Chaos At Bangkok's Zen After Red Shirt Surrender, Court Hears

[nicknostitz]

Nick, my post may have been a bit unclear. To be sure I do NOT suggest you should be careful with the company you keep. If that was your impression I apologise. I merely meant that as a foreigner in Thailand some things done or said may be looked upon with less friendly eyes than the same behaviour would be seen in other countries. No more, no less.

Don't worry. I understood.

There are people who do look with not friendly eyes at what i write and photograph, and there are others who do support me. That just goes with the job.

I just don't buy into fear and paranoia. It is my experience here that as long as a journalist does his/her job according to ethical principles, one enough leeway to still be able to work.

Well - most of the time. The cases against Chiranuch from Prachatai are a very disturbing, especially as they were clearly against Abhisit's wishes while he was PM, and so was also the case against Prof Somsak, in which the military filed the case at police (which leads to the question of course why the military can so blatantly act against the policies of the government). What was also disturbing were the cases filed against Jonathan Head (as far as i know they were thrown out), and the witch hunt against Dan Rivers after the 2010 protests, supported by high ranked members of society who were openly airing more than libelous statements, such as when Dr. Jermsak Pinthong his Channel 11 TV show accused Dan Rivers of having had an affair with Jakrapop.

Anyhow. Back to Saichon. It will be very interesting how the court decides, and based on which evidence.

Also the courts here in Thailand are under observation, there are researches done on the role of the courts, and some of them may not come to very positive results on Thailand's judiciary...

[nicknostitz]

Any chance of you setting up a school to teach a few Thai journalists about investigative journalism?

Maybe even a half hour course to tell them how to ask a relevant question?

I was actually recently asked to to do something similar. I declined.

Reasons were because i don't really feel competent enough to teach, i am a sort of learning by doing person. I also think that the problem in Thai journalism is less with the working journalists (who often do a very good job), but with editorial policies which make the job of working journalists very difficult. And these editors were not the people i was supposed to teach, but the journalists i feel that i should be learning from.

There is a problem with relevant questions. There are times when a journalist is pressured to ask any question, knowing that the person to be interviewed will just not give a relevant answer that the questions that would be relevant. I am not working for daily news (other than at times when i am hired as a photographer, which means i don't need to ask questions), and so i can chose the time when i ask questions, and which questions. But daily reporters just don't have that luxury.

Also, i don't need to care if politicians don't like me as i am not depending on being on their trail all the time. If they don't give me access, i couldn't care less. I get my access in other ways. Daily news journalists depend on being given access, so they have to be more diplomatic in their questions than me.

Edited July 20, 2011 by nicknostitz

[nicknostitz]

Keep it up!

Thanks.

I hope though that i won't need to keep it up. I hope that politics moves back to parliament, which i will not report on (there are others who can do that much better than me). I am only interested in street politics.

Well, hope...

[davidkia]

Just because these 2 can't be definitely identified by employees, doesn't mean that they weren't there or that other red shirts weren't there.

But, it will probably get them off in this case.

you never believe do you that maybe the police have the wrong people , you are always looking for the red shirts to be but down aren't you !

[davidkia]

Is it correct to publish the names of the witnesses? Maybe they'd be more brave on the stand if their names and employment records weren't published for all to see. After all, these are simple people, easily scared and intimidated, especially by the kind of people who throw grenades into shopping malls.

yes it is if they are telling the truth then they should stand there and tell it if they lie well justic will come to them !

[moe666]

These two could be the fall guys for the real perpertrators. In all of this has anyone of a real position of authority in the redshirts actually been held account. I mean really held account not sometime in jail then bonded out.

Thanks Nick for your information

[nicknostitz]

These two could be the fall guys for the real perpertrators. In all of this has anyone of a real position of authority in the redshirts actually been held account. I mean really held account not sometime in jail then bonded out.

Thanks Nick for your information

Well, you could also ask a similar question: has anybody in authority of the military been held account for the killings of so many unarmed protesters (which are the bulk of killed Red Shirt protesters)?

So far, more than one year afterwards, the many cases against the military have not even been forwarded yet to the prosecution. Not a single officer in charge has been suspended pending investigation, even though there are numerous cases of killings in which the evidence is more than clear, where there are witnesses, where the forensic and crime scene investigations have been performed, and where the is sufficient video footage and photos available.

