Thread: Investigators fail to identify killers of foreign journalists

Warning, lots of graphic and disturbing images in these clips.

A Tragedy In Thailand




กูรู้ ไอ้เหี้ย สั่งฆ่า 2 A Tragedy In Thailand II

[QUOTE=StrontiumDog;1607162]Warning, lots of graphic and disturbing images in these clips.


Oh dear, sarcasm not your strongest gift is it? Though the end credits did go over the top on the numbers killed and didn't detail the armed Thai civilians that were killed (but then again neither have the DSI and they've had 6 months to do the investigations).

Had a bad day at the office?

Keef, what are you talking about? Did you even watch the second clip? Some of the images are horrific.

^ The reason I took the position of blaming the reds for the M79 attack on the Silom BTS was because the M79 originated from a position they occupied and would've been in full view of the red shirts. However, none of them intervened or it seems offered eye witness testimony about it. Odd to the say the least. If you know the place, you'd know why I took such a view.

As regards your rather strange view that I'm not neutral, why do I post so much red shirt material? Such as the 2 videos above....? I've posted countless photos from red shirt gatherings (this thread alone is testiment to that)....posted news items from the Rajaprasong Facebook page, posted items from the red shirt magazines pages etc etc ....I simply post what's out there and try to avoid the illegal news items (such as the one on The Strait Times blog section today, that is highly contentious).

I also criticise where it is due, which may be the real reason why you don't like what I post. No one likes to be told they are wrong...and your admitted bias suggests you've gotten it wrong a long the way. In life any one-sided or extreme opinion is bound to be wrong. It is a rule of all human behaviour.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I also criticise where it is due, which may be the real reason why you don't like what I post. No one likes to be told they are wrong...and your admitted bias suggests you've gotten it wrong a long the way. In life any one-sided or extreme opinion is bound to be wrong. It is a rule of all human behaviour.

I was about to write your last paragraph borders on the absurd. But that would be wrong. It is absurd, totally.

I have taken sides, yes. I did not admit bias by saying that. Taking sides is a normal thing to do. Being neutral is difficult as one can see with you as you fail.

But that does not mean I agree with everything they do or say. Of course nobody is 100% right here. The government however is 100% wrong. It is illegitimate, on its orders many peaceful demonstrators have been killed as you should know better than anybody else.

I have already said everything I could reasonably say.

Really? That's rather sad then, as are you suggesting you have unreasonable things to say?

I guess it demonstrates how you operate and the kind of person you are, that I took the time to compose a lengthy response to your queries and snide comments, hoping that you might understand some more, or even glean some insight, but alas, your response is the above.

As I said in my piece, I'm wasting my time.

SD, you do come across as leaning towards the government side on occasions. Its not just Takeovers that gets this impression.

Most posters here state objective opinions based on information at hand. And most posters here tend to have a self admitted bias towards one side or the other for fundamental reasons rather than incident by incident.

Your claim to be completely neutral for someone so involved in the political struggle in Thailand goes against human nature. Your claim puts you up there with the most pius of individuals ever to have walked the earth.
"Undecided" might be a safer way of describing your position in defending it.
Though I am sure most readers would think your position slightly biased on occasions. Just MHO.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010...-30142568.html

DSI report 'ambiguous, unclear'

By Pongphon Sarnsamak
Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
April –May 2010 Crackdowns (PCI)
Published on November 19, 2010


Group says claims over killings of 91 must be backed up

The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) should release a full report to back up its claims about who may have been behind the killings of 91 people during street demonstrations this year, the People’s Centre for Information on the April-May 2010 Crackdowns (PCI) said yesterday.

On Tuesday, DSI director-general Tharit Pengdit summed up the investigations into the deaths that took place during crackdowns on red-shirt protesters in April and May.

He said investigators had divided the casualties into two groups one caused by red-shirt unrest, and the other by unidentified culprits with the suspected involvement of state officials.

