin should not make any comment on the report of the TRC chaired by Mr Kanit. 

  Moreover, the information in the report lacked credibility and was not scientific, she added.

 The UDD chair said the TRC report was full of bias, sowing hatred for  the red-shirts, blaming Thaksin as being the cause of all problems, and  giving legitimacy to Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep.

 No matter what, the facts on the 98 (sic) deaths, when established, would finally turn the public against the TRC, said Ms Tida.


-----
Suthep vows to fight cases in court | Bangkok Post: news

*Suthep vows to fight cases in court*
Published: 19/09/2012 at 03:24 PMOnline news: Local News
 Former deputy prime minister Suthep Thaugsuban  says he will fight any charges which may by filed against him in court,  saying he and former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva have been targeted  for legal action by some senior figures in the government in connection  with their handling of the 2010 riots.

 Mr Suthep was responding to Department of Specal Investigation (DSI)  chief Tarit Pengdit's comment there was a chance Mr Abhisit and Mr  Suthep could be charged with murder after the Criminal Court ruled that a  taxi driver was killed by bullets fired by soldiers ordered to the  location by the Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situations  (CRES). Mr Suthep, as deputy prime minister, was the director of the  centre at the time.

 If charges were filed against him, he would report to the authorities  to acknowledge them, and would then fight the charges in the courts to  finally establish the facts about the riots.

 "There is no reason (for the authorities) to take legal action  against those who performed their duty to maintain law and order for the  safety of the lives and property of the people, and to protect their  rights from being infringed on by rioters and terrorists shooting at  people and authorities with war weapons.

 "In such a situation, it is the duty of any government to quell the riots," Mr Suthep said.

 The former CRES director said during the early period of the riots  the security forces were told to use only shields, clubs, water cannons,  tear gas and rubber bullets.

 But, after April 10, 2010 when "men in black" emerged, using war  weapons to attack the authorities and the people, troops were allowed to  use their weapons to protect themselves and the people's lives.

 "We never ordered the soldiers to use force and weapons to break up  the protesters.  The operation launched on April 10, 2010 was to retake  occupied traffic space on Ratchadamnern Avenue. 

 "On May 19, government forces were used to retake Lumpini Park which  had been occupied and used as a terrorist base," Mr Suthep said.

 Mr Suthep said he would not say whether Mr Tarit had  breached professional ethics by talking about possible legal action to  be taken him and Mr Abhisit in public.

 "It is obvious that the government and the red-shirts are trying to  distort the facts.  They become disgruntled  whenever people speak the  truth.  This was seen from the way they expressed disapproval of the  Truth for Reconciliation Commission's report," he said.

 The former deputy prime minister said he would not  manipulate any cases brought against him to trigger a conflict in the  country.  He would not call on the people to fight for him.

 "But the people should not let themselves be forced to accept a sham  reconciliation law or an attempt to rewrite the constitution to give  some people the power to take complete control of the country's  administration.

 "Action taken against me and Mr Abhisit should not create fear and  make people agree to support their intention to grant an amnesty (for  wrongdoers).

 "We have declared we will fight to the end, both inside and outside  parliament, against any laws - no matter what they may be called - to  whitewash the cheats or those who broke the law and hurt the people.

 "If there is an attempt to rewrite the whole constitution without the  people's approval, I would fight against it," Mr Suthep said.

 Mr Suthep also said he did not believe the government would follow  the truith commission's recommendation that it delay aplans to amend the  charter or issue an amnesty law.

 The government had approved a fund of nearly 100 million baht for the  Interior Ministry to launch a campaign to get the people to agree with  it, he added.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Chalerm, reds stand against TRCT report - The Nation
*
*Chalerm, reds stand against TRCT report*

            September 20, 2012  1:00 am 
 
Thida

*Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung and  prominent red-shirt leaders yesterday loudly opposed the Truth for  Reconciliation Commission of Thailand's final report on the 2010  crackdown.*

                Chalerm dismissed the TRCT's conclusions as just the opinions of a committee that had no legal binding. 

    Robert Amsterdam, who now works as legal counsel for the red-shirt  Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship (DAAD), slammed the TRCT for  suggesting in its report that former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra  end his political activities. 

     He questioned the TRCT's credibility and its ability to stay neutral,  especially since it had been set up by a military-installed government.  He also denounced the report as counter-productive and provocative  because the victims of the crackdown would refuse to accept anything  less than accountability. 

     "The victims will not accept this report and will not accept the false  equivalence the report attempts to draw between an army firing upon  unarmed protesters and their civic right to protest for democracy  against a coup-appointed government," he said.

*IT'S PERSONAL OPINION: THIDA*

     Meanwhile, DAAD chairwoman Thida Thavornseth said the report, which  states that Thaksin was the root cause of the national divide, was  merely TRCT chairman Kanit na Nakorn's personal opinion. She added that  comments like this would not bring about national reconciliation but  would instead anger people. 

     Separately, Department of Special Investigation chief Tarit Pengdith  demanded that Abhisit Vejjajiva and Suthep Thaugsuban, then director of  the Centre for Resolution of the Emergency Situation, be held  responsible for the death of taxi driver Phan Kamkong. 

     The Criminal Court ruled this week that Phan had indeed been shot dead by soldiers. 

     Abhisit responded to the DSI chief's demand by saying that Tarit too  was a member of the CRES and had taken part in the centre's policies and  decision-making. He said it was unusual for Tarit to conclude that he  and Suthep committed a crime without going through the proper justice  procedure. 

     Chalerm, however, defended Tarit's comment, saying that only the CRES director should be held responsible.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Thai report on 2010 violence mixed - UPI.com
*
*Thai report on 2010 violence mixed*

Published By United Press International             

WASHINGTON, Sept. 19 (UPI) -- A lawyer representing the Red  Shirt movement in Thailand said a report on unrest in 2010 was a biased  attempt to absolve crimes committed by Thai elites.

The Red Shirt movement is loyal to Thai Prime Minister Thaksin  Shinawatra, who was ousted in a 2006 military coup and lives in  self-imposed exile, mostly in Dubai. Clashes between Red Shirt  supporters and security forces left at least 89 people dead in 2010.

A 275-page report from a truth and reconciliation commission said both  sides were likely responsible for the escalation of violence in 2010.  The BBC reports, however, that the commission lacked the authority to  subpoena witnesses and therefore wasn't able to indicate which side was  responsible for the deaths.

Robert Amsterdam, legal counsel for the Red Shirt movement, said the  report was an insult to those caught up in the 2010 violence.

"The Red Shirts reject the conclusions of this biased report as another  attempt to whitewash the crimes against humanity committed by a small  group of Thai elites," he said in a statement from Washington.

A breakaway general was assassinated during a live media interview amid the unrest in 2010.

The BBC reports that the human rights community blames the use of live  ammunition by government forces for much of the deaths. Members of the  protest movement, however, were likely responsible for some deaths as  well.

----------


## StrontiumDog

Michael Vatikiotis: Thailand's Lessons From Conflict - WSJ.com
September 19, 2012, 12:12 p.m. ET*Thailand's Lessons From Conflict* 

*Two years on, no one has been held to account for the deadly violence in Bangkok.*

*By MICHAEL VATIKIOTIS* 

The Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand  issued its final report Monday on the political violence in 2010, and  while it is a reasonably fair and balanced account, it doesn't resolve  responsibility for the 91 protesters killed in the streets of Bangkok  between April 10 and May 19. The wrangling between royalists and  supporters of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra over the incident  will inevitably continue. Nevertheless, the report's recommendations  could help prevent future clashes.


Zuma Press                 An anti-government protester lies dead in Bangkok?s Lumphini Park, May 2010.

The fact that the report can be read at  all represents progress. The last such document, from a commission of  inquiry into a deadly 1992 crackdown on student protests, was never  released to the public. So no matter how its findings are treated, the  report establishes a new benchmark for investigating political violence  in Thailand, where hundreds of civilians have died in such conflicts  over the past four decades.

 Two years in the making, the more than 300-page report provides a  detailed factual account of events that is impartial, if imperfect.  What's more, the commission drew on extensive international advice and  support. This is unusual for a country that is usually averse to foreign  involvement in anything political.

 Crucially, the report also presents a set of recommendations aimed at  addressing the root causes of the 2010 conflict. The authors placed  emphasis on the conduct of the security forces and the impartiality of  the justice system.

 To be sure, many of the recommendations are too broad to  realistically address the root causes or lend impetus to reconciliation.  But some of them focus on key areas that need addressing, including  access to justice, manipulation of the stringent lese majeste law and  the use of the military to manage protests.