The DSI, the main investigating unit (and whose most likely soon to be former head Tarit as a member of CRES is one of the accused as well, by the way - talk of conflict of interest...) has done nothing but stall the investigations in the cases against the security forces, obfuscating even their own investigation results (for example the sudden new "expert" in the Hiro case), shifting one 90 day deadline to the next, and in the recent months has not even bothered to issue new deadlines (the behavior of the DSI was so bad that some of the many honest and professional officers in this unit decided to leak reports to the media).

Why is a so far more than flimsy case against a few alleged arsonist in court already, when much stronger cases against the military have not even been forwarded to the prosecution yet, but are shifted from DSI to the police, and back again to the DSI, and where are they now?

There is another case i am somewhat familiar with, for example, of a female Red Shirt protester who was beaten and raped, allegedly by a soldier, when she left the protest site during the last stage of the protests. The case has been filed straight away, she was checked in hospital for evidence, the time and place is known, and therefore the particular unit should be known as well, sketches of the accused soldier were published, and nothing happened. As usual.

[MengWan]

Could this case be any weaker? What a joke

I agree !

Those who gave the orders to kill and arson should be first to be judged and executed, not always the "little guy" ...

[Buchholz]

"I want to go home," said Saichon, who is often described by those who knew him as not mentally sound.

We've heard that before about the Red Shirts...

Most of the red-shirt supporters in jail are garbage collectors, homeless people, and the mentally ill who cannot seek legal help or find enough money for bail. The People’s Centre for Information (PCI) revealed its initial investigation on the April-May crackdowns yesterday.

It collected information about 169 red-shirt protesters who are now under detention in the provinces of Maha Sarakham, Ubon Ratchathani, Udon Thani, Khon Kaen, Mukdahan, Chiang Mai and Chiang Rai over charges of taking part in illegal gatherings as well as arson or terrorism.

PCI discovered that most of the detained red shirts could not find lawyers or enough money for bail. Most of the detainees are garbage collectors, homeless people, and people with mental health problems.

The Nation / 2010-11-19

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/11/19/politics/Most-red-shirt-detainees-too-poor-to-seek-release--30142601.html

[nicknostitz]

We've heard that before about the Red Shirts...

What we were also able to read in the same article, continuing the incomplete quote, is that:

Some of the detainees were coerced into confessing to crimes of arson or terrorism, while some were told to pay more than Bt1 million in bail.

Meanwhile, the National Human Rights Commission revealed that about 180 red-shirt protesters are in jail, with some suffering from health problems and some needing to continue their education. Most of them do not have access to legal aid.

Krittiya Achavanichkul, a member of PCI, said there was not enough evidence for police to detain the red-shirt protesters and that some were tortured into signing confessions. She called on the government to release the detained red-shirt protesters because the Constitution gives them the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The authorities have already released some protesters under the caveat that they will be put behind bars again if they violate any regulations. This condition is believed to be a tool to suppress opposition.

[random]

These two could be the fall guys for the real perpertrators. In all of this has anyone of a real position of authority in the redshirts actually been held account. I mean really held account not sometime in jail then bonded out.

Thanks Nick for your information

Well, you could also ask a similar question: has anybody in authority of the military been held account for the killings of so many unarmed protesters (which are the bulk of killed Red Shirt protesters)?

So far, more than one year afterwards, the many cases against the military have not even been forwarded yet to the prosecution. Not a single officer in charge has been suspended pending investigation, even though there are numerous cases of killings in which the evidence is more than clear, where there are witnesses, where the forensic and crime scene investigations have been performed, and where the is sufficient video footage and photos available.

The DSI, the main investigating unit (and whose most likely soon to be former head Tarit as a member of CRES is one of the accused as well, by the way - talk of conflict of interest...) has done nothing but stall the investigations in the cases against the security forces, obfuscating even their own investigation results (for example the sudden new "expert" in the Hiro case), shifting one 90 day deadline to the next, and in the recent months has not even bothered to issue new deadlines (the behavior of the DSI was so bad that some of the many honest and professional officers in this unit decided to leak reports to the media).

Why is a so far more than flimsy case against a few alleged arsonist in court already, when much stronger cases against the military have not even been forwarded to the prosecution yet, but are shifted from DSI to the police, and back again to the DSI, and where are they now?

