Suggest to all involved to heed sbks's advice and read the report, rather than Thaivisa's disgracefully misleading headline that suggest that the HRW report condemned the govt and noone else.

As stated in the inner quote

Fruits of a poisoned tree,

no illegal and over the top violent rallies, and no deaths.

There was little or no violence before the army moved in using live ammunition.

Previously, during an earlier red-shirt rally that turned violent the army used live ammunition against stone throwing and catapult wielding protestors then lied about it.

No wonder they brought arms with them the next time.

Little or no confronting of troops at barracks? Little or no storming of government house? Little or no breaking through army lines at Thaicom and taking arms?

The rest you're just making up.

Yeah, really, Oberkommando, surely you're better than that. I know for a fact you know that 300 Red Shirts, led by Kwanchai Praiphana, physically attacked the 1st infantry barracks with petrol bombs on April 9. Why lie about it? The army already look bad to anyone remotely neutral.

And what was this "earlier red shirt rally that turned violent the army used live ammunition against stone throwing and catapult wielding protestors then lied about it"?

I have agreed with some things you post and I disagree with (most!) others. However, with this one I call your bluff... you are not being forthcoming with the truth and you deserve to be reprimanded for it. Shame on you!

Pi Sek, it is not Thaivisa's headline but rather the headline of the newspaper that wrote the report, if you have issue with that please contact them, cheers

So, again, read the report everyone, it does help.

Pi Sek, it is not Thaivisa's headline but rather the headline of the newspaper that wrote the report, if you have issue with that please contact them, cheers

In that case I humbly retract my comment.

Pi Sek, it is not Thaivisa's headline but rather the headline of the newspaper that wrote the report, if you have issue with that please contact them, cheers

In that case I humbly retract my comment.

Giant logo at the bottom of the article usually gives it away

Anyway, I would like to reiterate to those who partake in this discussion the importance of reading the entire report before passing judgment or reading it based on points picked by members

http://www.hrw.org/

Pi Sek, it is not Thaivisa's headline but rather the headline of the newspaper that wrote the report, if you have issue with that please contact them, cheers

So, again, read the report everyone, it does help.

It's a rather discouraging indictment of Agence France-Presse's balance and impartiality, especially when it's compared to the coverage of the exact same HRW report by Deutsche Presse-Agentur in Post # 14.

The differences are glaring.

The AFP's Chief Editor in Paris needs to have the Regional Director for Asia-Pacific in Hong Kong recommit to some of AFP's mission statement:

Accuracy is the absolute priority.

Coverage is balanced. AFP gets the other side of story, always seeking a response to accusations, claims and recriminations.

http://www.afp.com/afpcom/en/content/afp/our-assignements

Perhaps they've just gotten too big to fulfill some of their mission principles.

Every day AFP files 5,000 text stories in six languages.

http://www.afp.com/afpcom/en/content/afp/our-network

It stresses the importance for members to be aware of as many new sources as possible and to contribute those reports to the discussion, particularly in situations where the differences are glaring.

With appreciation to TV for providing the channel where these differences can be aired.

Suggest to all involved to read the ENTIRE report in full before rebutting selective quotes.

http://www.hrw.org/

It might make for a more informed and civil debate.

Good suggestion. It's the first article I've seen which not only condemns the government & army, but also clearly the UDD and other protesters.

I assume the suggestion the army torched CWT can be laid to rest now?

MAY CHAOS

Rights watchdog reveals inside story

By Pongphon Sarnsamak

The Nation

New York-based Human Rights Watch is calling on the government to immediately launch an impartial, transparent and independent inquiry into last year's crackdown and ensure that all perpetrators of serious human rights abuses are brought to justice regardless of their status and political affiliation.

"Secret justice is not true justice," Brad Adams, Asia director for the watchdog, said. "In plain view, government forces shot protesters and armed militants shot soldiers, but no one has been held responsible. Those who were killed and wounded deserve better than this."

Adams was speaking at a press conference held at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand to launch a 139-page report entitled "Descent into Chaos: Thailand's 2010 Red-Shirt Protests and the Government Crackdown". The report provides detailed accounts of violence and human rights abuses committed by both sides during and after the prolonged protests in Bangkok and other parts of the country last year.