 Encouragingly, media coverage has been extensive and comprehensive.  The report's formal release on Sept. 17 was packed with local and  international media, unlike previous events put on by the TRCT in the  course of its two-year mandate. 

 However, initial political reaction to the report was mostly  negative. The strongest response came from the Red Shirt/UDD camp, the  core supporters of the exiled Mr. Thaksin who were protesting in 2010.  At the report's launch, Red Shirt activists let loose a barrage of  questions that were left unanswered at the close of the event. Later,  their representatives rejected all the recommendations, saying that the  report is biased and doesn't offer any redress for the killings. 

 Weng Tojirakarn, a red-shirt leader who is also an MP with the  governing Pheu Thai Party, demanded the TRCT provide evidence to support  its conclusion that armed "men in black" were present at Bangkok  rallies and enjoyed support from his red-shirt group. Mr. Weng also  rejected the TRCT's claim that these armed men fired at soldiers during a  particularly notorious clash in the Pathumwan area of the city.

 It was never disputed that unarmed civilians died inside or close by a  Buddhist temple that had been declared a safe zone. However, the report  argues that soldiers on a nearby the elevated train platform were  taking fire from the vicinity of the temple and were forced to fire  back. Later, the report says, a gun was found in the temple compound. 

 Two years on, argument over accounts of the violence still stir  emotions. No one has been held responsible for any of the violence,  although more than 40 people remain in detention accused of criminal  charges related to the protests. The TRCT report does apportion blame to  the military for using live ammunition and inappropriate crowd control  tactics. One section of the report criticizes the military for firing  live rounds and provides photographic evidence that soldiers were not  just firing into the air, as the army has said. 

 Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra cautiously welcomed the report,  saying that according to the terms of its mandate, she would receive the  final report and then look at how to implement its recommendations. "If  there are useful ones that would help calming the situation, we are  willing to receive them," she said. 

 Yet the government, which initially embraced the TRCT as a central  plank of reconciliation, has been saying privately that it doesn't  really trust the commission. Publicly some officials say that amnesty  and constitutional amendments are the keys to effective reconciliation. 

 Inevitably, and despite valiant efforts  to remain impartial by core working members of the commission, the TRCT  fell victim to Thailand's highly polarized political environment. But  the commission and its findings should not be forgotten. 

 The recommendations calling for reform of the judiciary and the  security agencies should get top priority. Next, it would help if  leading political figures and officials associated with the unrest issue  a public apology, as the report calls for. Although unlikely, some  process of accountability should be explored, so long as it is fair and  balanced. The government should also address the cases of those facing  criminal charges related to the 2010 protests, whose continued detention  is a significant issue for the UDD.

 Despite its flaws and the ongoing conflict, the TRCT is the only  effort so far to lay the foundations of reconciliation in a highly  polarized and volatile situation. The key challenge will be to implement  its recommendations as soon as possible and prevent the report from  being further politicized.


_Mr. Vatikiotis is the Asia regional director of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue based in Singapore._

----------


## LooseBowels

> slammed the TRCT for suggesting in its report that former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra end his political activities.


Absolute bullshit suggestion in the report.

Khun Taksin remains the democratically elected PM of thailand, ousted by an illegal military junta coup, so has every democratic legal right to remain active in thai politics.
The people gave him that right,  :Smile: , and keep endorsing it for him


Notice how the propoganda report doesn't tell the unelected dark force monkies, and fat ugly bitches to stay out of politics.

You can't argue with that

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Suthep says DSI murder claim part of amnesty ruse | Bangkok Post: news
*
*Suthep says DSI murder claim part of amnesty ruse*
Published: 20/09/2012 at 08:10 AMNewspaper section: News
 Even if murder charges are laid against Democrat  executives, the party will not back down and support the government's  bid for a blanket amnesty to help ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra, its  MP for Surat Thani Suthep Thaugsuban says.

 
Suthep: Dares Tarit to charge him right away

 Political observers say the government is using the threat of  criminal charges against Democrat Party key figures as leverage to  obtain a pardon for Thaksin.

 Department of Special Investigation (DSI) chief Tarit Pengdith  earlier said Mr Suthep and Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could  face premeditated murder charges following the Criminal Court's ruling  on Monday that taxi driver Phan Khamkong was shot dead by soldiers in  the Ratchaprarop area during the political unrest on May 14, 2010.

 Soldiers opened fire in a bid to stop a van that drove into a security area while Phan was walking nearby.

 Mr Suthep was deputy prime minister and director of the Centre for  the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), in charge of the  red-shirt protest crackdown, and Mr Abhisit was prime minister at the  time.
 Mr Suthep challenged Mr Tarit to press charges against him right away.

 "We never ordered the use of arms to deal with protesters but when  armed 'men in black' appeared on April 10, 2010, and killed soldiers and  innocent people, forces were allowed to use arms to protect themselves  and people," he said, adding he would not use any charges against him to  instigate political violence.

 "The charges, if laid, will not scare me or Mr Abhisit and will not  force the Democrats to support the amnesty push by the government," he  said.

 "They [red shirts] become dissatisfied whenever some people tell the  truth. This was seen in the way they expressed disapproval of the Truth  for Reconciliation Commission's [TRC] report."

 Chaiyand Chaiyaporn, political science lecturer at Chulalongkorn  University, said yesterday the DSI was "jumping the gun" in saying Mr  Suthep and Mr Abhisit would be charged with premeditated murder. He said  the DSI could be criticised for serving politicians in power if it  prejudged the case against Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep. However, he  admitted the DSI would have to do its duty to find out those responsible  for the killings following the court's ruling.

 He called for the government to endorse the TRC report since the  government permitted the committee, established by the Democrat-led  government, to proceed with its investigation.

 Mr Abhisit said yesterday that if the charges are pressed, Mr Tarit  could not deny responsibility for the case because Mr Tarit had been a  member of CRES.

 But Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung said yesterday that Mr  Tarit was not responsible for the deaths during the 2010 crackdowns as  he had only been involved at an operational level.

----------


## Yasojack

Come on Hazz who's dan has he posted in this thread yet. or is he your altered ego

----------


## StrontiumDog

Clarity, justice remain elusive - The Nation

2010 red-shirt uprising

*Clarity, justice remain elusive*

           Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation April 10, 2013  1:00 am 
*
Debate on blame unresolved as all sides disagree on what occurred*

                 As red shirts began  marking the third anniversary of the April 10 to May 19, 2010 protest  which ended in blood and the loss of more than 90 lives, mostly on the  red-shirt side, there exists no consensus on whom to blame and whether  reconciliation is still achievable. Those from different sides  interviewed concur, however, that finding out the truth is important and  paramount in achieving closure and reconciliation.

     "Clarity [about what happened] is most essential," said Tul Sitthisomwong, leader of the multi-coloured-shirt group.

     "What red-shirts and Thaksin Shinawatra  fear most is clarity. I'm not opposed to amnesty. We must see who has  been misled. But we cannot forgive the masterminds until they have been  punished," he said, referring to red-shirt leaders, and to ousted and  fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, whom he considers the culprit.

     Tul said that since there's no agreement on what really took place and  who should be held responsible, Thailand has been "lost" over the past  three years.

     "[Can there be] forgiveness? I say ordinary red shirts were  mere pawns and political victims," said Tul, who insisted that soldiers  did not indiscriminately shoot at protesters but were provoked and  attacked by the mysterious so-called "men in black".

     Red Sunday group leader Sombath Boon-ngam-anong, meanwhile, agreed that  the debate on who is to be blamed for the deaths and violence is still  far from being resolved. Sombath added, however, that he thinks the  feeling of mutual hatred has subsided somewhat over the past three  years. Although Sombath was detained for weeks after protesting against  the crackdown in the immediate aftermath in 2010, he said he is now  personally no longer easily agitated as before.

     "It will take time. The incident [in 2010] was complex and I personally  thought both sides were victims and offenders. The judicial process is  still ongoing. I believe the passage of time will help clear up many  issues and lead toward eventual acceptance of the truth."

     Sombath urges all sides to strive towards unveiling the truth and to  seek justice. "The search for truth must continue. But let's not stall  the country [due to political division]. It's a different matter," he  said, adding that issues like who committed the Central World arson are  still not resolved.

     Puangthong Pawakapan, co-editor of a book detailing what happened in  2010 and key member of the People's Information Centre, agrees it will  take more time to unveil the truth. She said it may take another five to  10 years before people will be open-minded enough to recognise at least  two sets of narratives about what happened in 2010. "By then a new  round of searching for the truth may resume."

