'Leaked' Reports Blame Thai Military For Some Crackdown Deaths

[rubl]

Well it seems my facts were indeed factual after all, whoda thunk it

That nasty japanese photographer was such a threat

That Japanese journalist was reported to be amongst red-shirts when hit. Just like Ch. vanderGrift was amongst soldiers when 'grenaded' on the 19th of May. Similar threat ?

[jayboy]

The fact that you believe the DSI chief over Reuters says enough I think.

Snarky comment...? And how did Reuters know for sure they had received the report from a genuine member of the DSI?

Just another case of reds distorting the truth to spread hate.

I suggest you re-read your post.

You make a highly speculative and unsubstantiated comment, and then proceed to draw a conclusion from it.

[rubl]

begin removed, still in original post ...

Yes, many times and they're still in denial despite already being aware that documents were being leaked. The latest denial comes courtesy of Sansern: �I can categorically deny that the army has killed or hurt any Red Shirts or protesters, including the Japanese journalist,� he says. �Killing those persons would bring us no benefit whatsoever.�

http://asiancorrespo...illed-any-reds/

They said they were shooting into the wat because there was a gunman inside, but nobody inside the temple can confirm that. Mark Mackinnon who was present at the wat, said on twitter: "It was dark, I couldn't see everything, but I walked and ran through all parts of temple several times. I saw slingshots, clubs, no guns. Thai report says soldiers shot at from inside temple. I saw fireworks launched towards soldiers from just outside Wat, no gunmen inside."

Probably about 60+ deaths will be attributed to soldiers shooting straight (i.e. resulting in a kill). The rest either shot or attacked with grenades by 'unknowns'.

Not easy for any army to admit, read up on Iraq and Afghanistan for example. It did happen, regrettable, maybe avoidable. Having said that the provocation by red-shirts and the 'unknown black shirts' on April 10th made is nearly impossible to avoid further deaths. Too many newsflashes, especially around 14 - 19th of May talk about 'exchange of gunfire'. Interesting, against unarmed, bare-handed 'peaceful protesters'.

Provocation started in March already, inconsistency as well:

"�We will storm the places where soldiers camp out. We�ll shake the fence. We�ll cut the barbed wire. We�ll march through the barricades. We�ll march for democracy!� a leader of the �Red Shirt� protesters, Nattawut Saikua, shouted to the crowd. �This is where we�ll end military suppression. This is where we�ll create democracy.�"

and

�It is not our aim today to use violence. We�ll be visiting these soldiers as friends,� said another protest leader, Veera Muksikapong. �They would know that we come in good will.�

from the 27th of March http://asiancorrespo...-over-the-army/

"Not easy for any army to admit"... right, no one will be prosecuted on the army side, maybe that's why they should just issue a blanket amnesty? Well... I'm against it, I'd rather all those at fault pay, but I can see red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state, least that's how it looks right now. To avoid further fury over "double standards" maybe that's the best way? Though you could argue that Thai history keeps repeating itself because no one ever pays for their crimes. Chamlong and Suchinda both received amnesties after 92', but were both equally culpable? Definitely not.

All those at fault includes an awful lot of people. Very impractical to let all of them pay.

To say "red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state" is not really correct. The red-shirt militants can be called criminals or even terrorists. They had no legal status or order / permission to do their killing, no police permit to lop 60+ grenades. The army soldiers may have made mistakes, but they had their orders from the legitimate government. They were not trained for 'mob control', you can't blame them for that. Either blame a few army generals or the police force which seemed totally incapable in 'mob control'.

To avoid further fury about double standards, maybe BOTH sides should admit to errors. This includes the UDD leaders by the way

[26vinny]

ailand

Nobody never will be held responsible!

Did anybody heard until today, that those responsible for the Tak Bai Massacre on October 25th 2004 had been held responsible for their doing??? 85 people died. I did not hear anything!

http://www.youtube.c...ry=tak+bai&aq=f

Nobody within the military will get charged for whatever they do, or is being leaked. Those responsible (will) live with new paperwork and pension at an undisclosed location, or "work" at an "inactive post" with full salary.

T.I.T

Welcome to Thailand, piss the poor off, then you get, what is happening now, well done, repression never works,its my way or the Thai way, Buddismm is`nt that think bad do bad,bad things will happen to you. welcome to southern Thailand. where shall we start

[Pi Sek]

Well, these reports are what we've all been waiting for. Since the DSI investigations were concluded in November, it's time that they were publicised... so good!

If the reports are genuine (I hope they are and I can't why they wouldn't be, but am a bit skeptical due to the misrepresentation of truth from, well, all sides!), we now have a candid answer to 16 of the 91 cases... let's hope the other 75 cases are concluded and results publicised soon, which won't be easy as I'm sure we can all appreciate.

Note however that, in addition to the deaths being "likely caused by soldiers" deployed, the reports say...

acting on duty

What does this actually mean? Self defence? Or in uniform?