Also present at the press conference was Phayao Akahad, the mother of Kamolket, a volunteer nurse who was shot dead in Wat Pathum Wanaram on May 19.

The report took 10 months and is based on 94 interviews with victims, witnesses, protesters, academics, journalists, lawyers, human-rights defenders, MPs, government officials, security personnel, police and those who were directly involved in the violence from both sides.

It also documents deadly attacks by government security forces on protesters in key incidents and actions taken by armed elements such as the "black shirts", who are allegedly associated with the Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship (DAAD) or the red shirts.

Human Rights Watch's investigations found that the attacks were not initiated by red-shirt guards, but with a secret armed element within DAAD, whom the protesters and media called the "black shirts" or "men in black" even though not all were dressed in black.

According to the report, the "black shirts" were captured on film showing them armed with military weapons like AK-47 and M16 assault rifles, as well as M79 grenade launchers, during the clashes.

Adams also presented a video clip showing the "black shirts" protecting themselves with plastic shields on April 10 last year.

A journalist who spent several days with a group of armed militants at the red-shirts' Ratchaprasong protest site, was quoted in the report as saying he had seen no interaction between the "black shirts" and the red-shirt leaders.

He said these guys were organised by someone who provided them with the weapons and rationed out their bullets. Each man was given 30 bullets before he went out to battle.

"They weren't really 'black shirts' - they were sometimes in green military uniforms or dressed like red-shirt protesters. They had no relationship with the red guards, and they were not interested in dealing with the red-shirt leaders. They took their work very seriously," the journalist was quoted as saying.

The death toll and injuries was high on both sides partly due to the excessive and unnecessarily lethal force used by the security officials, the report said. At Phan Fah Bridge, some soldiers used M16 and TAR21 assault rifles to fire live ammunition and rubber bullets at protesters.

In addition, the Army deployed snipers at the Ratchaprasong protest site to shoot those who breached the "no-go" zone between the red-shirt protesters and the Army barricades or those who threw rocks and other objects toward soldiers. At times, soldiers took shots at the crowds.

A video clip showing a group of snipers taking aim from a building near Lumpini Park on May 15 was also presented during the press conference.

While authorities have not released forensic analyses of wounds sustained by those killed in the May 14-19 clashes, incidents reviewed by Human Rights Watch indicate that several unarmed protesters, medical volunteers and bystanders were killed with a single shot to the head, suggesting the use of snipers and high-powered scopes. On the evening of May 13, Maj-General Khattiya "Seh Daeng" Sawasdipol was fatally shot in the head while being interviewed by journalists.

"We have no answer to why these victims were targeted," Adams said.

However, he admitted that the red-shirt leaders had also contributed to the violence by delivering inflammatory speeches and urging supporters to carry out riots, arson attacks and looting. For months, DAAD leaders had urged followers to turn Bangkok into "a sea of fire" if the Army tried to disperse them.

-- The Nation 2011-05-04

Each of the 91 deaths should be investigated: HRW

By Pongphon Sarnsamak

The Nation

Human Rights Watch is calling on the government to conduct an investigation on each of the 91 deaths caused by the crackdown last year.

Meanwhile, the media and activists are demanding that the authorities inform the public about what really happened during the political riots and the subsequent crackdown.

The Department of Special Investigation, which is investigating the deaths, is controlled by the government and cannot be expected to produce an unbiased report, said Brad Adams, Asia director for the watchdog.

The New York-based agency has also asked Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's administration to immediately reveal details of people being detained under charges of violating the emergency decree since April 7, 2010. Information should include the names and current status of the detainees, their place of detention and whether they have access to lawyers, their families, and medical aid.

The government should also ensure access to all detention facilities and detainees by independent humanitarian agencies, it said. The rights body is also insisting that UN officials and other groups be allowed to investigate and report on the situation in Thailand, and the government should take necessary measures to implement their recommendations in a timely matter.

Adams said the government should review the military's role in politics, adding that people should not be using the lese majeste charge against people who are on different political sides.