In the first group of victims, DSI found the deaths of the eight people resulted from red-shirt unrest. In this group, most were soldiers and police.

The deaths of people in the second group were caused by unidentified culprits with the suspected involvement of state officials.

In the violence at Wat Pathum Wanaram, six were shot dead. Additional checks found three were shot from a high altitude. Security forces conceded that six officers were deployed on the elevated train track near the temple at the time of the incident.

“The results of the DSI’s investigation into the deaths during crackdowns on the red-shirt protesters in April and May ... were ambiguous and unclear,” Krittiya Achavanichkul of the PCI told a news conference at Thammasart University’s Faculty of Political Science.

Previously, Krittiya had produced a report on missing persons, casualties, and people killed during the bloody military crackdown on May 1990.

In this year’s violence, she said the PCI had divided the incidents that resulted in casualties into three periods: April 10, May 13-18, and May 19. But the DSI had not released any information on what really happened in any of these cases in its report.

The PCI also found no details to explain the incidents of May 13-18 in which many people were injured and killed by a sniper’s high-powered weapon. Moreover, there were many video clips showing pictures of a sniper operating during the crackdown. “Why did the [evidence] about this period disappear?” Krittiya queried.

She also asked the DSI to comply with Article 150 of the Criminal Procedure Law and conduct an autopsy and investigate the cause of death of all victims killed during the April-May 2010 crackdowns. The DSI should not conduct autopsy reports merely in some cases that benefit its own position.

“The current government is a party in the conflict. So changes the government can make to ensure justice will prevail are tough,” said Krittiya, adding that those who committed murder may not be brought to justice under the current administration.

“It would be good if justice were served under this administration, however. And I pray for it.”

Krittiya added that the forensic information on those killed was no longer available online.

Also, although DSI chief Tharit Pengdit wanted new autopsies to take place, many bodies had already been cremated.

Meanwhile, Payao Akkahad, whose daughter Kamolkade a paramedic was killed in Wat Prathum Wanaram on May 19, said the government appointed truth and reconciliation committee, chaired by former public prosecutor Kanit na Nakhon, had never visited or contacted her. Neither had it invited her to provide any information about the death of her daughter, even though the committee had said previously the investigation into the deaths of people at Wat Prathum Wannaram on May 19 was its first priority.

Kamolkade’s younger brother, Nattapat, said he wanted the DSI to release all its results, as the case of Wat Prathum was the clearest and yet it had not been solved.

“Or is it that the soldiers can just kill anybody with impunity? Regarding [monetary] compensation, can you really put a price on human lives? The relatives [of those killed] will not give up. We will do our best and will come up with new measures,” he said.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Keef, what are you talking about? Did you even watch the second clip? Some of the images are horrific.

My deepest apologies, SD, sincerely. Having watched the first, I didn't watch the second expecting more of the same. Again, my apologies.

I shall now watch the second video but at least I have been warned.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/poli...ect-dsi-report

Red shirts' kin reject DSI report

Military said to have blood on its hands

• Published: 19/11/2010 at 12:00 AM
• Newspaper section: News

Relatives of protesters killed during the April-May anti-government demonstrations are furious at the "lack of transparency" in the government's report into their deaths.



Some have claimed blood is on the hands of the military, not the red shirt protesters, as the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) has claimed.

Banjerd and Suvimol Foongklinchan, parents of Terdsak, 29, who was killed on April 10 on Tanao Road, said Tuesday's news conference by the DSI did not provide a clear picture of their son's death. "Our son had six bullet holes in his body. We believe that was done by the military," they said.

"We are waiting to get the court's approval for an inquest. At least nine bodies have not yet been cremated, which means the families are still going through this ordeal."

Relatives of the dead protesters called on the authorities to release autopsy and forensic reports to the public.

The group appeared at a news conference to lash out at the DSI which linked some of the victims killed in the government dispersal to red shirt members and its militia supporters.

The DSI said on Tuesday some of the 89 victims of the protests were killed by red shirt members and related groups.