I'm looking forward to seeing that Web URL for the full leaked reports before it gets shut down!

6 months ago, not many people saw both sides as wrong, they tended to back one side over the other quite unreservedly. Now I see it's only Jatuporn and Sansern!

Well it seems my facts were indeed factual after all, whoda thunk it

That nasty japanese photographer was such a threat

No, your speculation still is not factual. My question was "what does acting on duty mean" - no answer from that yet, and it's not an answer you, I or anyone on this forum can provide. That's why I want to see the report in full. We might even see that they really were firing at the Black Shirts armed with M79s and M16s seen mingling in the crowd on 10 April that some sources talk about.

The truth is probably somewhere between what you say - "the army randomly shooting unarmed civilians" - and protecting themselves against a threat. You are again misrepresenting the non-fact as fact - which justifiably made me label you as a scumbag yesterday.

I'll hold my hands up and say "OK I was wrong in my assumptions" if that ends up being the case. I doubt you would do the same, although I will commend you if the circumstance arises for you prove me wrong. And, sorry, I won't retract my opinion of you until you stop misrepresenting the facts, regardless of whether you send me abusive, threatening and insulting PMs.

[Emptyset]

begin removed, still in original post ...

Yes, many times and they're still in denial despite already being aware that documents were being leaked. The latest denial comes courtesy of Sansern: �I can categorically deny that the army has killed or hurt any Red Shirts or protesters, including the Japanese journalist,� he says. �Killing those persons would bring us no benefit whatsoever.�

http://asiancorrespo...illed-any-reds/

They said they were shooting into the wat because there was a gunman inside, but nobody inside the temple can confirm that. Mark Mackinnon who was present at the wat, said on twitter: "It was dark, I couldn't see everything, but I walked and ran through all parts of temple several times. I saw slingshots, clubs, no guns. Thai report says soldiers shot at from inside temple. I saw fireworks launched towards soldiers from just outside Wat, no gunmen inside."

Probably about 60+ deaths will be attributed to soldiers shooting straight (i.e. resulting in a kill). The rest either shot or attacked with grenades by 'unknowns'.

Not easy for any army to admit, read up on Iraq and Afghanistan for example. It did happen, regrettable, maybe avoidable. Having said that the provocation by red-shirts and the 'unknown black shirts' on April 10th made is nearly impossible to avoid further deaths. Too many newsflashes, especially around 14 - 19th of May talk about 'exchange of gunfire'. Interesting, against unarmed, bare-handed 'peaceful protesters'.

Provocation started in March already, inconsistency as well:

"�We will storm the places where soldiers camp out. We�ll shake the fence. We�ll cut the barbed wire. We�ll march through the barricades. We�ll march for democracy!� a leader of the �Red Shirt� protesters, Nattawut Saikua, shouted to the crowd. �This is where we�ll end military suppression. This is where we�ll create democracy.�"

and

�It is not our aim today to use violence. We�ll be visiting these soldiers as friends,� said another protest leader, Veera Muksikapong. �They would know that we come in good will.�

from the 27th of March http://asiancorrespo...-over-the-army/

"Not easy for any army to admit"... right, no one will be prosecuted on the army side, maybe that's why they should just issue a blanket amnesty? Well... I'm against it, I'd rather all those at fault pay, but I can see red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state, least that's how it looks right now. To avoid further fury over "double standards" maybe that's the best way? Though you could argue that Thai history keeps repeating itself because no one ever pays for their crimes. Chamlong and Suchinda both received amnesties after 92', but were both equally culpable? Definitely not.

All those at fault includes an awful lot of people. Very impractical to let all of them pay.

To say "red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state" is not really correct. The red-shirt militants can be called criminals or even terrorists. They had no legal status or order / permission to do their killing, no police permit to lop 60+ grenades. The army soldiers may have made mistakes, but they had their orders from the legitimate government. They were not trained for 'mob control', you can't blame them for that. Either blame a few army generals or the police force which seemed totally incapable in 'mob control'.

To avoid further fury about double standards, maybe BOTH sides should admit to errors. This includes the UDD leaders by the way

For sure, I think both sides should admit their mistakes and compromise. Actually, I'm glad you said that because it seems many on here are asking the UDD to apologize, which I totally agree they should, but excusing the state at every opportunity. It's almost like they don't want them to be held accountable for their actions - justifiable or not.

"They had no legal status or order / permission to do their killing, no police permit to lop 60+ grenades. The army soldiers may have made mistakes, but they had their orders from the legitimate government." Well, yes, but the problem for the army is that there's a command structure and officers can be held accountable for the actions of their subordinates. I'm sure they wouldn't mind a few token soldiers being prosecuted, but, for instance, who gave the order to fire upon the temple? Why was it necessary to "retake" the temple at this point? Surely there was no need to capture it so quickly, even if there were gunmen inside?

