Thailand's Red-Shirts Planning Revenge

[craigt3365]

BANGKOK: -- Anti-government red shirts seeking revenge are expected to instigate fresh turmoil in Bangkok and the provinces after the government lifts the emergency decree, security agency sources said yesterday.

These folks have no problem breaking laws, causing violence and terrorizing people but for some reason are scared to break the rules of the emergency decree?

a political assembly of more then 5 people would be a crime that allows the security forces to shot them down and arrest and chained the wounded like the the red shirts in this photo.

without the SoE the government could not do this legally. And without the SoE the reds could use their constitutional rights to protest without fear for life and health.

I think the chain is to keep them from running away, since they have been arrested. They also tie down people who are withdrawing from alcoholism, but in this case it's usually 2 or 4 limbs. I see the guy on the right has hurt his fingers.

Incredibly nice propaganda though.

I know, human rights issues are not one of the concerns of hypocritical Thaksin haters.

Human rights are EXACTLY what people who dislike Thaksin are all about! You entirely miss the point. My right to enjoy the central biz district without having to fight my way through it. My right to express my political ideals without having to be worried about some crazy trying to beat me up. My right to see my tax dollars used properly rather than just benefiting some corrupt official.

I could go on, but hopefully, you get the idea....

[mazeltov]

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 18, 2010

AHRC-OLT-005-2010

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Thailand by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

Abhisit Vejjajiva

Prime Minister

c/o Government House

Pitsanulok Road, Dusit District

Bangkok 10300

THAILAND

Fax: +66 2 288 4000 ext. 4025

Tel: +66 2 288 4000

E-mail: [email protected] �or [email protected] �

Dear Mr. Abhisit

THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is writing to you regarding the treatment of detainees under the state of emergency that your government has imposed in Bangkok and other provinces of Thailand in response to protests that gripped the capital in recent months. (photo: Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva , source:Prime Minister Media office)

The AHRC has numerous grave concerns regarding circumstances of arrest and detention under the state of emergency imposed via the Emergency Decree BE 2548 (2005), which the AHRC strongly opposed from the time of its introduction under the government of your predecessor, Pol. Lt. Col. Thaksin Shinawatra.

One of these concerns relates to the highly problematic provision that detainees under the decree not be held in official places of detention by virtue of their peculiar legal status as persons under custody but not charged with any offences. According to information currently available through various sources, among detainees being held in non-official detention facilities are persons who were wounded during the protests, who are being held in separate wards in medical facilities, and who are allegedly being chained to their beds.

Two cases reported in the media in recent days were of Mr. Jaran Loiphun (age 39) and Mr. Nattapon Thongkhun (age 20), of Bangkok, both of whom were shot during the military crackdown on the Ratchaprasong protest.

Nattapon was reportedly shot three times in front of the Lumpini Police Station on 14 May 2010. According to Nattapon, around noon on 14 May he and his friends were driving motorbikes from Petchburi Road to meet friends at Sathorn Road. When they reached the area in front of Lumpini Police Station, a group of protestors were burning a police bus on Wireless Road. When soldiers shot into the group of protestors, a shotgun blast went into his shoulder, and an M16 bullet went into his hand. He tried to get up to ask for help, but another shotgun blast hit his left leg. The protestors brought him to the Police Hospital. Nattapon explained that one day after that, as he was coming out of anaesthesia following surgery, police came to interrogate him. They accused him of violating the Emergency Decree. He was moved from a bed for ordinary people to a room for people facing accusations; there was another injured protestor in the room with him. He has since been shackled to his bed, guarded by police officers and allowed only short visits from family.

Jaran was reportedly shot twice at Pratunam intersection on 19 May 2010. The first shot was from a shotgun and was embedded in his left leg. The second bullet was from an M16 and went through his hand. According to Jaran, on the afternoon of 19 May, he was walking towards the area of Pratunam intersection. He saw a group of 4-5 soldiers walking about 20 metres in front of him. He was afraid and so he began to run away. But this group of soldiers shot at him. Jaran said that after he was hit by the shotgun he tried to get up and run again and the soldiers shot him with the M16. Jaran has also reportedly been shackled to the hospital bed, and he is being guarded by police officers.

For many years, the AHRC and other concerned organisations and individuals have voiced outrage at the shackling and otherwise barbaric treatment of accused criminal prisoners in Thailand. In the aftermath of the crackdown on the protests, there are also many reports of persons detained under the Emergency Decree in ambiguous and uncertain circumstances being similarly ill-treated.