It said it had completed inquiries into 18 cases and concluded that 12 were killed by members of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) and militia who supported the movement.

It also said six other victims were killed by unidentified gunmen. They included 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. The DSI said these six cases needed further investigation.

The court has delayed its consideration on whether to allow the inquest of the nine cases to be considered on Dec 27, citing official investigations against nine core leaders of the UDD responsible for the demonstrations.

Nattapat Akkahad, 21, a brother of volunteer nurse Kamolkade, who was killed at Wat Pathum Wanaram on May19, said the DSI's claim that it needed to further investigate three of the six deaths at the temple before determining who killed them was a surprise for his family.

"It's quite clear from an available video clip, bullet shell [evidence] and witnesses that my sister and, in fact, all of them were shot from above _ from the places where military were deployed," Mr Nattapat said.

"The bullets were not fired from horizontal directions that might produce different conclusion about the killers."

Phayao Akkahad, 45, Kamolkade's mother, said she felt the DSI's briefing was aimed more at appeasing the government rather than to explain frankly to the public who did what and when.

She said she was also disappointed with the progress of the Truth for Reconciliation Commission (TRC). None of the TRC members has talked to the relatives so far about the incidents.

Somjai Khemthong, 49, whose brother Mongkol was killed at the temple, said he was angry with the DSI's briefing and the slow progress of the TRC's work.

He said many relatives had signed a letter sent to the UN secretary-general last month asking the UN to investigate the killings in April and May, and to help those caught in the armed conflict.

The People's Information Centre on the Crackdown said the DSI had discriminated against the UDD.

The agency had become a political tool for the government which was a party to the conflict, the centre said.

DSI chief Tharit Pengdit defended the department's handling of the cases and said they were likely to be wrapped up by the end of the month.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Being neutral is difficult. It is a skill that few seemingly posses. However, it is what I was trained in.

...

So, continue to believe what you want to believe. Delude yourself if it makes you happy, but I know precisely what I'm doing and the reasons why.....

Then you better take a refresher course..

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Oh and one more thing...

I was shot at twice, by some unknown, but I'm pretty sure it was army snipers (it was during the "live fire zone" incident). Someone therefore tried to kill me. Twice.

... if anyone should be mightily pissed off at this government, I think I have some right to be.

And so why aren't you? Were you trained not to be pissed off at people who try to kill you too? Were you trained to take their side? Is that somekind of Stockholm Syndrome effect?

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Agree with Panda - "undecided" is a much better description, SD.

Though I'd say you are more like "leaning toward the PAD because they have money and power, and I like the Bangkok vibe their class of people have created cause it gives me a nice lifestyle, but I save some sympathy toward the grassroots reds' unfair treatment by the government"

Anyway you cut it, some are completely consumed with the ideas of themselves, therefore their perspective. Undecided, neutrality, and objectivity become symbols that guise as face-saving.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/o...required-truth

DSI 'progress report' falls far short of required truth

• Published: 19/11/2010 at 12:00 AM
• Newspaper section: News

At a press conference this week, Tharit Pengdit, director-general of the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), reported on the "progress" of the department's investigations into the deaths resulting from the military crackdown on the red shirt protesters.


Seeking justice: Puea Thai MP Pol Lt Gen Wiroj Pao-in (right) and relatives of dead red shirt protesters submit a petition to DSI Director- General Tharit Pengdit (left), on Sept 20, 2010.

Although he tried hard to put the statistics together for the presentation, it lacked sufficient detail to make the report credible.

Mr Tharit said the DSI was responsible for 254 cases, of which 54 have been charged. As for the deaths, he concluded that at least 12 were caused by members of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), the red shirts' core organisation. Most of these deaths involved military personnel, including Colonel Romklao Tuvatham, who lost his life on April 10 at Kok Wua intersection near the Democracy Monument. Only two were civilian: one died in the arson at Central World and the other from a bomb that went off in front of Big C supermarket on Ratchadamri Road.