"Now we know that the troops responsible for shooting into Wat Pathum were not raw recruits but supposedly "élite" special forces. Even if, as they claim, someone was firing at them from the temple (and remember, no independent witness has come forward to verify this), did they not pause to think that their bullets might harm the innocent? Precisely what special training to these troops receive? What also remains unclear is the intention of the soldiers. Are we supposed to believe someone struck by three bullets could be the victim of loose "covering fire"?

If, on the other hand, those shots were aimed, what was going through the minds of the soldiers as their sights came to pause on young female volunteers wearing shirts marked with large green crosses that in Thailand signify a medic? Or, for that matter, on journalists wearing green armbands that had been handed out for the media?

Although it confirms the deadly role of the troops, Thailand's Department of Special Investigations report still leaves unanswered many of the most vital questions that were being asked in the immediate aftermath of 19 May. Who was in control that day and who gave the order to shoot? Did Thailand's Prime Minister, Mr Abhisit, approve of these orders? What was his role? And what is he going to do about it now?"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/andrew-buncombe-i-didnt-see-who-shot-me-ndash-but-those-who-were-looking-have-few-doubts-2157437.html

[Pi Sek]

Although it confirms the deadly role of the troops, Thailand's Department of Special Investigations report still leaves unanswered many of the most vital questions that were being asked in the immediate aftermath of 19 May. Who was in control that day and who gave the order to shoot? Did Thailand's Prime Minister, Mr Abhisit, approve of these orders? What was his role? And what is he going to do about it now?"

Spot on, again, my red friend

Considering we're "not on each other's side", we share a lot of common ground.

[rubl]

Probably about 60+ deaths will be attributed to soldiers shooting straight (i.e. resulting in a kill). The rest either shot or attacked with grenades by 'unknowns'.

Not easy for any army to admit, read up on Iraq and Afghanistan for example. It did happen, regrettable, maybe avoidable. Having said that the provocation by red-shirts and the 'unknown black shirts' on April 10th made is nearly impossible to avoid further deaths. Too many newsflashes, especially around 14 - 19th of May talk about 'exchange of gunfire'. Interesting, against unarmed, bare-handed 'peaceful protesters'.

Provocation started in March already, inconsistency as well:

"�We will storm the places where soldiers camp out. We�ll shake the fence. We�ll cut the barbed wire. We�ll march through the barricades. We�ll march for democracy!� a leader of the �Red Shirt� protesters, Nattawut Saikua, shouted to the crowd. �This is where we�ll end military suppression. This is where we�ll create democracy.�"

and

�It is not our aim today to use violence. We�ll be visiting these soldiers as friends,� said another protest leader, Veera Muksikapong. �They would know that we come in good will.�

from the 27th of March http://asiancorrespo...-over-the-army/

"Not easy for any army to admit"... right, no one will be prosecuted on the army side, maybe that's why they should just issue a blanket amnesty? Well... I'm against it, I'd rather all those at fault pay, but I can see red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state, least that's how it looks right now. To avoid further fury over "double standards" maybe that's the best way? Though you could argue that Thai history keeps repeating itself because no one ever pays for their crimes. Chamlong and Suchinda both received amnesties after 92', but were both equally culpable? Definitely not.

All those at fault includes an awful lot of people. Very impractical to let all of them pay.

To say "red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state" is not really correct. The red-shirt militants can be called criminals or even terrorists. They had no legal status or order / permission to do their killing, no police permit to lop 60+ grenades. The army soldiers may have made mistakes, but they had their orders from the legitimate government. They were not trained for 'mob control', you can't blame them for that. Either blame a few army generals or the police force which seemed totally incapable in 'mob control'.

To avoid further fury about double standards, maybe BOTH sides should admit to errors. This includes the UDD leaders by the way

For sure, I think both sides should admit their mistakes and compromise. Actually, I'm glad you said that because it seems many on here are asking the UDD to apologize, which I totally agree they should, but excusing the state at every opportunity. It's almost like they don't want them to be held accountable for their actions - justifiable or not.

"They had no legal status or order / permission to do their killing, no police permit to lop 60+ grenades. The army soldiers may have made mistakes, but they had their orders from the legitimate government." Well, yes, but the problem for the army is that there's a command structure and officers can be held accountable for the actions of their subordinates. I'm sure they wouldn't mind a few token soldiers being prosecuted, but, for instance, who gave the order to fire upon the temple? Why was it necessary to "retake" the temple at this point? Surely there was no need to capture it so quickly, even if there were gunmen inside?

"Now we know that the troops responsible for shooting into Wat Pathum were not raw recruits but supposedly "�lite" special forces. Even if, as they claim, someone was firing at them from the temple (and remember, no independent witness has come forward to verify this), did they not pause to think that their bullets might harm the innocent? Precisely what special training to these troops receive? What also remains unclear is the intention of the soldiers. Are we supposed to believe someone struck by three bullets could be the victim of loose "covering fire"?