The authorities have always insisted that all detainees are being held at recognised places of detention and are not subjected to torture or any cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment.

-- The Nation 2011-05-04

Descent into Chaos

Thailand’s 2010 Red Shirt Protests and

the Government Crackdown

PDF document (download)

http://bit.ly/j2C2ia

Copyright © 2011 Human Rights Watch

over a year later, with an election pending, a Human Rights Group from the USA decides to throw their hat into an already busy ring

do they really think they are helping?

what about the rights of the current (not dead yet) folks here whos rights are going to hurt by this groups inflaming of an already RED hot situation

could they consider the timing of their self promoting dramatic report thats likely been pushed in to the current arena by the moron Robert Amsterdam

maybe we should ask them for a comment in Human rights terms about the murder of Bin Laden and the murder by Nato of Gaddafi's son and grandchildren

what about their rights?

i expect they will have a sympathetic word for them too

they should Brad Adams on a plane immediately, tell him to mind his own business and revoke his visa permanently (if he has one) isn't what he is doing considered working?

the world would be a much better place without these overpaid, sanctimonious, holier than thou dickheads passing judgement on world situations from the comfort of a high rise corner office to justify their own inflated wages................

Sure, it's much better to just ignore the abuses of BOTH sides....Reds rampage and black shirts...but also army firing in a wat (sure this will bring them a very good karma) and killing people....It's amazing how people who are involved or take side for red or yellow tends to say > yes but look here in the world, they do worse.....please admitt that the army has abused its firepower by using smipers and real bullets....

the deaths were the fruit of the same tree

no illegal violent protest

no army involvement

no deaths

no human rights issues

no problem

the reds came to Bangkok looking for trouble

they got what they wanted

so they should stop whining about how poorly they were treated whilst they were trying to seize power during the red revolution

they lost, man up and shut up............

Ahhh how refreshing, the voice of reconciliation and reason, nothing like extending the olive branch to your enemy

olive branches are for wimps...........

the deaths were the fruit of the same tree

no illegal violent protest

no army involvement

no deaths

no human rights issues

no problem

the reds came to Bangkok looking for trouble

they got what they wanted

so they should stop whining about how poorly they were treated whilst they were trying to seize power during the red revolution

they lost, man up and shut up............

The reds came to Bangkok to protest against injustice.

Anyone claiming that Thaksin, TRT, Samak, Somchai & PPP had fair treatment are obviously extremely biased.

The government ordered troops to kill unarmed protestors and those who made those orders will be in jail if PT win the election. They must be getting scared and rightfully so.

Pigheaded people like the one quoted above should realise that the reds did not lose, but in fact forced the government to give multiple fiscal concessions to the rural populace.

Also, they have shown the 'powers to be' that if they usurp power again they are going to face an even bigger uprising.

i am biased, the reds are a pain to this country, it would be so much more prosperous if the government were not spending billions of baht to defend the rest of us from them

how many schools, hospitals and roads could have been built with the money that's been used to compensate everyone for these revolutionaries damage

how much money would have been saved if they did not start their destructive and violent movement

Thaksin the terrorist financier would have saved billions alone, if it had not happened

there was no injustice, just lies and brainwashing to bring an unruly uneducated mob to confront the government and try to bring them down by threats, violence and ultimately death

well they LOST the war they started when they drew first blood by killing soldiers with the mercenaries Thaksin hired

i have no sympathy for them, nor brainwashed individuals like yourself who seem to think might is right

you have the ballot box, sell your vote and use it.........

As stated in the inner quote

Fruits of a poisoned tree,

no illegal and over the top violent rallies, and no deaths.

There was little or no violence before the army moved in using live ammunition.

Previously, during an earlier red-shirt rally that turned violent the army used live ammunition against stone throwing and catapult wielding protestors then lied about it.