The causes of death for the rest, mostly unarmed civilians, were inconclusive. For instance, despite tremendous diplomatic pressure, the death of Japanese photographer Hiroyuki Muramoto remained unsolved. And the death of "Seh Daeng" _ Lieutenant General Khattiya Swasdipol, who was gunned down by sniper fire while talking to foreign journalists at Saladaeng intersection _ did not receive a mention.

The controversy surrounding the shootings at Pathumwanaram Temple where six people were shot dead, strangely could not be concluded.

Pol Col Narach Sawetanun, the DSI deputy director-general, admitted that forensics had proved that at least three of the six deaths had occurred from shots fired from higher ground; this, together with other evidence found, could imply the involvement of armed troops stationed on the BTS skytrain tracks. Pol Col Naruch even said at the press conference that the army had admitted that eight soldiers had been stationed on the BTS tracks.

Back in May, during the censure debate in Parliament following the crackdown, the government had denied the presence of soldiers on the BTS tracks, even though video clips and pictures proved otherwise. Even in light of what DSI appears to know now, the government _ both Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjaijva and Deputy PM Suthep Thaugsuban who defended the military on the floor of Parliament _ is not taking any responsibility and it is doubtful any military personnel will be indicted.

Mr Tharit said all the cases would be resolved by the end of the month. Few believe he will be able to keep his word.

More damage to the credibility of the DSI's investigations has come from an interview given by Kanit Na Nakorn, a respected public prosecutor whom the government appointed to head the so-called Truth Commission. After months of making the rounds talking to all concerned parties, Mr Kanit had been criticised as "slow" in carrying out the Commission's undertaking, and thus felt the need to explain.

In his Nov 17 interview with the Thai-language newspaper Khao Sod , Mr Kanit admitted there had been little cooperation from the government and he had no power to forcibly elicit any facts.

The list of names of the deceased and injured had not been made public, so no one knew the actual tally. In addition, while the military had been "all talk", it had refused to actually hand over to him any operational plans regarding the crackdown

Mr Kanit revealed that at least 252 people were currently behind bars. His Commission had proposed that those not directly involved should be released on bail. He also said the Emergency Decree should be used sparingly and only when necessary. Mr Kanit felt that the government had not been "positive" in its answers, meaning there had been no transparency or openness.

Why did the government appoint Mr Kanit to fish for the truth if in reality it never wanted the truth to come out? And if there is no truth, then how can reconciliation begin?

The government was only buying time, that's why. It hoped the nightmare would simply go away; that in time, other events would take over the news headlines and that the Thais, being Thai, would forgive and forget the whole matter.

But 91 deaths caused by unexplained bullets are not the same as the 200-plus deaths from the recent flood disaster. For the latter, the cause of death has been clear and accepted as "natural and force majeure", whereas in the case of the former, the whole affair has been murky, manipulative, violent and unjust.

A democratic government must shoulder the responsibility of protecting the citizenry from whom it derives its very existence. The power of the people given to elected representatives to form a government must never be used against the people themselves.

But a "deformed" government will always fall into the trap of power. To sustain its survival, politicians cater to interest groups: the bureaucracy, the large corporations, the influential elite, and the military. Mao Zedong was right all along: "political power" does "grow from the barrel of a gun". And it is this power of the gun that has been used to suppress the power of the people.

How long do suppressions last? Historically, anywhere in the world, Thailand included, the time and conditions vary. But in the end no dictatorial regime lasts, no matter what kind of democratic mask they may put on. The power of the people yearning for truth and freedom will prevail.

The government of Mr Abhisit should accept the fact that it is party to this conflict, and therefore it is never going to be trusted, no matter what words it may utter in seeking to resolve the causes of death and reconciliation. And even if its intentions are benign, its actions to the contrary _ of maintaining the Emergency Decree, the operations of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) which continue to threaten red shirts elements, the shutting down and blocking of websites, and the dubious investigations of the DSI _ all point to a "cover up" more than a revelation of the truth.