If, on the other hand, those shots were aimed, what was going through the minds of the soldiers as their sights came to pause on young female volunteers wearing shirts marked with large green crosses that in Thailand signify a medic? Or, for that matter, on journalists wearing green armbands that had been handed out for the media?

Although it confirms the deadly role of the troops, Thailand's Department of Special Investigations report still leaves unanswered many of the most vital questions that were being asked in the immediate aftermath of 19 May. Who was in control that day and who gave the order to shoot? Did Thailand's Prime Minister, Mr Abhisit, approve of these orders? What was his role? And what is he going to do about it now?"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/andrew-buncombe-i-didnt-see-who-shot-me-ndash-but-those-who-were-looking-have-few-doubts-2157437.html

PM Abhisit probably said 'clear up the area with as limited injuries as humanly possible'. In gunfire exchange with unarmed protesters that's a wee bit difficult. Like vanderGrift on the 19th, together with some soldiers getting a grenade lopped on them.

In a close-to war-zone with militants, burning buildings, innocents will get harmed. The fault of the government? Should they have rolled over and submit to terrorists? Grow up.

[asiawatcher]

begin removed, still in original post ...

Yes, many times and they're still in denial despite already being aware that documents were being leaked. The latest denial comes courtesy of Sansern: �I can categorically deny that the army has killed or hurt any Red Shirts or protesters, including the Japanese journalist,� he says. �Killing those persons would bring us no benefit whatsoever.�

http://asiancorrespo...illed-any-reds/

They said they were shooting into the wat because there was a gunman inside, but nobody inside the temple can confirm that. Mark Mackinnon who was present at the wat, said on twitter: "It was dark, I couldn't see everything, but I walked and ran through all parts of temple several times. I saw slingshots, clubs, no guns. Thai report says soldiers shot at from inside temple. I saw fireworks launched towards soldiers from just outside Wat, no gunmen inside."

Probably about 60+ deaths will be attributed to soldiers shooting straight (i.e. resulting in a kill). The rest either shot or attacked with grenades by 'unknowns'.

Not easy for any army to admit, read up on Iraq and Afghanistan for example. It did happen, regrettable, maybe avoidable. Having said that the provocation by red-shirts and the 'unknown black shirts' on April 10th made is nearly impossible to avoid further deaths. Too many newsflashes, especially around 14 - 19th of May talk about 'exchange of gunfire'. Interesting, against unarmed, bare-handed 'peaceful protesters'.

Provocation started in March already, inconsistency as well:

"“We will storm the places where soldiers camp out. We’ll shake the fence. We’ll cut the barbed wire. We’ll march through the barricades. We’ll march for democracy!” a leader of the “Red Shirt” protesters, Nattawut Saikua, shouted to the crowd. “This is where we’ll end military suppression. This is where we’ll create democracy.”"

and

“It is not our aim today to use violence. We’ll be visiting these soldiers as friends,” said another protest leader, Veera Muksikapong. “They would know that we come in good will.”

from the 27th of March http://asiancorrespo...-over-the-army/

Yup - this says it all...

[chuang]

You go to protest and hold a city to ransom for more than a month and expect when it finally goes too far and army are called in - people are not going to get hurt or die? Please - go back to the farm, tend to the buffalo and look after your children. It is far safer than trying to pick up 500 Baht a day from a criminal who never really paid anything from his pocket, because he took it all from you in the first place and you still can't see it! Sad - really sad.

Full of sarcasm in the form of so-called elitists...

[Emptyset]

PM Abhisit probably said 'clear up the area with as limited injuries as humanly possible'. In gunfire exchange with unarmed protesters that's a wee bit difficult. Like vanderGrift on the 19th, together with some soldiers getting a grenade lopped on them.

In a close-to war-zone with militants, burning buildings, innocents will get harmed. The fault of the government? Should they have rolled over and submit to terrorists? Grow up.

Abhisit probably had nothing to do with it or very little input over what the troops actually did. Where did I say it was the fault of the government? No, they shouldn't have rolled over. They had a right to clear the area, but it doesn't follow from that that all the army's use of force was justified... I mean this is an extreme case, but in policing operations in Europe, protesters often get out of hand and try to occupy areas which the state would rather they didn't occupy. Does it follow that the state has a right to kill them? Obviously not. There are measures which are considered reasonable and measures that are not. Sometimes measures & orders are reasonable but actions of individuals operating on behalf of the state are not reasonable. It remains to be determined in this case what the orders and actions were. But in the specific case of the wat, I'd question why orders were given to fire? Surely, even if there were militants, it would've been better to withdraw and let the militants disappear rather than risking the lives of innocents?