No wonder they brought arms with them the next time.

anybody die from live ammo at that previous demonstration?

as to stone throwing and catapult wielding, david supposedly killed goliath with a stone and a catapult

even the bible acknowledges that to be a life threatening weapons system

do you think that the Army should just stand and be attacked by an angry mob with deadly weapons ?

and in defending themselves against that mob trying to uphold the law, you think that justifies an illegal mob with a revolutionary agenda to take up arms in preparation for a deadly firefight next time they meet?

you should be a politician..............

As with every story, the context and background reveals a lot more to this. Yes, the army did fire on civilians that mostly were unarmed, yes mistakes were made, yes there were snipers (which btw are very difficult to determine which side they belong to and whom they've been instructed to target), yes the were violent protesters, yes there were blackshirts, yes bullets fired from hundreds of yards away whizzed through sanctuary temples, yes high profile journalists and other 'media fodder' deaths such as volunteer nurses occurred, yes neither the Thai army nor the UDD leadership want an full investigation to reveal the truth behind all this for fear of ultimate culpability on both sides...

The point is, look at the bigger picture, the political divisions leading up to this, the previous April events setting a precedent, the ritual spilling of blood at Govt House, the cynical probability that the UDD planned to elicit this bloodshed all along regardless of concessions and deals on the negotiating table, the three months besieging the centre of the city, the multiple warnings for people go home or be subject to danger, the firebrand speeches urging people to fight their own military and burn down Bangkok, phone ins from a fugitive criminal...

Frankly, I think we got off lightly with 93 deaths, they were regrettable, but most of them were people willingly there when they needn't have been. And in light of the circumstances this was far less 'criminal' than many other events with civilian deaths that routinely occur around the world.

Next time a load of marine life washes up on the shores of Phuket, it's probably been blown out the water by the contents of this report.

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

As with every story, the context and background reveals a lot more to this. Yes, the army did fire on civilians that mostly were unarmed, yes mistakes were made, yes there were snipers (which btw are very difficult to determine which side they belong to and whom they've been instructed to target), yes the were violent protesters, yes there were blackshirts, yes bullets fired from hundreds of yards away whizzed through sanctuary temples, yes high profile journalists and other 'media fodder' deaths such as volunteer nurses occurred, yes neither the Thai army nor the UDD leadership want an full investigation to reveal the truth behind all this for fear of ultimate culpability on both sides...

The point is, look at the bigger picture, the political divisions leading up to this, the previous April events setting a precedent, the ritual spilling of blood at Govt House, the cynical probability that the UDD planned to elicit this bloodshed all along regardless of concessions and deals on the negotiating table, the three months besieging the centre of the city, the multiple warnings for people go home or be subject to danger, the firebrand speeches urging people to fight their own military and burn down Bangkok, phone ins from a fugitive criminal...

Frankly, I think we got off lightly with 93 deaths, they were regrettable, but most of them were people willingly there when they needn't have been. And in light of the circumstances this was far less 'criminal' than many other events with civilian deaths that routinely occur around the world.

nicely said virtualtraveller A+

over a year later, with an election pending, a Human Rights Group from the USA decides to throw their hat into an already busy ring

do they really think they are helping?

what about the rights of the current (not dead yet) folks here whos rights are going to hurt by this groups inflaming of an already RED hot situation

could they consider the timing of their self promoting dramatic report thats likely been pushed in to the current arena by the moron Robert Amsterdam

maybe we should ask them for a comment in Human rights terms about the murder of Bin Laden and the murder by Nato of Gaddafi's son and grandchildren

what about their rights?

i expect they will have a sympathetic word for them too

they should Brad Adams on a plane immediately, tell him to mind his own business and revoke his visa permanently (if he has one) isn't what he is doing considered working?

the world would be a much better place without these overpaid, sanctimonious, holier than thou dickheads passing judgement on world situations from the comfort of a high rise corner office to justify their own inflated wages................

WELL SAID I second that.

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

Yet, the idiots still try to justify the red shirt's actions.

Suggest to all involved to read the ENTIRE report in full before rebutting selective quotes.

http://www.hrw.org/

It might make for a more informed and civil debate.

Good suggestion. It's the first article I've seen which not only condemns the government & army, but also clearly the UDD and other protesters.

I assume the suggestion the army torched CWT can be laid to rest now?