     Unlike Sombath, Puangthong said emotions still run high and the level  of mutual animosity may, in fact, have deepened over the three years as  people like then prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva have still not been made accountable, she said.

     What's more, 18 red shirts are still being detained with little or no assistance from the Pheu Thai government of Yingluck Shinawatra, leaving some red shirts bitter with the government it helped to elect.

     "When I joined the red-shirt protests, I could sense their anger against the Pheu Thai government as well."

     At the same time, Puangthong feels that royalists who oppose the red shirts and  the government, and who currently oppose the move to amend the charter,  may never be at peace because they are simply running against the tide  of democratisation.

     "They may end up being full of hatred for the rest of their lives."

----------


## StrontiumDog

Men in black 'sparked unrest' | Bangkok Post: news

2010 VIOLENCE 
*
Men in black 'sparked unrest'*Published: 10 Apr 2013 at 00.00Newspaper section: NewsMysterious "men in black" did attack security  forces on April 10, 2010 on Ratchadamnoen Avenue, a senate sub-committee  looking into political violence has concluded.

Elected senator Somchai Sawaengkarn, chair of the sub-committee,  said there were grounds to believe the men in black existed and played a  significant role in setting off the turmoil during the red-shirt  protests three years ago.

 The men were armed with heavy weapons including assault rifles and grenades which were used against security forces.

 Sen Somchai, who is a member of the Group of 40 Senators, said the  panel also suspected that the 26 deaths reported after the April 10  incident at Kok Wua intersection on Ratchadamnoen Avenue were  exaggerated and wanted the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) to  investigate possible evidence tampering.

 The committee's findings were released one day before the red-shirt  United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship was to hold activities  marking the third anniversary of the violence.

 The inquiry focused on the violence that erupted on April 10 after  security forces were sent in to reclaim the red-shirt protest venue, and  on the death of Gen Romklao Thuwatham.

 It questioned more than 100 witnesses and reviewed piles of material evidence, Sen Somchai said.

 Lt Gen Nanthadet Meksawat, a member of the sub-committee, concluded  that two M-67 grenades were thrown from the direction where red shirts  were gathered and that the grenade blasts had killed Gen Romklao. He  criticised the DSI for its lack of progress in investigating Gen  Romklao's death.

 He said there was clear evidence for the agency to work with but so far the DSI had not made much progress.

 The panel also found the security forces did not spark the April 10  violence and that they had handled the situation in accordance with the  law.

 Wirat Panitpong, another sub-committee member, said the findings  suggested that Wasan Phuthong, who was shot in the head, was not killed  by security forces.

 Wasan's death is among 18 cases in which state authorities are suspected of involvement.


-----
Justice for the Dead of Kok Wua | Robert Amsterdam Thailand

*Justice for the Dead of Kok Wua*

Terdsak Phungkinchan was only 29 when the sniper’s bullet took his life. Three years ago today, on April 10th  2010, he fell, mortally wounded, onto the hard tarmac of a Bangkok  street. The force used against Terdsak – despite it being very clear to  the person pulling the trigger that his victim was completely unarmed  and posing no threat to anyone – was deadly and meant to be so. The only  word that can be used to describe this act is murder and my law firm  are still doing all we can to bring the people responsible for this to  justice.



There can also be no equivocation regarding an analysis of the force  used against the Red Shirts at Kok Wua that dreadful night in April 2010  – it was designed, purely, to kill. And kill it did, with 21 Red Shirts  falling in a hail of bullets fired from the guns former Thai Prime  Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had ordered onto Bangkok’s streets. In  addition five Thai Army soldiers died, their lives ending in what can  only be described as mysterious circumstances, whilst an investigation  into the death of the Japanese cameraman, Hiro Muromoto, is still  ongoing. All these acts left behind even more grief-stricken widows and  mothers.

 Without justice for all victims the tragedy of April 2010 is still  being played out. Thailand is not yet at peace with itself and, since  that night, the families of the dead have been left with more questions  than answers.

 To get a sense of the depth of feeling the April 10th Kok  Wua Massacre arouses you need look no further than the remarkable Thai  language book published by the Democracy Martyr Foundation whose title  loosely translates as “_The Dead Have a Face and Those Who Were Killed Had a Life_.”  This book gives voice to the victims of April 2010, a cry that must be  heard if Thailand wishes to move towards true reconciliation.

 Take Terdsak’s mother, Suwimon, who told the authors of this exceptional book thatDeep down, I still want to fight for my son because he  was innocent – he didn’t deserve to die, he shouldn’t have been treated  like that. I feel as if I couldn’t do much as we are just ordinary  people… I will never forget this.It is Suwimon’s words that we should meditate on as we commemorate the fallen of April 2010 – “_I still want to fight for my son.”_ The  mothers of the fallen Red Shirts, unlike the commentators, politicians  and, dare I say it, lawyers, can’t just “forget” when it comes to the  destruction wrought against their offspring. We can only continue to  offer the likes of Suwimon support and solidarity in her struggle for  justice.

 Another victim of the Kok Wua Massacre was tailor Wasan Puthong (39). His young sister, Numthip, is also quoted in “_The Dead Have a Face and Those Who Were Killed Had a Life_” sayingNowadays, I am still missing him as we had been working  together for such a long time – whenever I turned, I saw him there  because we were together all day all night…. It is hard for me to accept  this.Numthip’s comment are an apt reflection on the death of a brother who  was taken down in such abhorrent circumstance. The lack of definable  justice will continue to make it hard for victims of Kok Wua to just  “accept this”.

 Today my office had the honour of speaking to Wasan’s brother-in-law,  Klin, and it his words we end on here. These words must be our banner  as we mark another year where loved ones were taken from us.

*There is still not justice as the perpetrators have not yet been held to account. We will continue fighting for this justice.*

----------


## Tom Sawyer

^
Where is Robbin Hood when you really need him?

----------


## StrontiumDog

*http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/loca...-10-2010-clash
*
*Army chief also demands answers*
Published: 10 Apr 2013 at 17.26Online news: Local News

       As red-shirts held activities on Wednesday to  remember the protesters killed in street clashes with security forces on  April 10 three years ago, the army commander could not hide his  frustration at the long delay in the investigation into the deaths of  his soldiers in the fight at Khok Wua.

     The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), lead  by chairwoman Tida Tawornseth, organised commemorative activities on  Ratchadamnoen Avenue to remind members of the day anti-government  protesters clashed with soldiers and police.

 Her husband, Weng Tojirakan, laid a wreath to pay respect to those  killed in the exchange of gunfire, and other supporters laid roses to  commemorate their fight against the government then led by prime  minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.

 The clash at Khok Wua intersection near the Democracy Monument on  April 10, 2010 resulted in the death of six soldiers and 20 protesters.  Scores more were injured.

 The momentum of the violence was carried on from that day to May 19,  when government forces cracked down on the red-shirts at Ratchaprasong  intersection and dispersed the month-long rally.

 During the final violence, as the protesters dispersed, many  buildings were set ablaze in Bangkok, including shopping  malls, and government centres in several provinces were also set on  fire.

 
Red-shirt members lay roses on Ratchadamnoen Avenue to commemorate  the bloody clash on April 10, 2010. (Photo by Patipat Janthong)

 Key leaders of the UDD, including Nattawut Saikuar and Jatuporn  Promphan, did not attend the commemoration on Wednesday afternoon and  sent  wreaths instead.

 The gathering of UDD supporters today is to mark the the third  anniversary of the April 10, 2010 event to purge "the dictators'' and  restore democracy to the country, Mrs Tida said. "This is a historic day  for the UDD,'' she added.

 The UDD activities were to continue into the night. Two parades, one  from Sanam Luang and another from Phan Fa bridge, were to meet at the  Democracy monument later in the day.

 Police were deployed in large numbers to ensure the demonstration remained peaceful.

 Mr Weng said earlier that the UDD rally would demand the release of  colleagues still in detention and call for punishment for those who  broke the law.

 Army chief Prayuth Chan-ocha on Wednesday sent to a firm message to  the UDD and investigators working on the case, reminding then soldiers  were among the victims of April 10, 2010.

 He said the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) was dragging  its feet in the investigation of the deaths and injuries among the  soldiers.

 Gen Prayuth said the army had received complaints from the wounded  and relatives of those killed. They wanted to know if the DSI had made  any progress in its investigation, he said.

 "I think little progress has been made. Those responsible for the  losses must be found, even though both sides claimed they had not done  anything wrong. Soldiers are also citizens of Thailand," the army chief  said.