[whybother]

Abhisit probably had nothing to do with it or very little input over what the troops actually did. Where did I say it was the fault of the government? No, they shouldn't have rolled over. They had a right to clear the area, but it doesn't follow from that that all the army's use of force was justified... I mean this is an extreme case, but in policing operations in Europe, protesters often get out of hand and try to occupy areas which the state would rather they didn't occupy. Does it follow that the state has a right to kill them? Obviously not. There are measures which are considered reasonable and measures that are not. Sometimes measures & orders are reasonable but actions of individuals operating on behalf of the state are not reasonable. It remains to be determined in this case what the orders and actions were. But in the specific case of the wat, I'd question why orders were given to fire? Surely, even if there were militants, it would've been better to withdraw and let the militants disappear rather than risking the lives of innocents?

In Europe, protesters aren't armed. The fact that the red shirts were armed completely changes the acceptable or justified use of force by the army. It doesn't give the army carte blanche to kill people on sight, but given the number of deaths compared to the number of protesters, it's obvious that they didn't do that.

[rubl]

PM Abhisit probably said 'clear up the area with as limited injuries as humanly possible'. In gunfire exchange with unarmed protesters that's a wee bit difficult. Like vanderGrift on the 19th, together with some soldiers getting a grenade lopped on them.

In a close-to war-zone with militants, burning buildings, innocents will get harmed. The fault of the government? Should they have rolled over and submit to terrorists? Grow up.

Abhisit probably had nothing to do with it or very little input over what the troops actually did. Where did I say it was the fault of the government? No, they shouldn't have rolled over. They had a right to clear the area, but it doesn't follow from that that all the army's use of force was justified... I mean this is an extreme case, but in policing operations in Europe, protesters often get out of hand and try to occupy areas which the state would rather they didn't occupy. Does it follow that the state has a right to kill them? Obviously not. There are measures which are considered reasonable and measures that are not. Sometimes measures & orders are reasonable but actions of individuals operating on behalf of the state are not reasonable. It remains to be determined in this case what the orders and actions were. But in the specific case of the wat, I'd question why orders were given to fire? Surely, even if there were militants, it would've been better to withdraw and let the militants disappear rather than risking the lives of innocents?

PM Abhisit would know once he gave to order to clean-up, he should leave the army to it. That's delegation, no need for a boss to watch his troop's every move. not all the army violence might be fully justified, but that's hindsight. At the time the main goal was 'clean-up with minimal casualties'. With gunfire exchange and troops getting grenades lobbed on them, troop may have thought 'better safe than sorry'. Anyone having been in combat situations will probably confirm this.

In Europe the situation would never have been allowed to evolve as it did here. In Europe we also have functioning police forces. In Europe protesters tend to be really unarmed. All this makes a comparison difficult to the point of not adding any value.

As for the situation around the wat, see my first paragraph. Very regrettable, but under circumstances somewhat understandable. Remember by that time CentralWorld and ZEN were truly ablaze, lots of smoke and a need to clean-up before sunset.

[fxe1200]

ailand

Nobody never will be held responsible!

Did anybody heard until today, that those responsible for the Tak Bai Massacre on October 25th 2004 had been held responsible for their doing??? 85 people died. I did not hear anything!

http://www.youtube.c...ry=tak+bai&aq=f

Nobody within the military will get charged for whatever they do, or is being leaked. Those responsible (will) live with new paperwork and pension at an undisclosed location, or "work" at an "inactive post" with full salary.

T.I.T

Welcome to Thailand, piss the poor off, then you get, what is happening now, well done, repression never works,its my way or the Thai way, Buddismm is`nt that think bad do bad,bad things will happen to you. welcome to southern Thailand. where shall we start

........definiteley not here with such a professional statement!

[Roadman]

begin removed, still in original post ...

Yes, many times and they're still in denial despite already being aware that documents were being leaked. The latest denial comes courtesy of Sansern: �I can categorically deny that the army has killed or hurt any Red Shirts or protesters, including the Japanese journalist,� he says. �Killing those persons would bring us no benefit whatsoever.�

http://asiancorrespo...illed-any-reds/

They said they were shooting into the wat because there was a gunman inside, but nobody inside the temple can confirm that. Mark Mackinnon who was present at the wat, said on twitter: "It was dark, I couldn't see everything, but I walked and ran through all parts of temple several times. I saw slingshots, clubs, no guns. Thai report says soldiers shot at from inside temple. I saw fireworks launched towards soldiers from just outside Wat, no gunmen inside."

Probably about 60+ deaths will be attributed to soldiers shooting straight (i.e. resulting in a kill). The rest either shot or attacked with grenades by 'unknowns'.

Not easy for any army to admit, read up on Iraq and Afghanistan for example. It did happen, regrettable, maybe avoidable. Having said that the provocation by red-shirts and the 'unknown black shirts' on April 10th made is nearly impossible to avoid further deaths. Too many newsflashes, especially around 14 - 19th of May talk about 'exchange of gunfire'. Interesting, against unarmed, bare-handed 'peaceful protesters'.