There is another case i am somewhat familiar with, for example, of a female Red Shirt protester who was beaten and raped, allegedly by a soldier, when she left the protest site during the last stage of the protests. The case has been filed straight away, she was checked in hospital for evidence, the time and place is known, and therefore the particular unit should be known as well, sketches of the accused soldier were published, and nothing happened. As usual.

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

[TAWP]

Well, you could also ask a similar question: has anybody in authority of the military been held account for the killings of so many unarmed protesters (which are the bulk of killed Red Shirt protesters)?

The bulk of the protesters, not the bulk of those that stayed when things started going violent nor was killed in confrontations.

Nick-Nick-Nick...claiming you are non-biased again are we?

[TAWP]

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

Edited July 21, 2011 by TAWP

[random]

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

I never claim this, I never have and I never will, but maybe you can explain why an unarmed person, posing no threat should be shot and killed by the military because someone else is armed.

[noahvail]

We've heard that before about the Red Shirts...

What we were also able to read in the same article, continuing the incomplete quote, is that:

Some of the detainees were coerced into confessing to crimes of arson or terrorism, while some were told to pay more than Bt1 million in bail.

Meanwhile, the National Human Rights Commission revealed that about 180 red-shirt protesters are in jail, with some suffering from health problems and some needing to continue their education. Most of them do not have access to legal aid.

Krittiya Achavanichkul, a member of PCI, said there was not enough evidence for police to detain the red-shirt protesters and that some were tortured into signing confessions. She called on the government to release the detained red-shirt protesters because the Constitution gives them the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The authorities have already released some protesters under the caveat that they will be put behind bars again if they violate any regulations. This condition is believed to be a tool to suppress opposition.

Nick, could you shed some light on the "People's Centre for Information" please? Who runs it, who funds it? I've Googled it, but there are only two entries, both are quotes from the PCI that don't offer any information on the organization. Right now, it sounds like someone is making claims which may or may not be unsubstantiated, such as "not enough evidence" and "tortured." I'm hoping it's more than just a mouthpiece for the UDD. Thank you,

[TAWP]

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

I never claim this, I never have and I never will, but maybe you can explain why an unarmed person, posing no threat should be shot and killed by the military because someone else is armed.

Good that you agree that the black shirts exists, that red shirts and black shirts was armed, that they posed a lethal threat to the soldiers and civilians and that they carried out lethal attacks of soldiers and civilians that killed several soldiers and civilians.

An unarmed person posing no threat should not be short by anyone. In the perfect of all worlds.

Disregarding that no unarmed person, posing no threat, has been proven to be intentionally targeted and killed by the military in the events now.

[rubl]

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

I never claim this, I never have and I never will, but maybe you can explain why an unarmed person, posing no threat should be shot and killed by the military because someone else is armed.

That's a 'leading' question. An unarmed person posing no threat should NOT be shot and killed normally speaking. When militant hides in a group of unarmed persons normal procedure would probably be isolation of the group and trying to get the militant, talk them down, or whatever police would do. Under the chaotic circumstances with militants, grenades, fires and so, military are a bit less prepared or taught to take that approach, they're not trained for it. I guess that's why army representatives always talk about collateral damage.

[random]

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

I never claim this, I never have and I never will, but maybe you can explain why an unarmed person, posing no threat should be shot and killed by the military because someone else is armed.

Good that you agree that the black shirts exists, that red shirts and black shirts was armed, that they posed a lethal threat to the soldiers and civilians and that they carried out lethal attacks of soldiers and civilians that killed several soldiers and civilians.

An unarmed person posing no threat should not be short by anyone. In the perfect of all worlds.

Disregarding that no unarmed person, posing no threat, has been proven to be intentionally targeted and killed by the military in the events now.

However i did not say that the blackshirts were part of the redshirt movement.

It is also clear the soldiers did fire randomly into people, as can be seen from the death of certain press members, and the death of a soldier shot on viphawadde road by his own side (not disputed).

So it seems some people are prepared to see the bad from both sides(me), while others are happy to ignore the failings and cold blooded killings pepetrated by the military (you), or can you agree that some red shirts were killed whilst unarmed and whilst posing no immediate threat to the soldiers (such as the people in the temple)

[random]

The sad thing is that many posters on here still wont believe it, even if you had footage of a soldier walking up to an unarmed red shirt and put a bullet in his head, they would say he was trying the head the bullet. the fact nobody in government or the military has been held accountable is an absolute disgrace.