 He said that not only the UDD protesters sustained losses in the 2010  protest violence. The police, military and civilians also suffered  casualties. All sides were entitled to justice, he added.

 The legal office of the army will ask the DSI for a progress report  on its investigation into the deaths of soldiers during the Khok Wua  clash.

 The dead included Col Romklao Thuwatham , who was promoted posthumously to full general.

 
Mrs Nicha Hirunburana Thuwatham, the wife of Gen Romklao, left, and  former army chief Gen Anupong Paojinda, right, made a religious ceremony  at Wat Bowonivet Vihara for her late husband. (Photo by Nauvarat  Suksamran)

 Gen Romklao's widow, Nicha Hirunburana Thuwatham,  and former army  commander Gen Anupong Paojinda peformed religious rites at Wat Bowonivet  Vihara near Khok Wua for the dead soldiers.

 Mrs Nicha said she could not overcome the loss of her husband and  vowed to fight for justice. Although the investigation was  moving  slowly, the public already knew who killed him, she added.

 Mr Abhisit, the Democrat Party leader, was in line with Gen Prayuth,  saying that many lessons were learned from the clash on April 10 2010  -  particularly how to better control protests in the future to prevent  the loss of lives.

 But the public is still waiting the answer to the question who were behind the deaths and injuries, he said.

 "I believe that one thing we want to know most is the truth, in  addition to compensation measures which are under way,'' he said on the  party's Blue Sky TV channel. "One thing which caused the situation to  deteriorate was the presence the armed men we know as the 'men in  black'. They were active and they caused the losses,'' he said.

 He urged the government to speed up the investigation in to the deaths of members of the security forces.

 DSI chief Tarit Pengdit said the investigation into the violent  political incidents in 2010 is continuing. There was some progress and  the department was ready to brief the army, he said.

  On the death of Gen Romklao, then deputy chief-of-staff of the 2nd  Infantry Division, Mr Tarit said evidence obtained by the DSI indicated  that he was killed a group of unidentified armed men.

 Witnesses said they saw the men appear at the rally and move toward  the scene of the clash.  It was believed these men were linked to the  death of Gen Romklao, the DSI chief said.

 Mr Tarit said the prosecutors advised the DSI to find witnesses who  saw the unidentified armed men open an attack with war weapons.  The DSI  had not been able to do so.

 With photographs available, the DSI was still unable to identify any  individuals believed to be in the group.  The DSI had distributed those  pictures for people to provide clues to identify them, he added.

 Meanwhile, Metropolitan police will renew the investigation to find  who set fire to CentralWorld shopping mall on May 19, 2010 after two red  shirts suspected of committing the crime were acquitted for lack of  witnesses and evidence.

 Metropolitan Police Bureau chief Kamronwit Thoopkrachang and his  deputy Anuchai Lekbamrung on Wednesday held a meeting of investigators  handling the case for about one hour to discuss the matter.

 Pol Lt Gen Kamronwit said he called the meeting of the investigators  on receiving a complaint from Mrs Tida, calling for the police to  re-investigate the case to find the real culprits after two red-shirt  suspects - Saichol Paebua, 31, and Pinij Channarong, 29 - were acquitted  for lack of evidence and witnesses.

 A team of investigators led by himself and Pol Maj Gen Anuchai was set up to re-investigate the case and gather evidence. 

 On the completion of the investigation, a report would be submitted to the DSI for consideration, he said.

 The next meeting of the investigators had been set for April 17.

----------


## StrontiumDog

*Infographic: the dead of April 10 | Prachatai English
*
*Infographic: the dead of April 10*

                                                              Sun, 14/04/2013 - 15:30 | by *prachatai* 

The political violence of April 10, 2010 resulted in a total of  26 deaths: 21 civilians and five soldiers (details below). Most of them  died on two main spots, Kokwua intersection on Tanao Road and Dinso  Road.

  The presence of "black shirted men" in the incident emphasizes the  importance of having an accurate timeline of the incident, but the  reports of many fact-finding organizations still show some differences.  Information from the People's Information Center and testimonies from  witnesses however do indicate that the deceased were killed around the  early evening before the appearance of the black shirted men.


Click here for hi-res image     *

Deaths from the military crackdown on April 10, 2010*

*Terdsak Fungklinchan*, 28, office worker
 Education: Bachelor's degree
 Residence: Pathum Thani
 Bullet wounds in the stomach and chest

*Sawat Wa-ngam*, 43, truck driver
 Education: M.6
 Residence: Surin
 Bullet wound in the head

*Thawatanachai Kladsuk*, 36, taxi driver
 Education: M.6
 Residence: Nonthaburi
 Bullet wounds at stomach and chest

*Phraison Thiplom*, 37, dock worker
 Education: unknown
 Residence: Khon Kaen
 Bullet wound in the head

*Somsak Kaewsan*, 34, taxi driver
 Education: M.3
 Residence: Nong Khai
 Bullet wound at stomach and chest

*Ananda Sirikulwanich*, 54, contractor
 Education: Bachelor's degree
 Residence: Bangkok
 Bullet wound in the neck (died one month later)

*Amphon Tatiyarat*, 26, student
 Education: last year of university
 Residence: Bangkok
 Bullet wound in the head

*Buntham Thongphui*, 45, electrician 
 Education: unknown
 Residence: Chaiyaphum
 Bullet wound in the head

*Saming Taengphet*, 49, vendor
 Education: P.4
 Residence: Nonthaburi
 Bullet wound in the head

*Jarun Chaimaen*, 46, taxi driver
 Education: P.4
 Residence: Kalasin
 Bullet wounds in the chest and stomach

*Khanueng Chat-the*, 50, Security guard
 Education: unknown
 Residence: Bangkok
 Bullet wounds in the chest and stomach

*Hiroyuki Muramoto*, 43, Reuters cameraman
 Education: diploma
 Residence: Tokyo, Japan
 Bullet wounds in the chest and stomach

*Monchai Saejong* ,54, vendor
 Illiterate
 Residence: Samut Prakan
 Heart attack

*Bunchan Maiprasoet*, 55, sugar cane farmer
 Education: P.4
 Residence: Ratchaburi
 Bullet wound in the groin

*Nopphon Phaophanat*, 30, university lab officer
 Education: Bachelor's degree
 Residence: Chonburi
 Bullet wounds at chest and stomach

*Tossachai Mekngamfa*, 44, office worker
 Education: diploma
 Residence: Bangkok
 Bullet wound in the head

*Wasan Phuthong*, 39, tailor
 Education: M.6
 Residence: Samut Prakan
 Bullet wound in the head

*Siam Wattananukun*, 53, car mechanic
 Education: unknown
 Residence: Nakhon Sawan
 Bullet wounds in the chest and stomach

*Yutthana Thongcharoenphunphon*, 23, student
 Residence: Ratchaburi
 Education: Bachelor's degree
 Bullet wound in the head

*Mana At-ran*, 23, zoo worker
 Education: unknown
 Residence: Bangkok
 Shot in the head
 *died in the night of April 10th in Khaodin Zoo where army battalions were stationed

*Kriangkrai Khamnoi*, 23, taxi driver
 Education: M.6
 Residence: Chonburi
 Shot in the chest and stomach
 *died in the afternoon during clashes around Makawan bridge

*Gen. Romklao Thuwatham*, 43, soldier
 Hit by grenade

*Private Anuphong Mueng-amphan*, 21, soldier
 Hit by grenade

*Private Anuphon Hommali*, 29, soldier
 Hit by grenade

*Private Phuriwat Praphan*, 25, soldier
 Hit by grenade

*Private Singha Onsong*, 22, soldier
 Hit by grenade 

_Source: à¸ªà¸²à¸£à¸°+à¸[at]à¸²à¸ž: à¸„à¸§à¸²à¸¡à¸—à¸£à¸‡à¸ˆà¸³ 'à¸„à¸™à¸—à¸µà¹ˆà¸•à¸²à¸¢à¹€à¸¡à¸·à¹ˆà¸[at] 10 à¹€à¸¡à¸©à¸²' | à¸›à¸£à¸°à¸Šà¸²à¹„à¸—

-----
May Revisionism | Prachatai English

_*May Revisionism*

                                                              Tue, 16/04/2013 - 10:11 | by *prachatai*                                                  Cod Satrusayang        

 The dust has firmly settled and the dye is fully cast. It has been  three years since the eventful months of April and May. The barricades,  the speeches, the bloodshed and violence seems like distant memories to  some, fresh and painful ones for others. But after three years the only  perpetrators that are behind bars are red shirt activists and lèse  majesté violators.