Provocation started in March already, inconsistency as well:

"“We will storm the places where soldiers camp out. We’ll shake the fence. We’ll cut the barbed wire. We’ll march through the barricades. We’ll march for democracy!” a leader of the “Red Shirt” protesters, Nattawut Saikua, shouted to the crowd. “This is where we’ll end military suppression. This is where we’ll create democracy.”"

and

“It is not our aim today to use violence. We’ll be visiting these soldiers as friends,” said another protest leader, Veera Muksikapong. “They would know that we come in good will.”

from the 27th of March http://asiancorrespo...-over-the-army/

"Not easy for any army to admit"... right, no one will be prosecuted on the army side, maybe that's why they should just issue a blanket amnesty? Well... I'm against it, I'd rather all those at fault pay, but I can see red shirt militants paying but no one on the side of the state, least that's how it looks right now. To avoid further fury over "double standards" maybe that's the best way? Though you could argue that Thai history keeps repeating itself because no one ever pays for their crimes. Chamlong and Suchinda both received amnesties after 92', but were both equally culpable? Definitely not.

Have not read pass here but hey red flag...

Yes the Army as the enforcer of Law in Thailand (given the failure of the Pollice) had to put down a terrorist attack on Thailand and you want all parties to pay equally? Have no problem with the casualty numbers not being in the Army's best interests but seriously? Do you fail to grasp the concept that one group was terrorists. There should be no amnesty for the terrorists, but agree that is the biggest failing in Thai justice is that the scum can be free and even serving on the ministerial benches. And the only thing the Army should be held accountable to is to be now training in counter terrorist takeout tactics so that next time the strike is quicker and hopefully with even less casualties.

[Emptyset]

PM Abhisit probably said 'clear up the area with as limited injuries as humanly possible'. In gunfire exchange with unarmed protesters that's a wee bit difficult. Like vanderGrift on the 19th, together with some soldiers getting a grenade lopped on them.

In a close-to war-zone with militants, burning buildings, innocents will get harmed. The fault of the government? Should they have rolled over and submit to terrorists? Grow up.

Abhisit probably had nothing to do with it or very little input over what the troops actually did. Where did I say it was the fault of the government? No, they shouldn't have rolled over. They had a right to clear the area, but it doesn't follow from that that all the army's use of force was justified... I mean this is an extreme case, but in policing operations in Europe, protesters often get out of hand and try to occupy areas which the state would rather they didn't occupy. Does it follow that the state has a right to kill them? Obviously not. There are measures which are considered reasonable and measures that are not. Sometimes measures & orders are reasonable but actions of individuals operating on behalf of the state are not reasonable. It remains to be determined in this case what the orders and actions were. But in the specific case of the wat, I'd question why orders were given to fire? Surely, even if there were militants, it would've been better to withdraw and let the militants disappear rather than risking the lives of innocents?

PM Abhisit would know once he gave to order to clean-up, he should leave the army to it. That's delegation, no need for a boss to watch his troop's every move. not all the army violence might be fully justified, but that's hindsight. At the time the main goal was 'clean-up with minimal casualties'. With gunfire exchange and troops getting grenades lobbed on them, troop may have thought 'better safe than sorry'. Anyone having been in combat situations will probably confirm this.

In Europe the situation would never have been allowed to evolve as it did here. In Europe we also have functioning police forces. In Europe protesters tend to be really unarmed. All this makes a comparison difficult to the point of not adding any value.

As for the situation around the wat, see my first paragraph. Very regrettable, but under circumstances somewhat understandable. Remember by that time CentralWorld and ZEN were truly ablaze, lots of smoke and a need to clean-up before sunset.

I agree with your points about Abhisit.

"Very regrettable, but under circumstances somewhat understandable" How so? Much of the shooting happened after sunset. What did it have to do with CTW? You're right in Europe it wouldn't have happened, and neither would the military refusing to obey orders from the PM in 2008, and in fact maneuvering against him.

"In Europe protesters tend to be really unarmed." They often use what most of the red shirts used, molotovs, rocks and so fourth. But I would agree that because there were men amongst them armed with high powered rifles and grenades that the army's use of live bullets was justified. My point is, it doesn't follow that they were always justified in using that level of force.

[rubl]

PM Abhisit probably said 'clear up the area with as limited injuries as humanly possible'. In gunfire exchange with unarmed protesters that's a wee bit difficult. Like vanderGrift on the 19th, together with some soldiers getting a grenade lopped on them.

In a close-to war-zone with militants, burning buildings, innocents will get harmed. The fault of the government? Should they have rolled over and submit to terrorists? Grow up.