That's now two pretty concise reports covering all the events of last year now based on eyewitness accounts and investigations. Whether you agree with all, part or none of the content, I think that the Abhisit and his government would be held in higher esteem if they had at least tried to do the same. Instead, the Thais have been fed with "soundbites" of information about various arrests for certain incidents with no follow up e.g the Chiang Mai 10 or was it 11, and the only attempt at a report was one regarding 13 deaths by the DSI which was leaked in one form and published with a completely different set of conclusions. Why? Why hasn't the government come up with a report, it's had long enough and as much, if not more, access to witnesses?

phiphidon

Are you still on that crusade of yours

trying to blame someone for the massive destruction and fire in bkk and up country

instigated en mass by our favorite leaders Jatuporn and all?

There surely are many other worthy causes you can contribute to, I am certain of that.

No, I was just answering a post that still questioned whether army personnel were on the BTS tracks above Wat Pathumwanaram and shooting into it and the surrounding area.

phiphidon

Are you still on that crusade of yours

trying to blame someone for the massive destruction and fire in bkk and up country

instigated en mass by our favorite leaders Jatuporn and all?

There surely are many other worthy causes you can contribute to, I am certain of that.

No, I was just answering a post that still questioned whether army personnel were on the BTS tracks above Wat Pathumwanaram and shooting into it and the surrounding area.

No it didn't say that.

I questioned who possibly dressed as army was on the tracks,

BESIDES the army, besides those known to be there.

We know some army was there and we know some said they did 'fire into the wat'. BUT, they also said 'they didn't fire intentionally on civilians'. But someone DID fire intentionally at civilians, and this would be the perfect opportunity to frame 'the army units shooting covering fire', by 'shooting from above and behind them with similar weapons'.

It's not denial to question what is known and raise possible reasons why things are not as they might appear. We know the Black Ronin Warriors were there, and after the shooting of Sae Dang would be even more motivated to blame the army and set it up for JUST such an international inquiry as this, perfectly timed for the election.

And back to the poisoned tree.

If the Red Leaders hadn't set the scene for this carnage, this all would never have happened. Their intentional malevolences and disregard for all Thais and their own followers was more than adequately displayed.

Edited May 4, 201115 yr by animatic

Shame the witnesses in the report couldn't shed further light on which group this guy could belong to....

Edited May 4, 201115 yr by Insight

Shame the witnesses in the report couldn't shed further light on which group this guy could belong to....

blue man group?

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

I take it you didn't read further than the AFP headline.

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

I take it you didn't read further than the AFP headline.

maybe he can only read big writing?

As stated in the inner quote

Fruits of a poisoned tree,

no illegal and over the top violent rallies, and no deaths.

There was little or no violence before the army moved in using live ammunition.

Previously, during an earlier red-shirt rally that turned violent the army used live ammunition against stone throwing and catapult wielding protestors then lied about it.

No wonder they brought arms with them the next time.

Fantasyland. Must be nice there.

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

I take it you didn't read further than the AFP headline.

his statement is either clear evidence of his complete ignorance, or his view of the UDD has very recently changed. I think it's the former.

Edited May 4, 201115 yr by hyperdimension

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

The HRW maybe close to 100% correct, blaming government, army, UDD leaders and red-shirts. Only an idiot continues blaming government and army ONLY

The HRW is 100% correct and only an idiot would deny this or try to justify the army's actions.

The HRW maybe close to 100% correct

It is quite factual and balanced, unlike THE BANGKOK MASSACRES: A CALL FOR ACCOUNTABILITY by Amsterdam & Peroff LLP, who supposedly are fighting to uphold human rights.

I think the report should be translated into Thai so that the Thai people can make a better informed decision when they vote. Some time ago I was surprised to see Amsterdam's submission to the world court in Thai printed and posted outside the UDD's office in Imperial World Lat Phrao.

