Sister Of Italian Killed In Thai Protests Slams Money Offer

[apollo13]

It's all gone a 'bit off topic' hasn't it ( i'm also guilty), but the original article is about compensation, and is that being used to try and pacify the Polenghi family who are demanding to see the results of the autopsy on Fabio Polenghi. The autopsy results have the entry and exit points made by the bullet, thus determining the angle from shooter to target, and, importantly if the round was fired from street level or fired from a building. If the round was fired from a building it may imply that the victim was targeted by a sniper which would, in turn ,imply the Thai Military, who used snipers on rooftops. As far as i know, the autopsy results still have not been released.

Edited December 4, 2010 by apollo13

[babsy65]

It's all gone a 'bit off topic' hasn't it ( i'm also guilty), but the original article is about compensation, and is that being used to try and pacify the Polenghi family who are demanding to see the results of the autopsy on Fabio Polenghi. The autopsy results have the entry and exit points made by the bullet, thus determining the angle from shooter to target, and, importantly if the round was fired from street level or fired from a building. If the round was fired from a building it may imply that the victim was targeted by a sniper which would, in turn ,imply the Thai Military, who used snipers on rooftops. As far as i know, the autopsy results still have not been released.

.... and they never will. The Thai authorities will never allow that. Ditto for his photographic equipment.

This is an analogous case to the "Balibo 5".

35 years on and still no answers from the Indonesian government. No investigations, no evidence, no responsibility ..only denials....

[Jimi007]

Elisabetta Polenghi's brother Fabio was gunned down on May 19, the day of the bloody military crackdown in Bangkok that brought two months of "Red Shirt" demonstrations to an end.

"Certainly, the institutions in Thailand have made offers of financial compensation as you well know," Polenghi said in the letter to Somsakdi Suriyawongse, Thailand's ambassador in Rome.

She described those offers as "absolutely inappropriate" and said "we believe it is an obvious attempt to close our mouths and pay back the dignity of our Fabio with a little money".

Polenghi was killed while working as a freelance photographer covering the protest

I hate to sound unsympathetic to the victim's family, but I always had the impression that if a person decides to deem oneself a freelance photographer and enter into the midst of a war zone (and that's what Bangkok virtually was at times during the red shirt protests) aren't they accepting the danger associated with that type of profession?

I might get slammed and called a callus jerk for asking that, but I really always had the impression that a person was basically forfeiting their civil rights when choosing not heed warnings by entering into what is obviously a seriously dangerous situation.

I have to agree with you Wavefloater. People were warned, it was a live fire zone and yet this man made his choice to ignore the warnings in order to possibly make some money from his photos. Was he "unlucky" or did he chose to not heed the warnings and the obvious danger. Three pages of the usual off the wall and off the real topic of this article, with some of the usual insults thrown in, from the usual Thaivisa posters... Since he was "freelance' photographer, I would guess he didn't have a work permit or the proper credentials to be near the area. If he had used common sense and stayed away, he would be alive today.

[whybother]

It's all gone a 'bit off topic' hasn't it ( i'm also guilty), but the original article is about compensation, and is that being used to try and pacify the Polenghi family who are demanding to see the results of the autopsy on Fabio Polenghi. The autopsy results have the entry and exit points made by the bullet, thus determining the angle from shooter to target, and, importantly if the round was fired from street level or fired from a building. If the round was fired from a building it may imply that the victim was targeted by a sniper which would, in turn ,imply the Thai Military, who used snipers on rooftops. As far as i know, the autopsy results still have not been released.

i don't think the payment was to silence anyone. It was SOP for the government for any deaths during the protests.

I also don't think an autopsy will be able to tell much about where the bullet came from. With other evidence, it might show a general direction, but unless someone knows exactly which way he was facing, not just back or front to the army, but which way he might have been twisting or bending. For example, he may have been shot from high up, but if he was bending over it might look like he was shot from ground level. The same with a twist - if he had his back to the army, but facing more to the left or the right, it won't give a clear indication of the actual direction of the bullet. The type of bullet may give the best indication, but given the red shirts did have access to army weapons, it doesn't guarantee anything either.

[apollo13]

It's all gone a 'bit off topic' hasn't it ( i'm also guilty), but the original article is about compensation, and is that being used to try and pacify the Polenghi family who are demanding to see the results of the autopsy on Fabio Polenghi. The autopsy results have the entry and exit points made by the bullet, thus determining the angle from shooter to target, and, importantly if the round was fired from street level or fired from a building. If the round was fired from a building it may imply that the victim was targeted by a sniper which would, in turn ,imply the Thai Military, who used snipers on rooftops. As far as i know, the autopsy results still have not been released.

i don't think the payment was to silence anyone. It was SOP for the government for any deaths during the protests.