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

I never claim this, I never have and I never will, but maybe you can explain why an unarmed person, posing no threat should be shot and killed by the military because someone else is armed.

That's a 'leading' question. An unarmed person posing no threat should NOT be shot and killed normally speaking. When militant hides in a group of unarmed persons normal procedure would probably be isolation of the group and trying to get the militant, talk them down, or whatever police would do. Under the chaotic circumstances with militants, grenades, fires and so, military are a bit less prepared or taught to take that approach, they're not trained for it. I guess that's why army representatives always talk about collateral damage.

When the unarmed people were seeking shelter in the temple and were shot by the army, and when the unarmed medic was also shot by the army (as told by a UK journalist that was at the temple at the time), and nobody was firing from the temple towards the soldiers, are these victims collateral damage, or where they simply murdered by the army?

[rubl]

The sad part is that even when we have video evidence of black shirts running along-side red shirts, shooting at soldiers, red apologists here will still claim that the crowds was unarmed, filled with peaceful grandmas and was slaughtered by the military...

I never claim this, I never have and I never will, but maybe you can explain why an unarmed person, posing no threat should be shot and killed by the military because someone else is armed.

That's a 'leading' question. An unarmed person posing no threat should NOT be shot and killed normally speaking. When militant hides in a group of unarmed persons normal procedure would probably be isolation of the group and trying to get the militant, talk them down, or whatever police would do. Under the chaotic circumstances with militants, grenades, fires and so, military are a bit less prepared or taught to take that approach, they're not trained for it. I guess that's why army representatives always talk about collateral damage.

When the unarmed people were seeking shelter in the temple and were shot by the army, and when the unarmed medic was also shot by the army (as told by a UK journalist that was at the temple at the time), and nobody was firing from the temple towards the soldiers, are these victims collateral damage, or where they simply murdered by the army?

Was Canadian reporter Chris vanderGrift 'collateral damage' when he was running around with the army on the 19th of May and got a grenade lobbed on him and others around him ? With fires burning, militants running loose and trying to hide amongst unarmed, innocent protesters, etc., etc.

[random]

Was Canadian reporter Chris vanderGrift 'collateral damage' when he was running around with the army on the 19th of May and got a grenade lobbed on him and others around him ? With fires burning, militants running loose and trying to hide amongst unarmed, innocent protesters, etc., etc.

you are trying to compare apples and oranges, running with the army or seeking shelter in a temple whilst unarmed and after a surrender.

We seem to have gone off topic and no doubt will be warned soon, so back on topic talking about the scapegoats who are getting blamed for unknown military personnel starting fires, oops, unknown persons, a slip of the tongue

sorry about the edit, it only allows so many blocks of text on here, you post has not been edited, i mean i have had to take the earlier posts out.

[rubl]

Was Canadian reporter Chris vanderGrift 'collateral damage' when he was running around with the army on the 19th of May and got a grenade lobbed on him and others around him ? With fires burning, militants running loose and trying to hide amongst unarmed, innocent protesters, etc., etc.

you are trying to compare apples and oranges, running with the army or seeking shelter in a temple whilst unarmed and after a surrender.

We seem to have gone off topic and no doubt will be warned soon, so back on topic talking about the scapegoats who are getting blamed for unknown military personnel starting fires, oops, unknown persons, a slip of the tongue

sorry about the edit, it only allows so many blocks of text on here, you post has not been edited, i mean i have had to take the earlier posts out.

In most of our discussions we ended up in agreeing to disagree, one of those things.

(PS: don't worry about the edit/limitation of quotes, we all have the same problem.)

[nicknostitz]

Well, you could also ask a similar question: has anybody in authority of the military been held account for the killings of so many unarmed protesters (which are the bulk of killed Red Shirt protesters)?

The bulk of the protesters, not the bulk of those that stayed when things started going violent nor was killed in confrontations.

Nick-Nick-Nick...claiming you are non-biased again are we?

The bulk of the killed protesters were unarmed protesters. The majority of protesters that stayed when things were going violent were unarmed, and a minority were armed militants.