 Still, the narrative that people believe seems to follow an almost  linear path. Red shirts protested and shut down a major intersection of  the city and were rewarded with gunfire and a crackdown. As a journalist  that covered the events on the ground at that time, this was the  narrative that seemed to unfold before my eyes. But as I think back on  the events of April and May 2010, I have started to question if  everything that i saw was in fact everything that was really going on.

 My first question dates back to the first crackdown attempt at Khok  Wua. The major argument from the UDD camp throughout the protest was  that they were completely peaceful. Yet if this is was the case then who  killed Colonel Romklao? Who were the two sides combating on the very  streets that tourists now frequent? What was clear in the minds of  anyone who was there that night was that the soldiers were very scared  and kept falling back into defensive positions before eventually beating  a heavy retreat. This was probably due to a myriad of factors the least  of which was losing their command structure so fast. The emergence of  the 'black shirt' guerrilla also begs the question, if the UDD were as  peaceful as they claimed then who were these men at arms? Without  question, their involvement prolonged the protest. Without their  assistance that night, the red shirts would have been rounded up and  perhaps massacred. But with their assistance they were able to survive  the first crackdown attempt and readily beat a battalion of soldiers.

 The second question comes from the second site at Rajprasong. How  inept were the government forces that they couldn't clear a wooden  barricade without violence? We are not living in 18th century France,  one need not storm the barricades to kill Grantaire and Enjolras. Are  dogs, water canons and riot police not an option at all or did armed  soldiers have to be sent in? Furthermore there seems to be a serious  lack of professionalism within the Thai government structure, the police  almost colluding with the protesters at the time. If this is the case  one seriously has to question the ability and highlight the ineptitude  of the Abhisit government. The very same government who ordered the  assassination of one of its own generals in public view in the vicinity  of international press I might add.

 If anyone had ventured into the protest area during the ENTIRE MONTH  that they were camped there, they invariably saw the big "PEACEFUL  PROTEST" sign that was hung up on the main UDD stage. If this is the  case then why did they fight back against the soldiers? My one grievance  here that people tend to overlook, even my fellow journalists was that  the final few days of crackdown were an exercise in restraint on the  part of the soldiers. Despite horrible public relations (life fire zone'  anyone?) my observations were that the soldiers only fired at dangerous  areas and only when engaged. If the goal had been similar to 1991, 1976  or 1973 we would have had way more than the 96 deaths over that period.  Keep in mind that the 96 number encompasses all dead and not just  protesters and over the entire period from April until May. It literally  could have been in the hundreds had it not been for the restraint shown  by the soldiers. That being said, someone should remind the Democrat  party that grenades, APCs, automatic rifles etc do not belong in the  streets and NEVER used against one's own citizens.

 As for the events after the initial crackdown, questions must also be  asked. While one does not doubt the anger and sense of betrayal felt by  the majority of red shirts, one has to wonder how in a closed area of  engagement such as those around Rama I Road and Central World did  soldiers allow a group of people to burn down the place. There seems to  be more here than meets the eye. There also needs to be questions asked  of the events that transpired at Wat Pathum. Granted I was on the  completely other side of Rajprasong at this point, eyewitness accounts  completely went against the rules of engagement practiced by the  soldiers I saw that day. Here are some of my points: Soldiers at Wat Pathum fired indiscriminately into the temple area  with fully automatic weapons. But before that, soldiers were not on  full-auto, did not fire indiscriminately and only shot at threats. Soldiers at Wat Pathum were photographed from a high vantage point  making their way across the walk way and BTS line. How was this set up  so perfectly? Who in their right mind would climb a vantage point (which  was closed to journalists) with a pretty good lens to wait for a photo  opportunity? That angle pretty much gave one view and that was of Wat  Pathum. Something is not right here.Finally and perhaps more worryingly, the biggest question that must  be asked of the events that transpired is what was it for? The elections  came as they were predicted to anyways. The Peu Thai party won it and  all that bloodshed and carnage could have been avoided. If it was in the  name of democracy, freedom of speech and other liberties then why has  the PT banner dropped those causes so readily? Why have they abandoned  those who have been imprisoned so readily? If it was instead an attempt  by a deposed mad man to make his way back into power then perhaps the  UDD should consider where they stand and how they were so willingly  sacrificed in some ill-fated attempt at a return. If they do not then  they run the risk of becoming a puppet for some higher power like the  PAD and the Democrat party. If this were the case then all those people  really did die in vain. C’est n’est pas la lutte finale.

 - - - - -
_Cod Satrusayang is a writer and a blogger based  in Bangkok, Thailand. His works have appeared in the Asian Sentinel,  CNN, The Huffington Post and a myriad of other publications. His new  book The Fall is due out in the summer of 2014._


_-----_
_The 'men in black' were real. Who was behind them? We'll never know for sure. Some questions are just too dangerous to answer, says columnist Voranai. | Bangkok Post: opinion_

*The mysterious men in black*
Published: 11 Apr 2013 at 07.44Online news: Opinion
             When analysing politics we should connect the  dots as far as the dots (or our intellect) go, rather than stop at  whichever dot satisfies our moral righteousness and ignore the rest. And  we should be mindful of imaginary dots

 But sometimes we stop connecting because we know the next dot could have a dangerous domino effect.

 On Tuesday, a senate sub-committee concluded after an investigation  that mysterious ‘’men in black’’ armed with assault weapons attacked  security forces on April 10, 2010 at Khok Wua intersection. The clash  left 26 people dead, six of them soldiers, with scores more injured.

 The announcement came one day ahead of the gathering of the United  Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), which yesterday held  activities marking the third anniversary of the tragic incident.

 
UDD members held activities  marking the third anniversary of the tragic incident. (Photo by Patipat Janthong)

 The conclusion of the investigation, however, is like an unsolved  murder mystery, leaving the audience unsatisfied and full of questions.  This is not to dispute the conclusion, only to beg for more questions,  connecting more dots.

 Who were the men in black? Were they rangers employed by the late  Colonel Khatiya ‘’Seh Daeng’’ Sawasdipol, with the blessing of Thaksin  Shinawatra? Were they disguised soldiers of the Royal Thai Army, with  the blessing of then prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva? Or did someone  else employ them? Where are they now?

 The questions are simple to ask, if albeit difficult, as well  dangerous, to answer. A full and impartial investigation would require  that the finger point both ways.

 It would have to fully investigate the UDD and its leadership, the  lieutenants working under Seh Daeng’s command, as well as the Pheu Thai  Party, including Thaksin himself.

 It would have to fully investigate the Royal Thai Army, operation  commanders and former army chief General Anupong Paojinda, as well as  the leadership of the centre for the resolution of emergency situations  (CRES), Suthep Thaugsuban and Mr Abhisit.

 At this point, the proverbial ‘’this will never happen’’ echoes  between the ears of everyone reading this article – and that’s the  point. This will never happen. In fact, this cannot happen.

 If it is proven that the men in black were employed by the UDD, this  could lead to the arrest of actual relevant people, possibly bring the  Pheu Thai Party crumbling down and disintegrate the Shinawatra political  machine.

 This could, perhaps, lead to tens of thousands of red-shirts on the  streets in the firm belief that it is all an evil plot by the sinister  invisible hand to destroy democracy. Possible or imaginary dots?

 If it is proven that the men in black were employed by the Royal Thai  Army, this could lead to the arrest of actual relevant people,  including top army commanders and the leadership of the CRES, may throw  the army regime into disarray and bring the Democrat Party crumbling  down.

 This could, perhaps, lead to tanks on the streets with the firm  belief that this is all an evil plot by the sinister hand in Dubai to  destroy sacred Thai institutions. Possible or imaginary dots?

 Playing out the two scenarios as such is to make worst case  assumptions, granted. Things may or may not play out that way, or not to  the full extent, but who’s willing to take the risk?

 Therefore, the stakeholders on both sides would not want to connect  the dots farther. The price is too high. The next few dots may lead to a  dangerous domino effect. As such, the mysterious men in black could be  Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones for all we know.

 On the other hand, the worst case scenario of this unsatisfied  cliffhanger presented by the senate sub-committee is simply this: angry  articles, angry speeches, angry blogs, angry facebook updates, angry  forum posts and perhaps angry petitions – mere nuisances to the power  players.

 As with the case of who actually burnt Central World, it seems the last dot connected is the one that says: let’s play it safe.