I also don't think an autopsy will be able to tell much about where the bullet came from. With other evidence, it might show a general direction, but unless someone knows exactly which way he was facing, not just back or front to the army, but which way he might have been twisting or bending. For example, he may have been shot from high up, but if he was bending over it might look like he was shot from ground level. The same with a twist - if he had his back to the army, but facing more to the left or the right, it won't give a clear indication of the actual direction of the bullet. The type of bullet may give the best indication, but given the red shirts did have access to army weapons, it doesn't guarantee anything either.

Actually a lot can be ascertained from the bullet wounds. The nature of the entrance wound can give you an idea of the position of the victim in relation to the trajectory of the bullet. Also, if he was bent over and shot from ground level the line of travel would be completely different and thus the exit wound in a different place, The human body can only 'bend' in certain directions.

[rubl]

[it's only in the last two sentences I start to disagree. The most likely fact that Fabio P. was shot by troops is discomforting and regrettable. Doesn't upset me though. I only got upset when some poster wrote 'trigger happy' and 'Fabio was shot again and again' which is totally incorrect. The rest of the posts here regurgitate point of views, correct and incorrect ones. May be love of democracy, but not necessarily truth

The fact that a killing of a fellow human being does't upset you, that's fine, you are entitled to your own opinion, even though nobody asked for it.

But please, out of respect for other fellow human beings, including his widowed wife, his family, his 4 yrs kid who do not share the same feelings about his killing as you do, it would be best if certain personal comments were kept to yourself.

Maybe it's me, but personally I would be more upset if someone falsely said 'killed by trigger happy monkeys', 'down and shot again and again', 'free fire zone'. Somehow that seems much more disrespectful than my 'not being upset'.

Reading things again I admit I shouldn't have written that 'not upset' even though it's a personal opinion. The quote from cnxforever though I think is despicable (post #10).

[rubl]

begin removed ...

As for Se Daeng - No action of a sane person can be said to be literally asking to be shot. No action justifies summary execution in a society that has law and order.

From an interview with Thomas Fuller who was interviewing Seh Daeng when he was shot:

"Mr. FULLER: He's a very colorful person. He was - I think colorful is probably a euphemism. I mean he was a bit wacky. He was provocative. He was defiant. And it was a mystery to a lot of people why he couldn't be reined in. A military is not supposed to have renegade generals on the loose for as long as he was. But I don't think anyone saw him more than a mysterious, charismatic renegade soldier."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126805541

[jayjay0]

Fabio Polenghi, Hiro Muramoto, even Se Daeng being shoot by a sniper while he was having an interview, all killed by mistake i guess as the army was just shooting in the air if they were shooting at all, i am just waiting for the next revelation were all the 3 of them will be confirmed that were flying as birds, i actually recall some resentment toward the alien press expressed by the people in power during those days, just a coincidence?

Fabio and Hiro probably shot by the army while extreme unrest, violence erupted. Those black-shirts who caused it responsable. Seh Daeng asked for it, sorry, but he almost literally did just that.

As for resentment towards alien press, red-shirts tried to burn down Channel3 building with occupants, BP office evacuated, journalists harassed, equipment smashed.

Any co-incidence with smashed CCTV camera's ? Surely those peaceful red-shirts had nothing to hide (apart from a handful of grenades) ?

Don't smudge the chronology of events, it makes a great deal of difference. The unrest and violence was not much in evidence before the army went in. I don't think it an exaggeration to say the army action caused the lethal violence and unrest to erupt. Certainly, they had the greater fire power and responsibility. They did not go in to calm things down.

The red shirt actions (nobody disputes that it was the redshirts) after the army went in (like the Cannel3 building attack etc.) were horrendous – truly awful. Finding those responsible and proving their culpability is extremely important. It is as important as finding facts on the circumstances of the deaths at the rally site and around when the army 'went in'.

The Press? Neither side liked them because they were revealing the sins of both sides.

As for Se Daeng - No action of a sane person can be said to be literally asking to be shot. No action justifies summary execution in a society that has law and order.

O goody another one saying if the army hadn't gone in.