As Thailand is now a member of the UN Human Rights Council, it should not be necessary for the AHRC to remind your government of its obligations under international law; however, in light of the many reports of the sort cited above in recent days, we draw your attention to the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, under Rule 33 of which "chains or irons shall not be used as restraints" and other instruments of restraint shall be used only during a transfer of detainees as a precaution against escape, on medical grounds by order of a medical officer, or as a means to prevent self harm. Clearly, none of these circumstances apply in the cases described above.

The government of Thailand should be further aware that under the UN Convention against Torture, to which it is a party, the chaining of wounded detainees could constitute an act of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that would place it in clear violation of its responsibilities under international law.

Aside from being uncomfortable and humiliating for the persons in custody, this type of maltreatment engenders other types of abuse, and an attitude of contempt towards detainees among security personnel. In its most extreme form, it results in the handling of detainees as mere objects rather than human beings at all, leading to events such as the mass deaths in military trucks of persons in Narathiwat after the protests outside the Tak Bai Police Station of 2004. For this reason, all types of chaining and custodial maltreatment that are either explicitly endorsed through law or tacitly encouraged through routine practices are worthy of strong condemnation.

Accordingly, the Asian Human Rights Commission urges your government to ensure that all persons detained under the Emergency Decree are treated with human dignity and respect and specifically that wounded persons held under the decree are not chained or otherwise restrained while receiving treatment in hospital.

The AHRC also takes this opportunity to call for a full accounting of persons being held under the decree, for the prompt bringing of charges or release of all these persons, for all of these persons to be guaranteed their civil rights, including their rights of access to lawyers and family members, and to be guaranteed their rights to be free from torture and other forms of human rights abuse. Finally, we again call upon your government to lift the state of emergency without any further delay and return your country to the rule of law rather than rule by decree and the de facto military administration under which it has been placed in recent weeks.

Yours sincerely

Basil Fernando

Director

Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong

Cc:

1. Mr. Chaowarat Chanweerakul, Minister of Interior, Thailand

2. Mr. Peeraphan Saleeratwipak, Minister of Justice, Thailand

3. Mr. Kasit Piromya, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Thailand

4. Homayoun Alizadeh, Regional Representative, OHCHR, Bangkok, Thailand

5. UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention

6. UN Special Rapporteur on the question of torture

Posted on 2010-06-18

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

[rabo]

<snip>

The UDD still control hundreds of community radio stations throughout the north, northeast and central Thailand. On these broadcasts they're fond of such threats as "If you meet a woman who says she's a democrat, rape her. Then rape her sisters and daughters too."

<snip>

You don't expect anyone to believe that rubbish, do you?

They do. One of my brother-in-laws had one of these stations until recently. They are mostly small one man shows, have local commercials, put on music, and rant pretty much anything on their mind when they feel like it. He was crazy about any politics local or international. He had two dogs, one named Bush and the other Clinton. Nice guy except you could not sit next to him while he was watching boxing, you would get punched unconscious as he swung his fists in sync with the boxers.

Edited June 21, 2010 by rabo

[rabo]

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 18, 2010

AHRC-OLT-005-2010

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Thailand by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

<snip content>

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

With no criticism of the AHRC letter, which seems properly written, let me mention the two cases they discuss.

It is clear from the letter that the army was dealing with protester instigated violence, which the army had been instructed to stop or prevent. In both cases the individuals were first shot with a shotgun. The "shotguns" were the rubber bullet guns provided to about 2/3 of the soldiers on that day, according to all available photos of soldiers. In the second case, when the individual started to run away, he was then hit with an M-16 round in a limb, in this case his hand.

Every detail from the AHRC report describes the army behaving according to instructions and according to accepted international standards in such circumstances. This is interesting as it is the first report I have heard with exact details of the army operation that day.

As for the chains, according to the rules of the SOE, the individuals were not incarcerated among convicted prisoners, but placed in a hospital. It is clear that the bed chain was used to prevent their escape from an unsecured environment, although cloth rope is usually used for patient restraint in hospitals.

In neither case was the army out purposefully killing innocent civilians, as often claimed here. There is also a question of reliability of the individuals' statements as the AHRC has taken the individuals' account at face value.

Assuming the the army as a whole did behave in this manner, the story again raises the question of who was so clearly targeting the reporters and the emergency workers?