Abhisit probably had nothing to do with it or very little input over what the troops actually did. Where did I say it was the fault of the government? No, they shouldn't have rolled over. They had a right to clear the area, but it doesn't follow from that that all the army's use of force was justified... I mean this is an extreme case, but in policing operations in Europe, protesters often get out of hand and try to occupy areas which the state would rather they didn't occupy. Does it follow that the state has a right to kill them? Obviously not. There are measures which are considered reasonable and measures that are not. Sometimes measures & orders are reasonable but actions of individuals operating on behalf of the state are not reasonable. It remains to be determined in this case what the orders and actions were. But in the specific case of the wat, I'd question why orders were given to fire? Surely, even if there were militants, it would've been better to withdraw and let the militants disappear rather than risking the lives of innocents?

PM Abhisit would know once he gave to order to clean-up, he should leave the army to it. That's delegation, no need for a boss to watch his troop's every move. not all the army violence might be fully justified, but that's hindsight. At the time the main goal was 'clean-up with minimal casualties'. With gunfire exchange and troops getting grenades lobbed on them, troop may have thought 'better safe than sorry'. Anyone having been in combat situations will probably confirm this.

In Europe the situation would never have been allowed to evolve as it did here. In Europe we also have functioning police forces. In Europe protesters tend to be really unarmed. All this makes a comparison difficult to the point of not adding any value.

As for the situation around the wat, see my first paragraph. Very regrettable, but under circumstances somewhat understandable. Remember by that time CentralWorld and ZEN were truly ablaze, lots of smoke and a need to clean-up before sunset.

I agree with your points about Abhisit.

"Very regrettable, but under circumstances somewhat understandable" How so? Much of the shooting happened after sunset. What did it have to do with CTW? You're right in Europe it wouldn't have happened, and neither would the military refusing to obey orders from the PM in 2008, and in fact maneuvering against him.

"In Europe protesters tend to be really unarmed." They often use what most of the red shirts used, molotovs, rocks and so fourth. But I would agree that because there were men amongst them armed with high powered rifles and grenades that the army's use of live bullets was justified. My point is, it doesn't follow that they were always justified in using that level of force.

Much of the shooting happened after sunset? I think that should be 'lots of shooting continued'. As for CTW, ZEN and other fires, just to emphasize the urgency to clean-up as soon as possible to prevent further disasters.

With armed protesters who had been warned, who continue in gunfire exchange the level of force used by the army can still be called 'remarkably restrained'. Indeed innocents were hurt even killed, blame the militants amongst them who seemed to use innocents as human shields. 'if someone dies it will be your fault' is the usual excuse for hostage takers.

[jayjay0]

It never cease to amaze me how in crowds of thousands, there are army firing at people and how could they miss? I mean, get real, talk about a turkey shoot! Then to find by eye witness accounts they saw guys in camouflage uniforms firing directly at people who was to say they were not rubber bullets? None of this has an consequence or reality. Then the DSI have found 13 (of the 91!!!!) were attributable to army! Big freakin' deal ...

You go to protest and hold a city to ransom for more than a month and expect when it finally goes too far and army are called in - people are not going to get hurt or die? Please - go back to the farm, tend to the buffalo and look after your children. It is far safer than trying to pick up 500 Baht a day from a criminal who never really paid anything from his pocket, because he took it all from you in the first place and you still can't see it! Sad - really sad.

Thank you for the common sense.

What did those buffalo chasing people expect when they mixed in with people firing on the army. Not sure does that make you army just because you are wearing camouflage clothing standing on a overhead rail.

Kids best beware of what they wear some red shirt might shoot them.

Bottom line 90 people died Common sense (sorry to exclude red shirts) tells us that the army was responsible for most of the deaths. But not all of them.

Kind of makes you wonder if the human race is going backwards. After the second world war they did not hold a commission to see who shot the Germans and who shot the allies.

[Northman061]

Let us not forget, it was these same Millionaire Generals who broke their Oaths and turned troops and tanks onto the streets to oust a democratic government, so whats a few dead people a few years later?

And dont worry, anymore deaths will be done under the ISA which leaves the Army untouchable for its actions. :jap:

[Piengrudee]

http://patnpolitics.blogspot.com/2010/05/killings-at-wat-pathum-buddhist-temple.html Killings at Wat Pathum Buddhist temple and medical tent? Not possible. Just some warning shot INTO the tent.

[Piengrudee]

http://cartoon.spiceday.com/redirect.php?tid=160228&goto=lastpost&sid=6jkOPZ . . . . After the release of some photos showing soldiers in front of the temple, Lt General Daopong Ratanasuwan, the Army's assistant chief of staff for operations, said troops from the 1st Division, the King's Guard, were stationed at Siam BTS Station on May 19. They were ordered not to move closer to the temple, which was about 300 metres away. He insisted the troops were at the spot all night and entered the temple the following morning (May 20) to help police send demonstrators back home. . . . While saying the incident would be investigated, he questioned whether the shots were fired from somewhere else or if the shooting came from someone inside the temple. . . . Meanwhile, CRES officials said unidentified snipers were active around Rajprasong, and obstructed security operations. Spokesman Colonel Sansern Kaewkamnerd said unidentified snipers were responsible for deaths at the temple.