Think it out if they had not gone in the red shirts would still be there. It is not as if the Government didn't try to negotiate. You also conveniently over look the little detail of in effect shutting down a busy part of Bangkok and depriving many honest Thai's of there lively hood. Was that a legal action?

If it was a peaceful action why were they armed and building barricades?

Just once I would like to hear you people take responsibility with out this nonsense of if they had or hadn't Depends on what you are trying to justify

[jayjay0]

I have a different opinion on the issue.

Only you seem to feel it's your position to apportion shame, That is not your job, shame on you for attempting that. I feel sorry that he's dead of course, but he is more than a small part of the cause. No amounts of flames from you can change those basic facts.

I will leave it to forum members to decide whether your dress code post was appropriate.I think it was shameful and lacking in sensitivity, and I doubt whether I am alone in that view.

jayboy

Are you saying truth is not appropriate here?

Grow up there is going to be times in your life when truth will be shameful and insensitive. To deny it and run solves nothing.Maybe you should stay away from these type threads where your sensitivity will get hurt. (just a suggestion to help you with your peace of mind)

[Siam Simon]

O goody another one saying if the army hadn't gone in.

Think it out if they had not gone in the red shirts would still be there. It is not as if the Government didn't try to negotiate. You also conveniently over look the little detail of in effect shutting down a busy part of Bangkok and depriving many honest Thai's of there lively hood. Was that a legal action?

If it was a peaceful action why were they armed and building barricades?

Just once I would like to hear you people take responsibility with out this nonsense of if they had or hadn't Depends on what you are trying to justify

Posts and posters like this, to me, are very much a symptom of the modern action movie and video game mentality. A good way of taking responsibility for the type of garbled nonsense posted above would be for these posters to actually go and stand next to somebody who has the top of their head blown off by a high velocity bullet or their body blown apart by a grenade, and for said posters to then have to clean up the mess so they could actually, really see just what are the human results of the huge escalations of violence they are supporting .

[Siam Simon]

I have a different opinion on the issue.

Only you seem to feel it's your position to apportion shame, That is not your job, shame on you for attempting that. I feel sorry that he's dead of course, but he is more than a small part of the cause. No amounts of flames from you can change those basic facts.

I will leave it to forum members to decide whether your dress code post was appropriate.I think it was shameful and lacking in sensitivity, and I doubt whether I am alone in that view.

jayboy

Are you saying truth is not appropriate here?

Grow up there is going to be times in your life when truth will be shameful and insensitive. To deny it and run solves nothing.Maybe you should stay away from these type threads where your sensitivity will get hurt. (just a suggestion to help you with your peace of mind)

The day I stop being sensitive to the carnage and deaths caused by the orders to disperse on April 10 and subsequently, and start justifying them as a necessary political act, is the day I will stop thinking of myself as a member of the human race.

[rubl]

I have a different opinion on the issue.

Only you seem to feel it's your position to apportion shame, That is not your job, shame on you for attempting that. I feel sorry that he's dead of course, but he is more than a small part of the cause. No amounts of flames from you can change those basic facts.

I will leave it to forum members to decide whether your dress code post was appropriate.I think it was shameful and lacking in sensitivity, and I doubt whether I am alone in that view.

jayboy

Are you saying truth is not appropriate here?

Grow up there is going to be times in your life when truth will be shameful and insensitive. To deny it and run solves nothing.Maybe you should stay away from these type threads where your sensitivity will get hurt. (just a suggestion to help you with your peace of mind)

The day I stop being sensitive to the carnage and deaths caused by the orders to disperse on April 10 and subsequently, and start justifying them as a necessary political act, is the day I will stop thinking of myself as a member of the human race.

When you say 'caused by the orders to disperse', you might also say 'caused by the UDD leaders and their paymaster who started a peaceful protest in March which got more and more violent as those didn't result in what they had set as goals'. Very conveniently you also seem to forget those 60+ grenade attacks on police, army, non-red-shirt protesters and innocent bystanders.

Is there anyone on this forum who remembers the name of the Thai lady who was killed in the grenade attack on BTS Saladaeng station? Downstairs multi-color-shirt were protesting the reds blocking Bangkok and grenades lobbed on them caused 'collateral damage' ('only' one dead, 80 wounded). Anyone out here feeling compassion? No disrespect to Fabio P., but he choose to be in the warzone when fire was exchanged, the lady only wanted to get home.

[creck]

When there is a ‘chain of events’ in a mechanical system, you can rightly say the first item moved caused all the rest. Each part is only adjusting due to forces applied to it. No piece has any decision making capacity.