Edited June 21, 2010 by rabo

[way2muchcoffee]

It should also be noted that the article of the UN Human Rights Convention referenced by the AHRC refers to the shackling of prisoners in prison, not in hospitals. I could not find anything from the UN specifically addressing the issue of restraining prisoners in hospitals.

Here is an excerpt from the US Statutes regarding the restraint of prisoners in hospitals.

Hospitals: In an unsecured hospital ward, prisoners will be restrained. Leg irons will be

used to restrict a prisoner to or in a hospital bed. Handcuffs will be used in the event leg irons

cannot be used or must be removed. Handcuffs will be applied prior to the removal of leg

irons. Restraints should not be used when compelling medical reasons dictate, including

when a pregnant prisoner is in labor, is delivering her baby, or is in immediate postdelivery

recuperation. (added 10-30-2007)

The statutes are 28 CFR 0.111, and 28 USC 561 (g).

Edited June 21, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[hideki]

I think the chain is to keep them from running away, since they have been arrested. They also tie down people who are withdrawing from alcoholism, but in this case it's usually 2 or 4 limbs. I see the guy on the right has hurt his fingers.

Incredibly nice propaganda though.

I know, human rights issues are not one of the concerns of hypocritical Thaksin haters.

That's extremely silly. You need to take your human rights issue to just about every country in the world then as restraining people that are under custody while they are in a hospital is a world-wide norm. As depicted, it's no different than handcuffing or or other forms of physical restraint.

Edited June 21, 2010 by hideki

[animatic]

I think the chain is to keep them from running away, since they have been arrested. They also tie down people who are withdrawing from alcoholism, but in this case it's usually 2 or 4 limbs. I see the guy on the right has hurt his fingers.

Incredibly nice propaganda though.

I know, human rights issues are not one of the concerns of hypocritical Thaksin haters.

That's extremely silly. You need to take your human rights issue to just about every country in the world then as restraining people that are under custody while they are in a hospital is a world-wide norm. As depicted, it's no different than handcuffing or or other forms of physical restraint.

Nothing unusual at all restraining a prisoner in a open hospital setting

during recovery prior to moving him to a proper jail.

I spent a night in hospital next to a man similarly shackled by one leg,

because the facility was not secure.And he told he would have bolted for sure ,

if given the chance, seems he wanted to clean up some evidence before it was found...

S.O.P. in most case.

And of course this ignores the obvious:

If I had the choice of a hospital bed and one shakled leg

and weeks in ANY Thai jail... I'll ASK for the shakle and hospital bed.

Edited June 21, 2010 by animatic

[jayjay0]

BANGKOK: -- Anti-government red shirts seeking revenge are expected to instigate fresh turmoil in Bangkok and the provinces after the government lifts the emergency decree, security agency sources said yesterday.

These folks have no problem breaking laws, causing violence and terrorizing people but for some reason are scared to break the rules of the emergency decree?

a political assembly of more then 5 people would be a crime that allows the security forces to shot them down and arrest and chained the wounded like the the red shirts in this photo.

without the SoE the government could not do this legally. And without the SoE the reds could use their constitutional rights to protest without fear for life and health.

I think the chain is to keep them from running away, since they have been arrested. They also tie down people who are withdrawing from alcoholism, but in this case it's usually 2 or 4 limbs. I see the guy on the right has hurt his fingers.

Incredibly nice propaganda though.

I know, human rights issues are not one of the concerns of hypocritical Thaksin haters.

I have as much concern for the red shirts human rights as they did for all the people they prevented from making a honest living. Why do all you Thaksin brain washed devotee's not say anything about the human suffering you have caused.

Get real after one week of protesting the whole world knew the red shirt complaints. The rest of the time was just to cause as much trouble as they could in the lives of the honest hard working Thais. When they were finaly stopped they proceded to try to burn Bangkok down.

I live in Chiang Mai a red shirt strong hold. When the train with 300 protestors arrived home all they could muster to greet them was 100 peopple. The bars reported a booming business that night.

[mazeltov]

It should also be noted that the article of the UN Human Rights Convention referenced by the AHRC refers to the shackling of prisoners in prison, not in hospitals. I could not find anything from the UN specifically addressing the issue of restraining prisoners in hospitals.

ahh, yes. these silly human right lawyers totally forgot that these two are not ordinary convicts who were found guilty by a court of law and sentence to a prison term. they are just detainees under some nazi act like the Emergency Decree and therefore don't have the human rights like 'normal' prisoners. and as long you don't keep them in another place that is different from a prison human rights are void and it is totally normal and world wide practice to put them on a chain like dogs.

their crime: they are accused of attending a political assembly of more than 5 person, which is illegal under the SoE.