 Thailand is no longer in a political crisis as we have a  democratically elected government and peace in the streets. But still,  this peace is fragile and both sides must be careful not to push too  hard, or something might break.

 As to who killed whom, and who burned what during April and May 2010,  the only people who would face prison time are those deemed  "expendable". No formal agency or committee would connect the dots too  high, because the dangerous consequence is anarchy in the streets.

 Neither side of the political divide, and Thailand as a whole, want  to go there, again, with the possibility of things being worse than the  last time.

 And while both the Pheu Thai regime and the Democrat Party may spiel  rhetoric about justice and a full investigation, neither is exactly  doing everything in their power to push for an actual full scale  investigation. They understand the consequences.

 The senate sub-committee’s conclusion – much like the Department of  Special Investigation (DSI) investigating Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep, the  National Anti Corruption Commission (NACC) investigating Prime Minister  Yingluck Shinawatra, and the various lese majeste cases – have their  purposes.

 It’s a tit-for-tat game to keep your opponent off balance, while the  intention is not an actual conviction of "relevant" people, as this  could invite the consequences we have discussed.

 As well, the tit-for-tat game keeps supporters on both sides of  politics busy and passionate, with their angry articles, angry speeches,  angry blogs, angry facebook updates, angry forum posts and perhaps  angry petitions.

 
Red coffin is carried around at the third anniversary of the tragic incident. (Photo by Patipat Janthong)

 The strategy is to let them yell and scream "democracy" or "loyalty"  until their voices are hoarse and throats parched -- then hand them a  glass of lemonade to refresh.

  It’s in the interests of the power players to perpetuate the  self-serving good versus evil mentality. The context makes for an  effective political tool to stir passions among the populace. A struggle  where everybody is a good guy and everybody is the bad guy at the same  time, depending on whom you ask.

 After all, the power players will need to call upon the populace when  they require bodies in the streets or in the voting booths. So keep  them at it. Keep them believing in their superior moral sanctity. For  now, the outlets of angry articles, angry speeches, angry blogs, angry  facebook updates, angry forum posts and perhaps angry petitions will  suffice.

 The strategy is to keep the passion brimming, but also keep it in  check. For there’s no greater tool to inspire atrocities than the  sanctity of the moral cause. Every war in history attests to that.

 Meanwhile, it’s the decisions and negotiations behind the scenes by  the power players that will actually move this nation, or any nation for  that matter. Decisions not made on moral grounds, but on the strategic  and the practical. Again, here we assume key players act rationally  rather than emotionally.

 Possible or imaginary dots?

 If imaginary, then never mind and have a good Songkran holiday.


Writer: Voranai Vanijaka

----------


## Mid

> Originally Posted by GT200 Oerator
> 
> 
> Andrew Spooner's response to the Human Rights Watch opinion on the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand report is worth a look at, in Prachatai Online News.
> 
> Good old Andrew, calls for the immediate resignation of Sunai Phasuk, Phil Robertson and Brad Adams, and says all of whom have lied about 2010 and are participating in a cover-up of the murder of 90+ unarmed civilians.
> 
> 
> Yes, Andrew Spooner, whose wife translates for Robert Amsterdam at red shirt rallies......
> ...





*Uploaded on 11 Apr 2011*  
                        Brad Adams, Human Rights' Watch Asia  director speaks to an audience at the House of Lords at the UK  Parliament and asserts, despite no prima facie evidence, that the Red  Shirts set fire to buildings in Bangkok.

youtube.com

----------


## Tom Sawyer

^
Bearing in mind that HRW is anti-Red, it doesn't come as a surprise. Adams and his other henchmen try to sound 'neutral' but they are shills for the US State Dept - one needs to simply look globally at the states they go after and the ones they go after - but soft-peddle (Saudi, Israel, Thailand (royalist), etc).

----------


## StrontiumDog

*DSI clear officers, men 'just following orders' | Bangkok Post: news
*
*DSI clears soldiers in 2010 clashes*
Published:  1 May 2013 at 18.09Online news: Politics
The chief of the Department of Special  Investigation (DSI) said on Wednesday that military officers ordered to  crack down on red shirt protesters in 2010 could not be held responsible  for the deaths of civilians killed as a result.
 
Armoured personnel carrier smashes through defence lines built by  red-shirt protesters during their takeover of central Bangkok in 2010.  (Bangkok Post file photo)

 Tarit Pengdith announced the decision after a meeting with DSI  officials in charge of investigating the 91 deaths during the red shirt  street protests in April and May of 2010.

 He said the meeting concluded the soldiers at that time were just  doing their duty as assigned by their superiors. As a result, they will  not be held accountable and will be protected by Section 70 of the  Criminal Code, which states that those acting on orders by their  commanders are immune from prosecution.

 On May 14, the DSI will summon former premier Abhisit Vejjajiva and  his deputy prime minister at the time, Suthep Thaugsuban, to acknowledge  additional lawsuits against them. 

 The new charges came after the Criminal Court ruled in two cases,  calling the death of 14-year-old Kunakorn "Nong Isa" Srisuwan  premeditated murder, and the wounding of  Samon Maithong a case of  attempted murder. 

 “The death of Kunakorn Srisuwan was in the same incident that killed  (taxi driver) Phan Kamkong and seriously injured Samon Maithong, the van  driver. All of them were affected by the same military operation, (and)  as a result the three cases are merged into one case," Mr Tarit said.

 “So we need to summon Mr Abhisit and Mr Suhtep to hear the additional  charges so that the accused can understand charges and facts" of the  cases, he said.

 The Criminal Court ruled last December that Kunakorn was killed by a  military gunshot on Mor Leng Road in front of the OA cinema, about 20  metres off Ratchaprarop Road, on May 15, 2010.

 The court said Mr Samorn was seriously wounded by military fire as he  was driving a van into the army's restricted zone near a military  checkpoint at Ratchaprarop Airport Rail Link station.

 The court ruled last September that taxi driver Phan Kamkong had been  shot and killed by troops near the Airport Rail Link as well.

 The DSI chief also said his agency is preparing to arrest three  suspects believed responsible for killing Gen Romklao Thuwatham during  unrest near the Democracy Monument in 2010.

 Investigators would soon present evidence to the public prosecutor to  ask the court for arrest warrants for three unidentified men whose  images were in photographs of the crime scene. 

 Gen Romklao, then a colonel, was killed in a grenade attack on April  10, 2010, while he and troops were trying to reclaim an area occupied by  red shirts near the Democracy Monument.

----------


## StrontiumDog

^ So there you go, the people that actually shot people wont be charged. 

Just the people that gave the orders....

So all we need now is proof that the soldiers were acting under orders to shoot people dead. 

A document will do...........

Anyone?

----------


## Yasojack

No one gave the orders the soldiers were just shooting at random :mid: .

it was defo the Black shirts fault but who where they, muslim insurgents no doubt

Fact is whoever gets the blame now, the shit will hit the fan again.

It should be sorted quickly as the passing away of a certain person is going to be the turning point in Thailand

----------


## sabang

> He said the meeting concluded the soldiers at that time were just doing their duty as assigned by their superiors


That might work elsewhere, but it doesn't hold water for the soldiers firing at unarmed protesters & medics in the Wat, a designated place of sanctuary.

----------


## hazz

Its going to be interesting how PT sells this to the UDD. After all its hardly a secret that the DSI's leadership is loyal to those who control their immediate career prospects.

----------


## StrontiumDog

* Thailand: Hold Army Accountable for 2010 Violence* 

*Reject Proposed Amnesty, Prosecute Abuses by All Sides* 

                                May 7, 2013               
  
Enlarge_Prime Minister Yingluck should be reminded that  she came to power promising justice to the victims of political  violence. Any attempt by the government to manipulate justice by  shielding the army or others will break her promise to the victims and  the Thai people._

                                        Brad Adams, Asia director        

 (New York) – The Thai government should revoke  a decision to shield military personnel from criminal prosecution for  the 2010 political bloodshed, Human Rights Watch said today. A general  amnesty proposed by the ruling party that would include those  responsible for serious human rights abuses should be rejected.

 On May 1, the director-general of the Justice Ministry’s Department  of Special Investigation (DSI), Tarit Pengdith, announced that military  personnel would not be held responsible for casualties during the  government’s crackdown on street protests in 2010, despite overwhelming  evidence that soldiers shot civilians.

 “The Thai government’s decision not to prosecute military personnel  for the 2010 violence signals that there is one law for the army and  another for everyone else,” said Brad Adams,  Asia director. “This amounts to a government policy of shielding –  instead of prosecuting – soldiers who killed civilians on the streets  and commanders who gave the orders.”