Edited May 4, 201115 yr by hyperdimension

It's interesting to compare the written account of the Chulalongkorn Hospital raid event between the HRW report and Amsterdam & Peroff's APPLICATION TO INVESTIGATE THE SITUATION OF THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND WITH REGARD TO THE COMMISSION OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY

The HRW report has a whole chapter about it titled "The April Raids on Chulalongkorn Hospital" from page 68 to page 73. Here's an excerpt from page 72 to page 73:

Tensions increased throughout the day, as the afternoon brought news of increased fighting

in northern Thailand. Several explosions were heard outside the hospital. Later that day, the

protesters extended a clear plastic tube from one of the propane tanks toward the hospital

basement and, according to two witnesses, threatened to burn the building down. They later

withdrew the plastic tube after negotiating with hospital security guards. That evening

protesters returned to the emergency room to look for soldiers and police officers. They

spoke lewdly to physicians, nurses, and other hospital staff, and threatened to return the

next day to take them hostage.122

The next day, April 29, at about 6 p.m. UDD leader Phayap Panket and some 25 Red Guards

appeared at the gate of the emergency department with more than 100 protesters, some

carrying sharpened bamboo stakes, to demand they again be let in to search for police and

soldiers. UDD protesters shouted threats and obscenities, and grabbed the shirts of several

hospital guards. The protesters refused to believe the senior administrators’ assurances that

soldiers were not permitted in the hospital. Hospital administrators called police, who had

not yet established a formal presence nearby.123

UDD leaders persisted in their demand to search the hospital. Hospital administrators felt

compelled by the large number of protesters to acquiesce, although requested a limited

number of searchers participate. However, several hundred stormed the hospital compound

and began to search two of the previously evacuated larger buildings. When police arrived,

they accompanied UDD leaders in their search of other hospital buildings, while other UDD

protesters walked throughout the hospital and surrounding grounds in small groups.

Physicians and nurses expressed shock at the brazen attitude of the UDD protesters. One

doctor told Human Rights Watch, “We are neutral.… Maybe they don’t understand the

principles of the Red Cross.”124

For safety reasons, the hospital administration decided that evening to close the emergency

room and pharmacy and moved most hospital staff to buildings further from the UDD

encampment. Hospital administrators held an emergency meeting and decided to evacuate

the entire hospital early the next morning. By 7 a.m. on April 30, staff began to transfer and

discharge the remaining 600 patients. By that evening only the Supreme Patriarch,

Thailand’s most revered Buddhist monk, remained as a patient in the hospital. After he was

transferred the next day, the hospital had no patients.

The rush to move patients out of the Chulalongkorn Hospital was widely reported, with live

images of terminally ill patients being carried or wheeled out from the hospital buildings.

Among those patients, Thuanthong Vitthayacheewa died of heart failure on May 4 as his

condition worsened during the transfer.125

Several Red Shirt leaders soon apologized for the raid, calling it a mistake. Weng Tojirakarn,

a physician and protest leader, was quoted as saying, “The situation got out of control. It is

not our policy to obstruct hospital operations.”126

Many Thais were outraged by the incursion into the hospital, leading even some sympathetic

to the UDD to question the methods and the judgment of their leaders.127

Here is Amsterdam & Peroff's written account of the raid on page 67 of the application to the International Criminal Court:

Another example of this high-stakes form of negative public relations strategy involved the evacuation of Chulalongkorn Hospital in Bangkok on April 30, 2010. It was widely reported that the evacuation was prompted by an invasion of Red Shirt demonstrators searching for snipers. In fact, the incident was planned in advance by the Government Leadership and the Army Leadership, in collusion with certain members of the Thai media and certain members of the board of Chulalongkorn Hospital. After members of the press challenged Red Shirt leaders to back up their claims that Army snipers had fired shots from atop the hospital,hospital management immediately ordered the evacuation. There was never any genuine belief that the Red Shirt leaders presented a threat, and the orders to evacuate were given in order to heighten tensions and reinforce the false impression that the Red Shirts were violent and a threat to the Monarchy.The Government Leadership’s postponement of the beginning of the school year in May 2010 was also part of this anti-Red Shirt public relations strategy. The decision was not based on any actual or perceived threat from the Red Shirts, but was designed to create the illusion that they were dangerous.

Edited May 4, 201115 yr by hyperdimension