These militants to the most part only operated in cover of darkness. I was one of the view journalists who have seen them operating, briefly. They arrived after Red Shirt guards were shot and injured by the military at a barricade late at night, and launched a series of grenades into the lines of the military from a forward position, after which the military fired indiscriminately into the barricade, wounding several guards (i retreated to a safe position about 50 meters behind after the grenades were launched).

I was present on several occasions where the military have shot at, injured and killed next to me clearly identifiable unarmed protesters, without any militant in sight. On May 13, in the early night near Rama IV/Wireless intersection (one dead, at least one injured), on May 14 at Wireless Rd opposite Lumpini Police Station (where Nelson Rand, a Matichon photographer and several protesters were shot), on May 15 in the afternoon in Rajaparop Road - as described in my story "the killing zone", May 16 i took a day off to get my head back into shape, and until May 19 i went to the frontlines only when things were relatively calm. On May 19 i was behind the military, and was about 60 meters away from Chandler when he was injured by a M79 grenade fired by militants against soldiers (Chandler was in a group of soldiers, which was a bad mistake, most of us journos ran into cover after the first grenades exploded)

I do not underestimate the threat militants posed to the soldiers. That does not mean though that the military is excused from killing and injuring unarmed protesters. Kill and injure militants, no problem, as they are legitimate targets.

[thaihome]

Nick, you are still at it I see. Minimizing the radical UDD elements role in event of May 14 to the 19th and in this case on the 19th itself.

First you use a straw man that apparently attempts to say, if CW was built correctly it would not have burned so badly as if it now the owners of CW are at fault becasue thier building couldnt withstand an arson attempt.

Nick says: Did the builders fulfill the safety requirements in terms of building material, or have, as so often here, safety regulations not been kept? Did Central World regularly check the safety measurements, or, as so often here, nobody checked those?

Then you say

There is more than enough evidence that Red Shirt protesters have thrown petrol bombs in Central World, and also a few explosives.

But follow it with:

But we don't even know yet anything of the origin of the fire. Why don't we know that?

But you just told what the orgin of the fire was. Here, let me let you say it again

There is more than enough evidence that Red Shirt protesters have thrown petrol bombs in Central World, and also a few explosives.

Classic fallacy agruments, just trying to take the focus away from the real issue, one that you try to avoid but when confronted on it, you do everything to minimize and make the disccusion go elsewhere.

Nick says:

Another case i have direct knowledge about is Manop "Bhet" Charnchangthong - the Red Shirt guard who became famous for carrying weapons to the stage after the April 10 disaster. He was later accused and arrested by the DSI of having wrestled a handgun of a police officer during the SC Park Hotel incident (where Arisaman and Rambo escaped arrest), even though there is clear proof that another Red Shirt guard (now in the underground) has done this.

Now, now Nick, isn't Bhet more well known for this picture?

But you didn't mention that did you?

I fail to understand why you bother to attempt to potray yourself as nuetral "journalist" when again and again you show your bias. Just own up to it Nick.

TH

Edited July 21, 2011 by thaihome

[nicknostitz]

Nick, could you shed some light on the "People's Centre for Information" please? Who runs it, who funds it? I've Googled it, but there are only two entries, both are quotes from the PCI that don't offer any information on the organization. Right now, it sounds like someone is making claims which may or may not be unsubstantiated, such as "not enough evidence" and "tortured." I'm hoping it's more than just a mouthpiece for the UDD. Thank you,

The People's Information Center mostly consists of young academics and progressive human rights activists who are trying to collect information and map what happened last year. I think that they are doing a very good job.

"Mouthpiece for the UDD" is nowadays such a widely thrown empty accusation if someone does not agree with the state's position. Many people accuse me of being that as well. Yet they have not managed to disprove any of the facts i present, even though i have asked them on numerous occasions. When i am wrong about something, it is only helpful when i am corrected. Many though claiming that they had different information, or facts disproving me, never came up with what they claimed. Or it was the old "uncle-of-an-aunt-of-a-sister's-neighbor-said"... story.

Edited July 21, 2011 by nicknostitz

[random]

Well, you could also ask a similar question: has anybody in authority of the military been held account for the killings of so many unarmed protesters (which are the bulk of killed Red Shirt protesters)?

The bulk of the protesters, not the bulk of those that stayed when things started going violent nor was killed in confrontations.

Nick-Nick-Nick...claiming you are non-biased again are we?

The bulk of the killed protesters were unarmed protesters. The majority of protesters that stayed when things were going violent were unarmed, and a minority were armed militants.