 The Justice Ministry’s announcement follows a government policy  stated repeatedly by Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung, who is in  charge of justice and law enforcement affairs, that soldiers and their  commanders would be treated as witnesses to these incidents rather than  defendants, and would be fully protected from criminal prosecution  because they were acting under orders from the previous government.

 At least 98 people lost their lives and more than 2,000 were injured  during the confrontations between the opposition United Front for  Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), known as “Red Shirts,” and the  government of then-Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, according to the  DSI. Arson attacks in Bangkok and elsewhere in Thailand caused billions in damage.

 Forensic evidence and witness accounts detailed in a May 2011 Human Rights Watch report, “Descent into Chaos: Thailand’s 2010 Red Shirt Protests and the Government Crackdown,”  showed that high numbers of casualties among protesters, volunteer  medics, reporters, photographers, and bystanders occurred in the areas  designated as “live fire zones” by the government-appointed Center for  the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES). Most deaths and  injuries resulted from excessive and unnecessary lethal force by the  Thai army and other security forces.

 The CRES, established by Abhisit and chaired by then Deputy Prime  Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, approved the use of live ammunition to  contain and disperse the protests, but failed to take sufficient  measures to monitor and control those military operations in line with  law enforcement standards. A document signed by Suthep on April 18,  2010, later examined by Human Rights Watch, broadly authorized the  deployment of sharpshooters and snipers to “protect security forces and  the public.”

 However, not a single soldier or official has been held accountable  for the 2010 violence. The DSI announced in September 2012 that the  military was responsible for 36 deaths. So far, only nine cases have  been submitted to the Criminal Court for post-mortem inquests, and the  court found that five victims were shot dead by soldiers acting under  operational guidelines set out by the CRES.

 The DSI and police investigations and inquest rulings show that  insufficient efforts have been made to identify the soldiers and  commanding officers responsible for the shootings. After receiving the  inquest results, the DSI decided to charge only Abhisit and Suthep for  killings. Based on the theory of command responsibility, which allows  the prosecution of superiors for the actions of their subordinates, each  has been charged with premeditated murder.

 Human Rights Watch expressed concern about the politicization of  decisions about prosecutions for human rights abuses. In an interview,  Tarit reportedly said that, “DSI, as a government agency, has to follow  policy of the government. Now the government prioritizes  ‘reconciliation,’ DSI action will therefore reflect that policy.”

 “It is ludicrous for the Department of Special Investigation to say  it has to follow the government’s policy on reconciliation, which  clearly compromises its law enforcement duties,” said Adams.

 Human Rights Watch has also documented that some elements of the UDD,  including armed “Black Shirt” militants, were responsible for deadly  attacks on soldiers, police, and civilians. Some UDD leaders incited  violence with inflammatory speeches to demonstrators, urging their  supporters to carry out riots, arson attacks, and looting.

 The UDD was supported by former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra,  whose sister Yingluck Shinawatra is the current prime minister. However,  the UDD leadership, including those now holding positions in the  government and the parliament, have dismissed these findings. Some have  asserted there were no armed elements within the UDD, despite incidents  of “Black Shirts” and some UDD protesters committing violence with  weapons being captured on video and in photos.

 “Prime Minister Yingluck should be reminded that she came to power  promising justice to the victims of political violence,” Adams said.  “Any attempt by the government to manipulate justice by shielding the  army or others will break her promise to the victims and the Thai  people.”

----------


## StrontiumDog

_Prime Minister Yingluck should be reminded that  she came to power  promising justice to the victims of political  violence. Any attempt by  the government to manipulate justice by  shielding the army or others  will break her promise to the victims and  the Thai people._

                                        Brad Adams, Asia director

Yep..........

It's strange how this government is bending over backwards to let the army off.....

But the supposedly biased HRW keeps repeating the same stuff. 

Justice. Prosecute all involved.

----------


## Mid

*Inquest into two deaths at Bon Kai during May 2010 unrest*
Fri, 17/05/2013

On 29 April, the Criminal Court began an inquest into the deaths  of Mana Saenprasoetsi and Phonsawan Nakhachai who were shot at Bon Kai  on Rama IV Rd on 15 May 2010 when the Centre for the Resolution of  Emergency Situation was cracking down on red-shirt protests.

  Mana Saenprasoetsi, 22, was a resident of Bon Kai and a rescue  volunteer of the Poh Teck Tung Foundation.  He was fatally shot in the  back of the head near the mouth of Soi Ngam Duplee in front of a branch  of Thai Farmers Bank at about 2-3 pm while he was trying to help people  who had been shot there.

 One of those who had been shot and was helped by Mana was  Phonsawan, 23, who came from Roi Et province in northeastern Thailand.   He was shot in the stomach and died later. 

 _Mana, left, giving first aid to one of the injured on the evening of 14 May at the entrance to Soi Ngam Du Plee on Rama IV Rd._  
 According to the testimony of his mother Naree, 53, Mana on that  day was eating at home when he received a radio call from his colleagues  telling him that people had been shot near his home and asking him to  go out to provide assistance.  He went out and at about 6 pm she was  told by his colleagues that her son had been shot dead and his body was  at Lerdsin hospital.

 She later learnt from the rescue staff that her son helped bring  Phonsawan, who was shot in the middle of Rama IV Rd, to the footpath,  and when he left his shelter to help two injured persons, he was shot  and killed on the spot, while holding a red-cross flag in his hand.

 Phonsawans elder brother Nanthawan, 34, told the court that his  brother was a motorcycle driver for hire, and he was not one of the  red-shirt protesters.

 At about 6 pm on that day, he received a phone call from Lerdsin  Hospital that his brother had been seriously shot.  He went to the  hospital with his brothers girlfriend, and found that he had already  died.

 He later learnt from his brothers friends that Phonsawan had taken  his girlfriend to Silom and come to see friends at Soi Ngam Du Plee  before being shot.  They told him that the bullet came from the  direction of the Lumpini Boxing Stadium.

 The next hearing will be on 8 July.

 In an interview with VoiceTV not long after the incident, Atthachai  Thapji, Manas fellow rescue volunteer for the Poh Teck Tung Foundation  who was crawling behind Mana before he was shot, also believed that the  bullet came from the direction of the boxing stadium.

 In a CRES television press conference on 20 May 2010, then Deputy  Chief of Staff Lt Gen Daopong Rattanasuwon, now a general and Deputy  Army Chief, used the picture of Mana shot and lying on the footpath to  explain the military operation on 19 May 2010.  

 The picture was shown on screen as Daopong explained the situation  that fires had broken out at Central World, and military troops and  firefighters were prevented from entering the area due to armed  resistance.

 During the time we were waiting outside, some of those inside  started a fire.  They started to burn Central World, Centara Grand  Hotel.  The fire stopped and started again. We tried to bring fire  trucks into the area.  But when the fire trucks went in, they were fired  at from the inside, making it inconvenient to go in and causing losses.   But we tried our utmost to bring in the fire trucks, but were met with  resistance all the time. 

 _Picture of Mana shot and lying on the footpath of Rama IV Rd on 15 May 2010._ 



_The same picture of Mana is shown  at 0.45 minutes into the clip of the CRES press conference about the  burning of Central World on 19 May 2010._ 
 In a video clip shot on the afternoon of 15 May 2010, soldiers are  seen deployed in front of the Lumpini Boxing Stadium, with two snipers  stationed on an upper floor of a building.

 At 0.29 minutes, a voice is heard shouting Dont shoot! Put out  the fire first!  It is possible that this was the same time as when  Mana was trying to extinguish a fire at a telephone booth in front of  the Kasikorn Bank branch, as can be seen in several photos.


Mana (circled) 
 Mana and Phonsawan were among about 16 people killed at Bon Kai during 13-16 May 2010.

_Source: à¸£à¸²à¸¢à¸à¸²à¸: 3 à¸à¸µà¸à¸§à¸²à¸¡à¸à¸²à¸¢ âà¸¡à¸²à¸à¸° à¸à¹à¸[at]à¹à¸à¹à¸à¸à¸¶à¹à¸â à¹à¸«à¸¢à¸·à¹à¸[at]à¸à¸£à¸°à¸ªà¸¸à¸ à¸.à¸.53 | à¸à¸£à¸°à¸à¸²à¹à¸

_prachatai.com

----------


## StrontiumDog

*DSI to finalise murder case against Abhisit, Suthep at meeting June 14 | Bangkok Post: news

DSI finalising Abhisit, Suthep case*

Published: 5 Jun 2013 at 16.53
Online news: Crimes

The Department of Special Investigation will hold a meeting on June 14 to finalise the case against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his former deputy Suthep Thaugsuban before submitting it to the prosecution, DSI chief Tarit Pengdith said on Wednesday.