The government may feel it has the legitimacy to continue on until the next general election is called. It should not do so at the expense of justice which the 91 deaths deserve.

Let Mr Kanit have what he needs in his quest for truth and reconciliation. All information should be turned over to the Commission.

Let Mr Kanit have the power to learn the "real story" and tell the public what factually happened, so that a fair and just judicial process can punish the wrongdoers and vindicate the wrongly accused.

Let the truth be told. Only then can reconciliation happen and democracy be preserved. Else, be prepared to face the power of the people.

Suranand Vejjajiva served in the Thaksin Shinawatra cabinet and is now a political analyst.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Being neutral is difficult. It is a skill that few seemingly posses. However, it is what I was trained in.

...

So, continue to believe what you want to believe. Delude yourself if it makes you happy, but I know precisely what I'm doing and the reasons why.....

Then you better take a refresher course..

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Oh and one more thing...

I was shot at twice, by some unknown, but I'm pretty sure it was army snipers (it was during the "live fire zone" incident). Someone therefore tried to kill me. Twice.

... if anyone should be mightily pissed off at this government, I think I have some right to be.

And so why aren't you? Were you trained not to be pissed off at people who try to kill you too? Were you trained to take their side? Is that somekind of Stockholm Syndrome effect?

What a surprise, TS rolls in throwing out the usual drunken punches.

As you know seemingly nothing about what a forensic psychologist does, I could choose to inform you, but what would be the point? You have your opinions and nothing is going to change that. You are a product of the process I briefly described earlier, but you remain blissfully (?) unaware of it.

I'd also look up Stockholm syndrome if I were you....you appear to be unaware of that too.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Agree with Panda - "undecided" is a much better description, SD.

Though I'd say you are more like "leaning toward the PAD because they have money and power, and I like the Bangkok vibe their class of people have created cause it gives me a nice lifestyle, but I save some sympathy toward the grassroots reds' unfair treatment by the government"

Panda and you couldn't be more wrong.....you've also no idea of who I am, what I do and my background.

Therefore, everything you and Panda write about is pure speculation and opinion, based upon your own limited comprehension.

Try to join the dots sometime.

Originally Posted by sabang

Given the choice, SD would probably vote Dem- and thats fine. But he/she is also increasingly critical of the deteriorating situation in Thailand, which indicates an open mind and a degree of impartiality and objectivity not exhibited by some others I could name. If people cotton on to what is really happening here in Thailand, they would realise that Dem/TRT politicking is missing the point, it is a village squabble in a larger theatre of conflict. The real struggle here is between Democracy and Authoritarianism. Between transparency and accountability, and opacity and corruption. Between meritocracy and equal opportunity, and patronage and Cronyism. Between government that represents all, and government that serves the few. Between the peoples choice, and the Elite's decree. Real Democrats (not those PAD phonies) should actually be joining forces with their political rivals in the democratic system, to confront the real enemies of Democracy- as most visibly represented by the PAD and the Military high command. Once that is sorted out- hopefully forever- they can carry on squabbling as per the democratic norm.

Sorry can't green you at the moment.

Originally Posted by sabang

My main criticism of the Democrats and their supporters is that they were so easily duped.

I like that statement.

^ except that it is a failed argument, as Thaksin is from the elite and the red shirt leaders and PT have stated aim to return Thaksin to power....

There will be no change if the PT get back into power. Believing otherwise is delusion.

Which tells me just how adept you guys are at analysis (and how sharp your memories are too!)

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/poli...-help-in-sight

Victim in critical condition, with no help in sight

Wounded worry inquiry into government action on red shirt protests will turn up nothing because the army is refusing to cooperate

• Published: 19/11/2010 at 12:00 AM
• Newspaper section: News

Six months after he was shot in a "live fire zone" in Din Daeng, Amphon Narkbamrung, 18, is still in critical condition lying on a hospital bed.