[otherstuff1957]

The UDD still control hundreds of community radio stations throughout the north, northeast and central Thailand. On these broadcasts they're fond of such threats as "If you meet a woman who says she's a democrat, rape her. Then rape her sisters and daughters too."

After seeing the videos of leaders instructing followers to loot and burn Bangkok, I'm mildly surprised (instead of shocked). Have these broadcasts been recorded and available to download anywhere? I'd specifically like to have a copy of some of the recordings, such as the one you claim to have heard (or heard of).

I'd imagine that the government themselves are recording all UDD propaganda outlets 24h per day in case anything is said or written that can be used against them.

This is Thailand... The government probably told someone to record the UDD propaganda, but person probably forgot to put tape into the recorder!

[hideki]

nazi act

put them on a chain like dogs

colorful, yet inaccurate and exaggerated descriptions

[rabo]

It should also be noted that the article of the UN Human Rights Convention referenced by the AHRC refers to the shackling of prisoners in prison, not in hospitals. I could not find anything from the UN specifically addressing the issue of restraining prisoners in hospitals.

ahh, yes. these silly human right lawyers totally forgot that these two are not ordinary convicts who were found guilty by a court of law and sentence to a prison term. they are just detainees under some nazi act like the Emergency Decree and therefore don't have the human rights like 'normal' prisoners. and as long you don't keep them in another place that is different from a prison human rights are void and it is totally normal and world wide practice to put them on a chain like dogs.

their crime: they are accused of attending a political assembly of more than 5 person, which is illegal under the SoE.

Your peaceful assembly of your friends were BURNING A POLICE BUS IN FRONT OF THE LUMPANI POLICE STATION! For god sake.

Maybe you are thinking about the assembly of 5 or more peaceful terrorists.

[YouYouYou]

Here we go, here we go, here we go! ..again again again ....well, not until the footy is over me thinks eh ???!!!

It will be a long road to peace in this land me thinks ....

Edited June 21, 2010 by YouYouYou

[mazeltov]

nazi act

put them on a chain like dogs

colorful, yet inaccurate and exaggerated descriptions

pathetic Abhisit apologist should be ashamed.

well the human right dudes wrote:

"The government of Thailand should be further aware that under the UN Convention against Torture, to which it is a party, the chaining of wounded detainees could constitute an act of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that would place it in clear violation of its responsibilities under international law."

if human rights are your concern, you may be also interested to read what the AHRC thinks about the Emergency decree:

THAILAND: Hundreds detained under emergency regulations

[mazeltov]

It should also be noted that the article of the UN Human Rights Convention referenced by the AHRC refers to the shackling of prisoners in prison, not in hospitals. I could not find anything from the UN specifically addressing the issue of restraining prisoners in hospitals.

ahh, yes. these silly human right lawyers totally forgot that these two are not ordinary convicts who were found guilty by a court of law and sentence to a prison term. they are just detainees under some nazi act like the Emergency Decree and therefore don't have the human rights like 'normal' prisoners. and as long you don't keep them in another place that is different from a prison human rights are void and it is totally normal and world wide practice to put them on a chain like dogs.

their crime: they are accused of attending a political assembly of more than 5 person, which is illegal under the SoE.

Your peaceful assembly of your friends were BURNING A POLICE BUS IN FRONT OF THE LUMPANI POLICE STATION! For god sake.

Maybe you are thinking about the assembly of 5 or more peaceful terrorists.

Two Wrongs Don't Make A Right.

Wanna discuss another issue and violation of international law under UN Convention?

Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials

9. Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.

...

Policing unlawful assemblies

12. As everyone is allowed to participate in lawful and peaceful assemblies, in accordance with the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Governments and law enforcement agencies and officials shall recognize that force and firearms may be used only in accordance with principles 13 and 14.

13. In the dispersal of assemblies that are unlawful but non-violent, law enforcement officials shall avoid the use of force or, where that is not practicable, shall restrict such force to the minimum extent necessary.

14. In the dispersal of violent assemblies, law enforcement officials may use firearms only when less dangerous means are not practicable and only to the minimum extent necessary. Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms in such cases, except under the conditions stipulated in principle 9.

Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials

[Rucharee]

If you don't chain them they will escape.

So, OK to chain them.

Some Arab countries, they may cut off their legs to stop them from running.

So count this 2 men lucky.

[hideki]

nazi act

put them on a chain like dogs

colorful, yet inaccurate and exaggerated descriptions

- overly personal and derogatory language removed -

well the human right dudes wrote:

"The government of Thailand should be further aware that under the UN Convention against Torture, to which it is a party, the chaining of wounded detainees could constitute an act of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that would place it in clear violation of its responsibilities under international law."

if human rights are your concern, you may be also interested to read what the AHRC thinks about the Emergency decree:

THAILAND: Hundreds detained under emergency regulations

I was referring to your choice of exaggerated language, not the Human Rights group. For them, I would simply point out that Thailand is certainly not alone in its restraining of individuals that are under detention. The AHRC have their work cut out for them if they expect to end the practice for so many other countries that restrict the movement of detainees as likely every signatory nation to that convention is in violation.

As for the Emergency Decree, once control is established over those that wish to cause all this turmoil, then it will cease. The very title of this thread should tell you that those destabilizing forces aren't finished yet.

[yesdavy]

I had some sympathy for the redshirts before the hatred, violence and firestorm that they initiated in Bangkok. However, they have proved that the Prime Minister is right. Many of the leaders are acting like terrorists.

They need to stop the threats and do things legally and peacefully. After Bangkok, the government is justified in whatever measures it takes to stop them from ruining the country. They are cutting their own throats with their recalcitrance.

Is there a commonly accepted definition of terrorist? What is the difference between a terrorist and an insurgent? Why have international news media dropped the term terrorist?

[yesdavy]

If the people/organisations that are openly making the threats of further violent action are actually known or identifiable to authourities, why dont the authourities just arrest them now before it gets out of hand again - or would that just be too simple??

Would it be too despotic?

[Ulysses G.]

I had some sympathy for the redshirts before the hatred, violence and firestorm that they initiated in Bangkok. However, they have proved that the Prime Minister is right. Many of the leaders are acting like terrorists.

They need to stop the threats and do things legally and peacefully. After Bangkok, the government is justified in whatever measures it takes to stop them from ruining the country. They are cutting their own throats with their recalcitrance.

 What is the difference between a terrorist and an insurgent?  

Would you prefer the term subversive criminals? That may indeed be more accurate. 

[craigt3365]

I think terrorist is the appropriate term. Here is the definition as used the by the UN since 1994. Seems to fit:

"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them."

I think these red shirt lovers would have done well under the guidance of people like Jim Jones or Charles Manson. Follow them no matter what they say....don't use your own brain, just follow...a bit radical for me.

[craigt3365]

It should also be noted that the article of the UN Human Rights Convention referenced by the AHRC refers to the shackling of prisoners in prison, not in hospitals. I could not find anything from the UN specifically addressing the issue of restraining prisoners in hospitals.

ahh, yes. these silly human right lawyers totally forgot that these two are not ordinary convicts who were found guilty by a court of law and sentence to a prison term. they are just detainees under some nazi act like the Emergency Decree and therefore don't have the human rights like 'normal' prisoners. and as long you don't keep them in another place that is different from a prison human rights are void and it is totally normal and world wide practice to put them on a chain like dogs.

their crime: they are accused of attending a political assembly of more than 5 person, which is illegal under the SoE.

Your peaceful assembly of your friends were BURNING A POLICE BUS IN FRONT OF THE LUMPANI POLICE STATION! For god sake.

Maybe you are thinking about the assembly of 5 or more peaceful terrorists.

Two Wrongs Don't Make A Right.

Wanna discuss another issue and violation of international law under UN Convention?

Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials

9. Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.

...

Policing unlawful assemblies

12. As everyone is allowed to participate in lawful and peaceful assemblies, in accordance with the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Governments and law enforcement agencies and officials shall recognize that force and firearms may be used only in accordance with principles 13 and 14.

13. In the dispersal of assemblies that are unlawful but non-violent, law enforcement officials shall avoid the use of force or, where that is not practicable, shall restrict such force to the minimum extent necessary.

14. In the dispersal of violent assemblies, law enforcement officials may use firearms only when less dangerous means are not practicable and only to the minimum extent necessary. Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms in such cases, except under the conditions stipulated in principle 9.

Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials

I read this the other way. Especially when you read the entire "Special Provisions" section. What the government did was totally in line with this provision and the following "Policing Unlawful Assemblies" section.

The first sentence of #9 clearly gives them the right to use firearms. How many army and civilians either died or were wounded in previous attacks by the reds? The precedent was set. Protection of the army, police and civilians was needed. Easy. Thanks, now we know they did this according to international standards! :jap:

[Briggsy]

Here we go again..

They are waiting for the emergency decree to be lifted..? So why not just leave it in place.

Anyway, a 'friend' of mine said all this is (and the last protests) being organized (and funded) by powers much greater than the government can control.. otherwise the Bangkok 'thing' would've been over in a day..

Some think they are trying to de-stablize (sp?) the country so that Cambodian forces can move in, take over and HS and TS will have control.. scary thought but surely the world wont let that happen..?

Farcical post quoting the completely ridiculous xenophobic falsehoods put about by the yellows or army brass or who knows. Do you have a source?

[BlueTerrace]

From my down town roomsI watched as building after building after building was set on fire. They went up all over town and mostly in the same thirty minute period. Literally every direction you looked there was a column of oily black smoke. They were premeditated arson attacks.

The foreign media underestimate the damage done. They reported each fire as a single event, (e.g., the Siam theatre fire), but when you walk around this one event you can see that there are literally dozens of small shop owners who were burnt out in that fire. Same goes for the zen building, where dozens of businesses were burnt out.

We all remember how the government initially welcomed the redshirt protestors to Bangkok and we all remember how the redshirts ended it nearly three months later.

To bring this back to topic relevance: I am not sorry that the government is chasing down the people who blockaded, killed and burnt in the CBD. I hope the government catches and convicts more of these violent criminals. Amnesty for those brainwashed dolts who sat for ten weeks under a 24 hour barrage of propaganda might be a nice gesture, but go after the leaders, arsonists and gun men. (And before another redshirt sympathizer tries to deny that there were redshirt/blackshirt gunmen, don't bother..your words mean nothing - anyone who lived or worked down town saw it with their own eyes).

Edited June 22, 2010 by cdnvic
Removed mangled quotes

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

The UDD still control hundreds of community radio stations throughout the north, northeast and central Thailand. On these broadcasts they're fond of such threats as "If you meet a woman who says she's a democrat, rape her. Then rape her sisters and daughters too."

<snip>

You don't expect anyone to believe that rubbish, do you?

They do. One of my brother-in-laws had one of these stations until recently. They are mostly small one man shows, have local commercials, put on music, and rant pretty much anything on their mind when they feel like it. He was crazy about any politics local or international. He had two dogs, one named Bush and the other Clinton. Nice guy except you could not sit next to him while he was watching boxing, you would get punched unconscious as he swung his fists in sync with the boxers.

Then he - the brother-in-law - was probably considered a total nut-case by the village and nobody (hopefully) took him seriously.

[JetsetBkk]

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 18, 2010

AHRC-OLT-005-2010

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Thailand by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

<snip content>

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

With no criticism of the AHRC letter, which seems properly written, let me mention the two cases they discuss.

It is clear from the letter that the army was dealing with protester instigated violence, which the army had been instructed to stop or prevent. In both cases the individuals were first shot with a shotgun. The "shotguns" were the rubber bullet guns provided to about 2/3 of the soldiers on that day

<snip>

Do you think it is hard to tell the difference between a shotgun wound and a rubber bullet wound?

Now, if you'd said: 'I think the "shotguns" were probably the rubber bullet guns provided ....' your post would be acceptable. But you cannot state something as a fact just because you want others to believe it to be true.

Actually, you can say what you want. But then people tend to ignore you.

[yesdavy]

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 18, 2010

AHRC-OLT-005-2010

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Thailand by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

<snip content>

[AHRC Open Letter] THAILAND: Chaining of wounded detainees under Emergency Decree

With no criticism of the AHRC letter, which seems properly written, let me mention the two cases they discuss.

It is clear from the letter that the army was dealing with protester instigated violence, which the army had been instructed to stop or prevent. In both cases the individuals were first shot with a shotgun. The "shotguns" were the rubber bullet guns provided to about 2/3 of the soldiers on that day, according to all available photos of soldiers. In the second case, when the individual started to run away, he was then hit with an M-16 round in a limb, in this case his hand.

Every detail from the AHRC report describes the army behaving according to instructions and according to accepted international standards in such circumstances. This is interesting as it is the first report I have heard with exact details of the army operation that day.