Do you really think that this is true of the political world?

Do you think?

[whybother]

Actually a lot can be ascertained from the bullet wounds. The nature of the entrance wound can give you an idea of the position of the victim in relation to the trajectory of the bullet. Also, if he was bent over and shot from ground level the line of travel would be completely different and thus the exit wound in a different place, The human body can only 'bend' in certain directions.

If you don't know the trajectory or the position of the victim, you can only guess at both of them.

[whybother]

O goody another one saying if the army hadn't gone in.

Think it out if they had not gone in the red shirts would still be there. It is not as if the Government didn't try to negotiate. You also conveniently over look the little detail of in effect shutting down a busy part of Bangkok and depriving many honest Thai's of there lively hood. Was that a legal action?

If it was a peaceful action why were they armed and building barricades?

Just once I would like to hear you people take responsibility with out this nonsense of if they had or hadn't Depends on what you are trying to justify

Posts and posters like this, to me, are very much a symptom of the modern action movie and video game mentality. A good way of taking responsibility for the type of garbled nonsense posted above would be for these posters to actually go and stand next to somebody who has the top of their head blown off by a high velocity bullet or their body blown apart by a grenade, and for said posters to then have to clean up the mess so they could actually, really see just what are the human results of the huge escalations of violence they are supporting .

"the huge escalations of the violence they are supporting" - that describes the red shirt and their supporters quite well.

The red shirts started with a peaceful protest, then pushed and prodded and escalated at every chance they had. And when the army tried to disperse them - after they had stormed parliament and Thaicom, and expanded their protest area to disrupt more people in Ratchaprasong - the red shirts escalated it by throwing a grenade which killed the colonel in charge of the operation.

[asiawatcher]

The guy took a hit whilst wearing a black T-shirt and a pair of army combat trousers which was the garb worn by many 'red guards\men in black' and would have dramatically increased the chances of him being mistaken as such. In a photo I saw, he was also wearing a blue helmet with' PRESS ' printed on it in yellow.As to whether this helmet is standard issue for the press and should be recognised from a distance by the army or whether it was 'home made' from a motorbike helmet i must admit ignorance but I didn't spot a 'PRESS' armband on the guy which many other journalists and photographers did have. Anyway, he died doing what he loved but maybe didn't have proper training on how to move around in a combat zone as a member of the press. The guys from CNN and BBC all came home safely. Anyway, RIP Fabio.

I would tend to agree. Prepared press and well trained journalists know better than to act as a stringer n fatigues. I wonder if Fabio had endorsements to act from any Italian newspapers? Anyone entering a battle zone dressed similarly to soldiers is a walking target. At least the CNN and BBC guys wore a plain colour, an approved helmet and flack jackets and stood out as to what they were. I would think if Fabio was engaged by any foreign newspaper they should at least be doing the compensation. I also don't think a financial offer from Thailand is inappropriate irrespective of the amount. It is done as a gesture only. Where is this woman's point about trying to keep her mouth shut etc? Is there a confidentiality agreement attached to the payment? I think she is out of line and many forum members also are missing a point here.

[creck]

The redshirts are not blameless both before and after the army and police cleared the roads of Bangkok they behaved immorally..

The police are not effective as law keepers and deep action needs to be taken with them at all levels.

The Army are not angels and should follow the elected leaders even when they want a different objective.

The Men in Black should come forward and admit who and why they are.

They should all be treated fairly and punished for criminal acts

The government should get its act together and rule justly and without favour for the good of the whole country. It should consider a fair election and the results followed.

When ... when... when...

[jayboy]

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet by anyone broadly sympathetic to the Red movement, I think it's worth making the point that the army generally acted very professionally in these sad events.Nothing is ever perfectly achieved in these conflict situations and there no doubt several instances of unprofessional behaviour.I don't know whether Fabio was the victim of one of these lapses or not.I think Nick Nostitz sums up the context rather well.

"Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents where the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.

This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions."

Some on this forum should think carefully about Nick's last sentence.

[whybother]

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet by anyone broadly sympathetic to the Red movement, I think it's worth making the point that the army generally acted very professionally in these sad events.Nothing is ever perfectly achieved in these conflict situations and there no doubt several instances of unprofessional behaviour.I don't know whether Fabio was the victim of one of these lapses or not.I think Nick Nostitz sums up the context rather well.

"Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents where the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.

This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions."

Some on this forum should think carefully about Nick's last sentence.