"He still cannot move his legs. His arms are still numb and he cannot do anything," said his grandfather who has been looking after him at Rajavithi Hospital.

The life of this hard-working young chef who was the family's only breadwinner has been turned upside down since he was shot.

His grandfather worries about him and the family's future as they see no substantial financial assistance coming their way.

Mr Amphon was among the many victims of the violent clashes that erupted when security forces moved in to disperse the anti-government protests of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) in April and May. A total of 92 people were killed and more than 1,400 injured in the ensuing chaos.

Today marks the six-month anniversary of the army's operation against the red shirts on May 19. Many victims are still waiting for the truth about who the wrongdoers were as well as to see justice done.

While the government's ad hoc agency, the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), has claimed unidentified armed men who mingled with the protesters were behind the violence and deaths, many of the protesters have dismissed this as a lie.

They say bullets were fired without any warning from the direction of the security forces.

Mr Amphon, who was a bystander, not a protester, said he was "shot in the neck from the direction of the soldiers".

The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) on Tuesday revealed its initial findings into the violence, saying 12 people were killed by members of the UDD and its support militia while six were murdered by unknown gunmen.

Protesters and families of the dead and injured responded by repeating their claim that blood was on the hands of the military _ not the red shirts'.

Their hopes of finding out the truth now lie with the independent fact-finding team, the Truth for Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which was appointed by the government to find out who was behind the violence and mayhem.

They are hoping that many questions that remain unanswered by authorities such as the DSI will be clarified by the TRC.

Among the most frequently asked questions are: Who were the snipers photographed wearing military uniform? How many soldiers were deployed for the dispersal operation and how did they actually carry it out? What types and how many weapons were used? How were the victims killed?

As the body appointed by the government tries to uncover the truth behind the violent acts in which the state was one of the parties to the conflict, critics have cast doubt on whether the truth will ever be fully established.

"We won't let our mission end up like the fact-finding team of the 1992 Black May event," said TRC chairman Kanit na Nakorn, a former attorney-general who heads the TRC.

The fact-finding report on Black May was prepared and then abridged and had sections blacked out by the authorities.

Mr Kanit insisted this would not happen with the TRC's first report to be presented to the government and the public by January.

"We just need to carefully check the facts from all sides in the events and we want cooperation from them, especially state agencies," Mr Kanit said.

But it is not just whether or not his report will be blacked out. It is about his panel's ability to gain access to official documents, especially those in the possession of the military.

The road for the team's truth-seeking mission is clearly a rocky one.

Before the DSI's revelations on Tuesday, the agency had not shared any of its findings with the TRC, Mr Kanit admitted.

Without the power to subpoena members of the security forces and police, the best his team has done is "ask for cooperation", he said.

But cooperation from the police in delivering autopsy results and the military in fully revealing the details of its operations has been seen as sadly inadequate.

Earlier, some TRC members accepted they would gain little access to such secrets.

Critics worry that the state agencies involved in the dispersal may be reluctant to reveal everything, and that they could instead choose to sit on it.

"My understanding is that the TRC has had difficulties in getting information from the army," said Kritaya Archavanitkul, the deputy director of Mahidol University's Institute for Population and Social Research.

Ms Kritaya, who also co-runs an information centre for the victims, is not confident about the TRC's coming report because the panel investigating the crackdowns was appointed by the government at the time of the protests.

"The use of force by the authorities was clearly excessive. The army must give truthful figures about how many soldiers, armoured vehicles and machine guns were used," she said.

An explanation about why the CRES designated "live fire zones" must be given too, she said. This failed to follow international crowd control standards that should begin with softer measures first such as warnings, she said.

Mr Kanit also insists his team's mission is not to punish anyone but only to seek the truth, which many see as insufficient. Even if the TRC can establish the truth, critics say that any crimes that were committed must not go unpunished.

^ You ignore that a PT/Thaksin government would have a strong counterbalance to limit their power, something that is sorely missing with the present lot.