[OzMick]

.... appear to place the blame for most of the deaths in the April-May military crackdown firmly on the military.

The set of documents, purported to be investigation reports by the DSI, covered the deaths of 16 people killed in demonstrations between April and May. The reports conclude that the deaths of at least 13 of these victims were "likely caused by soldiers" deployed and acting on duty.

How does 13 deaths "place the blame for most of the deaths in April May ... firmly on the military"? Weren't there 90 deaths. 13 out of 90 is not most.

I'm sure there are more, but it's a misleading statement based on reports from only a small number of deaths.

They are talking about the reports of the 16 cases purported to have been investigated and the figure of 13 does represent most.

Perhaps there will will be more revelations about the remaining deaths that will alter the figures but at the moment they are correct.

Correct. They blame the soldiers for 13 out of 16 deaths. That is NOT to say the other three were down to the redshirts but are yet to be determined. So far it is 13-0 to the army and 3 unknown. Pretty damning as the investigators are part of the administration responsible.

So the sore is 13 Military and 3 unknown - out of the leaked reports. Have you considered that possibly that ONLY the reports implicating the military or ambiguous have been leaked, and that the final score may well be 75/13/3?

[Piengrudee]

"They were ordered not to move closer to the temple, which was about 300 metres away." CRES said. I believe the army is very discipline. If the order say NOT to move closer to the temple, the army WILL obey order. Hence the killing is Black shirt shooting Red shirts. I remember some Farang also confirm this; I am searching some old Farang interview now.

[OzMick]

Emptyset, your statement " My point is, it doesn't follow that they were always justified in using that level of force." is typical of armchair generals making their wise statements with 100% hindsight clarity. You weren't there, you weren't being shot at, and you have no right to criticize with the little 2nd-hand information you have received.

One rule applies in this type of situation; A court martial is easier to take than a military funeral - everything else is secondary.

If you don't like that attitude, tough cheddar. Men in green have just as much right to go home to their wives and children as anyone else doing a job. If you want to slingshot marbles, or throw a molotov cocktail, or stand with others doing these things, don't be surprised if you get very badly hurt.

[Piengrudee]

Thai army are maned by people. Thai people do not murder people. The order was very straight forward. Shoot only at legs. However, if shooting from overheads; go get to the legs, it has to go through the head / body first. Army boys just follow order to shoot legs.

[TAWP]

Let us not forget, it was these same Millionaire Generals who broke their Oaths and turned troops and tanks onto the streets to oust a democratic government, so whats a few dead people a few years later?

And dont worry, anymore deaths will be done under the ISA which leaves the Army untouchable for its actions. :jap:

Uh, what? They didn't break their oath...if anything, they acted on it.

[gemini81]

these leaked documents are quite flawed...even basic arithmetic tells us ONLY 12 or 13 isn't MOST.

The videos are more damning evidence than aly of this silly wiki crap

[yellow1red1]

It never cease to amaze me how in crowds of thousands, there are army firing at people and how could they miss? I mean, get real, talk about a turkey shoot! Then to find by eye witness accounts they saw guys in camouflage uniforms firing directly at people who was to say they were not rubber bullets? None of this has an consequence or reality. Then the DSI have found 13 (of the 91!!!!) were attributable to army! Big freakin' deal ...

You go to protest and hold a city to ransom for more than a month and expect when it finally goes too far and army are called in - people are not going to get hurt or die? Please - go back to the farm, tend to the buffalo and look after your children. It is far safer than trying to pick up 500 Baht a day from a criminal who never really paid anything from his pocket, because he took it all from you in the first place and you still can't see it! Sad - really sad.

respect yer honesty.

army did the killing but rioters deserved it....

is better than

rioters deserved killing but army didn't do it.

--------------

They could have cleared it with water canons, blockaed and starved them out,,, how insane is Titsup?

spring of 2010 was just the Preview

[mkawish]

The source of the leaked report also told The Nation that all the files, both in Thai and English, would be uploaded on a yet-to-be-identified site by today.

Since when DSI composed their initial or final reports in English language, pls?

Other than redshirts, there are also other sectors who are trying all they can to discredit the current govt et al.

Even JaTuPorn himself continuously claimed there were further solid evidences in his hands that he would reveal pretty soon, to implicate the govt and soldiers in killing innocent citizen.

Perhaps, even though JaTuPorn has not come out and acclaimed the credit yet, could it be possible that this leak was a part of what he claimed, he possessed several weeks ago.

He appears to be very much like a lost soldiers trying to find new directions, now that the head core position has been handed over to Weng's Chinese educated wife. Cheers.

Edited December 24, 2010 by mkawish

[Piengrudee]

"The source of the leaked report also told The Nation that all the files, both in Thai and English, would be uploaded on a yet-to-be-identified site by today." . . . . . . . I am still waiting.