As for the chains, according to the rules of the SOE, the individuals were not incarcerated among convicted prisoners, but placed in a hospital. It is clear that the bed chain was used to prevent their escape from an unsecured environment, although cloth rope is usually used for patient restraint in hospitals.

In neither case was the army out purposefully killing innocent civilians, as often claimed here. There is also a question of reliability of the individuals' statements as the AHRC has taken the individuals' account at face value.

Assuming the the army as a whole did behave in this manner, the story again raises the question of who was so clearly targeting the reporters and the emergency workers?

Please take a moment to elaborate on how you have concluded that:

Army shotguns fired only rubber bullets and not steel or lead shot.

Photos of soldiers with shotguns substantiates that they were not loaded with steel or lead shot.

An unarmed, wounded civilian trying to run away meets the UN standards for using lethal force.

Please offer an explanation of why the AHRC wrote the letter expressing concern if every detail meets international standards.

Regarding reliability, is there a difference between taking victims' accounts at face value, and taking an army's account at face value?

[yesdavy]

I had some sympathy for the redshirts before the hatred, violence and firestorm that they initiated in Bangkok. However, they have proved that the Prime Minister is right. Many of the leaders are acting like terrorists.

They need to stop the threats and do things legally and peacefully. After Bangkok, the government is justified in whatever measures it takes to stop them from ruining the country. They are cutting their own throats with their recalcitrance.

From what I remember of your posts you are pro-Yellow and very anti-Red.

Its funny how many Yellow supporters all claim to "......have had some sympathies with reds but not anymore......."

Are they attempting to portray a move of support away from Reds ?

I think you will find that Red strength is growing even more stronger - even those who were neutral have been disgusted by the governments lies and propaganda and now are not so neutral anymore.

Looks at this "Red School" nonsense by the Nation - pure fantasy pumping the government propaganda - pathetic. !!!

You can spin it both ways...many are tired of the red's lies and propaganda and are not so neutral anymore....I'm in this group...

They claim they can't campaign due to media closure. I am sure they could easily find a media outlet ready, willing and able to host their (paid for) ads...as long as they don't include things like burning down city halls, killing the PM, etc. Things which are not allowed in most civilized nations...

They say they don't have a voice just for spin.

What did we hear from sanamluang.tv for three months at Rajprasong? Their hoarse, threatening voices 24 hours a day.

The UDD still control hundreds of community radio stations throughout the north, northeast and central Thailand. On these broadcasts they're fond of such threats as "If you meet a woman who says she's a democrat, rape her. Then rape her sisters and daughters too."

They say this time the rally "will be effective." What could that possibly mean other than that they plan to attempt to overthrow the government? Even the largest anti-war demonstrations of the 1960s in the USA never lasted more than one day.

Sorry to be uninformed. Please allow a few questions:

First, is there an equivalent of the FCC in Thailand that issues broadcast licenses, transmission power limitations, mandates standards of good taste, and assigns frequencies?

Are the red radio stations centrally controlled, broadcasting any networked or bicycled programs?

Have incitement to rape statements been made as stated above, and if so how frequently, and is this a policy of the reds?

If this quote from red radio is indeed fact and not just TV baiting, where are the Thai women, especially the UDD women? Wouldn't they rail against such illogical, inhumane, verbal vitriol? If a woman meets another woman that is a Dem, is she supposed to rape her? And are siblings and offspring automatically of the same political leanings? Who could condone rape under any circumstances, least of all for a political agenda? Are Thai women allowed to vote yet? If so, why have they not organized politically to eradicate such demaining, despicable attitudes. By not doing so, they become part of the problem by not becoming part of the solution.

[craigt3365]

The same applies for people who listened to that garbage to bring bottles with you to the rally so they could fill them with gas and burn Bangkok down. What kind of sick person would even stand there and listen to that? Much less follow up, as hundreds and thousands did...sad, very sad. When the very people they hurt the most are the poor folks in Bangkok just trying to make a living...now they are unemployed...

I can understand them heading to the rally due to the financial payments. My uncle in law made more in one trip to Bangkok with his pickup than he makes all month working! And the local gossip is if Thaksin returns, every village will get 1MM Baht. Quite an incentive...especially since he has already given them money...

[Insight]

Check the front cover of the magazine highlighted on 2Bangkok.com today. Extremely provocative and as far from reconciliatory as you can get IMO.