Don't fall of your chair ... but I agree, not just with the last sentence but the whole post.

I don't think many posters were actually on the ground during the fighting, and even those that were there only witnessed a small part of the whole event.

Edited December 5, 2010 by whybother

[animatic]

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet by anyone broadly sympathetic to the Red movement, I think it's worth making the point that the army generally acted very professionally in these sad events.Nothing is ever perfectly achieved in these conflict situations and there no doubt several instances of unprofessional behaviour.I don't know whether Fabio was the victim of one of these lapses or not.I think Nick Nostitz sums up the context rather well.

"Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents where the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.

This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions."

Some on this forum should think carefully about Nick's last sentence.

What Nick says make sense. Balanced for a change.

Of course making comments based on observations, is not necessarily

based purely on political leanings, though some will assume as much.

I was not in London for the Blitz, but I certainly can make valid observations today.

Some, no doubt, make counter-punch comments, and attempts to derail conversations,

precisely because of their political leanings. Yes, certainly "Some on this forum should think..."

Please hold your own mirror, it might be enlightening.

Edited December 5, 2010 by animatic

[jayboy]

Some, no doubt, make counter-punch comments, and attempts to derail conversations,

precisely because of their political leanings. Yes, certainly "Some on this forum should think..."

Please hold your own mirror, it might be enlightening.

Actually I do try quite hard not to let my politics interfere with the facts.It would have been easy to suggest that the army acted incompetently as some Reds do.I never have.

I'm also grateful when someone politely tells me where I was wrong.I admitted openly recently I had been in error (foolishly because I knew though overlooked) saying there had been no court verdicts on technical grounds favouring the Democrats' opponents.

Some people are never wrong or admit error.I don't include you in that category by the way.

[AZBill]

Many countries provide such compensation and I don't consider it a bribe attempt unless there is some untoward conditions that go along with it. The problem is that the Thai government's rightly deserved reputation throughout the world as one of the most morally and shamelessly corrupt precedes them, even when there is no such intent. Certainly money can never replace her brother, but money is what we use in this world to compensate people for loss and I see nothing outwardly untoward about such an offer.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

It's amazing how much forensic detail posters on Thaivisa seem to have. Perhaps they could forward their files to the relevant authorities. I believe it's CSI Miami handling this one.

[rubl]

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet by anyone broadly sympathetic to the Red movement, I think it's worth making the point that the army generally acted very professionally in these sad events.Nothing is ever perfectly achieved in these conflict situations and there no doubt several instances of unprofessional behaviour.I don't know whether Fabio was the victim of one of these lapses or not.I think Nick Nostitz sums up the context rather well.

"Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents where the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.

This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions."

Some on this forum should think carefully about Nick's last sentence.

Hear, hear. Just the right note we needed on this topic before it really derails. Thanks.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet by anyone broadly sympathetic to the Red movement, I think it's worth making the point that the army generally acted very professionally in these sad events.Nothing is ever perfectly achieved in these conflict situations and there no doubt several instances of unprofessional behaviour.I don't know whether Fabio was the victim of one of these lapses or not.I think Nick Nostitz sums up the context rather well.

"Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents where the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.

This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions."

Some on this forum should think carefully about Nick's last sentence.

So you are a journalist or some other actor with intimate knowledge of the events, are you? Because saying "the army generally acted very professionally" sounds an awful lot like a "blanket statement", which could quite conceivably be motivated by your " own political convictions".

But that said I'd agree that at least in a narrow sense, the army did act professionally. The purpose of the army is to deploy force in the interests of the state. They did this very effectively so in one sense, they sould be commended.

[jayboy]

So you are a journalist or some other actor with intimate knowledge of the events, are you? Because saying "the army generally acted very professionally" sounds an awful lot like a "blanket statement", which could quite conceivably be motivated by your " own political convictions".

You obviously are unaware of my posting record and the political affiliation it reveals.

My conclusions were based on many accounts from diverse sources.I found ANU's Professor Desmond Ball's analysis particularly useful though his close relationship with the senior officer corps needs to be factored in.

[Siam Simon]

The day I stop being sensitive to the carnage and deaths caused by the orders to disperse on April 10 and subsequently, and start justifying them as a necessary political act, is the day I will stop thinking of myself as a member of the human race.

When you say 'caused by the orders to disperse', you might also say 'caused by the UDD leaders and their paymaster who started a peaceful protest in March which got more and more violent as those didn't result in what they had set as goals'. Very conveniently you also seem to forget those 60+ grenade attacks on police, army, non-red-shirt protesters and innocent bystanders.