Mr Tarit, speaking at the DSI's weekly press conference, was referring to the investigation into the deaths of 91 people in the political violence in 2010.

He said Mr Abhisit had submitted his defence statement.

The DSI will hold a meeting on June 14 at 4pm to finalise the investigation report, which will then be submitted to the prosecution.

After that, a letter will be sent to Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep, who was director of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) responsible for the crackdown on the red-shirt protests, advising them of the date they should report to the prosecutors. It was expected to be some time late this month, Mr Tarit said.

Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep face charges of premedidated murder in the deaths of taxi driver Phan Khamkong and a boy named Kunakorn Srisuwan, and attempted murder for the injuries incurred by Samorn Maithong.

-----
Police wrap up autopsy of first victim in 2010 political violence | MCOT.net | MCOT.net

 *

Police wrap up autopsy of first victim in 2010 political violence*

      By Digital Media | 8 มิ.ย. 2556 09:13 

BANGKOK, Jun 8 – An autopsy report on the first victim who was shot  dead in the 2010 Bangkok’s political upheaval will be submitted to the  Criminal Litigation Department for further action in court.

      The victim, identified as Kriangkrai Kamnoi, 24, was a tuk-tuk taxi  driver who was among nearly 100 people killed in the months-long  violence in several areas of the capital.

      He was shot during a demonstration in front of the Education Ministry  on Rajdamnern Avenue on April 10, 2010 and was pronounced dead at nearby  Vajira Hospital.

      The Criminal Court would be requested to determine details and cause of  Kriangkrai’s death during a crackdown by military forces against  protesters of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship, known  as the Red Shirts.

      Police said the cases of three other victims who were killed near Bon  Kai area on Rama IV Road will be wrapped up soon by the Department of  Special Investigation.

      One of the high-profile cases was the murder of Maj Gen Kattiya  Sawasdipol, or Seh Daeng, a former specialist of the Royal Thai Army who  was killed on May 13, 2010.

      Investigation into the case has yet to be finalised, police said.

      The Criminal Court and Bangkok South District Court have so far ruled  on nine fatal cases in the 2010 political unrest including Italian  journalist Fabio Polenghi.

      The court announced that Polenghi, killed at Sala Daeng intersection on  May 19, 2010, was shot by a high velocity bullet from the direction of  army personnel which was assigned to deal with violence in the capital  at the order of the government at that time. (MCOT online news)

----------


## StrontiumDog

Witnesses Recall Military Actions In May 2010 : Khaosod Online

By Khaosod Online

12 September 2013, Last upated at 18:30 GMT 
*
Witnesses Recall Military Actions In May 2010*

(12 September) A fish  vendor and a rescue worker told the Criminal Court yesterday about how military personnelshot at  them during clashes between the military and the Redshirts around Lumpini Park in May  2010.

The testimonies were given as part of the inquests into the deaths of 3 individuals  killed at the park on 14 May 2010: Mr. Piyapong Kittiwong, Mr. Prachuab Silapan, and Mr. Somsak  Silarat. The court is trying to establish whether the security forces had been responsible for the 3  deaths.

The military has repeatedly denied any responsibility to the deaths of civilians in  the 2010 crackdown, arguing instead that they had been killed by the shadowy armed militants. Over  90 people lost their lives in the violence which had engulfed Bangkok for 2 months.

Mr.  Thongchai Henglian, a fish vendor, told the court he was riding a motorbike to buy fish at the  market, passing along Rama IV Road. He spotted a group of protesters on the road, and went to  observe the gathering, parking his motorcycle at Lumpini Police Station.

Later, Mr. Thongchai  said, he mingled with the protesters and journalists, while rows of soldiers armed with automatic  rifles stood at some distance away. 

Then, according to the witness, gunfire erupted, and he  saw bullets crashing into trees and pillars along the road, so he ran toward the pavement around  Lumpini Park with a journalist, who was taking shelter 5 metres away from him.

Mr. Thongchai  continued that he heard the said journalist crying in pain that he was shot, so he attempted to  rescue the man, but came under fire himself. He was shot twice in his hip as he had his back to the  soldiers who were positioned 200-300 metres away, he said. 

Soon, a group of people carried  him away to safety. Doctors later extracted bullets from his body, and the wounds reportedly showed  he was shot from behind. 

Another witness, Mr. Preecha Nuwongsi, told the court he has been  working as a medical rescue worker at Vajira Hospital for 16 years. On the day of the incident, he  had received an emergency call that the soldiers were clashing with the protesters and there were  injured individuals in Lumpini Park, so he and his team drove the ambulance to the  scene.

Once he arrived there, Mr. Preecha said, he found a dead body in the pool near Gate 2  of the park, so he crawled toward the body (later identified as Mr. Piyapong), as there were  occasional gunfires. Having reached the body, he dragged it to the ground with a rope then carried  it to the ambulance.

However, Mr. Preecha testified, gunfire erupted in the direction of his  unit. He said he saw "dozens" of soldiers pointing their guns at his direction, so he shouted at  them to cease firing while his team waved a Red Cross flag, but, according to Mr. Preecha, the  soldiers continued to fire their weapons for a while.

After his team managed to escape, they  were informed by the police that a dead body had been found near Gate 3 (later identified as Mr.  Prachuab). The body had gunshot wounds on the chest, Mr. Preecha said, and there were soldiers in  the vicinity where Mr. Prachuab′s body was found.

The witness told the court that no weapon  was found on neither Mr. Piyapong nor Mr. Prachuab.

Meanwhile, Mr. Saengpetch Ruenrom, a security guard of the park, testified that he had not  seen any armed militants in the park, but he had seen a large group of soldiers armed with M-16  rifles and shotguns around the park.

The last witness, Mr. Terdsak Duangpapeng, another  security guard, confirmed to the court that he had seen no armed militants among the protesters  throughout the incident. 

The next trial will be held on 8 October.

----------


## StrontiumDog

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/loca...tical-violence
*
Prayuth slams investigators looking into political violence*

Published: 20 Sep 2013 at 00.00
Newspaper section: News

Army commander Prayuth Chan-ocha yesterday lambasted investigators looking into 91 deaths related to the 2010 political violence whom he accused of going back on their word.

Without naming anyone, Gen Prayuth said some of the investigators were part of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) set up to handle political violence at that time.

His remarks came after the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) said it was considering if charges should be pressed against any members of the CRES in the wake of court decisions during inquests into the 91 deaths.

Earlier, the Bangkok South Criminal Court ruled that soldiers killed six civilians in Wat Pathum Wanaram during the crackdown against red-shirt protesters.

Gen Prayuth said an earlier investigation found it was difficult to establish who had committed the violence.

The new investigation, however, pointed the finger at state authorities.

"I don't understand how they conducted the investigation," he said. "It is the same team of police investigators.

"But when there is a change in leadership, the investigation turns upside down.

"Some of them were in the CRES and back then they gave us words of support for doing our job.

"These days they are saying different things."

Gen Prayuth also urged the NACC to delay taking action and allow the allegations against the military to be finalised in court trials.

The army chief said state authorities never have a chance to defend themselves.

It will be better if the allegations can be made in court so the officers will be able to tell their side of the story, he said.

"I think there is enough evidence for a trial to take place," Gen Prayuth said.

"A ruling is needed otherwise the public will be confused."

He admitted he is worried that his men would not understand how the legal proceedings would unfold.

He said he has told his men not to be intimidated by the prospect of legal action.

----------


## Mid

*2010 protester 'killed by military fire'*
25/03/2014
*
The South Bangkok Criminal Court ruled on Tuesday that a  United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) protester was  killed by a gunshot fired by soldiers during the military crackdown on  anti-government protesters on May 19, 2010.*

         The court made the ruling after prosecutors from the Office  of the Criminal Litigation 4 asked it to establish Narin Srichomphu's  cause of death.

 Narin was shot on the pavement in front of Ban Ratchadamri condominium on Ratchadamri Road, near Sarasin intersection.

 The court said Narin was hit in the head with a high-velocity bullet  fired from a line of soldiers during an operation to retake an area  between Sala Daeng and Ratchadamri from protesters, as ordered by the  Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES).

 He died at the Police General Hospital.

 It is not know who fired the fatal shot.

bangkokpost.com

----------