These militants to the most part only operated in cover of darkness. I was one of the view journalists who have seen them operating, briefly. They arrived after Red Shirt guards were shot and injured by the military at a barricade late at night, and launched a series of grenades into the lines of the military from a forward position, after which the military fired indiscriminately into the barricade, wounding several guards (i retreated to a safe position about 50 meters behind after the grenades were launched).

I was present on several occasions where the military have shot at, injured and killed next to me clearly identifiable unarmed protesters, without any militant in sight. On May 13, in the early night near Rama IV/Wireless intersection (one dead, at least one injured), on May 14 at Wireless Rd opposite Lumpini Police Station (where Nelson Rand, a Matichon photographer and several protesters were shot), on May 15 in the afternoon in Rajaparop Road - as described in my story "the killing zone", May 16 i took a day off to get my head back into shape, and until May 19 i went to the frontlines only when things were relatively calm. On May 19 i was behind the military, and was about 60 meters away from Chandler when he was injured by a M79 grenade fired by militants against soldiers (Chandler was in a group of soldiers, which was a bad mistake, most of us journos ran into cover after the first grenades exploded)

I do not underestimate the threat militants posed to the soldiers. That does not mean though that the military is excused from killing and injuring unarmed protesters. Kill and injure militants, no problem, as they are legitimate targets.

fantastic, an actual eye witness, people will still dispute it though, they know better as they were in the comfort of their condo watching a movie on television or moaning on TVF, well done for putting some truths out there :jap:

[nicknostitz]

I fail to understand why you bother to attempt to potray yourself as nuetral "journalist" when again and again you show your bias. Just own up to it Nick.

TH

Yes, indeed - that is Bhet on this picture. He was accused of having wrestled a handgun from a police officer at the SC-Park incident. The is irrefutable proof that it was another Red Shirt guard (photos and videos of that incident). I don't understand why that makes me "biased".

If the origin of the fire were the petrol bombs and explosives then, according to several experts i have spoken with, then without the only way such a bog fire could have been caused would have either been massive amounts of accelerants or shoddy building standards. As to the accelerants - how could they have been brought in and placed properly when all along the Rajaprasong occupation Central World had armed guards?

My question to you - can you think of reasons why there was no proper investigation performed into the exact causes of the fire?

The real issue of this thread is that there are several people accused of arson right now at court. So far, no witness had identified one of them as arsonists. No photo evidence has been presented. No forensic evidence presented yet that connects the accused to the fire. These accused have been held in prison without bail for more than one year. If the prosecution has not more against the accused, then this opens more than a few questions regarding Thailand's justice system.

[noahvail]

Nick, could you shed some light on the "People's Centre for Information" please? Who runs it, who funds it? I've Googled it, but there are only two entries, both are quotes from the PCI that don't offer any information on the organization. Right now, it sounds like someone is making claims which may or may not be unsubstantiated, such as "not enough evidence" and "tortured." I'm hoping it's more than just a mouthpiece for the UDD. Thank you,

The People's Information Center mostly consists of young academics and progressive human rights activists who are trying to collect information and map what happened last year. I think that they are doing a very good job.

"Mouthpiece for the UDD" is nowadays such a widely thrown empty accusation if someone does not agree with the state's position. Many people accuse me of being that as well. Yet they have not managed to disprove any of the facts i present, even though i have asked them on numerous occasions. When i am wrong about something, it is only helpful when i am corrected. Many though claiming that they had different information, or facts disproving me, never came up with what they claimed. Or it was the old "uncle-of-an-aunt-of-a-sister's-neighbor-said"... story.

Thanks for the information, though it didn't exactly answer the questions of who runs it and who funds it.

As I said, I'm hoping it's more than just a UDD operation. I really do.

[nicknostitz]

Thanks for the information, though it didn't exactly answer the questions of who runs it and who funds it.

As I said, I'm hoping it's more than just a UDD operation. I really do.

I have no idea about funding. But i know many people that work there. This is not an UDD operation.

[nicknostitz]

[

fantastic, an actual eye witness, people will still dispute it though, they know better as they were in the comfort of their condo watching a movie on television or moaning on TVF, well done for putting some truths out there :jap:

Thanks.

Some people will dispute this. They make a lot of noise. That doesn't mean though that they have a point - they are just noisy.