Is there anyone on this forum who remembers the name of the Thai lady who was killed in the grenade attack on BTS Saladaeng station? Downstairs multi-color-shirt were protesting the reds blocking Bangkok and grenades lobbed on them caused 'collateral damage' ('only' one dead, 80 wounded). Anyone out here feeling compassion? No disrespect to Fabio P., but he choose to be in the warzone when fire was exchanged, the lady only wanted to get home.

I haven't "conveniently forgotten" the violence by either side caused by the huge escalation on April 10. And I would no more try to place responsibility for Fabio Pollenghi's death on his own incompetence with nothing more than speculation (as has been the case by several posters on this thread) than I would for Col Romklao or Ms Taebthong and the other two people murdered at the Saladaeng BTS (at least one poster on another recent thread tried to argue that civilians being shot at shouldn't have been in their own neighbourhoods and should have been living rough!)

[Siam Simon]

O goody another one saying if the army hadn't gone in.

Think it out if they had not gone in the red shirts would still be there. It is not as if the Government didn't try to negotiate. You also conveniently over look the little detail of in effect shutting down a busy part of Bangkok and depriving many honest Thai's of there lively hood. Was that a legal action?

If it was a peaceful action why were they armed and building barricades?

Just once I would like to hear you people take responsibility with out this nonsense of if they had or hadn't Depends on what you are trying to justify

Posts and posters like this, to me, are very much a symptom of the modern action movie and video game mentality. A good way of taking responsibility for the type of garbled nonsense posted above would be for these posters to actually go and stand next to somebody who has the top of their head blown off by a high velocity bullet or their body blown apart by a grenade, and for said posters to then have to clean up the mess so they could actually, really see just what are the human results of the huge escalations of violence they are supporting .

"the huge escalations of the violence they are supporting" - that describes the red shirt and their supporters quite well.

The red shirts started with a peaceful protest, then pushed and prodded and escalated at every chance they had. And when the army tried to disperse them - after they had stormed parliament and Thaicom, and expanded their protest area to disrupt more people in Ratchaprasong - the red shirts escalated it by throwing a grenade which killed the colonel in charge of the operation.

Yes, they pushed and prodded, plus they trespassed in large numbers at Parliament and at Thaicom, but the important thing is that the violence was minimal so the containment operation was rather obviously working in that respect. Then the Army was sent in to disperse (while the protestors were acting peacefully).....

Anyway, one of the points I was making was that the death of Fabio Pollenghi, and so many other deaths, were a result the decision to escalate.

Edited December 5, 2010 by Siam Simon

[whybother]

Yes, they pushed and prodded, plus they trespassed in large numbers at Parliament and at Thaicom, but the important thing is that the violence was minimal so the containment operation was rather obviously working in that respect. Then the Army was sent in to disperse (while the protestors were acting peacefully).....

Anyway, one of the points I was making was that the death of Fabio Pollenghi, and so many other deaths, were due to the decision to escalate.

No. The death of Fabio Pollenghi was due to the red shirts having weapons, and therefore the need for the army to use weapons.

Can you please point me to ANY protest in the middle of a large city where the protesters got violent and were not dispersed?

[jayjay0]

So you are a journalist or some other actor with intimate knowledge of the events, are you? Because saying "the army generally acted very professionally" sounds an awful lot like a "blanket statement", which could quite conceivably be motivated by your " own political convictions".

You obviously are unaware of my posting record and the political affiliation it reveals.

My conclusions were based on many accounts from diverse sources.I found ANU's Professor Desmond Ball's analysis particularly useful though his close relationship with the senior officer corps needs to be factored in.

I would like to commend you on your one post honoring and blaming both sides.

There is three sides to all stories the Pro and Con along with the truth. The third option can be very elusive.

That being said you now mention factoring in outside accounts.

How about factoring in a group of armed peaceful protesters illegally seizing control of a large commercial area in Bangkok thereby depriving many honest citizens of a lively hood and refused to move or accept any thing other than there demands. Almost forgot to mention these armed peaceful protesters built defensive barricades.

While we are here perhaps some one can explain to me how a person can be presumed innocent when they knowingly as well as physically support illegal activities?

A balanced explanation would be appreciated. Please don't even try to say they didn't there is enough video evidence to show they did it. Not to mention they were paid. Until there master saw his coup wouldn't work. He then left them to there own devices. It is only now through the government that they are able to get bail.